GREAT BRASS SALE

[MidlandPacific]

The Caboose (www.thecaboose.com) is selling a bunch of brand-new brass at half price - the N&W 4-8-0s Precision Scale did last year are going dirt cheap!

regards,

Rob

[Virginian]

!?!?!?! Sorry, but I don't think $600 is dirt cheap in anyone else's book my man.

[MidlandPacific]

Hey, for a PSC model, $600 is a steal. I mean, it's not GIVING it away, but given that you'll pay $300 for a barely-functioning 1970-era PFM Ma & PA 2-8-0 nowadays, it's a pretty good deal.

[Anonymous]

Rob, thanks for the tip. I just ordered the M2-c, as-built version. These are BEAUTIFUL models, folks - even the class lights work, removable coal load, etc. But these features were no doubt added mostly to justify a ground-breaking price for small steam; $1,100 - $1,200 when first introduced. Its pretty obvious that most potential customers felt as I did; I wouldn't pay articulated prices for small steam even if I could have afforded it. I know for a fact that a number of dealers chose not to stock these models because they didn't think they could sell them at such prices. There's a dealer unloading these models on E-Bay as well; I've monitored the auctions but dropped out at $599 (they've sold typically in the low-$600s) so Caboose was $4 under my maximum. I believe that the fellow on E-Bay got a deal directly from PSC on their inventory. Maybe this is so for The Caboose as well, or maybe PSC took back some money to help them out?

[MidlandPacific]

Sure. Glad to help out - the as-built version was my favorite, too. I'm not an N&W modeler, but I model the teens and the Virginian and N&W prototypes from that era have a lot of the characteristics I'm looking for.

Where do you live in NoVA? I'm in DC.

[tstage]

Obviously, you need to already know what you want and be familiar with brass because there are absolutely NO photos to even see what the product looks like. Why are there no pics of the locomotives?

Tom

[Anonymous]

Rob, although I grew up in the District I currently live in Great Falls. I proto-freelance the W&OD (i.e. I stick to the W&OD route map / building style, etc., but I use small steam as well as their early diesels), but I also have a scenario in which its an N&W line. The N&W predecessor actually tried twice to purchase the line in the late 19th century with the intention of building a connection from Berryville (only about 11 miles but would have required briding the Shenandoah, and tunnelling the Blue Ridge) for direct access to Washington City as it was then called. This allows me to combine the line I love best, with my favorite Class I equipment. Note that its either-or: all-W&OD or all-N&W. This latest purchase finally completes my stable of M-class.

I've just learned, by the way, that The Caboose is actually the same outfit that is offering these models on E-Bay. So they must have been chosen, or cut a deal, to offload PSC's stock.

Tom, the issue you bring up is indeed a problem with brass. At times you just have to rely upon the reputation of the importer, coupled with dealing with a knowledge / reputable dealer (such as The Caboose). The digital camera and e-mail have helped a lot, though; most dealers will take a digital photo (s) and e-mail them to you. I also monitor E-Bay and save good-quality pictures of models that I may be interested in in the future - or perhaps am interested in now, but cannot afford.

[Virginian]

I used to have a bit of brass. It may be a relative bargain, but $600 for any 4-8-0 is not cheap. As higher quality plastic and cast models have become available, most modellers, as opposed to collectors, just aren't going to be willing to fork over the cash, I don't think. Brass isn't going to die, but I see smaller runs and even higher prices ahead. I resisted a VGN BA, and P2K finally came thru. I have my fingers crossed for an M as well.

[Anonymous]

Since I gave up fishing a long time ago, I don't need any of these over-priced sinkers!!!
gtr

[underworld]

Thanks for the information!

underworld

Easter Easter Easter Easter Easter!!!!!

[:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

[trolleyboy]

I gave up on the brass market years ago. Mostly for price and prices are still going up.When you canpick up a couple of bli's with sound for the price of one of these evn though it is a deal i think I'll wait for the plastic stuff. Rob

[MidlandPacific]

See? You go away to wire a Tortoise and you miss everything.

The W&OD? I grew up in Leesburg: I can remember the process of converting the old roadbed from a bike trail. When I was a kid a lot of the old W&OD stuff - stations, etc - was still intact and decaying in Leesburg and in some of the other spots along the line (I used to run the bike trail for sports practice and when getting ready to go into the service - can't tell you how many times I went under that old stone highway bridge at Clark's Gap!). I even have the old edition of Herbert Harwood's book, bound in blue construction paper. Until about the mid-'80s, when everything east of Sterling got paved over, a lot of those places still resembled the photos in Harwood's book. Loudoun County was a great place to grow up: the western parts of it are as beautiful as anyplace I've ever been, especially in the fall.

Know of any good MR clubs in the area? There used to be one that modelled the Southern in an old W&OD depot, as I recall. I live just down GA Ave from the late, lamented John Armstrong, but never got the chance to meet him. I have seen Howard Zane's layout, which is impressive: Howard's also a really great guy.

I'm sure you've probably though of this already, but the two W&OD consolidations bear a strong basic resemblence (driver size and dimensions) to Sierra #24, which WSM made in a widely available brass version in the 1970s.

I think diecast models a great, but I also think they're limited. Take a look at the diecast steam models that have come out, and here's what you find:

Challenger (UP, Clinchfield, D&RGW)
Pennsy K-4
N&W Class A
USRA engines
UP mountain
Van Sweringen Berkshires
generic locomotives (Baldwin ten-wheelers, geared locomotives, Spectrum 2-8-0, Russian decapods)

The economics of brass and diecast models are, I think, totally different. Diecast models require a heavy capital investment for molds and dies. This means that the per-unit cost will decrease if you make a great many of them, which allows you to sell them for less. The problem is that you have to make a model that everyone will want. In the past, companies like Tyco dealt with this by making generic locomotives that kids would like and modelers could at least modify - there was a whole industry devoted to it: remember Cary parts for Tyco locomotives?

The economics of brass are totally different. It requires more labor and less capital investment: the per-unit cost of production does not decrease if you make more of them. There are no economies of scale, and it's therefore no surprise that brass manufacturers cater to a different market. They try to hit niche markets, producing just enough of a given model to sell it to everyone who can afford it.

Now, take a look at the die-cast model list I've included. The models on it share one common characteristic: they're all desireable to a wide swath of the modeling public. LOTS of people want USRA locomotives, or Van Sweringen Berkshires or Pennsy K-4s, in the first two cases because they ran on a variety of different railroads, in the last because it's simply a famous and well-known locomotive that ran on a railroad many people like to model. I often hear people say "I'm not going to buy [insert favorite loco here] until it comes out in die-cast, because it will be cheaper." The fact is that there are many locomotives that will only come out in brass: not enough people want them. And I don't think a lot of companies are going to take a big risk and run, say, a Colorado Midland Class 175, because the long-term consequences for a company that miscalculates the saleability of a die-cast product are greater: you have to sell a LOT of models. Fail to sell them at the break-even price you've projected (price being your great comparative advantage), and your loss is greater than it would be for a brass importer who has marked down his products to break-even price to clear shelf space.

I think I'll conclude this already too-long comment by noting two phenomena: one, that the place of brass in modeling has changed, and two, that the stability of prices (which in the past was always held to be a good thing, e.g., brass models "keep their value") actually represents an effective drop in price, since real salaries have (broadly speaking) risen since the early 1990s. It used to be that everyone owned brass, and everyone had a PFM Santa Fe 1950 class 2-8-0 and a Sierra 2-6-6-2. Those days are gone now; diecast models will, I think, cater to the mass market where they can, and brass will fill the niches. It will be a bit more expensive relative to the overall model market, but the realities of the market will still, I think, exert a restraining effect. Precision Scale may suggest a price of $1295 for a 4-8-0, but at some point, the number of people who will pay that do so, and the retailers will still be left with models that are taking up shelf space. The market will respond as it usually does, dropping the price to a point where demand increases: the market will clear.

[Anonymous]

Hi Rob,

Missed your response so hopefully you'll see this.

If you count the Great Falls Division, without ever meaning to I've lived less than a mile from some portion of the W&OD most of my life. However, in the eastern half - really more like eastern third. In the early 60s I took music lessons on Church Street in Vienna and saw a train come through two or three times - always behind C&O power by then, though. (By the way, at that time the last traffic light when heading west on the Leesburg Pike was in Falls Church). I visited many of the sites along the right of way before they were demolished. Of course I wish I'd taken more photos even though at the time I thoguht I'd taken too many.

Regarding the Sierra 2-8-0s, yes I know they're quite similar. Sure is too bad, though, that they were oil-fired. I perhaps don't have the skills, but certainly do not have the tools (i.e. a $300+ resistance soldering set) to tackle such a conversion.

Regarding brass: all true. Its also true that over the approximately 45-year history of serious brass imports, prices have increased only slightly more than inflation while quality has improved dramatically. But two additional comments: (1) the curve hasn't been a smooth one. The Eighties were the glory years for price/performance. (2) Inflation or no, there are still psychological barriers, to which I fully adhere. In this market I place them at $500 and $1,000. The shattering of these have basically priced me out of the brass market even though in terms of inflation and my income, I'm probably technically better able to pay the asking prices today than I was in the Eighties.

In any event, I personally think that we are nearly at the end of the production of new brass - UNLESS China can be the next new source for quality but affordable production. Look at the number of importers that have closed; look at the age of the principals in the remaining ones; how many new brass models (except cabooses for some reason) are being brought out these days? I feel fortunate that I started when I did. Today, I would turn my back on brass; assembling any kind of respectable roster seems out-of-sight at current prices. As it is, I've bit the bullet recently to fill out some holes in my operating scheme and its very possible that I've made my last brass purchase. So I guess I disagree with your belief that the importers will find some magic way to return to pricing acceptable in the marketplace. Don't under-estimate the upfront investment in detailed plans, drawings, and castings; even though the models are to some extent hand-made, they still need to be made in runs in the 50-100 range.

The run-up in brass prices has been a tremendous boost for quality plastic diesels, but nobody is ever going to be able to field a realistic stable of quality plastic steam. As a final aside, since you mention Howard Zane - a great guy, as you say - I've often wondered what percentage of all the brass steam is in the hands of a small number of elite collectors? I sometimes think it may be quite an appreciable percentage ... who knows.

There is still a model rail club in the Vienna depot, but they have been closed to new memberships for some time. I don't know of any other club in the Washington area that has a permanent, fixed location. You might want to consider joining a modular club.

[davekelly]

rripper and rails,

Very thought provoking posts. Much more fun reading than the posts that are just argumentative. The brass maket is indeed at an interesting point and it will be interesting to see what the future holds.

Dave

P.S. I own exactly one brass thingie. I purchased a PRR caboose on ebay about a year ago. Although Bowser has an excellent line of PRR cabins and with the CalScale antenna sets and other detail parts I could make an almost as detailed model for a fraction of the cost - there is something fascinating about brass. I think I spent about an hour just looking at it when it finally arrived.

[MidlandPacific]

Rail5,

Vienna! That was it - I can remember my parents taking me there as a kid for an open house: they were still building it. It was the first time I ever saw handlaid track.

I am basically done buying brass, and I've only purchased a single piece of it new: everything else is secondhand or worse. Even if you reckon the market price of those M-2s as the average of the prices they were actually sold for, the eight or nine hundred dollars apiece that I would guess it comes to is still pretty steep.

The real question is, I think, if there is a demand for models with brass-like characteristics (reliability, high level of detail, and unusual prototypes), how will the market meet it? Part of me hopes that the diecast manufacturers will find a way to bring down the per-unit price and make smaller runs of less famous locomotives. PSC and Soundtrax are both making diecast K-27s for narrow gauge modelers. Granted that a K-27 is (in the narrow gauge world) a model that is as desireable to a large segment of the modeling as, say, a Pennsy K-4, the economics of it are probably not "brass-like." One possibility that occured to me as potentially feasible was the creation of a standardized frame and valve gear that might be combined with different boiler/cab/pilot assemblies: there were, after all, a lot of consolidations with 57" driver wheels out there. But this would not really get around the economics of the problem, since there would still need different dies for the major components. I don't know what the ultimate answer will be, but I think something semi-modularized like the Bachmann solution might be the way the market will ultimately go.

I saw the Piermont Division just before Howard sold it to Dan Glasure, and his brass collection (inventory is really the word) was past belief. But I think you're onto something about those wealthy collectors.

[twhite]

I've always had to get mostly brass, mainly because of the railroad and the era I model (D&RGW standard-gauge steam). Which means haunting a lot of swap meets and hoping that my two LHS will occasionally feature some Rio Grande used locos. I've had pretty good luck with pricing, and I'll admit that I've had to tinker a lot with some of the locos I've picked up. But I really don't foresee a sudden flood of Rio Grande steam coming out from BLI or Genesis or P2k, because (like a lot of other prototypes) these locos are peculiar to a single road for the most part (try and modify a Spectrum heavy 4-8-2 into a Rio Grande M-78, for instance--no way!). Granted, that BLI has come out with some road-specific steam, but these are 'popular' road-specific locos (SP cab-forward, Pennsy Mountains, for instance) that have a lot of exposure to rail buffs and hobbyists. I don't foresee that happening with, say, a Rio Grande L-131 2-8-8-2. Much as I'd like to see some Rio Grande steam in plastic or die-cast, I don't think it's going to happen. So I'm pretty much stuck with brass and swap meets. Hey, you picks your railroad, you takes your choice.
Tom [:P]

[davekelly]

twhite,
A little off topic, but I always wondered how close to prototype MDC's narrow gauge steamers were (I think they are presented as DRGW prototypes).

[MidlandPacific]

Tom,

Since I'm modeling a freelanced version of the Midland, I understand your problem, and I've had to do the same thing.

I have also tended to argue the same thing, for the same reasons: an F-81 doesn't look like anything else. On the other hand, think about the D&RGW's early Mallets - the L-96s, for example. Below the boiler (i.e., running gear, cylinders, driver diameter) they're probably roughly similar to, say, the NP Z-3 class 2-8-8-2s, or even the early Harriman-standard Mallets. Is it conceivable that a manfacturer might simply chose to use a standard chassis for a couple of different but nevertheless similar locomotives, and build a diecast superstructure atop it? I don't know whether it would be economically feasible to cast a bunch of different boiler/cab assemblies, to say nothing of variations in valve gear: but as for the detail casting variations, Bachmann has already proved that you can swap things like press-on pilots around to provide greater realism and variation while still making an affordable model.

In the end, I don't know whether smaller-run diecast models are economically feasible. I do know that Precision Scale and Soundtraxx are making a tentative effort by producing narrow-gauge diecast locomotives. Granted that it's the narrow gauge equivalent of a Cab-Forward, it's still a smaller-run product than an equivalent standard-gauge product would be.

On the other hand, if you've got $1500, PSC-made F-81s are coming on the market: brand new, for the same price as your 1978 PFM Crown!

[davekelly]

Rob,

The idea of a common chassis and different boilers and detail parts is an interesting idea to perhaps bring down the price of steam and provide a larger selection of prototypes in model form. This seems similar to MDC/Roundhouse's efforts in steam engine kits (one chassis and 2 or 3 different boilers/tenders). Although such a system would bring some economies to the models, some compromise would be necessary in order to use common parts. The question would be how much compromise versus lower prices are modelers willing to live with. I'm thinking that the increase in expected detail will be the biggest detriment to a shared chassis idea. I love the idea and hopefully someone will figure out how to make it work.

[MidlandPacific]

Dave -

You've put your finger on it, I think - there would certainly be some compromise. My thought was that there's always a bit of compromise anyway in HO scale, if only because we need to build models that will fit around 22" curves. When you get right down to it, I think the dimensions on a lot of those locomotives were close - not identical, to be sure, but within a few inches. I think the Spectrum USRA Heavy 4-8-2 came with 64 scale inch drivers rather than the prototypical 69"; I would have to pull out the books to see how similar the two engines (D&RGW L-96 and NP Z-3) I cited actually were, but I know they're close. Modelers are surprisingly tolerant, if it can be made to "look right" - that John Allen sense of "the rightness of things" is important!

There was a company called The Locomotive Works that tried to do this in the Seventies, but it seems that they only lasted for a year or two. They sold kits as component packages, and you could combine several packages to create a single locomotive. It never caught on, although you're right in observing that some of the MDC locomotives come close. I'm not an expert, btw, but I believe the outside frame MDC locomotive is modeled on the Grande's C-21, and the inside frame model is based on the C-16s. Not positive in the latter case, though, and don't know how close they are to prototype dimensions.

Nothing would make me happier than an offer from Soundtraxx to come help them market a program like that, believe me..........my wife wants to move to Durango, too!

best regards,

Rob

[dinwitty]

Brass is getting way to pricey for me, and watching ebay I cant believe some of the prices people do pay.

BTW,

http://lostengines.railfan.net/

[MidlandPacific]

WOW! Thanks for the link. Those are some amazing pictures. Incredible that someone bought them and then never cut them up for resale, particularly since the Korean War was going on and they would've brought him a pretty penny.

[twhite]

QUOTE: Originally posted by davekelly

twhite,
A little off topic, but I always wondered how close to prototype MDC's narrow gauge steamers were (I think they are presented as DRGW prototypes).

Dave--they're close, VERY close, as far as I can see. I have a couple of the MDC standard gauge 'old time' 2-8-0's, which are simply the narrow-gauge boilers on a standard-gauge chassis, and they very closely resemble the Rio Grande 900 series C-series. I think the narrow gauge versions are kind of generic (someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an authority on Rio Grande narrow-gauge), but their outside-frame 2-8-0 looks close enough to the prototype to fool probably anyone but the most devoted rivet-counter (which I'm not). If there is a real difference, it might be that Rio Grande's early narrow guage 2-8-0's had the main rod connected to the 2nd instead of the 3rd driver. But I can tell you that I'm happier than all get-out with the two cute little 900 series that I got from MDC, even if they are noiser than Heck, compared to some of my brass.
Tom [:D]

[davekelly]

Tom,

Thanks. They are cool looking models and would be my first choice if I ever decide to do the narrow guage thing.

[twhite]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger

Tom,

Since I'm modeling a freelanced version of the Midland, I understand your problem, and I've had to do the same thing.

I have also tended to argue the same thing, for the same reasons: an F-81 doesn't look like anything else. On the other hand, think about the D&RGW's early Mallets - the L-96s, for example. Below the boiler (i.e., running gear, cylinders, driver diameter) they're probably roughly similar to, say, the NP Z-3 class 2-8-8-2s, or even the early Harriman-standard Mallets. Is it conceivable that a manfacturer might simply chose to use a standard chassis for a couple of different but nevertheless similar locomotives, and build a diecast superstructure atop it? I don't know whether it would be economically feasible to cast a bunch of different boiler/cab assemblies, to say nothing of variations in valve gear: but as for the detail casting variations, Bachmann has already proved that you can swap things like press-on pilots around to provide greater realism and variation while still making an affordable model.

In the end, I don't know whether smaller-run diecast models are economically feasible. I do know that Precision Scale and Soundtraxx are making a tentative effort by producing narrow-gauge diecast locomotives. Granted that it's the narrow gauge equivalent of a Cab-Forward, it's still a smaller-run product than an equivalent standard-gauge product would be.

On the other hand, if you've got $1500, PSC-made F-81s are coming on the market: brand new, for the same price as your 1978 PFM Crown!

Rob: Since you're modeling the Midland, we're not only in the same boat, we're darn near using the same paddle, LOL! Next to what I've seen available to the Midland, Rio Grande brass could be considered to be flooding the market.
I've often wondered about the feasability of manufacturers using different plastic or die-cast boiler castings on their wheel-arrangements--for instance the early P2K USRA 2-8-8-2 was based on a N&W prototype, but they chose a LATTER model Y-3 instead of the more generic USRA original (which the Rio Grande bought from the N&W during WWII and numbered in the 3550 series). So I did some kit-bashing to backdate it, and what happens? P2K comes out with a Rio Grande USRA 3500 series! Since I already have an Oriental Limited Powerhouse 3500, I passed. And try finding a PFM F-81 for under $1200--can't be done. So I did a Bill Schopp thingie on a bruised and beaten ATSF 2-10-2 I picked up at a swap meet for $25, about fifteen years ago. I don't know if you remember Bill Schopp or not, he wrote for RMC back in the '60's, and he was forever taking brass locos and 'kit-bashing' them into wild and wonderful prototypes. Drivers on the ATSF were the same diameter, loco length was close enough for me, I sawed, chopped, hacked and re-configured, and came up with something that LOOKS like an F-81 (if you don't look too close) that might have come re-built out of the Salt Lake Shops in the early 'forties. It ISN'T an F-81, but it's close enough to make me a semi-happy camper. Now if I can do that to a boiler and cab, the manufacturers ought to be able to.
Except for the front cylinders (which are HUGE!), all that P2K would have to do to their USRA 2-8-8-2 would be a smaller boiler, slightly different cab and VOILA! A Z-3 or an L-96 could be running on our layouts. I mean their new USRA looks to me just like the Y-3, only with front-hung pumps. How difficult was THAT?
Sorry--rambling again, but when I see how CLOSE some manufacturers can get without STILL no cigar, I get on my [soapbox].
Tom

[MidlandPacific]

Midland brass is always hard to find: I have two pieces of it, a Class 115 and a Class 104. Except for the switchers, it comes in and goes right back out: Caboose Hobbies never seems to keep Midland stuff on the shelf for more than a day or two. I think the only thing that keeps the price down is the sheer age of most of the stuff. I think (but couldn't prove) that there are a lot of Midland modelers out there, but they are a demographic the industry hasn't noticed, for some reason. I don't know how much research our suppliers do on product demand; probably not enough, because it seems like it would be a really bad idea to bring out two diecast K-27s at the same time (Soundtraxx, Precision Scale), just as it seems like a bad idea to bring out a bunch of Challengers or K-4s simultaneously. I hear a lot of anecdotal traffic, but I don't know if there's serious market research going on.

I would like to think that there are some unappreciated possibilities, but I think articulateds are the principal one: even if the expense of making multiple molds for the different boiler/cab combinations raised the price, a $600 Mallet is STILL cheaper than a brand-new PSC or DIVP 2-8-8-2.