@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr Hell yeah! My notifications are set for when you post next. Thanks for making quality content! There's so much that I didn't know, and so much that I didn't know that I didn't know (if that makes sense). Looking forward to seeing what there's to say about the climax locomotive. Also, if I may ask, how do you decide what locomotive (either type or specific engine) to do next?
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr I see! Well, I won't ask you to add more to your list. I'd feel bad if the workload/backup was too much. But, in the unlikely event you ever need more ideas, try asking on your community tab! There's likely many locomotives unknown to you, me, and many others that could do with the quality and in-depth research that you do! Thanks again for posting. Keep up the amazing work and see you next time!
Hi littlejohnny47. The Shay, Heisler and Climax were three different solutions to the same problem. Each inventor was trying to out do the other two to gain market share. Thanks for the comment and question and thank you for watching!!
In addition to ASL's comment, from what I hear from the grapevine (and a bit of logic), each locomotive has a benefit and a weakness. From what I've gathered (and could very well be wrong about): -Climax locomotives could haul the most, but were slow and prone to severe shaking, wearing out parts incredibly quickly. -Shays were less prone to shakes and were moderately reliable, but due to their driveshafts being mounted on one side of the engine, this leads them to require larger turning radia (radius's?). -Heislers were the most reliable of the big 3, but weren't geared down quite as much as the other locmotives, so they couldn't haul as much as either the shay or climax. Again, this is just what I've managed to piece together and am likely wrong.
@@weylinwest9505 I think you're on the right track. I haven't completed my research of the Climax so I can't offer an opinion yet. But, given how the engines are mounted, I can see where the shaking would come from. The Shays, however, were quite long, relatively speaking, and required a gentler curve due to the travel of its slip yokes. Heisler claimed their design could haul a greater load, albeit not much greater, than a Shay of comparable size.
There is a Heisler about 12 miles from me. Also a Shay, a Climax and a Willamette at the Mount Rainier Scenic Railroad.
Nothing better than learning about old logging Heislers at 7am! Thanks for making the awesome video ASL. Can't wait for the next one!
Hi weylinwest9505. That's hilarious!! I'm glad you enjoyed the video and stay tuned for the Climax coming soon!! Thanks for watching!!
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr Hell yeah! My notifications are set for when you post next. Thanks for making quality content! There's so much that I didn't know, and so much that I didn't know that I didn't know (if that makes sense). Looking forward to seeing what there's to say about the climax locomotive.
Also, if I may ask, how do you decide what locomotive (either type or specific engine) to do next?
@@weylinwest9505 I had quite a list of topics I wanted to cover when I launched the channel. However, I'm always open to suggestions!!!
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr I see! Well, I won't ask you to add more to your list. I'd feel bad if the workload/backup was too much. But, in the unlikely event you ever need more ideas, try asking on your community tab! There's likely many locomotives unknown to you, me, and many others that could do with the quality and in-depth research that you do!
Thanks again for posting. Keep up the amazing work and see you next time!
Another interesting video, please keep them coming.
Hi cdjhyoung. I'm glad you enjoyed it. Stay tuned for the Climax coming soon. Thanks for watching!!
Thank you Steve! Great overview of an interesting design. I have often wondered why there were three major variations of the geared locomotive?
Hi littlejohnny47. The Shay, Heisler and Climax were three different solutions to the same problem. Each inventor was trying to out do the other two to gain market share. Thanks for the comment and question and thank you for watching!!
In addition to ASL's comment, from what I hear from the grapevine (and a bit of logic), each locomotive has a benefit and a weakness. From what I've gathered (and could very well be wrong about):
-Climax locomotives could haul the most, but were slow and prone to severe shaking, wearing out parts incredibly quickly.
-Shays were less prone to shakes and were moderately reliable, but due to their driveshafts being mounted on one side of the engine, this leads them to require larger turning radia (radius's?).
-Heislers were the most reliable of the big 3, but weren't geared down quite as much as the other locmotives, so they couldn't haul as much as either the shay or climax.
Again, this is just what I've managed to piece together and am likely wrong.
@@weylinwest9505 I think you're on the right track. I haven't completed my research of the Climax so I can't offer an opinion yet. But, given how the engines are mounted, I can see where the shaking would come from. The Shays, however, were quite long, relatively speaking, and required a gentler curve due to the travel of its slip yokes. Heisler claimed their design could haul a greater load, albeit not much greater, than a Shay of comparable size.
@@americansteamlegacy-yh9dr I guess at that rate, it would come down to pounds of tractive effort and the cohesion factor, right?