Skip to main content

This came up on eBay, listed in the O scale section; I questioned the seller, who then moved it to S scale.

S F7#1

You can see the slight "hump" in the roof, which according to the NASG site, identifies this as Enhorning.

I figured to myself "how often does one of these show up?" so I pulled the trigger and it should be here in the next week or so. 

Here are some pictures from the listing.

It has a rather large, almost Central Locomotive Works motor:

S F7 #2

...with some sort of "drive bands" connecting the axles. I have no idea whether the frame/drive train is stock.

Anyone here have any thoughts and/or experience with these and can tell me what I've gotten myself into?

Thanks!

Mark in Oregon

Attachments

Images (2)
  • S F7#1
  • S F7 #2
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Enhorning's pop up from time to time.  I usually see at least one at an S Fest.  I've never bought one because the hump is a big turn off for me.  I do have an A-B set of Wabash Valley shells that were made after the tooling was modified to eliminate the hump.

Enhorning's are more historical artifacts rather than viable models since the introduction of AM's FP7 back in 1985.  Also compared with the SHS/MTH F-units, Enhorning's are pretty archaic.

As to the drive, I have no idea.

Rusty

1. Enhorning's are more historical artifacts rather than viable models since the introduction of AM's FP7 back in 1985.  Also compared with the SHS/MTH F-units, Enhorning's are pretty archaic.

2. As to the drive, I have no idea.

Rusty

Thanks Rusty. I figured you would be able to chime in here.

1: No doubt you are right; but since I was able to get this at a reasonable price (and I like " historical artifacts"), this seemed like a good opportunity. 🙂

2: Anyone else know about the drive on these?

Mark in Oregon

Mark,

I have an undecorated Enhorning shell that has no hump.  I've been told that the later versions were cast in a better, more stable plastic.  It didn't cost much and I bought it simply for its historical value.  It sits on my shelf (or used to since my layout is in storage now) and I plan on placing it on a simple frame, and leave it parked on a siding for "atmosphere" or even have in my engine house for filler.

Mikeaa, props for the Young Frankenstein meme....

@Strummer posted:

Looks like this is missing the horns, porthole and main windshield and (1) ladder. If anyone has any  extras, or suggestions, please email me.

Thank you.

Mark in Oregon

Yay! Another project! 😁

I searched the Model Railroader archives to see if there was a review.  There wasn't.  I did find a couple of ads in the early 50's (all the same ad) that has a photo of the F's.  This one is from the November 1953 issue:

MR 5311 Enhorning Ad

Image: Model Railroader 11/53 Kalmbach Publishing

Looks like there isn't any glazing.  I'm not even sure there was even a headlight lens.  If there's any present on the model, the modeller probably made his own.

Note the price for an undecorated powered A and dummy B.  A good piece of change back then.

Rusty

Attachments

Images (1)
  • MR 5311 Enhorning Ad
Last edited by Rusty Traque

This is a picture I posted many moons ago about an AMT NYC F unit I salvaged (box was mildewed, chassis with rot from moisture) - the Enhorning S scale model bears more than a passing resemblance, don't you think? 

DSC_0375

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...nit-flea-market-find

As Rusty noted, that early Lionel Alco FA is also of the humpback family - one could say the humps add to the charm of the models, most would probably hold their nose...

@MTN posted:

This is a picture I posted many moons ago about an AMT NYC F unit I salvaged (box was mildewed, chassis with rot from moisture) - the Enhorning S scale model bears more than a passing resemblance, don't you think? 

DSC_0375

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...nit-flea-market-find

As Rusty noted, that early Lionel Alco FA is also of the humpback family - one could say the humps add to the charm of the models, most would probably hold their nose...

Speaking of noses, the Enhorning F had a better nose than the AMT F...

Rusty

The F7 arrived today. It weighs 2 pounds, 14 ounces. 😳

I took a bunch of pictures of the mechanism, but for some reason am unable (right now) to send them from my phone to my computer. Will post them as soon as I am able.

It runs well enough, but as is mentioned on the NASG site, the electrical pick up leaves a lot to be desired. Will have to see about improving it. There is a headlight lens; no porthole or windshield. The box (which looks to be of similar vintage, so I'm guessing it's the original) has hand-written "A  24.00 NYC Pass."

Hopefully will get some pictures posted soon...

Mark in Oregon

Last edited by Strummer

Okay, here are some photos.

Next to a Gilbert Geep:

s2

Sprung trucks:

s4

s5

Mechanism:

s3

Since this photo was taken, I have swapped around those two weights; the taller of the two seemed like it should sit in that recessed area of the frame, so...

Simple GE # 1449 light bulb; very high tech.

Motor (5/8" stack):

s1

Can anyone here verify that this is indeed a Pittman "DC 94"? After a quick cleaning it runs very smoothly, of course.

It seems as though current pick-up is from only 4 wheels, so it's not "great". Will no doubt have to make a few mods if this is gonna run as well as I'd like it to, so stay tuned.

Comments/questions?

Mark in Oregon

Attachments

Images (5)
  • s2
  • s4
  • s5
  • s3
  • s1

Here's that motor, just reassembled. The similarities are pretty obvious, especially the way the brushes are mounted. This one is a three pole motor, but I've seen a seven pole version before. I'm not completely confident it's a Pittman, but it probably is. It was pretty finicky while reassembling - if I tightened it the wrong way, the armature bound up. I'm pretty sure the insulated sections on the two studs that the brushes are on are to blame, they may have been crushed over time and so will skew the top plate when tightened. Anyway, I managed to get it spinning freely after messing with it for a while.

Attachments

Images (1)
  • mceclip0

I can't really help much with it, but good luck figuring it out. I really like locomotives like these, made by small, obscure companies... It's fun to learn everything you can about them, and figure out how the particular company built their models. For instance, that GMC NW2 I posted about above has its own unique style of reverse unit, and I enjoyed figuring out how to make it cycle reliably. Turns out, it's easier to work on and simpler than a standard Lionel E-unit, it seems sturdier, and is probably just as reliable.

I went back to the NASG page(s) and have come to realize that this is actually their F9. There's a couple of odd mushroom-shaped items on the back end of the roof:

s6

...dunno what these are supposed to be; they aren't on the Enhorning F7, (or any F9 I've ever had in other scales) but do show up on both F9 photos on that site.

There is also a link to a review from the December 1962 S Gauge Herald, which speaks of the pick-up issues and mentions that earlier models had aluminum wheels, while later releases had wheels of brass. My sample has the aluminum ones.

More S scale history...

Mark in Oregon

Attachments

Images (1)
  • s6

Update (in case anyone's interested...) 

Been trying all sorts of things to get this to run better; electrical pick up is the biggest issue, as mentioned on the NASG site. I want to keep this as "stock"" as possible, so I've been looking for non-invasive ways to help it along. I think it's a neat old thing, so I'm trying to be as gentle as I can...

As built, the pick up is through the truck mounting screws, which proved to be sporadic at best. I was able to attach an additional pick up wire from each truck directly to the motor, without having to drill anything. This really made a difference; it'll now start to run at about 4 volts and is nice and smooth. Nice thing about an F unit; there's plenty of room inside for a couple of extra wires!

I removed the (2) "drive belts": seems to me that (2) gear-driven axles should be plenty, and since those belts mount to the wheels that pick up current, I figure the freer they (the wheels) rotate, the better. I can always re-install the belts or even find some newer replacements. I think these originals are pretty worn out anyway.

Now that it's actually running , I can look at installing some Kadee couplers and think about maybe bringing the body shell up to speed...plus, I have some other "goodies" on the way, so I need to clear off my work bench!

Mark in Oregon

@Strummer posted:

I went back to the NASG page(s) and have come to realize that this is actually their F9. There's a couple of odd mushroom-shaped items on the back end of the roof:

s6

...dunno what these are supposed to be; they aren't on the Enhorning F7, (or any F9 I've ever had in other scales) but do show up on both F9 photos on that site.

There is also a link to a review from the December 1962 S Gauge Herald, which speaks of the pick-up issues and mentions that earlier models had aluminum wheels, while later releases had wheels of brass. My sample has the aluminum ones.

More S scale history...

Mark in Oregon

Enhorning may have called it an F9, but it's really a phase 4 F3 (railfan terminology,) which means (in general terms) low pancake fans, fabricated side grills, horizontal vents between the portholes and rectangular dynamic brake openings on the front hatch.

A "factory fresh" F9 had low pancake fans, stamped Farr side grills, vertical vents between the portholes along with one vertical vent in front of the front porthole and a 48" dynamic brake fan on the front hatch.

The "mushrooms" are air intake and boiler exhaust steam generator castings  for passenger service.  They're not exactly in the right place.

Rusty

Attachments

Images (1)
  • mceclip0
Last edited by Rusty Traque

Removing those belts seems like a pretty big sacrifice to me, since that halves how much traction you can get. From my experience with that NW2, where only one truck is powered, 4 (albeit heavy) cars are enough to completely stop it - the motor has no issues, but it just doesn't have enough traction. I would probably test with and without the belts to see if there's any noticeable difference.

I ran across this by the way, which seems to confirm the motor as Pittman: https://www.ebay.com/itm/313404647590

You make some valid points. I took off the belts initially to see if that would help with the over all running qualities; I don't think it did, but now that I've got it running nicely, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to put them back on. On this particular model, it's the outside axles on each truck that are geared, so the load is pretty well spread out, and since it weighs almost 3 pounds, it seems to have plenty of traction.

And yes, it appears that you indeed have a Pittman; great motors. 🙂

Mark in Oregon

No one else has yet posted their own experiences regarding this model ( am I the only person here that has one of these?) so here are some final thoughts about this engine, if I may.

Body: although I've seen better F unit nose renderings, and in spite of that infamous roof "hump", given the "3 foot rule" this is more than adequate.

I went ahead and re-installed those "drive bands", just to keep this as stock as possible. I think it does effect the slow speed slightly, but over all seems okay. I will probably try to find some sort of more flexible replacements; installed a Kadee #802 on the back and an HO scale #5 up front, so we're good to go.

I often read comments about the noise level of open-frame vs. can motors; sometimes it's true, but I find these older open frame types are often just as quiet as more modern can motors, this example being a case in point. Just my opinion.

Anyway, there you go.

Mark in Oregon

@Strummer posted:

No one else has yet posted their own experiences regarding this model ( am I the only person here that has one of these?) so here are some final thoughts about this engine, if I may.

Body: although I've seen better F unit nose renderings, and in spite of that infamous roof "hump", given the "3 foot rule" this is more than adequate.

I went ahead and re-installed those "drive bands", just to keep this as stock as possible. I think it does effect the slow speed slightly, but over all seems okay. I will probably try to find some sort of more flexible replacements; installed a Kadee #802 on the back and an HO scale #5 up front, so we're good to go.

I often read comments about the noise level of open-frame vs. can motors; sometimes it's true, but I find these older open frame types are often just as quiet as more modern can motors, this example being a case in point. Just my opinion.

Anyway, there you go.

Mark in Oregon

Buried in a box somewhere I have a dummy engine that by memory seems to probably fit the same body here. It is painted an awful orange colour with I think some blue. Painted with a tar brush comes to mind. When I find it I will post a picture of it to see if it is the same body shell as mentioned here.

@Strummer posted:

Did you ever find that item?

Mark in Oregon

Hi,

yes, I did find it and it isn’t in good shape. As you can see the paint work is not brilliant. It has a couple of broken steps at the rear, I have one but the other one is missing. Someone has also cut out part of the pilot for a coupler but it never had one when I got it.

You will also see it has one of the side frames broken off, I have it and it is still attached to part of the casting it was attached to. It very much looks like metal fatigue the dreaded rot that we know about.

The axles have been knurled in the centre of the axle which must also be used for the motor units. It has a pretty heavy lump of metal to keep it on the track. I don’t see that the chassis it has is used for the motor unit and is even adaptable to accommodate a power set up.

image

image

image



image

Attachments

Images (5)
  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image
@Strummer posted:

I went back to the NASG page(s) and have come to realize that this is actually their F9. There's a couple of odd mushroom-shaped items on the back end of the roof:

s6

...dunno what these are supposed to be; they aren't on the Enhorning F7, (or any F9 I've ever had in other scales) but do show up on both F9 photos on that site.

There is also a link to a review from the December 1962 S Gauge Herald, which speaks of the pick-up issues and mentions that earlier models had aluminum wheels, while later releases had wheels of brass. My sample has the aluminum ones.

More S scale history...

Mark in Oregon

Like the AMT O gauge F unit, the Enhorning F unit is a mongrel - note the grills on the dynamic brake area near the cab - those were on F2 and F3 units, and were changed to circular fans starting with the F7.

Add Reply

Post
OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
330-757-3020

www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×