Hi all,
This week the Eastern Division of the TCA is hosting it's semi-annual train show in York, PA. This is one of the larger train show in the country and is somewhat unusual in that it is NOT open to the general public. You must be a TCA member to attend. The show is primarily aimed at 3-rail O gauge. However, several HO manufacturers have O-gauge product lines and thus attend the York show. This includes Bachmann, Atlas, and MTH. On the Wednesday before the show opens the TCA's National Toy Train Museum hosts an open house where each manufacturer gives a presentation on newly released and/or announced models. This time Mike Wolf broke with standard form and announced a new HO model, the Milwaukee Bi-Polar, that will appear in their next catalog.
I was able to snap a couple shots of the pre-production sample before Mike packed it up.
I'll try to get some additional shots at the show tomorrow. Unfortunately, one of the TCA's rules states that photography is prohibited in the show halls. I have the get MTH to let me take the engine outside to photograph it.
Thanks Dave, I see you posted this pretty darn close to midnight, go ahead and get some sleep, tommorow is going to be a long day. Keep us posted. When does MTH plan on releasing the next HO catalog?
Thanks,
David (bluegill1)
Looks like a nice model. I won't be getting one of these, but I have been considering getting Lionel's version of this engine (252) from 80 years ago. I wonder what radius this new MTH model will run on, and if they had to make similar compromises as they did with the 4-12-2?
_________________________________________________________________
This one is going to be a winner!
I hope it will also be released in an earlier paint scheme!
Carp!!
I might have to break my "no MTH" vow, but only if it comes out without a decoder.
Wow. That is a unique locomotive, to be sure. Here's a link to the Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road_class_EP-2
Once again, I find myself wishing I had an electrified line. First the Little Joes, and now these.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Thanks for the photo update, Dave...great shots.
boy, I got to tell you that based on the success of the Little Joe, this is going to be a winner indeed. With Fox Valley just releasing the Hiawatha in HO ( a very beautiful set and their first release in HO) the Milwaukee modeler is going to have a feast of new and excellent models to choose from.
This isn't a model that you'd ever see Athearn or Atlas doing - I'm glad these newer companies like Fox Valley and even MTH, offering such a versitle selection of motive power besides run of the mill GP9's and E- units.
This is Brass territiory and I'm glad to see this type of model being offered to the masses at what will probably be a very reasonable price to the consumer - my prediction is that this electric will be a big hit.
I just picked up the Hiawatha Set for a friend at this past weekends' Lockheed Martin train show and for their first time out in HO, I think I'm going to like this company alot.
Kudos to MTH and Fox Valley for the breath of fresh air on new and different products.
HeritageFleet1
Trynn_Allen2 Carp!! I might have to break my "no MTH" vow, but only if it comes out without a decoder.
And that will be the all important question.
So it is a good time to be a Milwaukee fan, between MTH, Fox Valley and Walthers recently.
But since I don't model the Milwaulkee, or the Southern Pacific, Union Pacific, (fill in the rest of the big name railroads who owned all the "famous" locos, PRR K4, Big Boy, GS4, etc, etc,) and since I don't collect - AND since the soon to be released FA's are not offered undecorated or in anywhere near the number of roadnames who owned those locos, MTH is still not on my shopping list.
Sheldon
On no!!!!
First the Little Joe, now Bi-polar! Looks like I'll may be building a new layout.
Funny how some self proclaimed "experts" here told me years ago there is no "market" for the Little Joe, let alone a Bi-Polar.
I guess Mike likes to prove them wrong.
Thanks for the great news and pictures!!!
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
WOW! That is one sweet looking engine. All the detail, right down to the engineer, its so sharp. Although I don't model Milwaukee, I've got to hand it to MTH for releasing such highly detailed, metal models, and in such a timely fashion.
Congrats to all you Milwaukee guys, looks like a winner. I hope they consider releasing some unique Pennsy engines in HO. They have produced some fantastic models in O gauge, quite rare models too, like the FF-1 electric and the S1 duplex.
Heritagefleet1 Thanks for the photo update, Dave...great shots. boy, I got to tell you that based on the success of the Little Joe, this is going to be a winner indeed. With Fox Valley just releasing the Hiawatha in HO ( a very beautiful set and their first release in HO) the Milwaukee modeler is going to have a feast of new and excellent models to choose from.
There;s also a rumor of 261 in the new catalog. So you may be more right than you know about the MILW feast. I just hope it ends up as one and not a dud liek the SP "feast" has been, with two Daylight sets, the Cab Forwards, the 4-8-2s, and a thrid possible consist (from Athearn, if they're still planning to do it), we got a model that's printed font is too light to read, one that leaks light, an AC12 that cannot pull its own weight at speeds even a Shay would consder slow...
Nice model though, I too hope it rolls out in DCC ready.
-Morgan
Here's a few more photos.
Is the body metal or ABS?
Metal.
Congrats to those who want this engine. glad you are getting it. But, I still won't do anything with MTH and since I don't do Milw, not a problem anyway.
Bob
I see they added extra articulation in the body so it can take tight curves. Any word if that can be 'locked' like the wheel articualtion on the big UP steamer? The wheels and frame ARE supposed to articulate between each set but not the carbody where it show in the second set of pictures.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Randy - right you are! It should not look that way. I find this to be a major drawback, should the loco be released into the market in this way.
Good Lord, that beauty is enough to make me want to string up caternary in MY mountains!
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!
My guess is they(MTH) will design this to lock (like the UP 9000 class4-12-2) - I guess some people just don't get why they are offering this - this is a long model and many modelers desiring it will not have adequate radii to accomodate it without the ability for it to pivot.
These have never been a problem for those who own them and it is a very easy 'turn key' process to lock the mechanism.
I'm not a advocate of this due to realism but then again, I have radii that will accomodate the motive power - but at least this manufacturer is 'thinking' on their feet about what the model should be able to perform under most 'normal' home layout radii(18" -22"), allowing for more modelers to have a model that actually will run on their layouts.
My suggestion to those interested in this model, not to jump to any conclusions as there are always negative comments aimed at MTH - the proof is in the product.
Thanks again, Dave for the additional photos of the Milw Electric Bi.
Heritagefleet1 My suggestion to those interested in this model, not to jump to any conclusions as there are always negative comments aimed at MTH - the proof is in the product.
Well, having been a MTH critic, I would like to make a few points:
One, if I was interested in this model, I would have no problem with the articulation, especially if it can be locked. I like the "modern" way articulated steamers are built, it makes large radius curves look even larger than they are, as well as making them more small layout "friendly".
Two, I feel all my MTH ranting against DCS has paid off, MTH now appears to be committed to offering DC as well as DCS/DCC models. Had I and others not spoke up, MTH might never have known how much of the market they might have been missing. I don't buy expensive DCC/sound models form those other companies (most of which offer DC versions), and MTH will be no exception, I don't care how "great" they are.
Three, Even though I have no need or interest in this model, or the Little Joe, I am very happy to see something other than another Big Boy, K4, Berkshire, Challenger, etc, etc. Now all we need from MTH is some undecorated models for us "modeler" types who still build, paint, letter, kitbash, etc.
Now all we need is a good model of a Pacific or two that are not PRR k4's. And a nice modern ten wheeler.
Atlantic...
Glad to hear from you.
My response was not aimed specifically at you since you've responded to my comment and I agree with you about them making something other than run of the mill locomotives. So, I hope you do not take my comment personally.
I was more making a 'broad brush' comment aimed more at newer visitors and those considering this model.
I'm not convinced that we'll see DC or DCC only versions on everything just yet - perhaps on the more popular diesels. Number to be produced will be a factor in determining that option.
In spite of complaints from the relatively few wanting DCC only or nothing, the models seem to be selling very well to a majority of buyers who do want the Protosound 3.0 equipped versions, which have proven to work flawlessly with DCC users.
I think offering both is a very good idea - from a marketing standpoint.
We'll have to wait and see.
Heritagefleet1 Atlantic... Glad to hear from you. My response was not aimed specifically at you since you've responded to my comment and I agree with you about them making something other than run of the mill locomotives. So, I hope you do not take my comment personally. I was more making a 'broad brush' comment aimed more at newer visitors and those considering this model. I'm not convinced that we'll see DC or DCC only versions on everything just yet - perhaps on the more popular diesels. Number to be produced will be a factor in determining that option. In spite of complaints from the relatively few wanting DCC only or nothing, the models seem to be selling very well to a majority of buyers who do want the Protosound 3.0 equipped versions, which have proven to work flawlessly with DCC users. I think offering both is a very good idea - from a marketing standpoint. We'll have to wait and see.
No. I did not take it personally at all, I simply wanted to take this opportunity to make it clear that any bias I have against MTH is based on facts and on my own needs and buying habits, not just some "emotional" reaction.
I don't buy BLI/PCM locos with DCC and sound (unless they are on sale at non sound prices), and when I buy Athearn Genesis, Intermoutain, Proto, etc, it is the DC version for me, usually undecorated except for some B&O, C&O and WM locos for my interchanges.
While the hobby has changed over the years, and many people like/want/use sound and/or DCC, there are still many of us DC operators out there. AND, many DCC people I know prefer to install the decoder of their choice.
So, if MTH wants into my pockets, they need to consider seriously the "other", older half of the market. Not necessarily that we are "older" in age, but refering to those of us who still see this as a craftsman hobby, not as the plug and play of expensive RTR, or as a hobby of collecting.
Dispite the tone of some of my rants from time to time, I keep an open mind about all the manufacturers and their new offerings. I never exclude a product that might fill a need on my layout because it is made by X or Y. I wait to see if each product is, affordable, equiped as I need/want it, well made, etc, then I buy.
I do have my own ideas about what I want/need and what I am willing to pay, but that too has nothing to do with any one brand.
One other related thought, not directed at you or anyone specificly, but I find it very interesting the number of people on here who make brand loyal or brand bashing statements with little fact attached and while only taking into consideration what prototypes interest them.
Example, many "rave" about Kato and Atlas, and I agree they make great stuff, but, for a modeler like myself who is focused on one era and just a few prototypes, the "greatness" of a brand is of no consequence if they don'y make models of the prototypes you model? I don't care a wit about a dash anything - in my world it hasn't been invented yet.
So I don't own any Atlas or Kato, over the years they have offered very few items in my era. And niether has offered even one HO steam loco, I model 1954, and still model steam.
So it also with MTH to this point, even if they had been offered DC and undecorated, they have only offered a few pieces that would have been on my radar, yet I own over 120 locos and 600-700 pieces of rolling stock - someone got all that business.
So, it does not matter how good they are until they make sometihng my railroad needs. And yes, the likes of Bachmann Spectrum, sometimes tuned up and improved by me, do meet my needs quite well since they make "everyday' type stuff like 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's and 4-8-2's that did the "work a day" tasks on America's railroads - Rather than just offering a few "big stars" that belonged to only one road, like K4's and Big Boy's.
Message to ALL the manufacturers - I don't own one - Big Boy, Challenger, PRR K4, SP Cab Forward, NYC Hudson, PRR GG1, SP 2-10-4, UP FEF, or vitually any of this stuff you have been basing your brains out duplicating the efforts of your competition - BUT I own 120+ locos, 2-8-0's, 4-8-2's, 2-8-2's, 4-6-2's, EMD F & GP units, Alco PA & FA units, etc, etc. - and I am not alone based on some of what I read on here and on others I know personally - make SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
Sheldon,
Huhhhh....I think that is what they are doing. lol.
We are all very fortunate to be living at a time in this hobby , when we're being brought so many differnet and impoved variations of locomotives, cars and structures.
Companies like Fox Valley and MTH, Intermountain and Exactrail - are leading the industry with new and never-before-offered products.
On a side bar: I'm interested in your era and roads you model - you must live in the northeast or are from there - I was brought up on the B&O in the Pittsburgh, Pa area and have a great affection for the WM (I'm from that neck of the woods) Hagerstown had a WM historical society but I've lost touch with those guys many moons ago.
Thanks, HeritageFleet1
Clearly, we have some folks on this forum for whom the Milwaukee is not an area of prototypical interest.
The Milwaukee EP-2 Bi-Polar prototypes WERE ARTICULATED! The MTH models don't and shouldn't lock. The only compromise for tighter curves in this design is the same one made on the prototype. The EP-2's had the cabs split into three sections just like the MTH model.
The Coast and Rocky Mountain Divisions of the Milwaukee's Pacific extension had a lot of 10 and 12 degree curves that required very flexible locomotives. The Bi-Polars were designed and built by GE specifically to accommodate these tight curves at high speeds. The original Milwaukee GE Box Cab EP-1 passenger motorss were built in 1915 along with the EF-1 freight motors. The primary difference between the EP-1's and EF-1's was the gearing. The EP-1's had half the gear reduction of the EF-1's so they could reach 70 mph instead of only 35 mph. In service this proved to be a major problem. The EP-1's didn't pull very well and were rather slippery when pulling out of the station. Milwaukee ordered the EP-2 Bi-Polar's in 1919 to replace the EP-1's in passenger service. Once the Bi-Polar's arrived the EP-1's were re-geared and re-numbered as EF-1's The EP-2 Bi-Polars proved far more successful and pulled the Olympian and Olympian Hiawatha for over 35 years.
Excellent post, Dave.
Thanks for the historical briefing as I didn't know much about the prototype....its interesting information.
More to the point though, its good to know that the model being offered will run well on the smaller radii of most layouts.
From the photos you posted earlier, it looks like it's well detailed and very high quality -what I've come to expect from Mike.
If they produce the 4-8-4 Northern and 261 does come to fruition , I will be in line for that for sure.
Well, that's the problem if you're a free-lancer. Only the SP had these:workaday engine with and without the skyline casing: http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2487.JPG
And while this http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2454A.JPG is a Harriman Heavy 4-6-2 (UP, SP and Chicago & Alton), each of the 3 roads' versions had a considerably different look..
Would a 4-6-0 like SP T-23 #2301 do you any good? http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2301A.JPG
I'm not so sure I'd call a K4 one of the "big stars" for any reason other than the fact that Pennsy rostered about 425 examples (17 times the number of Big Boys). Otherwise, at least for the Pennsy, they were about as workaday as you can get (as were the 598 I1s 2-10-0's). Pennsy also rostered something like 1500+ 2-8-0's of classes H8, H9 and H10 (more than most ralroads' entire steam rosters). Just adding up the K4's, I1's, and H8/9/10 gives you over 2500 engines. That's a sizeable number of engines that only appeared on one railroad and we haven't yet included the L1s 2-8-2's (574 of those) or the 301 examples of M1 variant 4-8-2's
I'm not trying to rag on you. It's just that while USRA engines make great fodder for the free-lancer, all the USRA engines have been done (if you're willing to count the Rivarossi Heavy Pacific as a USRA Heavy Pacific). From what I can see, the only thing "new" that could be done is to make small to medium sized engines that aren't USRA's, like say a Santa Fe 3400 class Pacific, a Harriman Mikado in SP, UP and IC variants or perhaps even a C&O G-9 2-8-0.
The minute you get away from USRA engines as they came from the factory in 1918-1920 (IOW the originals, not the copies), you're talking road specific appearance. I'm sure there are some road specific locos that would fit the Atlantic Central's concept (a modernized Erie K-5a comes to mind or even one of Southern's earlier Ps-4's like this one: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/pacific/srr1367.jpg ), but I doubt that a GN H-5 http://www.greatnorthernempire.net/index2.htm?GNEGN_H5_Class.htm would do you any more good than a Big Boy.
Andre
Sheldon's comments are about right on with my feelings. See, DC and DCC users CAN agree about something I like the DC only versions because I can put in my choice of decoder and know it's all 100% caompatible. And it's great that we're finally getting something other than Yet Another Big Boy - if things keep up there will soon be more manufactureres of model Big Boys then there ever were actual Big Boys.
But of all the locos produced by Broadway, PCM, and MTH, I have exactly 2 (of the same model) becuase they are the only ones made so far that fit my chosen road. For those that aren;t strict about a specific road, it would be nice if they offered undec versions - PCM did with the Reading T-1's, they offered them painted but unlettered. But that seems to be rare
I wasn;t bashing MTH, from all accounts their locos are good looking and run well. I just don't like the proprietary nature of DCS and the limited compatibility. They clearly ARE listening though, previously they seemed to have a rather cavalier attitude about the superiority of DCS, not they are giving the buyer an option to get what is otherwise the same loco but without the DCS electronics. Now, if they fo the FA's in Reading and they look as good as the P2K ones withotu being so fragile (the P2K ones are nearly impossible to pick up - anywhere you touch there are fragile detail parts like scale size grabs that tend to break) and it comes in a version without DCS - I would probably buy it. I certainly wouldn't reject it out of hand because it's made by MTH.
dave hikel Hi all, Clearly, we have some folks on this forum for whom the Milwaukee is not an area of prototypical interest. The Milwaukee EP-2 Bi-Polar prototypes WERE ARTICULATED! The MTH models don't and shouldn't lock. The only compromise for tighter curves in this design is the same one made on the prototype. The EP-2's had the cabs split into three sections just like the MTH model. The Coast and Rocky Mountain Divisions of the Milwaukee's Pacific extension had a lot of 10 and 12 degree curves that required very flexible locomotives. The Bi-Polars were designed and built by GE specifically to accommodate these tight curves at high speeds. The original Milwaukee GE Box Cab EP-1 passenger motorss were built in 1915 along with the EF-1 freight motors. The primary difference between the EP-1's and EF-1's was the gearing. The EP-1's had half the gear reduction of the EF-1's so they could reach 70 mph instead of only 35 mph. In service this proved to be a major problem. The EP-1's didn't pull very well and were rather slippery when pulling out of the station. Milwaukee ordered the EP-2 Bi-Polar's in 1919 to replace the EP-1's in passenger service. Once the Bi-Polar's arrived the EP-1's were re-geared and re-numbered as EF-1's The EP-2 Bi-Polars proved far more successful and pulled the Olympian and Olympian Hiawatha for over 35 years.
Yes, they were articulated but NOT between the hoods and the end of the center section that was attached to the hood. The real ones articulated in 2 places, it looks from the picture that MTH added 2 more articulation points, total of 4, as a compromise for small radius. That EXTRA articulation is the one I'm talking about. If you look at pictures, the cab is firmly fixed to the hood. Each hood and cab is hinged to the center section.The MTH model also pivots the hood in front of the cab, or at least the bottom picture of the second set posted seems to show this.
Heritagefleet1 Huhhhh....I think that is what they are doing. lol.
Heritagefleet1,
I did commend MTH for FINALLY doing something new and different, but why are there so many brands of Big Boys, K4's, Challengers, etc, etc, when those locos represent such a small piece of railroading in North America?
I don't buy the "ours is better" thing, that is a straw man. That does not grow the market or help the hobby in the long run. Anyone who has been around the hobby a long times knows that in the old days manufacturers avoided too much direct competition trying to sell the same item because they knew how small the market was.
All the resources that have been used by MTH and BLI to make a long list of the same products also offered by several other manufacturers could have been at least partly used to offer products NEVER offered before or only offered in brass many years ago.
And again, OK, MTH might be moving in a good direction with these new offerings, but only after a long list of stuff already recently done in very high quality by others.
I live in Forest Hill Maryland and am a life long resident of the Mid Atlantic region. My modeling interests are very focused and I do not "collect" model trains. I can just about count on two hands the items I own that do not fit the theme of my layout.
I like the freelance or protolance thing and the process of creating a fictional but believable layout with connections to real railroads that did exist. So I model mainly my fictional ATLANTIC CENTRAL and its connections to the B&O, C&O, and WM. Since the ATLANTIC CENTRAL is fictional, I'm not opposed to a little bit of "what if" in my modeling of those prototype roads - again, without stretching things too far.
I am into operation and my current layout which is under reconstruction is designed to provide operation for 8-10 operators or to allow display running of 5-6 trains. In final form it will stage about 25 trains and run a 25-35 train schedule in a full session.
My loco and equipment roster is based on what would have made sense for a railroad in the modeled area, at the time modeled, and for the operating conditions such a railroad would have had. That degree of protolancing is blended into what I like, what is available, what I can build and the fictional but possible senerio I have created for the line.
So, when MTH or BLI announce this or that, that has already been done, I either have it likely don't need more, or it was never going to be on my list anyway.
But when anyone does something that has never been done, there is that chance that it will fit into my fictional world and find a place on my layout. AND, when I buy locos, it is usually in groups of two or more to give that prototype feel to the roster. My ACR roster reads like this (just a sample):
9 USRA Heavy 4-8-2's
6 Baldwin 2-8-0's
5 LIMA Heavy 2-8-2's
2 USRA Heavy 2-8-2's
2 Reading built 4-8-4's
3 USRA 4-6-2's
6 EMD GP7's
8 ALCO FA1's
etc, etc. I am a model manufacturers best customer, make what I like and you will sell me not one, but 3 or 6 or more.
But Big Boys and PRR anytihngs just don't fit in, they are too distiinctive and/or don't fit the theme.
Well, got to go for now,
rrinker Yes, they were articulated but NOT between the hoods and the end of the center section that was attached to the hood. The real ones articulated in 2 places, it looks from the picture that MTH added 2 more articulation points, total of 4, as a compromise for small radius. That EXTRA articulation is the one I'm talking about. If you look at pictures, the cab is firmly fixed to the hood. Each hood and cab is hinged to the center section.The MTH model also pivots the hood in front of the cab, or at least the bottom picture of the second set posted seems to show this. --Randy
You're seeing things that aren't there. The MTH models do NOT have 4 articulations, only two. What you're seeing in this photo...
... is a bit of "fish eye" effect from my wide angle camera lens. The black area between the cab and hood is the cab door porch. It is correctly painted black in this paint scheme. It's not a rubber articulation point. Here's an over lightened photo that shows the porch area in better detail. The ribs you see next to the cab door are not corregated rubber. They are conduit detail which is also correct per the prototype.