Impulse Pain?
Gotcha covered!
It only hurtz at first, but not so bad when you only got $100 left to go eh!...
TF
AEP528 Water Level Route Lately, I've used that same premise for my model rail purchases. I buy what I need for what I am working on or are about to start working on. I tend not to buy extras. I don't stock up on model railroad items, nor do I tend to buy ahead. I buy as needed and spend my money on other things I can enjoy now rather than have closets and shelves full of model railroad supplies that I might never get to use.
Water Level Route Lately, I've used that same premise for my model rail purchases. I buy what I need for what I am working on or are about to start working on. I tend not to buy extras.
Lately, I've used that same premise for my model rail purchases. I buy what I need for what I am working on or are about to start working on. I tend not to buy extras.
I don't stock up on model railroad items, nor do I tend to buy ahead. I buy as needed and spend my money on other things I can enjoy now rather than have closets and shelves full of model railroad supplies that I might never get to use.
This is a topic for a whole different thread.
I do stock up. I do buy more than I will ever need. I have tons of model railroad equipment/supplies that will probably never get used.
This is because I want to finish my final lifetime layout, and parts are sometimes impossible to get.
I know I have too many old style non-DCC Walthers/Shinohara switches. I have too much Scalecoat II paint. I have too much Atlas code 83 flex track. I have too many Kadee PS-1 undecorated boxcar kits.
Now, I have too many Rapido Railcrew uncouplers.
-Photograph by Kevin Parson
None of this is impulse buying. It is all carefully thought out, and the goal is to be able to build my layout as fast as possible with no budgeting for materials or searching for materials.
If a new thread is started, I will add a lot more thoughts.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
My weekness is tools. I have two Shay Miters, the second one was with a bunch of other tools for a very cheap price, but unlike my Dremel, these don't wear out, so why did I do that, I know why, too many years in the trades, many times making do with what I had on hand, tool wise. Have duplicates of most of my tools.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
tstage PRR8259 I really don't want to participate in an electronics or coding discussion... Nor was that my intention, John. I was just making a statement of what has worked for me in my limited experience MUing like-locomotives with similar decoders, in the event it was helpful... Tom
PRR8259 I really don't want to participate in an electronics or coding discussion...
Nor was that my intention, John. I was just making a statement of what has worked for me in my limited experience MUing like-locomotives with similar decoders, in the event it was helpful...
Tom
I understand that vmin, vmid, and vmax should in theory get you close enough...but I've seen instances where engines that appeared to be matched closely enough fought each other just enough that we started hearing unpleasant noises. We separated those models, and eventually they sounded ok again, but we gave up on running them together. For those reasons in particular, I do not allow for any wheel spin just even while trains are getting rolling.
That's why, whether in plain dc or dcc operation--either way--we here have been buying pairs of models from the exact same run. Successive runs of even the same model have not performed quite the same on the layout in dcc for us. They are different enough for us to notice they do not quite match like we might want. Johnny is pushing engines to the limits of what they can pull without wheelslip, so I believe any issues with speed matching will rear their ugly head when train lengths are pushed to the limit.
I did spend a lot of time trying to get some Loksound 5.0 engines to match with Tsunami, and have frankly given up on that. For one, there are too many features that we do not want to disable, not just limited to the back emf. I view that as an epic fail. We will match Loksound 5 with Loksound 5 and Genesis Tsunami 2 with Tsunami 2.
The Athearn engines in particular have been running very well for us, and I actually like the running performance (not necessarily the sound) of my now two (as of today) BLI SD40-2's.
One could reasonably argue that most of my loco purchases are impulse buys, and if I do like something, I tend to get the second road number. I tend to prefer mainly Athearn locos for several good reasons, and my son, Johnny, prefers another make.
PRR8259I really don't want to participate in an electronics or coding discussion...
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
AEP528Tools, though... I love tools. I don't exactly impulse buy, usually the justification is that the project would be much easier with a certain tool purchase. At the end of the day, as long as I'm staying within my discretionary spending budget, I buy what I want, planned or impulse.
Mike
For my model railroad itself, no. While it's not strictly based on real railroads, it incorporates scenes and operations that I have observed on local railroads, so there is an overall theme. If I wouldn't have seen it on the real railorads, it won't be on my model.
So obviously I don't own a Big Boy, but I can understand why it is so popular and there are multiple models of it. Now, if I were to see 4014 operating in person, and I felt a strong emotional response, it's possible I might buy one for display. And if so, why not one that's fully operational? Owning a model of something that caused an emotional response is normal human nature.
That's not to say I never impulse buy, and I will never judge others who do as long as it is within budget. When impulse buying becomes compulsive buying, then it's a problem.
There's a large outdoor flea market not far from me that I like to visit a couple of times a year. I budget a certain amount of money for it, and usual go with no planned purchases in mind. Sometimes I buy things because they interest me, sometimes I come home with nothing.
Tools, though... I love tools. I don't exactly impulse buy, usually the justification is that the project would be much easier with a certain tool purchase.
At the end of the day, as long as I'm staying within my discretionary spending budget, I buy what I want, planned or impulse.
I really don't want to participate in an electronics or coding discussion...
I have one recent impulse buy BLI Illinois Central Death Star paint scheme SD40-2. Despite the 2005 era design, and the speaker rattle I haven't figured out (turned sound down almost to nothing), that BLI SD40-2 is a lot of fun to play with, but maybe that's because I "needed" a correct late IC unit to balance out some foobies. I know the new BLI SD40 is a nicer model, and I may yet get one. (Local store has a Santa Fe one that was ordered for me; we are waiting to see if anybody else needs it more than me before I take it home). They are also getting me a second IC Death Star SD40-2 to go with the first one they just got me.
Forgetting about BLI's sound completely; I'm just not a fan, the new BLI unit I have here runs exceptionally well and smoothly. The handrails are straight and strong, and the paint is really pretty good.
John
PRR8259 During the 2% of the time Johnny is using his own money, at Timonium mainly, I let him buy what he wants as long as it has metal wheelsets. I dont talk about fat too wide boxcars so as not to crush his dream. He bought a couple cars at last Timonium show. I forgot one was a fat boxcar... The reason he wants two of every diesel is because he is not happy with short trains, and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims. We cannot even correctly speed match ESU Loksound 5 equipped locos from one manufacturer with other loksound 5 units from the same manufacturer. Some move on speed step 1 of 28 and many others on speed step 2, which results in wheelspin. Adjusting vmin does not help. I tried. And forget about matching Loksound 5 to others like Tsunami 2. You have to disable back emf which we actually want to use. I have learned that I don't like dcc at all and have already replaced most of my dual mode decoder locos switching back to plain dc. We are having ongoing motor failure issues w one manufacturer. They are cooperating nicely even sending replacement locos overnight. However the fact is that one replacement failed in a bit over 3 hours and we are still testing others. They are working to find a solution and thought they had it fixed. I can't name them yet as they are honestly going the extra mile to work with us. I do not want to create a bigger problem. Said manufacturer wants us monitoring loco run time to failure which is fine with us. They will replace or remotor all our failed units once we know...It appears to be a builder issue in China. The motor design was not changed for many years and is still the same save one minor improvement. Possible material or assembly defect at builder. Are they cheating the importer? Maybe. Some units are ok and some are just not. For us failure percentage is sbout 50%.
During the 2% of the time Johnny is using his own money, at Timonium mainly, I let him buy what he wants as long as it has metal wheelsets. I dont talk about fat too wide boxcars so as not to crush his dream. He bought a couple cars at last Timonium show. I forgot one was a fat boxcar...
The reason he wants two of every diesel is because he is not happy with short trains, and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims. We cannot even correctly speed match ESU Loksound 5 equipped locos from one manufacturer with other loksound 5 units from the same manufacturer. Some move on speed step 1 of 28 and many others on speed step 2, which results in wheelspin. Adjusting vmin does not help. I tried.
And forget about matching Loksound 5 to others like Tsunami 2. You have to disable back emf which we actually want to use. I have learned that I don't like dcc at all and have already replaced most of my dual mode decoder locos switching back to plain dc.
We are having ongoing motor failure issues w one manufacturer. They are cooperating nicely even sending replacement locos overnight. However the fact is that one replacement failed in a bit over 3 hours and we are still testing others. They are working to find a solution and thought they had it fixed. I can't name them yet as they are honestly going the extra mile to work with us. I do not want to create a bigger problem. Said manufacturer wants us monitoring loco run time to failure which is fine with us. They will replace or remotor all our failed units once we know...It appears to be a builder issue in China. The motor design was not changed for many years and is still the same save one minor improvement. Possible material or assembly defect at builder. Are they cheating the importer? Maybe.
Some units are ok and some are just not. For us failure percentage is sbout 50%.
I think some of your comments should be copied over to Sheldon's DCC thread. Try to get that thread back on topic instead of it lingering in the OT discussion of borderline electronics Coding......
Relating this to impulse buying, I think it is important to stay within the confines of what you know best. I used to be a strictly Atlas buyer, at least they were predominately the products I sought. When Athearn finally installed LEDs, and offered a bunch of versions with LED ditchlights, I became a solid Athearn locomotive buyer, and that introduced me to their line of rolling stock too.
I have the luxury of filling a small roster with what I want instead of having to seach various manufacturers for a specific locomotive or freight car. So I can keep my purchases dominated by one manufacturer, and Athearn offers a wide variety of equipment anyway.
Some swear that Loksound sounds better, and I agree their PM is probably better than T2, but I still can't get the horn volume up to where I want it in relation to the PM...its just not loud enough. And I have also experienced different operating behaviors with ESU when OEM installed into different manufacturers locos. The light board and motors are not going to be the same, and I think those differences nuance the performance enough to be noticably different.
Just like back in my DC days where Life Like Proto would change the lightboards nearly every run, so some locos ran slower than others depending upon what the vintage was. I don't think OEM DCC truly solves that problem. You have to approach it by hardwiring every decoder into each locomotive, and still be aware of the vintages of the different motors and possibly gearing you're trying to run together.
So my impulse concerns are now relegated to mainly Athearn products, and Atlas for rolling stock. Not much else piques my interest, although I have a Bowser RS3M and a Rapido High Hood GP38 on order. Impulsive orders to a degree, but I am also curious as to how good these locos might be....ordered partly to satisfy a curiosity.
- Douglas
PRR8259and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims.
I've only speedmatched & MU'd a few of my locomotives using my Power Cab. However, I have not experienced the limitations you've run into, John.
When configuring Vmin, did you speedmatch your slower locomotive to your faster loocomotive? Your faster locomotive will only go as slow as it is capable - i.e. presuming a properly lubed drivetrain. The slower locomotive has be speed up to match the faster locomotive's slowest Vmin. Once Vmin is matched adequately (and it does NOT need to be perfect - a little tugging between couplers is okay), match Vmax for both locomotives.
PRR8259 My son Johnny is an impulse buyer. If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
My son Johnny is an impulse buyer. If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
I agree with Kevin.
I will also admit that an attractive paint scheme is very important to me, even if its a plain solid dip scheme. Its a visual hobby, and the trains have to please the eye. I find myself attracted to the Union Pacific, and have bought UP locos even though its not part of my railroad.
I would say your son has a plan. He plans to buy a pair of units for each Class 1. It may be a different plan that doesn't fit a traditional modeling approach, but I would not really call it impulsive.
I hope that he finds what he wants and enjoys it a lot.
PRR8259If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
Nothing wrong with that.
Some of the best layouts I have visited had motive power from all over the place. The owner ran what he liked.
If you know what you enjoy, you are better off not listening to people that tell you otherwise.
My free-lance "St.Paul Route" is based on two real 19th century railroads. It's happened several times that I've bought say an engine for the St.Paul Route just because I liked it, and then after the fact find out that one of the real railroads actually had an engine like that. I even built a scene on the layout (railroad bridge over water) that turned out to resemble an actual scene on one of the real railroads - but I didn't see pictures of the real place until years later.
I understand your point.
Depending upon the railroad in question there is actually very good documentation available. It just is not online and the books are rare anymore, so it can be a hunt.
For example, just about every single class of Santa Fe steam locomotive built since about 1908, with a few railroad rebuild exceptions, has been documented and even modeled in HO brass. This includes some locos from the KCM&O. There are two book editions that cover every single brass model steam loco ever made in HO for Santa Fe, what is correctly modeled and what is not, what road numbers are correct in what years for that model, and other close models that can be done with minor modifications. So Santa Fe steam is pretty well documented.
As is PRR.
But indeed many other railroads are not well documented or as fully modeled.
The other issue is that most of those Santa Fe brass models are costly now and require considerable work to run well. That is why I stick to modern diesels.
It was my desire to be true to prototype fidelity and history that led me to conclude that 'good enough' is the most realistic standard for my model and probably for most prototypes. The exceptions are the famous, well documented prototypes that were wealthy enough to purchase standardized locomotives in batches. For every Big Boy, Challenger, and other famous locomotives there were thousands of 4-4-0, 2-8-0 etc.
In my prototype case, the railroad used pre-owned locomotives acquired through merger with numerous short lines that themselves had gone through multiple ownership structures and had originally bought their locomotives second hand.
I model a poor area of South Texas. I've spent years reviewing maps, researching archives, walking down long gone right of ways, and talking to historical societies. Very little has been documented and few photos exist. Locomotives passed through too many hands and few had the time or money to document so guesses are what we have.
I wish I had time to write more but that will have to do for now.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Modelers who want to represent real life, want a real life selection of locos. There were 25 Big Boys, there were 33,000 2-8-0's...... There were only 1000 4-8-4's in all of North America, there were 14,000 2-8-2's.
Modelers who want to represent real life, want a real life selection of locos.
There were 25 Big Boys, there were 33,000 2-8-0's......
There were only 1000 4-8-4's in all of North America, there were 14,000 2-8-2's.
PRR8259 I could agree it's a believable mikado. I still like steam, but feel at the same time not connected to it in any way. When you realize that NKP literally did scale down the C&O 2-10-4, it could be more plausible.
I could agree it's a believable mikado. I still like steam, but feel at the same time not connected to it in any way.
When you realize that NKP literally did scale down the C&O 2-10-4, it could be more plausible.
Well, I feel very little connection to current prototypes, I can't even identify any of these modern engines and don't care one bit.
And I feel no connection to the "trains of my youth" in the 60's and 70's.
I love first generation diesels, they are just so cool, like the automobiles of that era, another interest of mine.
As for steam, my connection comes from two things. When my father got me started in this hobby, he had the Mantua Pacific and Mikado, and then I built several other Mantua steam loco kits.
The second thing is Strasburg, I have never lived more than 1-1/2 hours from there my whole life. My parents started taking us kids there on a regular basis when I was 5 or 6. I'm 66, I bet I have been there 100 times, not to mention a number of other steam tourist lines.
For the last 29 years I have lived less than an hour from Strasburg. Two or three times a season is typical.
But I am modeling a time period from before I was born, so the "connection" is not based on first hand experiance anyway. It is partly based on an overall interest in the past, and past technologies.
It is based not on a detailed history of a steam loco, but on a broad knowledge of the complete history of our country and culture.
Architecture - I restore 120 year old Victorian era houses for a living.
All my favorite cars where built before 1970 (but I do like the tech that makes new cars so good).
One of my other hobbies, the 27 year old garden tractor that was built to the same core design from 1971 to 2001.
I have 1700 vinyl records I still listen to.
I feel connected to all these old things and places.
Sheldon
John, The DT&I 800 Class:
https://www.rr-fallenflags.org/dti/dti-s800.jpg
As you can see, looks just like an S class Berkshire, just has 63" drivers, smaller firebox, and the all weather cab.
These were not as heavy ths the NKP S Class or the C&O K-4's, but they were heavy as Mikados go and had a high trailing truck loading.
And there were a number of roads who built Mikes as heavy or heavier than the these "famous" 2-8-4's, several with 69"/71" drivers. The GN O-8 had large drivers and a weight on the drivers and axle loading that exceeded even the over weight C&O K-4. And the NYC H10 and the B&O Q4 were pretty hefty. The B&O experimented with 70" drivers, the results were good, but the cost was considered excessive, so no additional locos were converted.
So, all these locos of both wheel arrangements were similar in weight and power.
So the ATLANTIC CENTRAL has their own unique Mikes.
DrW Sheldon, You produced here two interesting and believable models wth a good context story. A small detail I would add to both models is some kind of view block below the firebox. For my taste, the gap between the trailing truck and the firebox is a bit large. JW
Sheldon,
You produced here two interesting and believable models wth a good context story. A small detail I would add to both models is some kind of view block below the firebox. For my taste, the gap between the trailing truck and the firebox is a bit large.
JW
I have done that on some other kitbashed locos, but have not found an effective solution for these.
The trailing truck uses a drawbar that hinges at the pivot point of the trailing truck. This provides better tracking, considering the long firebox on these locos.
The white piece of styrene simulates rear bearing block of the Delta truck.
Sheldon--
PFM released a book on the Berkshire and Texas Types that covers every single prototype version. Yes, I like loco history, and I've read every single word of that excellent book, many pages several times through the years, but then I sold it...The DT&I 800's probably saw photos but I'm not as familiar with. I was or would have been a Nickel Plate fan, but as others have noted, unless you like to roll your own equipment, which is really not me, modeling NKP was a major challenge until just a few years ago.
You better believe I totally appreciate how hard it is to model 1954, or any other year you might pick (that's why I gave that up), and my son just wants to model what he sees today, which is actually easier in many ways, but we still allow way too much room for prototype license.
I was never able to stick to any one year--much less a decade. There's too much I like. My son is interested in the new CPKC and is looking forward to whichever of 5 paint scheme candidates the railroad employees choose (management is allowing the employees to make the decision).
PRR8259 Hi Sheldon- I am just trying to stick to the facts. We are losing so much historical steam locomotive information...the people interviewed by William Kratville and others, who were actually there when these things were built, are now gone, as are many of the authors. In online discussions there are many genuinely well meaning but not fully informed statements that will later be cited as some kind of a source. From the very outset much of diesel loco construction was standardized to prevent the issues that occurred previously in the steam era. You are correct that those of us who consider ourselves to be modelers of one sort or another should model the broad curves and gentle grade transitions, should avoid vertical cuts which in real life are very unstable, should do a better or more prototypical job on bridges and other structures, and do better at signaling. I am as you say just trying to enjoy running trains. My scenery is very basic. Right now I am wrestling with my recent impulse purchases thinking about only keeping units in correct paint schemes despite liking the foobies. At least I currently can say I have every single IC or ICG freight diesel paint scheme represented even into CN recent repaints that are still running with IC initials on them. Wherever possible without replacing the layout I already have flattened every curve (a mountain and 2 curved tunnels prevent further improvements). I can get any model American loco through my curved tunnels with clearance to spare. This includes all articulateds, but some brass ones would not like the track curvature into the tunnels. I can't fix that.
Hi Sheldon-
I am just trying to stick to the facts. We are losing so much historical steam locomotive information...the people interviewed by William Kratville and others, who were actually there when these things were built, are now gone, as are many of the authors. In online discussions there are many genuinely well meaning but not fully informed statements that will later be cited as some kind of a source. From the very outset much of diesel loco construction was standardized to prevent the issues that occurred previously in the steam era.
You are correct that those of us who consider ourselves to be modelers of one sort or another should model the broad curves and gentle grade transitions, should avoid vertical cuts which in real life are very unstable, should do a better or more prototypical job on bridges and other structures, and do better at signaling.
I am as you say just trying to enjoy running trains. My scenery is very basic. Right now I am wrestling with my recent impulse purchases thinking about only keeping units in correct paint schemes despite liking the foobies. At least I currently can say I have every single IC or ICG freight diesel paint scheme represented even into CN recent repaints that are still running with IC initials on them.
Wherever possible without replacing the layout I already have flattened every curve (a mountain and 2 curved tunnels prevent further improvements). I can get any model American loco through my curved tunnels with clearance to spare. This includes all articulateds, but some brass ones would not like the track curvature into the tunnels. I can't fix that.
John,
I know a fair amount about trains, prototype and model, but I'm not deep into some of the history like you are.
Honestly, I simply don't have the time, and modeling is a bit more important to me that railfanning or real deep rail history.
I don't think anyone is suggesting we somehow erase the hisotrical facts about steam locomotives.
In my mind that has nothing to do with building a model that is a "stand in".
This question is about being practical, building or buying models, and having fun with model trains, that's all.
I'm trying hard to make time to build a good sized layout, with broad curves, big turnouts, wide open natural looking spaces and plan to run representively long trains.
And still there will be a LONG list of "selective compression" and "representation", where "close enough is good enough".
And if others don't like it they can leave. I'm sure I will have no trouble finding a qualified crew for opps sessions and will be happy to welcome interested visitors.
But it will be an artistic interpretation with rolling stock that will range from 70 year old products to the newest high end models.
I suspect you do have some idea how hard it is to field a roster of "correct" models for a layout set in 1954. Nearly impossible to cover a wide range of rolling stock to a high level of accuracy and detail.
So close enough will have to do in many cases.
Honestly, I laugh at some of my critics on this forum when it comes to this issue. Many of them model more modern eras and will only buy high end "perfectly correct" models.
I suspect most of them could come see my layout and not know which models are correct for my era and which ones are generic.
As 40 of the roll by, an Athearn, Bowser or Accurail 34' hopper is a more than adequate model to represent my era.
Building a believable protolance private road layout is more involved than most people think.
Take a look at this loco, the picture is before it hit the paint shop:
This is a LIMA built heavy Mikado, that could have exisited. Are you familiar with the DT&I 800 class?
Well this is its 69" drivered big brother, not quite a Berkshire.
I did extensive study of all the large Mikado classes, and of the developement of the Berkshire before proceeding with this kitbash for the ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
LIMA could have built this loco if someone had asked. It would have required C&O or PRR class trackage, it would have been as powerfull as many Berks.
Heck, a great many actual railroaders considered the Berks nothing more than bigger Mikes.
I have built 5 of these from Bachmann 2-8-4's, three sub classes spread over the five locos. Here is another, not as good of a picture.
I created the sub classes buy mixing and matching the proto correct details offered on the three versions offered by Bachmann, and added long haul Vandy tenders to one sub class.
I like my accurate B&O, C&O and WESTERN MARYLAND modeling, but I also like doing this.
Bachmann just re-released some USRA Pacifics, no DCC, including B&O. I think I will get a few, and turn a B&O version into a B&O P6 - just need a Delta trailing truck (I think I have some that will fit) and a medium Vandy tender.
And the ATLANTIC CENTRAL could use another Pacific or two....
Just bought three new Athearn light equipped WV cabooses for ATSF, BN & FW&D. I don't "need" them, but gives me RTR options instead of relying on me finishing projects. Given the current state of my vision, lighting projects are not happening right now.
PRR8259 MJ4562 I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era Without detailing this thread, i must respectfully disagree completely on this issue. There are many steam locos I can name off the top of my head that are totally unique to one or rarely two railroads. NO amount of detailing is going to change a UP designed challenger into either a correct Rio Grande L105 challenger or a correct WP challenger though it is considered a cousin of the UP. The boilers of these other signature locos are completely different. The tenders are completely different. Its not like just remove UP domes from a boiler and add new domes. If you showed me pictures with roadnames removed I could identify a lot of big steam classes just by overall boiler shape and wheel arrangement. They were most definitely not like diesels where only a few appliances were added or changed here or there but purpose built and tailored to the road. I was never happy with the Bachmann 2-8-0 and the idea it is "close to" an IC or GM&O 2-8-0. To my eyes that is not true at all. There are many who look at loco specs and say things like the ATSF mikado is close to or the daddy of the USRA mikado. Real Santa Fe fans know that nothing could be farther from the truth. The basic specs are comparable but not the look. The Santa Fe mikes were all very different from USRA locos. With diesels I can easily buy something that is road specific correct right off the shelf. However, the WP, D&H, and WM challengers though cousins were all very different. They just were. To me buying a generic 2-8-0 and detailing it...if I even had the time and patience I would never be happy with the result. Even the famous PFM brass ATSF 2-8-0 matches only certain ATSF locos correctly. Only a few of them at a moment in time. Real work is required to do the others. There is a book that tells you which road numbers are correct and how you can modify the PFM brass models to do a couple others. With diesels it is easily possible to be correct for a given road number of a loco right down to variations of lettering on just that one loco road number-- right off the shelf. I always preferred prototype modeling to making up my own road. Ymmv.
MJ4562 I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era
I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era
Without detailing this thread, i must respectfully disagree completely on this issue. There are many steam locos I can name off the top of my head that are totally unique to one or rarely two railroads. NO amount of detailing is going to change a UP designed challenger into either a correct Rio Grande L105 challenger or a correct WP challenger though it is considered a cousin of the UP. The boilers of these other signature locos are completely different. The tenders are completely different. Its not like just remove UP domes from a boiler and add new domes. If you showed me pictures with roadnames removed I could identify a lot of big steam classes just by overall boiler shape and wheel arrangement. They were most definitely not like diesels where only a few appliances were added or changed here or there but purpose built and tailored to the road. I was never happy with the Bachmann 2-8-0 and the idea it is "close to" an IC or GM&O 2-8-0. To my eyes that is not true at all. There are many who look at loco specs and say things like the ATSF mikado is close to or the daddy of the USRA mikado. Real Santa Fe fans know that nothing could be farther from the truth. The basic specs are comparable but not the look. The Santa Fe mikes were all very different from USRA locos.
With diesels I can easily buy something that is road specific correct right off the shelf. However, the WP, D&H, and WM challengers though cousins were all very different. They just were.
To me buying a generic 2-8-0 and detailing it...if I even had the time and patience I would never be happy with the result. Even the famous PFM brass ATSF 2-8-0 matches only certain ATSF locos correctly. Only a few of them at a moment in time. Real work is required to do the others. There is a book that tells you which road numbers are correct and how you can modify the PFM brass models to do a couple others.
With diesels it is easily possible to be correct for a given road number of a loco right down to variations of lettering on just that one loco road number-- right off the shelf.
I always preferred prototype modeling to making up my own road. Ymmv.
John, I agree, lots of steam locos are very unique and distinctive.
But guess what, most people who don't have an "engineering eye" like you or I don't notice or care. One big modern 2-8-0 looks pretty much like many, not all, of the rest of them.
In my case I only care up to a point. After that, close enough is good enough - no matter what I know about the prototype.
I'm not buying locomotives with 4 digit price tags - simply not going there. In fact, not really interested in getting past the first half of the 3 digit price range.
So the price of that level of high accuracy is way past my point of diminishing return. I have fleet of 140 locomotives, that I am very happy with - most aquired over the last 25 years - dollar cost average price - about $125
Now here is my Devils Advocate position.
If the models have to be that accurate, why not the track radius, the turnout sizes, the bridge spans, the pasing siding lengths, etc?
Building a "complete" model railroad is both art and engineering - one of those arts is "selective compression", and another is "representation".
We don't have complete information on the history and evolution of every locomotive that ever ran on every railroad.
Where do we draw this line about "accuracy? Well we are going to draw that line in OUR OWN minds, and it will always be different from what others do.
Take a look at any of the great modelers your have known, or that have been published in the model press over the years. If they had your view on this issue, they would have never completed a layout to an operational and scenic stage.
You can and should persue this hobby in whatever way makes you happy. But I can assure you very few others take this aspect as seriously as you do.
There are few others on this forum who are very critical of my casual approach some of these "accuracy" issues - they no longer want any lowly "Athearn blue box" trains on their layouts - their choice, I'm fine with that.
I will take donations of steam era blue box rolling stock........
And it seems the previous trend in the hobby of every model needing to be a perfect example of how locomotive XYZ appeared on October 10th, 1938 at 12:46 pm is changing.
I see lots of nice layouts on facebook, great scenery, realistic trains, and little or no talk of anything that could be called "rivet counting".
John, have fun, however that works for you.
But fun for me that is an $80 Bachmann 2-8-0 lettered WESTERN MARYLAND with a few changed details like the pilot.
Fun for me is not obsessing over the nose profile of an F7 or a PA1.
And remember I do both, my own road and three "prototype" roads.