GTX765,I totally agree with your post. I tend to believe in a very wide interpretation of what makes someone a model railroader. An armchair model railroader is still a model railroader in my book. The usual reply to that from the other side is that just because you read a magazine about NASA doesn't make you an astronaut. My reply to that would be that model railroading is not a profession, it's a hobby, and it's up to each individual to determine how much time or money one spends on his or her hobby.
At any rate, you have to realize one important thing... This hobby is no different from any other. There are elitists in every human endeavour. Guns, cars, knitting, cameras, computers, gardening, doll houses, basket weaving, quilting, model rocketry, R/C, etc. Why should model railroading be any different? We just have to recognize elitists when we encounter them, and either take their "advice" or ignore it as we feel like it. The one thing you can't do is let it bother you.
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************
Paul, not in any way wishing to insult you but much of your long post's expressed opinions reflect your relative short duration in the hobby and lack of historical perspective. This probably is in large part why you fail to see the situation clearly. I'll try to address some of your misstatements in a limited space below.
With regard to who is a "real" model railroader, let me point out that from its inception, the adult hobby of model railroading has universally been regarded as a craftsman's hobby. It is not simply about owning and running miniature trains. Neither is it about collecting items. That too is a different pursuit, which in model trains has generally been associated with brass models, or antique tinplate. Neither approach makes you a "model railroader". Likewise, simply running store-bought trains on a board decorated crudely with store-bought pre-assembled structures, trees and other details, is what kids did in the 40's and 50's and that wasn't regarded as model railroading either. Those guys were referred to as having a layout, not being model railroaders.
Today, unfortunately, there is a growing faction in the hobby that doesn't wish to recognize that skills and talent, learned or otherwise, are prerequisites in model railroading. That outlook split the hobby once already fifty years ago and it may do so again.
Concerning "operators", most I know have fully scenicked layouts, not Dave Barrow's track on bare boards and are thus in the craftsman category. Playing with trains on a computer is not regarded as any form of classic model railroading. Why then would it be if doing so on just totally unscenicked bare boards?
Let's look at the "available" small steam locomotives again. Yes, there is the Spectrum 2-8-0. It's fine, as are the two smaller BLI engines. But the Spectrum 4-4-0 and 4-6-0 , plus the Roundhouse 4-4-0, 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 , are examples of turn of the last century designs, not representative of common steam motive power just before and during the transition era, no matter what claims are made. The Horizon steam engines never were all that good and most experienced modelers I know avoid them. IHC, while often fairly good runners, are highly inaccurate.
Now compare that to the steady run of monster, astronomically priced, new examples which appear at least twice a year now. Most are one road specific and not believably adaptable to any others. It's quite difficult to assemble a reasonable roster of modest, late-steam-era, engines today and very few of the affordable ones are suitable as kitbash fodder.
With regard to the decline of brass, it had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the rise of BLI, or any other modern plastic loco manufacturer. The decline of brass began back in the mid 1980's as prices outstripped the ability of the average hobbyist to pay. By the time BLI et al. came on the scene, the interest in brass had dwindled to a tiny niche element in the hobby.
CNJ831
A couple of points - first, I'm reliably informed that this loco is rigid, with a lot of lateral motion. I'd assume the same will apply for the BLI 4-12-2 when it comes out.
Second, from what I'm told, the cost of producing say, a 2-10-0 isn't too different to producing a 2-8-0 or 2-6-0, the problem being that the perception is that the loco should be proportionally cheaper. This has tended to make manufacturers nervous about making smaller locos. The same applies for "boring" "everyday" locos, versus the large locos that have been produced. The PCM I1sa has to an extent changed that perception - it was a loco needed in large enough quantities by enough PRR modelers that it sold out very quickly, and so I think BLI have been encouraged that more utilitarian locos can be produced.
That the hobby is divided in unquestioned, but I hope few of us in the overarching whole, called "The Hobby" won't let these arcane divisions stand in the way of cameraderie, mutual respect, and admiration for the interests and abilities that we all bring, and for what we all have in common...a healthy affection and interest for railroads and what they do.
I understand the differences as John lays them out, and I don't disagree. Even though I am very new to "The Hobby", I do see clearly that many long-time members are dedicated purists who strive to fabricate much of what they place in dioramas or on layouts. Their interest is in the measuring and shaping of raw materials to resemble carefully scaled and recognizable items that are remarkably like miniature versions of the larger prototype.
At the same time, there are the operators. These are guys who may dabble in the aforementionted, or maybe a lot of it, but they also like mimicking what railroads do on their scale layouts. It would be reasonable to suspect that some of them would be more interested in operations than in the scale modelling, the building, and would be pleased to have something close that comes ready to run.
Then there are guys like me who works like heck to erect something passably like a wooden trestle and calls that a milestone. But he is darned glad he doesn't have to cut and bend plastic and brass and fit motors and gears together to get a locomotive that he needs. Operations with that RTR whatsit is another thing altogether. Some of the non-craftsman types might do more operations that anything, and be happy with the Plywood Pacific.
I have left messages with BLI asking them to start helping those who are not Pennsy/NYC/UP/N&W/ATSF fans and who need Pacifics, Consolidations, Mastodons, and others from different roads. I would be happier knowing that they agreed and that at least a few of you disappointed fellows who could really use a break (and some nice RTR engines) would soon find relief.
-Crandell
Eddie_waltersfirst, I'm reliably informed that this loco is rigid, with a lot of lateral motion. I'd assume the same will apply for the BLI 4-12-2 when it comes out.
There would then be enough laterality to the wheelsets to make for a good overhang(!). Hence---when laying track--that is, if you are doubling track--around a turn make sure you drop one curve more than the 2" standard from the top curve. The parallel would be about the same but wider distance apart--
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/
Well, I think it's easy to see what my road of interest is. My comments on several aspects of this thread are:
I have indeed been "pricing" Q2 models on ebay for a few years, the cheapest and best deals seem to be WSM can motor units that sometimes go for about $350. If they run like my N2 2-10-2 ($200 not running with N6b caboose- repaired in 45 minutes), they won't need remotored. Of course, add the cost of Quantum/Tsunami/Loksound, and the labor, plus factor the single rail pickup, and larger radius required, not to mention painting, and that BLI price starts to look pretty good.
I would, however MUCH preffer to purchase three or four (or even five or six) H class 2-8-0 models of the same quality. I could actually USE those on my layout, for scheduled trains that spend time operating, not just as run through power.
I guess I'm placing myself in both collector AND modeller categories. Read my post and form your own opinion, though.
My current "layout" is 15x19. I think that quallifies as "medium". I have 24" minimum radii with "guestimate" easments on a doubletrack main with 2" centers, which become 2.5 inch on the curves, because I keep both tracks 24" R. my trackplan could be considered an operational display loop. It is continuous run, but set up for point to point.I have a 27 car capacity yard, a 20 car capacity yard, one 8 car capacity passing siding each direction, 7 industries (none in yards), and an interchange. I use a car card and waybill system. I also sometimes just run a train in each direction and watch.
My largest engines are the BLI J1 and T1. I have "just run" both at the same time in opposing directions. No problems on curves.
Even at 15x 19 that J does look silly with only 10 or 12 cars. Any more and the train takes up 2 walls.
Typical train length is about 6-9. Hmm, what engine would be a good choice...I know a 2-8-0!!
Lat year I took a BLI 2-8-2, and (gasp) cut off the trailing truck, and stuck on an MDC PRR boiler. Guess what? It came out pretty good. This year, I'm approaching it from the other end. I bought an ebay Gem H10, and I'm putting in a can motor and DCC/sound. So far it's a "wash" for what you end up with for the time and money. The Gem still looks better, the BLI still runs better. I figure I've got about $300 and 40 hours in each of them. After I get three or four done, BLI or MTH will probably release one. Honestly I think I would rather just pay the $300 and get it RTR. I have also built Bowser L1, K4 and B6 models. The L1 is going to get a BLI 2-8-2 running gear transplant (even after me hand assembling the valve gear). Nothing beats both rail pickup from the drivers!
My wife and I are looking to buy a new house in the near future. We are eyeing a foreclosure ;). One thing high on the list is the ability to add on to the existing garage (I have a classic car hobby, too), and build my dream 24x30 layout depicting Xenia Ohio and the Springfield Branch and the line to Dayton on the upper level, and "display loop" and staging representing Columbus and Cincinatti on the lower.
One other problem no one has mentioned is that BLI and MTH are duplicating efforts. I'm also an N&W fan, but come on, a THIRD J class offering? I thought the MTH K4 was a mistake, but the J is just nuts. Didn't they also duplicate an NYC engine? If MTH would have made those H10 2-8-0's instead.......
BTW I'm not made of money, either. I'm just extremely efficient with a knack for finding good deals, and have good budgeting skills.
If MTH can sell Centipedes, Passenger Sharks, H10's P5a(m)s, Little Joes, EF-3, etc to O scalers (colletors or whatever), they can probably sell those same models in HO, or we should at least let them try.
1948PRROne other problem no one has mentioned is that BLI and MTH are duplicating efforts. I'm also an N&W fan, but come on, a THIRD J class offering? I thought the MTH K4 was a mistake, but the J is just nuts. Didn't they also duplicate an NYC engine? If MTH would have made those H10 2-8-0's instead
The economics alone in this scenario is crazy but there it is---there have been previous threads on this topic that did discuss the duplication. My thinking is that this is another fine way of doing cut throat business----who makes a better 2-12-2 than who?----one that was articulated at the front hence causing a boiler overhang WWAAAAAAAAYY over here---or a rigid frame that has a potential for lateral overhang? The things you mentioned where the ones that got them into certain 'Legal' issues too.
And both made by the same manufacturer? As in, more lawsuits anyone?
1948PRR One other problem no one has mentioned is that BLI and MTH are duplicating efforts. I'm also an N&W fan, but come on, a THIRD J class offering? I thought the MTH K4 was a mistake, but the J is just nuts. Didn't they also duplicate an NYC engine? If MTH would have made those H10 2-8-0's instead.......
Thats the thing though, you are right the broadway J's are beautiful engines and excellent runners, but these are relatively scarce now. Nearly all the hobby shops within 100 miles in my area don't have them anymore, much less the 'in service' type which MTH is now for the most part accurately representing. And the bachmann J just doesn't match up, the stripe's color is all wrong, extremely light model, lacking in powerful headlight, just not my thing. MTH releases the first die cast J in HO, along with operational class lights, which are revolutionary for HO, plus sound, the only problem is the DCS. Other than that, the thing looks like a winner, either another run of J's would be needed from BLI, possibly in Blue Line, or paragon 2, but from what I've heard, this seems unlikely . So MTH made the right choice in choosing this engine. Its popular, certainly not obscure, it fits most of our needs. Some people have complained about the length of the draw bar, but for operational purposes, I am beginning to think I can live with this. Its really not that big of a deal. Believe me, I've tried running some broadways with the tender hitch on the second or even first hole, going around even 30" radius track just doesn't cut it. In my opinion, sometimes compromises have to be made, at least for me. Just sharing my thoughts, you have a right to your opinion as well.
However, the problems I have with both BLI paragon2 and MTH is the smoke, but hey I can just turn it off if I don't like it. If BLI is worried about money, they shouldn't be. Modelers (and collectors like myself) find fake smoke to be terrible. I used the smoke fluid on lionels before, after a few days I hated it. Never used it again. What good is smoke for if all it does is leave this black tar residue on the track, and it made my allergies act up reall bad too. At my LHS they test ran for me a mth k4, showing me the smoke, the synchronized chuff sounded and looked really cool when the smoke came out at appropriate intervals, but within 30 seconds I started to cover my nose and we all laughed. The LHS owners hate HO engines that smoke, they think this new addition is a terrible idea, but apparently a few minority customers like these things.
That Broadway is copying MTH in regards to synchronized chuff and smoke for financial reasons/competition, hey cool I guess, but I don't think many HO people will want these features. First I thought it would be cool, now I hate it. No offence to anyone who feels differently. Paragon 2 featuring smoke units is very disappointing to me. And whats with all these other gimmicks that come with the new Paragon 2 diesels? Sound fully equipped barn sounds, industrial steam sounds, Come on, whats up with this? If this is the future of model railroading, then I better hurry up and collect any vintage stuff I can find.
I will stick with paragon, blueline, and the brass hybrids, I think at this point. The exception is of course the MTH class J with the set of Powhatan Arrow cars. Unless of course I can actually find the rivarossi set somewhere...(yeah right). Will Rapido expand their Norfolk passenger cars? Fine cars but what good are they without the set?
Oh, and by the way as to the MTH K4, I agree, for the price they want, that engine is indeed a mistake, again all these gimmicks (smoke, crew talk), why? Why not focus on correctly operating marker lamps and class lights, or why not at least put jewels in place of operating lights, the Roundhouse 2-6-0 mogul had the green jewels and looked maginificient for a very reasonable price. I love that train, but they are virtually all gone now. I missed my chance to buy it..
As far as the nyc duplicate MTH is doing, that was another poor choice in my opinion. The BLI hybrid looks ten times better.
I really think BLI should focuse on hybrids instead of paragon 2.
Sorry, long post.....again,
I think most of the frustration on this board should be directed towards the paragon 2 line (rather than the brass hybrid line) for releasing such lame sound effects (again...farm animals?), its like this modern diesel has sounds simulating cows living in it, (that really was my first impression), on such common modern diesels that are heinously overpriced. Its outrageous and I think all of us can agree, we shouldn't stand for it.
1948PRR My largest engines are the BLI J1 and T1. I have "just run" both at the same time in opposing directions. No problems on curves. Even at 15x 19 that J does look silly with only 10 or 12 cars. Any more and the train takes up 2 walls.
Sorry, I forgot you said this. You make a valid point, I think that it sums up a lot of the opposition's greivances with BLI. They don't have the space to run these engines in prototypical railroad. I am in the same situation, the difference is, I don't mind it. I run about 15 cars max. behind my J1, I love it, even though it makes no sense. Of course maybe later in life after saving these engines, I can run them in more space. Detailed engines and simple operation is what makes it for me. After talking to my brother some more, I began to change my mind, scenery will take a back seat for now.
We all have our dream layouts, but what I have right now is good enough for me. However, others obviously feel differently on here, and thats fine.
CNJ831 selector This is not going to be very welcome news for many of you, but BLI has the Q2 listed for delivery late this year! That was the 4-4-6-4 Duplex which was the most powerful non-articulated steamer every produced. First they announce that they will make the UP 9000 series 4-12-2 engines, and now this!? Yet another example that, as I've pointed out before, the collector faction in model railroading and not the actual modelers, is what today is driving the manufacturers. If built to true scale and as a non-articulated just as the real Q2 was, the model will likely require track radii well in excess of 48" to operate (maybe 60"!). How many HO layouts have you every seen, or even heard of, with such specs? Don't expect to see many small, quality steamers in the future, that's clearly not where the market is going. The future is in making shelf queens. How's about a Pennsy S-1 next? CNJ831
selector This is not going to be very welcome news for many of you, but BLI has the Q2 listed for delivery late this year! That was the 4-4-6-4 Duplex which was the most powerful non-articulated steamer every produced. First they announce that they will make the UP 9000 series 4-12-2 engines, and now this!?
This is not going to be very welcome news for many of you, but BLI has the Q2 listed for delivery late this year! That was the 4-4-6-4 Duplex which was the most powerful non-articulated steamer every produced. First they announce that they will make the UP 9000 series 4-12-2 engines, and now this!?
Yet another example that, as I've pointed out before, the collector faction in model railroading and not the actual modelers, is what today is driving the manufacturers. If built to true scale and as a non-articulated just as the real Q2 was, the model will likely require track radii well in excess of 48" to operate (maybe 60"!). How many HO layouts have you every seen, or even heard of, with such specs? Don't expect to see many small, quality steamers in the future, that's clearly not where the market is going. The future is in making shelf queens. How's about a Pennsy S-1 next?
CNJ831,You seem to be looking in a very small box..Look outside of that box and you will see modelers has been buying what pleases them for years..How else can we explain a SD90MAC along side a 10 wheeler? The real reason behind that behavior isn't a collector..The reason is simple..This is a hobby that doesn't have any real disciplines or rules govern how a modeler should model.Model railroading has always been a free style hobby.
Then the PRR fans will be jumping for joy over this Q2 for sure.
Now then..
I agree that Q2 will look mighty silly going round a 22" radius..However,that seems to be the normal curvature for none Godzilla size basement layouts but,again that's like looking at a large mural with tunnel vision..How about the thousands of club members that buys this locomotive for club use?
Never forget the "cool,I want one" factor either..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I am a little slow on the switch this morning.
I learned about this item last night on the Broadway Webpage.
Im not going to pay the price and get one of these engines.I already have enough engines and prefer to spend the money on more important things.
In about a year when FDT starts to blow these things out for 200 bux call me and I might get a look.
Sadly I have no real interest in these monsters. BLI has done everything right and apparently made a engine the way I like to see them built.
The reason for my non interest is simple. There needs to be a market for smaller more common engines. Everyone is too much on one eastern road or one western road at the expense of so many other wonderful roads and thier engines.
To be blunt, if I see another engine being offered that is requiring 34 inches and number 10 switches to look and operate well and pull only 110 car trains that are longer than the house Im going to puke. And after the clean up, then get angry.
It's not so much the money. I retired about 40K in medical bills this year fixing broken stuff in life. 600 dollars is chump change. But better to have it directed at something useful than another monster that will be tossed onto the clearance and blowout rack in 18 months or less.
I feel that the hobby needs to accomodate those who are unemployed and possibly fighting to regain thier cash flow in a time of trouble and economic challenges. They are definately NOT going to spend 600 dollars on one engine. No way. Not in any meaningful numbers to count. They might get a IHC steamer and call it good enough first.
BRAKIE CNJ831,You seem to be looking in a very small box..Look outside of that box and you will see modelers has been buying what pleases them for years..How else can we explain a SD90MAC along side a 10 wheeler? The real reason behind that behavior isn't a collector..The reason is simple..This is a hobby that doesn't have any real disciplines or rules govern how a modeler should model.Model railroading has always been a free style hobby.
This is precisely the collector factor. Since the collector does go on raw emotion---"Look at the neato train!!!"---the collector is a VERY LARGE component in this whole shmozzel!! I'm not so sure the discipline part would work either---or was that a joke? I'm not so sure either that it was always a free style hobby---maybe for some but not always free style either way----
BRAKIEHow about the thousands of club members that buys this locomotive for club use?
Are you sure there are or rather will be that large a number of members who will buy that large a locomotive for "club use?" It could just as well be a collector using the club as an exccuse too. Because it has been seen up here a few times----guy never used it at the club because he found out the turnouts were 6 and 8----and he needed 10.
BRAKIE Never forget the "cool,I want one" factor either..
Which already was mentioned----heeheehee
Honest, Brakie, I don't have any blinders on.
I'll freely admit that many newer hobbyists and even some of the oldtimers, firmly believe that our hobby is absolutely without rules, regulations, or disciplines to be followed. However, that's really not true.
Just try submitting an article for publication written about a Plywood Pacific, a layout regularly running those SD90MACs along side 10-wheelers, or having towns and cities consisting of plopped-down, RTR structures and such and see if it's accepted by any of the magazines today. I can save everyone time by telling folks it simply won't happen. The best you're likely to get is a condescending smile and a rejection letter. To be acceptable, things in our hobby must conform to certain rules and standards. Simply put, the magazines understand that the hobby does have rules, even if the magazine editors don't wish to acknowledge this openly. In fact, the magazines themselves largely exist to show the reader the various "right" ways of doing things, like creating realistic scenery, accurate locomotives and detailed rolling stock. It's by no means an "anything is acceptable" hobby.
GTX765 If only the so called real model railroaders were involved in this hobby then most of the companies making this stuff would be gone by now.
If only the so called real model railroaders were involved in this hobby then most of the companies making this stuff would be gone by now.
Russell
CNJ831 BRAKIE CNJ831,You seem to be looking in a very small box..Look outside of that box and you will see modelers has been buying what pleases them for years..How else can we explain a SD90MAC along side a 10 wheeler? The real reason behind that behavior isn't a collector..The reason is simple..This is a hobby that doesn't have any real disciplines or rules govern how a modeler should model.Model railroading has always been a free style hobby. Honest, Brakie, I don't have any blinders on. I'll freely admit that many newer hobbyists and even some of the oldtimers, firmly believe that our hobby is absolutely without rules, regulations, or disciplines to be followed. However, that's really not true. Just try submitting an article for publication written about a Plywood Pacific, a layout regularly running those SD90MACs along side 10-wheelers, or having towns and cities consisting of plopped-down, RTR structures and such and see if it's accepted by any of the magazines today. I can save everyone time by telling folks it simply won't happen. The best you're likely to get is a condescending smile and a rejection letter. To be acceptable, things in our hobby must conform to certain rules and standards. Simply put, the magazines understand that the hobby does have rules, even if the magazine editors don't wish to acknowledge this openly. In fact, the magazines themselves largely exist to show the reader the various "right" ways of doing things, like creating realistic scenery, accurate locomotives and detailed rolling stock. It's by no means an "anything is acceptable" hobby. CNJ831
Well,unless the hobby has changed I still see it as it was years ago..A bunch of adults basically doing as they please when it comes to buying what they want.
Look more carefully at the next train show that has 2 or more modular displays and then asks yourself where is the discipline?
As far as writing a article..Get serious..Average joe modeler doesn't bother--just look at the Godzilla basement size layouts and above average modeling that gets publish vs. the more common average modeling..
No,magazines push agendas such as DCC,RTR,Sound,foam,scenery material etc from their advertisers by using a new "hobby great/expert ..Hard to believe? How many of the past hobby "leaders/experts" is still around or still in the hobby?
Gone are the articles on scratch building a locomotive,freight or passenger car.That died years ago.
So,its back to a free style hobby with no real rules or disciplines unless you care to follow the infomercials they call articles..
You do remember MR did a upgrade on the Carolina Central using Kato's Unitrack? There are other examples if you care to look starting in the 90s.
Look a tad closer at the pictures in MR..You may be surprise in what you see as far as RTR buildings,RTR cars etc.
Now,I suspect in the coming years there well be more prototypical modeling done by the younger modelers but,that day hasn't arrived yet.
Until that day arrives modelers will continue to free style or to use your favorite word "collect" what ever suits their fancy.The manufacturers knows this and we see this with every new announcement..Just look at the rash of short line locomotives on the older models..
And guys like us will be debating the different hobby styles..
I've tried to stay out of this one, saying it just doesn't apply to me. I'm not buying anything bigger than a 2-8-0, not at current prices and a hobby budget of $40/month.
The optimist in me likes to think that sales of these monster engines will encourage manufacturers to try smaller engines and earlier eras. But outside of Bachmann, I'm slowly being convinced that that will never happen. As has been pointed out, the average buyer of these monsters is buying it for the "cool" factor, - either display running or display period. It's not going to get used in an everyday train on the average layout. I would define that as collecting but many take umbrage at the label. Doesn't matter the reason why they are bought, the fact is the large locomotives sell.
I believe that there is sufficient market for both types of locomotives. Harkening back to the reasonably-priced brass era, both the articulateds and the 2-8-0s sold well. The AT&SF 2-8-0 was PFM's all time sales leader, according to Bill Ryan (founder of PFM). The Ma & Pa 2-8-0 had to be close behind based on the number I see on consignment shelves.
In an ideal world, the smaller engines - from 0-4-0s and 4-4-0s to 2-8-2s and 4-6-2s would dominate the market. It isn't and it won't happen because the hobby (however defined) is as much emotional as it is logical. Again, I can only hope that one day smaller and earlier steam will get some more manufacturing attention.
yours in having fun
Fred W
fwright Harkening back to the reasonably-priced brass era, both the articulateds and the 2-8-0s sold well. The AT&SF 2-8-0 was PFM's all time sales leader, according to Bill Ryan (founder of PFM). The Ma & Pa 2-8-0 had to be close behind based on the number I see on consignment shelves.
Harkening back to the reasonably-priced brass era, both the articulateds and the 2-8-0s sold well. The AT&SF 2-8-0 was PFM's all time sales leader, according to Bill Ryan (founder of PFM). The Ma & Pa 2-8-0 had to be close behind based on the number I see on consignment shelves.
In point of fact, Fred, in the glory days of brass small steam far, far out sold big articulated monsters. As you indicate, the PFM Santa Fe 2-8-0 was probably the best seller of all time, with the PFM UP 2-8-0 right behind. Each model sold between 3,000 and 5,000 units over the years! Likewise, I believe that the model with the single largest individual run may have been WMC's UP 4-4-2 Atlantic, with nearly 1600 units. Collectors back in the day were much more descriminating about choosing a range of models reflecting a given road's motive power. The "gee wiz" collectors are a more recent phenomenon.
John,I've been in the hobby "seriously" for 20 years. Earlier still, I grew up with an HO layout in my basement because my father has been in the hobby since just after WWII and switched over to HO scale around 1958-63. How many decades does one have to be in the hobby before one cannot be dismissed as some kind of newbie? What I'm saying here is that just because I disagree with you doesn't make me ignorant. You and I see the same things and come to different conclusions. That doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about, just that we disagree. You'd be a lot more pleasant to deal with if you realized that.
For example, you said, "It is not simply about owning and running miniature trains." Now there I strongly disagree. I believe that those who own and run minature trains are model railroaders because they are modeling a railroad. That belief doesn't make me some kind of know-nothing newbie.Now, if you wanted to change your labeling from "real model railroader" to "complete model railroader", then we would have no argument. A "complete model railroader" would do everything, from building models to running them on a well-done layout; basically everything you have defined above. Or you could call them "master model railroaders" to use the NMRA's term. Again, I'd have no argument. But when you start pointing fingers at people and telling them they aren't "real model railroaders" because they don't do what you want them to do, that just causes fights. Keeping today's date in mind, it would be like telling people they aren't "real Americans" just because they don't do things your way.
IRT model railroading on a simulator...of course it's not considered "classic model railroading". It's not old enough to be considered "classic". But building a world on the PC and making accurate computer models of equipment can take just as much time, effort and research as making a real-world model of it. IOW, yes, I consider TrainSim-folks to be model railroaders, too. To me, it doesn't make a whit of difference what medium a person uses to recreate railroads. Wood, metal, plastic, electrons...it makes no difference to me.
You then asked "Why then would it be if doing so on just totally unscenicked bare boards?" I'll tell you: because these "Plywood Pacifics" or whatever you want to call them are modeling a railroad...they just aren't doing it that well. For example, I have a good sized layout (25'x50') that I run Operations on. I don't have a lick of scenery on it other than the 30 building kits that I have built (most Walthers kits). I'd like to have scenery, but quite frankly I have next to no experience in making any. For the moment I'd rather spend my limited hobby dollar on buying & painting my NH models vs. buying hydrocal, screening, ballast, detail parts, etc. I'll be the first to acknowledge that my layout isn't very good because it's so bare, and that I am not any kind of "master model railroader" who thinks he's in the same category with the true masters of the craft. But to say I'm not a "real model railroader" because of it? I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more.
It's funny you mention that some of the small steam power is too old. We've got a member on this forum who keeps complaining that they are too new and what a hassle it is to backdate them to actual turn-of-the-century appearance. BTW, what about the Spectrum 4-4-0 with the steel cab? It's superheated, at least.
I do agree that there is a lot of super-huge steam power coming out year after year, and that it is difficult to assemble an accurate steam roster that represents an entire RR's real roster. However, I question how many people are actually interested in modeling a complete loco roster, even in proportion. RR's had a lot of small steam to run the inumberable local freights and yards that RR's had back in the steam days, plus commuter trains if you were close to a big city. How many model railroaders are going to be able to model that many freight yards and that many local freights or commuter trains?
About the brass...okay, allow me to rephrase my point. How about the rise of BLI, et al., put the nail in the coffin of the brass importers? My point was that why would anyone buy a brass model when a better running, equally accurate, and much less expensive plastic model is available? Well, other than the true brass collectors.
Rather than comment again on things I have commented on dozens of times, I will simply remind any manufacturers who might be reading that if they want my money they need to AVOID:
Anything with a rigid wheel base longer than 20 scale feet.
Anything that ran on the PRR.
Anything that has already been done by multiple manufacturers in the last 10 years.
Anything that costs over $400.00
I will consider locos that are:
Medium in size. Currently desired wheel arangements include: 4-4-2, 4-6-2, 2-8-2, 4-6-0
Any prototype as long as its features are not highly unique (like those of the PRR).
Preferably offered without sound and DCC, OR have low enough prices that the cost of those features are not a factor.
Any loco meeting this qualifications and having suitable running performance would likely be purchased in quantities of 2-4 of each.
Specific recommendations include:
Any/all Harriman locos, DT&I 800 class 2-8-2, USRA Heavy 4-6-2, C&NW 4-4-2, Any/all Reading or CNJ camelbacks, modern classes of B&O 4-6-0, just to name a few.
Sheldon
You should notice that the Q2 is part of the Hybrid line. I look at this line as a replacement for the less exspensive brass that we used to see like Sunset's "prestige" line that produced a number of nice brass engines that were cheap in terms of brass prices. I will be getting one of these for my layout to run. The hybrid line seems aimed at engine that will have a lower manufacturing run, but supply engines that modelers would not otherwise see.
There have been a number of nice smaller steam engines. The Bachmann 2-10-0, 2-8-0, 4-4-0, and 4-6-0 come to mind. The biggest problems with smaller steam is finding a prototype that will appeal to a number of modelers. The USRA light 2-8-2 and 4-6-2 are prime examples. Hopefully we will see UP and PRR 2-8-0's, as both the railroads have a large following.
The one thing I don't understand is the anger. There have been many engines produced that don't fit my layout in terms of era or railroad. However, that is just the nature of the game. I would love a nice Milwaukee Road Little Joe to pull my Walthers Hiawatha set, but no luck. We all have certain criteria an engine has to meet for us to spend the money. The Q2 may not meet your criteria, but then again the Bachmann 4-6-0 doesn't meet mine. The key is that we have more high quality engines then we ever did before. I can remember the 1980's and early 1990's, when all you had was engine that were poorly made and did not have the detail.
Eric
elauterbachThe one thing I don't understand is the anger.
I don't know that anger is the right word, but frustration surely is.
And it comes from one simple fact - the money that tooled up the third Big Boy, the forth PRR K4, the third GS 4, etc, etc, could have all gone into some locos for which the manufacturer would have had no competition.
I get that people like big steam - to a limit so do I, but this sillyness of eveybody making the same models, and all of them are same giant "collector" pieces is just crazy.
OK, now we are on to some new "giants", that's better than the same ones over and over, but some variety in size would be nice.
elauterbach You should notice that the Q2 is part of the Hybrid line. I look at this line as a replacement for the less exspensive brass that we used to see like Sunset's "prestige" line that produced a number of nice brass engines that were cheap in terms of brass prices. I will be getting one of these for my layout to run. The hybrid line seems aimed at engine that will have a lower manufacturing run, but supply engines that modelers would not otherwise see.
Exactly. Very well stated.
Paul3IRT model railroading on a simulator...of course it's not considered "classic model railroading". It's not old enough to be considered "classic". But building a world on the PC and making accurate computer models of equipment can take just as much time, effort and research as making a real-world model of it. IOW, yes, I consider TrainSim-folks to be model railroaders, too. To me, it doesn't make a whit of difference what medium a person uses to recreate railroads. Wood, metal, plastic, electrons...it makes no difference to me.
I could argue here that there is a difference, or rather distinction, between the various forms of Model Railroading. It's just that I do not see a hierarchical development between them. If there is/was no difference the very concept of 'model railroads' would be non existent. Nor would it be any different from playing with stones or such. I don't see why his concern for 'Real' modern railroading is an issue anyways. I see that rhetoric as more purist in approach while others have a different ( dang. There's that word again) way of approaching it. Hence, overall, the merry go round of dialog-------
Hi all I was emailing BLI for months trying to get them to make it. I sent pictures and every thing. I did a survey on 3 websites on how may people want a Q2 and I got about 150 replys and I emailed the survey to Broadway limited after the signing just about stopped. I got an email back and they said there talking and look what I helped do. When they told me that other people also emailed them they said maybe instead of no. And look now we got it. Im gonna get a dt402d and a Ur92 so i can run all functions. Like the auto pilot. I also emailed factory direct trains for there price and they say theyll put it on next week and there price soon. There gonna email me again about something im hoping about priceIm gonna buy at least 2 at the most 4
Adam
cointrain Hi all I was emailing BLI for months trying to get them to make it. I sent pictures and every thing. I did a survey on 3 websites on how may people want a Q2 and I got about 150 replys and I emailed the survey to Broadway limited after the signing just about stopped. I got an email back and they said there talking and look what I helped do. When they told me that other people also emailed them they said maybe instead of no. And look now we got it. Im gonna get a dt402d and a Ur92 so i can run all functions. Like the auto pilot. I also emailed factory direct trains for there price and they say theyll put it on next week and there price soon. There gonna email me again about something im hoping about priceIm gonna buy at least 2 at the most 4 Adam Pomeranz
Adam Pomeranz
Ah, the plot thickens. There's a powerful cult out there, this guy is part of it and he and the cult need to be stopped before any more damage is done.
Either that or we have to form an even more powerful cult that will overwhelm BLI with a flood of demands for Harriman engines that is of Biblical proportions. We'll give BLI a total of 40 days and 40 nights to get with the program. After that, they'd better either be able to tread water for an awfully long time or be well supplied with life vests.
Can I hear an AMEN, brethren and sistern?
Andre
andrechapelon Either that or we have to form an even more powerful cult that will overwhelm BLI with a flood of demands for Harriman engines that is of Biblical proportions. We'll give BLI a total of 40 days and 40 nights to get with the program. After that, they'd better either be able to tread water for an awfully long time or be well supplied with life vests. Can I hear an AMEN, brethren and sistern?
Amen Bro!!!
I have done my part...as I said earlier. I have pointedly asked Matt Williamson and team to start feeding the rest of the USA modelling world. No more UP/Pennsy/NYC steamers for the foreseeable future. 2012 at least!
Please!!
blownout cylinder andrechapelon Either that or we have to form an even more powerful cult that will overwhelm BLI with a flood of demands for Harriman engines that is of Biblical proportions. We'll give BLI a total of 40 days and 40 nights to get with the program. After that, they'd better either be able to tread water for an awfully long time or be well supplied with life vests. Can I hear an AMEN, brethren and sistern? Amen Bro!!!
cool
selectorThis is not going to be very welcome news for many of you, but BLI has the Q2 listed for delivery late this year! That was the 4-4-6-4 Duplex which was the most powerful non-articulated steamer ever produced. First they announce that they will make the UP 9000 series 4-12-2 engines, and now this!? I guess I'll have to start flippin' burgers. -Crandell
This is not going to be very welcome news for many of you, but BLI has the Q2 listed for delivery late this year! That was the 4-4-6-4 Duplex which was the most powerful non-articulated steamer ever produced. First they announce that they will make the UP 9000 series 4-12-2 engines, and now this!?
I guess I'll have to start flippin' burgers.
Crandell
I have been out chasing the 4449 out of Portland the last two days and have not seen the Q2 announcement. This probably means MTH will announce it also within a week or two. I for one will get the Q2 since I have a Westside Q2, but I don't install sound or DCC into standard brass locomotives. The pickup on one side of the locomotive and one side of the tender of the old brass does not make for good DCC operation.
Good to hear they are bringing it out. hope they realize the Q2 tender is not the same as the J1 and not use the same shell.
CZ