Thanks, Bob. Glad it helped you out.
These cars, and the lightweight ones, too, are still holding up well. I sure wish they would have expanded the line of heavyweights to include a diner and perhaps RPO and a few other Pullman floorplans but I don't see anything coming anytime soon...
Thanks again, Ed
Ed, I'm just getting around to reading your post and all the others who have answered it as well. This was a well prepared and stated overview in the world of passenger car models (at least the two companies mentioned) and I found it very informative and helpful as I select the passenger cars needed to equip my layout. The photos and comparisons much appreciated! I guess I stand with those who want to run a most accurate and reslistic design of model cars (within limits) as is possible; with the emphasis on "running them" rather on the little intricacies that modelers lose sleep over! I too am amazed at the detail that occurs today than when I first ran HO in the 60s! Thx for your submission; well done!
When I saw the announcent of the MTH heavyweights, I was hoping that the observation would be a 10 section-lounge, since it hasn't been done in plastic. Instead, the MTH observation is a drawing room parlor car, and the window arangement isn't close to that of a 10 section-lounge.
The model appears to be a pretty-good representation of the PRR Queen Mary, which was a one-of-a-kind on that road. The model appears to have an ice activated air conditioning system, although the underbody component layout differs from that shown in the photo of the car in Vol. 3 of the PRR Color Guide to Freight and Passenger Equipment (p. 22). Also, the model rides on 2410 drop equalizer trucks rather than the prototype's 242 straight equalizer trucks.
KK Bridge ATLANTIC CENTRAL KK Bridge gmpullman I thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments. Ed, Thanks for the detailed photos and explanations. It's hard to evaluate these new items with the few clear images otherwise available. Our manufacturers and importers seem to have caught onto our desire for more and more prototypically-accurate locomotives and freight cars, but things have lagged a bit in the passenger car arena. I think we modelers all need to understand the necessity to recoup development and tooling costs by offering more paint schemes than are strictly accurate for a mass market. And, obviously, the foobie passenger cars are successful, or Walthers, Rapido, or MTH wouldn't produce them. But we can increase our store of knowledge and urge the manufacturers to bring us better copies, particularly when the cost to do so will be slight. Again, thanks for the great photos. -- John John, I'm not against having accurate models, but there are some challenges that are not always understood. First, most passengers cars were "nearly" one of a kind, especially streamlined cars. Sure, manufacturers had standard designs, but railroad nearly always requested specific features and identical cars were typically built in relatively small numbers. Then, the railroads typically modified them the first time they needed a major overhaul. So what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype. Then there is the question of the later modifications? How many versions of the same car can/should we expect the manufacturer to make? A classic example are the B&O smooth side cars that were rebuilt from heavyweights. They were all vertually one of a kind, rebuilding done in the B&O shops, nothing like them never used by any other road. I can't even imagine the limited market or high price that would be involved. Then there are the issues of wide appeal to all levels of modeler. Large curves, sharp curves, etc, etc. It's simply amazing that we have what we have - but as stated earlier, I'm not in - I'm not paying $80 or $100 a car to then have to rework the coupler/diaphragm relationships. And to be honest, while it might have been at one time, "exact" fidelity to prototype is no longer that important to me. I find that the more important aspect of modeling is the overall "impression" of the layout, not the number or arrangement of windows on every passenger car. To each their own. Sheldon ATLANTIC CENTRAL So what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype. Except that we do have excellent documentation of Pullman cars, lightweight and heavyweight, and extensive photographic records of them, and it's all right there on the internet. MTH obviously did some prototype research, because by and large they got the car names right. All 6 of the PRR models are named for Pullman 12-1 cars painted "PRR Standard" and leased back to the Pullman Company by the railroad after they were bought by the Pennsy in 1948 as part of the anti-trust settlement. Likewise, all 8 of the Pullman green cars MTH offers were painted Pullman green throughout their careers. Five of the 6 Milwaukee Road 12-1 cars are named for cars actually used by and painted for that road, and 3 of the 6 Union Pacific cars can be documented as having been painted in the two-tone gray scheme. But MTH needlessly missed lots of details on the 12-1 cars. Let's start with the basics. The MTH 12-1 is a Plan 3410A car, just like the Walthers and Branchline products. (The Rivarossi model is of a Plan 3410B car--the difference is in the lounge and toilet room windows.) The MTH model rides on Type 242 straight equalized trucks, and has a Mechanical air conditioning system, as do the Walthers cars. The MTH model has an installed brine tank for the air conditioning system, a not-inconspicuous part, whereas the Walthers car has an optional, add-on brine tank. Readily available Pullman records show when the brine tanks were removed from each car that had them, which was generally the case in the late 1940s. Once the 12-1 cars were air conditioned in 1935, virtually nothing was done to their exteriors, other than repainting and the removal of brine tanks on the cars with Mechanical A/C sytems. The notable exception is the "streamstyling" of a handfull of those cars by the PRR. Here is what is inaccurate about each of the MTH PRR 12-1 cars in terms of detailing. The James Fennimore Cooper has the wrong Plan, trucks, and A/C system. (They all have the wrong A/C systems, so I won't repeat that.) The Hess is otherwise correct. The Marcus Loew has the wrong trucks. The Joseph D. Oliver was streamsyled in 1939, so it also has the wrong trucks, roof, ends, and paint scheme. The Oliver H. Perry also has the wrong trucks, as does the John Greenleaf Whittier. Also of note with respect to the Whittier is the fact that the latter car is of the wrong Plan, and had only an A/C duct blister on one side of the car, whereas the model has blisters on both sides. Might have these errors been avoided? The answer as to the PRR cars is, "Absolutedly," had the manufacturer paid a little more attention to the readily-available records. Just by applying the following names to its PRR 12-1 cars, MTH would have given us dead-on, incontovertable models, with the correct Plans and window arrangements, and correct trucks, underbody details, A/C systems, roofs, and paint schemes: ADAMSDALE, BELFAST, CARVILLE, McEWEN, McRAVEN, RAVENNA, SUNBROOK, and WALTERSBURG (renamed J. FINLEY WILSON in 1952).
ATLANTIC CENTRAL KK Bridge gmpullman I thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments. Ed, Thanks for the detailed photos and explanations. It's hard to evaluate these new items with the few clear images otherwise available. Our manufacturers and importers seem to have caught onto our desire for more and more prototypically-accurate locomotives and freight cars, but things have lagged a bit in the passenger car arena. I think we modelers all need to understand the necessity to recoup development and tooling costs by offering more paint schemes than are strictly accurate for a mass market. And, obviously, the foobie passenger cars are successful, or Walthers, Rapido, or MTH wouldn't produce them. But we can increase our store of knowledge and urge the manufacturers to bring us better copies, particularly when the cost to do so will be slight. Again, thanks for the great photos. -- John John, I'm not against having accurate models, but there are some challenges that are not always understood. First, most passengers cars were "nearly" one of a kind, especially streamlined cars. Sure, manufacturers had standard designs, but railroad nearly always requested specific features and identical cars were typically built in relatively small numbers. Then, the railroads typically modified them the first time they needed a major overhaul. So what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype. Then there is the question of the later modifications? How many versions of the same car can/should we expect the manufacturer to make? A classic example are the B&O smooth side cars that were rebuilt from heavyweights. They were all vertually one of a kind, rebuilding done in the B&O shops, nothing like them never used by any other road. I can't even imagine the limited market or high price that would be involved. Then there are the issues of wide appeal to all levels of modeler. Large curves, sharp curves, etc, etc. It's simply amazing that we have what we have - but as stated earlier, I'm not in - I'm not paying $80 or $100 a car to then have to rework the coupler/diaphragm relationships. And to be honest, while it might have been at one time, "exact" fidelity to prototype is no longer that important to me. I find that the more important aspect of modeling is the overall "impression" of the layout, not the number or arrangement of windows on every passenger car. To each their own. Sheldon
KK Bridge gmpullman I thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments. Ed, Thanks for the detailed photos and explanations. It's hard to evaluate these new items with the few clear images otherwise available. Our manufacturers and importers seem to have caught onto our desire for more and more prototypically-accurate locomotives and freight cars, but things have lagged a bit in the passenger car arena. I think we modelers all need to understand the necessity to recoup development and tooling costs by offering more paint schemes than are strictly accurate for a mass market. And, obviously, the foobie passenger cars are successful, or Walthers, Rapido, or MTH wouldn't produce them. But we can increase our store of knowledge and urge the manufacturers to bring us better copies, particularly when the cost to do so will be slight. Again, thanks for the great photos. -- John
gmpullman I thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments.
Ed, Thanks for the detailed photos and explanations. It's hard to evaluate these new items with the few clear images otherwise available. Our manufacturers and importers seem to have caught onto our desire for more and more prototypically-accurate locomotives and freight cars, but things have lagged a bit in the passenger car arena.
I think we modelers all need to understand the necessity to recoup development and tooling costs by offering more paint schemes than are strictly accurate for a mass market. And, obviously, the foobie passenger cars are successful, or Walthers, Rapido, or MTH wouldn't produce them. But we can increase our store of knowledge and urge the manufacturers to bring us better copies, particularly when the cost to do so will be slight.
Again, thanks for the great photos.
-- John
John,
I'm not against having accurate models, but there are some challenges that are not always understood.
First, most passengers cars were "nearly" one of a kind, especially streamlined cars. Sure, manufacturers had standard designs, but railroad nearly always requested specific features and identical cars were typically built in relatively small numbers.
Then, the railroads typically modified them the first time they needed a major overhaul.
So what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype.
Then there is the question of the later modifications? How many versions of the same car can/should we expect the manufacturer to make?
A classic example are the B&O smooth side cars that were rebuilt from heavyweights. They were all vertually one of a kind, rebuilding done in the B&O shops, nothing like them never used by any other road. I can't even imagine the limited market or high price that would be involved.
Then there are the issues of wide appeal to all levels of modeler. Large curves, sharp curves, etc, etc.
It's simply amazing that we have what we have - but as stated earlier, I'm not in - I'm not paying $80 or $100 a car to then have to rework the coupler/diaphragm relationships.
And to be honest, while it might have been at one time, "exact" fidelity to prototype is no longer that important to me. I find that the more important aspect of modeling is the overall "impression" of the layout, not the number or arrangement of windows on every passenger car.
To each their own.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRAL So what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype.
Except that we do have excellent documentation of Pullman cars, lightweight and heavyweight, and extensive photographic records of them, and it's all right there on the internet. MTH obviously did some prototype research, because by and large they got the car names right. All 6 of the PRR models are named for Pullman 12-1 cars painted "PRR Standard" and leased back to the Pullman Company by the railroad after they were bought by the Pennsy in 1948 as part of the anti-trust settlement.
Likewise, all 8 of the Pullman green cars MTH offers were painted Pullman green throughout their careers. Five of the 6 Milwaukee Road 12-1 cars are named for cars actually used by and painted for that road, and 3 of the 6 Union Pacific cars can be documented as having been painted in the two-tone gray scheme. But MTH needlessly missed lots of details on the 12-1 cars.
Let's start with the basics. The MTH 12-1 is a Plan 3410A car, just like the Walthers and Branchline products. (The Rivarossi model is of a Plan 3410B car--the difference is in the lounge and toilet room windows.) The MTH model rides on Type 242 straight equalized trucks, and has a Mechanical air conditioning system, as do the Walthers cars. The MTH model has an installed brine tank for the air conditioning system, a not-inconspicuous part, whereas the Walthers car has an optional, add-on brine tank. Readily available Pullman records show when the brine tanks were removed from each car that had them, which was generally the case in the late 1940s. Once the 12-1 cars were air conditioned in 1935, virtually nothing was done to their exteriors, other than repainting and the removal of brine tanks on the cars with Mechanical A/C sytems. The notable exception is the "streamstyling" of a handfull of those cars by the PRR.
Here is what is inaccurate about each of the MTH PRR 12-1 cars in terms of detailing. The James Fennimore Cooper has the wrong Plan, trucks, and A/C system. (They all have the wrong A/C systems, so I won't repeat that.) The Hess is otherwise correct. The Marcus Loew has the wrong trucks. The Joseph D. Oliver was streamsyled in 1939, so it also has the wrong trucks, roof, ends, and paint scheme. The Oliver H. Perry also has the wrong trucks, as does the John Greenleaf Whittier. Also of note with respect to the Whittier is the fact that the latter car is of the wrong Plan, and had only an A/C duct blister on one side of the car, whereas the model has blisters on both sides.
Might have these errors been avoided? The answer as to the PRR cars is, "Absolutedly," had the manufacturer paid a little more attention to the readily-available records. Just by applying the following names to its PRR 12-1 cars, MTH would have given us dead-on, incontovertable models, with the correct Plans and window arrangements, and correct trucks, underbody details, A/C systems, roofs, and paint schemes: ADAMSDALE, BELFAST, CARVILLE, McEWEN, McRAVEN, RAVENNA, SUNBROOK, and WALTERSBURG (renamed J. FINLEY WILSON in 1952).
I never said we don't have good documentation, in many cases we do, especially when it comes to Pullman. But that is not always the case.
And despite that documentation we have $100 plastic passenger cars that are only "close".
Your detailed exercise in the mistakes MTH made proves my point - so what if someone wants to correctly model the the car names MTH messed up on? MTH or any manufacturer is unlikely to make all those subtle detail changes on all those different cars - that's likely how MTH messed it up in the first place.
At least when Branchline was still in that business, you had a good kit starting point if that level of accuracy was important to you. It sure does not look like ATLAS is headed in the kit direction with those cars?
Personally, I don't model the PRR, nor would I care about such details if I did.
I have those Pullman records downloaded on my computer. But Pullman was far from being the only builder of passenger cars - especially in the lightweight era.
And the "history" of Pullman built cars not leased back to Pullman after 1948 is sometimes sketchy as well, as is the history of cars built by Pullman but never operated by Pullman.
When I say "passenger cars" I think of the whole catagory, not just Pullman operated cars.
The history of many railroad owned cars is poorly documented at best.
Today at the GSMTS I looked at the MTH cars very nice - but you know what really turned me off? The marketing - buy them in a set, take what we want you to have or take nothing. Again, treating us like tin plate collectors, not modelers, my biggest complaint with MTH.
I have not researched the cars in question, again I don't model the PRR. But in addition to the various changes in A/C systems, it was very common for otherwise identical Pullman cars to have differences like dual brake cylinders vs single brake cylinders, different generators, minor variations in underbody layouts, etc.
So much for rivet counting.....
ATLANTIC CENTRALSo what is a manufacturer to do? Even with today's much improved method of tooling, all these variations are simply imposible to bring to market, assuming we even have good documentation on the prototype.
Ed,
I agree it is wonderful that we have such a wide variety of passenger equipment, in a wide range of detail and price levels.
While I like to build models, I am by no means "anti RTR", I buy my share of RTR as well as kits.
The other side of that however is that I model several prototype roads (B&O, C&O, WM) as well as my freelanced ATLANTIC CENTRAL, so building, painting and lettering cars is a big part of my modeling (I don't think I have enough money to get MTH to do a run for my ACR).
And, I am by definition not a collector, I only buy/build stuff that fits the layout theme. I have some full length "accurate" scale cars, Branchline, Bachmann and others.
But I am just as happy with the visual effect of my Athearn and ConCor "generics" which have had details added, some heavily kitbashed into other styles, and which have all been modified for close coupling working diaphragms.
And, I am considering how one might do some "simple" kit bashes to model some of those unique B&O cars.
John, Sheldon, thanks for commenting.
I provided the photo of the NYC Budd dome car as a counterpoint to dinwitty's warning to be careful about the liberties that MTH was taking with these cars, yet he wasn't specific about what the problems were.
I was on the John Greenleaf Whittier when it was at the Ohio Railway Museum and I can attest that the MTH model is a very close representation of that car. Similarly, the Mt. Baxter was an open-end obs before its 1937 rebuilding into a solarium-lounge. I was on that car, too (after the rebuilding ) and I believe the MTH model is a good representation of that car as well.
As you state, Sheldon, to accurately represent a Pullman roster, or consist, at any given period in time you would have to research exactly which floor plan and exterior configuration that is correct for that moment in time.
In 1930 Pullman was operating some 8,000 cars (about 60% of these were the 12-1s that MTH chose to model). They were nearly always going through some kind of rebuilding as air conditioning, roller bearings, windows and especially, adding more rooms to replace the open berths that the travelling public began to shun in increasing numbers after the war.
Much of the information I have found comes from the excellent book, The Cars Of Pullman by Welsh, Howes and Holland.
Again, as Sheldon points out, there are very few models that are 100% exact representations of the prototype. Some are nearly perfect while others, like the NYC Budd dome, well...
So you have to decide what's "good enough" for your needs. Personally, I'm thrilled to have the sheer volume of passenger cars available today that were only pipe dreams in the not too distant past of this hobby.
Happy modeling, Ed
gmpullmanI thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments.
dinwittySome simple research they could get it right...but DOH! I have ZERO MTH stuff.
I think I understand what you are trying to say. Many manufacturers have made "foobies" and I'm not trying to imply that these latest cars from MTH are a rivet-for-rivet exact duplicate of the car for which it is named.
I thought I'd provide some photos for other modelers to look at and judge for themselves. The photos I found in the MTH catalog or other sites do not provide any details and my intent was to show some of these details and invite comments.
Here is an example of a Walthers PROTO car...
Not to be outdone, you can get it in PRR, too.
https://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/920-13023
The description says "Perfect for building realistic Budd passenger consists"
From the Walthers website describing their Proto line:
Working directly with railroad historical societies, museums and modeling authorities to obtain the most accurate data possible, each WalthersProto model is superbly detailed to match its prototype.
Will I stop buying Walthers passenger cars? Don't think so...
I have a relatively large collection of brass passenger cars as well. Will I ever be able to fabricate accurate interiors for all of them in this lifetime... I highly doubt it. Overall, I think MTH has come a long way toward making a decent passenger car at a reasonable price. I like them, I'll mix them in with my Walthers heavyweights and have a little more variety.
Oh, and if I want an aquarium car with a swimming fish in it, MTH is the place to go for one of those, too.
Thanks for your input,
YMMV... Ed
Hi, Tom
Trying to sort out a Pennsy roster can be a real chore but from what I can gather PRR had 56 B-70s like the MTH one. Then to go on to all the sub-classes I found rebuilds from BM-70s and these cars had smaller doors where the mail apartment had been then, of course there all the end door cars, scenery cars and horse cars and that's just the 70 footers!
There's really no room between the coupler head and the draft gear shelf to use a shorter-shanked coupler however MTH has provided an additional mounting hole to set the draft gear farther back. MTH says in the included instruction booklet that this will reduce the minimum radius to 42"
I recall hearing of some fellows that selected the optional mounting on one end only on the streamlined cars for a compromise. Maybe this would be a solution on these heavyweights but this reduces your switching and make-up of trains.
I should mention, too, that a steam heat connection is supplied to be installed by the user.
The interior is accessed by pulling the floor, with the trucks attached, up and out of the body.
The PULLMAN lettering is always a bit of an issue when dealing with the post 1944 antitrust settlement. Many of the cars were bought by the railroads then leased right back to Pullman. Sometimes retaining the Pullman on the letterboard, other times the railroad name was on the letterboard and a smaller PULLMAN was placed toward each end of the car. The actual repainting as a result of the court settlement didn't begin until 1947.
Looking through the excellent book by Charles Blairdone and Peter Tilp, Pennsylvania Railroad Passenger Car Painting and Lettering I found that the Pullman issued lettering diagrams show Pennsylvania in 9" letters on the letterboard. These drawings are dated 1950.
However, I found dozens of photos of heavyweight cars still lettered Pullman even in the mid 1960s.
I cringe at the thought of a "patch-out" on a passenger car, but it WAS done. That's one option, the other would be to try your favorite method of removing lettering. There are many photos of re-lettered cars, some with only the 3" Pullman painted out at the car ends. As frequently happens, the patch-out paint doesn't match the aged paint already applied.
Thanks for commenting, Ed
Thanks, Ed. Just a couple questions:
1. PRR had hundreds of B60's. How many B70's did they have?
2. Is there enough space to replace the long shank couplers with short shank? Would that be enough to significantly imporove the coupled appearance?
3. When would the Pullman name have been removed and replaced with the Pennsylvania name? Would it be practical to make this change on the model without a complete repaint?
Tom
gmpullman Hi, Sheldon Those MTH cars do have a pretty wide gap at the diaphragms! The draft gear do not have the same swing assembly that Walthers uses. The Walthers cars are a bit closer but there's still the gap. I wonder why more manufacturers don't use the type of pivot (I'll have to look up the name for it if there is one) where the gap widens on curves and tightens up in the straight run. Some BLI and Bachmann tender drawbars have used this link. Of course, like anything else, there has to be a compromise on our tight curves and manufacturers don't want to lose market share if their particular car requires a larger radius than most modelers can achieve. Thanks for the comments, Ed
Hi, Sheldon
Those MTH cars do have a pretty wide gap at the diaphragms! The draft gear do not have the same swing assembly that Walthers uses. The Walthers cars are a bit closer but there's still the gap.
I wonder why more manufacturers don't use the type of pivot (I'll have to look up the name for it if there is one) where the gap widens on curves and tightens up in the straight run. Some BLI and Bachmann tender drawbars have used this link.
Of course, like anything else, there has to be a compromise on our tight curves and manufacturers don't want to lose market share if their particular car requires a larger radius than most modelers can achieve.
Thanks for the comments, Ed
I understand about them not wanting to loose sales because the cars require too large a curve. It would seem to me rather simple to make a dual position coupler mounting.
The cars in my photo, admittedly ConCor shorties (72'), will run on 24" radius with no propblems. I have the same setup on 80' cars which still handle 28" radius.
Admittedly my layout is all 36" radius and larger.
My process is simple, the body mounted couplers are long shank Kadee 30 series. The 30 series draft gear allows the widest possible swing, obviously the long coupler is set back on the car farther to get the close coupling.
The cars are spaced at about 30 scale inches, prototype spacing is about 22". So it is very close and looks very convincing.
While I do have a few 80' cars, I actually pefer shorter cars for their "selective compression" effect - both regarding curves and other layout features like station platforms.
My typical passenger train is a prototypical 9 to 11 cars, sometimes longer.
Ed, thank you for the detailed report, those cars look very nice.
Here is the one thing I do not understand about any of these new RTR passenger cars - the coupling distances between them. It ruins the appearance for me.
For that reason I will simply not spend that kind of money on them - MTH, Walthers, BLI, it matters not. That said, I am a freelance modeler and a willing kit builder, so I have other solutions.
I use American Limited diaphragms on my cars and couple them at nearly scale distances with the diaphragms always touching and they work perfectly.
It would seem to me that for all that money they could solve this issue?
" target="">
My interests are heavily biased toward passenger operations so anytime I can check out new equipment that can expand my already bloated roster, I'm ready to jump in with both feet!
I saw these heavyweight passenger cars when MTH announced them over a year ago. Recently they became available so I picked up a two car set intended to be an add-on to the five car package. I didn't want to commit to all five cars (four of which are the 12-1) and I can always use more head-end equipment so the baggage/12-1 combo made sense.
I hope MTH offers other combinations and expands the line to include maybe a diner and RPO, some coaches and maybe a 6-3 or other common Pullman floor plan.
I never thought I'd be singing the praises of an MTH product but since acquiring the 1938 Century and 1941 Empire State Express cars I have grown to appreciate the fine engineering that went into Mike's passenger cars. In many ways they are superior to similar offerings from Walthers, notably the "stay-alive" lighting already installed.
As near as I can tell there are only three cars available, a 72' baggage, the 12-1 Pullman and a 10 section-buffet observation. The Pennsy baggage car has the round window doors found in later rebuilds. Rectangular windows are on the U.P. and Milwaukee versions.
The John Greenleaf Whittier was retired from service in 1963 and acquired by the Ohio Railroad Museum in Worthington, Ohio.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3323117
Crisp lettering in a good representation of PRR Buff is applied.
The baggage car could pass for a Pennsy B-70 other than the 2411 riveted pedestal trucks. Note the nice representation of the belt driven generator on the right truck.
Here's what the belt looks like. It just barely rides on the axle and is flexible enough not to cause any operating problems.
The end details are superb. The diaphrams are much more detailed than the Walthers counterpart. I'll eventually clip off the 3" pipe hanging from the coupler
The lettering is well done and I like the fact that car names are already applied. The green window shades are a nice touch and the windows look exactly like the Pullman double sash used in the air conditioned era.
Undercairrage details are very well executed. Steam traps, battery and stand-by plugs, Spicer drive for A-C, air reservoirs and check out the hand brake rigging!
Another look at how the generator belting was done. The 12-1 has Pullman type 242A trucks. These cars, as well as the MTH streamlined ones, roll exceptionally well.
Of all my Tuscan red PRR equipment, the MTH cars shown here are the "reddest" but I suppose it could represent a freshly painted car. To my eye the Scalecoat Tuscan red is a good representation and the Walthers shade leans a bit toward the brown shade.
Note the wire pull on the baggage door. Nice touch.
Cars couple fairly close and they come with genuine Kadee "scale" couplers
You can see the difference in the two truck styles here and a good view of the prisim glass in the washroom.
Brass handrails in the aisle windows (I just spent some time adding this detail to some of my Walthers heavyweights) too bad there isn't a WATCH YOUR STEP sign on the step riser. The step treads should be black rubber. Just barely visible is the end gate which must be closed if the car is run at the end of the train.
If I have one nit to pick that would be that the floor height is high so when you populate the car you will have to amputate your travelers at the knees. The lighting is done with a decent yellowish glow, maybe just a bit too yellow for me but it is a bit dimmer than the lighting on the streamlined cars.
I noticed that the "stay alive" is only good for about 5 seconds of current interruption, which is OK but far shorter duration than on the streamlined cars which stay lit for 20 to 30 seconds. The baggage car is lighted as well (which I may remove to use in another car since this is not a messenger car).
MTH can't seem to get away from their Lionel roots, the box label says these cars are for use on "Two Rail" systems.
These cars can be found for about $70-75 each from the discount sellers. In my opinion they are an exceptional value for the level of detail and lighting provided.
MTH would do very well to make the baggage cars available in other road names or at least in Pullman green, unlettered, so those of us who would like to add some head-end cars can get them without having to buy another Pullman.
I would also like to be able to get the observation car without having to buy FOUR more 12-1s. The Pullman lettered observation car is named Mount Baxter which is a car owned by the Midwest Railway Preservation Society in Cleveland (it was featured in the Robert Redford movie The Natural) although it was rebuilt in 1937 to a solarium lounge with the open platform removed.
This is just my overview on these new cars from MTH. They come along at a good time since the stock of Walthers heavyweights is dwindling. Comments or questions are welcomed...
Regards, Ed