Review of my new favorite loco - by a long shot: MTH Premier ATSF 3462 Hudson

Lee: very nice review. Hope you get many years of use.

Great review...and even better, you made the purchase from one of our Sponsors!!

Alan

Looks like a great locomotive.  Very nicely detailed and a great price when compared to other Hudsons on the market.

Lee, very nice looking engine.

Jeff

When I got my PS2 version 9 years ago I felt the same way.  I still think it is the best of MTH's Santa Fe engines.  The others are a little more generic using the same shell for both the 2-10-4 and Northern.

I like the sounds better on your PS3 version.  The PS2 sounds like all my other MTH Santa Fe engines.

The only big gripe I have is that MTH modeled the drivers at a noticeable 77 inches instead of the scale 84 inches, otherwise a truly great engine.

I was tempted to order a -2 version and perhaps I should have, but I was hoping I could have picked up the recently announced 3rd Rail version with scale sized drivers.  

An interesting note from I think Larry Brasher's book "Santa Fe Locomotive Development" was that these engines were so good that Santa Fe downgraded the passenger trains that these engines were heading because they were too powerful and a waste of power for the streamlined lightweight passenger trains.  They ended up on trains like the Fast Mail Express which better met their capabilities.

A reason to own 3461 is:

"In December 1937, locomotive #3461 set a world record for the longest single run by a steam locomotive by completing the 2227 miles from Los Angeles to Chicago without maintenance other than five refuelling stops en route, hauling Train #8, the Fast Mail Express. An average speed of 45 mph was attained, including stops; maximum speed during the run was 90 mph. During steeply graded portions of the run it was, of course, assisted by helpers. Such long distance runs were a goal of railway operating departments, enabling a reduction in locomotive numbers and through increased locomotive utilization, reduce overall costs."

Now I'm thinking I may have to get historic 3461.

Lee, thanks for the review, I enjoyed it.  Enjoy your new engine(s)!

Lee, you have great taste! 

I have number 3463 from the PS2 run.  It is one of my favorite locomotives.  Big without being huge.

Stuart

Great review.

Art

Nice review Lee,

Thanks for the videos; I was wanting to hear the sounds of the new model.  It sounds like the PS3 Santa Fe Blue Goose the came out a little while ago.  Below is a video of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4WKt0QjrAA

Yes, the drivers are undersized.  And the side rods are incorrect; these engines did not have roller bearing side rods.

Not sure if 3rd Rail has enough reservations for their model of this engine.  One of their projected models will have large Santa Fe emblems on the tender sides.  That model will be a knockout!

Steve

Here is a photo of the Santa Fe with the 2 Santa Fe emblems on the tender side.

Great review and even greater looking engine.

I hate to bust your bubble, but the qty 5 ATSF 84" drivered Hudsons developed about 300 drawbar HP LESS than a NYC J-3A. Source of my info is the dynamometer test results for these engines published in "The Santa Fe's Big Three" by Farrington. The engine on test vibrated so bad that the firebrick fell into the firebox, and it had a LOT of other problems. Santa Fe found out what they had, and that was probably one reason why there were only five...

There was only one Super Hudson design, and we all know whose it was...

Having said that, the MTH rendition of this engine in O Scale/Gauge is beautiful. I saw a two rail streamlined version at York a few years ago, and it is spectacular.

Well, okay, that's what you think,  but no: the bubble is not burst.  Nor will it be.

With trains, cars, aircraft, etc., there is always some test, somewhere, or someone who has a copy or reference to a special test or dynanometer run that was done or something.  For all I know there was a special test of the 3460 that proved it had 3,000 HP and could do 110 mph pulling a twelve-car train, but I would not opay attention, because again, it isn't apples to apples.  For comparison purposes, in all cases, I use the the steamlocomotive database on line: yeah, I know, not perfect, but it is a common source, I've never seen any evidence it plays favorites, and its what I use.  There, the 3460 class and Js aren't even close as to power orgtractive effort or weight.  

As to the vibration, my books mention they had some initial imblance problems when the bigger design was first tested, but I absolutely see no evidence that the final product as run for nearly two decades had any.  The 3460s were retained about as long as Santa Fe kept any steam because they were powerful and eocnomical (into the mid '50s), and as marker referenced above, 3461 set a record for the longest credible revenue service run without maintenance - badly vibrating locos running 90 mph don't do that . . .  

I agree the NYC Js were iconic and very pretty - that's why I have a Vision Hudson.  I'm glad you like the J3A and have the enthusiasm you do for it.   

Lee, a great review and great detail that you went to.

I hate to bust your bubble, but the qty 5 ATSF 84" drivered Hudsons developed about 300 drawbar HP LESS than a NYC J-3A. Source of my info is the dynamometer test results for these engines published in "The Santa Fe's Big Three" by Farrington 

So what was the drawbar horsepower figure published in Farrington's book?

Once I discovered that the axle (common) pickups on some of the trucks weren't actually

touching the axles, my PS2 3463 became a nice runner over my GG switches.

Now, don't misunderstand, the NYC Hudsons will always be my favorites, of course. How

could it be otherwise? But that big 3460-class is a real bear, and any Hudson is an

interesting steamer (the 4-6-4 is simply Just Right).

Plus, the ATSF 3460's were the prototypes for Lionel's "Santa Fe type" small PW Hudsons - and my original 2055 is sitting on a shelf in the next room. Take a look at a 2055 (etc)

boiler casting sometime - surprisingly accurate, given the situation. It's also funny

that Lionel used a simplified version of their NYC scale Hudson smokebox front on it.

So, the "face" is a mix of East and West.

The 3460's were the heaviest Hudsons for a while, if I recall correctly - but later out-

weighed by the CNW E-4, the C&O L-2 and maybe the MILW F-7? (F-7 here is a steamer.) 

On page 118 of Farrington's book is a table derived from the "Power Performance Curve" for engine 3461 reproduced on page 119 of the same book, showing maximum drawbar horsepower of 3600 at 50 mph.

Brian Reed, in his "Locomotives in Profile, Vol.1" (Table 1, p.28) gives max dbhp for the J-3a as 3935 at 65 mph. He does't cite the source for this figure.

Thanks B. Smith, I enjoy learning about such things.

Lee - I was going to point this out earlier but couldn't find a picture.  However, Steam Guy provided a picture that works.  If you look at the picture he provided,

you will note that there is an area between the number boards, and between the stack and sand dome that is not painted black like MTH did it, but it is correctly painted the same color as the boiler front.  I haven't changed it on my Hudson yet, but have on other Santa Fe engines.  You might look at your 3rd Rail ATSF Northern which is correctly painted to see what I am pointing out.  

S. Kip Farrington's "The Santa Fe's Big Three" is a fascinating book based on Santa Fe dynamometer tests, and Brian Reed's two volumes on (mostly) British and some American steam engines contains a lot of interesting technical detail and a good deal of

very personal opinion. Another remarkable book is "La Locomotive a Vapeur" by Andre Chapelon, the great French designer (available in an English translation), first published in 1952. It covers modern steam locomotive development in great detail.

Sad they didn't save these. Don

Lee Willis - I had no idea that the translation of Chapelon's book had become so rare expensive (I found only one copy available through Abebooks, at a dealer in England for U.S. $520!). I don't remember exactly what I paid for my copy at the time of publication in 2000, but probably around $75. Now I feel even more lucky than before to have a copy. 

One signature in my copy (pps. 407-422) from the first printing was bound in upside down, but I didn't bother trying to get a replacement from the publisher. I never thought it would become a "collector's item."

I paid $320 for the one I ordered, and was happy  since the prices of other options were much higher.  I think that he was the best steam engineer (by which I mean a guy who could make steam work and work hard  . . . )  in the RR industry, regardless of country, although I think Nigel Gresley was a better overall locomotive engineer.  Chapelon got incredible power (supposedly 5200 HP, but that's another one of those suspect "special dynanometer tests" I talked about above, so who knows . . . ) out of the 242.A that he re-designed.  The book Genius of Steam says he had stability problems above 90 mph (they would not have shown up on thje 241.A since ti really couldn't go quite that fast) that he could only cure by going to two axles on the rear pilot, but it was still twitchy, so he ended up using a rear truck design and parts he bought from the US - Baldwin or Alco, I can't remember.  This really honked off French engineers and was one reason EST did not really like the 242.A.  Another is that it was expensive and no doubt would have been a maintenance handful, like most hot rods where you've doubled the HP.

Again, thank you for the tip.  Oh, BTW, I bought the other book you mentioned, too.

Lee, we have one more road number 3465 in this set.

Thanks

Pat

Image:	Price:	Title:	Details:
	$1,079.99	4-6-4 Troop Train Steam Passenger Set w/Proto-Sound 3.0 - Santa Fe http://www.patstrains.com/View...Details=View+Details	Stock Number: 20-3474-1 Gauge: O/O-27 Gauge Manufacturer: MTH Premier Product Type: Sets Availability: In Stock

P.S. I can sell the engine only if desired.

Pat

PATRICK'S TRAINS

WWW.PATSTRAINS.COM

E-MAIL PATSTRAINS@AOL.COM

142 29TH STREET

WHEELING WV 26003

304-232-0714

Nah, let me think about it . . . the troop train is definitely worth the additional $$$.  No need to sell the engine alone.  I just missed that the set had a different #, for some reason I thought it was 3462 also.

EDIT: Okay, I ordered it.  Now I will have half the class.  Cool.  The troop train will be interesting.  I have a 22 car WWII army train, too, with lots of armor and all, but I never had any "personnel." to go with all the tanks and cannon, etc.  This could turn out to be exceptionally nice.  Three ATSF military trains on the layout at one time!  

Wow, Lee 

I will pay the shipping on the set. I have to say this engine is beautiful. I am a NYC Hudson collector and this engine looks even better than my 700E. The picture MTH has in the catalog is terrible and the on-line picture is bad. Its nice to open an engine and take it out of the box and all you can say is wow.

Thanks

Pat

Thanks.  I agree it is a jewel of a loco.  I love the idea of having three.  

I doubt Santa Fe ever tripled headed these, but I'm going to. One of these certainly could not pull a train over Raton Pass by itself, but I doubt ATSF used 84"-driver locos for assistance: they had Mallets and small-driver torque monsters in Trinidad and Raton that were designed for that duty and did nothing else. I certainly can't find pictures of them even double headed in any of them, but when I triple head mine I will post a picture.  

Didn't Pecos River offer a three rail ATSF 4-6-4?  If so, how does that rate?

They were pushed off the mainline by the Northerns and also early passenger diesels. Balancing may not have been a problem on a secondary line pulling the "Antelope".....

As info, Baldwin Hudsons on the New Haven and C&O also had balance problems. The Baldwin Northerns on ACL also had balance problems, and it has been published that vibration was "severe" on the Baldwin built PRR T1's. A NYC J-3 on a high speed slip test using greased rail reached a driving wheel rotational speed of 164 mph. The drivers lifted off the rail a fraction of an inch at this rotational wheel speed, and put some minor scuff marks on the rail. The NYC J-3 was the most perfectly designed and balanced six coupled steam locomotive ever built.

The use of a dynamometer car for locomotive road testing does permit an "apples to apples" comparison. Despite its 84" drivers, the ATSF engine may not have been a high speed design, as its boiler provided only enough steam to reach its peak drawbar HP at 50 mph. (The NYC J-3A reached its peak at 62 mph, and from a "smaller" boiler, 265 psi, and using coal and not oil for fuel.) Kiefer knew his stuff.....

Absolute size is not an indicator of performance. The oil fired MILW F7's had 300 psi and 84" drivers. They ran to 110 mph, but hauled only 430 tons. ("The Hiawatha Story"-Scribbens).

A NYC J-3A could take 1000 trailing tons to 94 mph, and this with axle mounted car electrical generators in service at 30% demand. On test, J-3A #5408 took 1000 trailing tons to 98 mph on a descending 0.3% grade.

Pecos River Brass made the smaller 3450-Class 4-6-4, in several versions from original through last rebuilding with LFM drivers.  They are very fine looking engines and run well, but could benefit from modern electronics, as they were produced several years ago.

hello guys and gals, Lee

I was surprise that the S.F.3460 class Hudson was indeed bigger and larger than the NYC Hudson. Lee, that is very handsome looking S.F. Hudson

the woman who loves the S.F.5011,2678

Tiffany

Yes.  Along with your favorite, the 5000 class,  and the big Northerns (my personal favorite), the final corner of ATSF's "Big Three" triangle.  They were 10% to 20% larger that the Js in every single measure, but they were designed for a different purpose - long range stamina.  They probably did not have quite as high a top speed, but they had oversized boilers and thus could sustain 80+ mph forever and with dependability over long distances - hence 3461 holding the steam record for longest run ever, etc.  

What I find most interesting is that the 3460s were produced nine years after the 3750 Northerns.  Until I looked into them I assumed that Santa Fe had had them built and then decided them could not cut it and went to Northerns, but that is not the case.  ATSF went back to Hudsons and had this half dozen done when they have the follow-on 3760 Northerns built.  Both locos were part of a kind of two-tier plan.  While they were brutes as far as Hudsons go, they were still lighter-weight - smaller versions of the 3760s in a way, with equipment downsized equivalently, and  were intended for "second tier"mainline service: pulling slightly shorter, slightly lighter and less prestigious trains on the same Chicago to Lajunta route, using their speed and stamina to maintain high average speeds in order to keep their place syncrhonized with - match the speed of - their big brother Northerns that were pulling the "big" trains.  Far from being "pushed off the mainlines by the Northerns" as was suggested above (and as one might expect given they were smaller) they stayed in service as long as the 3750 Northerns: they were scrapped in '56, the same year as the 3750s, and in fact went to the same breaker's yard.

 I expect to receive 3461 and 3465 later this week, since UPS says they left Patrick's place today, and I will post a videos of all three - half the class - running together, and  maybe if I can, with my 5000 and 2900 and 3750 class locos if I can figure out how to fit all of them together.  That would be spectacular. 

Doug, go with the pre-order.  Cab forwards were cool, and that model is sort of iconic, too, and initial impressions of "I gotta buy it" usually do prove to be right (or at least a big regret if you cancel.)   I think Patrick might have another 3460 though, should you find a extra wad of bills sitting around.

Lee - A few corrections.  The Santa Fe Hudsons were never intended to go West of La Junta on transcontinental trains.  They were switched out at La Junta for Northerns.

As diesels arrived they were reassigned and could be found in areas other than New Mexico and Arizona.  They did serve on the Colorado Joint line from time to time.

Santa Fe's Northern classes were 3751 (3751-3764); 3765 (3765-3775); 3776 (3776-3785) and 2900 (2900-2929).  When you mention the "3760 Northerns", 3760 to 3764 would still be a 3751 Class.  If you specified a 3765 Class, that would be a later and different Northern.

A 3750 would be a 4-8-2 Mountain of the 3700 Class.

Regarding the 5000 Class, there was only one.  Madame Queen #5000 the first real Santa Fe 2-10-4.  

Next was the 5001 Class, very different from 5000.  

Then came the 5011 Class which is the one MTH makes.  There are differences between 5001 and 5011.

The two easiest to spot differences between 5001 and 5011 are the engine truck (front, pilot truck) and especially the tender.  

Lee that Worley book is a gem and you can loose hours learning the differences.  When you learn them, they become significant, especially to a Santa Fe fan like you.

Thanks marker. I appreciate the info and corrections.  While I am a UP (mostly) and ATSF (growing fast) fan, I never really paid much(well any) attention to the 3460s until I got this model and saw how BIG it was.  I had assumed the 3460s was follow ons to the rather wimpy 3450s (sorry if that honked anyone off, but they were small-really just revised Pacifics, one of which I modeled with a bashed LC+).  I was shocked when I got this model and saw it was, except for length, as big as 3751.

I did know that fairly soon soon after delivery, the Hudsons seldom went west of La Junta most of the time. Powerful as they were,I suppose they did not really have the oomph to really leave the flat prairie.  But they were used through the war on Chicago to LaJunta and they did great there.  But certainly 3461 did run all the way to Chicago at least once: pulling the "Fast Mail" on its record run of 2227 miles was from Chicago all the way to LA.  As I understand it the Blue Goose never did: it pulled the Chief only on the first legs of that journey.  

You're right about the road numbers on the Northerns, too, I just mis-typed, 3750 instead of 3751. And while I know Madam Queen was a different loco, in the interests of time, well . . . they were all 2-10-4s. The 5001-5010 is one of my two favorite locos (other being 2900s).   Anyway, I am pretty sure the 3460 Hudsons were close design-kin of the second ATSF Northern series, the 3765 class, and the 5001s.  They were were designed and built in the same period and they all show an amazing family resemblance in their piping and layout.   

I have several big siopping bagsfull of old papers and newspaper clippings and photos my aunt left me after my uncle died (she was an ATSF dispatch records clerk/supervisor in their Trinidad office for about four decades; he drove locos mostly back and forth over Raton pass assisting trains over the pass, and for a few years the big  Northerns and F3s and such on to LA.   Anyway, there are a  copies of the Raton Pass Bulletin, a sort of employee newspaper or something, not very well written or printed.  One from 1938 talks about the "new,big Hudsons" and boosts about the world record 3461 set (no details there you don't know - not even as many as in Iron Horses),but the company pride is evident.   As you would expect in a company newsletter it goes perhaps a little far in praising it, saying that 3460

was reported capable of over 100 mph and that dynamometer tests of it before

 the shrouding was put on it verified "it exceeded expectations with almost 4000  horspower" (Yes, they mis-spelled that) and "could put out 3000 all -day long."  I never set much stock in information from sources like that - they weren't really lying, but I know how people with an incentive to find an answer can, and how word of mouth often has a multiplier of about 1.05 per cycle, etc..  But the pride the employees had in their locos and their company was very real, and something i kind of envy - not a lot of that around today.