MTH 0-8-0 Review / Shame on Bob

[bowlerp]

As always, the message is "caveat emptor". The buyer decides HIS or HER particular key priorities. If one of them is to have BOTH scale and road name fidelity, then a generic "N&W" 0-8-0 will simply not do. For others, having roadname is more important than combination scale and roadname fidelity, they can vote with their purchases. I personally avoid the generic pieces like the Lionel Erie "scale" Berkshire or the similar MTH choices. I did buy the Lionel Erie pacific, because it is a fairly close match to an Erie K5, and as close as I am likely to ever get in 3-rail. When tooling costs are so high, it is easy to understand why a manufacturer would try to amortize his tooling cost sooner by marketing additional roadnames for the segment of customers who just buy for the sake of roadnames. Neither customer is wrong in any way, just very different in their approach. The generic marketing approach is the only way we are likely to have as much product choice as we do have - it is simply too expensive to make diecast tools to make them small batch runs to very specific designs like Third Rail does in brass. If I were Lionel, I would consider attacking Third Rail's niche in brass, especially now that MTH has won the diecast court ruling and essentially closed out Lionel's diecast scale product line. Presuming Lionel survives, that is.

[Anonymous]

As a huge fan and modeler of the N&W in HO scale, I know how frustrating it can be to locate locomotives and rolling stock in that roadname only to find out that they're not correct. In most cases, I would simply have to modify or scratchbuild what I needed. I couldn't even begin to tell you how many hours I have in converting 10 Athearn SD40-2s to high short hoods and adding all the other necessary details. It seems to be better now than it used to be though.

However, I recently got into O scale and discovered that I'm back to square one with my favorite roadname--either live with it or modify it. I am seriously considering the MTH 0-8-0 and have come to the conclusion that I'd rather worry about operation than an absolutely correct appearance(even being faced with a $500 asking price). Kitbashing is fun, but it gets old quick when you realize that you'll have to modify almost every piece of rolling that you own to be 100% correct. I'm at the point that it may not look exactly like what I grew up with in Richlands, VA, but it's something I can live with.

Robert

[Anonymous]

It's does not look like a very good model of the N&W 0-8-0 when comparing the photos but I think the article at least gives some visual comparison as far off as it is.

[palallin]

QUOTE: Originally posted by macdannyk1

Not for the prices you pay for some of these engines. If we're to pay in the $500 range for these "toys", then they'd better be at least close to the prototype.

If it ain't 1:1 scale AND making money, it's a TOY, no matter how much it costs.

Hey, if prototype fidelity is your thing, go for it. But there are those of us for whom such fidelity holds less value and other things--such as play value, toughness, reliability, nostalgia, and price--hold more value.

[Anonymous]

If they took all the ads, reviews and pictures of the $500 and up locos out of Classic TOY Train magazine there would be no magazine left. What happed to the TOY part of our hobby? The big money manufactures are making a profit center out of our hobby. Adding all the electonics, and detail and making every thing Scale, as if that is utopia, is the way to justify the cost. Great for a few rich yankees with basements and 072 curves. Bet most of these things are sitting in the box running down the battery.

old timer Charlie Bee

never paid more than $100 for any toy loco

[macdannyk1]

Not for the prices you pay for some of these engines. If we're to pay in the $500 range for these "toys", then they'd better be at least close to the prototype.

[palallin]

Who cares which road had which engine? These are TOYs, ya know?

[Bob Keller]

I'll plead guilty here. The photo files at KPC run deep, but the images of the "as bought from C&O" 0-8-0s were few in number (two) and pretty weak (one image showed the middle of the boiler and that was it), while the photos of the modified 0-8-0 (which I mentioned that the RR built) generally made the point of the overall USRA design. I presumed readers would note the text remark on headlight placement and tender capacity and make the connection.

In retrospect I should have run no prototype photo, rather than trying to give readers an idea of what a N&W USRA 0-8-0 actually looked like.

Regards,

[BigJim]

For those of you that are interested in the USRA 0-8-0, there are two good articles in the Mainline Modeler magazine, May 1982 & June/July 1982. Back issues may still be available.

Fellows,
My point was that the analogy used by Bob didn't fit. As a journalist, he should have used better judgement and compared the model to another road's engine. The W&LE version looks to be a close match.

[superwarp1]

I second Roxin2002 on this one. MTH and Lionel Build one engine and stick a bunch of road names on it. What you get is a engine that doesn't really match any of the road names stamped on it.

Gary

[Anonymous]

Why do mfg make a so called scale model and then letter it for a loco it does not look like.?
The only mfg that models a correct engine to its protype is 3rd rail.

[BigJim]

Reading Bob's MTH 0-8-0 review, I wonder just what he was thinking trying to compare the model to the prototype N&W S1/S1a???

By itself, his "Proto" blurb was correct and there were two nice pictures of the N&W loco. No problems there.

By itself, his "Model" blurb was also correct. The model is very nice looking and well detailed. No problems there either.

The problem lies in the fact that the model doesn't look like the N&W photos that he is comparing it to.

So, why did he compare the two? Other roads used the USRA 0-8-0. I'm sure one of them looks more like the model than the N&W version! I'm sure that the HUGE Kalmbach conglomerate could have provided him with enough information to make a valid comparison. If not, he should have asked Hundman Publishing!

A decent N&W S1/S1a is yet to be made!