Mikado Oil Tender?

[tqvfjmin]

I have an older BLI (Blue Box) MP Mikado numbered 1111. The new Eagle issue MIkado article says that this # was delivered with an oil tender but the model comes with a coal tender. I guess I have 3 choices:

1. Ignore the discrepancy (not really how I’m “built”)
2. Convert to an oil tender (any ideas on how?)
3. re-number the loco to one that actually had a coal tender, probably something in the 1250s since the model doesn’t have a booster.

Any thouights? Thanks.

Tim Nichols

[peggyrothschild]

Tim
It makes a difference depending on what part of the Mopac you are modeling. The MP Texas Lines used oil and the upper lines freight locomotives in Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Arkansas all used coal.

Charlie

[tqvfjmin]

I’m semi-freelancing but based on the Arkansas/Missouri portion of the RR. I guess that means I should keep the coal tender as is and re-number the loco. BTW, is there any info to suggest that any of the engines with oil tenders got coal tenders later in life? These locos were delivered in the teens ans 20’s but I’m modeling late steam and diesel transition.

BTW, the GP is really nice.

[Bud Moss]

The railroad often changed tenders depending on the area the locomotives worked. If you are modeling the Missouri/Arkansas portion of the MoPac, you would have seen both oil and coal burning locomotives on the Missouri Division. I think it is your choice. I’d leave it as a coal burner. If you convert to oil, you also have to remove the ashpans under the firebox since oil burners didn’t produce ash and clinkers. Jerry Michels

[tqvfjmin]

Sooooo, since they MAY have changed the tender, I can model assuming they did and run the 1111 as a coal burner — guilt free?

[Bud Moss]

I never feel guilty about my modeling, I have seldom run into the prototype police :^)

[bargetanika]

I have 12 steam engines lettered for MP. Two light USRA mikes are are relatively prototypical, 2 BLI heavy mikes are only vaguely like MP engines, 4 Bachmann 2-8-0s are numbered in imaginary number classes as are two decapods, one 4-8-2 is like before the pre-late thirties rebuild, and one ten wheeler is “something like” an MP engine. Does this bother me? OF COURSE NOT!!! They all run great! Crawl like ants! I’ve heard too many bad things about how prototypical MP brass engines run! I’m perfectly happy with a smooth running 75% prototypical engine switching my way freight.

[Bud Moss]

One thing I will agree with Pat, brass is typically horrible unless perhaps from the late 1980s, Overland in particular was excellent. The rest were pretty horrible. I have completely rebuilt and had rebuilt a number of brass steamers, and they now perform quite well. Jerry Michels

[peggyrothschild]

This tread got me thinking about steam and the Mopac signature they placed on them. With 3D printing does anyone have a source where we could get the tender steel doghouse made and the number boards that were behind the smoke stack? This would certainly help brand a model as Mopac.

[bargetanika]

As well as the stack light and hinged stack cover. And oil bunkers to convert Bachmann 2-8-0, 2-10-0, and USRA 2-8-2’s to oil.

[alexortiz25]

I’d like to see Frontend Throttles for 0-8-0s.

3D printing is worth investigating. On Shapeways others produce locomotive cabs for upgrading specific models. Several HO locos could be benefit with correct MP cabs.

[tqvfjmin]

I have used Cal Scale 190-260 for the numbers (will send photo later). Just had to grind off the dividers on the front so I could apply a single 4-digit decal. Shapeways makes HO scale doghouses. I have a pair that haven’t been painted or installed yet. Not sure how prototyically Mopac they are but they’re all I could find.

[tqvfjmin]

Here’s the numberboard pic.

[bargetanika]

Is that a BLI Pacific? Pic of the entire engine please.

[tqvfjmin]

Yes, Although it was not originally MP (can’t recall what it was). I relettered and renumbered it. Here’s a pic:

[Author]

Posts