WTB: HO Scale CLIMAX logging 2 truck

It's nothing like any real Climax, though. Not even a Class A. The Bachmann has arrived, and while not as old looking as this, is pretty good.

That is the Roundhouse, (MDC) Climax kit, and someone did a damn nice job of adding details. As others have said, it doesn't resemble any real life prototype. Used on a layout where it would be the only loco, it might not look too bad.

The "Battle Mountain" series from MDC, of which this was one, was intended for a "might have been" type layout, kitbash the cars to get either mining cars or logging cars, or anything else that turned your crank, but far from any real prototype.

On the "bad" side, it's out of scale, way out of scale, the trucks are not anything that Climax ever used. Details, well, with logging, build your engine and you'll probably find a prototype somewhere that's pretty close. It's also incredibly noisy.

On the "good" side, it was cheap, and with a little fiddlling can be made to creep incredibly slow. As could be expected, it's powerful, too powerful. Pulling what would have been impossible trains with it is no problem.

You might look at Ye Olde Huff and Puff, they offer a non powered kit, without trucks and couplers. Climax trucks seem to be a non hot item, you'll have to scratch something. Couplers, well, I have my doubt that any Climax A had automatic couplers, pin and link are all I've ever seen in any picture I've come across. I have not seen the YOHP kit, but everything else the make and sell is first rate, I wouldn't expect their Climax kit to be any different.

Greybeard

I think previous responders who say it doesn't even resemble a Class A Climax are being a little too harsh. The trucks are wrong, the boiler sits too high, the gondola-like side boards around the base of the boiler extend too high, and the rear water tank is not the usual factory as-built vertical axis cylindrical type (but does approximate the rectangular tanks on many logging company rebuilds). But to be able to make these comments means the MDC model does have the general characteristics of a Class A Climax. I think it comes down to what's your budget, and what's your "good enough for my eye" threshold. Another consideration is that Class A's were the earliest Climax model and tended to be used on earlier, smaller, and somewhat more often eastern logging operations. The MDC would be less apropos if you were trying to convey the feel of a larger 1930's-40's western logging operation. Gary Q

Gary Q is right re his comments about the Climax model. However, whoever built and painted the thing did a very nice job; I think it looks great! Bob E.

Whilst it is true that the Class A was the first loco model that Climax built, they were still building them when they closed down in the late-1920's, so many loggers were still ujsing them in the 1930-1940's.

A Class A was one of the last still under construction when the company made the decision to close up shop.

Jeff Law New Zealand

For a "T" boiler, it would be about right. However, the rest of the loco doesn't fit in with the early "T" boiler models.

the gondola-like side boards around the base of the boiler extend

With the exception that the wood load is much too high too. That would be very difficult for the fireman to keep stoking until the pile was burned down quite a bit.

They were also used in the west, as well as the east and south. An A Climax, to my eye, would be out of place on anything much past 1910 for logging. Seeing them used for shunting in a mill yard or some other application would extend this period somewhat, but by then heavier and more powerful locos had taken most of the "woods" work.

It all depends on location and time period, here in Wisconsin, rod locos outnumbered geared by at least ten to one, and were just as likely standard gauge as narrow. (And that even goes back into the

Don't take this wrong, I love my MDC Climax, and pulling a short string of their logging cars, doesn't look bad at all. It's only when I hook on a string of shorter logging cars, the Russel cars, that it looks too far wrong. Then it becomes very evident that it's much too big. There are reasons for this, I believe they used the same frame and running gear as the box cab, just made another body shell, but in some cases it can work very well.

If the OP is still interested, in the thread on Athearn/MDC there is a link to a supplier that says he has them in stock, and the kit isn't bad to build, goes pretty easy. Price is under $30 plus shipping. I just ordered another, but my best guess is that I'm going to get a backorder notification.

Greybeard

Thanks everyone for responding - and wile I agree that the loco may be "wrong" for a bunch of reasons, I feel it is a cute as anything I have seen and seems "after the spirit" of those backwoods men who used what they had available to keep their business going. I understand the scale issues etc. but still wish to buy a couple of these to detail up.

GREYBEARD - I looked at that site and was about to buy 2 when I saw their bloody postage charges for International orders. Nearly 100% of my buy-price! and frankly that's a real rip off. I can get the TWO items delivered to Australia for $13 by USPS. So it rules out my ability to buy those ones ..... the hunt goes on

as do I!

:)

Steve

Hmmm. Sorry 'bout that, didn't look at your header. Charges for US delivery sounded about right, so I didn't read any further than that. I did order the box cab at the same time, locally, and that includes Milwaukee, they're unobtanium.

Greybeard

Agreed. Whatever that MDC 'thing' is, it's NOT a Climax. It does bear some resemblance to a variety of other geared steam locos, bit is considerably oversized for HO. It would look better regauged to Sn3 or even On3 (with some cab and other work).

Dan Mitchell ============

I hear what everyone is saying, though this in no way helps me be able to buy one!

:)

Steve