In November of 2007 I started back into model railroading with a yahoo search. That search brought up all kinds of sites, including this one. About a month later, after a lot of research, I bought my first piece of rolling stock, an American Model Builders IC side door caboose. The rest as they say is history....
I found that while there have been a lot of changes since I packed up my last model railroad 30 years ago, a lot has remained the same, and I'm a little disappointed in some of the things that have remained the same.
I have come to the conclusion that other forms of modeling, for example, military modeling have really advanced in how they are supported by the manufacturers, model railroading hasn't made the same advancements. The military scale modeler can literally buy a kit for just about every version of the M4 Sherman tank that was ever produced, to include some that were produced in very small quantities. Need a bf109 in your collection, no problem, do you want one as fought in North Africa, the Battle of Britain or the Eastern Front, or how about a nightfighter version the the radar antennas?
Unfortunately us model railroaders aren't that fortunate. If I want an IC steam locomotive, I'm pretty well limited to the Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0, it's very close to an IC 900 series 2-8-0, but Bachmann doesn't even offer it lettered for the IC. If I want a different type of IC steam locomotive, it's brass or hours of kitbashing and scratchbuildiing. Not that I mind it all that much, but sometimes it's pretty frustrating.
I suppose there are more military modelers then there are model railroaders and companies like Tamiya can make money retooling for all those different versions of M4 Shermans and bf109s. My question is, why couldn't the model railroad manufacturers make money doing the same thing?
Why not build a basic locomotive, say a 2-8-2, sell it either with 57 or 63 inch drivers, Harriman or USRA boiler and couple different cab variations. How about a few sprues of detail parts and instructions on how to build a couple variants of the locomotive. Would it be impossible to make money with that model? Branchline and Red Caboose do similar things with their undecorated freight car kits and many of the resin kits come with parts to make a couple different variants.
I know that the current trend runs toward ready to run cars and locomotives. More model railroaders are concerned with how their locomotive sounds then if it's actually the correct locomotive. But I think there must be some people like me who'd like to see something like the kits I described.
Jeff
Hi Jeff, I beat you back by a couple of years. Enjoying this round more than any other. I had the opposite reaction. I was amazed at all the new stuff. I love my DCC radio throttle. That is how I always thought running a train ought to be. When I last bought an engine, a John English Yard Bird was a well detailed model. Now they are better than that. I still drool over all that brass that has been built in the last 40 years. I can't afford much, but I do have three. I love scenery, and the blue foam approach to mountains is more fun than I ever had with plaster.
So everything you said was true, but some of what you did not say is what is making my fourth trip to HO land the most fun ever. Hope to hear more from you and to see some pics as things develop.
Hi Art,
Please don't misunderstand. I'm enjoying myself immensly. And there are a lot of new things in the way of buildings, scenery, DDC/Sound that I only dreamed about 30 years ago.
I'm just curious as to why we still get generic locomotives from the major manufacturers. And I did neglect to mention the Proto 2-10-2 with the correct Baker valve gear for the IC.
Welcome Back.
Couple of thoughts.
While the military model fraternity may be all model builders, many of the model railroaders are not.
There's a lot of building that goes into getting a layout up and running. So for many of us who are focused on running trains, RTR locomotives and cars help us get there a little faster. I personally haven't built a car or engine kit for a few years even though I have several of each because I am focused on getting the layout running. I actually am stockpiling kits for retirement because they may be gone by then - in fact the 4 MDC HOn3 locomotive kits I have are no longer being made as kits.
We're too scattered across time and railroads for specific kits to appeal to enough modelers who build kit locomotives (except PRR which is well covered by Bowser) and there are too many differences in steam locomotives for a manufacturer to include enough details in a general kit to get enough sales. The trend is actually away from locomotive kits. I think Bowser may be the only one left in HO. There are a couple of small suppliers in S and O.
Because we're so scattered only the most popular roads such as PRR and Sante Fe are well represented by models.
Scratch building and brass are the answer for many specific locomotives.
Enjoy
Paul
JWhiteWhy not build a basic locomotive, say a 2-8-2, sell it either with 57 or 63 inch drivers, Harriman or USRA boiler and couple different cab variations. How about a few sprues of detail parts and instructions on how to build a couple variants of the locomotive. Would it be impossible to make money with that model? Branchline and Red Caboose do similar things with their undecorated freight car kits and many of the resin kits come with parts to make a couple different variants.
I like what you are suggesting. I'd like to be able to get different cabs and different boilers, especially, and domes that could be moved around.
JWhiteIf I want an IC steam locomotive, I'm pretty well limited to the Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0, it's very close to an IC 900 series 2-8-0, but Bachmann doesn't even offer it lettered for the IC. If I want a different type of IC steam locomotive, it's brass or hours of kitbashing and scratchbuildiing. Not that I mind it all that much, but sometimes it's pretty frustrating
Do you know Orsonroy (Ray Breyer)? He may have some advice on modeling IC steam locomotives. Check out his website and photos.
Gary
Gary,
I'm glad my ideas aren't too out of line. Ray and I have corresponded on building IC steam and he's been most helpful.
My point is that I watched military modeling evolve. When I was a kid and young man, if you wanted a different version of an M4 Sherman, a Panzer MKIV or a fighter plane, you kitbashed and scratchbuilt. Today there is still some of that going on, but there is a good chance you can just buy the version you want, or you can buy a kit that allowed you to build one of several versions.
It just doesn't seem to me that model railroading (at least in that area) has evolved all that much. I guess prototype modeling isn't a big enough part of the hobby that the manufacturers could support it.
I know that steam locomotives were more one of a kind then production line models, and that the same locomotive might look different at different times in it's service life, but what would producing a basic boiler, frame and drivers with a couple cabs and a couple sprues of user applied detail parts cost compared to the RTR engines we get now?
The irony is, when I packed away my last railroad in the 70s I was modeling present day and most of the equipment available was for the transition era. Now that I'm modeling the transition era, there is all kinds of present day equipment available. Just my luck, always out of phase with what's popular ;)
Jeff,The manufacturers have already gone a long way towards railroad specific detail parts included on factory painted models. Just look at Athearn and their RS-3: with or without steam gen (of two different kinds), with sealed beam headlights or reflector, air cooled or water cooled turbo stack, several different kinds of horns, etc.
But what you're asking for is unrealistic. Steam engines, with few exceptions, are all unique. Even locos in the same class weren't 100% identical. And it's not just little things that are different such as cabs, whistles, pilots, etc. The driver size can vary, the boiler length and diameter, 3 or 4 different kinds of valve gear, driver spacing, and so on. These are major parts that would require all new tooling for each variant. For example, just something simple like changing the driver size from 57 to 63 inches would require new driver spacing and changing the frame height (and coupler height). This would require a whole new frame.
If you want to do your own, buy a ton of Cal-Scale parts and have at it. BTW, that's one advantage we model railroaders have over the military modelers. We have several companies that make large catalogs of detail parts for us to customize our models. With the military stuff...not so much. Sure, there's quite a bit of military detailing parts, but model railroading parts are much more plentiful.
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
No misunderstanding. I am in the process, after 58 years, of super detailing the English 0-4-0, With the help of the computer I downloaded about 50 pics of the PRR's prototypes. I am having a great time trying to decide which engine I am working with for each part. I think I will end up with still one more variation of that great old engine. Though my main interest is in scenery, which I like to get right, I may well try another super detailing project.
Interesting points. I won't argue that for the IC fan this is not the golden age that some others have proclaimed it for model railroading. Isn't one key issue that any given Illinois Central steam locomotive, compared in numbers or popularity to all the other steam locomotives used in the USA, is hardly in the same position as the Sherman tank was vis a vis all the other American made tanks during WWII? A better comparison is the Pennsy K4 and there are all sorts of outfits that offer K4s, with variations, at least in HO. (And even for Pennsy fans there are some very interesting PRR locomotives that have not been offered in anything other than brass, if that.)
It isn't that long ago that manufacturers offered an EMD F3 or F7 and it was just barely accurate for even one of the many variants those engines went through. Now we see F2, F5, the many "phases," with prototype specific parts and details. I think we are closer to the military modeler's situation than you think, but if Illinois Central steam is to be the standard of comparison, then for various reasons (including running through so much of the country where model railroading has not been greatly popular) I think that will be a specialized taste. You can substitute any number of railroads, including large ones, for "Illinois Central" and the same shortage will prevail.
Dave Nelson
I'd say that these ways we are actually WAY better off than we used to be - especially when it comes to the rolling stock. I've actually been going through my rather extensive collection of MR, dating back to the 50's - and wow, some of the compromises that used to be made make the Missouri Compromise look like child's paly. Hardly anyone seemed to car of the car even had the right number, let alone if the railroad name printed on the car actually owned any cars that looked vaguely like it. Today we have some very well detailed and specilized cars even in plain odl plastic - and if you REALLY want specific items we have companies like F&C, Sunshine, and Westerfield.
In general, I think we're better off in locos as well, although I doubt we will EVER have enough specifics to suit every modeler of every railroad. But we now get plastic locos that are better detailed than most brass was 30 years ago, AND they are relatively less expensive. Love them or hate them, you have to hand it to Broadway Limited for producing affordable plastic models of various steam locos previously only available in brass.
Add to all that the wonder that is DCC and I think we've got it pretty good these days. You couldn't get me to set up a DC-based 4-5 cab progressive cab control system for all the tea in China - and I defy anyone who syas DCC is too complicated to look at the wiring diagrams for such a system and tell me that's easier.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
According to a lot of letters on this forum, all you need is plenty of beer, a cat to run all over your layout and money enough to buy 5 or 6 brass engines anytime you want, welcome back ! ! And remember, that boxcar you bought back in 1959 for $4.00 just how much did you make per month???? so things aren't really that much more expensive. have fun ! !
tatansAccording to a lot of letters on this forum, all you need is plenty of beer, a cat to run all over your layout and money enough to buy 5 or 6 brass engines anytime you want, welcome back ! ! And remember, that boxcar you bought back in 1959 for $4.00 just how much did you make per month???? so things aren't really that much more expensive. have fun ! !
Nobody bought a boxcar in 1959. They were "real" railroad modelers back then. They made them out of shirt cardboard and tin cans. They hand painted the lettering with a quill pen by oil lamp.
My sentiments exactly, I was going to relate the same message, but thought I may be stoned to death, real model railroaders MAKE all their "stuff" don't they??? now back to my quill pen.
Buncha wise guys lol. The February 1959 Model Railroader shows a Varney boxcar kit for $1.69. America's Hobby Center was offering wood body embossed side boxcars for 98 cents (nylon trucks). Sure enough, in the November 1959 issue, John Chapp showed how to scratch build a grain box car from wood, strathmore, aluminum tubing, brass strip ..... But let's go back to the January1959 issue (the 25th anniversary issue). Fleischmann offers a NYC reefer for $3.95 but the highlight of the ad is "model" Blaze Starr (a famous and gorgeous stripper) almost falling out of her dress. So don't tell ME things weren't better back then.
They stepped up - in Jan 1958 they used Carrie Abbott.
Then of course there's all those Tru-Scale ads...
JWhite <snip> I have come to the conclusion that other forms of modeling, for example, military modeling have really advanced in how they are supported by the manufacturers, model railroading hasn't made the same advancements. The military scale modeler can literally buy a kit for just about every version of the M4 Sherman tank that was ever produced, to include some that were produced in very small quantities. Need a bf109 in your collection, no problem, do you want one as fought in North Africa, the Battle of Britain or the Eastern Front, or how about a nightfighter version the the radar antennas? Unfortunately us model railroaders aren't that fortunate. If I want an IC steam locomotive, I'm pretty well limited to the Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0, it's very close to an IC 900 series 2-8-0, but Bachmann doesn't even offer it lettered for the IC. If I want a different type of IC steam locomotive, it's brass or hours of kitbashing and scratchbuildiing. Not that I mind it all that much, but sometimes it's pretty frustrating. I suppose there are more military modelers then there are model railroaders and companies like Tamiya can make money retooling for all those different versions of M4 Shermans and bf109s. My question is, why couldn't the model railroad manufacturers make money doing the same thing? Why not build a basic locomotive, say a 2-8-2, sell it either with 57 or 63 inch drivers, Harriman or USRA boiler and couple different cab variations. How about a few sprues of detail parts and instructions on how to build a couple variants of the locomotive. Would it be impossible to make money with that model? Branchline and Red Caboose do similar things with their undecorated freight car kits and many of the resin kits come with parts to make a couple different variants. I know that the current trend runs toward ready to run cars and locomotives. More model railroaders are concerned with how their locomotive sounds then if it's actually the correct locomotive. But I think there must be some people like me who'd like to see something like the kits I described. Jeff
<snip>
As a military modeller as well as a model railroader myself, I agree with you completely.
In armour and aircraft modelling, you buy a "naked" kit, build and finish it yourself.
Kits are always available. The only time they go out of production is once the technology that was used to produce them is so out-dated that there is a new and improved version avaialble. I want to build the Tamiya Sturmtiger at some point. I have other kits to build first but I'm not worried because I know the Sturmtiger will still be avaialble when I am ready.
Compare this to model railroading where some product is no longer available before it even hits the store shelves!
At DMW, we are waiting on locos we preordered over a year ago that have still not been produced and may well not be.
I ascribe all of this to the Ready-to-Run phenonomen. It is economically inefficient to produce great batches of painted, finished models with specific road numbers which is why so many locos and rolling stock come and go so quickly. And no manufacturer wants to produce too many of a given kit for fear of being stuck with a load of Buffalo, Moscow and Brisbane loco #666. If it was a "naked" kit, the manufacturer would have one SKU and the modeller could make it whatever he wanted.
Now compare this to model railroading structures such as those by Walthers Cornerstone or Atlas. You know those kits will be available again soon even if they went temporarily out of stock. Structure and accessory kits have behaved more like armour and aircraft models. Today I can still buy the same Atlas station I had when I was a kid. Of course, now the built n Ready structures thing is happening.
Every now and again, there is a lot of chatter about the death of model railroading.
If anything makes that sad event happen, I believe it will be the economic ineffciencies of Ready to Run.
Craig
DMW
Paul3 <snip> But what you're asking for is unrealistic. Steam engines, with few exceptions, are all unique. Even locos in the same class weren't 100% identical. And it's not just little things that are different such as cabs, whistles, pilots, etc. The driver size can vary, the boiler length and diameter, 3 or 4 different kinds of valve gear, driver spacing, and so on. These are major parts that would require all new tooling for each variant. For example, just something simple like changing the driver size from 57 to 63 inches would require new driver spacing and changing the frame height (and coupler height). This would require a whole new frame. *******************
*******************
Actually, Paul, the same is true of aircraft and armour. Ongoing production line changes, field modifications and unit-specific adaptations make the uncommon common.
Just look how many different roadwheel coonfigurations there were on the Jagdpanzer IV and that vehicle was produced for less than two years! (Yeah, I know -- wrong forum )
There is the world of difference between model railroading and static modelling. There is also great deal of difference in the two markets as well.
First of all, we model railroaders aren't just building a locomotive or a box car or what not We also have to build a layout on which to run our trains. That requires that we spend money on the layout materials for benchwork, terrain, landscape, tracks, structure, vehicles, people animals, buildings and lot's more. Once we've got a layout we can then spend some time with detailing our trains and other items. In effect we have got to cover alot of ground.
Static modellers don't have to worry about all of this so they can spend their money on a basic kit and buy lots of additional add ons like photoetch, cast parts and bits, decals, special paints and what not to get the exact vehicle, plane or ship they want. These things don't move and thus they do not need a layout to show them. Any shelf will do.
Second of all, locomotives have motors, gears and metal frames and electronics. They don't change that much so the same inards can become any one of several locomotives. Styatic models don't usually have these things and they don't really need them or they become something else and fall into a different category of modelling.
Static models in plastic come from something known as a mold and those molds cost gundreds of thousands of dollars. The cost of those molds need to be recouped and given the fact that most modle runs are for 5,000 kits, it's going take an awful lot of kits being sold to recoup even a small part of the cost of the molds. So it behoves the model manufacturers to make as many possible variations of a given model as they possibly can and hence you see the plethora of versions of the Sherman Tank, Messeschmidts and what not. The mold itself isn't chnaged but special minimolds for a particular version is made and it really doesn't cost anywhere as much as the main mold.
While most plastic locomotive shells are cast the same way as that for a static model, that isn't the most expensive part of a locomotive. It's the electronics, drives and other moving parts that are, So what do you expect offering different versions or even detail parts for a specific variation of 4-8-4 would cost to produce? And once you've figured that how much profit do you think there is in that? Not much. So is it really worth somebody make detail kits for specific locomotives? I don't think so.
Irv
I'm amazed at the fact that companies are still selling train cars that have horn hook couplers, plastic axles, trucks, and wheels. I realize that this is getting better and there aren't as many of those rolling stock cars that I described on the market, but I know there are some.
Modeling the N&W freelanced at the height of their steam era in HO.
Daniel G.
Paul3 With the military stuff...not so much. Sure, there's quite a bit of military detailing parts, but model railroading parts are much more plentiful. Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
With the military stuff...not so much. Sure, there's quite a bit of military detailing parts, but model railroading parts are much more plentiful.
Whoa...Simply not true. The sheer volume of aftermarket parts available for military modeling is mind boggling, to say the least. For (almost) every plastic kit produced there are at least 3-4 photoetch brass sets available, not to mention replacement workable tracks, resin conversions, replacement turrets, precision machined barrels, roadwheels, etc...it's crazy. Then there are the history fanatics, you want to see nit-picky, check out some of the more serious military modeling forums...these guys are nuts.