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?
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/
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.
-Crandell
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.
Sheldon
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
- 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.
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.
- 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.
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.
Andre
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?
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.
CNJ831
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!
Ray Breyer
Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943
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.
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
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].)
Mark
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.
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!
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.