I think you are looking at this all wrong. BLI is doing your (and my) wallet a huge favor by making engines that are too large for our layouts. :-)
At the same time, htere are apparently plenty of mr's who will glady pay the big $$ for big steam. This keeps the BLIs and others in business so that one day they may someday make a couple of smaller locomotives.
Reality point #1: Large steam is more profitable to produce than small steam. Model railroaders, for whatever reason, are content to pay based on the number of drivers and size of the engine. Never mind that the cost differential between producing a 4-4-0 and a Big Boy is on the order of 10% when all is said and done. Are you willing to pay 90% of the going price of a Big Boy for your little 4-4-0? Nor will most mr's.
Reality point #2: Model railroaders buy big engines way out of proportion to their needs. Most of us just plain like articulateds better than small engines. So big engines are more profitable and tend to sell better.
Reality point #3: There are fewer actual manufacturers than there are companies importing the locomotives. BLI and MTH were/are using the same manufacturer, and in fact got tangled up in lawsuit(s) over the deals - lawsuit(s) that were recently settled. Lionel and MTH had similar problems a few years ago with a Korean manufacturer. Bachmann's manufacturer also produces locomotives and cars for Blackstone - a Soundtraxx division. It's no coincidence that Bachmann started featuring OEM'd Tsunami decoders in their Spectrum steamers at the same time Blackstone production was beginning. Under these conditions, occasionally making almost (or exactly) the same locomotive for 2 different importers should hardly be surprising. The manufacturer is going to charge extra for locking in exclusive production rights from the tooling, engineering, and design work.
Final point - you get to be a better model builder by seeing how many different ways you can bash a Roundhouse 2-6-0. Which in turn justifies more tools to be used in conjunction with your new skills. The failure to produce a new 2-6-0 or 2-6-2 is the perfect reason to buy that lathe and milling machine you have always dreamed of. :-)
yours in more tools
Fred W
I agree with both. We do need some smaller steamers and the makers will not do them. Its a shame they already have 90% of the parts and tooling needed.
Take BLI for instance. They could take the boiler from the K4 and a 2-8-0 chassis with the short tender from the I1s and some detail changes and they will have an H8, H9 or H10 depending on details and numbers. How many of them would I buy? At least 8.
Life Like started something with the USRA locos but seem to have given up with any more. How about a USRA 2-6-0 or 2-8-0. The real builders made thousands.
Now that Bowser has quit building kits there are few resources for us just getting into the real building phase.
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
Don:
Not that I'm the least interested in a 4-12-2, but that BLI announcement has me curious. I wonder what THEIR minimum radius is, and if it's smaller than 42" are they going to do something similar to that Gawd-awful articulation that absolutely ruins the MTH loco, at least IMO?
Okay, I've got a somewhat larger than normal home layout with nice generous curves, but I don't mind admitting that I've just about GOT all the big steam I need.
I'm with you--surprise, surprise--I'd like to see some more 4-6-0 and 2-8-0 and possibly 2-6-2 locos come out (I'm always amazed at how MANY railroads had 2-6-2's). I'd like to have a nice fleet of little 2-8-0 workhorses (which for years were pretty much the backbone of the railroad I model) and a couple of 4-6-0's. Some years ago, Roundhouse answered the need rather nicely (plus a lot of Cal-Scale detail parts) and I'd like to see them re-issue some new and improved ones.
But TWO Mfgrs now jockeying for hobby dollars on a locomotive that was only owned by one railroad and even then run only on certain divisions?
Hey, what am I saying. I can't go into a LHS any more without tripping over a Big Boy. And how common were THOSE babies on any railroad besides Union Pacific?
Oh well--
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
There's no such thing as a USRA 2-6-0 or 2-8-0. The USRA designs were for the following:
0-6-0, 0-8-0, 2-8-2 (light and heavy), 2-10-2 (light and heavy), 2-6-6-2, 2-8-8-2, 4-6-2 (light and heavy), 4-8-2 (light and heavy).
Every single one of the USRA engines has been done by somebody or another.
The L-1 2-8-2 used the same boiler as the K-4. The H-8, 9 and 10 used the same boiler as the E-6 (as did the G-5 4-6-0).
As for smaller steamers, Bachmann makes the Spectrum 2-8-0, 2-10-0, 4-4-0, 4-6-0.
However, it would be nice if someone would make a Harriman Mike or Pacific (light or heavy), a Santa Fe 1050 class 2-6-2 or 1226 class 4-6-2 (or maybe that old PFM standby - the 1950 class 2-8-0).
There's probably also an untapped market for more layout friendly "large" engines like the NC&StL J-3 4-8-4 (Yellojacket or Stripe), a Rutland L-1 4-8-2 or the FEC 4-8-2's in the 400 series that went to several railroads in the 30's. The Cotton Belt L-1/SP GS-7/8 is a good modest sized 4-8-4.
Andre
I forgot to mention Reality Check #4: BLI puts QSI/Blueline sound in all their locomotives. It's a whole lot harder to do a good job with sound in a 2-6-0 and get plenty of weight for traction and fit a decent motor, flywheel, and gearbox and conceal the motor inside the boiler or in front of the backhead detail and arrange the engine-tender wiring so it doesn't cause derailments or loss of traction. It can be done, but takes more upfront engineering and design work, and more assembly labor skill. BLI's smallest locomotive to date was a Mikado. The rest has been medium-large to large engines, and I don't think they are likely to change soon for the reasons given.
First, ditto to everything Andre said.
Second, I have a theory that says somewhere, in attics, basements, warehouse shelves, retail stores and mini storage units of train show dealers, there are already enough HO scale Big Boys for EVERY active modeler with a working length of track to have copies of ALL 25 of those things that ever existed - yet somebody makes more every day?
We need more small and medium steam. Myself and others have repeatedly listed dozens of great choices, any of which we would purchase by the 6 pack if manufactured. Yet we get more rare monsters - go figure?
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALWe need more small and medium steam. Myself and others have repeatedly listed dozens of great choices, amny of which we would purchase by the 6 pack if manufactured. Yet we get more rare monsters - go figure?
I think this is more of the issue of people -- marketing -- distorting the market by pumping demand for something that has more profitability. MAYBE. Then again, our romantic/modernist tendency for the unique, the original, the exotic---over the merely plebian, mundane things. I keep hunting for the SW's and the RS's and RSD's than the SD70mac's and the like---yet BIG impresses more---
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
I will once again remind any manufacturers who are listening that I do not own any of the following:
UP Big Boy
UP Challenger
SP Cab Forward
UP FEF
PRR T1
PRR K4
N&W Class J
Triplex
anything-10-anything
SP GS4
etc, etc.
So if you want to keep me off your customer list, keep making more of these.
Edit - And while I do not own any of the above models, from any manufacturer, I own over 100 HO locomotives - and will buy more when you make the right stuff.
A 4-12-2? Yawn. Wake me for useful steam, like anything Harriman, or a non-USRA Mikado of ANY kind.
In the mean time, let's all keep supporting Bachmann. THEY at least seem to "get it" when it comes to small steam. Maybe one day someone else will too (hah!).
Ray Breyer
Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943
orsonroy In the mean time, let's all keep supporting Bachmann. THEY at least seem to "get it" when it comes to small steam. Maybe one day someone else will too (hah!).
I will second this comment as well. Bachmann is the backbone of my steam fleet based on their combined quality, price and selection.
I will echo the call for smaller steam, but I do find it interesting that BLI anounces a UP 4-12-2 to compete with MTH's and all of it's short comings. I almost wonder if it's some kind of retaliation for MTH's lawsuit against them a couple years ago.
John.
I'm confused. Everybody wants to be more "prototypical" while engaged in this hobby, so why not do what the prototypes did. If that monster just don't cut it, then cut it and make a couple smaller ones
onequiknova I will echo the call for smaller steam, but I do find it interesting that BLI anounces a UP 4-12-2 to compete with MTH's and all of it's short comings. I almost wonder if it's some kind of retaliation for MTH's lawsuit against them a couple years ago. John.
This would not surprise me. What with people taking certain phrases and switching them into some other dang meaning this would be typical. I'd think too that if done rightly it possibly could be fine work--
ATLANTIC CENTRALI will once again remind any manufacturers who are listening that I do not own any of the following: UP Big Boy UP Challenger SP Cab Forward UP FEF PRR T1 PRR K4 N&W Class J Triplex anything-10-anything SP GS4 etc, etc. So if you want to keep me off your customer list, keep making more of these. Sheldon
Add my name to Sheldon's list. The biggest locomotive I will consider buying is a saturated steam 2-8-0. And I do buy. I just bought a mint HOn3 FED 2-6-0, to which will be added a remotor kit and additional details (another $150). I am waiting for the MMI 4-4-0 to come some day.
In standard gauge, how about:
- an accurate Class A Climax (bet you could sell a bunch of these, and it wouldn't be difficult to make)?
- an 1880s or 1890s 2-6-0 that is an accurate model of a Baldwin, Rogers, or a Porter that was sold and used in the US ?
- use the existing Frateschi shell with a new mechanism for Baldwin 2-8-0s and 4-6-0s?
- a logging 2-4-2T, 2-6-2T, or 2-8-2T (also bet a lot would get sold on cuteness).
You can make any of the above without sound, just isolate the motor for future DCC, please provide good all driver and all tender wheel pickup and I'll be a happy buyer. If you want to make a DCC/sound version, I'm OK with that and would likely buy either one.
...when you wish upon a star...
Will this 4-12-2 work on a 15" radius?
just kidding...man, you people are easy.
San Dimas Southern slideshow
This is not a loaded question at all - it's just that I'm interested because with two manufactueres offering what is the same locomotive model that seems to imply that there must be a descent sized market for this beast.
Only two? That's nothing. The UP Big Boy has had (non-brass in HO):
1. Rivarossi (including the new Hornby resurrection).
2. Athearn.
3. BLI/PCM.
4. Trix.
5. Bowser
They should have divvied up the market with Rivarossi doing 4000-4004, Athearn doing 4005-4009, PCM doing 4010-4014, Trix doing 4015-4019 and Bowser doing kits for 4020-4024.
If I've forgotten any mfg, let me know.
If the same ratio of locos to manufacturers were used for NYC Hudsons, there would be 55 manufacturers who dabbled in J's.
Not counting the ex W&LE Berks, NKP had what, 80 of em (700-779)? That would be 16.
I just had a horrible thought. If there were 55 manufacturers of NYC Hudsons can you imagine the number of questions on the MR Forum about which one's the best?
Don't forget the unpowered Con-Cor Big Boy.
Jason
Modeling the Fort Worth & Denver of the early 1970's in N scale
Okay, So I'll admit it, I'd love to get a 9000 class. That's a 9000, just one. Just as I have a Big boy. Why? It's a Show (-ing off) piece. I take my UP 4019 (With the Elephant Ears...Thank You Genesis, I love you!) to the club for people to oodle. Most of my Steam Fleet is like that, in fact. The bigger locos tend to be more distinctive, and there-in become more apt to become show engines. A friend of mine has a Challenger, and when he's free, we sometimes pretend that the Midwest is Sherman Hill with our two locos. Truth be told, those elephant ears are what pulled me over. I had wanted a Big Boy at sometime, and am in to he modern show steam, since that;s the only real tie I have to that era, but had no use for it besides showing off, and the ears did just that. At some point as well, I'd like to get 844 and 3985(#?) as well. Again for Show Purposes. (Sorry Tom, but Rio Grande just hasn't got the Steam Preservation, and I don't have tools/budget/ability to maintain those beautiful Yellowstones). Also Truthful, and should they be available again, I'd probably look at snapping up more than one AC12 in a heartbeat. But I missd them, and wasn't there something up with the gear towers in the InterMountains?
That said, Half-Moon Orion & Northern's largest engine isn't any longer than a GS4, and likley shorter. Though we did shove a set of drivers under the tender... There should be a picture of her hanging on Page 8 of the current Diner. If/when I develop nough abality (and trust within myself) several versions of the CfD-6 class steamers will be made. 3 to precise, Bicenntenial, Christmas, and straight black. And there are several smaller engines on the roster as well, including a C&O mountain for the George Washington, NKP 587, since I'm near (in the loosest sense of the term) the real one and have a model going of the ITM train, a shay, and an 080 for the IN. Harbor Belt. I'd love to get a Spectrum American sometime too.
And back to the 9000, I wait to see what the radius on it is. Least it doesn;t have the infernal DCS in it this time...
-Morgan
I like the trends going on here, maybe BLI can answer MTH's triplex with the Virginian one.
I doubt now I would buy the MTH for the BLI.
For the small engines I just want Roundhouse to return with the kits.
citylimits...Because the consensus here seems to be in favour of small, or smaller, steamers, I am wondering if any of our fellow forum members, who will be buying either one or both of these big UP steamers could chime in and tell us why they would choose either one or the other - which brand would be the preferred choice and why this model vvould be included in your shopping list...
I'll have a go, but you're getting my small house to look at. I can't show you anyone else's.
First, why am I getting one? 'Cuz its the biggest honkingest rigid framed loco there was this side of the Urals. And unlike its smaller Texas type 2-10-4's, it had a third cylinder and Gresley valves to run that third cylinder. Like one of my favourite roads, the C&O, it had twin flying pumps on the smokebox front. In plain German, it vas baaaad!
I am, like Tom White, hopeless when presented with big steam. Oddly, I have no particular interest in a Big Boy, so I haven't one. I do have the Lionel Challenger, and I have the Pennsy 2-10-4 J1, and the PCM N&W Y6b Mallet, and I have the Rivarossi Allegheny H-8. Oh, and the BLI T1 Duplex 4-4-4-4. I would fall all over each of you in my haste to get in line for a $500 Yellowstone with modern drive and decoder.
Then, MTH announced their 4-12-2. Dang, I am not a big fan of MTH's approach to marketing and engineering. I was interested, I'll admit, until I saw the articulated front end (what were they thinking!?). But the killer for me is the DCS control system. I have purchased my control system....thanks piles...and I don't want any more redundancy than the purchase of my second DT400 affords me. My Super Empire Builder does all I need. I would have to purchase the DCS system to do all I enjoy doing with my SEB if I were to purchase MTH's version of the UP 9000.
I am happy that BLI is effectively taking it to the Mike. BLI will get my dough. They already have my loyalty. They have proven that they can present a good...no, a really good...product. I won't have to get another control system. Yeah, I'll be stuck with some weird 22" curve enabling engineering....I guess...but I love the long snout on this engine....and simply must have it. In fact, I expect I'll cough up for two.
One thing before I go...the MTH model seems to have a rather nifty Gresley valve system operating on the top of its pilot shelf. BLI doesn't make mention of this feature on theirs.
-Crandell
citylimitsThis is not a loaded question at all - it's just that I'm interested because with two manufactueres offering what is the same locomotive model that seems to imply that there must be a descent sized market for this beast. Bruce
Bruce
Read http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=2665. I don't think that market size for the UP 4-12-2 has much to do with 2 companies producing the same locomotive. I have little doubt that although the 4-12-2 is not on the list of transferred tooling, that production is being shared between BLI and MTH. Whether this is voluntary on the part of both importers or not is another matter, and I suspect both would much prefer to have exclusive rights to a particular prototype with MKT. We can look forward to MTH producing new runs of the transferred BLI tooling when MTH perceives a market opening.
FWIW, the other MTH lawsuit against Korean Brass referred to was about Korean Brass giving trade secrets to and making MTH designs for Lionel. A lawsuit that forced Lionel into bankruptcy until a doable settlement was reached. I'm amazed that MTH continues to place orders with Korean Brass (MKT). The settlement terms must have been good enough.
Just like BLI, MTH is going to favor large engine models. Small engines are not going to hold all their electronics, speakers, and smoke - nor sell at the needed price point. And MTH's 3 rail O heritage fits in very well with getting large locomotives to go around very sharp curves.
my thoughts, your choices
fwright Just like BLI, MTH is going to favor large engine models. Small engines are not going to hold all their electronics, speakers, and smoke - nor sell at the needed price point. And MTH's 3 rail O heritage fits in very well with getting large locomotives to go around very sharp curves.
Fred, All good points, fact remains, my money and the money of MANY modelers I know will remain in our pockets.
I will not buy ANYTHING from MTH until he builds them to operate on DC to NMRA standards, big small or other wise.
I know I may be a minority (but maybe a larger minority than some think), but I do not use DCC or onboard sound or smoke, so companies like Bachmann/Proto/BLI Blueline who keep their prices lower and/or offer DC versions of their products will continue to get my business. And if they choose to make medium or small steam they will get even more.
I have big curves and some big locomotives, but I am building a model railroad, not a collection of the worlds most famous locomotives. I need/want locos that are plausable for my model senerio, not a trip to Steamtown.
andrechapelonI just had a horrible thought. If there were 55 manufacturers of NYC Hudsons can you imagine the number of questions on the MR Forum about which one's the best?
Think that might provoke a few flameouts maybe?
I know that it might leave quite a few locked threads ----
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing that is certain, at least from this end of the world, is that there are a lot of collectors out there who do go after the big one's. It is like that in the die cast cars. How many of you seen a die cast AMC Gremlin? Or a Ford Pinto? (and no, the Fresh Cherries don't count) or a Chev Caprice of, say, 1990 vintage? Not too many around. But, boy, will you see Lamborghinis, Ferrarris, Hummers---
It all comes down to the exotic element---and I'm only referring to those who just collect the things. They will drive that market--
blownout cylinder One thing that is certain, at least from this end of the world, is that there are a lot of collectors out there who do go after the big one's. It is like that in the die cast cars. How many of you seen a die cast AMC Gremlin? Or a Ford Pinto? (and no, the Fresh Cherries don't count) or a Chev Caprice of, say, 1990 vintage? Not too many around. But, boy, will you see Lamborghinis, Ferrarris, Hummers---
bc:
I have to say that the die-cast mfrs. are better at this than they had been, for a few years. I mostly buy these for my son (mainly because few are in the right era for my RR (:() and there's a lot of normal cars! Weirdly enough, actual Ferraris and Lamborghinis aren't as common as muscle cars.
I think Mikados need more appreciation. Everybody loves 4-8-4s, I love 4-8-4s, but there were 12 Mikes for every Northern. Looking at the Denver Public Library's photo collection online, that's all you see...Mike, Mike, Mike. People do run them on their layouts, but they just don't get the attention. They're a nice-sized engine for model use, too...big enough to look big, but small enough to take short curves.
Of course, this is all nothing new. You get the same situation back in the 1930s. People had one-horse pikes but ran Hudsons, K4s, and P5a electrics, because that's what was produced. There were familiar-sounding complaints in the letters pages. Over the years, the locos have changed, but this situation has generally persisted...what stands out are the exceptions, like MDC, whose steam was all just right for a small pike. I am really starting to miss that line.
The real point to remember concerning the OP's thoughts is that in our hobby the "collecting" element outnumbers the truly "operating" segment and probably to quite a significant degree today. Very few existing layouts and the type of railroading depicted on them, justifies the use of a large number of huge locomotives, with even fewer layouts having large enough radii to make them look realistic. Yet these engines will sell out quickly every time, as do any re-issues.
It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotive rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
CNJ831
CNJ831It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotives rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
And it is not just in this hobby that one finds distorted markets.
Look at an interior design magazine sometimes. Notice style called "Shabby Chic"? Guess what. If you wander into a flea market you'll find pieces for about $30 that you can get that in some dang specialist stores will go for about $350!! And I used to make some $$$ off of this very thing because people will buy it if it is 'in'.
What John is saying is quite true. Audrey's quilts for example--in the 80's we could still get them at yard sales for $5. Now you'd be lucky to find any because the collector with lots of dough came along and --woooosh!!---up goes the price! If the market can bear it--and that also includes the collector with the cash--the prices will go up. And there are a LOT of collectors out there----
CNJ831The real point to remember concerning the OP's thoughts is that in our hobby the "collecting" element outnumbers the truly "operating" segment and probably to quite a significant degree today. Very few existing layouts and the type of railroading depicted on them, justifies the use of a large number of huge locomotives, with even fewer layouts having large enough radii to make them look realistic. Yet these engines will sell out quickly every time, as do any re-issues.
Yes. We have only to look at the history of brass in the last 30 years. Big bucks, tightly controlled numbers, and they all go, mostly to fill a 16" gap in somebody's display case. And even then, if they are only buying the diecast and plastic offerings, fewer than (I would guess) one in ten purchasers would want them for something approximating proto operations. No, they want them (as do I) for their gee-whiz qualities.
The only operation I am hoping to get out of a BLI UP 9000 is one to repair the hernia that ensues first time I hoist it onto the tracks. Ouuuuw!!
At least we're starting to see some different big steam engines now. For a while it was all the same thing (Big Boys, Challengers, Mallets), so it's good to see some variety.
Now if only Horizon would bring out MDC's old steam engine line. Even if it was all ready to run instead of kits, at least we'd have more choice for small steam.
_________________________________________________________________
I notice my name came up twice on this page in relationship to 'big steam', and yes, I will admit that I have a propensity for it. And I have a relatively good-sized railroad with generous radii and long grades to justify it. But I try and keep my 'big steam' appropriate to the railroads that I model (Rio Grande, SP) with the one exception of my 3 Yellowstones--Rio Grande leased them but never bought them. However I did, LOL!
And I will respectfully disagree a little with CNJ about the 'collecting' aspect of it--BUT ONLY IN MY PARTICULAR CASE, mind you. Modeling the railroads that I model, most of my big steam HAS to be brass, but it's out there on the layout earning its keep (and being 'tinkered' with a lot ).
However, in my own defense, I will say that I've really GOT all the 'big steam' that need. Well, not exactly, I could use a Z-6 4-6-6-4 (which I've got on order and will become a GN 'loaner') but that should really wrap it up as far as articulateds.
What I really have a dearth of are those neat 'backbone' locos of almost any railroad during the steam era, the 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 2-8-2's and 4-6-2's (and yes, both Rio Grande and SP had quite a few of them). And why? Well, there just aren't that many available. Bachmann, bless 'em has made some neat inroads with their smaller power, but if you stand back and look at the 'quality' small steam power, there just isn't very much running around.
So, from this particular end of the spectrum, I'm DEFINITELY in the 'smaller steam' camp. I've started running some shorter 'turn' trains on the layout, and I don't mind admitting that they look a little weird behind 2-8-8-2's, LOL!
twhite What I really have a dearth of are those neat 'backbone' locos of almost any railroad during the steam era, the 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 2-8-2's and 4-6-2's (and yes, both Rio Grande and SP had quite a few of them). And why? Well, there just aren't that many available. Bachmann, bless 'em has made some neat inroads with their smaller power, but if you stand back and look at the 'quality' small steam power, there just isn't very much running around.
Tom, I'm surprised at you. Suitable mid-sized steam has been available on the used brass market. Let's see, for example, D&RGW locomotives. Consolidations were imported by Key Imports and Nickel PLate. Ten-wheelers were imported by PFM. Mikados were imported by PFM and Sunset. Pacifics were imported by PFM. And then there is the WP and SP stuff. You forgot to include Moguls, but those have been imported too.
You did it with your articulateds, so I know you can do it (buy used, remotor, paint, etc.) with mid-size too.
Mark (fortunate to have purchased new, 2 Challenger Consolidations, 2 Division Point Mikados, 2 Precision Scale Moguls, and a Glacier Park Pacific, all SP)
Mark:
I do have a small representation of smaller brass steam in both Rio Grande and SP--and yes, I'd like to get some more. And yes, in brass, there's quite a bit out there if you search for it and happen to hit the 'market' on the right day, LOL!
My post was actually aimed at DCC or dual-mode modelers who would prefer to have more contemporary plastic locos in smaller wheel sizes, and less 'generic' and more road-specific, sound ready--all of the bells and whistles that are available with the riad-specific large steam being produced by MTH and BLI. To my way of thinking, at least, it seems to be a sadly ignored portion of the hobby market. However, what I would like to see and what the mfgrs. put out seems to be on two entirely different tracks.
Darth Santa Fe At least we're starting to see some different big steam engines now. For a while it was all the same thing (Big Boys, Challengers, Mallets), so it's good to see some variety. Now if only Horizon would bring out MDC's old steam engine line. Even if it was all ready to run instead of kits, at least we'd have more choice for small steam.
Isn't Roundhouse doing a 4-6-2?
EDIT:L Yep: right here. http://www.roundhousetrains.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=4-6-2&CatID=THLS I don't know what Roundhouse quality is like, aside from the decoder, but I see a 2-8-0 in there as well that I haven't seen mentioned much here.
Yes, if they brought out the Harriman in RTR or kits I would buy a few of each.
I sure hope someone at Horizon sees this thread! I know that I'd like to see the line of MDC kits return as I'd buy several more! I was only able to find three of the Santa Fe style 2-6-2 kits before my source dried up. When I e-mailed Athearn to ask about the possibility of reissuing the MDC kits, they unfortunately stated they had no intention of doing so.
Hornblower
AMEN !!!!!!!!. Not only are the manufacturers what we don't want, the prices are bordering on the ridiculous. R. Staller
It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotives rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
You mean like this guy? http://www.spmogul.com/ Two Moguls and a Baldwin S-12 (although I see an Alco S-2 and a C-9 2-8-0. You gotta have some variety alread).
One of the things that tickles me is the focus on busy main lines rather than secondary mains and/or branches. A good modest sized layout is the White Mountain Division layout in the July MR is that focuses on the branches along the MEC line from Portland to St. Johnsbury, VT. You have the Beecher Falls mixed (4-6-0 in steam, SW-7/9 in the early diesel years or a GP-7 later).There was a local passenger train in each direction from Portland to St Johnsbury (#'s 162/163) powered by small Pacifics in steam, GP7's in diesel with the last run being powered by an E7 and containing more cars than the local ever ran. B&M ran a summer season train (the Mountaineer) from Boston to Whitefield which ran from 3 to 5 cars (diner plus coaches) powered by an E7 postwar. Through MEC freights from Portland to St. Johnsbury and v.v. were powered by MEC's S class 2-8-2's (which included the 6 USRA lights that MEC owned).
Basically the layout as it appears in the July MR could duplicate just about every MEC operation in the area with the added benefit of the "Mountaineer" in season depending on the era modeled. It wouldn't take all that much motive power, either. In steam, you could get away with 2 or 3 Mikes with a couple of 2-8-0's and a 4-6-0 (or another 2-8-0 in N scale sinc 4-6-0's aren't available) plus a B&M E7. Passenger cars: the MEC local passenger ran 3 to 5 cars (some wooden). The Mountaineer ran 3 to 5 cars with a mix of heavyweights and "American Flyer" coaches (now becoming available in HO and hopefully N later).
MEC dieselized the Mountain Division with F3's, GP7's and SW7's/SW9's. The switchers were used as road engines on locals and also replaced the Mikes at Bartlett in helper service. The initial color scheme was the same as B&M. After about 1953, units began being re-painted with green in place of the maroon. Note that the SW's were painted in road colors and not the black with red nose stripes normally assigned to both B&M and MEC switchers. The SW's were MU equipped.
For a diesel roster in the transition years, you could probably get by with 2 F3A's and a single B unit (MEC only owned 10 F units, all F3's, of which only 2 were B's). The 2 AB sets ( 671A and B, 672A and B) bought in 1948 were Phase II and the remaining 6 F3A's were phase IV's. Add 3 or 4 GP7's with one being for trains 162/163 and a couple of SW7's for the locals and you're set.
The one real problem I see with the layout in MR if you want to run B&M's Mountaineer is the fact that there's no way of turning the E unit at Whitefield without some modifications. Don't have room for the layout? Beecher Falls would make a good stand-alone shelf layout with some staging. If you can include Colebrook, so much the better.
Another good MEC based layout would be the Rockland Branch. Four passenger trains in each direction up until the early 50's with seasonal Pullman service and a couple of local freights in each direction. Motive power, 2-8-0's on the freights and Pacifics (including MEC's newest) on the passengers. Depending on the era in diesel, you could use GP7's, the SW7's/9's transferred from Bartlett, an occasional F3 or even, IIRC, an RS-3.
Took the words right out of my mouth!
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Ever get the feeling the manufacturers are starting to cater to the collector market and forgot their own roots? Kinda makes one wonder---
blownout cylinder Ever get the feeling the manufacturers are starting to cater to the collector market and forgot their own roots? Kinda makes one wonder---
The manufactures will go where ever the money is. If the collectors become the main market then expect even more of the unusual and big steamers. If the model railroaders with the smaller home layouts become the majority then I would expect more small steamer.
There is also another aspect to consider, steam versus diesel, not many modelers were around when steam was running. I spent a lot of time in the prairies and that is where Canadian steam spent the majority of it last days. I remember seeing the large CPR grain trains with the Selkirk engines near the end of steam days.
As that appears not to be happening, with the exception of the Bachmann Spectrums. Perhaps Bachmann has found the perfect nich market and the majority of purchasers are the small layout model railroaders. Should not forget Roundhouse also seems to recognize the need for smaller steam engines.
Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol!
CB&Q Modeler Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol!
Love it!! All that to get UP over the little 'bump' in the Rockies that they called Sherman Hill. Have no idea what they'd have concocted if they ever round a real MOUNTAIN on their route, LOL!
I want one! It would be ideal for a 5 m.p.h. drag freight, but I wonder if the engine crew would need to be changed more often than resupplying the locomotive with water and fuel. Which bring me to the question: how many crew would be needed to run this thing? There are two cabs.
Mark
So, this is what a 4-8-8-0+4-8-8-4+0-8-8-4 looks like; what I would call a true triplex, and apparently a triple articulated too. Sorry guys: in my mind an Erie "triplex" is merely a duplex.
twhite CB&Q Modeler Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol! Love it!! All that to get UP over the little 'bump' in the Rockies that they called Sherman Hill. Have no idea what they'd have concocted if they ever round a real MOUNTAIN on their route, LOL! Tom
That would be a classic Union Pacific idea!! What would have been it's overall length?
Tom- After looking at that I'd be wondering the same thing. It would be HUGE!!!
jguess733why are the manufacturers so adverse to producing kits? It would seem to me that it would cut down on labor costs if they don't have to pay somebody to assemble it. Just roll it off the assembly line and into the box. Then again I could be mistaken.
I don't want to rain on your parade, but they still have to pay people to put the pieces parts in boxes and make sure that nothing's missing. It's not automated. There's no assembly line, either, either for kit pieces or completed models.
andrechapelonI don't want to rain on your parade, but they still have to pay people to put the pieces parts in boxes and make sure that nothing's missing. It's not automated. There's no assembly line, either, either for kit pieces or completed models.
Excuse me for being a little but since there is no automated system involved we'd have to assume there are humans doing the work then, right? OK fine. Then there must be some kind of production line involved. If it is not automated and there is no assembly line for either the kit/completed models then how do they come out? Via thin air?
Some kind of human activity has to done if the product is going to be made/distributed. There are methods that can be used to do this without the traditional idea of an assembly line. Please rest assured I'm not bouncing on your head but I do think something went awry here---
An assembly line implies that the work moves in a sequential pattern to multiple work stations where the workers perform a very small number of highly repetitive operations as the line is moving towards the next work station. The classic example is an automobile assembly plant. However, an assembly line doesn't require a mechanical line. If the work is small enough, the items being worked on can be passed from one worker to another, but IIRC, that's not the way things are built in the MR industry. 'Course, my memory could be faulty.
Besides, an assembly line with respect to kits makes no sense. It would be as if Ford sent components in a line with more being added as the line moved until every component required to make a vehicle was dumped in a big box for assembly by the buyer. There's no assembly line because no assembly is done. That reminds me of a story that appeared in Car & Driver (IIRC) many years ago about a guy who was determined to build his own VW Beetle (the old one). Turns out, the "kit" cost 4 times more than the ready to run version because he had to buy the parts at retail. The story was fictional, but the relative cost was pretty close to what it would have been.
andrechapelonHowever, an assembly line doesn't require a mechanical line. If the work is small enough, the items being worked on can be passed from one worker to another, but IIRC, that's not the way things are built in the MR industry
Some of the smaller operations in China that I knew of ran sort of along that line you just mentioned but some of the Kader things are somewhat mechanised. When Len and I figure out more of that cnc machine then I'll be somewhat closer to getting an actual frame made out of barstock---I've done up a wheelset on it but---
Some of the books I've managed to find on production mgmt tended to refer to such hands on lines as a type of assembly line.
Hence my
Big famous steam always seem to get the money and sales. FDT has the USRA Mikado's on a two for one sale. Nice smaller locomotive and they can't give them away. It could be that too many have been imported over the past few years and the market is satisfied for now.
I would like to see all sizes of locomotives available to us. The PRR E6 and G5 would be a great choice for my money if BLI could see their way to make that model.
CZ
jguess733I'm fairly certain that if you are paying someone hourly that they will be able to move a lot more product if they are simply breaking pieces from a mold and putting them into boxes than if they were stuck puttying together one piece of rolling stock together at a time. And I know there is a demand for kits because I can't count the number of posts pertaining to lack of kits.
I've haven't worked directly in manufacturing, but I have worked in construction and electronics project planning and aircraft maintenance.
I would agree that producing a kit takes less assembly labor. But kits have much higher QC and support costs. It's a lot easier to ensure all the parts are on an assembled car or locomotive than making sure all the parts (and the right numbers of them) are in the kit box. Downstream, after the model has been sold, a certain percentage of defective RTR will get returned. The cheap and easy way out is to just replace the defective model - that way you don't have to have any skilled staff to trouble-shoot and repair. Bachmann does this pretty well. With a kit, there is no way around a skilled staff (is often one person or less for smaller manufacturers) to hold the hands of those who got in over their heads, and to replace parts that got broken, omitted, or lost either at assembly or in the modeler's hands. And even if a few $$ are charged for replacement parts in some cases, support is going to be a loss center, not a profit center. Also, a larger parts stock is required for kit support than for RTR support because of breakage or damage that occurs due to modeler rather than factory error.
A saving grace for kits is that the best estimates are that 75% of kits bought never get opened (according to a British model railroading magazine poll in the '80s or '90s). My shelves attest to the validity of the estimate. Obviously, these unopened kits have no support costs.
Overall, my semi-educated guess is that the total costs to the manufacturer for a plastic kit are about the same for RTR and kits. For craftsman type kits that require more assembly labor and higher skill levels for assembly than plastic, kits are likely cheaper to produce than RTR. But the manufacturer can charge a 20% or greater premium for RTR vs kit. Hence, the dearth of new tooling being produced as plastic kits.
my thoughts and experiences
CAZEPHYRFDT has the USRA Mikado's on a two for one sale. Nice smaller locomotive and they can't give them away. It could be that too many have been imported over the past few years and the market is satisfied for now.
The only ones on the two for one sale are the "left overs" in roadnames nobody wants, fact is on this latest run of Mikes from BLI, undecorated was one of the first things to sell out, as did a number of other roadnames.
The two for one sale is just another example of BLI being undercapitalized and having to give away product to move the rest of it quickly. Not the best business model in my opinion.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL CAZEPHYRFDT has the USRA Mikado's on a two for one sale. Nice smaller locomotive and they can't give them away. It could be that too many have been imported over the past few years and the market is satisfied for now. The only ones on the two for one sale are the "left overs" in roadnames nobody wants, fact is on this latest run of Mikes from BLI, undecorated was one of the first things to sell out, as did a number of other roadnames. The two for one sale is just another example of BLI being undercapitalized and having to give away product to move the rest of it quickly. Not the best business model in my opinion. Sheldon
I agree that they are ones that left over but they still are a deal to anyone wanting smaller steam. This type of sale has been going on with the BLI products dating back to the first big blow out sale about four years ago when the founder left the company. I picked up several PCM Big Boys for very little money with and without lettering along with several other models. The Mikado's can be decaled for any road after the other names are removed.
What you are seeing the realities of a capitalist market.
When I got into model railroading as an adult there were TONS of steam models available in HO from a large number of manufacturers.
The REASON there aren't many today is because the manufacturers couldn't sell them. They just aren't that much in demand. The generation who can actually remember when Steam rode the rails and the diesel was the new kid on the block is greying (if not outright dying).
To many of today's modelers 1st generation diesels are some kind of antique.
Its sad but true those models wouldn't have gone away if they had been hot sellers. They weren't so people who want to stay in business are going to make what they think is going to sell. Want a particular steamer, start an email campaign to get it produced, enough emails and they'll make them.
But then you had better by them or they won't pay attention to you next time.
Why do people think model train manufacturer/importers produce items which are expected to be most in demand by their customers? It is far more likely model train businesses produce items that the owner and/or key employees want for themselves with the hope they can then sell enough of the product to cover production costs.
A major reason why smaller steam locomotive models have been slow sellers is due to many of them suffering from less-than-stellar quality.
TwinZephyrA major reason why smaller steam locomotive models have been slow sellers is due to many of them suffering from less-than-stellar quality
Equine plumage---the demand is there. They did not put that much effort into selling/making the dang things in the first place. And even if what you do say is the case then that is all a dang excuse for another way to avoid doing the work----
Bob Sandusky The REASON there aren't many today is because the manufacturers couldn't sell them. They just aren't that much in demand. The generation who can actually remember when Steam rode the rails and the diesel was the new kid on the block is greying (if not outright dying). To many of today's modelers 1st generation diesels are some kind of antique.
This response by Bob has made me think a little bit more about the relitive popularity of steam locomotive models in the world of those who currently model trains.
Like many others, I model the transition era - specifically, 1949. I grew up with steamers and first generation diesels were the new kids on the block - flash critters
Anyway, in order to detail an 0-6-0 correctly for the SAL, I asked a question on the ACL,SAL, SCL modelers group with no luck/response. Many of the folks contributing to this Group are extremely knowledgeable people, yet none seemed to have an answer for me. On thinking about this I realsied that most topics, questions and answers on the ACL, SAL, SCL Modelers Group related to rolling stock and diesel locomotives - very little if any posts, other than mine, relating to the venerable steamer. I don't know if this is something that relates to this group alone or is indicitive of model railroading locomotive interest and preferences generaly.
If this is so then perhaps it could be a reason for the decling availability of Steam locomotive models and kits.
Just a thought.
Bob and Bruce, I think if you actually examine the marketplace over the past decade with any care and compare it to earlier eras, you will find that the selection/number of steam locomotives available today exceeds that of any previous time in the hobby's history. The present day is a steam-lovers golden age and by no means one in serious decline! Perhaps total sales volume may be down as compared to 30-40 years ago, simply because of the shrinking of the number of hobbyists, but I expect that it is reflected in diesel sales in the same manner.
I would also point out once again that the era most modeled in HO today remains the transition era, just as it has been for 50 years now. And it is modeled specifically because it allows the hobbyist to include a selection of late steam and early diesel.
Folks:
The middle-aged modelers who grew up watching Geeps might not be into steam, but the kids sure are, and the 20 or 30-somethings seem to have an interest, too...it will be interesting to see what develops out of that in a few years.
One thing about the kit manufacturers is that there were the same four, then three, for a long time, and not much of a pattern. (speaking of the major HO steam-kit makers).
Varney saw the 1950s RTR boom and jumped right in, cheaping their line out aggressively...too aggressively. You can still buy the plastic cars. They're Life-Like's trainset line.
Mantua did brilliantly well during that same era, with high-quality engineering and innovation. Then came Consolidated Foods, which just wanted a bargain-priced marketing tool. A between-the-lines reading tells the rest of the story...the Tylers bought it back, and for the next 13 years there were reissues, new models, and lots of upgrades. The Tyco cheaping out (such as PM-1s in Mikados) was reversed.
In 1990 Eric Tyler became VP. The next year came the Superbowl Express. Then came smoke. In 1993 the kits went away. In 1996 the horrible high-priced Collectibles came. And now Model Power has the tooling...44 years to build it up, 7 years to kill it dead, 13 years to bring it back, and 11 years to kill it again.
MDC I don't know much about. I think the owner just gradually wound things down, until selling to Horizon, who didn't have any interest in kits, I guess. They did keep upgrading the line, practically up to the end of kit production, which is probably why they can still succeed as RTR.
Bowser snapped up kit tooling for years, and kept working on the lines, upgrading them, and introducing new kits, until the B6. It's a bit early for a full PM, but there does seem to be a rather steep shift in direction after that. Even their famously stoic full-page steam ads in MR started going away. (Contrasting MDC's utterly brash copy was always fun.)
Really, the only trend is that these were all smallish family businesses, which rarely pass to the next generation without incident. This has happened all along, but what the difference is now is that new ones haven't yet jumped into the void...the current mfrs are not and never have been interested in making kits.
Regarding modeling what you grew up with I don´t think it is so important. I live in Sweden and is "only" 38 years old and I have never seen operating steam-locos and certainly not US railroads and still I model them. When it comes to manufacturers fascination for big steam I think they should also offere smaller engines.
How about something like this:
A Richmond engine that was built 1900 ( I think) it would also please the Swedish railroaders as it was exported here.
Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:
My Railroad
My Youtube:
Graff´s channel
Bob SanduskyThe REASON there aren't many today is because the manufacturers couldn't sell them. They just aren't that much in demand. The generation who can actually remember when Steam rode the rails and the diesel was the new kid on the block is greying (if not outright dying).
Bob, you are absolutely correct. No demand, no supply. If supply is high and demand is low, cut the price and get what you can. Spend that cash on manufacturing a product that you know will sell. That is the way business works.
Been there, done that...
Bob
Photobucket Albums:NPBL - 2008 The BeginningNPBL - 2009 Phase INPBL - 2010 Downtown
rclanger Bob SanduskyThe REASON there aren't many today is because the manufacturers couldn't sell them. They just aren't that much in demand. The generation who can actually remember when Steam rode the rails and the diesel was the new kid on the block is greying (if not outright dying). Bob, you are absolutely correct. No demand, no supply. If supply is high and demand is low, cut the price and get what you can. Spend that cash on manufacturing a product that you know will sell. That is the way business works. Been there, done that...
Maybe to you there is no demand. Did anyone check this out? Did anyone go and do the actual marketing surveys themselves to see if this is correct? Seems to be a lot of demand for big things but no one has done much to see if the truth might be that no one just does them----period. No one does much marketing/advertising for these smaller models---and why not? No one is asking for them----
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe the real answer could be that we just want to put out what we wanna put out?
Graffen Regarding modeling what you grew up with I don´t think it is so important. I live in Sweden and is "only" 38 years old and I have never seen operating steam-locos and certainly not US railroads and still I model them. When it comes to manufacturers fascination for big steam I think they should also offere smaller engines. How about something like this: A Richmond engine that was built 1900 ( I think) it would also please the Swedish railroaders as it was exported here.
With the exception of the 3 axle tender the engine is similar to the Spectrum 4-6-0 which was representative of the Baldwin engines.
4-6-0 with 52" drivers
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/products.php?act=viewProd&productId=156
4-6-0 with 63" drivers
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/products.php?act=viewProd&productId=162
All these engines and yet I can't find an HO GN S-2 4-8-4.......................
Mac46 All these engines and yet I can't find an HO GN S-2 4-8-4.......................
Didn't you hear? There is no demand for small steam locos----all these posters who are looking for them don't really count as demand------
That is, according to some around here-----
don7 Graffen Regarding modeling what you grew up with I don´t think it is so important. I live in Sweden and is "only" 38 years old and I have never seen operating steam-locos and certainly not US railroads and still I model them. When it comes to manufacturers fascination for big steam I think they should also offere smaller engines. How about something like this: A Richmond engine that was built 1900 ( I think) it would also please the Swedish railroaders as it was exported here. With the exception of the 3 axle tender the engine is similar to the Spectrum 4-6-0 which was representative of the Baldwin engines. 4-6-0 with 52" drivers http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/products.php?act=viewProd&productId=156 4-6-0 with 63" drivers http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/products.php?act=viewProd&productId=162
This model was modified from a Bachmann 4-6-0 (found the pic at a Swedish web site)::
No Demand for smaller locos? OK, to show that I put my money wher my mouth is, I own:
8 Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0's
6 Bachmann Spectrum USRA Heavy 4-8-2's
2 Bachmann Spectrum 4-6-0's
2 BLI USRA Heavy 2-8-2's
1 Genesis USRA Light 2-8-2
2 IHC 4-6-2's
2 Brass 4-6-2's
2 Proto 0-8-0's
1 Mantua 4-4-2
1 Mantua 0-6-0
1 Mantua 4-4-0
A total of 28 locos 4-8-2 or smaller, only nine larger:
2 Proto 2-8-8-2's
1 Rivarossi 2-6-6-6
1 BLI 2-6-6-4
2 PCM Reading 4-8-4's
3 Bachmann Spectrum 2-6-6-2's
And as "big" locos go, even some of these big ones are not really big (2-6-6-2 for example) compared to Big Boys or 4-12-2's.
So, depending on how you break it down, 75% to 85% of my steam fleet is small to medium, much like a real railroad roster. And my future purchase desires are for more smaller/medium locos not any more big ones.
But I must have been the only person to buy these locos since there is no demand. I have two or more of most locos I own, especially the small/medium ones, to give the railroad that realistic fleet look. Most collectors I know only have one copy of each. Seems to me I would be a more valuable customer than the guy who only buys only one of each for his showcase?
Again, a modern 4-6-0, a 4-6-2, a 4-4-2, some different 2-8-2's would all have me buying 6 packs of locos.
ATLANTIC CENTRALBut I must have been the only person to buy these locos since there is no demand. I have two or more of most locos I own, especially the small/medium ones, to give the railroad that realistic fleet look. Most collectors I know only have one copy of each. Seems to me I would be a more valuable customer than the guy who only buys only one of each for his showcase?
You see, what galls me is that there are people out here who will sit and say there is no demand for small locos simply because it is easier to do. Here is a fine example of what happens when a collectors market pops right in there and messes things up. The good thing here is that Bachmann is the only company --outside of a few randoms that get thrown in on occassion from others--that seems to be in there doing anything. The same thing could even end up in diesels as well as the collector will favour those big HUGE exotics over the local switcher----something that keeps on occuring---
Sheldon,Since when are 4-8-2's, let alone Heavy USRA 4-8-2's, "smaller steam"?
Personally, I tend to sort steam by trailing truck & articulation:Light = no trailing truck, non-articluated, plus all geared steamMedium = 2-wheel trailing truck, non-articulatedHeavy = 4 or more wheel trailing truck, plus all articulated steamYes, I know there are exceptions (some of WM's 2-8-0's are too big to be considered "light" by anyone's scale, and 2-4-4-2 loggers are a little small to be called "Heavy"), but for reasons of comparison, I like the above system. It covers probably 90% of steam engines, with only some exceptions.Therefore, I would class your collection as:14 Light14 Medium9 HeavyNow, if you want to talk about a larger sampling, I have my club roster of equipment handy. We are a large (10,000 sq. ft.) & old (est. 1938) HO club in Hingham, MA (www.ssmrc.org), and we currently have 68 members. Our loco roster is currently up to 875 total locos of all types, ranging from HOn3 steam, to electrics, to Doodlebugs, to AC6000CW's. Today, I tallied up the steam locos, and these are the results:There are only 107 steam locos out of 875 registered. That's just 12%. Of that 12%, we have the following wheel arrangements on the roster:2-8-2 = 114-8-2 = 104-6-2 = 94-6-4 = 90-8-0 = 82-8-4 = 82-10-0 = 62-10-4 = 62-8-0 = 62-10-2 = 52-8-8-2 = 52-6-6-2 = 44-4-4-4 = 44-8-4 = 42-6-0 = 22-6-6-4 = 24-6-0 = 24-8-8-4 = 22-6-6-6 = 1Heisler = 14-6-6-4 = 1 4-8-8-2 = 1To sum up:Light = 25Medium = 35Heavy = 47
I think this shows, quite clearly, that Heavy steam as a whole is more popular than Light steam, at least at our club. Heck, it's almost a 2 to 1 ratio in popularity. Can you understand now why manufacturers are chasing big steam and not making little teakettles? BTW, just for giggles, I also sorted the diesel roster, too. The most popular diesels at our club are:GP7 = 38GP38 = 33F7A = 31RS-3 = 29E7A = 25F3A = 23SD35 = 18RS-11 = 18F7B = 17SD40-2 = 16GP40 = 12RS-1 = 12C40-8 = 11C44-9W = 11RDC-1 = 11S-2 = 11E8A = 10F3B = 10GP35 = 10Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
Paul,
Repeatedly throughout my post I used the terms "small to medium", and I have used those terms consistantly in regard to this subject - not just in this thread.
How about we use some other "classification system" that has more prototype accuracy like T.E., Adheasive Weight or rigid wheel base to seperate "sizes" of steam locos. If we use rigid wheel base (which was a size restricting condition on the prototype), even my 2-8-8-2's are only "medium" sized since they are small drivered. If we use TE or adheasive weight, the Reading 4-8-4 is only slightly larger than the USRA 4-8-2H, but sit them next to each other, the T-1 looks MUCH bigger and is much longer.
Even at that I have no problem with your "clasification" of my fleet - I did say small to medium repeated throughout the post.
AND, we need more "medium" sized locos as well as smaller ones. What we don't need is another 4-8-4 or 4-12-4, or 2-10-2.
Your club, while it does represent a bigger sample than just me, is still not a big sample and represents a group likely to have similar likes and bias, so not much of an indicator. And, how many of those members have all their locos registered at the club? Another "error" in the research. It would stand to reason that club members would be more likely to bring larger power to a club layout where they can run longer trains and for "bragging rights", leaving their fleet of 2-8-0's home on their smaller layout.
I'll do my 70+ diesels another day.
For what it's worth, I'm just getting back into the hobby in my early 30's (years after my brief flirtation as a boy). If I may be so bold as to offer some thoughts in general on some of the opinions expressed on the forums:
1. Anyone interested in model railroading should embrace Thomas the Train, despite whatever problems they may have with it. My son discovered Thomas and Friends, which directly led to his interest in model trains and hence, my interest. (I only point this out because no engine on Thomas is larger than a 4-6-2.)
2. RtR is helpful for people who work 60-80 hour weeks because I don't have 330 hours to spend putting kits together or scratch-building items. I still admire the work of people who can and honestly believe they have quite the artistic ability but denigrating people for using RtR or manufacturer's for trying to meet a market segment's realistic requirements to enter the hobby is self-defeating for the hobby itself.
3. "Monster engines" do pique my interest (and wallet) moreso than the humble 2-6-0 Mogul. I'm sorry to say so but I feel I get more "bang for the buck" purchasing BLI's 2-6-6-4 for a little over $200.00 from Factory Direct Trains than when I dropped $100.00 for a Bachmann K-4. Am I dissappointed with the Bachmann? No, but it's only worth $200.00 or so if it comes with DCC and sound in my opinion.
4. The "monsters," from what I have been able to observe, are typically associated with a specific locomotive used by a specific railroad. When I bought my T1, I didn't have to worry that the model manufacturer took liberties in adhering to the actual prototype. No other railroad had a T1. Same with my N&W Class A.
5. I've noticed my own hesitancy to purchase smaller engines because I'm concerned about how well they match the prototype. My ignorance of history leads me not to buy a number of 2-8-2's simply because I haven't figured out if the PRR Mike's had Belpaire fireboxes or not in the 1940's. Nor have I had the time or inclination to figure it out yet.
6. Steam isn't dying with younger modelers. I have yet to purchase a diesel. My son has no interest in diesel. The only place I've seen a steam locomotive is on TV and in museums but I'm going to model steam.
Take my opinions for what they are worth but I felt it was necessary to comment.
CNJ831 Bob and Bruce, I think if you actually examine the marketplace over the past decade with any care and compare it to earlier eras, you will find that the selection/number of steam locomotives available today exceeds that of any previous time in the hobby's history. The present day is a steam-lovers golden age and by no means one in serious decline! Perhaps total sales volume may be down as compared to 30-40 years ago, simply because of the shrinking of the number of hobbyists, but I expect that it is reflected in diesel sales in the same manner. I would also point out once again that the era most modeled in HO today remains the transition era, just as it has been for 50 years now. And it is modeled specifically because it allows the hobbyist to include a selection of late steam and early diesel. CNJ831
That is a refreshing piece of reasurance regarding steam. Not haveing the rescourses to make comparison research regarding the sale of model steamers I happily accept that steamers are far from being in serious decline. (Whew!)As a modeler of the transition period I believe that I can access the best of both worlds and in a limited way, observing the practices of the prototype I model, do just that.
I have to say that even though my prototype used some big steamers in their day, Class R 2-6-6-4, for example, often they proved to be unsucessful in the stamping ground chosen for them by their owners and were sold on to the B&O. These large locomotives generaly ran in a area of their system that is not the focus of my modeling interest.
I still like smaller locomotives myself anyway - that's just a personal reference - the largest I have is a 2-10-2.
Sheldon,You opened your post with, "No Demand for smaller locos? OK, to show that I put my money wher my mouth is, I own: 8 Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0's, 6 Bachmann Spectrum USRA Heavy 4-8-2's..." 'Scuse me if I thought you had lumped Heavy USRA 4-8-2's into the "smaller locos" category, since, ya' know, you kinda lumped them into the smaller loco category. BTW, note the smilies...I wasn't all that serious.
We could try to use tractive effort, weight on drivers, total working weight, or overall dimensions for every steam loco to try to fit them into a "light, medium, heavy" class system. Unfortunately, we don't know these pieces of information, or at least I don't. Wheel arrangement is easy, and while it does have flaws, it's pretty simple and gets it right probably 90% of the time. Why? Because it's all about the firebox. The reason you have a trailing truck in the first place is to support the firebox. The bigger the firebox, the larger the boiler and the steaming demands that can be put on it. The larger the boiler, the larger the frame, the greater the weight, the larger the train you can pull, etc. Essentially, the bigger the trailing truck, the "heavier" the steam loco is (with some exceptions).
I disagree on the use wheel diameter to indicate "light, medium, or heavy". Smaller drivers usually mean more power to the rail, while larger drivers usually mean higher top speed. Neither one has much to do with "light, medium, or heavy". For example, the NYC's 4-4-0 999 had 86" drivers, originally. The Big Boy had 68" drivers. Can anyone argue that the 999 was heavier than a Big Boy? Faster, yes. Heavier, no.
BTW, the remark about prototypical accuracy for a classification system is all well and good, but my system addresses all railroads and all types of steamers from Day 1 to the end of the steam era. For example, the NH's heaviest freight loco was the R-3 4-8-2, and the loco with the greatest TE on the RR was their L-1 2-10-2's. On the NH, these would be classed as "heavy". On the UP, which had Big Boys and Challengers, these NH engines would be medium steam. And that's my point. Taken with a "world" view of the steam era, usually the engines that had the 4-wheel trailing truck were "heavy", the ones that had 2-wheel trailing trucks were "medium", and those that had none were "light". As I said, there are exceptions like the 4-12-2 that comes to mind, but those are rather rare.
You may not need another large steam loco, but then I don't need anything other then NH power. Should I tell all manufacturers to stop making non-NH locos? Look, the manufacturers make these large engines for one simple reason...they sell. It's fine that you don't like it (hey, I cringe everytime someone makes a Penn Central loco), but let's recognize that manfucturers are chasing the dollar, here. Somehow, I think they know their market better than we do...since they have the sales figures and we don't.
As for my club's roster, yes, it's a fairly small sample size compared to the estimated 137,500 HO model railroaders in the USA...but our club's sample size is 68 times greater than your sample size, which consists of just you.
Yes, not every steam loco that everyone owns is registered at the club. Far from being discouraged, I think it bolsters my argument. Why? Because it's evidence that people don't run small steam even if they own it. The rule at the club is that you need to register the loco if you plan on using it during Operation Sessions or if you plan to leave it on the layout. Therefore, the fact that people aren't registering small steam means either that they aren't interested in running it, or that they don't have any in the first place. Oh, and most of our club members don't have a home layout. That's why they joined.
In summation, big steam is more popular than small steam. Always has been, always will be. Manufacturers know this, and therefore continue to make rare big steam locos over more numerous but less popular small steam locos.
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
My understanding is that anything eight-coupled (or higher) with a superheater and with a driver diameter meant for main-line freight or passenger service was to be included in "heavy" steam. This would exclude 2-8-2T and other industrial and slow-track engines. We could also use an arbitrary figure of 60K lbs. of tractive effort as the point separating medium from heavy steam, except that there would be an occasional overlap of the Berkshires, which are generally accepted to be the first heavy steamers, and the NYC's H10a's Mikados, for example, which had 2K lbs more tractive effort than at least the first Berks.
Paul3 Yes, not every steam loco that everyone owns is registered at the club. Far from being discouraged, I think it bolsters my argument. Why? Because it's evidence that people don't run small steam even if they own it. The rule at the club is that you need to register the loco if you plan on using it during Operation Sessions or if you plan to leave it on the layout. Therefore, the fact that people aren't registering small steam means either that they aren't interested in running it, or that they don't have any in the first place. Oh, and most of our club members don't have a home layout. That's why they joined.
Just another set of facts that bias the data.
My position has never been that these companies should not make large steam, what I fail to understand is the reasons why they keep making the same large steam while ignoring lots of small amd medium steam that would sell well. The loco that started this post is new to the marketplace, but how many times have the same, mostly larger locos, been done over and over.
You can say that's what people want, but there is considerable evidence that many have bought and would buy a host of other locos if they became available. The record breaking sales numbers of the Bachmann Spectrum Consolidation are proof enough.
As I have pointed out, I don't own hardly any of "famous" big steam that is made over and over.
Paul3 Sheldon,You opened your post with, "No Demand for smaller locos? OK, to show that I put my money wher my mouth is, I own: 8 Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0's, 6 Bachmann Spectrum USRA Heavy 4-8-2's..." 'Scuse me if I thought you had lumped Heavy USRA 4-8-2's into the "smaller locos" category, since, ya' know, you kinda lumped them into the smaller loco category. BTW, note the smilies...I wasn't all that serious.
And, I read all of what people write and take the whole statement in context before I respond, rather than just reacting to one or two sentences. I said repeatedly "small and/to medium", even if that was not in that opening statement. You may not have been serious, but I agreed with your classification.
And, again, this is a great time to be in this hobby, but the manufacturers need to hear from everyone willing to speak up about what products they would or would not buy. I'm not buying any Big Boys (no matter how many manufacturers make one) or any 4-12-2's.
As for using your "club" members as a data base, I can do the same. In our group of about 25 modelers, only about half have any "big steam" and only 2-3 have locos like the 4-12-2 or a Big Boy. So does that make my sample correct, no, no more than yours.
But rather, to further my modeling goals of a believable roster for my railroad, I will buy 2 or 3 or maybe even 6 or 8 of the right locos. A big consideration for me is how a loco will look on my 36" minimum radius curves and #6 turnouts. Some people don't care, if it makes it around, its fine. They are entitled to that choice. I have higher standards. So I keep all rigid wheelbases under 20 scale feet on my railroad. And, since I model the east, I want locos with an eastern flavor.
I will continue to vote for more selection with my wallet and my voice.
Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the late Great Eastern Railway see: - http://www.greateasternrailway.com
For more photos of the late GER see: - http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/rogertra/Great_Eastern/
Looking back through my old Model Railroader issues, I came across some interesting points.
- Linn Westcott stated in an editorial that Bill Ryan of PFM stated their all time best seller was the ATSF 2-8-0.
- The Varney Docksider and Mantua switchers and General were common on many layouts in the '50s and '60s. But so were the Varney Old Lady, Casey Jones, and Mantua Pacific and Mikado.
- Bowser never made any small steam until they took over Penn Line and Varney. The Bowser Pacific and Challenger were the apparent top sellers from the original Bowser line.
- The most common used brass loco I see at various hobby shops I have visited in the past 7 years is the Ma & Pa 2-8-0. I see far more small steam used brass for sale than I see heavy and articulateds.
My conclusion is that small steam sold well in the '50s, '60s, and '70s, but model railroaders are much more willing to sell off their small steam than their big steam. The big steam is much more likely to be part of a personal collection. I suspect the same is true today - many model railroaders own one or two large steamers that are special to them - regardless of whether they have a layout that will run them or not.
I have a Bachmann Spectrum K4 passenger set, and a matching super-detailed Bowser K4. I doubt they will ever run on a layout I am likely to have. But I am having a hard time bringing myself to sell them because they were special to my father. The same would be true if I were gifted with a Challenger, Big Boy, an HOn3 K series, or even a 4-12-2. Even though I would be unlikely to buy any of these on my own, and they won't fit into my layout, if one came into my possession through a gift or especially good deal, I would be hard put to give it up.
just my thoughts
fwrightMy conclusion is that small steam sold well in the '50s, '60s, and '70s, but model railroaders are much more willing to sell off their small steam than their big steam. The big steam is much more likely to be part of a personal collection. I suspect the same is true today - many model railroaders own one or two large steamers that are special to them - regardless of whether they have a layout that will run them or not.
When I was at the Woodstock Trainshow back in April '09 I saw a lot of brass small steam engines--2-6-0's, 2-8-0's, 4-4-0's, 2-4-0's 2-4-0T's --and such but not one big lokie. Even in plastic, or what have you small by the bucket load and no big ones. I would kind of think that therefore the market is pretty much run by what the collector wants. The small steam just did not seem to move. And yes, big steam seems to be the driving force in this market. Even the secondary markets prove this. What ends up on the fleamarket spaces? Small steam. Very rarely will I come across big steam on a fleamarket table--and if I do, it is in millipieces.
Hence what seems to be happening is that the companies, yes, are going to where the money is. The question might be raised. Does it have to be ONLY this way? How to answer that would be tricky.
blownout cylinder When I was at the Woodstock Trainshow back in April '09 I saw a lot of brass small steam engines--2-6-0's, 2-8-0's, 4-4-0's, 2-4-0's 2-4-0T's --and such but not one big lokie. Even in plastic, or what have you small by the bucket load and no big ones. I would kind of think that therefore the market is pretty much run by what the collector wants. The small steam just did not seem to move. And yes, big steam seems to be the driving force in this market. Even the secondary markets prove this. What ends up on the fleamarket spaces? Small steam. Very rarely will I come across big steam on a fleamarket table--and if I do, it is in millipieces. Hence what seems to be happening is that the companies, yes, are going to where the money is. The question might be raised. Does it have to be ONLY this way? How to answer that would be tricky.
Just another take on the "fleamarket" and used model experiences. Perhaps the over representation of so called, small, steamers is that these are offered for sale from deseased estates. Those dear departed MRR bretheren are having their collections liquidated by the widow or family and there were no large locomotives in the collection. Or, perhaps the large steamers being arguably more valuable have been listed on eBay, by way of an example.This of course dosen't represent all situations but it is perhaps another factor to consider in what is anecdotal eveidence.
citylimitsJust another take on the "fleamarket" and used model experiences. Perhaps the over representation of so called, small, steamers is that these are offered for sale from deseased estates. Those dear departed MRR bretheren are having their collections liquidated by the widow or family and there were no large locomotives in the collection. Or, perhaps the large steamers being arguably more valuable have been listed on eBay, by way of an example.This of course dosen't represent all situations but it is perhaps another factor to consider in what is anecdotal eveidence.
There are problems with anecdotal evidence. However, I think that they are probably the only thing that seems to be brought forward. If someone comes up with surveys, be they from marketing or even from some sociological research group, or even a publisher they usually are called out as partial, or biased, or somesuch. Maybe we should just allow them to be what they are ---useful tools in an ongoing debate.
And most of the fleamarket goodies do come from estate sales. I'm not so sure there are large numbers of living MR's who just dump their small steam on the market. It appears that that is the case but are we so sure? Not so much.
The question of why the market is large steam dominated has to take into account the collector and the role s/he plays in keeping the MRR market thriving. And how the small steam market can be addressed in this----maybe by making more----exotic small steam?
blownout cylinder There are problems with anecdotal evidence. However, I think that they are probably the only thing that seems to be brought forward. If someone comes up with surveys, be they from marketing or even from some sociological research group, or even a publisher they usually are called out as partial, or biased, or somesuch. Maybe we should just allow them to be what they are ---useful tools in an ongoing debate.
In that regard, let me offer the following as an explanation of why small steam seems to greatly outnumber big steam in the brass re-sale marketplace. It's really no mystery.
If one consults a source such as The Brown Book, they immediately find that back in the hey day of brass sales, a couple of decades ago, small steamers were being produced at the ratio of perhaps 10 to 1 or more when compared to really big steamers. By example, PFM alone imported over 10,000 1950 Santa Fe 2-8-0s! That's a number of units far larger than the runs you see for plastic diesels today! Likewise, many of the brass models of yesteryear were representative of railroads that never owned any really large steam.
I think what may have change in more recent years to promote the sales of big steam is that while brass enthusiasts were generally a rather limited faction in the hobby, today's dabbler/collector segment is much greater in numbers. Likewise, this market is broadened even further by the fact that today's large plastic, or composite, steamers are cheaper relative to brass in the past and thus rather more affordable. So, as others have long since pointed out here, the manufacturers are aiming their products toward these individuals, rather than with an eye toward the practicing model railroader.
Tjsingle.................... The big boy is popular because people see it as an american locomotive that is famous as well K4's, Daylights and others. Railroads had more then 4-12-2's...
Locomotives such as the big steamers of the Pacific Coast RR's are, to use a hackneyed term, iconic. So are probably the motive power of other roads - Lil' Joe's and the Pen GG1. Anybody with even a smattering of railroad knowledge - like myself - can recognise these locomotives. Cab forward and big-boy steamers fall into the same catagory and would be a must for the model collector whose ambition is collecting rather than modeling - or, a combination of the two.
CNJ831 seems to be suggesting that it is the model collector who is driving the production and sales of these big steamers like the 4-12-2 by manufactuers - kind of like they are becoming to resemble the activities of Franklin Mint who, back in the day, themselves offered named steamers as part of their range of collectables. Perhaps, CNJ831 is correct and this really is the target market - not the prototpe or freelance modeler whose layouts represent roads that included in their roster mainly locomotives of a more modest wheel arrangement.
I can't see many of those manufactuers being idiotic enough to mearly churn out a plethora of large steamers designed to satisy a market that exists mainly in the minds of their marketing and product developement departments. I guess that experience in the market has shown them that large steamers will sell well, so that is what they produce.Anyway, as I've mentioned before, I prefer the smaller steamer because of the way they fit into my modeling. One thing I have done to give variety to my small fleet of 0-6-0 steamers - other steamers will follow - is to decorate then differently. I've used models by separate manufactuers and detailed them in such a way as if they had been modified while being shopped as was often the way with the prototype roads.
So even if all we are offered in the near future are behemoth steamers and and smaller steamers are being neglected because of this, there are always alternitives to justify further purchases of small steamers already in the stores if prototype activity is your chosen way.
citylimitsI can't see many of those manufactuers being idiotic enough to mearly churn out a plethora of large steamers designed to satisy a market that exists mainly in the minds of their marketing and product developement departments. I guess that experience in the market has shown them that large steamers will sell well, so that is what they produce.Anyway, as I've mentioned before, I prefer the smaller steamer because of the way they fit into my modeling. One thing I have done to give variety to my small fleet of 0-6-0 steamers - other steamers will follow - is to decorate then differently. I've used models by separate manufactuers and detailed them in such a way as if they had been modified while being shopped as was often the way with the prototype roads.
I think CNJ made this point sometime back about these trends. The idea that a company being "idiotic" enough to merely turn out large locos is pointed but the problem is we are seeing it occurring right now. Some other markets have displayed that very behaviour in recent years in other ways. In the rush for the quick buck whole segments of the hobby market get hardly anything at all.
It might be interesting to see just how many hobbyists do buy the large locos for just the collection end of things to see just how deep that money pit potentially is. Because if it is as deep as I think it is, we may be seeing this dog and pony show trending this way for awhile yet. And if this is so, then the ol' used loco market may just be the way to go---if not, then----?
Sheldon,C'mon, you can't say, "My position has never been that these companies should not make large steam..." when you also say "What we don't need is another 4-8-4 or 4-12-4, or 2-10-2." If you are telling folks they don't need something, that's the same as saying they shouldn't make something, 'cause if you don't need it, why make it? Right?
BTW, what "record breaking sales numbers" are there for the Bachmann 2-8-0? Considering that sales numbers are probably the most highly kept secret in the hobby today, how can anyone (other than Bachmann) know they had "record breaking sales"?
If the 2-8-0 is the evidence of this supposed high interest in small steam, then where is the interest in the Athearn/Roundhouse 4-6-0 and 2-6-0? Or the Bachmann 4-4-0? Do these have "record breaking sales numbers" too?
What I think is funny here is that you, who is arguing against more big steam production and can't understand why they keep being made, actually has an Allegheny, a N&W Class A, and 2 Reading T1's. Meanwhile, I don't have a single one of these "name" big steam engines, unless you count the NH's I-5 4-6-4. Kind of ironic, eh?
Just for fun, I looked up my New Haven RR Summaries of Equipment:
Barry:
I'll kinda/sorta jump in here on a purely personal basis.
I model two specific railroads--Rio Grande and Southern Pacific, and as everyone knows, I'm 95% steam by choice. Which means that for power, I've got to go at least 95% brass for ANY kind of Rio Grande steam, and about 80% for Southern Pacific (unless I want a currently available mfgr's models, which would make my SP roster nothing but either Cab-Forwards or GS-4's and pretty much ignore everything else.) .
In order to get small or medium steam for EITHER railroad (everything from an 0-6-0 to a 2-8-2) I still have to go used brass. Frankly, I've gotten so used to doing used brass that I just kind of shrug and say, "Okay, here we go," when I'm looking for a new steam loco for either railroad, either small, medium or large. Now personally, I don't mind, I like 'tinkering', and more often than not, I'm pretty amazed at how well they run right out of the box. And I think that in my case, being railroad specific, it's pretty much how it WILL be.
Funny thing, I've been showing photos of some of my smaller steam lately (just to prove that I HAVE some, LOL!) and several posters have said, "When do we get to see more of your articulateds?" Which makes me kinda/sorta smile. I run my articulateds, sure. But a lot of times when I'm in a purely 'operational' mode--at least as much as my MR will allow--I'm usually running 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 4-6-2's and my neat little fleet of 2-8-2's. None of these, BTW, are USRA's, because USRA types, historically speaking, never made a dent in either of my prototype rosters. HOWEVER, it seems to be the 2-10-2's and larger that get the attention.
'Tis a puzzlement. But I'll tell you one thing, if Spectrum or anyone else ever came out with a RTR plastic version of a Rio Grande C-48 2-8-0, or one of those delicious SP series of the same wheel arrangement, I'd have a fleet of them so fast it would make your--and my--head spin!
Maybe it's a market that we steam lovers have to keep secret among us. Heck, I don't know.
Paul3 1/1/1931 Summary 0-4-0 1 0.1% 4-4-2 12 1.5% 2-8-0 15 1.9% 2-8-2 33 4.1% 2-10-2 50 6.2% 0-8-0 54 6.7% 4-6-0 56 6.9% 4-4-0 69 8.5% 4-8-2 70 8.7% 4-6-2 138 17.1% 0-6-0 144 17.8% 2-6-0 167 20.6% Paul A. Cutler III
Paul A. Cutler III
We getting into the Excell spreadsheets again?
I noticed the 2-6-0's were prevelant. But do you actually FIND them now being done for NH?
twhiteFunny thing, I've been showing photos of some of my smaller steam lately (just to prove that I HAVE some, LOL!) and several posters have said, "When do we get to see more of your articulateds?" Which makes me kinda/sorta smile. I run my articulateds, sure. But a lot of times when I'm in a purely 'operational' mode--at least as much as my MR will allow--I'm usually running 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 4-6-2's and my neat little fleet of 2-8-2's. None of these, BTW, are USRA's, because USRA types, historically speaking, never made a dent in either of my prototype rosters. HOWEVER, it seems to be the 2-10-2's and larger that get the attention.
That does not seem to surprise me. I'm getting summat here as well except that some people want to come see me running large diesels on what is a shortline? Since when does a --- excuse me for cobbling up something here--SD4000Mac show up on a shortline in my era? Not likely--
But t'is true---the large ones do attract the attention. Our smaller steam/diesels just buckle down and do the work---The Secret Market. It just might work--
I'd be intrested to hear specifically what small steam engines you guys think would sell. I would bet everybody in this thread comes up with a different answer. As much as I'd like to see more smaller steam in plastic, I just don't see something like a GN ten wheeler selling any where near as much as a UP 4-10-2. I think alot of people buying these big engines are buying them for the allure of these famous big steam engines. I just don't see this happening with an every day steamer only owned by one road.
I guess you could build more "generic" steamer like the Bachmann 2-8-0 and 4-6-0's, which aren't correct for anything (although they do look nice), but I personaly wouldn't buy anything like that unless it could be bashed into something accurate.
I would like to see some kind of modular system used to build smaller plastic steam. Besides the USRA engines, most steam engines were RR specific, but many engines from different RR's had common parts. For example, a Baldwin built CB&Q O1 2-8-2 had the same boiler as a B&O mike. The same boiler would also fit a CB&Q O1A and an S3 4-6-2. Of coarse, things like domes, cabs, appliances and tenders would need to be tooled for each engine. I'm sure many more examples of this could be found. The down side would be all the initial research to find these similarities.
I believe this reuseing of common parts could help make these smaller steam engines more economically viable. Of coarse I don't know the first thing about manufacturing models and could be way off base.
John
John, I agree with you largely. As most of us would (probably ) agree, very few of us are really "modelling", even any one particular road. We might like one or two or three, and have a bunch of their available (or crafted) engines, but the fact is that most of us are collectors and players. We pick a road or five, take five years to get a stable that is quite a hodge-podge of engines, probably not very representative of the historical ratios, and we mostly play. Some of us actually go the the trouble of adding scenery, but playing with the trains is largely what the hobby means to us. So, we crave a limited form of excitement. For us, getting the gee-whiz factor almost always means the bigger, badder, somewhat rarer engines, and lately the inducements coming off the shelves have been what the manufacturers sensed we had a newfound hankering for. And largely they timed it right.
Meanwhile, most of us also have a couple of USRA name-its, an RS-whatever or six, ten ABBA F-sets, and the rest. We have the run-of-the-mill and were looking for something more. The bigger badder engines in 1978 were constrained solely to brass or U-Make-Its. Today,....well, we have one foreign member (who hasn't posted in quite some time BTW) who has every one of the UP PCM Big Boys. I know 'cuz I pointed out to him that the glass shelf he had set them on to image them had a distinct sag in it!
Guys, a smart cookie in business follows the money. Where's yours going? I'll tell you where mine seems to go. Add up the numbers and it should be as clear as the view out your back door.
selector John, I agree with you largely. As most of us would (probably ) agree, very few of us are really "modelling", even any one particular road. We might like one or two or three, and have a bunch of their available (or crafted) engines, but the fact is that most of us are collectors and players. We pick a road or five, take five years to get a stable that is quite a hodge-podge of engines, probably not very representative of the historical ratios, and we mostly play. Some of us actually go the the trouble of adding scenery, but playing with the trains is largely what the hobby means to us. So, we crave a limited form of excitement. For us, getting the gee-whiz factor almost always means the bigger, badder, somewhat rarer engines, and lately the inducements coming off the shelves have been what the manufacturers sensed we had a newfound hankering for. And largely they timed it right. Meanwhile, most of us also have a couple of USRA name-its, an RS-whatever or six, ten ABBA F-sets, and the rest. We have the run-of-the-mill and were looking for something more. The bigger badder engines in 1978 were constrained solely to brass or U-Make-Its. Today,....well, we have one foreign member (who hasn't posted in quite some time BTW) who has every one of the UP PCM Big Boys. I know 'cuz I pointed out to him that the glass shelf he had set them on to image them had a distinct sag in it! Guys, a smart cookie in business follows the money. Where's yours going? I'll tell you where mine seems to go. Add up the numbers and it should be as clear as the view out your back door. -Crandell
I disagree totally. This does not sound like any of the modelers I know personally. No offense Crandell, but I have read a number of your posts see where you are coming from. But after 40 years in this hobby and having known a lot of modelers, I hardly think collectors and "players" are the majority of the hobby. Especially not in HO or N scale.
And many of the modelers I know, like my own roster, have mostly or only locos that fit the theme of their layout.
You should enjoy this hobby however you like, but to assume that your perspective on it is the majority or that "everyone" is "collecting" locos from dozens of unrelated roads or eras, denies what many many people have posted on boards like this one, and about this topic.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI disagree totally. This does not sound like any of the modelers I know personally. No offense Crandell, but I have read a number of your posts see where you are coming from. But after 40 years in this hobby and having known a lot of modelers, I hardly think collectors and "players" are the majority of the hobby. Especially not in HO or N scale.
I'm sort of guessing the collector that is being discussed here may not be the ones IN MRR'ing as such. The people I've come across who buy large lokies do not HAVE the layouts that we have. Better yet. They don't MODEL Railroads(ing) or any of that. They have display cases.
I've seen a few of these people who will buy 2 or even more of one specific engines. Some did buy in the larger scale but there were some who would buy even HO, N or S scale as well. You have a lot of modellers around who I also am acquainted with up here but then these guys that I have seen in the collectors realm comprise a whole 'nother critter---
Yep I'll have to agree that the big 10 coupled locomotives along with the huge articulateds got all the press.While the little guys did all the work.
Here's my smallest Great Northern steamer a class K1 4-4-2 yet to be painted non the less I love watching those 73"drivers churning away lol
Until they took over Penn Line, Bowser only had 3 locomotives, the ex-Knapp 4-8-2, the Challenger and the NYC K-11 4-6-2, so it's hardly surprising that the top 2 sellers were the Pacific and the Challenger.
BTW, the NYC K-11 Pacific is a small locomotive, relatively speaking.
That's hardly surprising, considering that the above constituted the bulk of the non-brass (and non Pennsy) steam power available after about 1960 or so. They were also cheaper than the more complex Varney engines (Mike, Berk, Pacific, Hudson, Reading Consol) that Varney made into the 50's.
A Varney Super Pacific sold for $57.50 in 1950, and that was without tender. That's the equivalent of over $500 today. IIRC, the Mantua Pacific sold for $29.95 or only the equivalent of $265. Mantua included a tender.
Paul3 What I think is funny here is that you, who is arguing against more big steam production and can't understand why they keep being made, actually has an Allegheny, a N&W Class A, and 2 Reading T1's. Meanwhile, I don't have a single one of these "name" big steam engines, unless you count the NH's I-5 4-6-4. Kind of ironic, eh?
No Paul the real ironic thing is that I bought both my Allegheny and my N&W Class A REALLY CHEAP on close out because they could not sell them all at retail or normal discount prices. The Class A was on a BLI factory direct clearance - see more on this below. And, all of these locos are lettered for my road name, none bought to "collect" for their "famous" status. I model the eastern mountains, these are eastern mountain railroad locomotives. Again, no Big Boys, Challlengers, GS4's, Cab Forwards, PRR anythings, 4-12-2's, FEF's, etc - no mater what Crandell says.
I am voting more variety of steam, not a shift from one to the other. Instead of three or four companies making the same locos, over and over, and having to dump the last of them cheap to get their money to invest in the next round, I'll bet they could do some stuff that's never been done, sell them all at a higher overall profit, and not be butting heads with the others in the business.
Bachmann gets this. They sell their stuff at pretty low prices wholesale, but from what I understand from dealers I know, they NEVER dump product like BLI does. BLI is on a very distructive business model that under mines the value of their product and hurts the hobby and the industry in the long run. I think this is evident by the number of "announced" products that have never shown up.
As for my roster, again, I am building a functional roster for a eastern coal hauler, just like those roads in real life, medium steam out numbers heavy steam. And, triple headed 2-8-0's pulling 40 hoppers is just as exciting as train I've ever seen, real or model.
andrechapelon -- The Varney Docksider and Mantua switchers and General were common on many layouts in the '50s and '60s. But so were the Varney Old Lady, Casey Jones, and Mantua Pacific and Mikado. That's hardly surprising, considering that the above constituted the bulk of the non-brass (and non Pennsy) steam power available after about 1960 or so. They were also cheaper than the more complex Varney engines (Mike, Berk, Pacific, Hudson, Reading Consol) that Varney made into the 50's.
-- The Varney Docksider and Mantua switchers and General were common on many layouts in the '50s and '60s. But so were the Varney Old Lady, Casey Jones, and Mantua Pacific and Mikado.
Andre, even by the latter half of the 1950's the field of available HO die cast locomotives was already growing quite large and diverse. It could hardly be considered limited, nor the Docksider, Shifter/Big Six and General considered the "bulk" of the engines then available. In addition, both small and large steam, in inexpensive brass from International Models, et al (many examples selling at just a few dollars more than the die cast Mantua engines were), were also available. By "After about 1960", the field was really broad and in some respects as good as (maybe better) than today, so the widespread use of small locomotives that the poster you quoted suggests would have been as a matter of choice, certainly not one of availability. The period of truly limited availability/high cost locomotives were the years prior to and immediately following WWII.
I would also point out with regard to the all too often cited CPI bumbo jumbo, that having grown up in the 1940's-50's myself, the preceived value of sums like that $29.95 for a Mantua Pacific were not regarded as anything like the equivalent of $295.00 today. It was a different time and I can tell you that expendable cash was regarded in quite a different fashion than today.
onequiknova I'd be intrested to hear specifically what small steam engines you guys think would sell. I would bet everybody in this thread comes up with a different answer. As much as I'd like to see more smaller steam in plastic, I just don't see something like a GN ten wheeler selling any where near as much as a UP 4-10-2. I think alot of people buying these big engines are buying them for the allure of these famous big steam engines. I just don't see this happening with an every day steamer only owned by one road.
The critical thing is to get some variety in mechanisms. If you look at the 2-8-0, 2-8-2 models being made they are all either 48/50" or 61/63" drivers. If there were some 54/56" driver 2-8-0's made that would open a whole bunch of options.
Same with 4-6-0's. Most of the ones made have fairly small drivers. How about an engine with 68/70" drivers?
If you have the mechanism it is easier to kitbash/scratchbuild the boiler. I could change a boiler from narrow firebox to cameback, I can't kitbash a 63" driver into a 68" driver.
Its also amazing to me how many opportunities the model manufacturers pass up to offer varieties of steam. IHC offered a 4-4-0 and a 2-6-0. A 2-6-0 cameback was also offered. A 2-6-0 camelback is a really rare duck. Very few were made. On the other hand, thousands of 4-4-0 camelbacks were made and operated on dozens of railroads. The standard firebox and camelback boilers on the IHC engines are interchangeable. Did IHC offer a cameback 4-4-0? Noooooo.
Opportunity missed.
The Bachman Spectrum 4-4-0 and 4-6-0 are nice engines. Beautiful details and run well. The engines are detailed for the 1920-1930 era. By putting a kerosene headlight on the engines and taking off the generator you could backdate the engines to cover another 20-30 years (at least come closer to backdating the engine).
An opportunity missed.
A nice 1870's,1880's era 4-4-0 would go a long way. It would be close to a number of engines and the 4-4-0 was the "SD40-2" of the first 75 years of railroading. Virtually EVERY railroad owned them. The existing models are tooling and designs that are 30-40 years old.
If you asked modelers which deisel they want made, you would get dozens of suggestions. But that doesn't seem to stop manufacturers from producing new diesels.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
CNJ831I would also point out with regard to the all too often cited CPI bumbo jumbo, that having grown up in the 1950's the preceived value of sums like that $29.95 for a Mantua Pacific were not regarded as anything like the equivalent of $295.00 today. It was a different time and I can tell you that expendable cash was regarded in quite a different fashion than today.
Maybe the problem here is that perceptions between --dare I use this phrase--"eras" was different. As some historiographers put it--there were different 'mentalities' involved, differing value systems as such. Discretionary income essentially was not a commonality back than as it is now. The whole notion of discretionary income--or spending money--was something that not too many people thought they had even. It was only a matter of somethiing like 20 years or less from the depression of the 1930's. And a lot of folks were still kind of shell shocked from that.
If one was going to use CPI then it would then be done with an idea of keeping the eye on the savings as well. The savings rate back in the 1950's was much higher than now---something along 9% as opposed to some percentage I came across in Seeking Alpha for last August 2008 of just under 1.25%. We have, or rather may have, gained that extra discretionary at the cost of savings rate here---
Sheldon, you may be entirely correct. I was trying to account for the apparent insistence of the manufacturers these days of offering so many of the larger steam engines, and then announcing subsequent production runs. I don't see that your perspective does.
dehusman Its also amazing to me how many opportunities the model manufacturers pass up to offer varieties of steam. IHC offered a 4-4-0 and a 2-6-0. A 2-6-0 cameback was also offered. A 2-6-0 camelback is a really rare duck. Very few were made. On the other hand, thousands of 4-4-0 camelbacks were made and operated on dozens of railroads. The standard firebox and camelback boilers on the IHC engines are interchangeable. Did IHC offer a cameback 4-4-0? Noooooo. Opportunity missed.
Correct and I did a couple of kitbashes based on just that premise, one of which appears below.
CNJ831 dehusman Its also amazing to me how many opportunities the model manufacturers pass up to offer varieties of steam. IHC offered a 4-4-0 and a 2-6-0. A 2-6-0 cameback was also offered. A 2-6-0 camelback is a really rare duck. Very few were made. On the other hand, thousands of 4-4-0 camelbacks were made and operated on dozens of railroads. The standard firebox and camelback boilers on the IHC engines are interchangeable. Did IHC offer a cameback 4-4-0? Noooooo. Opportunity missed. Correct and I did a couple of kitbashes based on just that premise, one of which appears below. CNJ831
CNJ:
I think something along that line could be made and sell well---but do we see anyone with the vision to do something along this line? Nooooooo----
I like the look of that little fellow---
blownout cylinder CNJ831I would also point out with regard to the all too often cited CPI bumbo jumbo, that having grown up in the 1950's the preceived value of sums like that $29.95 for a Mantua Pacific were not regarded as anything like the equivalent of $295.00 today. It was a different time and I can tell you that expendable cash was regarded in quite a different fashion than today. Maybe the problem here is that perceptions between --dare I use this phrase--"eras" was different. As some historiographers put it--there were different 'mentalities' involved, differing value systems as such. Discretionary income essentially was not a commonality back than as it is now. The whole notion of discretionary income--or spending money--was something that not too many people thought they had even. It was only a matter of somethiing like 20 years or less from the depression of the 1930's. And a lot of folks were still kind of shell shocked from that.
Quite honestly, Barry, just to begin to explore how both the outlook of society and more particularly that of model railroaders has dramatically changed since the 50's would surely occupy hundreds of posts.
I would point out, however, that the whole concept of incurring almost limitless personal debt today was an unfathomable idea fifty years ago and has allowed manufacturers to jack the prices of products far beyond what would have ever been regarded as prudent in the past. There were essentially no widely circulated credit cards in the 50's, folks didn't unthinkingly put themselves into debt and there wasn't the host of mindless "must have" gagets we see today being pushed on the consumer to waste their money on. You bought only what you needed and not all that often. You bet the way society functioned financially back then was different!
onequiknovaI'd be intrested to hear specifically what small steam engines you guys think would sell.
OK; I'll take a stab at this!
0-4-0T: B&O Docksider
0-6-0: Harriman (UP/SP) 0-6-0, NYC B-10/B-11
2-6-0: generic Baldwin, small drivers
2-8-0: PRR H-9/H-10, Harriman-standard "small" 2-8-0, generic small Baldwin (57" drivers)
2-8-2: Harriman-Standard, NYC H-5, NYC H-10
4-4-0: generic pre-1875 Rogers, generic pre-1875 Cooke, generic "modernized" (post-1890) 4-4-0
4-4-2: Harriman-Standard 4-4-2
4-6-0: C&NW R-1, NYC F-12
4-6-2: Harriman-Standard light 4-6-2
I'm leaning heavily on Harriman and NYC designs for several reasons. First, they cover a lot of ground for both sides of the Mississippi. Second, both railroad conglomerates have HUGE influences over engine design, and a standard engine platform can cover (with various degrees of modification) hundreds or thousands of engines, covering up to a dozen railroads. None of these engines have been done in "modern" forms. You can find them as either clunky old brass or clunky old MDC/Roundhouse kits: take your pick. Finally, these engines look nothing like USRA designs, so they each have a uniqueness factor to them which should appeal to the collector, freelancer and proto modeler alike.
I would bet everybody in this thread comes up with a different answer. As much as I'd like to see more smaller steam in plastic, I just don't see something like a GN ten wheeler selling any where near as much as a UP 4-10-2. I think alot of people buying these big engines are buying them for the allure of these famous big steam engines. I just don't see this happening with an every day steamer only owned by one road.
True, but most of your answers will likely be knee-jerk biased answers based on a modeler's personal preferences. Besides the B-11s and H-5's above, I don't NEED any of the engines I mentioned above, and would only buy the R-1 out of sentimental reasons (chasing C&NW 1385 across IL and WI in the 1980s).
A GN, Wooten-fireboxed 4-6-0 might be a bit of a stretch. A Pennsy 4-6-0 wouldn't, nor would the R-1.
There's "generic", and then there's "generic". Both of the Bachmann engines you mentioned ARE prototype engines. The 2-8-0 is a Harriman-Standard heavy 2-8-0 built only for the IC. With minimal redetailing it can be turned into three different series of IC engines covering almost 300 road numbers. It's also turned out to be almost the perfect redetailing platform for engines from the ATSF, B&O, NYC and many other roads. The 4-6-0 out of the box is almost exact for a M&PA engine, and can be modified into many other post-1920 engines. This sort of generic steam model is perfectly acceptable, since they CAN be simply reworked into lots of near-prototype models. Virtually all of the newer IHC steam on the other hand is pure fantasy: they're not generic, they're freelanced, and not convertable into any real engine. I'd avoid this form of model producing like the plague.
I would like to see some kind of modular system used to build smaller plastic steam. Besides the USRA engines, most steam engines were RR specific, but many engines from different RR's had common parts.
Never gonna happen. Steam kits are dead, never to return except as VERY limited runs (and likely as VERY expensive models, along the line of DJH's excellent kits). The most we can hope for is for a common chassis with several different boiler and tender options, similar to Bachmann's 4-8-2 or 2-10-2 lines. That sort of project DOES require a fair amount of research to do properly, but if there's a big enough desire, I'm sure someone will step up to the plate. I just hope their research is sound!
Barry,There's only been one manufacturer of NH 2-6-0's. New England Rail Service (NERS) did a run of 2-6-0 K-1d's around 15-20 years ago in brass, and they were very expensive at the time compared to other brass. I have one, and I painted and decaled it recently for NH. There is now a DCC decoder in it, and now it needs some tweaking to get it to run perfectly. It's a nice little runner. But that's about it for NH 2-6-0's.
Here's a pic of one on a wire train (note the arched window cab...a NH trademark):http://www.railroad.net/articles/railfanning/worktrains/media/MW_19.jpg
My NH steam roster is as follows:I-4 4-6-2 NJ/Custom BrassI-5 4-6-4 NJ/Custom BrassI-5 4-6-4 Broadway LimitedR-1 4-8-2 Bachmann SpectrumR-3a 4-8-2 NJ/Custom BrassL-1 2-10-2 NJ/Custom BrassK-1d 2-6-0 NERS BrassY-3 0-8-0 W&R BrassY-3 0-8-0 Proto 2000Y-3 0-8-0 Oriental Brass
What I really need for accurate NH steam ops is more mainline power, not too many additional small steam. I know 2-6-0's and 0-6-0's were the most common steam engines on the NH in 1931, but they were used for specific purposes that I don't model. 2-6-0's were used for just about all local freights, and 0-6-0's were used for just about all small yards (of which the NH had many). However, I am modeling the NH's mainline between Boston and Providence. There were only two locals on the mainline that I can model, one from Boston and one from Providence (because I can't model every branch, just the main). Therefore, I only need a couple small steamers to operate them, plus a couple 0-8-0's to switch my Boston and Providence yards. Meanwhile, the NH was running hourly named passenger trains, and a dozen or so mainline symbol freights every day. I should have more Pacifics, Hudsons and Mountains, not Moguls, Ten Wheelers, and Americans.BTW, I should mention that the 2-6-0 and 0-6-0 fleet was reduced drastically from 1931 to 1943 because of the introduction of 1 DEY-1, 10 HH600's, 10 HH660's, 10 Model Y's, 19 44tonners, 65 S-1's, and 22 S-2's during this era. The NH was an early diesel road, and switchers and small local freight engines were some of the first casualties.
orsonroy There's "generic", and then there's "generic". Both of the Bachmann engines you mentioned ARE prototype engines. The 2-8-0 is a Harriman-Standard heavy 2-8-0 built only for the IC. With minimal redetailing it can be turned into three different series of IC engines covering almost 300 road numbers. It's also turned out to be almost the perfect redetailing platform for engines from the ATSF, B&O, NYC and many other roads. The 4-6-0 out of the box is almost exact for a M&PA engine, and can be modified into many other post-1920 engines. This sort of generic steam model is perfectly acceptable, since they CAN be simply reworked into lots of near-prototype models. Virtually all of the newer IHC steam on the other hand is pure fantasy: they're not generic, they're freelanced, and not convertable into any real engine. I'd avoid this form of model producing like the plague.
Thanks for the clarification. I was under the assumption there were no prototypes for those Bachmann engines.
Andre, even by the latter half of the 1950's the field of available HO die cast locomotives was already growing quite large and diverse. It could hardly be considered limited, nor the Docksider, Shifter/Big Six and General considered the "bulk" of the engines then available. In addition, both small and large steam, in inexpensive brass from International Models, et al (many examples selling at just a few dollars more than the die cast Mantua engines were), were also available. By "After about 1960", the field was really broad and in some respects as good as (maybe better) than today, so the widespread use of small locomotives that the poster you quoted suggests would have been as a matter of choice, certainly not one of availability. The period of truly limited availability/high cost locomotives were the years prior to, or immediately following, WWII.
Large and diverse? As compared to what? Most (not all, but most) die cast steam locomotives ever made by the likes of Varney, Mantua, Penn-Line, Roundhouse and English were in production by the early 50's. Except for Penn-Line and Roundhouse, they were also largely generic. And who limited the discussion to the Docksider, the Shifter/Big Six and the General? Certainly not I. I certainly said nothing about limited availability locomotives, although I do consider the Varney "Super" series expensive for their time. So what are you arguing about?
What you're overlooking is the fact that we were both kids back then and had a kid's view of pricing. I didn't think $30 was that much when I was a kid even though my parents might complain about paying that much for this thing or that. It wasn't until I was on my own that I really understood. Even when I was making $30 a month when my paper route, it was essentially all discretionary since food, clothing, shelter, etc., were paid for, so it didn't look like that much.
Sometime in the late 50's ('57 or '58, IIRC), some insurance company had a series of magazine ads based upon some supposedly average Joe making $82.50/week. I don't remember if that were gross or net, although I suspect the former. It works out to about $625/week in today's dollars. $29.95 is more than 1/3 of a week's income in 50+ year old dollars. You better believe people thought about it before they spent it. My dad made about twice that at the time and he certainly thought long and hard before committing that much money to anything that could be considered discretionary. So did his friends and acquaintances. And this was back when you could get a house for $15K. Not a McMansion certainly, but an adequate dwelling with a quarter acre lot.
If I could magically be transported back to, say, 1957, with a wife, 2 or 3 kids (, an income of of around $750/month (about what my dad made at the time and he had 5 of us kids), a mortgage, car payments, etc., you can rest assured I'd be looking at $29.95 in pretty much the same manner a 40 year old head of household in similar circumstances would look at $295 today.
orsonroy A GN, Wooten-fireboxed 4-6-0 might be a bit of a stretch. A Pennsy 4-6-0 wouldn't, nor would the R-1.
It would definitely be a stretch since the Pennsy and the GN used Belpaire fireboxes (with the square "corners"), not Wooten.fireboxes (with the wide grates).
But since I model the RDG, if you want to make an HO model 4-6-0 with a Wooten firebox, bring it on! 8-)
For goodness sake, Andre, read your own post! It was your response to the poster who noted that the Docksider, Mantua switchers and General were by far the most common engines seen on early layouts. The exact statement you make: "That's hardly surprising considering that the above constituted the bulk of the non-brass (and non Pennsy) steam power available after 1960." This, of course, utterly untrue.
As to availability compared to what, if you'd simply check the facts you'd find that more steam locomotives were in actual production at the time (1959) than you have today (2009).
With regard to how one looks at prices/expenses, whether from the position of a juvenile or as an adult when it came to model railroading by in the 50's, I saw it from both perspectives. Back then my dad was also a model railroading enthusiast, one with a pretty average blue collar job, while I worked part time. Neither of us considered spending $29.95 on a Mantua and a bit less on Gilbert (HO) locomotives any really big deal and we each purchased several (still have 'em too!). You simply put aside a little cash each week and in a month or so you had enough to make the purchase. The 1950's weren't the Depression, most people I grew up around had hobbies and at least some disposable income to spend on them.
dehusman But since I model the RDG, if you want to make an HO model 4-6-0 with a Wooten firebox, bring it on! 8-)
Next year, Dave, next year!
andrechapelon , with a wife, 2 or 3 kids (, an income of of around $750/month (about what my dad made at the time and he had 5 of us kids), a mortgage, car payments, etc., you can rest assured I'd be looking at $29.95 in pretty much the same manner a 40 year old head of household in similar circumstances would look at $295 today.
, with a wife, 2 or 3 kids (, an income of of around $750/month (about what my dad made at the time and he had 5 of us kids), a mortgage, car payments, etc., you can rest assured I'd be looking at $29.95 in pretty much the same manner a 40 year old head of household in similar circumstances would look at $295 today.
I agree with you, Mike. Back then, I remember a loaf of bread was 35 cents and candy bars were 5 and 10 cents, and a hamburger sandwich platter was 50 cents. So those prices have increased about ten-fold. A family could live very comfortably on $10,000 a year, which was significantly higher than average and since factoring inflation that's equivalent to about $100,000 now. (On the other hand, California sales tax was 3% whereas now it is nearly 10%, so while most prices have increased arithmetically over time, taxes have increased exponentially to a factor of 30 [10 times increase in prices times over 3 times higher tax rate].)
markpierce (On the other hand, California sales tax was 3% whereas now it is nearly 10%, so while most prices have increased arithmetically over time, taxes have increased exponentially to a factor of 30 [10 times increase in prices times over 3 times higher tax rate].) Mark
(On the other hand, California sales tax was 3% whereas now it is nearly 10%, so while most prices have increased arithmetically over time, taxes have increased exponentially to a factor of 30 [10 times increase in prices times over 3 times higher tax rate].)
This is very true, and a big part of the problem, regarding both the cost of the hobby and the economy in general. Many people today have less actual disposible income, not because products cost more than they should, but because the government now takes a larger PERCENTAGE of their income. On that note I will end because this will lead to discussions not approperate here.
But, taxes or no, the cost of most everything in out economy represents a similar number of work hours now to what it did years ago - primary exception noted above.
Paul3Barry,There's only been one manufacturer of NH 2-6-0's. New England Rail Service (NERS) did a run of 2-6-0 K-1d's around 15-20 years ago in brass, and they were very expensive at the time compared to other brass. I have one, and I painted and decaled it recently for NH. There is now a DCC decoder in it, and now it needs some tweaking to get it to run perfectly. It's a nice little runner. But that's about it for NH 2-6-0's.
Now you solved that mystery for me because I picked up one for $30 at a yardsale of all things just a couple of days ago! Now mind, this fellow goes after stuff in yard sales because he is a yard sale nut!!
Now the next question is what happens to all the brass tooling when someone goes----PTOOF!!
I think most of you are overlooking something, and it was brought up in one or two past posts. Roundhouse (Horizon) still has small locomotives available, as does Bowser, and the latter is no slouch when it comes to producing quality engines; if you still doubt, then check out their web site.
One thing also that seems lacking nowadays is the amount pf people accepting the challenge of taking a Roundhouse or a (Mantua???) engines, and making it into a better engine by putting in your time and reaching for the high standards. I don't decry the RTR-ers, or the people who aren't interested in this facet-this is their hobby, too. I am saying to those who have it in them to consider what I say here, and maybe give it a try.
Rich
(Yellowjacket EF-3)
CNJ831 With regard to how one looks at prices/expenses, whether from the position of a juvenile or as an adult when it came to model railroading by in the 50's, I saw it from both perspectives. Back then my dad was also a model railroading enthusiast, one with a pretty average blue collar job, while I worked part time. Neither of us considered spending $29.95 on a Mantua and a bit less on Gilbert (HO) locomotives any really big deal and we each purchased several (still have 'em too!). You simply put aside a little cash each week and in a month or so you had enough to make the purchase. The 1950's weren't the Depression, most people I grew up around had hobbies and at least some disposable income to spend on them. CNJ831
While reading your post, I was reminded of my senior year in college (1960) and the fact that instead of living in a dorm, I had decided to rent an apartment with a buddy of mine. I had more than enough income from a well-paying summer job working for the Forest Service to afford it (with a roommate) and so did he. We settled into a studio apartment, and I brought along my trains.
One day in downtown Sacramento, we went into a hardware store to get some picture hangers. The hardware store also had a fairly good-sized section devoted to model railroading. In a glass case was a PFM 1950 Santa Fe 2-8-0. I stared mesmerized at my first brass locomotive. My roommate, having bought his picture hangers, came up and admired it with me ( he was not a model railroader but he thought it was neat when I set up a temporary track and ran what trains I had at the time). He said, "Wow, that's cool." I stared at that little bitty piece of artwork. Mike, my roommate blinked at the price. "Wow, that's almost FORTY DOLLARS!" I just stared at it. I looked over at him. "I think I can afford it." He blinked. "How will you pay the RENT?" I just stared at him. Now mind you, this was my best friend in the whole world, but he Squeaked when he Walked.
I took it home. We put it on the kitchen table and just stared at it for the rest of the evening. All Mike could think of was that we'd be living on potato chips for the rest of the month because I really COULDN'T afford the $39.95 I had just spent on a little hunk of brass and he'd have to pay the whole rent for the next month. Funny thing was, I COULD afford that forty dollars at the time, due to Overtime on forest fires and the fact that almost everything else in those days was CHEAP! Yah, it was kinda/sorta of a hunk of change, but guess what--almost fifty years later, that little PFM (with a new motor) is still chugging around my layout and enjoying the heck out of itself. Even back then, it turned out to be an Absolute Bargain. And it didn't cost me any rent at all.
In current market values, it might cost me a house-payment today, LOL! That is, if I didn't consider it "Disposable Income", a term that we didn't even know EXISTED back then.
I called Bowser today to order some small parts and other things for a couple of steam locomotives. Also to check on the G-5 ten wheeler I have on back order. They have six on back order and will produce the engine if enough orders are received. They still have several H-9 Consolidation kits available. I couldn't help notice the number of references in the various posts to the G-5. Basicly Bowser has stopped manufacturing steam locomotives. If those that are interested in the small locomotives as I am, please call and order. I mentioned the number of posts on this subject.
twhite One day in downtown Sacramento, we went into a hardware store to get some picture hangers. The hardware store also had a fairly good-sized section devoted to model railroading. In a glass case was a PFM 1950 Santa Fe 2-8-0. I stared mesmerized at my first brass locomotive. My roommate, having bought his picture hangers, came up and admired it with me ( he was not a model railroader but he thought it was neat when I set up a temporary track and ran what trains I had at the time). He said, "Wow, that's cool." I stared at that little bitty piece of artwork. Mike, my roommate blinked at the price. "Wow, that's almost FORTY DOLLARS!" I just stared at it. I looked over at him. "I think I can afford it." He blinked. "How will you pay the RENT?" I just stared at him. Now mind you, this was my best friend in the whole world, but he Squeaked when he Walked. I took it home. We put it on the kitchen table and just stared at it for the rest of the evening.
I took it home. We put it on the kitchen table and just stared at it for the rest of the evening.
Tom, I purchased two of the PFM 1950s class locomotivesover a period of several years in the 1960s. One was pre-RP-25 wheelsets, and one with RP-25 wheelsets. Both ran well, with the later one even smoother. They were well-built, handsome models. As a high school student back then, that was lots of money but it was well worth it.
I was up on the roof yesterday evening, nailing down shingles, and thinking about things, including this topic.
It seems to me that the postwar years saw a lot of newbie model railroaders, who were also busy starting families and generally getting things going (after the war). The small tabletop model railroads with small steam or diesel locos and sharp curves were parts of a system that worked well for people in that situation. It's a system that, on the whole, demands little time, effort, and attention. The small equipment functioned well on the small layouts.
This system still works well for people in similar getting-things-going circumstances. I can attest to that. However, a lot of MRRers are older now or retired, and today's favorite style needs a lot of track and cars, and a fleet of big locos - the medium to large-sized, staging yard-dependent mainline layout. It's not the only style around, but it does seem to be in favor. This needs a lot of time, effort, and attention. Perhaps this causes more people to put off construction longer, and collect more equipment in the meantime.
Another unrelated thought: a lot of us are modeling the transition era so we can get steam and electrics and dismal-electrics together. By that time, however, a lot of the steam in use was the large mainline steam, sadly sinking into disrepair and ever-more-secondary roles. The small, older locos were the first to go, except for some cases (like the Wabash 2-6-0s) where they had a niche to fill.
Just a few thoughts...shingling tends to generate those.
Hi from Belgium,
I am modeling in Nscale american models and we have the same problems with this scale, big steam, articulated or big rigid base like big mikados or mountains. My layout is in the steam erea.
I have heard often from manufacturer that because of the tiny scale it's easier to make a big engine.
I COULD'NT AGREE IN ANY WAY in Nscale or in HO scale for US steam models; because the manufacturer in Europe are obliged to make tiny engines in both scales, because here in Europe we have had many tiny steam engines like 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 and a lot of this arrangemt with very small tender.
So if Fleischmann or Roco or Marklin for HO or Hornby, Roco, Kato for N scale can do very small European steam engines with remarkable running qualities, I could'nt beleive that the American manufacturer couldn't do it too for small americans ones.
I am often on a lot of forum and when asked, a lot of modelers in all the scale whish to see small steam engines on the market .
I hope to see small engines in all scale like 0-6-0 or 0-4-0 switchers, and why not a good docksider.
Both in Nscale and HO scale the Walthers Proto heritage 0-8-0 switcher was a hit.............
Marc
Marc_Magnus Hi from Belgium, I COULD'NT AGREE IN ANY WAY in Nscale or in HO scale for US steam models; because the manufacturer in Europe are obliged to make tiny engines in both scales, because here in Europe we have had many tiny steam engines like 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 and a lot of this arrangemt with very small tender. So if Fleischmann or Roco or Marklin for HO or Hornby, Roco, Kato for N scale can do very small European steam engines with remarkable running qualities, I could'nt beleive that the American manufacturer couldn't do it too for small americans ones.
Hi Marc in Belgium,
I stopped by a train shop in Brussels last month a few blocks away from the location pictured below, and don't recall seeing a steam locomotive larger than a 2-10-0 in the American Whyte classification system, but then my impression is that there were few large steam locomotive prototypes in Europe compared to the U.S.
Marc, I think you were bringing several issues to your comment and its underlying opinion. It is one thing to make a small engine, another to be able to sell it, and another to make a good quality small engine that will also sell. Are the typical Fleischmann N scale engines selling for the same price as the typical Bachmann or whatever N. American model N scale engines of the same caliber and complexity? My understanding has been that Euro engines are much more expensive, and I would guess that at least part of that extra cost goes into development and engineering and construction, including materials, that many N. Americans won't pay for.
So, I agree with the person you were talking about...you can make a small engine, but to make one easily that will also sell....well...now yer talkin' some problems in the market that MR represents mostly.
selector It is one thing to make a small engine, another to be able to sell it, and another to make a good quality small engine that will also sell.
It is one thing to make a small engine, another to be able to sell it, and another to make a good quality small engine that will also sell.
If they don't make 'em, they can't sell 'em.
Crandell,
You are absolutely right about the cost of European equipment. If the same prices was given on an American counterpart these forums would be in flames from the massive influx of complaints.To buy a Swedish engine similar to lets say a Bachmann 4-6-0 you would expect to pay roughly 500$. A typical diesel will run you 400$.
I would have a hard time seeing a US manufacturer releasing simple diesels and steam engines at those prices and be welcomed by the industry.
Magnus
Absolutely, Mark. You could also substitute, "If there is no market..." in place of "If they don't make 'em..." and "...they won't make them," for "they cant sell 'em," and still be accurately characterizing the very same situation.
Autobus Prime Another unrelated thought: a lot of us are modeling the transition era so we can get steam and electrics and dismal-electrics together. By that time, however, a lot of the steam in use was the large mainline steam, sadly sinking into disrepair and ever-more-secondary roles. The small, older locos were the first to go, except for some cases (like the Wabash 2-6-0s) where they had a niche to fill.
One good thing about modeling the Southern Pacific is that it had plenty of small and medium-sized steam locomotives, like 0-6-0s, 2-6-0s, 2-8-0s, and 4-6-2s, during the transition period up until the mid-1950s and especially in California, as well as biggies like 2-10-2s. 4-8-2s, 4-8-4s, and 4-8-8-2s.
markpierce Autobus Prime Another unrelated thought: a lot of us are modeling the transition era so we can get steam and electrics and dismal-electrics together. By that time, however, a lot of the steam in use was the large mainline steam, sadly sinking into disrepair and ever-more-secondary roles. The small, older locos were the first to go, except for some cases (like the Wabash 2-6-0s) where they had a niche to fill. One good thing about modeling the Southern Pacific is that it had plenty of small and medium-sized steam locomotives, like 0-6-0s, 2-6-0s, 2-8-0s, and 4-6-2s, during the transition period up until the mid-1950s and especially in California, as well as biggies like 2-10-2s. 4-8-2s, 4-8-4s, and 4-8-8-2s. Mark
MP:
Very true, and it's no coincidence that so much of our smaller steam is from SP prototypes, or based on those designs: the former Varney and MDC 4-6-0, several other MDC locos, and the Pemco/IHC Mogul, for instance. Fortunately, the SP had very elegant and classic steam, and it can pass for a lot of other railroads' designs without a whole lot of squinting.
Hi!
Sooner or later I knew I'd have to put my $0.10 in to this post............................
I model the ATSF - with a minor in the IC - both in the '40s/'50s. I've got the BLI Paragon 4-8-4, 2-10-2, and 2-10-4, and the Spectrum 2-8-0 & 2-10-0 for the ATSF, and the Spectrum 4-8-2 for the IC. That's great, and I'm thankful they have been produced.
However, I sure would like to get my hands on an ATSF 0-8-0, 4-6-4, 4-6-2, 2-8-2 and and an IC 0-8-0 and 4-6-2 - especially with DCC and sound. Given the popularity of the Santa Fe, it is a mystery to me as to why BLI, Athearn, P2K, or Spectrum do not offer some of these with Santa Fe characteristics (and NOT just markings like the BLI Mike produced a couple years ago).
Anyway, for what its worth........
Mobilman44
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Nice to see you at the "Grand Place of Brussels"; hope you have enjoy your holydays at Brussels and in Belgium.
Well I have seen some little Fleischmann engines in Nscale, a T3 a little engine without tender with dcc for 100euros or something like 130$ its had a lenght of 6.5 cm or 2.5inch.
Compared to a small american model like the whalters Proto 0-8-0 switcher it's the same price but without dcc. Same price for a small V1000 diesel Atlas but with dcc.
Today with the offer of the market all the good running engines are in this category of prices.
A Proto mallet in Nscale are with dcc in the 250$ range.
All the big HO steamers offer in the last months are in the 270 to 400$ with dcc.range
So If you want a small locomotives with good running capacities and dcc you need to pay something around 140$
This price is just in the range of the good running locos offer today with dcc.
So and I am modest, I still beleive that the possibility to make a small engine is possible with good running qualities.
Just ask the people about the model they want, but a small steamer which could be a small switcher and a local road engine could be a winner for sell; I am sure about it.
Ps Did you remenber the name of the train shop in Brussels?
Marc_Magnus Did you remenber the name of the train shop in Brussels?
Did you remenber the name of the train shop in Brussels?
No, but it was on a north-south street, on the east side of the street, that was a few blocks west of the central plaza (Place'?) from the former city hall, now museum, in the picture.
Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry
KemacPrr Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry
Holy Sufferin' Horseshoe Curve!!! Is that the one that if you forget it's a Duplex, turns out to be a 4-10-4?
Oh, Lordy, Lordy!
twhite KemacPrr Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry Holy Sufferin' Horseshoe Curve!!! Is that the one that if you forget it's a Duplex, turns out to be a 4-10-4? Oh, Lordy, Lordy! Tom
I can see it now----more Grumble Grouch---Crab Crab Gripe Snarl
blownout cylinder twhite KemacPrr Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry Holy Sufferin' Horseshoe Curve!!! Is that the one that if you forget it's a Duplex, turns out to be a 4-10-4? Oh, Lordy, Lordy! Tom I can see it now----more Grumble Grouch---Crab Crab Gripe Snarl
I'll come up with something better, and I've already got it. A 2-8-8-4-4-10-0-2-8-8-4-4-10-0. Of course, it's just two of my Yellowstones with pedestal tenders double-headed, but that wheel arrangement sure LOOKS impressive, doesn't it, LOL?
Unfortunately the 4-10-0 part of it doesn't have any drivers. BUT--on my MR, those 4-10-0's pick up power from one side, so it sure gives the 2-8-8-4 portion of the loco-tender combination a nice, broad contact with the rails, by golly!
twhite blownout cylinder twhite KemacPrr Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry Holy Sufferin' Horseshoe Curve!!! Is that the one that if you forget it's a Duplex, turns out to be a 4-10-4? Oh, Lordy, Lordy! Tom I can see it now----more Grumble Grouch---Crab Crab Gripe Snarl Barry: I'll come up with something better, and I've already got it. A 2-8-8-4-4-10-0-2-8-8-4-4-10-0. Of course, it's just two of my Yellowstones with pedestal tenders double-headed, but that wheel arrangement sure LOOKS impressive, doesn't it, LOL? Unfortunately the 4-10-0 part of it doesn't have any drivers. BUT--on my MR, those 4-10-0's pick up power from one side, so it sure gives the 2-8-8-4 portion of the loco-tender combination a nice, broad contact with the rails, by golly! Tom
OK--The next question would be where would you park the poor thing? I mean, the wheelsets alone would just about stick out anywhere you'd put it in your yards!----poor critter would be homeless---if'n you don't take a chunk o' real estate out---or build more up! LOL!!
And don't ask if ol' Shakey Pete up here in Williston would have space in his train museum---he just looked at the plans and went-----YYYEEEEEEKKSS!!!!!
blownout cylinder twhite blownout cylinder twhite KemacPrr Well then you will love the next release from BLI !!! How about a PRR Q-2 !!!! ----- Ken McCorry Holy Sufferin' Horseshoe Curve!!! Is that the one that if you forget it's a Duplex, turns out to be a 4-10-4? Oh, Lordy, Lordy! Tom I can see it now----more Grumble Grouch---Crab Crab Gripe Snarl Barry: I'll come up with something better, and I've already got it. A 2-8-8-4-4-10-0-2-8-8-4-4-10-0. Of course, it's just two of my Yellowstones with pedestal tenders double-headed, but that wheel arrangement sure LOOKS impressive, doesn't it, LOL? Unfortunately the 4-10-0 part of it doesn't have any drivers. BUT--on my MR, those 4-10-0's pick up power from one side, so it sure gives the 2-8-8-4 portion of the loco-tender combination a nice, broad contact with the rails, by golly! Tom OK--The next question would be where would you park the poor thing? I mean, the wheelsets alone would just about stick out anywhere you'd put it in your yards!----poor critter would be homeless---if'n you don't take a chunk o' real estate out---or build more up! LOL!! And don't ask if ol' Shakey Pete up here in Williston would have space in his train museum---he just looked at the plans and went-----YYYEEEEEEKKSS!!!!!
PARK it???? I'm still wondering how in the bloody Heck I could TURN it, LOL!
twhite Barry: PARK it???? I'm still wondering how in the bloody Heck I could TURN it, LOL! Tom
I'm sure that if'n MTH could do that overhanging boiler articulation then we could see summat like caterpillar articulation------boy there is going to be a lot of
This thread is getting a bit old now, but since I posted it Bachmann has released their Baldwin HO 4-4-0's and Athearn/Roundhouse is re-releasing their HO 2-6-0's,
Who says size does not matter? I love the large articulated locomotives of the N&W! But, they are expensive and even worse, they require a larger radius, which means more area used, in order to look "correct". I started out with 2-8-0's (the N&W W2's) but it was hard finding these locomotives. NWSL had some brass locomotives for about $200. That was about 20 years ago. I ended up with 2 of them. Hard to find anything else that ran well and looked good. So, I got into the Atlas RS3's when they first came out and some F7's. BUT, I love steam!!. Broadway Limited seems h-ll bent on building large locomotives. So, I have some N&W class A and J's, what are you going to do??
Craig North Carolina