Trains.com

Some standardization of labeling is needed

1254 views
6 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • 6,434 posts
Some standardization of labeling is needed
Posted by FJ and G on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 3:46 PM
in the toy train industry.

Some examples:

1. Scale of the trains should be given
2. Authenticity of the train should be labeled
3. Something as simple as running characteristics should be included, for instance:

Tractive effort, or horsepower, or drawbar pull; perhaps in pounds and ounces. You shouldn't need to wait for the CTT and OGR reviews to come out to get performance and other characteristics. Why keep this a secret? OK, I know the answer--so that toy train magazines have something to review!

dav
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mile High City
  • 296 posts
Posted by jkerklo on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 6:44 PM
Not sure train manufacturers would benefit; they probably don't like the magazine reviews either. If specs are given, they have to be met, consistantly, and this might be a difficulty.

Might be something for one of the smaller manufacturers to do; some of the Williams trains look like they would show well. Then larger companies would have to follow.

I like the idea, but don't see it happening.

John Kerklo
TCA 94-38455
www.Three-Rail.com
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Over the Rainbow!
  • 760 posts
Posted by eZAK on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 8:37 PM
That would actually require the importers to test their own product! [:O][(-D]

That'll never happen![xx(]
Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Home Brew!</font id="size2"> Pat Zak</font id="size3">
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • 37 posts
Posted by Frank in Steam on Thursday, April 1, 2004 6:03 AM
& if this happened does it mean that the couplers would have to stay closed and be at a consistent height, not to mention locomotives operating through switches and not stalling et al ?
Frank Dz, if its worth doing, its worth doing to wretched excess.
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Culpeper, Va
  • 8,202 posts
Posted by IRONROOSTER on Thursday, April 1, 2004 6:39 AM
At least start with scale. Then add the others. Minimum radius would be nice also. For the cars as well as the locos.
Enjoy
Paul
If you're having fun, you're doing it the right way.
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mile High City
  • 296 posts
Posted by jkerklo on Thursday, April 1, 2004 8:44 AM
Frank may have hit on one of the most important criterion, and I haven't even seen it included in reviews: operation on track and switches.

I would assume that the designers of the trains would test their designs on a variety of track systems and switches, but forum discussions suggest I am overly optimistic.

It could be a tricky parameter to state clearly, but something that says it has at least been tested on a track system or switch would be useful.

Minimum curve diameter is often stated for larger engines, but I have never seen a rating for rolling stock or a full train with engine and rolling stock.

John Kerklo
TCA 94-38455
www.Three-Rail.com
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Sandy Eggo
  • 5,608 posts
Posted by dougdagrump on Thursday, April 1, 2004 2:26 PM
AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE CONSUMER !!!!!!!!!!
Sounds like heresy to me (a manufacturers point of view).
But speaking as a consumer it would be extremely helpful even if it were only in a few specific areas as mentioned in an earlier post.

Remember the Veterans. Past, present and future.

www.sd3r.org

Proud New Member Of The NRA

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month