There is often much conversation on this forum about proto specific, high detail models and how that is what most modelers appear to want these days.
Yet, a number of recently released models are anything but proto specific - and some are from those very companies who would seem to be promoting this trend.
Finally, after many years of promises, BLI has offered a Pacific that is NOT a PRR K4 - thank goodness - or should we thank anyone?
As it turns out, like their USRA Heavy and Light Mikados, the Pacific's are generic - but in this case the heavy Pacific is not even as accurate as either of the Mikados.
OK, putting a USRA Light Mikado boiler on a 73" driver 4-6-2 drive yields a credible, if not completely accurate USRA Light Pacific.
BUT, putting a USRA Heavy Mikado boiler on that same 73" driver frame does not make a USRA Heavy Pacific - but that is just what Broadway did. The USRA Heavy Pacific had 79" drivers, spaced differently, and had a smaller, (but higher mounted) boiler than the Heavy Mikado.
And in all the road names offered, light or heavy, not one of the smallest or simplest details was changed for greater accuracy. In the B&O green scheme, they could not even put the correct two different Presidents names on the two different road numbers offered - both say "President Washington"?
It would have been so easy to make the B&O locos more correct with a different bell and headlight, and a Delta trailing truck. Other brands have done it.
And while these locos are not at the upper tier of pricing these days, they are by no means in the "bargain" price range either.
I did buy one, which is already being kit bashed to ATLANTIC CENTRAL standards, but I doubt I will buy any more. Had the B&O versions been more correct, and/or the Heavy version been a true 79" driver loco, I might have bought a small fleet.
So, why in this age of "high end proto specific" locos, is it impossible to get a Pacific that is correct? Unless you want a PRR K4?
Is sound and DCC more important that a correct model? Have production costs and market conditions finally hurt the "proto specific" craze? Why should I suffer the "preorder" game for a generic loco? ( I did not preorder the one I bought)
I will repeat, if Bachmann can make models and offer different parts for simple details like trailing trucks, cabs, headlights, pilots, etc, to make more accurate, road specific models at a reasonable cost, then why can't Broadway?
Other recently offered "generic" or incorrectly lettered offerings include the BLI Mikados and MTH Berkshires - from the two companies busy telling us how much "better" they are. Really?
Being a freelancer and a "prototype" modeler, I can find a place for generic models and am not shy about saying so. But I sure thought we were headed in the other direction?
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRAL There is often much conversation on this forum about proto specific, high detail models and how that is what most modelers appear to want these days. Yet, a number of recently released models are anything but proto specific - and some are from those very companies who would seem to be promoting this trend. Being a freelancer and a "prototype" modeler, I can find a place for generic models and am not shy about saying so. But I sure thought we were headed in the other direction?
Sheldon,
I cannot directly answer your question about the direction that the hobby is headed in this regard.
What I believe is that there are two camps: those who care and those who don't. And, I don't mean to say that in a glib manner. I, for one, don't really concern myself with the differences that you noted in your examples. Others care a lot about this whole issue.
My main concern is for detail and quality in the locos and rolling stock that I buy. I am never comfortable if I learn that a certain locomotive or passenger car is not even close to representing the prototype. But, beyond that, I don't care all that much.
It will be interesting to read how other feel about this issue.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrain ATLANTIC CENTRAL There is often much conversation on this forum about proto specific, high detail models and how that is what most modelers appear to want these days. Yet, a number of recently released models are anything but proto specific - and some are from those very companies who would seem to be promoting this trend. Being a freelancer and a "prototype" modeler, I can find a place for generic models and am not shy about saying so. But I sure thought we were headed in the other direction? I am never comfortable if I learn that a certain locomotive or passenger car is not even close to representing the prototype. But, beyond that, I don't care all that much.
I am never comfortable if I learn that a certain locomotive or passenger car is not even close to representing the prototype. But, beyond that, I don't care all that much.
That is actually a big part of my point. With just a different headlight and bell location, the B&O Light Pacific would have been more than close enough for most people for the B&O P5 class.
AND, those same details, and a Delta trailing truck - an easily recongnized feature - and the correct lettering, would have even made the "incorrect" Heavy a dramiticly better "stand in" for the early P7.
I mentioned Bachmann and their efforts at proto specific details from one roadname to another. They did this on the Heavy and Light Mountains, Ten Wheelers, 2-6-6-2's, 2-10-2's, K4 "versions", the Berkshires and others - not always getting things perfect, but making and effort to get the obvious stuff close.
And it seems it would have been real easy, and not real expensive, for BLI to do the same here.
I see your point, Sheldon.
In the sense that the manufacturer could easily have made a slight modification or added one or two small details to make the model more prototypical, it is a shame that the manufacturer stopped short for whatever the reason.
That said, I would ask what was the reason for stopping short. Insufficient research? Cost consideration? Indifference?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL OK, putting a USRA Light Mikado boiler on a 73" driver 4-6-2 drive yields a credible, if not completely accurate USRA Light Pacific. BUT, putting a USRA Heavy Mikado boiler on that same 73" driver frame does not make a USRA Heavy Pacific - but that is just what Broadway did. The USRA Heavy Pacific had 79" drivers, spaced differently, and had a smaller, (but higher mounted) boiler than the Heavy Mikado.
And that's exactly some of the same reasons why Bachmann offerings for the NYC are foobies, Sheldon. Although I haven't looked at their 4-8-4 Niagaras, their other 4- and 6-driver NYC locomotives are so generic that they don't even come close to representing what the NYC had in their roster.
I would agree with you that it would be great if manufacturers offered more parts so that modelers could make the needed changes to their locomotive to make it more prototypically correct for their road name. However, no amount of aftermarket parts is going to correct a wrong boiler. This is true - whether it be BLI, MTH, or Bachmann.
So, let your money do the talking when it comes to buying your locomotives. I doubt it's going to make much of a difference in my case in regards to Bachmann though.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage ATLANTIC CENTRAL OK, putting a USRA Light Mikado boiler on a 73" driver 4-6-2 drive yields a credible, if not completely accurate USRA Light Pacific. BUT, putting a USRA Heavy Mikado boiler on that same 73" driver frame does not make a USRA Heavy Pacific - but that is just what Broadway did. The USRA Heavy Pacific had 79" drivers, spaced differently, and had a smaller, (but higher mounted) boiler than the Heavy Mikado. And that's exactly some of the same reasons why Bachmann offerings for the NYC are foobies, Sheldon. Although I haven't looked at their 4-8-4 Niagaras, their other 4- and 6-driver NYC locomotives are so generic that they don't even come close to representing what the NYC had in their roster. I would agree with you that it would be great if manufacturers offered more parts so that modelers could make the needed changes to their locomotive to make it more prototypically correct for their road name. However, no amount of aftermarket parts is going to correct a wrong boiler. This is true - whether it be BLI, MTH, or Bachmann. So, let your money do the talking when it comes to buying your locomotives. I doubt it's going to make much of a difference in my case in regards to Bachmann though. Tom
Tom, I will agree that puting NYC on the Ten Wheeler was not Bachmanns best move, and as I have commented before, the other small locos are generic train set locos - not correct for ANY of the roadnames offered.
As for the Niagara's , it is my understanding they are pretty close, and the newer drive runs rather well, like the Berk and the new GS4 in the regular line.
Bachmann is far from perfect on this issue, but they have made way more effort than BLI.
It is "easy" to make something very road specific, like a PRR K4 (or any of the long list of very unique locos BLI has offered) and only offer them lettered for the one road who had them.
It is a little more work to do like Bachmann did with the Heavy Mountain and the 2-10-2, and make it reasonably correct for 4 or 5 road names. Granted, several of the paint schemes originally offered on the Heavy Mountian were also somewhat "stand in" nature, but again, I would have been impressed if BLI had just bothered to make a Delta trailing truck and a different headlight/bell for the Pacific.
Bachmann got the domes and tenders right for three different road names on their standard line Berkshire - and did not not bother with any "stand in" or "foobie" roadnames - not so with MTH at three times the money.
ATLANTIC CENTRALIs sound and DCC more important that a correct model? Have production costs and market conditions finally hurt the "proto specific" craze?
I don't think that sound and DCC have much relevance to whether or not a model is "correct". In that regard I think the manufacturers are only catering to what they believe, possibly incorrectly and whether we agree or not, is the largest pool of purchasers.
Concerning production costs, I don't think it costs any more to have a correct dome or trailing truck on a model instead of incorrect items. I think it does cost more to have someone do the research to identify the correct items. And it probably does cost more to make additional detail items to be stocked under the assumption that someone might eventually buy them.
What I'm wondering, at least in the case of steam engines, is if the available pool of people who are actually able to identify the differences is shrinking. I believe that many of us would look at the loco you reference and would believe that it has very fine details. The issue seems to be that the details are indeed fine, but incorrect. I would not know the difference.
Just my opinion.
maxman ATLANTIC CENTRALIs sound and DCC more important that a correct model? Have production costs and market conditions finally hurt the "proto specific" craze? I don't think that sound and DCC have much relevance to whether or not a model is "correct". In that regard I think the manufacturers are only catering to what they believe, possibly incorrectly and whether we agree or not, is the largest pool of purchasers. Concerning production costs, I don't think it costs any more to have a correct dome or trailing truck on a model instead of incorrect items. I think it does cost more to have someone do the research to identify the correct items. And it probably does cost more to make additional detail items to be stocked under the assumption that someone might eventually buy them. What I'm wondering, at least in the case of steam engines, is if the available pool of people who are actually able to identify the differences is shrinking. I believe that many of us would look at the loco you reference and would believe that it has very fine details. The issue seems to be that the details are indeed fine, but incorrect. I would not know the difference. Just my opinion.
Well, maybe so, but in the case of the trailing truck, we are talking about a very obvious difference.
Here is a photo of B&O #5300 - note the style/design of the trailing truck:
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s5300ags.jpg
Here is a photo of the model with the incorrect trailing truck:
http://www.broadway-limited.com/images/view.aspx?productId=2859&index=0
We are not talking about a pipe out of place or a few inches of some small dememsion - we are talking about a major feature of the loco. But a major feature that could have been made correct by only making one extra part.
You can note the headlight and bell locations in the first photo as well - really "hard" to research - it took me 3 minutes.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL We are not talking about a pipe out of place or a few inches of some small dememsion - we are talking about a major feature of the loco. But a major feature that could have been made correct by only making one extra part. You can note the headlight and bell locations in the first photo as well - really "hard" to research - it took me 3 minutes.
I only offered an opinion. I am not disagreeing with you. What I am saying is that in this case you are well versed as to what that particular loco should look like. I am also saying that I think that the pool of potential purchasors who are equally knowledgeable has probably decreased over the past 10 or 15 years.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Here is a photo of B&O #5300 - not the style/design of the trailing truck: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s5300ags.jpg Here is a photo of the model with the incorrect trailing truck: http://www.broadway-limited.com/images/view.aspx?productId=2859&index=0 We are not talking about a pipe out of place or a few inches of some small dememsion - we are talking about a major feature of the loco. But a major feature that could have been made correct by only making one extra part. You can note the headlight and bell locations in the first photo as well - really "hard" to research - it took me 3 minutes.
Here is a photo of B&O #5300 - not the style/design of the trailing truck:
That is a dramatic difference and there is no excuse for that.
maxmanI am also saying that I think that the pool of potential purchasors who are equally knowledgeable has probably decreased over the past 10 or 15 years.
Interesting thought that brings up a good point..I think the younger modelers is modeling what they see..
As far as going backwards..Yes,I've notice some boo boos on "correct" locomotives.Now,recall I'm not a locomotive detail guru so,if my untrained eyes can see it....
However..
The Bachmann NYC 4-6-0 will sell simply because its affordable.
This Bachmann knows..
Is the hobby going backwards,forwards or sideways I suspect that will depend on the modeler being asked..
BTW..I some times think there is at least four different camps in the hobby today but,we'll not go there.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Some of it has to do with whether or not a particular manufacturer is willing to work with or take advantage of the various historical societies available to them. And some historical societies are easier to work with than others, or have the needed information readily available at hand.
I know that the NYCSHS has not had a very good working relationship with manufacturers in the past. However, in the past couple of years it has been making some real strides to improve that. The recent announcement of the True Line Trains 19000-series caboose is a testament of that.
As much as we would like it, it does cost $$$ to research and to produce and have extra parts available for the variations of steamers. And, apart from the USRA-versions and unlike diesels, steamers were generally unique to their particular prototype. Another issue is that the producing and keeping track of the various inventory of extra parts could be very daunting and probably end up being a loss for the manufacturer as far as profitability is concerned.
Only four? Feel free to to take the conversation anyplace the subject takes you, I don't mind, I like to hear different opinions.
maxman ATLANTIC CENTRAL We are not talking about a pipe out of place or a few inches of some small dememsion - we are talking about a major feature of the loco. But a major feature that could have been made correct by only making one extra part. You can note the headlight and bell locations in the first photo as well - really "hard" to research - it took me 3 minutes. I only offered an opinion. I am not disagreeing with you. What I am saying is that in this case you are well versed as to what that particular loco should look like. I am also saying that I think that the pool of potential purchasors who are equally knowledgeable has probably decreased over the past 10 or 15 years.
Maxman, and I was not disagreeing with you, but rather in effect asking you if that is a noticeable difference to you? It is a rather major feature - not unlike a diesel with the wrong trucks or wrong style grills on the side.
BRAKIEThe Bachmann NYC 4-6-0 will sell simply because its affordable.
I totally agree with you, Larry. From a business standpoint, if you know something is going to be profitable with a minimum amount of effort (i.e. in this case stamping different road names onto an identical product), why would you want to change that?
Manufacturers have been doing that for years. And those who aren't particularly concerned about accuracy but just want a locomotive to run around their layout, they are going to look for the biggest bang for their buck.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL It is "easy" to make something very road specific, like a PRR K4 (or any of the long list of very unique locos BLI has offered) and only offer them lettered for the one road who had them. It is a little more work to do like Bachmann did with the Heavy Mountain and the 2-10-2, and make it reasonably correct for 4 or 5 road names. Granted, several of the paint schemes originally offered on the Heavy Mountian were also somewhat "stand in" nature, but again, I would have been impressed if BLI had just bothered to make a Delta trailing truck and a different headlight/bell for the Pacific.
Each variant costs money. With more variants, the production run is fragmented further, driving up costs.Obviously, some of us are willing to pay the extra freight for proto-specific models, but the manufacturer has to evaluate if that market will make up for those priced out of the model when it's done in multiple versions versus one-size-fits-all.
Economic conditions in general remain poor, another factor affecting the pricing of a model brought to market right now. This makes proto-specific runs an even iffier proposition.
Of course, each manufacturer sees these issues in different terms according to their own cost structures. BLI has to arrange or contract for its production, while Bachmann has more flexibility in terms of its costs. It could use building different versions as "filler" between runs of far larger quantity orders and can stockpile parts for all versions at little cost. That may be why you see one level of detail on a BLI vs the B-mann.
I guess I'd question the premise that we're all going in the same direction with the same goals -- as an industry or a hobby. In fact, I'd argue that this kind of diversity in detail quality is a good thing, with good entry level gear AND more sophisticated offerings for those willing to pay the freight. I don't think the difference in pricing quite reflects such differences in details in many such comparisons, though.
It's a marginal cost to add more detail, but the pricing of that to the end consumer doesn't always reflect reality. Another example of that is DCC/sound. Usually about a $90 to $100 increase in cost, that differential could be cut in half and still leave a substantial profit, but the manufacturers all have an incentive to let it stay where it is. Besides, if they went with such a reduction, it would likely further marginalize the market for DC-only versions, which would likely no longer be perceived by some manufacturers as worth the trouble to do. B-mann already produces many models as DCC-equipped only at very low budget prices, for example. Not that those decoders are much good, but...
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
tstage Some of it has to do with whether or not a particular manufacturer is willing to work with or take advantage of the various historical societies available to them. And some historical societies are easier to work with than others, or have the needed information readily available at hand. I know that the NYCSHS has not had a very good working relationship with manufacturers in the past. However, in the past couple of years it has been making some real strides to improve that. The recent announcement of the True Line Trains 19000-series caboose is a testament of that. As much as we would like it, it does cost $$$ to research and to produce and have extra parts available for the variations of steamers. And, apart from the USRA-versions and unlike diesels, steamers were generally unique to their particular prototype. Another issue is that the producing and keeping track of the various inventory of extra parts could be very daunting and probably end up being a loss for the manufacturer as far as profitability is concerned. Tom
Tom I agree that in some cases research can be a major limiting factor, but in the case of the B&O P7 Pacific, first, one still exists, two, ten minutes on the web and two or three books and you have all the data to build a new real one from scratch, let alone get a few major details at least close on a model. No one needs any historical society help to build a reasonably accurate B&O P7, especially not today.
With specific reference to this trailing truck issue, for those of you who do not know a lot about steam, many USRA locos, and USRA clones built later, had their trailing trucks changed to the more modern, and easier to maintain Delta design in later years. In many cases like the P7, later clones were built with the better Delta design.
After some requests from modelers, Bachmann recognized this about their USRA Heavy Mountain and later runs came with both style trailing trucks for the user to swap out at will to his taste and modeling era. This simple detail alone made the SP version from Bachmann a much better "stand in" than with the USRA style trailing truck.
For $299, the BLI Pacific's and Mikados, locos with much detail molded on their plastic boiler, could at least have that little option to make it more versatile to more detail savy modelers.
The point here is that with a few extra parts, the model would likely appeal to a much larger market, selling more copies, making more money, offsetting ALL the tooling costs faster. Especially in this era when it seems fewer and fewer modelers are willing to modify or kit bash locos themselves.
I run a freelanced Southern Pacific, I don't care if they really had a particular engine or not, if it runs well, if it will run on my layout, is highly detailed, and says Southern Pacific (or an associated name like Union), then it will find a home. As for trailing trucks, getting a trailing truck to work right with a particular engine is a lot more engineering than you might expect, meaning it can cost alot. Spectum has a number of their trucks where the lead or trailing truck is not engineered right, sometimes due to the drivers or sometime due to the truck design themselves.
ATLANTIC CENTRALMaxman, and I was not disagreeing with you, but rather in effect asking you if that is a noticeable difference to you? It is a rather major feature - not unlike a diesel with the wrong trucks or wrong style grills on the side
Yes, of course there are differences and I can see them looking at the two pictures side by side. But the comparison circumstances are different. If I were in west coast land and went to the hobby shop to purchase a steam loco and saw that model, in all likelihood I would make my purchase without any consideration as to whether or not the trailing truck was incorrect or the headlight in the wrong location. And it is likely that it would not even cross my mind to do any research. It would look like a steam loco to me because I just didn't know any better.
You, on the other hand, live in B&O land and are familiar with how the model is supposed to look so those things jump out at you. My premise is that the number of people who "know better" is shrinking.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL BTW..I some times think there is at least four different camps in the hobby today but,we'll not go there. Only four? Feel free to to take the conversation anyplace the subject takes you, I don't mind, I like to hear different opinions. Sheldon
Me too, especially since I was the guy who said that there were only two camps.
It is like cars, and simple.
People WILL buy what they make..IF they want something.
It matters little what the public demands...for instance the minivan with the actually easily useable 3rd row seat, is amongst the most popular models sold, yet manufacturers are losing it. People WILL buy SUVs or CSVs they make when the supplies of minivans have ben exhausted, IF they want a car/vehicle of some sort {we aren't all going back to horse and buggy, now, are we?}. Manufacturers KNOW that. SO they will make what they want, or what makes the most money, or whatever..
...and like the movie said "if you build it, they will come"...
If you want something, you will buy the next closest thing, the Manufacturers know that.
..even if not exactly prototypical.
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
rrebell I run a freelanced Southern Pacific, I don't care if they really had a particular engine or not, if it runs well, if it will run on my layout, is highly detailed, and says Southern Pacific (or an associated name like Union), then it will find a home. As for trailing trucks, getting a trailing truck to work right with a particular engine is a lot more engineering than you might expect, meaning it can cost alot. Spectum has a number of their trucks where the lead or trailing truck is not engineered right, sometimes due to the drivers or sometime due to the truck design themselves.
Which Bachmann locos? The N&W J had a bad run with lead trucks assembled backwards - easy fix.
I have over thirty Bachmann steamers, all the lead and trailing trucks work just fine. In fact I remove the springs from the lead trucks of my Bachmann 2-8-0's and they run better that way.
And since this change would be strictly cosmetic on the sideframe, it would require no additional "operational" engineering on the part of BLI.
Fact is, I have two BLI USRA Heavy Mikados, and one BLI Heavy Pacific which I have already installed Delta trailing trucks on. I used surplus trailing trucks from Athearn Genesis 4-6-2's that I purchased direct from Athearn and with a few simple mods installed them on the BLI locos.
But again, parts like that are getting harder to find and fewer modelers seem able or interested.
Lead and trailing truck performance has more to do with good trackwork and reasonable radius curves than anything else.
Sheldon, regarding the orginal point; I think it may just be a broadway thing. Applies to diesels too.
For instance my 2 C30-7s. One has the correct trucks (like the older U30C's trucks, snubbers on the two outside, axles and inside low-mounted brake cylinders). One has incorrect trucks (more like the Dash-8's, snubber on the middle axle, high outside-mounted) brake cylinders.
Here's an example: Wrong sideframe: http://www.broadway-limited.com/images/view.aspx?productId=621 Correct sideframe: http://www.broadway-limited.com/images/view.aspx?productId=623
Why the change I'll never know, but I don't think they do all the research they should. If they did, they would have realized 0 of the BN C30-7s had the newer sideframes. And this is something realitively easy for them to do, since they have the correct parts.
On a side note, I will likely call BLI when I'm not busy during the few hours they are open (I never understood why they are only open for a few hours a day) to see about getting the right sideframes. If that fails, I buy some from Atlas and modify them to work. I've already found out I can glue to the back of an Atlas sideframe, and I can make my own tab and glue it to the Atlas sideframe. Axle spacing is the same for the Atlas U30C and BLI C30-7.
Vincent
Wants: 1. high-quality, sound equipped, SD40-2s, C636s, C30-7s, and F-units in BN. As for ones that don't cost an arm and a leg, that's out of the question....
2. An end to the limited-production and other crap that makes models harder to get and more expensive.
PackerFor instance my 2 C30-7s. One has the correct trucks (like the older U30C's trucks, snubbers on the two outside, axles and inside low-mounted brake cylinders). One has incorrect trucks (more like the Dash-8's, snubber on the middle axle, high outside-mounted) brake cylinders.
Are you HO or N? I'm pretty sure they did do the research when they originally sold the HO scale C30-7's. Prior to buying mine I asked them which type side frame came on the Conrail model because the catalog pictures only showed a black blob. I was told that it came with the proper sideframe (single snubber) which happens to be the one that you are calling incorrect for your model. When it arrived it had the two-snubber sideframe. So I called to complain and they connected me with the individual who had done the research. He must have had some sort of spread sheet because he said the model should have come with the single-snubber design. After that, Broadway did send me the proper sideframes.
So what I think happened is that there was a disconnect between the research and the implementation.
By the way, the way I remember which type sideframe the Conrail GE's have during the era I model is that the U has two, but you only C one. Seems to work for everything except a U23C which has none.
maxmanAre you HO or N? I'm pretty sure they did do the research when they originally sold the HO scale C30-7's. Prior to buying mine I asked them which type side frame came on the Conrail model because the catalog pictures only showed a black blob. I was told that it came with the proper sideframe (single snubber) which happens to be the one that you are calling incorrect for your model. When it arrived it had the two-snubber sideframe. So I called to complain and they connected me with the individual who had done the research. He must have had some sort of spread sheet because he said the model should have come with the single-snubber design. After that, Broadway did send me the proper sideframes. So what I think happened is that there was a disconnect between the research and the implementation. By the way, the way I remember which type sideframe the Conrail GE's have during the era I model is that the U has two, but you only C one. Seems to work for everything except a U23C which has none.
I'm in HO. Your theory does make sense though. On the BN U30C, U33C, and C30-7 all had the same 2-snubber sideframes. U23Cs had none, with 3 high outside brake cylinders, looks almost like an old SD7/9 sideframe.
If you changed your 2-snubber sideframes for 1-snubbers, what did you do with the 2-snubber sideframes?
PackerIf you changed your 2-snubber sideframes for 1-snubbers, what did you do with the 2-snubber sideframes?
I had a feeling you'd ask me that I know I didn't throw them away. Finding them, well, that's another issue. I'll take a look around. If I do find them then they're your's for the cost of postage. I'll send you a PM if I find them.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And in all the road names offered, light or heavy, not one of the smallest or simplest details was changed for greater accuracy. In the B&O green scheme, they could not even put the correct two different Presidents names on the two different road numbers offered - both say "President Washington"?
Did anyone notice that even in the "Official" BLI promo photo the wrong engine number is below the headlight?
I bought one of the P7 Pacifics. Yes, I knew there were inaccuracies but I thought I would deal with them by modifying the details later. At a street price just above $200 I thought it was a deal.
Interesting thing is, my cab IS lettered President Adams but my engine number is 5300! I need that numberboard off the engine in BLI's photo!
Happy modeling... Ed
gmpullman ATLANTIC CENTRAL And in all the road names offered, light or heavy, not one of the smallest or simplest details was changed for greater accuracy. In the B&O green scheme, they could not even put the correct two different Presidents names on the two different road numbers offered - both say "President Washington"? Did anyone notice that even in the "Official" BLI promo photo the wrong engine number is below the headlight? http://www.broadway-limited.com/images/view.aspx?productId=2859&index=0 I bought one of the P7 Pacifics. Yes, I knew there were inaccuracies but I thought I would deal with them by modifying the details later. At a street price just above $200 I thought it was a deal. Interesting thing is, my cab IS lettered President Adams but my engine number is 5300! I need that numberboard off the engine in BLI's photo! Happy modeling... Ed
Ed, that is real interesting. A friend of mine bought one of each road number and they are both lettered President Washington. Sounds like a real quality control issue, so maybe they did "try" to get that part right.
If you can find an Athearn light Pacific trailing truck, it is a pretty simple retro fit.
And $200 is a deal, the more common street price seems to be between $230 and $250.
Hi,
I brought up a related situation a couple of years ago. BLI - to me a respected "high end" loco builder - was offering USRA Mikado's in Santa Fe livery. Well, the Santa Fe never had USRA locos, and the model did not have the required boiler tube cow catcher or the iconic ATSF number boards.
Yup, I had bought one (not realizing what I was buying), and ended up reselling it on Ebay the following year. Needless to say, I was very disappointed in BLI, for "slapping" unprototypical liveries on locos. This was something one would expect from the "low end" companies, but not one of their "stature".
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central