Re: K-36 and K-37

Earl Knoob
 

Remember, when looking at a folio and comparing it to a model,  the boiler diameter in the folio is the diameter of the pressure vessel.  To that is added the boiler lagging (insulation) and the jacket.  That easily adds 3-4+" to the diameter of the boiler.


From: HOn3@groups.io <HOn3@groups.io> on behalf of Jim Spencer <trainmanjs@...>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 11:24 AM
To: HOn3@groups.io
Subject: Re: [HOn3] K-36 and K-37
 
Mick, I happen to own both a 1994 PSC K-28 and a couple of the Westside K-28s.  While I agree that the detail on the PSC is much greater (brake shoes, for instance), I think the Westside is little more proportionately correct.  I located a folio sheet on the K-28s (from John Norwood's "Rio Grande Narrow Gauge"). 
The overall boiler diameter is supposed to be 64 3/4".  Measuring both models with a caliper is quite difficult in terms of missing the handrails, etc.  But the Westside appears to be about 69" and the PSC about 67" - both too large - though the PSC wins on that account. 
The more important dimension is the overall height of the boiler.  Extrapolating the folio sheet shows 9.2' off the top of the rails.  Again, both models much are too tall.  The Westside wins on that account by being around 9.9' where the PSC is right at about 10'.
I don't have a Division Point K-28, but my understanding when this model came out was that it was the first K-28 model to get the overall height and boiler diameter correct. (Maybe someone else who has one can confirm that).
Another important thing that hasn't been brought up is the cab corners.  All the newer models mentioned above have the correct rounded corners.  The older PFMs don't and appear to be fabricated out of separate flat pieces and soldered at 90º.

Join HOn3@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.