Why have manufacturers abandoned anybody modeling before WW1?

[dehusman]

This will also be my last post on this for a while, but I would like to make one last point that was touched on by andrechapelon where he said:

"I still don't understand why all the fuss. You think early 20th century modelers have it tough and are given short shrift by plastic model manufacturers? Try modeling New Zealand's 42" gauge railways in ANY era. "
and.....
"This is my last post on the subject. By now, it should be apparent that I am rather a bit less than sympathetic. There are modelers in Britain who model the Great Western Railway as it was in its broad (7+ feet) gauge days. I have yet to hear a complaint from that crowd about lack of manufacturing support. Come to think of it, in the November MR, there was that guy who models Russian railroads. Now THERE's a niche."

My point is that all of the prototypes you mentioned are exceptions to the rule, "odd" gauges serving limited areas, the prototypes themselves are "niches".
That is not the the case I am making. I am not talking about making a model of a rare prototype that was used on some obscure shortline or equipment that was unique to a 100 sq mile area.
I am talking about producing models of locomotives that were more common than GP7's and F units combined. Locomotives that operated on virtually every single mile of main line in service in the North American continent for over 50 years. I am talking about making reasonable priced, reasonably detailed models of cars that comprised 90% of the N American rail fleet in 1890. These aren't exceptions, these are bread and butter cars, basic rolling stock. Surely in the hundreds of new product roll-outs each year, one pre-Safety Appliance Act car could be produced.

Dave H.

[jrbarney]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ereimer

rather than just bicker back and forth about why there are few plastic RTR items available for pre-WW1 railroads , how about we share the resources we already have .
i'll start ....

interesting manufacturers (not much plastic here , and no RTR)
. . . .
http://home.sprynet.com/~bcmodels/
. . . .

For those that are interested in BC Models, I believe that line has been sold to Mr. Jeff Stone and moved to another state. He is in the process of bringing the line back up. If you want to get on the mailing list for his flyer when he is ready, send Mr. Stone an Email at:
[e-mail]
Don't forget that this line includes a lot of the parts from "fallen flags" like Red Ball, Binkley and Model Engineering Works/MEW.
Bob
NMRA Life 0543

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

andrechapelon wrote:
"How is it a self-fulfilling prophecy? You seem to believe in the "if you build it, they will come" school of manufacturing."

No, but Bachmann (et al) have produced entire lines of late 1800's early 1900's engines in G gauge and On30. If there is enough interest to support an entirely new gauge /scale combination, there is enough interest to support a couple cars in HO standard.
As for the self fulfilling prophecy, companies don't offer a "full" line, so people can't easily start a railroad off the shelf. So they make another choice. As a result sales of what is offered lags. Then manufacturers say sales are bad and don't want to offer a full line.

"Anyone alive who might remember that era is at or above the century mark in age."

That is a very weak arguement. How many modelers model something other than what they've actually seen (other than in books and maybe a video)?

If that was a valid arguement then why are there hundreds of people modeling US roads in Europe when they have never set foot in the US? How many modelers model the ATSF or SP or UP on the east coast and have never been west of Pittsburgh? It is very common to model entirely from written and photo documentation.

There are niche markets, actually its getting more to the point that many new realeases are themselves niche models (for example the the C&O 2-6-6-4 and the UP Big Boy). So why not "my " niche?

Dave H.

Apropos G and and narrow gauge, G got its start in Europe where there is a higher concentration of railfans than in the US. Not as high as in Britain, where they're actually building a mainline steam locomotive (Peppercorn A-1 4-6-2 , IIRC), but higher than the U.S. Narrow gauge bucks the trend because, well shoot, it's cute and funky. Narrow gauge also had a tiny, but vociferous following in the 50's as well as some (e.g. Cliff Grandt) who were willing to supply fellow narrow gaugers without having to make a large profit.

As for European modelers modeling the US, they have an advantage in that there is a already a sizeable supply of models made for a fairly large U.S. market. The Europeans don't have to depend on European manufacturers to satisfy their demand for U.S. models. For that matter, a modeler here who wants to model Europe or the U.K. would get his/her models from overseas without expecting a U.S. manufacturer to fill that niche. IOW, US modelers of Europe or European modelers (like Pelle Soeberg) can tap off a previously existing market.

I still don't understand why all the fuss. You think early 20th century modelers have it tough and are given short shrift by plastic model manufacturers? Try modeling New Zealand's 42" gauge railways in ANY era. There's essentially NOTHING in plastic. There are kits, including some nice Sn3 1/2 kits of famous NZ steam classes like the Ab 4-6-2, the J and Ja 4-8-2 and the Ka/Kb 4-8-4's, but they require a lot of time and skill to assemble. Interestingly enough, despite the small population (roughly that of the city of Los Angeles), there are several recognized scales in use in NZ. http://www.railmodel.org.nz/modelit.htm#NZScales

Why is it necessary/desirable to be able to buy a wide range off the shelf models for early 20th Century modeling? If this is such a big deal, why not become a manufacturer. At least then you'll be able to determine if a market either exists or can be created.

Just like the people who did this: http://eureka.m.bigpondhosting.com/Garratt.html

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go lie down until the temptation to buy a NSWR AD60 Beyer-Garratt dissipates. The SP didn't own Beyer-Garratts. I must resist.............

What did they do back when I got my first HO train? Oh yeah, that was a metal Mantua Little Six generic 0-6-0T kit which needed a lot of flash cleanup before assembly and painting and a couple of Silver Streak wood kits which only had the car sides painted and lettered. The rest you had to paint yourself after you assembled it. I was 10 years old at the time. I hit the big time when I got a Mantua Pacific kit for Christmas and managed to assemble the valve gear correctly. I wish I still had that engine.

This is my last post on the subject. By now, it should be apparent that I am rather a bit less than sympathetic. There are modelers in Britain who model the Great Western Railway as it was in its broad (7+ feet) gauge days. I have yet to hear a complaint from that crowd about lack of manufacturing support. Come to think of it, in the November MR, there was that guy who models Russian railroads. Now THERE's a niche.

Andre

[BRAKIE]

Mantua made a series 4-6-0 and 4-8-0 that will work on a pre WW1 layout.AHM made a 4-6-0.How about the 4-4-0s ,2-8-0s etc made by United and other brass companies? MDC made a old time 2-8-0 along with freight cars,cabooses and passenger cars...Dave,There are models out there but,you need to look. Try e-bay,train shows and the Internet..

[SpaceMouse]

Dave,

That was my take. I cannot argue what goes on with business decisions, because I don't reside in the board rooms. My guess is that many people here that act like they know are merely spouting what they heard and not what they know. Don't get mad this is a guess.

Furthermore, I speculate that the "marketing research" is based upon the sales of a couple engines that because of their size were crappy perfomers. Engineering techniques are better today and the problems have been solved. Just look at Harold's fix of the IHC 4-4-0.

And Further-furthermore, I submit that because we, the baby boomers grew up in the era of early TV Cowboys and Indians we have an affinity for that era and would model it if given the material to do so. And Old West steams are just too cool for words. We are talking about the glory days of railroading.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman
IHC produced a camelback 2-6-0 to fit their SP 2-6-0 chassis. Its a model of a O&W engine. Unfortunately cameback 2-6-0's are rare. So they chose to pick an small niche wheel arrangement (2-6-0) of a small niche type engine (camelback) based on a very small niche railroad (O&W). What is maddening about this whole thing is they also produce a 4-4-0 chassis which is interchangeable with the 2-6-0 chassis. If they would have offered a 4-4-0 camelback they would have had a wheel arrangement and type of engine that was used by dozens and dozens of railroads, as many railroads had 4-4-0 camelbacks. I even wrote to them explaining what could be done. How much of a business case does it require to snap an already tooled, stock shell on an already tooled, stock chassis and come up with an entirely new NEVER BEFORE OFFERED engine?
Dave H.

Unfortunately, IHC apparently failed to do much, if any, valid research with regard to their camelback shell, as it truly represents no camelback that ever existed (although some try to pawn it off as an NYO&W class U, which it resembles only vaguely). The model's worst error is that the cab is far too small, low, and tight to have ever held an engineer!

My guess is that the design was a quick, cheap, after thought to fit their 2-6-0 mechanism. It's really a shame since it could have been a good choice and a nice model. There actually were a large number of camelback Moguls in use by many northeastern railroads at the turn of the last century. Then again, I guess the inaccuracies come as no surprise. Many of IHC's currently offered HO locomotives are also "fantasy" engines.[:(]

CNJ831

[bpickering]

QUOTE: Originally posted by palallin
Another New Haven 4-4-0 engine (class A-1) was a "standard" Alco design, and looked almost identical to a Big Four 4-4-0 (it's in "New Haven Power" by Jack Swanberg). But even tho' both of these locos look almost like a copy of each other, crosshead is completely different, the valve dome is different, the air tank is mounted different, the piping runs are different, etc. How would a manufacturer do this? It's one thing to change tender trucks and swap out domes, but how do you change the valve gear from model to model? Or wheel diameter? Or driver spacing?

Not quite. The differences among various roads' late steam and diesel engines in detail are every bit as significant as as those between the examples 4-4-0s.

For that matter, Mantua address this question fairly successfully with their 4-4-2s: eight different versions.

MR has a long history of articles on modifying generic disels to better match a particular road's idiosyncracies.

[dehusman]

For those that argue manufacturer's developing a "business" case for their models, I don't think there is all that much analysis going on.

Two cases in point.

IHC produced a camelback 2-6-0 to fit their SP 2-6-0 chassis. Its a model of a O&W engine. Unfortunately cameback 2-6-0's are rare. So they chose to pick an small niche wheel arrangement (2-6-0) of a small niche type engine (camelback) based on a very small niche railroad (O&W). What is maddening about this whole thing is they also produce a 4-4-0 chassis which is interchangeable with the 2-6-0 chassis. If they would have offered a 4-4-0 camelback they would have had a wheel arrangement and type of engine that was used by dozens and dozens of railroads, as many railroads had 4-4-0 camelbacks. I even wrote to them explaining what could be done. How much of a business case does it require to snap an already tooled, stock shell on an already tooled, stock chassis and come up with an entirely new NEVER BEFORE OFFERED engine?

The other car is the Mann Creek hopper. Talk about your niche. Making a model of a car that only operated on one really obscure railroad. The ony possible business case I can see for that one was that somebody modeling the Mann's Creek railroad paid to have the tooling/molds done.

And the sad thing is the company thet brings out a decent line of cars will own the market because there is very limited competition.

Dave H.

[palallin]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul3

If they tried to simply make a 4-4-0 and pawn it off on the public, it'd flop. One road's 4-4-0's were not, in general, just like anyone else's 4-4-0 (unlike F-units). Take the Boston & Providence RR. They were famous for building inside-connected steam engines some 20 years after they fell out of favor (one of which exists today in St. Louis).

Another New Haven 4-4-0 engine (class A-1) was a "standard" Alco design, and looked almost identical to a Big Four 4-4-0 (it's in "New Haven Power" by Jack Swanberg). But even tho' both of these locos look almost like a copy of each other, crosshead is completely different, the valve dome is different, the air tank is mounted different, the piping runs are different, etc. How would a manufacturer do this? It's one thing to change tender trucks and swap out domes, but how do you change the valve gear from model to model? Or wheel diameter? Or driver spacing?

Not quite. The differences among various roads' late steam and diesel engines in detail are every bit as significant as as those between the examples 4-4-0s.

For that matter, Mantua address this question fairly successfully with their 4-4-2s: eight different versions.

MR has a long history of articles on modifying generic disels to better match a particular road's idiosyncracies.

[ort007]

I realize that this doesn't significantly add to the discussion (my posts rarely do), but it's interesting that nobody has mentioned AHM's ubiquitous 2-4-0 Bowker and their line of "old-time" coaches in the liveries of V&T and KC StL & C (it took me forever to even find that railroad in history). They sure sold a lot of these in the 80s and they can still be found regularly on ebay. While the detail is not great, I've had fun fixing them up with new motors and a little detailing.

Ort007

[MidlandPacific]

I'll add a few:

For figures, http://www.musketminiatures.com./
Upper-end wooden cars, http://www.riograndemodels.com/

And for those who haven't considered it, there's a great range of available brass and diecast models in pre-1920s prototypes. The USRA engines weren't built until 1919, but they can be thought of as reflecting corporate "best practice" from about 1915, and the Spectrum 4-6-0s look right straight out of the box. In brass, you can usually get an old PFM Ma&Pa 2-8-0 for under $300 - it has an open-frame motor, but they can usually be made runnable with minimal maintenance: that's perfect for turn-of-the-century practice.

[ereimer]

rather than just bicker back and forth about why there are few plastic RTR items available for pre-WW1 railroads , how about we share the resources we already have .
i'll start ....

interesting manufacturers (not much plastic here , and no RTR)
http://www.remsmodels.com/
http://home.sprynet.com/~bcmodels/
http://loggingcars.com/cars.htm
http://www.yeoldehuffnpuff.com/
http://www.fandckits.com/
http://www.laserkit.com/laserkit.htm
http://www.troutcreekeng.com/

for general info
http://www.steamfreightcars.com/index.html

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FundyNorthern

Just received in the mail today a flyer from B.T.S., and it includes three resin kits for the United States Military Railroad from the 1860's. One boxcar, two different flat cars.

ww.btsrr.com

Bob Boudreau

And in last months MR inside cover is an Atlas N Scale 4-4-0.

(Ricker Fracker---Grumble I'm in HO.)

[Anonymous]

Just received in the mail today a flyer from B.T.S., and it includes three resin kits for the United States Military Railroad from the 1860's. One boxcar, two different flat cars.

ww.btsrr.com

Bob Boudreau

[slotracer]

Many do model eras from before their time, but most of that centers on the popular transition era late 1940's-late 1950's. I was born in 59 but in the past when I was doing a layout that was my era. So much variety in roads new and old equipment and a simpler form of life with active downtowns and viable rural communities to model, neat industrial buildings, one had steam and deisel, wood and steel cars, passeneger and frieght, stations still stnading and in use, even working coal docks, but life in general was not all too terrbly different than what one experienced growing up in the 60's- early 80's. Streets were paved, there were automobiles, large yards in semi modern cities etc. As mentioned earlier, pre WW1 equipment looks very unique and many do not find it attractive, I too don't get very excited about 30' cars, bobber cabooses, fraile small engines and giant smoke stacks but to each his own.

When you fall back to the early 40's the number of modelers drop off and as one goes into the 30's and 20's it starts dropping dramatically, not only was equipment more unique but the way towns and cities looked and the way life functioned was considerably different. Those earlier eras require someone dedicated to modeling them to take a far narrower focus on equipment and model something quite removed from their life experience and it limits thier ability to toss in as much variety here and there that many modlers like to do. When one starts modeling pre WW1 it enters an entirely different time period(s) very unique and far removed from what most can relate to enough to devote the time and effort to a layout that is more limited and focused. A guy modeling a 1955 layout can more easily toss in some 60's or even 70's equipment and change eras from time to time as a whim suits them more than somone who models 1905 and wants to run equipment indicitive of the mid 30's. The towns, industries, the roadbed and track themselves look vastly different. The Coal Belt is a great railroad model but it takes dedication to be strictly adhered to that unique era.

Colorado Narrow Gauge is a niche that has bucked this trend, it is has seemed to attract suffiecient numbers to garnetr mnfg attention, but not all that much, it still mostly requires brass engines and scratch building.

Perhaps if one builds it they will come, if enough mnfgs make a wide enough variety ofequipment in pre WW1 era that it would make it warm enough waters fro more modelers to enter but I find it risky. A mnfg has to sink considerable invertment into tooling in the hope that if they provide it the market will come. Many of our mnfgs have been in the hobby for a long period and are there to make a buck, if the demand was out there they would certainly have realized it by now, someone would have tried to make a buck by capturing an unserved market..

The number of pre WW1 modlers is very small, but even if it were to triple in size it would probably still not cost justify the investment in tooling.

I feel your pain though, one has to wonder how many F unit modles need to be made (Seems like everyone makes them) an occasional good kit that could be modified and adapted to extend it's use certainly would be welcome by WW! modelers. Some niche's are too far off the scale for most folks attention to ever budge teh needle, traction modeling is another example, there is loads of european prototype products available, yet very few in teh USA model that despite the availability.

Modeling that era could be quite a bit of fun and challenge, but to accept devoting one to that one must also accept that it will take modifying, kitbashing, scratchbuilding and comprimise. I wouldn't go into it trying to model strict prototype. John Swanson used to put out great articles on kitbashing nice looking and running home road steamers from commercial kits, that in itself, building a fleet of home road locomotives from ones own hands could be fantastic inspiration alone.

[dehusman]

andrechapelon wrote:
"How is it a self-fulfilling prophecy? You seem to believe in the "if you build it, they will come" school of manufacturing."

No, but Bachmann (et al) have produced entire lines of late 1800's early 1900's engines in G gauge and On30. If there is enough interest to support an entirely new gauge /scale combination, there is enough interest to support a couple cars in HO standard.
As for the self fulfilling prophecy, companies don't offer a "full" line, so people can't easily start a railroad off the shelf. So they make another choice. As a result sales of what is offered lags. Then manufacturers say sales are bad and don't want to offer a full line.

"Anyone alive who might remember that era is at or above the century mark in age."

That is a very weak arguement. How many modelers model something other than what they've actually seen (other than in books and maybe a video)?

If that was a valid arguement then why are there hundreds of people modeling US roads in Europe when they have never set foot in the US? How many modelers model the ATSF or SP or UP on the east coast and have never been west of Pittsburgh? It is very common to model entirely from written and photo documentation.

There are niche markets, actually its getting more to the point that many new realeases are themselves niche models (for example the the C&O 2-6-6-4 and the UP Big Boy). So why not "my " niche?

Dave H.

[ereimer]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon
not to mention Don Ball's 1899 era Moraga Springs Northern - http://home.jps.net/~dlball/msn/ ).

thanks for the link , i haven't seen that one before . unfortunatly almost all of his loco's and a lot of his cars are from manufacturers that no longer exist . gives me some ideas what to watch for on ebay though [:)]

[jrbarney]

Admittedly, they're not shake-the-box, but let's not forget that B.T.S. now offers USMRR freight and flat cars:
http://www.btsrr.com/bts9507.htm
and Merle Rice's Model Railroad Warehouse offers the Mann's Creek Railway hopper cars:
http://www.mrrwarehouse.com
Bob
NMRA Life 0543

[sebamat]

In my eyes, one of the problem of models in non mainstream time epoques (like 1880-1900) is the one of consistency: yes, I can buy e.g. a more or less prototocal 4-4-0 or 4-6-0 from 1910-15 or some older 4-4-0.
But what is missing is all the rest: to really be able to enjoy it, I need a complete train: mail cars, coaches, sleepers, or at least a few fitting boxcars and a caboose of the same RR company. (And possibly more than just one kind of engine). And those are really missing, ang e.g. MDC was not able to complete fill in (offering a 30' coach , of wich there was only one in all US will not really satify collectors).


That make me less prone to start at all to modell this epoque. And make the lonesome model already on the market a quite sure faillure... scaring away from other new models.
Clearly there is brass, rare kits ( as labelle) and kit-bashing/ self made models, but that is not for everyone (because of time/money/interests/capacities) and the few ones that do are not enought to bring the retourn of investment today companies need to jump in with investments in new models..

Some european producers recognised that and have started really systematic efforts to offer an operative set of engines with all the required passenger and freight cars (e.g Fleischmann with old prussian railroad KPEV).

sebastiano

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman
Why have manufacturers abandoned anybody modeling before WW1?

The hobby's "conventional wisdom" is that people model what they saw as a kid, thus the thought is that there aren't any modelers left who remember anything before about 1930, so no manufacturers really support the earlier periods. I personally think that's a load of fecal matter, since I'm 35 and model 1950. Two of my modeling buddies are younger than I am, and are modeling 1954 and 1934. One 50-something modeler in the area with a LARGE layout is modeling 1916, and another 60-something is modeling 1923. There are lots of us modeling what we never saw, just so we CAN see it, at least in miniature.

QUOTE:
How many manufacturers make a reasonable quality (at least as good as an Accurail or Athearn) pre WW1 car in R-T-R or plastic kit?

Bowser's got the GS gon, and GLa, H21 and H22 hoppers. Accurail's USRA twin can be used for a pre-1918 Pressed Steel or ACF car. Accurail's USRA double sheathed box can be backdated to represent all sorts of cars. Atlas' 36' meat reefer can be backdated to represent many types of reefers. But overall you're right: only Roundhouse really supported the pre-WWI era modelers, and with only three body styles (and the steel-sided 36-footer with wood ends is wrong for ANY road). There are lots of cars out there that can be backdated, but not many that cab be used out of the box.

QUOTE:
Westerfield and LaBelle offer craftsman kits that can be used for post 1900 layout.

Don't forget Funaro & Carmelengo. They've got more pre-1918 cars than Westerfield. Even Sunshine has a few pre-WWI cars (reefers and Gons, mostly)

QUOTE:
How many manufactures make a good running 1890-1910 era engine? One. The IHC NYO&W camelback 2-6-0

Make that four: IHC, Bowser, Roundhouse and Bachmann. The Bowser K-11 4-6-2 is a 1905 design, and some of the Pennsy steamers are prewar. Every steamer Roundhouse makes (made?) is pre-WWI. And Bachmann has at least three in their inventory: the small drivered 4-6-0, the large drivered 4-6-0, and the Consolidation, which is a 1911 Baldwin. The Bachmann engines need to be backdated, but the core engine is there and correct.

QUOTE:
As far as I can tell, a switch engine from any time prior to WW1 (other than the out of production Mantua camelbacks) has never been made. Never.

Well, except for the Life Like Teakettle 0-4-0 toy, you're almost right. Bowser makes a 1916 A-5 0-4-0 (and I think the B-6 0-6-0 is prewar too), and Roundhouse makes the Harriman 1911-ish 0-6-0, as well as their 0-6-0T. I think the Bachmann Spectrum 0-6-0T is also pre-1918.

Your basic arguement is sound: there's not enough out there to EASILY construct a 1918 or before model railroad. But hey, who ever said this hobby was supposed to be easy, or out of the box? I model 1949/1950; you wouldn't BELIEVE how hard it is to get stuff for my time period! Can I find a good 1946 Peterbilt? No, just 1953 Whites and Macks. Can I get a 1948 Chevy? No, but I can get 312 different versions of the 1957 Chevy. And roughly half of my freight car fleet will have to be kitbashed, scratchbuilt, or constructed from resin kits, because there are so few GOOD plastic single sheathed boxcars out there (GOOD=one car, the Tichy/Intermountain USRA single sheath. Everything else needs work). I don't let it bother me too much though; I just buy what I can, do the research, and scratch/bash what I can't get.

[Anonymous]

If there is huge amounts of money to be made here start your own company and make it. But I tend to agree pre-WW I model railroaders are far and few between and companies are in business to make money and don't see any potential in this nich.

Bob DeWoody

[andrechapelon]

And he also said:
"If you want to model the pre-WWI period, you're going to have to "make do" with craftsman kits. There's just not the same kind of market as for later periods."

Its a self fulfilling prophecy. Nobody makes any equipment so nobody models it so everybody says there is no market.

I know you can make models out of resin (I have make P&R class XMe 34' boxcars, new resin underframes with correct truck centers to replace MDC underframes, replacement resin underframes for Bachmann cars and I am working on masters to cast gondolas). I know you can kitbash cars (a Varney/Lifelike hopper can be made into either PSC or SSC hopper, an Athearn gon can be cut down to make a 1902 PSC low side gon). I know engines can be modified and reworked.

Yes I know that in several years Horizon might begin remaking the 25 year old designs, that Model Power will eventually produce the 40 year old Mantua designs and LaBelle has been making the same wood kits for the last 30 years. Is it too much to ask that in between the 35th copy of the PRR K4 or offset twin hopper that once a decade or so somebody produce something from before WW1?

Dave H.

How is it a self-fulfilling prophecy? You seem to believe in the "if you build it, they will come" school of manufacturing. It ain't going to happen with pre-WWI era models. Anyone alive who might remember that era is at or above the century mark in age.

I'll admit the era has its attractions. It's really tempting to do something like modelling SP's Tillamook Branch in Oregon circa 1915. Thanks to H.H. Arey, there are a lot of photographs available. And Mark Schutzer's rendition of SP #2500 based on an MDC kit ( http://markschutzer.com/index.htm ) and an Arey photograph starts the mind to consider the possibilities.

However, you gotta work at it.

I'm an SP fan (late 40's/early 50's). SP steam in plastic consists/has consisted of the RIvarossi cab-forward (AC-8/`10/11/12), Lionel/Bachmann GS-4, BLI AC-4/5 and now Precision Craft is going to give us a sound equpped version of the AC-8 yada yada yada. Hopefully, before I'm dead or at least senile, Bachmann will release the Spectrum version of the GS-4.

The point is, if I want most classes of SP steam, my choices involve brass, kitbashing/redetailing or scratchbuilding, exactly the same situation that you're complaining about. If I want correct prototype "Daylight" cars, the options are brass, plastic core kits with brass sides or scratchbuilding. The situation is a little better with freight cars, and I could kiss Walther's tokhas for bringing out the SP C30-1 caboose in plastic.

Pennsy modelers have it easy and have had it relatively easy since Penn-Line. However, I'm not going to sit around and curse because BLI did the Pennsy M1-a/b instead of an SP MT-4 or the Pennsy K-4 instead of an SP P-6.

Andre

[SpaceMouse]

I think if MTH offered a line of 1880s--1920s HO engines they'd have a better chance of stealing market share thatn going straight against the established K-4s. They would be appealling to a market that has been abandonded.

And if you think that this era doesn't have nostlgia, how many of you miss John Wayne movies and can't wait till the next Tom Selleck western comes out.

[Anonymous]

This subject is now being discussed on a O-gauge forum (OGR) since MTH will be offering late 1800's/ early 1900's steam. It's a small market, but a lot of interest has been shown. While I love the look of early 1900's steam, they would look out of place on any layout of mine, since I'm "nuts" for 1950's diecast cars. Joe

[bwftex]

I feel people will buy what they are truly sold on. Bachmann appears to have done this with On30. Many people switched to this scale/gauge. There could be good market for the early 1900’s or late 1800's. But it may have to be created. The idea, romance and advantages of the era would have to be sold as well as products. Everything moved by rail back then. There were many types of industries both large and small served by rail. There was a great diversity of traffic and equipment. These were the glory days of shortlines that operated in the vicinity of all most everyone’s home in every part of the nation. Short equipment, short trains and numerous types of rolling stock make this era perfect for smaller model railroads. One can capture the character and reflect the operations of a real railroad in less space than the more modern eras. There are a lot of good points that have real benefits for modeling the earlier steam era. Someone will have to take a bold step with quality well packaged and well marketed products to see if it can be done profitably. But no matter how well done it still might fail. Bold steps fraught with risk are not things people or business’s like very much. But occasionally someone steps forward. I think the first steps in doing this with HOn3 are now taking place, so it could happen. Or at least someone might try it. Bruce

[selector]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

Instead we have models of 4-6-6-4's, streamlined 4-8-4's, etc. All of which were only every used on maybe 5% of the US railroad system by a handfull of railroads....
I think that the manufacturers are missing a huge opportunity here.

Dave H.

Dave, taking some license, I have juxtaposed two statements you made. You don't appear to see exactly the point that I and others have been making...it is precisely because they WERE produced and used during that nearly 5% of the time left for steam that we wealthy late-middle-aged and retired men (mostly) were exposed to what we now model. It IS nostalgia. So, since the dollars are there, are not the manufacturers paying us the ultimate compliment of telling us that WE are always right? And we want the stuff that was produced latterly, the stuff of the big steam mystique.

Personally, I have zero interest in slide-valved six-wheelers that weighed in at, what, 40 tons, and hauled maybe 150 tons at 30 mph before cylinder valves (more pleasing to my eye) were invented. And the wide expanding stacks? Puhleese.

Nope, as a fellow born in '52, and who can remember being awestuck by steam when I was merely 2 years old, I want what I first saw. Moreover, BLI is only too happy to sell it to me.

[Anonymous]

Modeling circa 1910, I always pause before opening the latest MR and pray that there will be an announcement that something like a PRR wooden GG or fishbelly GL hopper will appear... heck, I'd be thrilled even if they came with cast-on grabs and hook-horn couplers!

Always disappointed, my frustration grows as I see the perpetual ads for Cable Cars and pre-Civil War classics like the John Bull or De Witt Clinton train sets (oh yeah baby... we're talking big-time, mass-marketing potential there!!! :D). Gee, will the manufacturers ever liquidate the original production runs of these models?!?

After I simmer down a bit, I take comfort in the fact that one can piece together a reasonable equipment roster ... providing that you're willing to mix craftsman and shake-the-box kits, kit-bash a lokie or two, and aren't too wrapped up about following a particular prototype. Come to think of it... that was part of the attraction.

But... about that GG hopper!!!!!!

[Paul3]

dehusman wrote:

QUOTE: Why have manufacturers abandoned anybody modeling before WW1? It seems unless you are narrow gauge, the model railroad suppliers think railroads were invented in 1945. The first 75 years of railroad history is completely ignored.

The first 75 years of railroading on this continent began in either 1826 (Granite RR, Quincy, MA) or 1830 (B&O) and that would put 75 years at either 1901 or 1905. If you are talking strictly before WWI's start (1914), than it should be more like the first 84-88 years, not 75.

As far as the manufacturers thinking that RR's were invented in 1945, I don't think that holds much water. Take a look and you will see that many diesels of the pre-1945 era have been made in plastic: E6's, DL109's, The Zephyr, NW2's, S-1's, S-2's, RS-1's, FT's, etc. Even more have been made in brass. And we haven't started on the rolling stock.

And the steam? Most if not all the plastic models made are pre-1945 in origin.

And this is not counting those models of the "John Bull" and "DeWitt Clinton" that I see from time to time.

QUOTE: How many manufacturers make a reasonable quality (at least as good as an Accurail or Athearn) pre WW1 car in R-T-R or plastic kit? One, MDC and then only 2 or 3 body styles. Westerfield and LaBelle offer craftsman kits that can be used for post 1900 layout.

MDC sold 7 to 8 different wood-era car kits, and 17 different wooden passenger cars, not 2 or 3.

QUOTE: How many manufactures make a good running 1890-1910 era engine? One. The IHC NYO&W camelback 2-6-0, about as obscure a choice for an engine as can be had.

Not true. I could buy a nice New Haven EP-1 electric, last built in 1908, from Railworks/Crown Custom Imports or NJ/Custom Brass (a long time ago for that one). And what about Shays and Climaxes and Heislers?

And I don't know how obscure the 2-6-0 camelback is. Didn't LNE and other anthracite roads have camelback Moguls?

QUOTE: Think about it. F units were only in production from 1939 to about 1959. 20 years. And we have literally dozens upon dozens of variations of F units from every concievable manufacturer. Yet an entire nation's production for 75 years is more or less ignored. We have at least 5 versions of USRA 2-8-2's, two or three versions of USRA 4-6-2's.

You seem to be missing a very large point here. F-units were, with rare exceptions, almost all identical in shape which is why Athearn can crank out more, highly accurate F-units every month. It was the beauty of the design from Lubliner that by merely switching out a few body panels, you could change an F3A to an F9A.

Manufacturers want broad based appeal for a model before they make it. There are exceptions of course, because that's not the only selling point. But a manufacturer will try to go after the biggest return on their investment that they can get. By making F-units ad nauseum, they can satisfy the largest group of model railroaders by making the one engine that almost everybody had.

If they tried to simply make a 4-4-0 and pawn it off on the public, it'd flop. One road's 4-4-0's were not, in general, just like anyone else's 4-4-0 (unlike F-units). Take the Boston & Providence RR. They were famous for building inside-connected steam engines some 20 years after they fell out of favor (one of which exists today in St. Louis).

Another New Haven 4-4-0 engine (class A-1) was a "standard" Alco design, and looked almost identical to a Big Four 4-4-0 (it's in "New Haven Power" by Jack Swanberg). But even tho' both of these locos look almost like a copy of each other, crosshead is completely different, the valve dome is different, the air tank is mounted different, the piping runs are different, etc. How would a manufacturer do this? It's one thing to change tender trucks and swap out domes, but how do you change the valve gear from model to model? Or wheel diameter? Or driver spacing?

QUOTE: Only one manufacturer makes a decent 2-8-0 and that, along with the 4-4-0, were the most common engines ever built.

The most common wheel arrangement, yes. The most common locomotive...no. The only thing these locos had in common were, for the most part, the number of wheels. Wheel diameter, piston stroke and diameter, length, height, valve gear, etc., all varied by road. Some even varied on the same road.

QUOTE: Instead we have models of 4-6-6-4's, streamlined 4-8-4's, etc. All of which were only every used on maybe 5% of the US railroad system by a handfull of railroads. The entire, all time production of those engines probably wouldn't equal one month's production of 4-4-0's, 4-6-0's and 2-8-0's in late 1800's.

You forget that a 4-8-4 and a 4-6-6-4 still roam the land today, and are used quite successfully in UP's PR dept. People want to model what they've seen, and the UP Challenger is an engine that thousands of people see every year, not only in person but also in magazines and on the web. Other modern steamers are in museums, or were running not that long ago (N&W J-class, NKP 2-8-4).

QUOTE: As far as I can tell, a switch engine from any time prior to WW1 (other than the out of production Mantua camelbacks) has never been made. Never.

You've got to be careful with absolutes. "Never"? Not so. Overland in the last couple years has released a NH T-2b 0-6-0, bult from 1905-1913. This was also done for the B&M as both had simular designs. Of course, the model is at least $500...

QUOTE: Its like as if model airplane manufacturers decided that they would just never make another biplane or ship model makers decided that they would never make another sailing ship.

Oh? You mean like this: www.yankeemodelworks.com This company makes 1/350th scale ship models in resin kits. They only make one pre-WWII model, a German WWI U-35. The rest are all vessels as they were in WWII or later.

Model Railroading is harldy unique in that most of the interest lies after 1940.

QUOTE: The sad thing is it offeres so many advantages. Cars and locomotives were smaller (30, 34 and 36 ft were most common), trains were shorter (a 40 car train was huge) and speed were slower (25 mph was tops for a freight in most places, passenger trains went 45-60). All the things that HELP make a small layout seem bigger.

There aren't too many steam engines that size that will run that slow on a consistant basis. And I don't know of too many 4-4-0 models that could pull 20 cars, let alone 40.

And please don't forget those link and pin couplers. I know about Lincoln Pin couplers, but how many of us are going to do that?

QUOTE: I think that the manufacturers are missing a huge opportunity here.

If they were, then why isn't MDC's old time stuff flying off the shelves? It's been available for decades, yet there doesn't seem to be much interest. I wonder why? Could it be that model railroaders just aren't that interested as a whole in pre-WWI modeling?

QUOTE: I don't buy that. Steam engines stopped operating generally about 1956. Assuming "adulthood" means 18, that would mean that only 65+ year olds liked steam engines. There have been a dozen new steam models released in the last couple years, the manufacturers seem to think they have a market there.

Again, some of the models we're seeing released today in steam are ones that are still running today or are preserved in a museum somewhere. UP 4-6-6-4's, N&W J's, NKP Berks, etc. It hasn't been that long for a lot of these since they last ran.

As for myself, I model the New Haven which died 36 years ago. Why? Because the modern era in southern New England is just anemic compared to the past. But even I feel the pull to buy and model the MBTA, Amtrak and Conrail (the roads I grew up watching).

QUOTE: Probably 50% of modelers NEVER saw a F unit in regular freight service. But there are a gazillion F units out there.

Did you know that F-units run in revenue service today for Metro-North? And many, many others are in museums or on tourist lines around the country.

QUOTE: Talk about your niche markets. Except for the 2-10-4, NONE of those chassis are useable under another design boiler shell, they were all unique wheel arrangements used just once. Yet those were all considered to be valid "business cases". Making a good quality small 2-8-0 that was used by virtually every railroad in the US for decades is a bad business case? That's like saying it would be a bad bet to make a GP-7.

Sigh. Your missing the point. For one, big engines sell. That's why Kato made the SD90MAC and SD80MAC, why Athearn makes the DD40X, why Lionel made the 4-6-6-4, etc. People in this hobby like big trains, big locos, big layouts, etc, etc., etc. The bigger the better. I know people who have bought giant engines that they can't even run on their home layout, but they are just so happy to have bought that huge locomotive. Weird, but true.

Secondly, it's not good to compare 2,724 almost identical GP7's with a 2-8-0 that probably can only be matched to one prototype. Apples to oranges.

QUOTE: Think about that, 1865 to 1918. 53 years. That's like the model manufacturers skipped every single engine between the FT and the SD70.

But the difference is that most model railroaders want FT's and SD70's. And they don't want pre-1900 locos.

CNJ831 wrote:

QUOTE: Late 19th century and turn-of-the-century locomotives were physically quite small and even today it's difficult to produce a really good running example of these engines in HO scale because of the necessary small size of the motor/flywheel.

I have to agree with CNJ831. The physical size of the models is one of the limiting factors. And while I realize that Z-scale is a perfectly fine operating scale, Z cars weigh practically nothing and their mini locos can haul them with ease. I don't think you could get an HO 36' boxcar to weigh that little, unless you built it from balsa.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[dehusman]

CNJ831 wrote:
"Late 19th century and turn-of-the-century locomotives were physically quite small and even today it's difficult to produce a really good running example of these engines in HO scale because of the necessary small size of the motor/flywheel."

Don't necessarily buy that either since there are N scale engines that perform very well. I have also operated on a 1905 era layout with remotored and regeared 4-4-0's and 4-6-0's in brass that perform flawlessly. Take an N scale 4 axle diesel. Put HO scale 33" wheels gauged to HO standard gauge. Replace the diesel sideframes with archbars. Put it in the tender. Since all that and a DCC decoder can fit in a N scale hood unit there is plenty of room in an HO tender, with considerable room for weight. There is no reason an good running HO 4-4-0, 4-6-0, 2-6-0 or 2-8-0 can't be produced.


Andrechapelon said:
"MDC had a pretty full line of old time freight cars (box, tank, reefer, caboose - which pretty much covers it except for gons and flats) and also had some nice 80' passenger cars from the turn of the century, not to mention the 1870/1880's passenger cars."

Sorta. they produces only 36' cars which were less than half the fleet in 1905. The rest were 34 ft and 28-30 ft cars. Its kinda like saying that the only boxcar you have is the Athearn 40 ft. We have progressed way beyond that. There are literally dozens of reasonably priced, under $20 a pop, boxcar models from the 1950's. Maybe ONE manufacturer would care to make ONE other car other than the MDC 36' car.

And he also said:
"If you want to model the pre-WWI period, you're going to have to "make do" with craftsman kits. There's just not the same kind of market as for later periods."

Its a self fulfilling prophecy. Nobody makes any equipment so nobody models it so everybody says there is no market.

I know you can make models out of resin (I have make P&R class XMe 34' boxcars, new resin underframes with correct truck centers to replace MDC underframes, replacement resin underframes for Bachmann cars and I am working on masters to cast gondolas). I know you can kitbash cars (a Varney/Lifelike hopper can be made into either PSC or SSC hopper, an Athearn gon can be cut down to make a 1902 PSC low side gon). I know engines can be modified and reworked.

Yes I know that in several years Horizon might begin remaking the 25 year old designs, that Model Power will eventually produce the 40 year old Mantua designs and LaBelle has been making the same wood kits for the last 30 years. Is it too much to ask that in between the 35th copy of the PRR K4 or offset twin hopper that once a decade or so somebody produce something from before WW1?

Dave H.