It was a nice, eye-catching ad, but as you did, I found myself looking to the valve-gear which is my eye-candy on a steamer. Same old stuff, all right. So, I am afraid I agree with you, as much as I wish you were mistaken about IHC's latest offerings. In a way it makes the whole 2-10-2 episode seem a bit odd, doesn't it? It is a superior model, but what has gone on the past 12 months? Is this a flash in the pan?
I wish they would start to market some decent rolling stock, too. It isn't all bad, I guess, and certainly not for the price, but those horrible plastic trucks and wheelsets, and the useless couplers...sheesh! Add $5 to each car and put a decent truck, wheel-set, and coupler on the things....please!
I to saw the ad and went uhhh! I mean they look like toys or that crap that are in those ads you get at home where it says"this highly detailed engine will the pride of your family" for 5.98$.
They look very poor and very plastic, What a shame, I'm in the market for a nice B&O Mikado.
Magus
What you guys miss is that IHC is a really longterm player in the hobby, with most of its products available either for extended periods or virually all the time. As such, IHC has been following the same production concept as many of its predecessors did (like Mantua), re-using the same boiler on several locomotives which, even at the cost of accuracy, was a successful plan in the past and kept individual companies going for decades.
In today's increasingly limited market of Model Railroading you are taking big chances creating totally new locomotives every few months and expecting to stay afloat on the hopes that they will sellout immediately on issue and you can quickly recoup your investment. Believe me, companies like BLI are operating on the ragged edge doing so. Should they have a couple of their limited run models consecutively fail to sell, you'll likely see them vannish from the scene overnight. IHC's 2-10-2 was likely developed for the massive one-time order from the Canadian company that sold them at Christmastime last year, so there was an large immediate return on the investment in development. That can't be counted on happening when releasing a new model to the general market.
Too many entry-level hobbyists are demanding increasingly highly accurate steam engines these days, whereas in year's gone by, hobbyists took generic models and made them more accurate themselves. Understand that the potential market for models, as they become more and more accurate and road specific, is ever narrowing. This is a very dangerous game whose end result could be that choice will become quite limited in the future and that ALL new models will be priced at what today is the price of similar brass examples. Don't think it can't happen...we're well on our way there already.
CNJ831
loathar wrote: These things look like crap! I can see taking one loco type and making it generic to cover a bunch of road names, but they used the same exact loco for their 2-8-2 AND their 4-6-2. All they did was change the wheel arrangement. Same boiler, same cab, same details, same tender.
Yeah, the prototype wouldn't do that!
Oh wait! Yes they did. All the time. Using the same boiler and tender on multiple wheel arrangements.
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
loathar wrote:I've been waiting to see what some of their "new" steam offerings looked like. I was hoping they would be a nicer product like their 2-10-2. Finally saw the ad in MR today. These things look like crap! I can see taking one loco type and making it generic to cover a bunch of road names, but they used the same exact loco for their 2-8-2 AND their 4-6-2. All they did was change the wheel arrangement.Same boiler, same cab, same details, same tender. They didn't even get the bell in the right place.It's not like these are some $50-$60 loco. They're asking around $140 for these generic, poorly detailed things. I was hoping for a little more after the 2-10-2.(guess not!)
Actually these engines can be had for $49.99-61.99 except the Mountain..Those go around $85-99.00.
These are smooth running and nice looking generic locomotives.
BTW..You ever hear of the USRA design?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
CNJ said:Too many entry-level hobbyists are demanding increasingly highly accurate steam engines these days.
Well,there must be different types of new modelers because most I seen or have read questions from don't know a 0-4-0 from a Big Boy.
BRAKIE wrote:Well,there must be different types of new modelers because most I seen or have read questions from don't know a 0-4-0 from a Big Boy.
These engines have been around for decades. They are goot little engines for DC and one step up from trainset engines. I had a IHC pacific until it finally met a cat for at least 20 years. The biggest issue with that Pacific was the dummy coupler on the front believe it or not. No switching ability so I stayed with desiels for that.
But IHC? Or even the old AHM's? They are worth a trip to the wayback branch.
Like it or not, DCC is here to stay. That is where the shift occured in the hobby. Not everyone has caught up with it yet. At the risk of stepping on toes, I daresay that in about 20 years after all of the Analog users (Including myself) has passed on... maybe all engines produced will have DCC only with the road specific features some of us look for.
I remember when they did away with the old pizza cutter flanges and made them smaller like most of the others. I thought at the time "Now THIS was a upgrade"
BRAKIE wrote: CNJ said:Too many entry-level hobbyists are demanding increasingly highly accurate steam engines these days.Well,there must be different types of new modelers because most I seen or have read questions from don't know a 0-4-0 from a Big Boy.
Can't say just what threads you might have been following, Brakie, but I see a constant stream of posts here from the track-on-plywood crowd pushing for more and more detailed, road-specific, engines to be produced, or moaning about this or that new model's lack of free standing detail, vent placement, or operating doors. It's a world away from the craftsmen's hobby this used to be even just 15 years ago.
Believe it or not, the IHC steamers, even these "rerun, generic, plastic pieces of..." are pretty decent engines. In fact (for good or bad) they're the most accurate USRA light Pacifics on the market these days (Bowser's got the only other one on the market, and it's nowhere near a USRA engine).
IHC engines are a good bang for the buck. True, their advertised MSRP is $140, but that means nothing in the age of E-shopping. Bachmann's Spectrum steamers have pretty high MSRPs too, but who's foolish enough to pay it? (as an example, the MSRP for the 2-8-0 with DCC is $275. There's on on Ebay right now for $41). Are the IHC engines as detailed as BLI, Bachmann or Trix? Nope, but check out those engine's MSRPs; they're, on average, twice as high as IHC.
If you're looking for a decent entry-level steamer and want something that Bachmann doesn't make (like a non-Pennsy Pacific, or ANY Mike), you need to look at IHC. True, they're concentrating on completely fictitious engines (their new 2-10-2 and 4-6-4 visually are train wrecks), but the engines are reliable, pull well, affordable, and are usually always in stock. How many other steam manufacturers can hit all four of those points at once?
I've got four of the new DCC-ready Pacifics on order, sight unseen. Three of them are contract jobs to convert into NKP K-1 Pacifics (all four will be converted, but the last one's mine!): you think I'd slap $200 worth of brass detail parts and another $150 worth of Tsunami into an IHC steamer if I didn't think it'd be worth it?
Ray Breyer
Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943
dehusman wrote: loathar wrote: These things look like crap! I can see taking one loco type and making it generic to cover a bunch of road names, but they used the same exact loco for their 2-8-2 AND their 4-6-2. All they did was change the wheel arrangement. Same boiler, same cab, same details, same tender. Yeah, the prototype wouldn't do that! Oh wait! Yes they did. All the time. Using the same boiler and tender on multiple wheel arrangements.Dave H.
My prototype carried this to an extreme. The most numerous 4-6-2 used the same boiler as the most numerous 2-8-2, there were only 2 standard cab designs used on more than a half-dozen locos (the passenger and dual-purpose had side doors, the pure freighters didn't) and every set of valve gear was identical in design and dimensions, supported by identical (and very distinctive) mounting brackets.
For the last and best, they jacked up the boiler of their heaviest 2-8-2 (which was becoming a casualty of electrification,) gave it a passenger loco cab and rolled a 4-6-4 mechanism under it - the ultimate kitbash.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
CNJ831 wrote: BRAKIE wrote: CNJ said:Too many entry-level hobbyists are demanding increasingly highly accurate steam engines these days.Well,there must be different types of new modelers because most I seen or have read questions from don't know a 0-4-0 from a Big Boy.Can't say just what threads you might have been following, Brakie, but I see a constant stream of posts here from the track-on-plywood crowd pushing for more and more detailed, road-specific, engines to be produced, or moaning about this or that new model's lack of free standing detail, vent placement, or operating doors. It's a world away from the craftsmen's hobby this used to be even just 15 years ago. CNJ831
Been spending to much time on the Atlas forum again CNJ?
That sounds like some of their mindset..
If you care to look you will find such questions on this forum..But,I ain't going to look up.
True to form, IHC will start discounting these heavily if they do not sell. They need to establish a high dollar price in order to show they are discounting them later.
Jim
Whether or not it runs well, it doesn't matter.
They ought to be flogged for building a 2-10-2 and decorating it for the Western Maryland. Total "fake" engine, the WM never owned any of this type. They even numbered it close to the 2-10-0 class to try and pass it off as legit. How can we maintain historical credibility within the hobby while manufacturers keep building stuff that never was. I'm sorry if this ticks anyone off, but the "toy" and "fake" stuff has no place in a serious modeling magazine, even if they do pay the almighty advertising dollar.
kbfcsme wrote: They ought to be flogged for building a 2-10-2 and decorating it for the Western Maryland. Total "fake" engine, the WM never owned any of this type. They even numbered it close to the 2-10-0 class to try and pass it off as legit. How can we maintain historical credibility within the hobby while manufacturers keep building stuff that never was.
They ought to be flogged for building a 2-10-2 and decorating it for the Western Maryland. Total "fake" engine, the WM never owned any of this type. They even numbered it close to the 2-10-0 class to try and pass it off as legit. How can we maintain historical credibility within the hobby while manufacturers keep building stuff that never was.
If this is how people feel about Model Railraoding now adays, I think we all collectivly need to take a step back take a deep breath and say. "Its ONLY A HOBBY!!" While I like you may have no interest in a Western Maryland 2-10-2 or a GN painted GG-1 for that matter, I have boughten several locomotives that not only have no resemblance to any prototype locomotive that ran on my favorite prototype, but have little or no bearing on reality at all, just because I like the overall appearence of the engine.
Bachmann's stubby 2-6-2 for example. In actuality its probably one of the best examples of a USRA 0-6-0 you can find without haveing to give up the left of certain near and dear body parts for a Proto-2000 model. But they put these stubby little leading and trailing trucks on it and the whole effect is a nifty little locomotive that just screams to me like a full blast from a locomotive air horn. "BUY ME AND RUN MY WHEELS OFF" I have three of these locomotives and want a few more.
And I may add they are available in UP, NYC, B&O, and Rock Island. And I would venture to guess that none of these roads rostered a 2-6-2. or if they did, their physical charactaristics were quite different than the bachmann loco.
So I implore before blasting one of the few manufactures of locomotives I can still afford for its "Wanton Wreckless perversions of locomotive design and history" Please step back for a moment take a deep breath. This is only a hobby. Is it really that important?
Master of Big Sky Blue wrote:If this is how people feel about Model Railraoding now adays, I think we all collectivly need to take a step back take a deep breath and say. "Its ONLY A HOBBY!!" While I like you may have no interest in a Western Maryland 2-10-2 or a GN painted GG-1 for that matter, I have boughten several locomotives that not only have no resemblance to any prototype locomotive that ran on my favorite prototype, but have little or no bearing on reality at all, just because I like the overall appearence of the engine.So I implore before blasting one of the few manufactures of locomotives I can still afford for its "Wanton Wreckless perversions of locomotive design and history" Please step back for a moment take a deep breath. This is only a hobby. Is it really that important?
IHC is making the engines for people who have small layouts, don't care about historical credibility, and want an engine that will run good, for a good price (and, in the roadname of a local railroad). IHC has accomplished this.
My first steam engine was an IHC 4-6-2 in the MILW's Chippewa paint. I have to say that even though it's looks leave quite a bit to be desired, it runs better than ANY of my Bachmann Spectrum steam engines. The 4-6-2 was a better present than an ugly Model Power 0-4-0 or something of that sorts, even though it cost about the same.
We have to remember that Model Railroader magazine is not only for the serious modelers who have a $1,000 a month budget for the hobby, plenty of 8 year olds recieve MR as a Christmas present, and read it.
Phil
kbfcsme wrote: Whether or not it runs well, it doesn't matter.They ought to be flogged for building a 2-10-2 and decorating it for the Western Maryland. Total "fake" engine, the WM never owned any of this type. They even numbered it close to the 2-10-0 class to try and pass it off as legit. How can we maintain historical credibility within the hobby while manufacturers keep building stuff that never was. I'm sorry if this ticks anyone off, but the "toy" and "fake" stuff has no place in a serious modeling magazine, even if they do pay the almighty advertising dollar.
Come on down off of your high mule..Guys that buy those engines are in the hobby because they like trains and are still having fun in the hobby.
Is that against the law these days?
I like IHC steam engines because they are cheap, run well, and are fun to kitbash:
Did any of you read Mahano's mission statement ??
It reads for children of the world. Nothing about hobbiests or modellers.
That may be the reason. They are not trying to deal with or satisfy us.
Johnboy out.
James:1 Verse:5
Long Live the "Wobbly"
from Saskatchewan, in the Great White North..
We have met the enemy, and he is us............ (Pogo)
Those locomotives are awesome msowsun. Now THAT's what you're supposed to do with inexpensive engines that run well but are not prototypical for any road, if you care to. If not, you can choose to run them as they come. Or buy the more expensive ones. I started into redetailing locomotives years ago because they didn't look like they should. You choose what to change and what is good enough. Then repaint it and run it and most importantly enjoy your work!
Mikie
msowsun wrote: I like IHC steam engines because they are cheap, run well, and are fun to kitbash:
I am a BIG fan of Canadian Steam, and those are awesome models! I especially love that 2-6-0.
BRAKIE wrote:Come on down off of your high mule..Guys that buy those engines are in the hobby because they like trains and are still having fun in the hobby.Is that against the law these days?