IHC What were they thinking??

[cjcrescent]

Incidentally, that Pacific tooling has been in production since Mehano started making it for AHM in the late 70's. I remember when they came on the market.

It was also used for the Life-Like 2-8-2 and 4-6-2 offered at the same time. The LLs were actually smooth runners but couldn't pull well. This was easily corrected by placing some extra lead in the boiler.

All in all these "older" models, and the new ones as well, make absolutely great starting projects for anyone who wants to learn how to redetail a locomotive. Cary, before it became a part of Bowser, used to offer a "USRA detail set" for steamers than had 12 brass detail parts in it. By removing a few pieces of cast on details, replacing with the Cary parts and adding some wire for piping, a person could turn these generic models into a more prototypical appearing model for less than $20.

[marknewton]

Mostly we can co-exist in the one forum, but occasionally we get the "rivet counters vs. It's my railroad and I'll do what I want" polarization.

Yes, we do occasionally have conflict between the two camps - funny how it's almost invariably the "It's my railroad and I'll do what I want" crowd who cast the first stone.

There should be room in the hobby for all sorts, including those who value quality and accuracy. It would be nice if we could express a opinion that didn't automatically trigger some unthinking response about "having fun"...

Mark.

[marknewton]

I suppose when a low price steam engine runs as smooth as a higher price engine..That's gotta hurt the old ego.

I wouldn't know - I've never encountered a low-price model steam engine that ran anywhere near as well as an higher-price one - tweaked or not.

Then when one takes some old fashion modeling and turns a lemon into lemonade that's gotta hurt as well.

Does it? I reckon buying the lemon in the first place would hurt more. If you're thinking to play that card, don't bother. Almost everything I run is either scratchbuilt, kitbuilt, or heavily modified. My "old fashion modeling" skills are well developed, thanks. They have to be, to model an obscure Japanese railway, in a minority scale, a long way from Japan.

But,we know you high rollers will never acknowledge that

What's to acknowledge? If you reckon you've made a silk purse from a sow's ear, good luck to you.

It doesn't bother me either way, because I'm not competitive about it, which you apparently are, nor do I have that little niggling touch of envy colouring my views...

Mark.

[marknewton]

Kato has gotten ripped for missing details or wrong paint shades.Even Atlas has gotten rip for missing details or wrong paint shades..

I haven't heard of any manufacturer that hasn't been ripped for something or the other.Even OMI got a flogging for a detail or paint mistake.

 

Really? Kato, Atlas and OMI have made fantasy locos in fictitious paint schemes, have they? That was the point being made. Did you miss that, or were you avoiding the issue because you had nothing in response?

[BRAKIE]

Kato has gotten ripped for missing details or wrong paint shades.Even Atlas has gotten rip for missing details or wrong paint shades..

I haven't heard of any manufacturer that hasn't been ripped for something or the other.Even OMI got a flogging for a detail or paint mistake.

 

Really? Kato, Atlas and OMI have made fantasy locos in fictitious paint schemes, have they? That was the point being made. Did you miss that, or were you avoiding the issue because you had nothing in response?

 

Atlas no longer produces fantasy road names on their locomotives and cars..Some of their truck trailers are fantasy though.That's should be the point and not what was done in  the past years.

Now Atlas got ripped over the missing details on the low end Trainman models and like I mention detail and paint errors on their standard lines..How much more do you think Atlas will get ripped for a foobie road name?

 

Mark,You need to realized that low end models can run as good as the higher end models and there lays the trap that causes some modelers to despise the low end models along with their personal modeling styles to include the cheap ego trips some get by bashing the low tier models that is more then likely keeping the hobby alive..

Serious? I haven't been serious about my modeling since having a light heart attack in 98 and especially after my major heart attack in '05, the trifles in life its not worth worrying about..

I still believe in the old school "Model Railroading is Fun..High tier or low tier models in the end does it matter? Not one tiny bit.

 

 

 

 

 

[marknewton]

How is any of this relevant?

[marknewton]

Mark,You need to realized that low end models can run as good as the higher end models...

"Can" being the operative word. My opinion is simply based on seeing and attempting to operate numerous low-end models that didn't run well at all. Perhaps they can run as well as more expensive models, but I've yet to see any that do. Of course, what you regard as good running and what I regard as good running may well be light years apart.

EDIT: The more I think about this, the more I think Brakie's claim is codswallop. A while back I was asked to look at an IHC loco that belonged to a friend of a friend. It'd had a hard life and wouldn't run. The engine had a cheap little three-pole motor with a plastic worm, no gearbox or flywheel, a plastic frame with no bearings worth speaking of, and woeful pickups. Even after a thorough going-over, the thing didn't run especially well, but the owner was thrilled. He reckoned it was much better than it had been before.

Compare that with a loco I recently bought. It has a coreless motor, gearhead and flywheel, compensation, and split frame pickup. It is absolutely silent at normal speeds, has excellent control response at all speeds, can crawl all day without hesitating, and can cope beautifully with less-than-perfect track. Now if Brakie can point out a cheap and cheerful loco that can do all that, I'll buy an armful of them...

I still believe in the old school "Model Railroading is Fun.

No doubt you do, but why do you believe that others don't? Someone disagrees with you, and you promptly accuse them of being anti-fun. Why?

[simon1966]

Mark,

Kato's first run of HO scale SD-40's included a Red Bird Burlington Route CB&Q version that never existed.  It does not materially effect your point, but it is an example of one of the better makers getting it wrong, in this case I suspect on purpose.  For a while this model was attracting insane bids on e-bay which prompted me to get rid of my 2.

[Anonymous]

About 25 years ago I received a circle train set for christmas. Later I found out it cost about $25 or so but that did not phase my interest in model trains. Fast forward 25 years to the present day (literally the past 30 minutes) and now I begin to question why should I begin to design and build my 1st layout.

I see the ads in various magazines saying "authentic replicas" and highly detailed and I think the pic looks great (doesn't matter whether steam or deisel) and the price is average. Then I see this thread and read every post and start to wonder what the big deal is.

If the product offends you so bad then don't buy it! It is that simple.

If the manufacturer has lowered their standards to stay in business (not a new concept) and the new business as usual is not good enough for you, buy from someone else.

On the other hand, if some offers a product line that catches your eye and you have the cash buy the darn thing and be happy.

 

I may step on some toes here which really does not bother me but it may appear to someone new that maybe to become a real model railroader you must first build the ego, then the layout.  

This hobby, like many others, is all a matter of what the individual wants. If I shop around for a 1940 Ford coupe for sale I can find a few basic versions-

1-someone will have a fully functional restored coupe that has factory matched ID#s,

2-there will be a coupe with the hood removed and big chrome all over the engine,

3-Joe Schmoe down the road will have a 1940 coupe that was restored using aftermarket body panels made in 1994, a seat that was reupholstored by some wet behind the ear 20-something, and a 1979 Audiovox AM/FM casstette player,

4-Tom, Dick and Harry Custom Cars wll be happy to build what I want.

So if, according to the standards I see displayed here, I buy any one of these I will be scum to the fans of the other styles. THAT IS THE EXACT INTERPRATION OF THE POSTS! "This loco ain't true to life" so if I buy it I'm in the out crowd OR if I buy the loco because it looks real sweet pulling a few other cars I have, I'm also in the out crowd.

And you guys wonder why modeling railroads is not as famous, traditional, or popular as it once was?

Ken

 

I understood you perfectly. There is room for tradition in the Hobby.

I handle cars from time to time and having a old style air breathing V8 (Or whatever) with it's associated fumes and certain personality depending on the wether is something totally absent from today's new cars.

But I would not pay alot of money for a older car to use as a daily driver, I would want something with a steel timing chain, fuel injection and rather basic controls without so much "Electronic luxuries".

If that older car is demonstrated to be in factory new condition or nearly so, the attractive pricing goes up and makes it more likely that I would want such a vehicle.

Im sorry for the brief journey on the passing track away from this topic.

[dinwitty]

IHC is kinda going the Mantua way with shades of Rivarossi, with semi-freelancing. Hey, Lionel made a shell that looks like an electric E33 (virginian EL3) but it would fit on a geep 7 chassis, totally non-prototyipic, but inspired by. Their prices are going to be lower, but this makes it more available to the buying public. IHC will likely find their hobby niche sales, but we know better here. Maybe a hobby company like this will help introduce people to the hobby, with some decent stuff, it just isn't quite the exact proto we expect. I was impressed with their 0-8-0 even lettered to BRofC it was a near match to their engine. What stopped me from buying that engine was the deep flanges.

Givem time maybe they will answer some serious hobby needs.

 

 

[cjcrescent]

IHC is kinda going the Mantua way with shades of Rivarossi, with semi-freelancing. Hey, Lionel made a shell that looks like an electric E33 (virginian EL3) but it would fit on a geep 7 chassis, totally non-prototyipic, but inspired by. .

This model was not made by Lionel. It was made by Athearn, sold under the Lionel name. During the time that this and other models/train sets were sold by Lionel, they were made by either Rivarossi or Athearn, depending on the model. Until recently, it was the only way to get a RTR Athearn car.

Lionel hasn't manufactured any HO model, except the GP-7/9 during the early 1970's, (I'm sure the Challenger and the Turbine were done overseas, eliminating them). This engine didn't last long, as Lionel went bankrupt again and "sold" the rights of manufacturing them to Bachman, who had designed and built the geep body anyway. Bachman eliminated the very good 8 wheel drive, heavyweight metal chassis and replaced it with the 4 wheel drive pancake motored, plastic chassis. 

[marknewton]

Mark,

Kato's first run of HO scale SD-40's included a Red Bird Burlington Route CB&Q version that never existed.  It does not materially effect your point, but it is an example of one of the better makers getting it wrong, in this case I suspect on purpose.  For a while this model was attracting insane bids on e-bay which prompted me to get rid of my 2.

That's interesting to know, Simon. I'd have never thought Kato would do such a thing. If I ever see one in a hobby shop I'll grab it!

But as you say, it doesn't affect the point. SD-40s do exist - Kato didn't invent a loco out of thin air, in the way that IHC and others have done. I'm utterly mystified as to why they do that...

All the best,

Mark.

[msowsun]

IHC doesn't invent locos out of thin air.  IHC only imports locos made by Mehano in Slovenia.

Almost all the Mehano locos are old Pemco models that are based on specific prototypes.  Example: the 4-8-2 is a C&O prototype. Mehano then decided to change the wheel arrangement to make a new loco.

The resulting 4-6-4 and 2-10-2 may not be an exact model of any prototype, but they fill a need. That is good marketing if you ask me. If you don't like the end result, you don't have to buy them.  

Mike Sowsun

Oakville, Ontario

[CNJ831]

The resulting 4-6-4 and 2-10-2 may not be an exact model of any prototype, but they fill a need. That is good marketing if you ask me. If you don't like the end result, you don't have to buy them.  

Mike Sowsun

You are quite correct, Mike. Further more, I'd have to say that except for a small minority of folks, 90% of hobbyists today or in the past, don't know whether a given model is accurate or not...or even vaguely prototypical, for that matter. If anyone here thinks the average hobbyist is a locomotive authority today, you are sadly mistaken.

What we do see are most hobbyists going by what they are being told is correct or incorrect by a very small minority (even amongst members of this website) of other hobbyists on websites such as this. Condeming a company for producing a product which might otherwise appeal to a wide audience in the hobby is a very poor idea, especially considering the questionable stability and prices charged by of some of the more "prototypically accurate" manufacturers. If you think the hobby can be sustains with only the high-end, high accuracy, manufacturers in play, especially in this era of the hobby's decline, you are in for a rude awakening!

CNJ831

 

[marknewton]

IHC doesn't invent locos out of thin air. IHC only imports locos made by Mehano in Slovenia.

I doubt that Mehano conjured up the 2-10-2 and 4-6-4 off their own bat - the demand for such things in Europe would be pretty limited.

The resulting 4-6-4 and 2-10-2 may not be an exact model of any prototype, but they fill a need. That is good marketing if you ask me. If you don't like the end result, you don't have to buy them

No, I don't have to. But that doesn't stop me from commenting on them, does it?

Cheers,

Mark.

[orsonroy]

I suppose when a low price steam engine runs as smooth as a higher price engine..That's gotta hurt the old ego.

I wouldn't know - I've never encountered a low-price model steam engine that ran anywhere near as well as an higher-price one - tweaked or not.

Mark, compare new production IHC engines with 1970s brass. No comparison: the IHCs run MUCH better.

True, this is sort of an extreme situation, but it's still an example of "high end" not running nearly as well as "budget". To bring things down to what's currently available, I'll pit anything in Bachmann's Spectrum line against everything in P2K's steam line (except for their USRA 0-6-0). While the P2K stuff looks better and is much closer to a correct representation of the prototype, the Bachmann stuff runs almost as well and will outpull anything made by P2K. Decent performance and superior lugging ability will trump beauty and anemic performance any day in my book!

Then when one takes some old fashion modeling and turns a lemon into lemonade that's gotta hurt as well.

Does it? I reckon buying the lemon in the first place would hurt more. If you're thinking to play that card, don't bother. Almost everything I run is either scratchbuilt, kitbuilt, or heavily modified. My "old fashion modeling" skills are well developed, thanks. They have to be, to model an obscure Japanese railway, in a minority scale, a long way from Japan.

I'm in sort of the same boat as you: I'm modeling a "minor" class one in a very specific way, and NO ONE makes the engines I need. I'm working on two 1980s Key Brass "Nickel Plate Road" Mikados right now, and they're so wrong it hurts. Every one of the Mikes I'm building looks like this before it hits the paint booth:

Now, what to use as a starting point for these engines? Brass? Well, if you're a glutton for punishment, and like hours of soldering (and DEsoldering). Trix's "excellent" USRA light Mike? Well, the sound chip sucks, so it has to be pulled and replaced, bringing the price above $400 to start. Both are examples of "high end" engines not being worth the trouble. I default to Athearn and BLI engines for my needs, since they're a good compromice between price and performance. Would I use an IHC engine as the starting point for a NKP Mike? Well, I have, before Athearn came out with theirs. At the time the IHC USRA light Pacific was the best on the market, save for the pricey and hard to find Overland Powerhouse engines.

The IHC Pacific is THE best USRA light Pacific on the market today. Its only competition is the Bowser model, which isn't even a "real" USRA engine (none of their "USRA" engines are). The same can be said about any of the IHC engines, if you're looking for something to convert to fill a SPECIFIC need. Their SP 2-6-0 is a pretty good representation of the prototype, their "modern" 4-4-0 is the only such engine on the market, as is their Moher Hubbard 2-6-0. The 4-8-2 is the best C&O (or non-USRA heavy) Mountain on the market. Even their "heavy" 4-6-4 fills a niche for proto modelers, IF you need a Milwaukee or CB&Q enigne and don't want to pay upwards of $1000 for a brass example.

It all boils down to money, talent and sincerity. If you've got the scratch, by all means buy the "best" on the market (brass). If you just want something inexpensive that runs well enough, go with the "low end" stuff (IHC and Bachmann Spectrum). If you have the talent to convert, why bother with the highest end stuff when you just have to strip off everything and start over anyway? Isn't the base boiler contour and chassis reliability good enough?

 

[marknewton]

You are quite correct, Mike. Further more, I'd have to say that except for a small minority of folks, 90% of hobbyists today or in the past, don't know whether a given model is accurate or not...or even vaguely prototypical, for that matter. If anyone here thinks the average hobbyist is a locomotive authority today, you are sadly mistaken.

A good point, and one that I hadn't considered. I will admit to the mistake of assuming others have a similar level of knowledge and interest to mine. That's why I've been surprised that people would happily settle for what - to me - are inferior models. But I concede that if most modellers don't know the difference, then they'll have less exacting standards than those who are more knowledgable.

What we do see are most hobbyists going by what they are being told is correct or incorrect by a very small minority (even amongst members of this website) of other hobbyists on websites such as this.

I wouldn't rely solely on this forum for accurate information about steam locos, that's much is certain. There are only a few posters here who know what's what when it comes to steam. The rest are best taken with a grain of salt.

If you think the hobby can be sustains with only the high-end, high accuracy, manufacturers in play, especially in this era of the hobby's decline, you are in for a rude awakening!

That's not an opinion I've expressed, is it?

(I like the way you managed to slip in a reference to your unswerving conviction that the hobby is dying...)