Has anybody looked at BTS, they both sell early rail kits.
http://btsrr.com/
Amesville Shops also sell some early cars, mostly eastern stuff.
http://www.amesvilleshops.com/
Alkem used to sell early rail stuff, but its discontinued.
Probably 80-90% of the railroad mileage was east of a N-S line through Kansas City in the 1880's. The western roads had rosters in the hundreds or maybe a 1000 cars while the eastern roads had rosters in the multiple 1000's to 10's of thousands (the PRR probably had more GA gons cars in 1880 than any of the roads going into Houston had cars, the PRR had 30,000 class GD hopper bottom gons by 1900).
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Here's a url for upgrading Bachman's 4-4-0 ...this modified engine pulled at least 14 1860s type rolling stock.
http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/1879/bachmann_4-4-0/sound/
I don't have the Bachman 4-4-0 but I do have a Tyco 4-4-0 which has an open frame motor. I put supermagnets in it to reduce start current draw, etc. but have yet to try and put some increased weight into the engine to up the "pull". The old alnico magnets were strong enough to spin the wheels under load so the SMs just lowered the current draw/s.
I agree completely with everything De Luxe has written. Another pet peave is that manufacturers do not offer painted but unlettered locomotives and rolling stock. I'm trying to model Houston in the 1880's, so I have to repaint and decal almost everything I use. Also, the detail and accuracy of the items are laughable compared to modern models. Bachmann has some new "old time" rolling stock, but the truss rods, painting and other details are toy-like.
Problem is that they have us over a barrel.
Doug Weiskopf
I think rather than saying 'ballon stacks were more common in the west' it might be more accurate to say 'ballon stacks lasted longer in the west'. But it wasn't that much longer, maybe a decade. The advantages of coal as a fuel source made it the fuel of choice by c.1890, even in heavily forrested areas.
Plus, remember not that much of 'the old west' was heavily forrested. Once railroads got into the prairies, there weren't enough trees to cut down and burn for fuel, so they shifted to coal. IIRC - based on the Frey and Shrenk books - the NP started ordering new engines with straight stacks around 1880 or a bit later, about the time they got into the prairies of North Dakota.
No point beating this iron horse to death, but I'm not talking about exceptions. Let's agree to disagree. In the meantime, do some research.
Tom
@ ACY: You´re talking about exceptions. That doesn´t count. I know back then all steamers were built in the East but that doesn´t matter. It´s about where they saw service. And history showed that woodburners with balloon stacks were much more likely to be found in the found in the West than in the East due to lack of coal in the West (doesn´t mean there was no coal in the West but just much less than in the East). But I do agree of course with you that the Wild West is more defined by overall scenery than particular engines.
DeLuxe:
You may think balloon stacks were a Western phenomenon, but that's just part of the mythology that has grown up over the past hundred years or so. Look at photos of Promontory Point in 1869. Did U.P. 4-4-0 number 119 have a balloon stack? No. Look at the obviously Eastern locomotives at the B&O Museum in Baltimore. Does B&O 4-4-0 number 25 ("William Mason") have a straight stack? No. Look at any photo showing Civil War railroading in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, etc., and you will see balloon stacks galore. After all, the General and Texas are rightly thought of as Civil War engines, and their territory was Atlanta, GA to Chattanooga, TN. Few people would call that "The West".
Almost all of the equipment used by the early Western railroads was built in the East by decidedly Eastern builders who were following the standard practices of the day. The equipment they shipped out for use on those Western railroads was essentially not much different from that used in the East. There was not a separate Western standard that differed substantially from the Eastern standard. The technological level was the same at any given time. Locomotives were highly decorated, with a lot of bright paint and metalwork. Domes were usually fluted. The spark arrestor system depended on the type of fuel. Wood burners needed a different system than coal burners did. A few early Eastern railroads opted for coal fuel at an early date and found less need for balloon stacks; but a lot of other Eastern lines, especially the smaller ones, continued to use balloon stacks after 1900. Heck, the coal-burning Twin Seams Mining Company in Alabama was using large balloon stacks in 1960! Eventually a few locomotives were built in the West, but not very many in the great scheme of things. In the 1800's, the principal locomotive builders in this country were located in New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia.
Scenery, traffic, etc. will define a "Wild West" layout, particularly if you are freelancing. Equipment, by and large, will not. You can put the very same equipment in an Eastern setting to represent New England, Georgia, and most other locations East of the Mississippi.
That cab forward 4-4-0 was not a fantasy project. The model is based on a locomotive actually operated by the South Pacific Coast (about as far West as you can go). It burned oil and, as the photo shows, did not have a balloon stack.
@DeLuxe
Yes, it is HO scale.
Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:
My Railroad
My Youtube:
Graff´s channel
8 cars might be a bit long for an 1870's train. Until larger engines came along, five cars would have been more typical. IIRC the original NYC Empire State Express of the 1890's was only five cars or so for example. By the 1920's it might be 14 cars or more. 19th century was normally small engines pulling shorter trains, with more trains per day than you'd see in the 20th century.
http://www.stampcommunity.org/uploaded/wt1/20140117_EmpireStateExpress.jpg
@MidlandPacific: Thanks for the link! You see? Because of all that stuff you wrote down I prefer the 1860s to 1880s era like mentioned before, because the 1890s already differed from that era and things started to change in many ways. By the way I have an authentic 1894-1904 SP Sunset Limited consisting of 6 Roundhouse Palace cars featuring individual and prototipically correct interior arrangements and custom painting and detailing as well as a Mehano SP E-23 4-4-0 with DCC, sound and smoke. The Mehano 4-4-0 is based on SP´s E-23 class Americans that appeared in 1899. It´s my favorite train and for some time I thought I´d be satisfied with that, but I realize that I want an open platform car passenger train with an even older 4-4-0 from the even earlier era as these are my probably most favorite trains.
@John Busby: 8 cars is exactly the number I´d like my 1870s passenger train to have. And an American that is strong enough to pull it even on grades. But such models aren´t available. By the way I´m a fan of traction tires because they are more effective than just boiler weight. I have a small european 2-10-0 equipped with 4 traction tires that easily outpulls my much bigger and also heavier american 2-10-2´s that don´t have traction tires but just boiler weight.
@Graffen: Thank your for this link! I´ll have a lot to read in this thread as it has 74 pages! Just a quick question: There is no mention of the scale, but I assume it´s HO, right? That Mogul of him with the big wood load looks really marvelous!
@wjstix: I agree with you. The smaller the prototype the larger the scale should be. But impossible for people with restricted space like me. Believe me, if I was a millionaire with a huge house with garden, I would build a huge outdoor G scale 1870s era layout for sure!
@ACY: I disagree. Wild West means a lot! Nobody will think of Maine when hearing this! Also woodburners with those big stacks were clearly a more western thing than eastern. Yes I know that many models of this era are oversized. But I must admit that I like seeing when the roof of the engine cab and the roofs of the passenger cars are on the same height or "in the same line". It´s just more beautiful to look at in my opinion than having a train where the cars look like 1:70 and the engine like 1:100. So I must admit I do like some of the oversized Mantua engines like their 2-6-0, 4-6-0 and 4-8-0 (which is basically the same design except wheel arrangement). Yes indeed, these drive shafts bother me very much. Once I owned a very beautiful Austrian 2-6-4 Adriatic steam engine (prototype was built in 1911). The model had fantastic details, light, sound, smoke and even openable smokebox door. But the motor was in the tender and of course a drive shaft was connecting the tender and the engine. I just couldn´t look at it anymore after some time and sold it off.
@Mheetu: Is that 4-4-0 Cab Forward a fantasy product or has a prototype ever existed? That Consolidation looks pretty nice! Do you know if they are good pullers and would handle 8 open platform passenger cars or 20 freight cars?
@tomikawaTT: I know. But did you also watch Italian and Yugoslavian Western movies from the 50s, 60s and 70s? They´re good too and towns don´t always look the same. But why are you writing about today´s cowboys? Of course the cowboy life of today has nothing to do anymore with the cowboy life 150 years ago, and of course even back then cowboy life was much less "romantic" than depicted in the movies.
One way to get decent traction out of a miniscule loco with a pencil-thin boiler is to mount the drive in the tender and surround it with (iridium, if you an afford it, or lead) weight. Then make the locomotive just heavy enough to track and work it over to let it freewheel. I first saw this in the '70s, a model of a SNCF loco that had been purchased in Paris. The boiler and machinery of that 2-8-2 were feather-light and would roll at a harsh glance. The tender weighed about a ton, and could have pulled the knob off a door.
As for the "Wild West," it was mostly a fabrication of fiction writers who never got west of Pittsburg (the terminal 'h' came later.) Note, too, how many of the movies seemed to have towns that all looked the same - thanks to a movie set now called 'Old Tucson,' just west of the Arizona city of the same name. In most Western towns, the Marshall and a deputy or two were among the first settlers.
I grew up on Hollywood Westerns. More recently, I met real cowboys. They were wearing MLB team jackets and NFL logo baseball caps, and were riding the range in pickups and Jeeps. Not much romance there, I'm afraid.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
How about those Roundhouse Old Timer kits. I know they are not the most up to date but they do look decent.
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/ROUNDHOUSE-HO-306-S-P-2-8-0-LOCOMOTIVE-KIT-/291794372377?hash=item43f04cc719:g:IZsAAOSwvg9XVeve
Even this is rather cool
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/HOn3-WISEMAN-MODEL-SERVICES-NORTH-PACIFIC-COAST-21-CAB-FORWARD-4-4-0-PARTS-SET-/151127218493?hash=item232fe2593d
Hi Graffen
I only had a quick look, thanks for the link
I got a bit distracted by the rather nice little structures on the left hand side of town in the first or second picture, as thats what I need is some very nice small structures
When I have a bit more time I am going in for a better look that layout needs a propper look at.
regards John
A few thoughts:
1."Wild West" means nothing. What you really mean is Early American. With a few variations, the basic design of most mid-19th Century North American locomotives and cars was essentially very similar from Maine to California, and from Florida to British Columbia.
2. Many of the models of this period are actually oversized. The Mantua General is one of the few that is pretty close. Some are based on V&T designs that came after the Civil War, and tended to be a bit larger.
3. A very small loco has very little space inside it for anything. Usable traction is related to adhesion, which depends upon weight. You're in luck if your prototype had a tender. You can load the inside of the boiler, cab, stack, etc. with all the weight you can, leaving room only for a small gearbox. Put the motor in the tender, and you can have a useful engine. If the little tiny drive shaft bothers you so much that you can't abide it, you'll probably have to live with a poor puller.
Generally, it works best if the actual size of the prototype you're interested in is inverse to the scale...that is, the smaller the real engine, the larger the scale should be. If you want to model the mid-19th century, you should check out what's available in O scale, like what you can see on Bernard Kempinski's Civil War era "Aquia Line" layout.
p.s. Just because a car doesn't come from the factory with an interior doesn't mean you can't add one. Several companies, like Palace Car Co., make seats, tables, RPO mail racks, etc. for car interiors.
I thought you might be interested in this post:
http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=35088
Håkan is a friend of mine that is very much into early trains.
He even makes some very nice passenger car kits.
Hi Old Thumper
Definatly no sugar molases or other sweetener in that statement just truth
From what I have read a reasonable train for one of the early 4-4-0's
Would be in the region of 4 to six cars and a monster train would be something like 8 after that a second loco would be required.
So if the model needs traction tyres to do that then its not heavy enough and has a rubish motor that needs traction tyres like I said bad design there are metals that can add the weight and I don't mean lead.
Also good quality small motors that can do the job so the failure of the designer to use them is bad design.
Sorry but I won't knowingly go and purchase a loco that has the infernal things fitted they are more trouble than they are worth.
I also object strongly when one goes and the relevent manufacturer says oh we don't have them sorry and believe me it happens more and more these days.
And they know full well the loco is useless without them.
Early rail is definitely niche, but I keep a somewhat up to date list of relevant suppliers on my blog:
http://mprailway.blogspot.com/
You might want to look at Eight Wheeler Models for early sleepers; that guy is doing some interesting stuff with 3D printing. Other good suppliers are John Canfield, who is on the Yahoo EarlyRail group. I pick up a lot of stuff on EBay, and much as I love LaBelle cars, the crown jewels of the wooden passenger car kits are probably Westwood - hopefully, I have enough of them for one lifetime. Rio Grande Models makes some good general purpose kits - flatcars, ventilated boxcars - and all kinds of MoW equipment. Funaro and Camarlengo has some of the more modern wood 40' cars, as does Tichy Train Group - which also makes virtually everything you will need to scratchbuild wooden equipment - and if you think you can't scratchbuild, my advice is to try to build a good basic LaBelle boxcar model: if you can do that, you can scratchbuild.
The range of commercial 4-4-0s is expanded slightly by brass: PFM did a reasonable range of them (V&T, CP/UP set, although Balboa's was better), and NWSL did their "Spartan Series" 4-4-0s and 2-6-0s, which look promising to me, although I have never built one; Ken Kidder also made some nice 2-6-0s. Finally, if you are a real glutton for work, there were some old 4-4-0 kits that can be made into something nice - Roundhouse and Mantua did them, although the brass "Belle of the Eighties" is probably a lot of work for even the most dedicated scratchbasher.
The 4-4-0 was an interesting engine, and its heyday was really the 1850-1880 period, when track was rough enough that its suspension and flexibility were at a premium, and trains were light enough that it could pull most anything. I don't know how many were built, but after reading this, I went back to reexamine Schrenk and Frey's book on NP steam, which demonstrated something interesting. Between the formation of the NP in 1870 and 1887, the 4-4-0 was practically it, as far as road engines went: they had switchers of all types (although mostly 0-4-0 and 0-6-0), two classes of 2-6-0, and a class of 2-8-0s - and that was it! But from 1887 onward, that situation changed dramatically, and NP bought 2-6-0s, 4-6-0s, 2-8-0s, even a pair of unlucky 2-10-0s - but just a few 4-4-0s, and many of them specifically for passenger service.
What happened? In a word, air brakes. Prior to 1887, the longest trains that could be braked by air were about ten cars. Under certain circumstances, you could run longer trains, but they were hard to hand brake, and so the railroads tended to be sized (loco power and siding length) for very short trains. Power braking of longer trains simply wasn't practical: there was no effective way to graduate the application in the leading cars, which tended to be damaged (they were wood, remember) by the crushing force of the unbraked equipment on the rear of the train as an application initiated by the engineer made its way through the train. Once George Westinghouse solved that problem, the Burlington let him conduct a series of tests in 1887, and he proved to just about everyone that fifty car trains were at least theoretically feasible.
Now, prior to 1887, most railroads had some heavier locomotives: they might be, like the Reading, coal-haulers that moved very long trains at what was basically a walking speed, with multiple engines in the train. They might be, like the transcontinentals or the B&O, carriers who had particularly hilly districts where the 4-4-0s came off and a 2-8-0 went on; the point is that the balance of motive power was in most cases determined by a combination of the road's physical characteristics and traffic flow - but that on flat ground, a 4-4-0 generally sufficed.
All that began to change after 1887. Congress passed the Rail Safety Appliance Act in 1893, and gave the carriers seven years to install air brakes; they didn't make it, so Congress gave them a few more. Train lengths grews, and engine power grew - bigger 2-8-0s, 4-8-0s, then some false starts like 2-6-2s, then the first Mallets. Bridges got rebuilt, and track, and the engineers, not having the benefit of computers or any sense of where this was all going to end, slide-ruled everything out to a couple of extra places and left us with infrastructure that had strength for a century of growth - or more. By the time engines grew to the size of the early 2-8-8-2s, they were hitting the outer limits of what wood construction could do, and a lot of the early Mallets were used in pusher service, because they were more than capable of pulling wood cars apart, if the train passed a certain size. By then, the 4-4-0s were pulling local and mixed trains, but there were still plenty to be found, with the brass painted over in the same somber black as the rest of the engine - cheaper to maintain.
The first steel cars were introduced in the 1890s, and they were generally used for bulk minerals, wood cars having pretty much reached the limit of what could be carried on a given set of trucks, even with truss rods and steel members to strengthen them. Train length grew - again - and by the start of the First World War, a lot of railroad systems were struggling to handle the traffic they were carrying, and at least one - the Colorado Midland - may have choked to death on the sheer volume of traffic it had to carry later in the war (accounts differ).
For railroads, it was a turbulent period of change and transition. For better or worse, it gave us the railroad infrastructure we have today (the system reached its maximum extent in 1913), and it made the nation's economy more efficient, and richer. For railfans, it is still a niche, but a fascinating one - filled with elaborate billboard reefers, erathen ballast, wood Pullmens with elaborate, archaic Victorian names like "Tryphena," and a wonderful variety of steam engines.
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
@Old Thumper: And a (reliable) daily runner is exactly what I need. That´s why the Mantua/Tyco isn´t a choice for me.
@dehusman: I know the term Wild West is critical. But I also know that most Western movies don´t play in the "real" West but rather in the Midwest because most of them are cowboy themed, who could be mostly found in the Midwest (Great Plains). I´d say that the grand majority of Western movies plays in the plains of Texas, Kansas and New Mexico. But for me this is part of the Wild West too. Well it would be nice to have an American that can pull 8 to 10 open platform passenger cars on level track as well as grades. And on grades most models released simply won´t make it. Those baggage cars released by ConCor or Roundhouse aren´t full baggage cars but combined baggage-mail cars. And at least the mail section had interiors, which these models lack. I know most trains in that era had meal stops but some already featured diners already in the open platform era. So why not model that? Well, in the 1870´s Omaha-Oakland via UP/CP clearly was a long distance passenger route through the West. I know there were only kerosene lantners or the light from the firebox existing as "cab light" during that era. But you know it´s a model railroad, so the cab light can´t be a kerosene lantern of course but simply an electric light (LED) in a casing that is resembling a kerosene lantern. This is absolutely doable. And lighted fireboxes are nothing new too. And with todays LED´s being available in such small sizes, many things are possible to be lighted that surely wouldn´t have been possible before. I know all these models you mentioned but none of them is satisfying my needs.
@richg1998: Didn´t know they moved the motor into the engine. Sounds good. I always disliked looking at that shaft between the tender and the engine!
@mlehman: I know about LaBelle but those types I desire aren´t available too at LaBelle and in addition to that I´m absolutely not in the mood for kits. I really want RTR models as I´m too lazy for building all these kits. Painting is not a big deal for me but building kits...hell no! Especially not when I see that some kits are equally or even more expensive than RTR stuff.
@NevinW: Sounds interesting although 1910 is not my desired era. But I can imagine your layout still has a lot of "Wild West Flavor". Would you mind sharing some pics? Would be curious to see them as I always like getting inspired by creative ideas.
I model the 1910 era Nevada mining railroads and you are right, manufacturers don't make much pre 1930's equipment. However, if you know were to look and get on the corect websites there is more out there than you would think. The Virginia and Truckee has been intermittantly popular with manufacturers over the decades and kits can still be found on Ebay. I've built an entire 10'x20' layout dedicated to two of the most obscure railroads ever: The Bullfrog Goldfield RR and the Tonopah and Tidewater RR so I know it can be done. Just don't expect everything to come RTR.
Keep in mind that 4-4-0s couldn't pull much of a train in 1:1. And trains usually weren't all that long either.
Left unmentioned in available rolling stock was LaBelle. They offer a variety of kits that are suitable for modest backdating and are light, since they're made of wood. Don't ignore the narrowgauge options, since there was relatively little difference in size between much SG and NG rolling stock before 1900. See: https://www.labellemodels.com/scale-c-21.html?osCsid=soistrud7on5a2g3c6ne2ln4f3
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
There are some early rail groups around. I belong to two.
At least two companies on line sell kits for rolling stock. Not sure about passenger cars though.
I asked an Athearn rep at a show back in Jan this year. He claimed Athearn would start selling the Rouindhouse products again this year. We shall see.
The Bachmann 1880's locos now have the motor in the boiler. Sound in the tender. Diagrams are at the Bachmann website.
Rich
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
Being a huge fan of (western) 1860s to 1880s era railroading (LOVE the Wild West!), I´m disappointed by the fact that there is so little good stuff from that era available in the model railroad market (no matter which scale).
You need to get on a Civil War modeler forum. I kinda cringe when I hear "Wild West". It is so much of a creation of the movies so the eras and what happened typically are very muddled.
The Pacific Rail Act was passed in 1862 and the golden spike was driven in 1869. That means that for the majority of the 1860's the "Wild West" that was rail served was east of Kansas City or west of the Sierra Nevada's. Most of the rail lines west of Kansas City weren't laid until the 1870-1890's.
If you are modeling "western" railroads in the 1860's you are modeling Missouri, Kansas or Arkansas (or California).
Ok, Bachmann made a step forward by offering their 4-4-0´s with DCC and sound. But besides this, I think this particular model is still awful because it´s barely pulls more than 3 to 4 cars and is quite generic: the CP "Jupiter" and UP #119 only differ in stack style, in headlight position and in boiler length.
Do you actually have one or are you basing your observations on an older model. Most of the reviews of those engines I have read, they pulled well 10-15 cars on the level (it is a small engine so its going to pull a small train and it will loose power on grades).
The situation is even worse with passenger cars: Only ConCor offers open platform cars with interiors but it´s only their coaches that have interiors while their baggage-mail cars do not.
No interior in a baggage car IS the interior. A baggage car is a big open space.
Bachmanns open platform cars don´t offer any interiors at all, and both Bachmann and ConCor produce only 2 types each: ConCor has a coach and baggage-mail car while Bachmann has a coach and a combine. Roundhouse offers the best and most beautiful open platform cars in my eyes, but they too come without interiors and only 2 types more: coach, business car, combine and baggage-mail car. But where are the open platform diners and sleepers? Open platform diners and sleepers were already well around by the 1870´s, so I really wonder why nobody yet decided to produce models of them because long distance passenger trains already featured these types during that era. It would be so nice to have a 1870´s passenger train with mail cars, baggage cars, coaches, diners and sleepers with all cars featuring full interiors and the possibility to install interior lights as well!
Pullman sleepers were invented in 1862, so for most of the 1860's they didn't exist. Diners were also few and far between. Research the "Harvey House". Trains would stop at a station and while the engines were being serviced and the baggage and express was being handled the people would get off the train, go into the restaurant and get something to eat. That's how they did it in that era.
In the 1870's There would be very few "long distance trains" since railroads weren't that long or hadn't been built yet. A train between New Orleans and Los Angeles? No tracks yet. Long distance was New York to Chicago (certainly not the Wild West).
I would LOVE to see 4-4-0 Americans, 4-6-0 Ten Wheelers and 2-6-0 Moguls featuring not only DCC with sound and working headlight but also with working cab light, traction tires and smoke units (which would surely fit into the large woodburner baloon stacks at least). I´ve already seen lots of photos with Americans pulling 10 car passenger trains and Moguls pulling 25 car freights during that era, which isn´t possible to do with those weak Bachmann engines. That´s why I think traction tires are a must to equip these old little types with. I know Mantua had traction tires on their 4-4-0 General, but besides that the model is of course not up to date although I must admit I like the die cast metal construction of the earlier models. Would prefer new DCC with sound, headlight, cab light and smoke unit equipped 4-4-0´s to be made of die cast metal too!
Be careful, because there aren't that many photos of 1860's to 1880's trains. A lot of the pictures of early trains are actuall from post 1900.
What cab light? Engines didn't have electric lights until the late 1890's early 1900's. The "cab light" of an 1870's engine was the fire box or a kerosene lantern.
Just so you know, you would only use a headlight between sunset and sunrise. During the day they extinguished the headlight (they were oil, not electric headlights). It wasn't until the 1950's that railroads kept the headlight on by day and night. Air brakes and knuckle couplers weren't required until 1906, so in your time period all the couplers would be link and pin and hand brakes, no air brakes. Most cars were in the 30-34 ft range, 36 ft cars were popular in the 1890-1910 era. There were a few 40-50 ft cars but they were extremely rare and like an 86 ft hi-cube today. I would suggest using knuckle couplers on the models because link and pin are really hard to operate with. Check out BTS models (http://www.btsrr.com/) and Allkem (http://www.alkemscalemodels.com/) Labelle offers wood kits for early passenger cars (https://www.labellemodels.com/)
Don´t know for sure, but am I right when I assume that the only reason for the manufacturers not to produce such models is simply because there are much less people modeling that era and therefore desireing such models?
The major manufacturers have largely abandoned the pre-WW1 market. Roundhouse used to produce some 4-4-0, 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 engines that were as close as you could get. Bachmann and Pocher made 4-4-0's (which have been greatly improved with the new Bachmann line). Bachmann Spectrum made a 4-4-0 and 4-6-0 but they were more 1890-1910 era engines detailed for the 1920's. Tyco/Mantua made a 4-4-0 that was appropriate for the era. AHM./IHC made a 2-4-0 and 4-4-0, and Tyco/Mantua made a 4-6-0 that were era appropriate but were oversize, close to S scale in some cases. There are kits out there for early cars, but they are mostly wood or resin "craftsman kits". It is a niche market, but if you REALLY want to model it you can do it.
John Busby Hi all If it needs traction tyres to haul a decent train Then its junk in big bold capitals And who ever designed it needs to be taken out the back and put out of our missery as it is just plain cheep skate very bad design regards John
Hi all
If it needs traction tyres to haul a decent train
Then its junk in big bold capitals
And who ever designed it needs to be taken out the back and put out of our missery as it is just plain cheep skate very bad design
Although the post civil war 4-4-0´s were the key loco in the making of a nation, they never became as iconic and popular as the Big Boys, Challengers, Cab Forward´s and other behemoths. Apparently, manufacturers do not see a chance of selling a sufficient amount to make a reasonable profit.
It´s a pity, but I don´t think it will change. European model railroaders suffer as well, there are hardly any pre-1900 locos and rolling stock around.
Ok, Bachmann made a step forward by offering their 4-4-0´s with DCC and sound. But besides this, I think this particular model is still awful because it barely pulls more than 3 to 4 cars and is quite generic: the CP "Jupiter" and UP #119 only differ in stack style, in headlight position and in boiler length.
The situation is even worse with passenger cars: Only ConCor offers open platform cars with interiors but it´s only their coaches that have interiors while their baggage-mail cars do not. Bachmanns open platform cars don´t offer any interiors at all, and both Bachmann and ConCor produce only 2 types each: ConCor has a coach and baggage-mail car while Bachmann has a coach and a combine. Roundhouse offers the best and most beautiful open platform cars in my eyes, but they too come without interiors and only 2 types more: coach, business car, combine and baggage-mail car. But where are the open platform diners and sleepers? Open platform diners and sleepers were already well around by the 1870´s, so I really wonder why nobody yet decided to produce models of them because long distance passenger trains already featured these types during that era. It would be so nice to have a 1870´s passenger train with mail cars, baggage cars, coaches, diners and sleepers with all cars featuring full interiors and the possibility to install interior lights as well!
Don´t know for sure, but am I right when I assume that the only reason for the manufacturers not to produce such models is simply because there are much less people modeling that era and therefore less people desireing such models?