Here's the thing. All things being equal, I'd like to model 1885, but lately I've had pause. I looked around on the net for some MDC 4-4-0's and 2-6-0's and found that the undecorated 4-4-0's have all but vanished and the 2-6-0s are getting scares. I know that MDC is coming out with a 2-8-0 soon, but I'm worried that I won't have the cash to buy the 15-20 locos I'll need before they go the way of the Dodo as well.
Right now all I have are 2 MDC 2-6-0's w/o sound.
Plus it's just plain easier to find stuff for 1905--and I have a LaFever climax that would not have come out in 1885. But my current structures and figures are more 1885--and there's a lot of work in there.
If I went to 1905 I could sneak in a Shay and Heisler for laughs and giggles--with a little back dating maybe.
What are some of your ideas? What am I not thinking of?
The thing is if I change years, I want to do it before I build any more.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Would it bother you to "change history", and stay with 1885 and bring the future back in time?
This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements
What part of the country are you modelling Chip?
I'm just thinking if your are "out west", 1905 in Gold Hill NV is way behind on technology as 1905 NYC. So if your looking to model where you have wagons, saloons, etc and still be in the 1900's, with the cool thing likes Ron's Climax, and cool locos like Shays and Heislers, would not be a stretch.
If my assumptions are incorrect about your modeling location, sry bout dat.
I think that 1905 is much easier for a variety of reasons. The Bachmann 4-6-0 and 4-4-0 is appropriate for that era and runs great. The MDC stuff is much more appropriate for the later time too. There is a some old MDC stuff like the Pullman Palace cars out there that look great that can be found on Ebay and at swap meets. The couplers are more appropriate too. Yet it still has the period feel. - Nevin
Tonopah and Tidewater forever!
SpaceMouse wrote:I'm not sure I get the question.
Would it bother you to see a 1905 locomotive running around in your 1885 setting?
twomule wrote: What part of the country are you modelling Chip?I'm just thinking if your are "out west", 1905 in Gold Hill NV is way behind on technology as 1905 NYC. So if your looking to model where you have wagons, saloons, etc and still be in the 1900's, with the cool thing likes Ron's Climax, and cool locos like Shays and Heislers, would not be a stretch. If my assumptions are incorrect about your modeling location, sry bout dat.
I am modeling a section of the stretch between Sacramento and Virginia City. It is in the Sierra Foothills in the fictional towns of Train City (named by my son) and Rock Ridge, a mining town. Train City is a thriving semi-metropolis where all engines going over Donner Pass have to swap engines.
GraniteRailroader wrote: SpaceMouse wrote:I'm not sure I get the question.Would it bother you to see a 1905 locomotive running around in your 1885 setting?
Three reasons:
1) I'd get flack here (good natured but still...)
2) I'm planning ops sessions and I thought an old time layout would be a gas on the ops circuit. I think a level of consistancy ads to the realism of the ops.
3) Main one. I like the internal consistancy of a well though-out layout.
On the other hand, my son's Harry Potter train will have a staging track all it's own.
What would exist in 1885 that you couldn't protypically model in 1905, or 1910?
Has MDC stopped production on the 4-4-0??
Go with the timeperiod you like. In my 35 years in the hobby someone has always had a 4-4-0 balloon stacker.
Enjoy
Paul
Well, transportation really didn't change that much between 1885 & 1905 (there were only a few 10s of thousands of rather rickety automobiles on the roads in 1905, and trucks were fairly rare [1000 or so?]- horse & wagon were the mainstays as they had been for centuries/millenia before; and as for airplanes...) EXCEPT - the Good Roads movement (started by and for bicyclists) was under full steam in 1905, instead of just getting started (well, in 1880) , so you'll need better paved roads and some old-school saftey bikes upon them in 1905. Also, more electrical/telephone poles & wires, more brick buildings, and you can run bigger & beefier locomotives & rolling stock, but still the change between 1885 & 1905 is a lot less (in my opinion) than the change between 1900 and 1920, especially in more rural areas, and the western US (the Coast excepted, of course).
Besides, if you remember 'Wild West Tech' (and you should, although they kinda ran out of topics toward the end), they covered right up to the start of WWI in some of their shows, so they would certainly consider 1905 to be kosher old west....
chutton01 wrote: Well, transportation really didn't change that much between 1885 & 1905 (there were only a few 10s of thousands of rather rickety automobiles on the roads in 1905, and trucks were fairly rare [1000 or so?]- horse & wagon were the mainstays as they had been for centuries/millenia before; and as for airplanes...)
Well, transportation really didn't change that much between 1885 & 1905 (there were only a few 10s of thousands of rather rickety automobiles on the roads in 1905, and trucks were fairly rare [1000 or so?]- horse & wagon were the mainstays as they had been for centuries/millenia before; and as for airplanes...)
This is how I lean with respect to your question, Chip. How much did exterior appearances really change in structures and practises between the years you place as your bounds? Did the tracks look much different, or were they used differently? Is there any reason you couldn't cover the bases of your tastes over time by building the earlier vision, but getting some of the more modern equipment to run, either as a change now and then, or for when you actually update your operations. In other words, build the old style and run what you can reasonably run now. Paint over available engines in the 4-4-0 and redecal as so many of us have to do. Then, when the time comes that you get your hankering for 1905-15, you can modify some of what collects dust daily on the layout, and introduce to your trackplan (with changes) some of the newer stuff you had purchased a few years back that are first seeing the light of day.
I guess I don't see your quandry quite like someone who has to contend with all the almost monthly developments that happened between 1945 and 1952 on most US roads with introductions of new diesels as if a new model automobile year had just passed, and fixed dates beyond which steamer w-x-y-z nevery ran. If the worst comes to the worst, yank a stack and put a details west one in its place.
I feel for you...I really do, because this dilemma and paucity of motive power is a bear for you, and has been for many long months now.
-Crandell
pcarrell wrote:Hey Chip, I just sent you an Email that may help.
Phillip,
Thanks for the article. I had read it, but it was nice to be reminded. Helped a lot in fact.
Chip,
What era are the new Athearn 4-4-0s? Later than 1880s?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage wrote: Chip, What era are the new Athearn 4-4-0s? Later than 1880s?Tom
If you are talking about the MDC's theya re fine, but when I started looking for them they were getting hard to find. The 2-6-0's in SP were pretty scarce as well. If they make another run, then all is well.
Chip, The area you are modeling did not change that much from the 1880's to 1905. Buildings, wagons, even men's clothes didn't change much. Smaller roads such as you are modeling were likely to be running older equipment with maybe one or two more modern egines or passenger cars. There were several reasons for this:
1. Many of the "diggins" had pretty much played out in the 1890s and early 1900s.
2. The market for silver collasped during this period, leading to mine closure and reduction in production
3. The US went thru some pretty serious economic depressions and panics during these years, many of which had a negative effect on smaller railroads.
The result is that your railroad probably would have suffered decreased revenues during the period, making it hard to replace equipment. The old V&T was a classic example of this, retaining old equipment long after it was obsolete on Class ! roads. Look at some of the pictures of the interior of V&T's roundhouse taken around 1914 and you'll still see funnel stacks on some of the 4-4-0s.
Newer equipment can be justified as a more recent purchase, or in the case of the geared engines, the property of some more prosperous logging outfit. Of course if you interchange with a class 1 road, like SP, their stuff would include uptodate equipment.
So I don't think it's a problem inculding a lot of 1880s stuff in a railroad set in your location. Certainly more realistic than trying to explain how stuff dating from 1905 ended up in 1888.
JBB
SpaceMouse wrote: Here's the thing. All things being equal, I'd like to model 1885, but lately I've had pause. Right now all I have are 2 MDC 2-6-0's w/o sound. Plus it's just plain easier to find stuff for 1905--and I have a LaFever climax that would not have come out in 1885. But my current structures and figures are more 1885--and there's a lot of work in there. If I went to 1905 I could sneak in a Shay and Heisler for laughs and giggles--with a little back dating maybe. What are some of your ideas? What am I not thinking of? The thing is if I change years, I want to do it before I build any more.
Here's the thing. All things being equal, I'd like to model 1885, but lately I've had pause. Right now all I have are 2 MDC 2-6-0's w/o sound.
I don't see your problem (I do model the 1900-1910 time period). Towns that existed in 1885 were still standing in 1905; just updated with added new buildings and 1905 things like early power distribution for that new fangled electricity. People still looked the same and clothes were almost the same. My model does not use any automobiles (only horses and wagons/carriages) as it is a silver mining model; not a main-stream city.
Build your 1885 town and update only as necessary due to the loco's available determining the "actual" layout date. In other words; quit thinking and get to work !
I do understand where you are coming from. In another thread, the question was asked what we would do if we had reasonably unlimited resources for our model railroading. My response was that I'd expand the layout somewhat, but more importantly do the same layout in 3 different eras - 1870s, 1900, and 1920s - rotating eras about every 5 years.
Certainly modeling 1905 is easier than 1885 in HO. And modeling 1925 is even easier. Even 1870 is easier than 1885 because of the Civil War modelers. So how much does 1885 appeal to you as compared to 1905? Are you willing to give up on your chosen era for better commercial model availability? In general, perhaps about 25-50% of a line's locos delivered in 1885 would still be in use in 1905, but the economics of keeping the older stuff running would be rapidly failing. Car size and weight and train length all grew rapidly during that period, which meant older locos could no longer pull efficient size loads. Wood cars built in the 1880s typically had a life span of 15-20 years, and again the economics of larger loads was against rebuilding and repair. So only a small proportion of the 1885 rolling stock would still be around in 1905.
Bottom line: either go with ability to run both eras (and have the extra locos and rolling stock) or you have to choose one or the other.
What I did: I chose 1900 as a compromise to get the various features I wanted. I wanted:
- plausible use of sail (no steam ships) at my dog hole lumber port
- use of knuckle couplers instead of link and pin
- plausible use of small Class A, and maybe even Class B Shays and Climax.
- narrow gauge as a still profitable, separate entity despite car load swapping for interchange
- early enough to avoid bigger steam (no trailing wheels to support larger fireboxes and boilers)
I deliberately avoided the 1890s because they were such a time of financial turmoil for railroads, especially in the West. Trying to figure out what my free-lance road would have gone through during that decade was problemattic.
You have practical reasons for wanting to move your chosen era to 1905. Staying with 1885 will likely take a significant effort in bashing and improving the few available commercial locomotives. But I sense your heart is still in 1885. Which is more important - staying with your heart and delaying layout completion significantly, or becoming operational much sooner? I personally prefer the smaller scope, slower completion route - but that's me, and I certainly wouldn't knock anybody for choosing differently.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Not much difference - only 15 years - Really depended on the line & track.
NEW equipment was added as it came about.
Shays lasted a long time. In 1995, one still still ran above Central City Colorado.
Fred,
You are right. My heart is still in 1885.
To everyone that took the time to comment. Thanks.
Sorry for the delay, couldn't log in.
This guy has done me more than right, more than once. Good people.
http://www.jaystrains.com/HO-HOn3/Locomotives/hosteam.htm
Rock Ridge, Rock Ridge... Splendid!
(Although the film that quote came from opened with a scene building the railroad, they didn't spend the money to include a locomotive.)
With the setting "out west", I concur with the comments suggesting that the collapse in the silver market around 1896 sort of froze some western lines in time. You can come up with all sorts of reasonable explanations for including some older-style equipment still operating in 1905, but if you say it is 1885 then you are bound to that in your detailing.
I hope that your Rock Ridge will include a Sheriff's Office.
Bill
Beach Bill wrote: Rock Ridge, Rock Ridge... Splendid!(Although the film that quote came from opened with a scene building the railroad, they didn't spend the money to include a locomotive.)With the setting "out west", I concur with the comments suggesting that the collapse in the silver market around 1896 sort of froze some western lines in time. You can come up with all sorts of reasonable explanations for including some older-style equipment still operating in 1905, but if you say it is 1885 then you are bound to that in your detailing.I hope that your Rock Ridge will include a Sheriff's Office.Bill
SpaceMouse wrote: Fred,You are right. My heart is still in 1885. To everyone that took the time to comment. Thanks.
I'd start with 1885. Then, as time went by, it would be possible to consider moving up to later years. You could replace buildings, add electricity here and there, and add newer motive power and rolling stock as the mood struck you. To me, this would keep things fresh and interesting on your layout.
If you do get up to 1905, motorized vehicles would have been rare at best, especially considering the area you're modeling. Don't forget: this was still the time when cars were playthings of the wealthy. What might be interesting, though, is to have one of the Jordan Highway Miniatures as a load on a through train, headed for a prosperous buyer in another town.
Bill C.
I think from the vantage point of 2007 the differences between 1885 and 1905 aren't that great. Things didn't change as fast as they would in more recent times. You could just model the "era" of 1885-1905, or use 1905 as a "cut-off" year - anything before that is OK, anything after that is verboten. Since most buildings and your scenery would basically be the same in both periods, you could just rotate between the two, do three months of 1885 then three months of 1905.
BTW if you're not using link-and-pin couplers, you're already doing some historical fudging re 1885.
wjstix wrote: BTW if you're not using link-and-pin couplers, you're already doing some historical fudging re 1885.
I decide on that compromise long ago. If I'm running ops sessions, I'll need the Kadees.
SpaceMouse wrote: wjstix wrote: BTW if you're not using link-and-pin couplers, you're already doing some historical fudging re 1885. I decide on that compromise long ago. If I'm running ops sessions, I'll need the Kadees.
The Janney coupler was invented in 1873 and adopted by the MCBA in 1887. Automatic couplers were the law in 1893. So it's not too much of a fudge for 1885. (from http://www.narhf.org/nar01/NAR01awards_coupler.html).
Have fun with your trains
IRONROOSTER wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: wjstix wrote: BTW if you're not using link-and-pin couplers, you're already doing some historical fudging re 1885. I decide on that compromise long ago. If I'm running ops sessions, I'll need the Kadees. The Janney coupler was invented in 1873 and adopted by the MCBA in 1887. Automatic couplers were the law in 1893. So it's not too much of a fudge for 1885. (from http://www.narhf.org/nar01/NAR01awards_coupler.html).EnjoyPaul
Actual implementation of the 1893 law wasn't complete for all interchange traffic until 1903. The same law mandated what was essentially the Westinghouse K air brake system and more uniform placement of grab irons and steps.
The implementation of air brakes was what permitted train length to grow and drove the need for larger engines. Before air brakes, being able to slow or stop a train was a huge constraint on train length and weight.
The 1893 law that codified coupler and brake development is a big reason why there are so many differences between actual standard practice on most railroads between 1885 and 1905. Although the 1890s economic crashes and depressions slowed or halted development in the West, by 1905 very few railroads (and those were mostly isolated) could afford to use equipment and operating practices they used in 1885. In 1900, 10% of the entire US labor force was working directly for, or in support of the railroad business.