Andrew Brandon Wrote:
=======================================================
> As James mentioned in another post, a lot of the
> Mason info online is incorrect (outdated). I
> noticed this evening in fact that the list of
> Bogies we have on PacificNG is incorrect for these
> two locomotives. Don Ball is correct on his blog,
> the drawing he shows is in fact the Mason drawing
> for the "Amador". Don is very knowledgeable on the
> Stockton & Ione and is currently working on an
> article about the line for PacificNG.
>
> The locomotive histories are reversed on that
> roster over on CPRR.ORG and the Cylinders/Drivers
> for "Stockton" should be 10x14, 42" dia drivers.
>
> The Amador had 12x16 cylinders per the note on the
> drawing.
10x14? Did you mean 10x16 as per Phillip's post? Other engines built to that pattern (Boston, Revere Beach & Lyn, etc) typically used a 16 inch stroke when paired with 42 inch drivers. Just want to be clear here after years of seeing everything under the sun listed for this locomotive, since 14 is also hypothetically possible via buyer specification.
Upon close examination I do notice the "Stockton" is a bit different from the stock 12x16 0-4-4 in that the driver spacing is different (shorter) and the tank appears smaller. So that's my mistake due to ignorance of Masons in general. I'll edit my other post to clarify so as to remove bad info from the internet (enough of it out there already).
If we start at 10 inch diameter cylinders, then that'd suggest the rebuild increased the cylinders to 12 inch diameter, as opposed to the 13 inch cylinders mentioned above.
I also wonder whether the rebuild reduced or eliminated the lateral motion of the driving unit given that was the cause of most of the single fairlie's faults (relative to the similar Forney type). No mention seems to have been made of this either way so I suppose it's lost to history.
