The 485 post below made me ponder...anything to avoid work! I happy to say I worked a lot on all of the 9 reamining class K-36 locomotives .Here is my critique...
480. This engine had problems. It hit something hard enough on the fireman's sibe to crush the left cylinder. The D&RGW did a creditable job brazing it back together, but I felt there was something not right with the ports. Consequently it was very slippery and there were lots of mechanical problems with the left side, culminating with a serious breakdown a couple of years back where the running gear flew apart with heavy damage as a consequence. It steamed well, and like other 480s, it could perform valiantly when called upon to do so.
481. All around ,this was one of the best of the class. It steamed well and ran square. Since it was put back in service in 1981, it has had few major mechanical problems .
482. I liked this engine, but it seemed to have some very beat-up running gear, and rode rough. It steamed well.
483. Some claim this was the best of the class. It was the best steamer, square, and could pull. It was favored byv the D&RGW ,and they fixed it after the bad 1958 wreck.
484. El Coke's favorite locomotive. It was square, steamed as good as 483, and could perform a miracle if called upon to do so. The only problem was for some reason the injectors were always tempermental on this rig. It ran a lot, and appears in mre photos than any other 80. God bless that old mill.
485. No, (despite rumors) I never worked it. Legend has it that it was a good engine.
486. I never liked this engine. It steamed poorly, always developing a dead spot in the fire in the right front. Also the Butterfly door worked when it wanted to( the only bad Butterfly I ever worked with).
487. This was another engine I never cared much for. It was not the best steamer, and in later years it was never square. It had oval wheel centers and would pound badly when descending long grades or at speed (20mph). However, this was one of the most dependable locomotives I ever worked on, rarely developing mechanical problems .
488. I used to say, "the 488 is a dog, but it it's MY dog!" I caught a lot of thips on that beat-up bucket of bolts. It steamed well, but consumed more coal than the other 80s. It, too was a very dependable locomotive.
489. This engine had its good and bad points. It had an excellent throttle and steamed very well. When I ran it (1990s)it always had overheated drivers.This may have been because when it received new axles it was not keyed correctly (by a well-known r.r.company that will go un-named). It also was in a bad wreck in 1926, and wreclks are never good for locomotve running gear. The left sander never worked, so if it rained on Cumbres, you were dead.
482, 484 and 488 were regular power on the "San Juan" , especially after the 7 K-28s went to Alaska in 1942. These engines had special passenger appliances which included a air-operated buzzer and a steam heat manifold. Other engines used on the San Juan were the 483, 485 and 489.
The 480s rode rough. I suspect the swing-design on the trailing truck may have caused that. Also , on the D&SNG, the driving box liners were kept loose so the class could negotiate the sharp curves there. The short stack made these engines very dirty and smoky. Ergonomically, they were not real comfortable to run as the engineer had to lean forward to use the throttle. They were top-heavy, and a couple of them flipped overe in their histories, so engineers were cautous with them. Some of the problems I list above were temporal, and could change with new tires and bearings , front end repairs and firebox work.
The best thing about the class was their remarkable dependability. Not a whole lot went wrong with them, as long as they were competently maintained. They had a great balance between steam capacity and consumption, and like I said, even the most problematic engines could exceed their limits when a miracle was needed. Ear1 and I once had an interesting discussion about the class. They are the most complete class of steam engines left in America. We also agreed that they may have been among Baldwin's best.
