Yes.
I’m older than dirt and still have pretty good eyesight (Cataract Surgery on both eyes) and at a couple of feet I can’t see any difference so it must depend on the individual. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
DAVID FORTNEYSo is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout?
For some people, yes. For others like me, no.
If you don't want to pay the premium price but want the very detailed look, we have a lot of modelers on this forum who customize fairly cheap cars into very detailed ones.
I don't think I have the skills to do that yet, but it's something I will probably try in the future.
York1 John
This is a bit like asking if 23-jewel pocket watches with diamonds on the staff, sapphire on the pallets, rubies on the gold train, and damaskeening under the bridges and under the dial are necessary. Not really, and you can get comparable timekeeping and service reliability much more cheaply. But if craftsmanship of beautiful things appeals to you, and you have the money but not the time and skill to lower the cost by doing the 'improvements' yourself 'at cost' -- there you go!
No. Then again I really don't care about super detailing my freight cars and locomotives.
Sometime in the future it will be hard to handle it with your hands carefully placing it off and on the layout making sure nothing bends or broken.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
York1For some people, yes. For others like me, no.
For more than 50 years, I was perfectly happy to flip the tab on the rear view mirror and night. Now I have an automatic mirror that cost 20x as much and I can't use if I back into my garage with the sun behind the car.
I watch a guy on Youtube and when he reviews engines and rolling stock, it is not uncommon to find broken piece when he first unboxes the car. That is a triumph of technology over reason.
Sure some people want all the MU hoses, the firecracker antennas. Those of us who will have small kids handling the rolling stock don't really want broken MU hoses and firecracker stubs.
I do like separately applied grab irons and see thru mesh instead of molded plastic. But at my age, 68, I am not going to throw $50 bills or more at each car to replace my old BB rolling stock.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
First off, it is a hobby. "Nesessary" it is not.
Everybody must decide what, or how much, is important to them, and weigh that against their skills, interests, time, and money.
I like well detailed models, I was adding better trucks, full brake rigging, air hoses and cut levers to Athearn cars at age 15........that was a while ago. I was also building wood craftsman kits with separate grab irons and other "higher" levels of detail at that age.
Most of that stuff still runs on my layout today.
And I have my share of new, RTR, high detail rolling stock.
But for me, it is not essential that every piece of rolling stock on the layout be of that detail level, done by me, or RTR.
I am not, and will never be, on a program to replace every piece of "blue box" level rolling stock with some "perfect" high detail model, again, be they RTR or built/detailed by me.
So for me the answer is YES and NO.
Sheldon
The only rub to me is when the detail arms race doesn't have an alternative. Autoracks are a pretty decent example. There isn't a, uh, not-high detailed version. I don't really feel the need for see through sides, because I can't really see through the real ones in the first place.
I'm more of an impressionist than a realist! All of my modest priced models make a good impression of railroad cars and locomotives when stopped or running. I don't need the finely detailed models to enjoy running trains but do enjoy looking at the finely detailed models at a store or on someone else's layout.
NittanyLion The only rub to me is when the detail arms race doesn't have an alternative. Autoracks are a pretty decent example. There isn't a, uh, not-high detailed version. I don't really feel the need for see through sides, because I can't really see through the real ones in the first place.
Agreed.
I'm actually happy that I model 1954.
Fewer modelers even know if the models on my layout are "correct" or not.
Fewer "ultra high detail" models have been, or are being offered in my period.
And there are plenty of less detailed, reasonably correct models for my era on the secondary market.
Again, I like my FoxValley B&O wagon top box cars, and my Spring Mills Depot B&O wagon top cabooses and hoppers, my Intermountain stuff, etc.
I am a little bit more particular about detail levels on locomotives, but even there, close enough is often good enough.
I do a lot of "minimum effort modeling", that is adding just enough detail to give a model that extra bit it needs.
Hard to see in this picture, but I have a whole fleet of Athearn heavyweight passenger cars with addtional underbody detail and working daphragms.
It makes a big difference. There is no piping, just the major elements added that Athearn left off. CalScale brake cylinders and tanks, steam vents, generators, Kadee brake shoes, etc, just the stuff you can notice sitting on the track near eye level.
Or these, my modified Athearn 50's era piggybacks. This is detailed and close enough.
I have about 100 of these to support two 35-40 car trains and some cars in the terminal.
Nobody has really made a well detailed RTR version of an early piggyback. A few kits have been made, but are expensive and hard to find. And I needed a lot of these.
I can tell you everything that is not correct on them, but they capture the "feel" well enough for me.
"really necessary?" Is any model train of any level of detail or accuracy really necessary? Of course not. It all boils down to what we like and what we prioritize. The term "model railroading" (or "scale model railroading") is so incredibly broad.
I know some guys who are super fussy about accurate detail but would never think of paying for a ready to run car detailed to their high standard. Their fun is in doing the modifying and detailing (and this is important: doing the research behind that detailing) themselves. It isn't a matter of money because if you price out one of those super detailing articles in the old Mainline Modeler, or Prototype Modeler, Rail Model Journal, Model Railroading, or the handouts you get at a prototype modeling seminar, with the parts lists, it often comes out to as much or more than a RTR car that is super detailed. People used to gasp at the cost of a Kadee PS 1 boxcar but price out what it would take to bring say a Walthers or ConCor PS1 boxcar to that level of accuracy and the costs come out very close.
I know other guys who are super fussy about accurate details but would shudder to see their model subjected to a typical operating session. It is the detailing and accuracy, not the "railroading" that they emphasize.
Certainly there is a level of enjoyment in coming closer to accuracy and detail on a commercial model if the challenges are reasonable and the model is still a usable and practical part of the fleet at the end of the day. Just look at the many tutorials Wayne has given us about his tireless efforts to make accurate and attractive rolling stock out of the cheapest possible train set stuff.
I have my feet on both sides of this gulf but I will say that extremes of emotion from either side on the topic seem strange to me. Some of the prototype modeler guys seem not to realize that these are still little tiny trains that don't actually carry any freight and do not go from real town to real town.
Dave Nelson
Non disputatus de gustibus.Me, I'm interested in operations far more than anything else. Old MDC and Athearn and Details West and Walthers cars are good enough for me. I'm too busy trying to spot the car at the correct spot to worry about if I can see through the end platform or not, and if I'm ever seeing underframe details, something has gone seriously wrong.Mileage, vary, yours.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
Its a need, not for running trains but for all the yards and sidings.
Overmod This is a bit like asking if 23-jewel pocket watches with diamonds on the staff, sapphire on the pallets, rubies on the gold train, and damaskeening under the bridges and under the dial are necessary. Not really, and you can get comparable timekeeping and service reliability much more cheaply. But if craftsmanship of beautiful things appeals to you, and you have the money but not the time and skill to lower the cost by doing the 'improvements' yourself 'at cost' -- there you go!
At one time a 21 jewel or better (some allowed 18 jewel or better) pocket watch, minimum size 16, lever set, arabic numerals with a 60 second sweep hand, adjusted to 6 positions and in a condition to not gain or lose more than 30 seconds a week was required.
Alas, now a watch just needs to be "reliable."
Jeff
(My work watch fits the old standard. A Hamilton 992B Railway Special.)
DAVID FORTNEY"Is incredibly detailed freight cars really necessary?".
I suppose that depends a lot on the individual. I don't consider them necessary, but have bought a couple of r-t-r highly detailed cars, and they were nice enough to use as-is (with a little weathering).
I've also bought similar cars as kits, and in most cases, fabricated better versions of some of the parts, not only to make them more accurate, but also more durable.
I'd guess that most of my model railroading friends who visit don't always notice such details, which doesn't concern me at all, as I'm not trying to impress anybody but myself (and have succeeded in that only occasionally).
However, I do enjoy the process, and generally would rather buy a suitable run-of-the-mill model, often used and/or abused, to see if I can make it into something closer to the prototype upon which the model was originally based. That doesn't mean, though, that it's necessarily "incredibly detailed"...maybe a little better-detailed than it was before I got it.
Almost 20 years ago, I modified a couple of hopper kits from Stewart (now Bowser) to better match some prototypes used in my hometown, following an article in RMC. I was fairly well-pleased by the results, and also got a nod of approval from the guy who wrote the article.Here's a photo...
Recently, while looking for another article, I came across the one I had followed, and came to the realisation that I had missed a few things, and perhaps could have done better (I wasn't the only one who missed some stuff, either, but I do feel that the author did do, in some ways, a much better job than did I.)
To address that, I decided to redo the two cars with which I had been so satisfied, and to that end, began to remove some of the added parts which were correct, but in the way of other parts which had not been included.I also managed to drop one of them, which remove quite a bit of stuff that wouldn't have needed to be removed.I also bought another ten undecorated kits, and hope to make a dozen, um...let's just say, uh, pretty-accurate models of the real ones, which were in service from 1914 into the '60s.I'll see how that turns out, and maybe do a thread on it elsewhere. If so, regardless of the results, I'll add a link to this thread.
Wayne
jeffhergertAt one time a 21 jewel or better (some allowed 18 jewel or better) pocket watch, minimum size 16, lever set, arabic numerals with a 60 second sweep hand, adjusted to 6 positions ...
(I know this isn't relevant to fancy model cars, but there are quite a few parallels between railroad watches in America and the perceived markets for really super detailed models.)
Some highly interesting things were observed on individual railroad 'approval' lists. I had thought open face was a 'hard' requirement after 1891 (no hunting-case door over the crystal and disk, and winding stem at 12:00, but apparently some older watches were 'grandfathered' in. There were no rules on where the 19 jewels had to go, and this led to some interesting approaches, notably the Howard series 0 or 5 that were good 17-jewel watches with two more applied to the mainspring arbor. Howard also was the home of "jeweling" the banking pins, not exactly what was thought of as the reason for jeweling.
Now, Webb C. Ball in the days before becoming the man who defined the 'modern' railroad watch was famous for pointing out anything more than 17 jewels were 'smokestack jewels' with regard to reliability. But putting caps on the escape wheel (the sensible interpretation of where the two extra jewels to make the 19 should go for most benefit, as on the Waltham Crescent Streets) is a major improver of reliable accuracy, and capping the lever as well gives you the canonical 21-jewel railroad watch as epitomized in all those Elgin B.W.Raymonds and Hamilton 992s. (Jeweling either the barrel, for a 'motor barrel',or the arbor then got you to 23; there were additional things to get as far as 26 but they did not really enhance either the precision of the movement or its long-term reliability from dirt and other problems. (Cap jewels are not just for keeping dust out of the bearing...)
The five positions reflect the ways a railroad man might keep his watch: dial up or down, as the watch would sit on a table, pendant (stem and bow) up, as normally carried in a pocket, and pendant left and right, as a watch might shift in a pocket if the chain became slack. Illinois pooularized the 'six positions' and some manufacturers followed. Others including Elgin were cagy and quietly started referring to adjustments rather than positions (looks the same, doesn't it?). All good watches are adjusted to temperature (which could be forked a bit to mean the balance in the watch adjusted for hot conditions and also for cold ones) and for isochronism which meant the hairspring making the watch keep time also did not vary eith temperature. So in a pissing contest an Illinois with 'temperature and six positions' did not look quite as well tinkered with as a BWR with 'eight adjustments' (which was just hot, cold, isochronism and those mandatory 5 positions).
Now it turns out there is a sneaky reason for the added showy jewels and danaskeening in watch movements that, after all, were sealed in their cases and not to be reset by employees (the major reason for lever set, and by extension 'Fort Wayne' double hour hands for men operating across time zones). Come to find that watch dealers artificially inflated the price of 'railroad' movements, "to cover the cost of the weekly time-service inspections and adjustments" with the not-do-peripheral effect that railroad watches actually became perceived as worth more as better timekeepers ... unlike in Britain where nearly any time you had a 'Railway Timekeeper' it was a scam.
Now in the later stages of railroad-watch marketing, there were technical breakthroughs in metallurgy, first in the use of Invar alloys in the balance to make hot and cold irrelevant and then Elinvar (elasticity as well as expansion temperature-invariable) to fix isochronism inherently. Then with the advent of diesel-electrics adoption of anti-magnetic construction, something you find in Walthams back to the 1870s and of course in various Paillard patent watches, became common. The interesting metallurgy developed for the production Hamilton Model 21 marine chronometers were applied to the redesigned 992B and 23-jewel bridge 950B which were two of the finest technical achievements of American practice.
Amusingly, the requirement to positively lock the regulator persisted into the wristwatch age, and you can tell many railroad-approved versions including the Ball Trainmasters and the Hamilton Electric 500s and 505s because they have little whip regulator fine adjust. (Elgin went to the funky Durabalance which requires more time to try to explain than all the interest in this forum would tolerate...)
Yes, IMO, you need some detailed cars. I think people tend to assume that this question is necessarily about ALL your cars when it's really a question about SOME of your cars.
A detailed car stands out and draws attention to itself. Then the mind wants to believe that other cars are similarly endowed. Often not the case and rarely does it need to be the case. The point is to create an illusion or as one previous commenter might call it, as impression.
But you have to start with something and the better currency you use in buying realism the more satisfied you'll likely be in the end.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
I like Mike's answer above. When you simply gotta, get 'em. When you're willing to suspend disbelief (they are toys, after all), and are inclined to let your imagination fill in anything you think is missing or poorly rendered, do so....with alacrity.
As an example, when I want to watch a longer train go by, I make it up with all sorts of rolling stock from different brands with different qualities. My mind makes it look like a train from a distance, and I enjoy that. If I'm trying for realism, say with a stacked photo, camera down in the weeds, I will put my finest items in view.
Necessary? I suspect that depends on who you ask.
I sold my fleet of Athearn BB and Roundhouse cars except for the RTR cars that fit my 94/95 era and upgraded my car fleet with the higher detailed cars from Atlas,ExactRail,Intermountain,Red Caboose, Fox Valley, some Walthers and Athearn RTR.
To be sure while operating my ISL I'm more focus on the car's number then the details.
Be that has it may I'm not about to sell my Atlas RS-11s and buy Rapido RS11s. I have never and will never will play that game.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
OvermodThis is a bit like asking if 23-jewel pocket watches with diamonds on the staff, sapphire on the pallets, rubies on the gold train, and damaskeening under the bridges and under the dial are necessary. Not really, and you can get comparable timekeeping and service reliability much more cheaply. But if craftsmanship of beautiful things appeals to you, and you have the money but not the time and skill to lower the cost by doing the 'improvements' yourself 'at cost' -- there you go!
I agree. When a well detailed car is running down the track the details may not be easy to see, but when you are holding the same car in your hands, seeing the details can be very enjoyable.
I have a few very nicely detailed RTR cars and I love examining them. I also have 150 or so Athearn BB, Accurail and similar cars that are not finely detailed and IMHO they look fine on the tracks too.
This is really an 'each to his own' debate.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Necessary? From a manufacturer standpoint, they are communicating yes. ScaleTrains reports the majority of their demand is for their Rivet Counter series of models. Tangent Scale Models sell very well. Etc.
From a hobbyists stand point, was you can see in this forum, some are satisfied with lower detail models, some prefer higher fidelity models. That's pretty much it in a nut shell.
So what about Walthers autoracks, they are not high detail (all molded on) - I know, I have some. What about the operator versions from ScaleTrains more modern autorack? What about Accurail open autoracks available on the secondary market. These are examples of earlier, middle and later era auto racks without all the details.
As for other alternatives, there are a lot of lower detail models on the secondary market. Tangent just released a high fidelity Greenville 86' auto parts box car. I just sold 7 of my Athearn blue box Greenvilles 86 footers - two of them have the same paint schemes as the Tangent cars.
In the current day, really there are models to satisfy both the high fidelity fans and the "good enough" lower detail hobbyists. I really don't understand why there is an issue these days and people keep posting the same old same old. There is plenty for everyone; granted you may have to hunt for models creatively but with a little effort, you can usually find what you need. When the pandemic eventually subsides, train shows have plenty of lower detail models.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
What is necessary?
That all depends on what you want to get out of your railroad.
There is a group of older rails here in town that each have large home layouts. All these guys care about is operation. They run their trains as close to prototype practice as possible. These guys look at Blue Box cars and any reliable locomotive as being good enough. I don't think they look at any feature on the car other than reporting marks and number. As long as nothing derails or breaks down, the equipment meets all their needs.
I like to look at my trains, and take eye level photographs. I have a different standard that requires brake details and free standing ladders. I do not put brake detail on fishbelly flats or gondolas. You can't see it, I do not include it.
I have no need for super-detailed locomotives. Locomotives get handled for repair and maintenance, and I expect them to be a bit more durable than freight cars. 99% of minute detail can be better replicated for photography with paint anyway, and I am a very skilled painter. A properly painted and weathered locomotive photographs better than a super-detailed locomotive anyway.
Some people desire accuracy as much as possible, and place less importance on durability. For these people the newer hyper-detailed models are necessary, and I am glad they are available for them to purchase.
I get a lot of enjoyment from buiding as much from kits as possible, but many people do not. This is how we each find different ways to get enjoyment from this hobby, and again, it is all just fine.
There is plenty of space for "you do your thing, and I will do mine" under this umbrella for all of us.
After all, the world does not move to the beat of just one drum, and what might be right for you might not be right for some.
If you are having fun, you are doing it the right way.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Lastspikemiketoys are very serious objects
Not mine. I don't think I own anything that can be desccribed as a "Very Serious Object".
The reason the super detailed stuff is done is simple economics. A highly detailed model witll sell to some active model railroaders but will sell even more to arm chair collectors and then we have the just collectors. A much bigger pie that model railroaders with an active layout.
I see solid empty trains of autoracks all the time at Enola Yard, sometimes 50 solid autoracks (yes I count them) and one can most definitely see through them to see what is behind them. Some new racks are harder to see through, but the vast majority are see-through.
I greatly appreciate Intermountain's model. It is excellent in every way! The new run has panels that fit precisely as they should and they did a great job of achieving the look of the real cars. I like the way the light plays off the real metal side panels. To me they look as real as you can get, and since I'm not spending a fortune on little HO cars, I like being able to see through the racks. There are two different screens, and the one represents the earlier screens and is more see-through than what's on the late BNSF cars.
I also have the Atlas autorack cars and they are a great car too.
I have four of the Tangent 86' box cars, and there are many differences between the individual versions. To be honest, it's THE boxcar I always wanted. My buddy feels the same way (and got 3 of them so far). I cannot stand the crude details on the earlier cars (and got rid of all of mine many years ago), and if I even wanted to buy an earlier Walthers Thrall car right now, there are people price gouging on Ebay, attempting to sell some of them for more than twice the MSRP from when they were brand new. This makes the Tangent car at $52.95 a bargain in my eyes.
Some people are spending a relative fortune on motive power and have multiple unit sets of Genesis diesels. Others have large fleets of steam or both steam and diesel. I do not. Right now, I have one steam engine of my own of any kind (it is plastic) and that's it (all other engines are my son's).
So, if I want to buy the more nicely detailed rolling stock, and if I teach my 14 year old son how to handle it correctly, and we have the curves to operate it, then it's our railroad!
Manufacturers make what people BUY. People like myself have been asking for, hoping, dreaming somebody would make a decent 86' autoparts box car. Atlas and Intermountain also listened and made those gorgeous 'racks.
John Mock
rrebellA highly detailed model witll sell to some active model railroaders but will sell even more to arm chair collectors and then we have the just collectors. A much bigger pie that model railroaders with an active layout.
I have often wondered how many new models are sold to collectors that do not have an operating layout. It would be great to know the percentage. I am sure some of the manufacturers have an idea.
If HO train cars were only purchased by people who were going to run them on layouts I would be there would be fewer models available and they would be much more expensive.
PRR8259Manufacturers make what people BUY.
John, I suspect many of us will draw a line on how much we are willing to pay for a freight car. I won't buy a (say) $60.00 flat car. I almost bulked at paying $50.00 for a boxcar but,decided to bit the apple and buy it.
Thankfully 90% of my upgraded freight car fleet was bought used at good prices.
BTW..My Santa Fe 2-8-0 and 2-8-2 looks mighty good when coupled to my KD boxcars on my test track.
At the present time, only running at a club or on modules, high end rolling stock does not make sense, it is too fragile. It is embarassing to pull a $60 RTR car out of transport or the original box to find it has broken details. So I am updating blue box and Accurail kits as runners. Just as fun, without the expense. If and when I get a permanent layout, I will have a place for a few of those high dollar RTR cars. But I don't really need them.
BRAKIEJohn, I suspect many of us will draw a line on how much we are willing to pay for a freight car.
I hope I do not cross the "This Hobby Is Too Expensive" line here.
I have no problem paying $65.00 for a Yarmouth resin kit or $125.00 for a brass tank car. These are occassional purchases of special items. I have specific models on my "To Buy List", and do not pay this price for something I will not use.
There are two Sunshine boxcar kits I would pay $100.00 for, but there always seems to be someone else willing to pay $105.00 for these on eBay... someday.
For the most part, I think hobby prices (the real prices, not MSRP), are right where they should be. Accurail kits are right on where Athearn was when adjusted for inflation. The better models cost more. The $50.00 price point for Rapido's new PENNSYLVANIA boxcars was acceptable to me for that model.
I can get an undecorated Kadee boxcar for less than $25.00, and it is perfect in every way (for me).
tin canAt the present time, only running at a club or on modules, <SNIP> I am updating blue box and Accurail kits as runners. Just as fun, without the expense.
Public displays are the perfect place for the fleet of blue box Athearn freight cars. They look more than good enough for these displays.
SeeYou190I hope I do not cross the "This Hobby Is Too Expensive" line here.
Kevin, I am sure we all have our "over budget" price range. I had mine since I started buying trains 60 years ago.
OTOH If I wanted a (say) a United Brass Class B Two truck Shay then I would be willing to fork the cash over for it but, (say) $65.00 flat car is a price I'm not willing to pay since there are other quality flat cars available at cheaper prices.
I hope that explain what I was trying to say.
I think if highly detailed models are your thing you should be in proto scales (Proto87, Proto64, Proto48, etc.).
While highly detailed models are great for close up photography and display, I just don't really see much difference from lesser detailed models when running them on the layout.
Paul
PRR8259 have four of the Tangent 86' box cars, and there are many differences between the individual versions. To be honest, it's THE boxcar I always wanted. My buddy feels the same way (and got 3 of them so far). I cannot stand the crude details on the earlier cars (and got rid of all of mine many years ago), and if I even wanted to buy an earlier Walthers Thrall car right now, there are people price gouging on Ebay, attempting to sell some of them for more than twice the MSRP from when they were brand new. This makes the Tangent car at $52.95 a bargain in my eyes.
I have wanted high fidelity models of the 86' auto parts box cars as well and the new Tangent models are fantastic. I've gotten 4 so far (1 DT&I, 1 Sou and 2 SP) and may get a 5th. I'm selling off most of my old crude Athearn blue box 4 Greenvilles.
Aren't Walthers 86' hi-cubes Pullman Standards? Athearn's 8 doors are Thralls IIRC. Anyway, yeah, the listed prices are in many cases as high as the Tangents or more, and for a much lower detail car. I bought most of the 4-door Walthers P-S 86' cars I needed a few years ago for around $20-25 each that are appropriate for the Ford FAST, a few as cheap as $8 (green PC, green DT&I, red Santa Fe, brown PRR, green NYC, MILW, early Conrail)
Manufacturers make what people BUY. People like myself have been asking for, hoping, dreaming somebody would make a decent 86' autoparts box car. Atlas and Intermountain also listened and made those gorgeous 'racks. John Mock
Yep, agreed
I have often wondered how many new models are sold to collectors that do not have an operating layout. It would be great to know the percentage. I am sure some of the manufacturers have an idea. If HO train cars were only purchased by people who were going to run them on layouts I would be there would be fewer models available and they would be much more expensive. -Kevin
I wouldn't really know how manufacturers would know the percentage of customers are collectors with no layout.
For many years (following a separation and later divorce, job layoffs and a number of moves, I didn't have any place to build a layout; so I was one of those "collectors" without a layout. But I suspect most of these collectors plan to build a layout when they can, and sometimes life or circumstances prevent it but eventually some do get around to it.
Before this thread quickly spins into forbidden territory and gets blocked, let me join others in keeping it on track (pun).
Can someone please explain extreme detail or too expensive for a car? Probably not. Would I spend more than $20 on one car? Yes, but only if it's worth it. Atlas Master Line is something worth the price. Paying more than the cost of feeding a small country is probably not worth it.
kasskabooseCan someone please explain extreme detail or too expensive for a car? Probably not.
I think the Tangent 86' Greenville speaks to the "exteme detail" explanation nicely. Another example of "extreme detail" are the Arrowhead series of coal cars and Railgon gondola. Look no further than these fine examples.
As for "too expensive" ... I don't think that assertion was made by the original poster and injects a greater likihood of topic moderation.
Paying more than the cost of feeding a small country is probably not worth it.
How much exactly would that be?
My mistake--
I thought the Walthers cars were Thralls, you may be correct they are P-S. I have been avoiding them.
There is somebody trying to sell a pair of new Walthers ATSF Autoparts boxcars for something like $79.95 nib.
I want Santa Fe cars, but at that price I can wait for Tangent's which will be light years better.
John
PRR8259 My mistake-- I thought the Walthers cars were Thralls, you may be correct they are P-S. I have been avoiding them. There is somebody trying to sell a pair of new Walthers ATSF Autoparts boxcars for something like $79.95 nib. I want Santa Fe cars, but at that price I can wait for Tangent's which will be light years better. John
I've bought the Walthers P-S 86' auto parts cars because I want a realistic mix which were typical of the Ford FAST, which is an autoparts train that rotated every 90 days between competing railroads from Michigan to California (It ran on the UP, D&RGW, WP, SP on the west end).
Here are some photo's showing typical auto parts cars in the Ford FAST.
In the top photo is a green P-S DT&I (Walthers) and blue Greenville DT&I (Tangent).
Middle photo is a green P-S Penn Central (Walthers) and red Thrall Santa Fe.
Bottom photo is a brown Greenville Southern (Tangent).
I've identified the other Walthers P-S 86 footers in other auto parts train photo's for my RR as well, so this is why I have not avoided Walthers. Granted the Walthers are not up to Tangent standards but in the absence of a better version, these will do; and they are a better looking than the old Athearn blue box 86' foot cars.
I also wanted a red Santa Fe Walther 86' as well, and I watched Ebay over time and eventually found a single for about $25 IIRC.
Now that we have the Tangnet Greenvilles and Walthers P-S, I'd love to see someone do the 4 door Thralls.
Larry--
I love the Kadee freight cars though some of the printing can be a bit light, but I also have a son who wants all modern stuff (though he does like some really big steam). I do not want to have two entire freight car fleets (am actually blowing out older prototypes on Ebay), so on our layout we have just "modern" (to us) freight cars. Yes, I'm totally cheating by decades by pulling autoracks and 86' boxcars with big steam, but Johnny also has Genesis 2.0 SD90MAC-H's and an MTH SD70M-2 to pull them with. I do have to say, the big stuff looks good behind a big 4-8-4 or 4-6-6-4.
I would have kept some brass but 1. wanted to generate some more funds for college costs and 2. "good quality" Santa Fe brass steam that actually runs well without considerable work was not possible for me to find for less than $1000 per engine. You may have been very fortunate indeed with the engines you acquired, that I cannot deny, and I hope you enjoy them thoroughly! I have a DM&IR 2-8-8-4 coming just because I always wanted one of those...and it will be 20% of the cost of a good brass one, which allows me to have some nice freight cars.
Since we only need 75 or so freight cars on the layout, and have most of what we'd ever "need", buying nice ones makes sense for us. I would not necessarily recommend that for others.
I bought the original release Intermountain Autoracks but did subsequently sell them after playing with them for awhile specifically because the screens didn't lay down flush and "look right". However, I basically got what I paid for them or very close to it. My buddy took them off my hands and was glad to get them, and a few went on Ebay.
Clearly, even then as well as now, there are people that have no problem spending $90 or $100 (depending upon how scarce the roadname is) for an Intermountain autorack. Maybe some here can't justify that, but the marketplace has spoken. The third run? Intermountain autoracks are out and mostly gone. One cannot even find some of the neat roadnames like FEC or the bright yellow UP shield versions, and I found a beautful bright yellow L&N one at English's.
I was hoping there would be a fall Timonium show as my buddy and I were hoping to find more autoracks--the roadnames that are gone from all the websites. Oh well.
Rio Grande--
Yes, I saw some of your posts elsewhere.
Santa Fe had many more Thrall hi cubes than Greenvilles...
When the big auto plants in California closed, Conrail bought large numbers of the 86' boxcars from Santa Fe. What I want to know is: does anyone have a listing of those cars that went to Conrail.
Today, BNSF owns zero 86' hi cubes, I think UP has very few if any left, CSX and NS have the lion's share, CN/CP have some remaining cars, and idk if KCS retains any at all. I would like to know more about that traffic.
My Mechanical Engineer friend got into the big plants because he designed specialty truck trailers. He told me he's seen plants big enough to house multiple rows of 10 86' hi cube boxcars at a time. With just in time delivery, the plants would load/unload 10 cars simultaneously. They'd have the 60' cars elsewhere on other indoor sidings.
Edit: CR hysterical society does have some information on the cars that came from other roads. It is hit or miss.
I like nicely detailed cars, but I also like to run my trains. Superdetailing isn't high on my list. I prefer to have near-perfect trackwork so derailments are rare.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
BRAKIEKevin, I am sure we all have our "over budget" price range. I had mine since I started buying trains 60 years ago.
I guess I could have been more clear in my post.
I was saying for certain special models that are only available in brass or resin, I will pay more.
For mass produced plastic car kits, $25.00 is about my limit. If Kadee can produce perfection at that price point, why should I ever pay more?
Considering that I have copier boxes full of blue box kits that I bought in the 70s and 80s; and several tubs of blue box, MDC, and Accurail that I got at wholesale when I owned a hobby shop in the late 90s; I would say i have a lot of stuff that is priced right.
I guess it depends if you have the funds to justify paying for your toys.
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.
Yes a lot of people plan for a railroad and it is amazing how many never build so much as a module. As to the detail of cars, even when running trains, most people have sidings and or a yard where the cars are not constantly moving.
For the contemporary era in which I model, equipment that has seen several owners is common. So the paint jobs should reflect patch jobs, relettering and renumbering, and faded original paint. As-built factory-new paint schemes are for collectors.....
Athearn is running a line with more accurate paint schemes for more contemporary eras called "Prime for Grime" series.
Its hard for a modeler to fade as built paint by weathering, (at least for me) as well as adding patch-outs without raising the texture or surface where the patch is, which the eye will definitely pick up.
An accurate contemporary paint job is just as important as the type of details applied, IMO.
- Douglas
riogrande5761 So what about Walthers autoracks, they are not high detail (all molded on) - I know, I have some. What about the operator versions from ScaleTrains more modern autorack? What about Accurail open autoracks available on the secondary market. These are examples of earlier, middle and later era auto racks without all the details.
Those open ones are long gone if you're even close to contemporary.
Have you priced the Walthers ones on the secondhand market lately? They're commanding prices that rival what Intermountain's offerings hit the street at. I'll admit that I forgot about Scale Train's racks (which I consider a reasonable price), but I do think of them as a more...I don't want to say niche, but they're not as common. They're very, very new cars in real life. There's no "fleet filler" model available, because demand for the low detail versions has gone up so much that they match the price point for the very detailed one. That makes it a bit of a lose/lose
It's a hobby, buy what you feel is right. I have maybe a midsized Industrial Switching Layout based on the CN's Valley Sub. I run 2 through trains and that rollingstock is mainly Scaletrain Classics, Details West, Walthers, Athearn RTR and a few Accurail. No one, including me can see the details even at a 20 to 40 scale mph. My rolling stock that is run and switched a couple times a week at least consists of BLMA, ST's Rivet counters, Athearn Genesis. I like the details I can see on the slow moving or stopped cars that are being worked. Since 2014 retirement I have greatly changed my rolling stock and had been concentrating on modeling the year 2005 and now 2015. My 300 BB's were too varied and didn't fit the era. I now have the 2 through trains of 24 cars each. My switchable cars number 48 but don't all show up on the layout at the same time.The BB's were sold and that money turned into the above. Just remember when someone says too expensive for them, it may not be for you. Values differ from person to person.
TomO
DAVID FORTNEYSo is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout? Dave
No, it's not necessary...unless you really want extremely detailed locomotives and rolling stock running on your layout.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
NittanyLion Those open ones are long gone if you're even close to contemporary.
It depends on what era you are modeling. I didn't notice you mention era; only that you were lamenting the lack of lower detail autoracks.
Have you priced the Walthers ones on the secondhand market lately? They're commanding prices that rival what Intermountain's offerings hit the street at.
Yes, and of course you have to ignore the crazy's on Ebay - and shop around. I've seen them for prices in the $25-30 range, and some Walthers are the upgrade versions that cost more when new than the old kits. I've sold about half of my old kit built Walthers autoracks in the past few years for around $25 (assembled and with KD's). I had back dated to early 80's and most of the Walthers racks are late 80's thru mid 1990's and later. I've found if you are patient, you CAN find these models are fairly decent prices.
I'll admit that I forgot about Scale Train's racks (which I consider a reasonable price), but I do think of them as a more...I don't want to say niche, but they're not as common. They're very, very new cars in real life. There's no "fleet filler" model available, because demand for the low detail versions has gone up so much that they match the price point for the very detailed one. That makes it a bit of a lose/lose
You have to buy the operator version when they have them available. Snooze and wait for a future run. Point is, modern operator versions have been made.
For mass produced plastic car kits, $25.00 is about my limit. If Kadee can produce perfection at that price point, why should I ever pay more? -Kevin
I wouldn't call Kadee perfection and generally they cost much more than $25 although if you shop around, you can find them for that. I have.
The thing about Kadee is they are era limited and the freight cars they represent were gone or getting thin by the early 80's. I have bought a few that would have lingered into the late 1970's and a bit beyond.
Here is one thing I've noticed about Kadee box cars. Some of them look like they were not painted but molded in the color they are sold in. Examples, BN green (hideous). GN green: I have one and it looks almost translucent. ICG orange, also not so nice. Basically the only box cars that look decent are the brown ones, and maybe my dark green GM&O. No, not perfection. Many of the box cars are quite good but some not so much.
riogrande5761 For mass produced plastic car kits, $25.00 is about my limit. If Kadee can produce perfection at that price point, why should I ever pay more? -Kevin I wouldn't call Kadee perfection and generally they cost much more than $25 although if you shop around, you can find them for that. I have. The thing about Kadee is they are era limited and the freight cars they represent were gone or getting thin by the early 80's. I have bought a few that would have lingered into the late 1970's and a bit beyond. Here is one thing I've noticed about Kadee box cars. Some of them look like they were not painted but molded in the color they are sold in. Examples, BN green (hideous). GN green: I have one and it looks almost translucent. ICG orange, also not so nice. Basically the only box cars that look decent are the brown ones, and maybe my dark green GM&O. No, not perfection. Many of the box cars are quite good but some not so much.
And Scale Trains, Tangent, Moloco, ExactRail, etc, etc, are not "era limited" or selection limited in their offerings?
Those brands for the most part make very little or nothing in the era Kevin and I model.
Easier to make an excuse for an older car than for one that has not been built yet?
I started my 50's era piggyback fleet 30 years ago, and still the most detailed model anyone has offered is the Walthers 54' GSC flat car, a car that actually saw very limited piggyback conversion/use. But I have my share of those as well.
The recent Bachmann car is not bad with a little work.
The Athearn car remains in production and apparently sells despite its inaccuracies.
So, I'm glad I did not wait to buy/build my fleet of early piggybacks........
I like Kadee freight cars, but only have a few of them.
There is still a VERY LONG LIST of models that have NOT been done in high detail RTR.
Like I said before, I buy my share of the ones that fit my era and roster needs, but I'm not holding my breath, placing a bunch of preorders, or replacing what I have already.
riogrande5761 For mass produced plastic car kits, $25.00 is about my limit. If Kadee can produce perfection at that price point, why should I ever pay more? -Kevin I wouldn't call Kadee perfection and generally they cost much more than $25 although if you shop around, you can find them for that. I have.
I was talking about plastic kits. The Kadee PS-1 plastic kits retails for $26.00, and can be had for about $21.00 on MB Klein.
The Kadee kit is not perfection? What would you do better?
Everything fits easily and perfectly. Detail is spot-on, It comes with Kadee trucks and couplers in the box. The model weighs the correct weight. The molded on detail is amazing, there is never any flash or mold lines. And on and on and on...
I know of no better kit for any hobby at any price.
SeeYou190 riogrande5761 For mass produced plastic car kits, $25.00 is about my limit. If Kadee can produce perfection at that price point, why should I ever pay more? -Kevin I wouldn't call Kadee perfection and generally they cost much more than $25 although if you shop around, you can find them for that. I have. I was talking about plastic kits. The Kadee PS-1 plastic kits retails for $26.00, and can be had for about $21.00 on MB Klein. The Kadee kit is not perfection? What would you do better? Everything fits easily and perfectly. Detail is spot-on, It comes with Kadee trucks and couplers in the box. The model weighs the correct weight. The molded on detail is amazing, there is never any flash or mold lines. And on and on and on... I know of no better kit for any hobby at any price. -Kevin
Kevin, I assure you he is thinking RTR.......
ATLANTIC CENTRALKevin, I assure you he is thinking RTR.......
Probably, but I very clearly said mass produced plastic kits.
Oh well.
So here is a rundown, I model 1954:
ScaleTrains - no products in my era
Tangent Scale Models - the two gons, and all but one of the tank cars are in my era. I would like to get a few tank cars.
Moloco - no products in my era
ExactRail - B&O wagon top box cars their only product in my era.
FoxValley - again only B&O wagon tops (which I have), and a passenger train from a railroad I don't model.
Spring Mills Depot - 5 out of their eight projects so far in my era, I have the three that have been delivered, both RTR and undecorated kits.
Intermountain - tons of stuff in my era, and tons not in my era, I have mostly kits and F unit locos, not much RTR.
Kadee - all but one in my era, I have a few of their cars.
Athearn Genesis - No freight cars in my era, I do have my share of F units......
Rapido - 3 freight cars in my era, RDC's (which seem a little pricey to me), they lost their first potential sale to me when the dropped the undecorated PA's from the production run. I already had them preordered.......
I could not fill/replace half, or even a third, of my current 1,200 car roster with current or recent high end/high detail RTR rolling stock matching car types and paint schemes.
Guess I will just keep my Athearn Ready to Roll and Blue Box, old MDC, Athearn and Varney metal cars, Bowser, Accurail, older Walthers, TrainsMinature, Silver Streak wood kits, Atlas, F&C resin kits, Westerfield resin kits, ConCor passenger cars, and a long list of other "sub standard" model trains - which are for my purposes all reasonable representations of trains from the era I model.
So the point is, no matter if you like these high detail RTR cars, you will not find all the cars you many need or want for your modeling if you plan to present a realistic and complete operational roster for a given era and road.
I model 1939 roughly. Tangent has some tank cars, MTH has some hoppers, Intermountain, lots of boxcars and reefers along with Atlas. Ertl had boxcars and a few other like flat (these were early Tichy or Gould when they were made). Proto 2000 has some tank and stock cars. Branchline had reefers. Was hopeing someone would do 36' box etc., but they were done by Accurail, not detailed enough.
I like the Kadee cars, but I generally can't find recent releases (assembled rtr) for $25. Then as stated well above, I would want the ICG boxcar, but molded in orange (and I love bright colors) it is "too much" "too translucent" and just doesn't look right to me especially next to anything from Intermountain/Tangent/Exactrail in that paint scheme, so yes, I owned a couple but they didn't look right at all and had to go. Some Kadee cars also have gorgeous sprung trucks that do not roll well at all (replace with plastic Kadee trucks and you can pull twice as many).
I'm not here to bash Kadee, but the time period of their products generally doesn't work for me. They are great cars for up to the early '80's.
I should've kept the Conrail covered hopper to have one.
PRR8259 I like the Kadee cars, but I generally can't find recent releases (assembled rtr) for $25. Then as stated well above, I would want the ICG boxcar, but molded in orange (and I love bright colors) it is "too much" "too translucent" and just doesn't look right to me especially next to anything from Intermountain/Tangent/Exactrail in that paint scheme, so yes, I owned a couple but they didn't look right at all and had to go. Some Kadee cars also have gorgeous sprung trucks that do not roll well at all (replace with plastic Kadee trucks and you can pull twice as many). I'm not here to bash Kadee, but the time period of their products generally doesn't work for me. They are great cars for up to the early '80's. I should've kept the Conrail covered hopper to have one. John
I don't follow Kadee cars closely but the recent release do seem to go for around $39 give or take. I do see some Kadee rolling stock on Ebay for around $25 often enough.
But yeah, the colored boxcars (orange, green in particular) look wrong to me too, partly the shade and partly sort of translucent. My guess here is they are molded in those colors to save on production costs since they are made in the US, but in these cases, it seems to compromise the appearance negatively.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And Scale Trains, Tangent, Moloco, ExactRail, etc, etc, are not "era limited" or selection limited in their offerings?
I was responding to Kevin regarding the Kadee freight cars, not other brands.
ATLANTIC CENTRALExactRail - B&O wagon top box cars their only product in my era.
Wouldn't the '40 MILW ribbed boxcars fit in your era, Sheldon? - i.e. unless they would have been re-painted by '54. Finding an Exactrail version of that unique boxcar may be difficult these days but they are very nice models.
tstage ATLANTIC CENTRAL ExactRail - B&O wagon top box cars their only product in my era. Wouldn't the '40 MILW ribbed boxcars fit in your era, Sheldon? - i.e. unless they would have been re-painted by '54. Finding an Exactrail version of that unique boxcar may be difficult these days but they are very nice models. Tom
ATLANTIC CENTRAL ExactRail - B&O wagon top box cars their only product in my era.
I went by what was currently on their web site.
I already have MILW rib side cars in kit form when they were offered by, none other than, RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY.
Sheldon,
ExactRail released those in 2011. I was grateful to pick up a couple off eBay a few years later before they were all gone. I also have a few made my Accurail and IM.
Watching YouTube vids is as close as it gets for me. I enjoy Manifests the most because of the variety in stock. But, I don't particularly watch the vids to check for detail-details. Like when I'm operating my HO model - just seeing the Trains rolling-by, is "good enough". So no, I don't feel that high-detail Rolling Stock is a must have.
For me, it stops at carving-off moulded-on Handrails and replacing with appropriate detail parts. Also, clunky moulded Stirrup-Steps. If required, new Handbrake Wheel, Couplers and Wheels. This is where the money I saved buying a cheap, used model - starts to go out the window.
All of my Athearn B/B ACF Hoppers and R/House Boxcars will be repainted and so it makes sense to carry-out detailing, to this level.
My 4 No. each Walthers Gold and Athearn Gen' Hi-cubes - will remain exactly as out of the box. Paul
"It's the South Shore Line, Jim - but not as we know it".
tstage Sheldon, ExactRail released those in 2011. I was grateful to pick up a couple off eBay a few years later before they were all gone. I also have a few made my Accurail and IM. Tom
The RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then.
ExactRail was five years too late..........
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then.
My only ribbed side car was built from a Sunshine Models kit.
When everything you paint is for a ficticious roadname, certain cars become a problem. B&O Wagon Top cars are all for the MIDLAND ROAD, and the PRR round roof cars will be for the ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL tstage Sheldon, ExactRail released those in 2011. I was grateful to pick up a couple off eBay a few years later before they were all gone. I also have a few made my Accurail and IM. Tom The RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then. ExactRail was five years too late.......... Sheldon
Accurail purchased the molds from Ribbed Side Cars and has now released a couple of them.
Rick Jesionowski
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL The RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then. My only ribbed side car was built from a Sunshine Models kit. When everything you paint is for a ficticious roadname, certain cars become a problem. B&O Wagon Top cars are all for the MIDLAND ROAD, and the PRR round roof cars will be for the ATLANTIC CENTRAL. -Kevin
ATLANTIC CENTRAL The RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then.
How did you know that? I have a stack of undecorated Bowser PRR round roof cars waiting to be lettered ATLANTIC CENTRAL!
dti406Accurail purchased the molds from Ribbed Side Cars and has now released a couple of them.
Rick, good to hear from you again. You have been AWOL and I was getting concerned.
dti406 ATLANTIC CENTRAL tstage Sheldon, ExactRail released those in 2011. I was grateful to pick up a couple off eBay a few years later before they were all gone. I also have a few made my Accurail and IM. Tom The RIB SIDE CAR COMPANY kits were on the market in 2006/2007 and I purchased several then. ExactRail was five years too late.......... Sheldon Accurail purchased the molds from Ribbed Side Cars and has now released a couple of them. Rick Jesionowski
I was wondering about that, thanks for the info.
I for one love the new highly detailed cars, just picked up Tangents new 86' Greenville Hi Cubes and the are beautiful. I will be getting more.
Scalettains new Finger Flats are on the way and will have reinforcing steel loads added soon.
Oh by the way my Athearn 86' Hi Cubes will be on sale shortly.
Rock Jesionowski
dti406 I for one love the new highly detailed cars, just picked up Tangents new 86' Greenville Hi Cubes and the are beautiful. I will be getting more. Scalettains new Finger Flats are on the way and will have reinforcing steel loads added soon. Oh by the way my Athearn 86' Hi Cubes will be on sale shortly. Rock Jesionowski
Ditto that! How many DT&I did you get? I only got one but also got a Southern and 2 SP. I might get another DT&I when they are re-run next year. I am looking forward to what others will be offered.
I have a couple of finger racks on their way too. Cool looking flatcars.
As for my Athearn 86' Greenvilles, I've already got a sale on 7 of them. I have a couple of the 8 door Thralls that there is no replacement for ... yet.
Jim
riogrande5761 dti406 I for one love the new highly detailed cars, just picked up Tangents new 86' Greenville Hi Cubes and the are beautiful. I will be getting more. Scalettains new Finger Flats are on the way and will have reinforcing steel loads added soon. Oh by the way my Athearn 86' Hi Cubes will be on sale shortly. Rock Jesionowski Ditto that! How many DT&I did you get? I only got one but also got a Southern and 2 SP. I might get another DT&I when they are re-run next year. I am looking forward to what others will be offered. I have a couple of finger racks on their way too. Cool looking flatcars. As for my Athearn 86' Greenvilles, I've already got a sale on 7 of them. I have a couple of the 8 door Thralls that there is no replacement for ... yet. Jim
I got all four DT&I's and a NYC, also an undecorated GB&W version that I will paint for the Ann Arbor as the Annie got all of the GB&W 86' cars. I will not be selling my Athearn GB&W car that I did as it was the last decal for that car and I don't know what happened to Don Manlick's artwork in order to get any more. Maybe Tangent will do the GB&W car, although you can't run it with the Ann Arbor cars.
dti406 I got all four DT&I's and a NYC, also an undecorated GB&W version that I will paint for the Ann Arbor as the Annie got all of the GB&W 86' cars. I will not be selling my Athearn GB&W car that I did as it was the last decal for that car and I don't know what happened to Don Manlick's artwork in order to get any more. Maybe Tangent will do the GB&W car, although you can't run it with the Ann Arbor cars. Rick Jesionowski
What about the Walthers P-S 4 door DT&I's? I have one of the green versions which I've seen on Rio Grande trains, but I don't ever recall seeing any of the magenta-ish versions thru the Rockies so passed on that one.
I've a few Athearn Greenvilles left, but those will probably be sold eventually too (orange D&RGW, brown "dividend logo WP and red Santa Fe is all that's left)
riogrande5761 dti406 I got all four DT&I's and a NYC, also an undecorated GB&W version that I will paint for the Ann Arbor as the Annie got all of the GB&W 86' cars. I will not be selling my Athearn GB&W car that I did as it was the last decal for that car and I don't know what happened to Don Manlick's artwork in order to get any more. Maybe Tangent will do the GB&W car, although you can't run it with the Ann Arbor cars. Rick Jesionowski What about the Walthers P-S 4 door DT&I's? I have one of the green versions which I've seen on Rio Grande trains, but I don't ever recall seeing any of the magenta-ish versions thru the Rockies so passed on that one. I've a few Athearn Greenvilles left, but those will probably be sold eventually too (orange D&RGW, brown "dividend logo WP and red Santa Fe is all that's left)
I am still keeping the Walther's PS Hi-Cubes unless something better comes along, they are still better than the Athearn and they are PS versus Greenville, and the green is the correct color, the Walther's Magenta Cars are foobies as the Magenta Cars were either Greenville's or PC X67 cars. Hopefully Dave will do the Magenta Greenville's on a future run. I used to see the Magenta Cars on the NYC/PC going east or west thru Airline Junction. They were delivered and originally assigned to the Woodhaven Stamping Plant (WSP Car Code). The DT&I Delta interchange yard serviced both the N&W and NYC with the FAST cars going on the N&W (Ex-Wabash) to Kansas City with some cars forwarded to Milpitas via various routings depending on how the railroads wanted to do the routing, but the UP, SP, D&RGW, WP, MP and RI were involved with the RI dropping out when their track was so bad.
dti406I am still keeping the Walther's PS Hi-Cubes unless something better comes along, they are still better than the Athearn and they are PS versus Greenville,
The Walthers P-S cars are a bit better looking than the old Athearns. Really if the Walthers had separate rods on the doors (apparently the newer upgrade ones do), then I'd probably be ok with them long term. A bit if judicious weathering around the vertical rods may improve the appearance however.
and the green is the correct color,
They look about right to me but I've never done a critical comparison of the color.
the Walther's Magenta Cars are foobies as the Magenta Cars were either Greenville's or PC X67 cars. Hopefully Dave will do the Magenta Greenville's on a future run. I used to see the Magenta Cars on the NYC/PC going east or west thru Airline Junction. They were delivered and originally assigned to the Woodhaven Stamping Plant (WSP Car Code). The DT&I Delta interchange yard serviced both the N&W and NYC with the FAST cars going on the N&W (Ex-Wabash) to Kansas City with some cars forwarded to Milpitas via various routings depending on how the railroads wanted to do the routing, but the UP, SP, D&RGW, WP, MP and RI were involved with the RI dropping out when their track was so bad. Rick Jesionowski
Good to know I dodged the Watlthers foobe magenta. I usually try to check if I am interested in buying, most of the time.
I haven't ever seen a magenta DT&I on a auto parts train pulled by the D&RGW but if what you say is true, they may have run on the Ford FAST and I just never saw a photo of any.
Jim Hediger provided the paint chip for the color match on the green cars for Walthers.
dti406 Jim Hediger provided the paint chip for the color match on the green cars for Walthers. Rick Jesionowski
Cool.
So you've got documantation that the magenta DT&I greenvilles were used on the Ford FAST?
riogrande5761 dti406 Jim Hediger provided the paint chip for the color match on the green cars for Walthers. Rick Jesionowski Cool. So you've got documantation that the magenta DT&I greenvilles were used on the Ford FAST?
I see a market for both a few highly detailed models and more good 'enuff protypically accurate but less detailed economy models. On a small switching layout with one locomotive and five cars I would want a lot of detail. On a large layout I would prefer more economical rolling stock because the focus would be on the long trains and sweeping overall scene.
I had actually been thinking about starting my own thread asking what people with large layouts running hundreds of cars do to fill out their roster.
MJ4562 I see a market for both a few highly detailed models and more good 'enuff protypically accurate but less detailed economy models. On a small switching layout with one locomotive and five cars I would want a lot of detail. On a large layout I would prefer more economical rolling stock because the focus would be on the long trains and sweeping overall scene. I had actually been thinking about starting my own thread asking what people with large layouts running hundreds of cars do to fill out their roster.
OK, I will answer your question right here.
I just took down a layout that filled 1,000 sq ft room, I'm getting ready to start a new one that will fill a 1,500 sq ft room. How nice, my retirement house is smaller than my "raise the kids house", but it has a bigger train room and a bigger yard.....
The new layout is designed for 35-50 car freight trains, 10-15 car passenger trains, and will stage about 30 trains total.
The double track mainline will be about 400' long.
I model 1954, and I have been at this hobby since 1968.
My roster of equipment includes kits made before I was born, Athearn and Varney metal cars, Athearn, MDC, older Walthers, TrainMinature, Bowser, and other "blue box" type cars from the last 45 years.
It also includes a fair number of wood and resin craftsman kits, and many kit bash projects, some easy, some more complex.
And, I have my share of more recent high detail rolling stock. By recent I mean the last 25 years, starting with stuff like Proto2000 kits, Intermountain, Fox Valley, Spring Mills Depot, and others.
AND, I also have my share of less expensive recent production Athearn Ready to Roll, selective Bachmann pieces, Walthers RTR, etc.
It has taken all these years, but the roster includes a lot of stuff, 1,100? freight cars, 200? passenger cars, and about 140 powered locomotives.
Lots of freight cars were purchased for just $2- $4 back in the day, some have cost much more. But I can't say I have paid more than $40 or $50 for much, if any rolling stock.
I do however outfit most every freight car with about $7 worth of Kadee sprung trucks refitted with Intermountain wheelsets, and genuine Kadee couplers.....
MJ4562On a small switching layout with one locomotive and five cars I would want a lot of detail.
My thoughts as well. All of my rolling stock have detailed grabs, ladders, and brake rigging for the up-close views on my shelf and switching layout. Once I get my severe spinal arthritis under control with another steroid injection next month, I'll return to working on it and the other projects that have been put on hold.
Russ
Modeling the early '50s Erie in Paterson, NJ. Here's the link to my railroad postcard collection: https://railroadpostcards.blogspot.com/
DAVID FORTNEY But if you put them side by side the difference is very noticeable. So is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout? Dave
But if you put them side by side the difference is very noticeable. So is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout?
An "expensive model collector"
Not necessary for me. Like some of you, I have done this a whole bunch of years. I always liked having the latest and greatest. However, in the last few years, I have discovered that wasn't making the hobby fun for me. I grew tired of having the same stuff that everyone has, so I sold my Tangent and Moloco cars and am building more Roundhouse, for example, stuff.
The fun for me is building the old American made kit. In fact, I am planning my layout using American made stuff along with Kato and Roco power.
Besides, the money I'm saving helps me fund my other main hobby...dirt bikes!
Chuck - Modeling in HO scale and anything narrow gauge
Is there a model-railroad related response somewhere in this history of watches tutorial?
Dorassoc1Is there a model-railroad related response somewhere in this history of watches tutorial?
And the 'responses' say about what you'd expect from the question: some would, some wouldn't; and it's a matter of more factors than just the relative visibility of superdetails.
For rolling stock my expectations of detail are quite low, as long as it looks good overall and I'm satisfied with it, I will take it. But I will also not to hesitate to purchase some pieces for projects, to redo and detail.
"No one realizes how beautiful it is to travel until he comes home and rests his head on his old, familiar pillow." -Lin Yutang
-
Dave,
Six things: First of all I will be honest and say that the value of things changes so much that my vison of what $50 means today is so skewed from 40 years ago that I have lost track of what “expensive” means. So I am not a good judge of that.
I try to pay $10 or less for mass produced detailed kits like Intermountain Red Caboose or P2k but that is old school for sure. Many good kits cost far more. I don’t really buy much RTR rolling stock but have paid lots for nice kits – around the price points being discussed here for RTR. It just depends.
This is a new era in terms of RTR quality. Take a look at a Blackstone stock car or a Kadee box car- awesome detail and pretty clean construction. I might have a hard time building to the same quality as some of the RTR out there from a kit. That build quality and detail might be worth some bucks. In many ways if you figure in the skills and time to build, these cars are a bargain...
Other thing: Detail?? Oh yeah...Bring it on!!! Always more. A gorgeous model is a gorgeous model. I will always be for better detail and more accurate. I got rid of nearly all of my Blue Box stuff years ago and replaced it with high detail stuff – we run it and yes, it can break, but in general it warms my soul every time I see it on the layout. But that is just me and the crowd I hang with...
I build most of my rolling stock. It just never occurred to me to buy them. Part of the reason for that is the expense the other is the joy of building things and of course the other factor is the availability of an accurate model of the prototype you seek - whether it be RTR of kit form. If you want it and can’t get the kit or RTR, then it’s a scratch build.
Last thing: I don’t build everything myself – When you need many multiples of a car type and the thrill has worn off building the 34th kit of the same car or when a car is difficult to scratch build and no kit exists, then I do seek RTR relief if possible. That is rare but has happened. My reefer trains are a good example of that.
Dave's Question: So dancing around the semantics of “necessary” for a moment, I would say that Yes, it is necessary to have incredible detailed freight cars in the hobby – just wouldn’t be the same without them.
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
MJ4562 I had actually been thinking about starting my own thread asking what people with large layouts running hundreds of cars do to fill out their roster.
I have a medium sized layout with an operating roster of @200 cars. We hold OPs sessions a few times a year (in non-pandemic times). All the cars on the layout are needed for the OPs scheme. Most of these cars fit into the highly detailed/super detailed category. Most have separate grabs and stirrups all have Kadees, free rolling trucks (mostly metal wheels – it depends) and are set up to run with proper weight coupler height etc.
I built my roster slowly over the years. I love to build cars so at this point I have lots more cars than will fit on the layout. These extra cars are in off layout storage. I often will build cars in batches (I wrote an article about this for another publication) to speed up construction time.
All of the layouts in my operating group have highly detailed rolling stock. Most of us build lots of models, so operators are careful but sometimes things get broken. I do have to fix stuff from time to time. I feel running these nice cars is worth it due to how the cars look. It is great to share them with other operators who enjoy the quality as well.
For those starting out, you can always buy the less detailed cars and upgrade as you feel like it. That is how I started.
trainnut1250I built my roster slowly over the years.
That is the best way to do it.
Over the past three years I have built over 100 freight cars for the fleet requirements of my next layout. It was time very well spent.
rrebell A bunch were Ertl which were tooled by Gould which became Tichy.
I only have one Ertl freight car, but it is a gem.
I had no idea they were the Gould/Tichy models.
SeeYou190 rrebell A bunch were Ertl which were tooled by Gould which became Tichy. I only have one Ertl freight car, but it is a gem. I had no idea they were the Gould/Tichy models. -Kevin
Yes, it's really necessary
BEAUSABREYes, it's really necessary
If it were necessary, we would have done it ourselves, and in some cases, we did. Otherwise, it's simply a convenience.
No, it is a necessity - in order to give those who desire such models the chance to own them. If you choose not to purchase such, that's a great, it is a free country. No one says you have to buy them. But don't deny others the opportunity to enjoy the hobby the way they choose.
BEAUSABRENo one says you have to buy them. But don't deny others the opportunity to enjoy the hobby the way they choose.
I think there is a place, as someone noted a few posts back, for kits and boxed RTR with the superdetailed shell and perhaps trucks, but a limited subset of installed detail. That would allow a wider range of modelers to get the difficult-to-make parts relatively cheaply and then add the details they value for 'runners'. And then easily superdetail when they have the time, skill, money ... and inclination ... to add specific detail.
I used to have to build what I want, now I can buy, and overall it is about the same price at times, even at retail.
DAVID FORTNEY So is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout?
So is it really necessary to pay the high prices of extreme detail if your going to run them on a layout?
Late to the party as usual, but extreme detail in rolling stock and locos is not something I'm interested in. Both from a value perspective (I'm a cheapskate) and because I'd rather not worry about detail breaking from my son (or myself if I'm honest) handling them.
I've got one Genesis loco and it looks fantastic, but I'm always worried about dinging up some littlie detail bit. On the other hand my son and I can run our blue-boxers with no worries.
As I've said before though, I'm so very thankfull for the folks who love their super-detailed cars and the companies that keep making them. Increasing "standards" is a big reason that more-and-better less-fragile rolling stock keeps appearing on the train show tables and trading sites.
Visit the Chicago Valley Railroad for Chicago Trainspotting and Budget Model Railroading.
Thjs must be one of the silliest questions ever asked on this forum and I'm surprised so many readers responded. What bugs me about the question is the word "necessary". I doubt there are many, if any, things that are really necessary in this hobby -- at least I hope so. One of the pleasures of the hobby is that I can do what I want to do or buy what I want to buy. If I want to buy superdetailed cars I can but if I want to buy cars with cast on hand grabs I can do that. I think you should buy what you like and not consider what others think are "necessary". Are "incredibly detailed freight cars really necessary" ? -- of course not. Is it good for the hobby that "incredibly detailed freight cars" are available ? -- yes, of course. Is it equally good for the hobby that very inexpensive, less detailed cars are available ? -- again yes. What matters is having a choice. I don't need to be told what is "necessary". I suspect most of us have some limitation on the money we spend on the hobby and consequently it is good to have a range of model prices to fit every budget. You can enjoy this hobby on any level of spending and the important thing is not to be pressured to do what others say is "necessary".
Lastspikemike The cost of acceptance rolling stock is a lot less than building it yourself if your time is at all valuable to you. You should only build it yourself for the enjoyment, you're not saving money. In fact, unless a kit gives you more options for detailing you're better off buying a finished car and detailing that, time used as compared to results achieved. If you lack skills the value of ready to run is even higher.
The cost of acceptance rolling stock is a lot less than building it yourself if your time is at all valuable to you. You should only build it yourself for the enjoyment, you're not saving money. In fact, unless a kit gives you more options for detailing you're better off buying a finished car and detailing that, time used as compared to results achieved. If you lack skills the value of ready to run is even higher.
You have that right, one of very good modelers came up with the cost to upgrade the old Lifelike X72 boxcar costs more in the parts alone than the cost of the new Rapido model and that does not include the time to do that upgrade.
LastspikemikeThe cost of acceptance rolling stock is a lot less than building it yourself if your time is at all valuable to you....
Time is valuable mainly because it's one of the main ingredients needed for building something rather than buying it.
Lastspikemike...You should only build it yourself for the enjoyment, you're not saving money...
I agree that building it yourself should be enjoyable, but it depends on what you're building, if you're saving money or not.I built this Rapido kit (somewhere around forty bucks at my LHS)
...mainly because Rapido doesn't make much that's suitable for my layout's era, but I did want to support them, even in this small way.
I could easily have made a comparable car for about $20.00, mainly because I have lots of left-over materials bought for building some other model that I had wanted at that time. Yes, I paid for that material, but once that car had been built, the leftover material didn't cost me a penny more, and there might be enough to build four or five cars.
A different scenario arises when the car you want is not available (not because they're all sold-out, but because it's something so obscure that chances are no one will ever make it).The ones on which I'm currently working are available as very basic kits, and also as ready-to-run, but still very basic (and they're even lettered for one of the roads I'm modelling).However, the more important details, which are needed to make it look prototypical, are either incorrect or are not present at all. My main expense, after buying the basic cars (12 of them) is for couplers and brake gear, as the kit parts for the latter are incorrect. The other main details which are missing are grabirons, and lots of them. While I usually have lots of them on-hand, the sizes needed are not standard.Fortunately, I have lots of phosphor bronze wire on hand, paid for by friends who wanted all-wheel pick-up on their steam locomotives. All that's need is that other valuable commodity - time.
I think that the necessity of highly detailed models depends on what's important to each modeller. I can afford to buy some high quality stuff, and very occasionally do (all but one as kits, and pretty-well most of them modified to make them either more prototypically-correct or more durable).
My main reason for building my own rather than buying them, is to see if I can do a credible job of it....maybe not quite as good, or maybe a little better. If it helps to improve my skills (even by acknowledging what I may have done poorly) then the time (and money) spent is worth it.I would say, though, that while the high-end r-t-r stuff does look great, I get more satisfaction out of those I've built myself...even if they're not quite the equal of the more expensive ones.
Somewhere along this train ride, I expect that I won't be able to meet my own standards, and, hopefully, will know when to quit.
Wayne, are you retired? Where do you get the time to get the "satisfaction" of building yourself? I felt guilty taking a couple of half days for the first time in months to work on laying track over the Labor Day weekend. Having the time to do all the stuff you do sounds like pie in the sky to some of us. I think coming here just makes me envious of all the hobby time some here seem to have.
dti406 Lastspikemike The cost of acceptance rolling stock is a lot less than building it yourself if your time is at all valuable to you. You should only build it yourself for the enjoyment, you're not saving money. In fact, unless a kit gives you more options for detailing you're better off buying a finished car and detailing that, time used as compared to results achieved. If you lack skills the value of ready to run is even higher. You have that right, one of very good modelers came up with the cost to upgrade the old Lifelike X72 boxcar costs more in the parts alone than the cost of the new Rapido model and that does not include the time to do that upgrade. Rick Jesionowski
I think the OP's question goes to do you really need to add detail at all as opposed to the most efficient way (time vs money)to have a highly detailed car.
For those who get enjoyment out of the process, it really doesn't matter whether you start with a kit or RTR and then add/change details. Go with what works best for you.
But for others Accurail kits, built as is so to speak, are a good economical way to go in the time vs money. The kits are reasonably priced and go together fairly easily and look pretty good.
In my case I am building a 10 1/2 x 34 ft layout, so I use RTR where ever I can. At 73, I don't have the time to build/detail everything. And I don't want to spend the money to buy museum quality RTR. So I go with what looks good at 3 feet.
Lastspikemike...Old style CPR cabooses are getting rare...
If you're referring to the wooden cabooses (I've never gotten used to the term "van", despite being Canadian - it's a British term,******!), you might be interested to hear that Atlas has acquired some of the TrueLine Trains tooling, and will be producing CNR and CPR cabooses, and many of the locos and freight cars that they offered. I missed out on the Fowler stock cars first time around, and was going to scratchbuild a couple, but this will save me the trouble.
SeeYou190I have often wondered how many new models are sold to collectors that do not have an operating layout. It would be great to know the percentage. I am sure some of the manufacturers have an idea
I don't know the answer to that Kevin, but years ago, when the P2K line of locomotives came out in the mid 1990's I had a client who collected all of those locomotives that he could, regardless of road name or paint scheme, but he didn't have a layout. My bet is that there are plenty of people like him out there. When you think about it, Life Like came out with a surprising upgrade with the P2K, which, at that time, I thought they were pretty well detailed, but almost crude by today's R-T-R standards.
E-L man tom when the P2K line of locomotives came out in the mid 1990's I had a client who collected all of those locomotives that he could, regardless of road name or paint scheme, but he didn't have a layout. My bet is that there are plenty of people like him out there.
I also knew a local guy that was so impressed with the new P2K line that he bought up everything he could find. That was about 25 years ago.
The P2K models are a big part of why I switched to HO scale.
They really were amazing in their day, and more than adequate for me now. The detail on a P2K model is the benchmark for what I consider "good enough".
E-L man tom SeeYou190 I have often wondered how many new models are sold to collectors that do not have an operating layout. It would be great to know the percentage. I am sure some of the manufacturers have an idea I don't know the answer to that Kevin, but years ago, when the P2K line of locomotives came out in the mid 1990's I had a client who collected all of those locomotives that he could, regardless of road name or paint scheme, but he didn't have a layout. My bet is that there are plenty of people like him out there. When you think about it, Life Like came out with a surprising upgrade with the P2K, which, at that time, I thought they were pretty well detailed, but almost crude by today's R-T-R standards.
SeeYou190 I have often wondered how many new models are sold to collectors that do not have an operating layout. It would be great to know the percentage. I am sure some of the manufacturers have an idea
Crude?
Not sure I know what models you are comparing them to today?
Just my view, but to make a comparison you need to compare a GP7 to GP7, an FA to an FA, etc.
Is there stuff today like Rapido that really does go that extra mile, sure.
But there are a fair number of products built in the last 20 years that had similar price points without detail as good as Proto2000.
I consider most BLI diesels disapointing when compared to their Proto equivalents.
My Intermountain, Proto and Genesis F units are all "about the same" with the Genesis maybe having a small edge in detail/fineness.
Crude, I think not, even 30 years later.
I don't know about P2k freight cars back in the day, but the very early vintages of P2K locos had movable subshades attached by a rather clunky rain gutter, and the grab irons were made from a delrin that was thicker than wire.
LL quickly dumped the movable sunshades and replaced the plastic grabs with wire grabs, and thinned up the handrails too.
So if we are talking very early P2K locos, I would agree that they are crude by todays models, but, they were also crude if compared to the very next vintage of P2K models that came out by about 1997.
I like a certain amount of detail without going overboard...everything on the layout made to the same level of detail looks better than some items highly detailed while others are not.
Sheldon,Sorry, but the old P2K models (in gold boxes) are a bit crude by modern standards. The first, the BL2, had oversized plastic detail parts (as in the grabs, handrails, etc.), and, IIRC, most had a little sprue still stuck on 'em. Picking out the 1989 version of the P2K BL2 is pretty easy compared to the later ones because of that.
The FA-2/FB-2 had dim headlights and a black spinning fan in a black hole under a thick screen that one couldn't see through anyways. The flopping radiator shutters were taped into the shell, and really need to be glued in one position to look right.
The GP18 had thick plastic grills over the radiators, and the opening cab doors meant that they had unsightly seams around them.The E8A/E8B are not known for their fidelity for the nose contour and there always seemed to be a gap between the nose and the pilot. They also tended to shed axle journals unexpectedly and had a weird articulated truck where the inner axle flexed up and down.The SD7's were okay, but the ladders on the ends were molded in colored plastic that were never the same color as the paint on the shell behind them.Probably the SW series in 1995-96 were the first engines P2K made that would still hold up well today (just a little lightweight). The SD9 fixed the SD7 problem (mostly; I think the handrails were still molded in color that didn't match), the E7A/E7B was fine (but still with an awkward nose, IIRC), but the GP9 and PA-1 are not only fine but are still being made today (just recently, in fact).
All the companys went though this phase it seems. I remember the first Spectrum steam, looked good but ran terrible, followed very quickly by better stuff. Now I have Bachmann's DCC and sound values that look better than BLI, don't run quite as nice but dose not have the problems of some of the BLI's like the NW2 that derail places that even my cheapest locos have no problems with and if you look it up, it is not just me and it is only the forward truck too.
The Proto 2000 SD7 and SD9 were not crude by todays standards, and many laud the GP30 as being quite good also, and don't really think it needs a modern tooled high fidelity replacement. Really, for those two examples, the body's were pretty nicely detailed; it was the chassis/mechanicsm that many have noted is not up to par. Some of the other models have had legitimate needs for improvements has noted. Blanket comments the a line of models is crude misses the fact that some maybe, but others not so much.
My Proto 2000 SD-7 runs fine, Not quite as well as my Stewart/Kato F units, but absolutely it is a good runner.
My Bachman DCC and sound is crawls around the layout, for got it was running one day and came back hours later, still moving.
.
Sams Trains on youtube did a test to see how long a Hornby cheapo trainset 0-4-0 would run before it died. Managed to clock around 341 real miles before it stopped due to overheating. After it cooled down, the engine still worked!
Given a more expensive engine with proper bearings, metal/brass gears, and a better 5 pole motor, engines made today can last a lifetime! (given there is no major fault such as split axles)
Anyways, back on the topic, I believe items that matter to you should have extra detail, whereas items that you care less about dont. Personally, I care a lot about my engines, my passenger cars, and my cabooses. Everything else(trackwork, buildings,scenery, most freight cars), I couldnt care less. That's why my engines, passenger cars, and cabooses have lots of attention to detail and operating characteristics, whereas my AAR 40' boxcars are mostly from bluebox kits, my tack is not handlaid, my buildings are kits and not scratchbuilt and scenery isnt even finished on my layout!
But things change. For example, when I first began modeling, I didnt really care about passenger cars. I knew little about their history, and little about how they worked. I had athearn bluebox, and rivarossi heavyweight cars. Later, I began learning all about them, their consists, modifications, and prominance, and as a result my standards improved. Looking at my completely unprotoypical cars, I became disappointed. I sold off all those cars, bought branchline/walthers cars, added constant dim lighting, handrails, interiors, shades, figures, underframe piping, etc. and now they're some of the most detailed pieces on my layout.
Its all about what you find important.
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the Santa Fe & Pennsylvania in HO
Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLb3FRqukolAtnD1khrb6lQ
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
riogrande5761 The Proto 2000 SD7 and SD9 were not crude by todays standards, and many laud the GP30 as being quite good also, and don't really think it needs a modern tooled high fidelity replacement. Really, for those two examples, the body's were pretty nicely detailed; it was the chassis/mechanicsm that many have noted is not up to par. Some of the other models have had legitimate needs for improvements has noted. Blanket comments the a line of models is crude misses the fact that some maybe, but others not so much.
Exactly, well said.
As for running qualities, I have never had any trouble getting any Proto2000 model to run well with just the most minor work.
And maybe that is generational, vs the expection of perfection out of the box.
ATLANTIC CENTRALCrude? Not sure I know what models you are comparing them to today? Just my view, but to make a comparison you need to compare a GP7 to GP7, an FA to an FA, etc. Is there stuff today like Rapido that really does go that extra mile, sure. But there are a fair number of products built in the last 20 years that had similar price points without detail as good as Proto2000. I consider most BLI diesels disapointing when compared to their Proto equivalents. My Intermountain, Proto and Genesis F units are all "about the same" with the Genesis maybe having a small edge in detail/fineness. Crude, I think not, even 30 years later.
Well Sheldon, Maybe that's too much of a generalization. I guess maybe for the price point of P2K vs. R-T-R today, they are, say, a little less detailed. For a lot of that I can't talk from personal experience, as I have not purchased a "high end" locomotive in several years, the most recent being a Genesis A-B set of F3's. As for today's Rapido, BLI, etc. I really don't know how they compare. I wholeheartedly agree with you, that the P2K line is still an excellent locomotive, and a great value for the money; and, "good enough" for me!
Lastspikemike...Genesis are pretty good, I picked up a light Mike which won't pull the skin off a rice pudding but looks oh so lovely while trying to do so...
There's a how-to on improving their tractive effort HERE
Lastspikemike...The Proto Heritage 0-8-0 steam locomotive I acquired is really quite lovely and runs well with a dummy plug....
Yeah, I have one and it was a nice-running loco, but like the Genesis Mikado, has trouble pulling its own shadow. It's mentioned (and shown) in the link offered above.
doctorwayneYeah, I have one and it was a nice-running loco, but like the Genesis Mikado, has trouble pulling its own shadow.
I have four USRA light Mikados, one Genesis and three Oriental Powerhouse.
My Genesis 2-8-2 was worthless. The three Powerhouse locomotives are A+ in my book. Tenders are bad, but with new tenders and a few details, they are quite good locomotives.
My next USRA light Mikados will be Key brass models.
Lastspikemike Yes, thanks, I've actually previously book marked that extensively detailed description. Thanks. The disparity in pulling power for these steam locomotives has me pondering coefficients of friction on nickel silver... However, I noted an extensive thread on locomotive drawbar force as it may relate to the coefficient of friction of steel on steel as well as steel on sanded steel comparing prototype to HO. In light of the significant disagreements evident there I decided not to make my own contribution. The topic seems surprisingly controversial, given that the physics have been well understood for over 100 years. Interestingly, diesel models seem quite predictably uniform in their pulling power and roughly correspond to prototype patterns: bigger and heavier pull proportionately better. This is not the case for steam locomotive models which is frankly a bit weird.
Yes, thanks, I've actually previously book marked that extensively detailed description. Thanks.
The disparity in pulling power for these steam locomotives has me pondering coefficients of friction on nickel silver...
However, I noted an extensive thread on locomotive drawbar force as it may relate to the coefficient of friction of steel on steel as well as steel on sanded steel comparing prototype to HO.
In light of the significant disagreements evident there I decided not to make my own contribution. The topic seems surprisingly controversial, given that the physics have been well understood for over 100 years.
Interestingly, diesel models seem quite predictably uniform in their pulling power and roughly correspond to prototype patterns: bigger and heavier pull proportionately better. This is not the case for steam locomotive models which is frankly a bit weird.
It is not weird at all. Model steam locos, even with spring drivers suffer from a lack of even weight distribution on the drivers, as well as other traction losses on our sharp curves, etc. This problem increases with the number of driven axles.
The physics of the prototype does not scale down.
The flexibility of diesel trucks solves this problem.
Discussion of physics of model pulling power need to be in a properly-titled new thread -- they are only remotely, if at all, on-topic for the thread as titled and what may be a rich discussion will be missed by those not following the already-beaten-to-death nominal topic.
Overmod Discussion of physics of model pulling power need to be in a properly-titled new thread -- they are only remotely, if at all, on-topic for the thread as titled and what may be a rich discussion will be missed by those not following the already-beaten-to-death nominal topic.
I know you and I could write pages and pages, I just want to point out the obvious minimum explanation. I will let Mike explore the details on his own or with your help.
I have 19th Century houses to restore...
Sheldon.