Rick,
I wasn't upset, just making the point that it is so much better for that locomotive to be restored and operating than becoming returning to the earth at Morningstar. I do have to agree that if an engine is restored, it should be done right, this including even the smallest details. It appears to me that everything was addressed fairly thoroughly, minus the points of the lettering and incorrect tender (and maybe a few other things which I am not aware of)
I would like to point out however, that when former GLRR Inc. #40 was sent to the WP&YR that she obtained #44's tender, while #44 was to use #40's tender when it was returned to service. To this day, #40 still runs with #44's tender. So it could be said that #40 is inaccurate too...
I am not sure of this, and perhaps I am very wrong in thinking this, but I believe the lettering on #30/74's tender was done by the same person/company that mis-spelled the lettering on D&RGW coach #280 a few years back ("Rio Grande" spelled as "Rio Grand"). This may explain the tender lettering problems. You'd think they could at least spell the "Grande" correctly....but noooooo. That would be too easy.
And yes, CHS likes to tweak the history so that it fits what they like/need. Stupid politics getting in the way, just like always.
Shane