Why didn't the 2-6-6-2 loco configuration have a name?

EDM5970 wrote:Sorry, Insane, but you have your cylinder sizes backward; also, the one boiler comment doesn't wash. I doubt that any steam locomotives were built with more than one boiler. (Ships are another story.)

A locomotive with two boilers:
http://www.djbengineering.co.uk/kit-dblfairlie.html

I believe insane had this in mind:
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/L ... mallet.htm

Touche- I was thinking American steam, and the Fairlies hadn't even entered my mind.

Now that Fairlies have entered the discussion, Baldwin built a double 0-6-0 tanker for either the Sierra or the McCloud, but it was not a success and became two 0-6-0Ts.

How about a triple boiler?

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/L ... boiler.htm

To return to the original topic, it's because no railroad chose to give them a name. UP named the Big Boy and Challenger, C&O named the Allegheny, the same 2-6-6-6 design was a Blue Ridge on the Virginian, the 4-6-4 Hudson was named by the NYC, although the Milwaukee called theirs a Baltic. The SP named the 4-8-2 Mountain, but I forget who named the Berkshire.
The N&W had no names, only class designations. A 2-6-6-2 was a Class Z. And while the 4-8-4 was a Northern, after Northern Pacific, on the N&W, it was a Class J.