The state of N-scale loco quality in 2013

[drewsaur]

I switched to N-scale model railroading in the 1990s, when it seemed that the major manufacturers of N-scale made real progress in terms of quality.

But since those days, it seems that there has been NO progress made in the quality of N-scale locomotives. There are details in almost all HO-scale models today that are finer than you find in any N-scale models - it just doesn't make sense. For example, how come N scale handrails still look like scaled sewer pipes when HO models have handrails that are thin enough to be proper scale only if they were N?

And if Micro-Trains can do it for N-scale cars, why can't the loco manufacturers try at least a little harder?

These days, I scream inside when I see new N-scale locos whose highlighted features are:

• Directional lighting!
• Dual-flywheels!
• Skew-wound motors! 

I mean, really?

What is keeping some of the production enhancements in HO scale (or even Micro-Trains quality) from trickling down (or across) to N scale locos?

I know that HO is more popular, but you would think that, by 2013, that that someone would make at least an attempt to make a premium N-scale loco product (think Athearn Genesis).

My money is waiting...

Drew

[Lehigh Valley 2089]

Ok, your talking about a scale that is half the size if HO, so it is by nature harder to get finer detail, hence why the handrails look like pipes. I don't let this bother me, Features? It is harder to get more electronics inside of a loco body only a few inches long by less than an inch wide by one inch high. Besides, Micro-Trains can do it since they have the tooling necessary, and if they have a patent, can sue if another company creates something similar.

[drewsaur]

The HO models of today have details that are physically (not merely proportionally!!) finer than the N-scale models of today.

In other words, you might have a handrail component that is a half of a millimeter in actual (not scale) diameter on an HO loco, but an N loco of today might have a handrail component that is closer to a full millimeter in actual (not scale) diameter. It makes no sense. 

If manufacturers could at least use items of that physical delicacy on N-scale, it would be such a significant improvement over what N-scale has today.

The HO manufacturers are not using tooling that is proprietary to Micro Trains!

Drew

[drewsaur]

Additionally, I am not looking for electronics features. Just better detail in terms of parts and finesse in the execution of the shell.

Drew

[tstage]

[BRAKIE]

Drew,Some of the newer  N Scale freight cars have finer detail however,you can barely see them.

N Scale remains a modelers scale as far as details-you need to add them and I don't think that was change any time soon.

Now,as pretty as the HO details are the truth is 90% of the time you can't see 'em under normal layout viewing.Also cars and locomotives have become quite fragile and even adding KD couplers can lead to problems and broken details.

From my last few years in  N I fully believe most  N Scalers is more interested in running 100 or more car trains on a layout full of scenery then owning highly detailed locomotives.

I suggest looking at the locomotive detail parts from BLMA and go from there.

[Lehigh Valley 2089]

There's also Jim Jelly's article "Character, Not Caricature", and true, you want incredibly fine detail, N scale is a scale that would need a lot of work. I think I might just be used to it.

[BRAKIE]

Lehigh Valley 2089

There's also Jim Jelly's article "Character, Not Caricature", and true, you want incredibly fine detail, N scale is a scale that would need a lot of work. I think I might just be used to it.

 

Jake,I seen some highly detailed  N Scale locomotives and several scratchbuilt and kitbashed steam locomotives on  N Scale forums..

 

There are some things  N Scale has that we don't like scrap glass and scrap tire loads.

 

[Lake]

Well, Drew, all I can say is that maybe N-scale is not for you.

I like most others did not get into N scale because it had so many fine details that looked great, but would break off after a while. We got into it because of most items are half the cost of HO.

We can model much of the real world that we choose to have on our layout with less compromises then other scales. Sound is not one of the main reasons I do N scale, but it is available for those that must have it, and sounds good with the larger 6 axle diesel engines.

I do not care for lots of detail that I will not notice while operations as I am not a roundy rounder. In fact I could not even do that on a point to point operations layout.

Others have their reasons for N scale and these are some of mine.

[Burlington Northern #24]

Locomotives, details, etc. My kato's are by far the most superior loco's as for adding onto locos I have issues. I have a ton of BLMA parts, unfortunately I can't get them placed exact or the holes drilled exact. 

the things I could go for are more roadnames not just the same ones, newer locomotives, more first gen diesels, re runs of previous models(like BN F7's), body mount couplers, and honestly to prototype cars. 

Why that last one? if the same roadnames keep getting rereleased manufacturers could atleast try to make them like the real thing. If the financial burden is too great, atleast number and label them properly. none of my BN cars match the road number series of the real thing, I've checked everything not a single freight car matched. 

[drewsaur]

BRAKIE

I fully believe most  N Scalers is more interested in running 100 or more car trains on a layout full of scenery then owning highly detailed locomotives.

I think the same used to be said of HO modelers at one point.

But then things changed, and HO scalers seemed to enjoy it quite a bit. Not everybody wants to be an active modeler. It's hard enough to get weathering right, let alone all of the stuff that needs to happen first.

I take great pleasure in having miniature trains, in the same way that watch aficionados like having those small intricate machines on their wrists. I would buy whole new sets of next-generation locos if the manufacturers would step up to the plate.

Remember when Life-Like introduced Proto 2000? It changed things. The technology seems to be there. I just want someone to try harder with N.

Drew

[BRAKIE]

drewsaur

Remember when Life-Like introduced Proto 2000? It changed things. The technology seems to be there. I just want someone to try harder with N.

Drew

Correct it is there.

After 50 years the manufacturers finally heard the years old plea of body mounted couplers on freight cars which many  N Scalers speak out against just like they still speak out against C55 rail and LoPro wheels.When some of us spoke out against the low mounted headlights on FVM new(at that time) NS GEVOs we was French fried by those that said all was well in  N Scale land and told us basically shut up and don't by them if you don't like them..

If you notice the later runs of FVM NS GEVOs has the correct high mount headlights.

One thing  N Scale lacks is direction and unity in the ranks and until that improves don't expect to see finer detailed or road specific detailed locomotives-unless there is a outcry by the minority like there was in HO years ago or the outcry over the FVM NS GEVO headlights..

There is a downside..N Scale MSRP  is usually a tad less then HO and that can't help as far as producing highly detailed locomotives.

Its hard now to look at a standard detailed N Scale freight car for $24.95 and see its RTR HO brother with more detail for $29.95..

[Anonymous]

Up until very recently, I have been an avid follower of N scale, though I did not model US prototype.

N scale in Europe and Japan seems to have higher standards than in the US, as the following pictures may prove.

The only thing I don´t like is the old fashioned Arnold style coupler!

With a "little" extra work, a Kato C11 can be turned into such a gem:

[Burlington Northern #24]

well I made a poll on the N scale.org FB page so far 10-2 in favor of body mounts,  MTL's honestly should be the standard couplers of N scale for every manufacturer. Kato kinectimatics are picky and troublesome, Atlas accumates are just as bad, con cors dummie couplers are next to useless. will it drive prices up, probably just a couple dollars. 

[BRAKIE]

Burlington Northern #24

MTL's honestly should be the standard couplers of N scale for every manufacturer.

My biggest issue with MT couplers is the "slinky" action of the coupler..Its a designed fault that MT is well aware of and as a "fix" they sell tiny axle springs that fits on the point of the axle.IMHO not much of a fix to a known design fault.BTW they should improve the door design on their 40' boxcars.

As far as the body mounted couplers try discussing that on one of the stronger N Scale forums..

In case you haven't guess I still very passionate about  N Scale and would like to see the needed improvements plus some manufacturer standards.

[Burlington Northern #24]

BRAKIE

Burlington Northern #24

MTL's honestly should be the standard couplers of N scale for every manufacturer.

My biggest issue with MT couplers is the "slinky" action of the coupler..Its a designed fault that MT is well aware of and as a "fix" they sell tiny axle springs that fits on the point of the axle.IMHO not much of a fix to a known design fault.BTW they should improve the door design on their 40' boxcars.

As far as the body mounted couplers try discussing that on one of the stronger N Scale forums..

In case you haven't guess I still very passionate about  N Scale and would like to see the needed improvements plus some manufacturer standards.

yeah, Another thing I would like to see is regular bachmann Locos especially they're diesels to look less toy like. I couldn't stand the geep's and U's I had they looked too tall and rather big. they also need pilots for they're locos. I feel that the conversion kits for older Kato F & E's, Con cor E's, no as a matter of fact all of them should have an illustrated guide on installations my CC E's couplers droop. I agree with your standards. 

[Lehigh Valley 2089]

BN#24: Accumate couplers aren't that bad in my opinion, but I agree with you as far as the Kato couplers. Same with Bachmann couplers, and the couplers that Model Power uses. I really like FVM's wheels, enough so in fact that they are a standard on my railroad. Same with Accumates. I have plenty of truck-mounted couplers and some body-mounted ones, but I really don't feel like performing the needed conversions.

[Burlington Northern #24]

Lehigh Valley 2089

BN#24: Accumate couplers aren't that bad in my opinion, but I agree with you as far as the Kato couplers. Same with Bachmann couplers, and the couplers that Model Power uses. I really like FVM's wheels, enough so in fact that they are a standard on my railroad. Same with Accumates. I have plenty of truck-mounted couplers and some body-mounted ones, but I really don't feel like performing the needed conversions.

the whiskers on accumates sometimes catch the switch frogs when I run them, as well as some uncouplings. the coupler on my Lt. mountain(bach. spectrum) is a good coupler a bit big but a good coupler none the less. as for standard wheels, I'd like  to use FVM's, the plastic wheels on the MTL's I like but they are plastic. I'd really like to see detail parts like kato or atlas ones made a lot more. Decals we definitely need decals for various cars and locos that have yet to be made.

[dknelson]

It probably should be pointed out that older and more crudely detailed HO scale locomotives are still available in the marketplace and presumably are still selling well enough to please the maker or importer.   To get those wonderful levels of accuracy and detail you have to pay more as a rule.   The HO market is larger and has room to cater to a wide range of types of customers.  N is by no means a "minority scale" but it is just smaller enough to account for the narrower range of offerings.

Speaking as an HO scaler I marvel at the detail level of many N scale locomotives and while I sympathize with the OP, I think it is the HO market that benefits from having the N scale market prove that yes it is possible to cast pastic, with an acceptable degree of durability, for things like stirrup steps and handrails.

Dave Nelson

[Lehigh Valley 2089]

BN#24: For the couplers, seeing how I don't use uncoupling magnets, I just remove the whiskers. :)

[drewsaur]

BRAKIE

One thing  N Scale lacks is direction and unity in the ranks and until that improves don't expect to see finer detailed or road specific detailed locomotives-unless there is a outcry by the minority like there was in HO years ago or the outcry over the FVM NS GEVO headlights..

There is a downside..N Scale MSRP  is usually a tad less then HO and that can't help as far as producing highly detailed locomotives.

I think it's time to start saying it out loud:

I am willing to pay more for more detail and innovation in N-scale locomotives!

Drew

[BerkshireSteam]

It was touched on, but firstly, it's all about scale. N scale is small, HO is bigger. When a 40' box car is about the width of a computer keyboard more detail can simply be fit in an area than if it is the width of your cell phone.

Actually I already said the secondly, scale size. If you want scale size hand rails on your diesel locos, start plucking hairs. Not that it's difficult, it's just around the thickness of a few hairs. Even for HO things like rivets and not-bolt-washer castings can be over sized.

Now boiled down to basic details I can agree with the OP. Separate roof walks and platforms, separate ladders on the sides, and some details I think could be a little thinner etc., but not to the point of N scale size.

[Burlington Northern #24]

Lehigh Valley 2089

BN#24: For the couplers, seeing how I don't use uncoupling magnets, I just remove the whiskers. :)

oh, I usually leave them on I feel they simulate a brakehose I can put silver on the tip.

[BRAKIE]

BerkshireSteam

Actually I already said the secondly, scale size. If you want scale size hand rails on your diesel locos, start plucking hairs. Not that it's difficult, it's just around the thickness of a few hairs.

Hairs? A lot of  N Scales are senior citizens with shiny bald heads.

IIRC N Scale detailers uses .008th wire for handrails.Its not impossible to add scale looking handrails and other details..After all they have mu hoses,grab irons,plows,air hoses etc already available.

http://www.blmamodels.com/cgi-bin/webstore/shop.cgi?ud=BQYBBQoKAwICBxQUEBEcHAIAAQcJBgYGCQkTEQAA&t=main.red.htm&storeid=1&cols=1&categories=02002-00014&c=search.red.htm&&scount=1

 

http://www.goldmm.com/nscale/gmnlotyp.htm

 

There are other locomotive detail parts available.

 

[drewsaur]

dknelson

It probably should be pointed out that older and more crudely detailed HO scale locomotives are still available in the marketplace and presumably are still selling well enough to please the maker or importer.   To get those wonderful levels of accuracy and detail you have to pay more as a rule.   The HO market is larger and has room to cater to a wide range of types of customers.  N is by no means a "minority scale" but it is just smaller enough to account for the narrower range of offerings.

Speaking as an HO scaler I marvel at the detail level of many N scale locomotives and while I sympathize with the OP, I think it is the HO market that benefits from having the N scale market prove that yes it is possible to cast pastic, with an acceptable degree of durability, for things like stirrup steps and handrails.

N may not be a minority scale, but I don't think that the improvements in the mid-90s that caused prices to go up didn't seem to hurt the hobby any. As a matter of fact, that's when and why I decided to switch - when those manufacturers (namely Atlas and Kato at the time) seemed to invest in the hobby once and for all. No, I feel like I was duped.

Ho is no longer benefiting from N; HO details are, in raw (not scale!) numbers, much finer than N-scale detail these days. It is the N industry that could benefit from HO at this point, which is really what inspired my post...

Drew

[MJ4562]

Drew, I agree with you and share your disappointment about the seeming lack of progress made in N scale recently. It might have to do with the economy and a perceived or actual shrinking market for model trains. Manufacturers may perceive N scale's status as second most popular as too risky to invest in new products. I also agree with an earlier comment about a lack of focus for N scale enthusiasts. I think this is because N scale is practical for a broad range of modeling topics (like HO) and therefore attracts modelers with a broad range of interests. N scale is perfect for modeling the everything from the 40's with Big Boys pulling 100 car trains of PFE reefers all the way up to modern diesels pulling trains of double stacks and autoracks. The other not HO scales are by the nature of their size more niche focused on small highly detailed trains. In planning a future layout I am on the fence between HO and N for the very reasons you describe. I prefer the proportions of N, HO equipment looks too big in relation to the buildings and scenery IMO, but oversized rail and pipe-sized handrails are a big turnoff.

[drewsaur]

BerkshireSteam

Now boiled down to basic details I can agree with the OP. Separate roof walks and platforms, separate ladders on the sides, and some details I think could be a little thinner etc., but not to the point of N scale size.

That's all I am asking. I am not asking for 20 links in my stanchion chains. But something more than 3 or 4 (6? Anyone?) would show that someone is making an effort. I would love to read a press release with something like:

- 6-link stanchion chains!

And again, if I saw N scale handrails that were the same actual (not scale!) thickness as the "too thin" Athearn Genesis HO handrails, I would be very pleased.

Couplers — which seem to be getting a lot of discussion here — are not my beef. MT couplers are just fine with me, thanks to a company that really cares about N scale....

Let's do for the rest of the loco what MT did for the couplers!

Drew 

[Burlington Northern #24]

hmmmmm, N scale loco details. I'd like to see road specific features, if Athearn can afford to do it for their HO scale models why can't Kato and Atlas for N scalers. I'm not talking just in text, decals, and cab light placement. I'm talking full on as close as one can get to the real loco's. 

As for locos there needs to be more made of models that are/were popular when they were made, I'm looking at you Kato I'd really like some BN F's, some GP's for the BN as well, ex "Q" E units with BN road lettering. I'm asking for lotsa BN stuff because, I'm sure other modelers of different RR's feel the same way but with their railroad of choice. Would it push the price of loco's up maybe, it'd be worth it for me  

[BRAKIE]

drewsaur

Couplers — which seem to be getting a lot of discussion here — are not my beef. MT couplers are just fine with me, thanks to a company that really cares about N scale....

Drew,IMHO improved slinkless couplers would go hand in hand with the details you ask for..

----------------------

Let's do for the rest of the loco what MT did for the couplers!

----------------------

Please no! The way those couplers slink it would be one big step backwards to the early years of herky jerky  N Scale locomotives..

We won't discuss their boxcar doors.

[gatrhumpy]

We put finer detail on these N scale engines and cars, and people will start complaining that they're too delicate or brake easily.

Give me a break.