OP has asked that we lock the thread for him. Done. Thanks, all.
-Crandell
I don;t see the same line on the prototype photo at all. Themodel has a line that appears to start right at the yellow/blue line under the wing window, all teh way along the hood top/side line out to the edge of the number board and then appears to go vertical down to and maybe through the number board. I'm no picky rivet counter - I don't bother to move the horns on my P2K Geeps - but that line/mark really stands out on the model picture to me. I'm not sure about those who said they didn't even see it at first. It's like the sprue mark dimple on the top center of the Atlas RS-3 cabs. You can't miss it.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Seems like nobody has commented on how interesting and strange it is that the prototype photo linked above seems to show the very same line ... I somehow cannot conceive that P2K went that far in prototype specific details! Or was there in fact a prior owner who scribed it in and this is not actually a factory fresh unit? It would be interesting to know if that same line showed up in the inside of the shell because it does look more like a crack than a mold line.
Dave Nelson
Hi!
I tend to agree with Randy - the Stewarts are among the best choices for F units! While I do not have experience with Walthers P2K F units, I do with E units. Getting replacement shells for factory defect product was impossible (they said), but they did repair mine to my satisfaction. Your situation - IMHO - does not look like something that could have been easily repaired - at least not cost effectively.
As an aside, I have often read how difficult it is/was to make a mold to form the bull nose of F units, do to the complexity of the various curves. Obviously, P2K chose to make the mold in two parts, but the seam is not seamless.
You know, this "parting line" reminds me of several Lionel post war cars that had similar situations. Ha, those lines have become identification marks for collectors.
One last point....... be glad you got rid of it. If you had kept it, every time you looked at that loco you would see the defect, and it would grind away at you!
Mobilman44
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Gary UK Right then, just to reiterate. This was not intended to be a mud flinging excercise against P2K products, i have many and im more than happy with them. I was mearly inquiring if anyone else had seen this problem before i spent a load more cash on another to which most guys answered helpfully to the original question (thankyou). It looks like a very isolated fault and i was just unlucky this time. In hindsite i would have been better off taking this up with my retailer but its gone now anyway. Looks like il give these P2K F units another go sometime. Randy, thanks for taking the time to post the picture of your Reading unit, certainly flawless in comparison. Lets draw a line under this one now guys. Thanks..
Right then, just to reiterate. This was not intended to be a mud flinging excercise against P2K products, i have many and im more than happy with them. I was mearly inquiring if anyone else had seen this problem before i spent a load more cash on another to which most guys answered helpfully to the original question (thankyou). It looks like a very isolated fault and i was just unlucky this time.
In hindsite i would have been better off taking this up with my retailer but its gone now anyway.
Looks like il give these P2K F units another go sometime.
Randy, thanks for taking the time to post the picture of your Reading unit, certainly flawless in comparison.
Lets draw a line under this one now guys.
Thanks..
Not mine, much too expensive brand new, plus the grab ladder up the nose is too new for my era. I stickw ith the Stewarts and add the dress-up kits for grabs. The pic is from another member of the RCT&HS who provided a picture of his units so people could see what they look like, vs the flat artwork shown in the Walthers ads. I'm cheap - I tend to not pay more than $50 for a loco, and have gotten many Stewarts and P2K models for that, even the Stewart switchers with Canon motors. My only 'expensivce' loco is my PCM T-1 with sound.
MichaelC Read the OP again. He has already gotten rid of the loco in question.
Read the OP again. He has already gotten rid of the loco in question.
Agreed. Much ado about nothing at this point.
Alton Junction
onequiknova I don't own any Proto F's, but it's definitely a mold parting line from when the shells were cast. All of the F units from different manufactures will have a similar seam, but they are supposed to be sanded smooth before being painted. I'm betting the seam wasn't sufficently sanded before it was sent to the paint shop.
I don't own any Proto F's, but it's definitely a mold parting line from when the shells were cast. All of the F units from different manufactures will have a similar seam, but they are supposed to be sanded smooth before being painted. I'm betting the seam wasn't sufficently sanded before it was sent to the paint shop.
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
Gary UK Has anyone else seen this issue on a Proto 2000 F? Look at the poor join or mould line above the number box. Was i just unlucky? I ended up selling this model as i couldnt face repairing this fault what with re painting etc. I'd like another one but not if looks like this one did!
Has anyone else seen this issue on a Proto 2000 F?
Look at the poor join or mould line above the number box. Was i just unlucky?
I ended up selling this model as i couldnt face repairing this fault what with re painting etc.
I'd like another one but not if looks like this one did!
I looked at an undecorated one I have not painted yet, and there is a mold line there, but not near as obvious as in your photo, so I would say it is a defect.
My two factory painted C&O versions have no such mold line showing.
Sheldon
From this photo, it almost looks like it is prototypical.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=52008&nseq=0
Might just be the pic or me, but it looks like the protoype 200L has a similar line. Best check with others who have had a Proto F3 200L. But the grab irons are off from the photo.
Vincent
Wants: 1. high-quality, sound equipped, SD40-2s, C636s, C30-7s, and F-units in BN. As for ones that don't cost an arm and a leg, that's out of the question....
2. An end to the limited-production and other crap that makes models harder to get and more expensive.
Here's the Reading one. It is correct, they even got the trust plate information from the RCT&HS.
No sign of the same flaw.
Gary UKI'd like another one but not if looks like this one did!
Gary,
I'm with you on this one. You will never be happy with it unless you disguise it with weathering as has been suggested.
You and everyone who recieves a defective engine should complain loud and clear and maybe the manufacturers will get the message. I have and with success. I'll bet the seller will make good on this. Give it a try.
Happy railroading
Bob
Don't Ever Give Up
Maybe it was this unit but repaired
http://pixdaus.com/single.php?id=154685
Springfield PA
You know what this is going to sound unbelievable but it looks like it's been repaired and repainted, but form the factory? notice the hole on the right side of forth step from the bottom, it doesn't have the relief or pocket that the others do. Same goes for the next one up but only on the right side again. looks like a poor sanding job with the squadron putty on someone's part. Unless it's a casting defect what else could it be then a repair job. Some may say your being a bit of a rivet counter or a purest but new is suppose dot be new not repaired and sold as new. If they knocked of 30% or better and said factory refurbished that would make it a whole lot noticeable to me.
I weather the snot out of most everything I have so you never see the details any more but bring in your magnifying glass to the lHS if you do decide to buy a new one.
Wow! The model has a fantastic paint job (assuming it's prototypical) and great detail.
Mark
Well you could model the loco with a structural crack. happens all the time, maybe not at that spot but who knows
Gary UKNope, far from it but i reckon that an unsightly seam line like that on a model that cost me 320 GBP is unaceptable.
Nope, far from it but i reckon that an unsightly seam line like that on a model that cost me 320 GBP is unaceptable.
Agreed, but you did ask for opinions. I reckon I would contacting Proto instead of fishing here.
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
I saw it right away. It's quite obvious. It looks more like the shell was cracked, the line goes horizonatally across the nose/side seam and then down just past the edge of the number board. Looks liek the number board is a bit messed up too.
I have a large picture of one of the new Reading ones but not in a place I can link the image from, it definitely does not have that same defect. I think you got unlucky.
I could barely see it, but only after I looked at the place you described.
Are you one of those rivet counters by any chance? LOL
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
call me blind, but I don't see it
Oh, I see it now. It's odd, but not untolerable. I've not seen that on my Es. But I haven't looked.
-Morgan