BMMECNYC PRR8259 Perhaps one reason I'm getting into brass steam power is the "experts" out there have either left the regular day-to-day-able-to-post-online-and-critique scene, or they have little interest/funds to be able to purchase/critique/modify said models to suit themselves. It is a little bit easier to appreciate a fine steamer when people aren't shredding it online, like some seem to do with the latest fill in the blank diesel. The NJCB Boston and Maine 2-10-2 has 4" undersized drivers.... I bought it anyway. Why? Close enough, and no one else makes one. Am I going to change it, no.
PRR8259 Perhaps one reason I'm getting into brass steam power is the "experts" out there have either left the regular day-to-day-able-to-post-online-and-critique scene, or they have little interest/funds to be able to purchase/critique/modify said models to suit themselves. It is a little bit easier to appreciate a fine steamer when people aren't shredding it online, like some seem to do with the latest fill in the blank diesel.
The NJCB Boston and Maine 2-10-2 has 4" undersized drivers.... I bought it anyway. Why? Close enough, and no one else makes one. Am I going to change it, no.
Plus it has DCC and Sound, and runs amazingly.
DSchmitt Posted by BMMECNYC on Tuesday, May 09, 2017 5:39 PM "Model Railroader Cyclopedia Volume 2 Diesel Locomotives shows F7B units with Steam Generators. B&M F7As did not appear to have SG, but the B units did." ---------- From http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=68370 Boston & Maine F7 "F-7's 4265 - 4268 were purchased for freight service, but found their way into summer passenger service early in their careers. They were not built with steam generators, but some of the B units were retrofitted with steam generators in the 1960's to work on the "Ambassador" and "Montrealer" - "Washingtonian" service from Springfield,Mass. to White River Jct.,Vt. until those trains were abolished in 1966. Both the F-7a's and F-7b's had dynamic brakes when built, but had them removed and the hatch blanked over sometime in the late 1960's - early 1970's."
Posted by BMMECNYC on Tuesday, May 09, 2017 5:39 PM
"Model Railroader Cyclopedia Volume 2 Diesel Locomotives shows F7B units with Steam Generators.
B&M F7As did not appear to have SG, but the B units did."
----------
From http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=68370
Boston & Maine F7
"F-7's 4265 - 4268 were purchased for freight service, but found their way into summer passenger service early in their careers. They were not built with steam generators, but some of the B units were retrofitted with steam generators in the 1960's to work on the "Ambassador" and "Montrealer" - "Washingtonian" service from Springfield,Mass. to White River Jct.,Vt. until those trains were abolished in 1966. Both the F-7a's and F-7b's had dynamic brakes when built, but had them removed and the hatch blanked over sometime in the late 1960's - early 1970's."
That checks with the photo I found of 4265A and a B unit, only the B had the steam generator.
BRAKIE I still enjoy switching with my BB GP7 as much as I do with my Walthers P2K GP7 or my Genesis GP9.
.
John Allen used to assign a Shay locomotive to yard duties at Great Divide just so the operators would be forced to switch freight cars slowly.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
PRR8259...the market does not factor into what we are able to buy but rather a small but very vocal subset of the market which is rather loudly clamoring for the utmost levels of detail has a disproportionate influence over the rest of the market. Not everybody in the marketplace is clamoring for near-brass levels of detail, only a few--but they are the loudest few, and have no qualms about telephoning manufacturers and demanding what they want. The squeaky wheel gets the grease...until said manufacturer finds out the hard way that certain things do not sell...which has actually happened. One manufacturer told me straight out that undecorated diesels did not sell--did not even make the minimum pre-order requirements--but as a form of "customer service" they did them anyway, at a loss (basically amortized over the costs of the rest of the production run, so hard to quantify actual loss). They told me they will not do undecorated diesels again, ever. Certain people are clamoring loudly for ACL/SCL models, but the marketplace, with some limited notable exceptions, did not actually buy them, and now one manufacturer is stripping them for parts because they can't give them away. So I reject the notion that the market as a whole determines what we get. It is the rather loud influence of a few. Yes, a few boutique manufacturers are offering outstanding levels of detail, or a few outstanding items. But have you ever considered how many ordinary Athearn blue and yellow box freight cars are sold for every one specialty, higher end item? It's got to be quite a lot. Not everybody wants to buy the highest end, fully detailed, see-through autoracks, for example.
One manufacturer told me straight out that undecorated diesels did not sell--did not even make the minimum pre-order requirements--but as a form of "customer service" they did them anyway, at a loss (basically amortized over the costs of the rest of the production run, so hard to quantify actual loss). They told me they will not do undecorated diesels again, ever.
Certain people are clamoring loudly for ACL/SCL models, but the marketplace, with some limited notable exceptions, did not actually buy them, and now one manufacturer is stripping them for parts because they can't give them away.
So I reject the notion that the market as a whole determines what we get. It is the rather loud influence of a few.
Yes, a few boutique manufacturers are offering outstanding levels of detail, or a few outstanding items. But have you ever considered how many ordinary Athearn blue and yellow box freight cars are sold for every one specialty, higher end item? It's got to be quite a lot.
Not everybody wants to buy the highest end, fully detailed, see-through autoracks, for example.
I'm rather circumspect in complaining about progress in the technology used in our hobby. People used to complain about DCC causing the costs of locos to climb. Now we mostly accept that as what sells. It's part of what makes the hobby attractive to younger folks.
Part of this is due to being a narrowgauger. We often adopt techniques and technologies before standard gaugers do. That, plus our relatively smaller numbers (remember that NGers come in various scales, so one model can't come anywhere close to covering all our needs) means most new production is rather costly, then the price drops as it comes into widespread use.
However, I don't begrudge the price of progress. It's what keeps the hobby fresh and hungry. It's what attracts the younger and more technically literate. Mostt of all, it's often what drives production decisions. If there's not a new feature, why bother producing more of an item? More detail is good, as I can see it in my pics. The only place where I don't want more detail is where it will break easily. In terms oif the actual models, we are approaching the point where it's harder to justify more detail, but I doubt the demandf for detail ever really will fall.
But if you want old-school stuff, rfemember it's out there, just take the trouble to find it.
ê
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
riogrande5761plant is that they served?
Russell
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Modeling, it does seem that modeling the trains has been replaced by train collecting and layout building.......
Modeling, it does seem that modeling the trains has been replaced by train collecting and layout building.......
Nah, it's been replaced with whining online.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, a few boutique manufacturers are offering outstanding levels of detail, or a few outstanding items. But have you ever considered how many ordinary Athearn blue and yellow box freight cars are sold for every one specialty, higher end item? It's got to be quite a lot. John, great point, example, I have 4 Spring Mills Depot B&O wagon top covered hoppers, but I have eaaily 400 Athearn Blue Box freight cars...... Sheldon If by Athearn blue and yellow box you mean Athearns modern RTR line, they offer some pretty nice stuff amongst them and if you are choosy, some are accurate for some prototypes - Athearns RTR line is quite decent in the past 10 years, even including some of the former Genesis line. The warmed over ex-Details West stuff I steer clear of although I still have a few original DW box cars from the olden days. I was looking at some wreck photo's on the D&RGW and low and behold, I saw a Nestle PC&F box car amonst them - thats the first time I saw an example of that prototype of what Athearn made - have one on the roster now. I used to have a bunch of Athearn blue box rolling stock but I'm down to maybe 20-25 or so pieces, most of them 86' auto box cars, because they are the only game in town. One of these days a manufacturers may actually offer HQ quality Thrall 86' auto parts cars; I see people asking for them often. The boutique stuff, like Spring Mill and Moloco (is Moloco Boutique?) are really nice and of course at $50-55 a pop, I can't afford many but they fill holes in the roster and provide some interesting models. I've got one of the B&O Canstock cars and one of the NATX PD cars, and plan on picking up on Chessie versions next time I'm at Timonium. The PD cars were regulars on the Rio Grande, reallyI could use a few more.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, a few boutique manufacturers are offering outstanding levels of detail, or a few outstanding items. But have you ever considered how many ordinary Athearn blue and yellow box freight cars are sold for every one specialty, higher end item? It's got to be quite a lot. John, great point, example, I have 4 Spring Mills Depot B&O wagon top covered hoppers, but I have eaaily 400 Athearn Blue Box freight cars...... Sheldon
John, great point, example, I have 4 Spring Mills Depot B&O wagon top covered hoppers, but I have eaaily 400 Athearn Blue Box freight cars......
Sheldon
If by Athearn blue and yellow box you mean Athearns modern RTR line, they offer some pretty nice stuff amongst them and if you are choosy, some are accurate for some prototypes - Athearns RTR line is quite decent in the past 10 years, even including some of the former Genesis line. The warmed over ex-Details West stuff I steer clear of although I still have a few original DW box cars from the olden days. I was looking at some wreck photo's on the D&RGW and low and behold, I saw a Nestle PC&F box car amonst them - thats the first time I saw an example of that prototype of what Athearn made - have one on the roster now.
I used to have a bunch of Athearn blue box rolling stock but I'm down to maybe 20-25 or so pieces, most of them 86' auto box cars, because they are the only game in town. One of these days a manufacturers may actually offer HQ quality Thrall 86' auto parts cars; I see people asking for them often.
The boutique stuff, like Spring Mill and Moloco (is Moloco Boutique?) are really nice and of course at $50-55 a pop, I can't afford many but they fill holes in the roster and provide some interesting models. I've got one of the B&O Canstock cars and one of the NATX PD cars, and plan on picking up on Chessie versions next time I'm at Timonium. The PD cars were regulars on the Rio Grande, reallyI could use a few more.
Jim,
I think most of the cars you are refering to are way to new for my era. I do have my share of recent (last 15 years) Athearn Ready to Roll, but I also have lots of original blue box kits.
I model 1954, nothing you mentioned above is even on my radar.
40', 50' basic steel box cars, 34' hoppers, 40' reefers, the fleet of 50' piggyback flats I talked about earlier in this thread - that's the kind of stuff I have. And I have interest in replacing 45 years worth of purchases because they are not exact models - they all look the part.
I do have the 50' ATSF ice reefers from Athearn - very nice - I have all of them, and the ATLANTIC CENTRA has some too.....
I also have lots of MDC, old Athearn and Varney metal kits, various craftsman kits, Silver Streak, F&C, and more.
Moloco makes nothing I would ever own - outside my era.
I also have stuff like Fox Valley wagon top box cars, Spring Mills B&O wagon top cabooses (I do after all model the B&O along with my ATLANTIC CENTRAL). I have Branchline passenger cars, I also have lots of ConCor and Athearn 72' passenger cars and recent production Harriman style cars from Athearn/Roundhouse.
Yes, most of my passenger cars are freelanced/generic/selectively compressed - BUT - they run closed coupled with diaphragms that touch and have a fair amount of detail added were visable.
Do I care that they are too short or the window arrangements are generic? - not one bit. I have kit bashed many into a wider selection of types than made by those companies and they look great running close coupled on my broad curves.....
Old Fat Robert Would somebody, anybody or everybody please tell me what the original post was about? And then tell me what it is about now? Old Fat Robert
Would somebody, anybody or everybody please tell me what the original post was about? And then tell me what it is about now?
Old Fat Robert
csxns riogrande5761 saw a Nestle PC&F box car amonst them - thats the first time I saw an example of that prototype They used to show up at the yards in Charlotte NC back in the 80's.
riogrande5761 saw a Nestle PC&F box car amonst them - thats the first time I saw an example of that prototype
They used to show up at the yards in Charlotte NC back in the 80's.
The wreck photo is the only prototype picure I've ever seen. Anyone know where the plant is that they served?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
riogrande5761saw a Nestle PC&F box car amonst them - thats the first time I saw an example of that prototype
PRR8259 RioGrande5761-- Seems you got just a little bit hasty with the cutting and pasting, and apparently did not fully read the rest of my post before reacting to it.
RioGrande5761--
Seems you got just a little bit hasty with the cutting and pasting, and apparently did not fully read the rest of my post before reacting to it.
I did read it, rest assured and still feel my points are valid with regard to the generalizations.
Qualified - that is a bit better! Don't worry, your in good company - I've gotten bit many times making generalizatons!
That is about my ratio of high end vs average.
ACY Portholes can be closed up by filling them with green stuff and sanding smooth. Or plating over with very thin styrene or brass. Lots of details can be changed. Some require only a little bit of effort and some require more. If you make the attempt, you are a modeler, even if your results aren't perfect. If you don't make the attempt, you are not a modeler but a purchaser. You have the right to be either one, or a combination of the two. You also have the right to suggest ways that a manufacturer can improve his product. Steemtrayn's CNJ Geep can be improved by adding the extension with styrene, and touching up the paint. Actually, I think CNW also had extensions like this, so maybe there is an opportunity for an aftermarket parts manufacturer to make the part. He can make that change if he wishes, but he isn't violating any legal or ethical code if he doesn't. It's his hobby and his choice. Nobody makes a B&O Shark diesel that has the extra sandboxes that B&O added to their noses in the later years, but they can easily be added by anybody with a few scraps of styrene and an XActo blade. I think you cross the line when you expect the manufacturer to do everything for you and cater to all the unique features of your chosen prototype. Tom
Portholes can be closed up by filling them with green stuff and sanding smooth. Or plating over with very thin styrene or brass. Lots of details can be changed. Some require only a little bit of effort and some require more. If you make the attempt, you are a modeler, even if your results aren't perfect. If you don't make the attempt, you are not a modeler but a purchaser. You have the right to be either one, or a combination of the two. You also have the right to suggest ways that a manufacturer can improve his product.
Steemtrayn's CNJ Geep can be improved by adding the extension with styrene, and touching up the paint. Actually, I think CNW also had extensions like this, so maybe there is an opportunity for an aftermarket parts manufacturer to make the part. He can make that change if he wishes, but he isn't violating any legal or ethical code if he doesn't. It's his hobby and his choice. Nobody makes a B&O Shark diesel that has the extra sandboxes that B&O added to their noses in the later years, but they can easily be added by anybody with a few scraps of styrene and an XActo blade.
I think you cross the line when you expect the manufacturer to do everything for you and cater to all the unique features of your chosen prototype.
Tom
Completely agreed, we are now full circle. On page one I suggested the OP fill in the port holes, touch them up with some silver paint, weather the model to the typical poor condition of an AMTRAK E unit, and no one will know if he did a good job or not........
Still interesred in building trains, not just structures and scenery......
Nice post, Tom.
Or if one desires, step up, spend the cash, and buy a "closer" to prototype version in brass, if/when it is available. Even then, it can be quite a challenge to find what one wants. Some models can be very difficult to find, at any price point.
I said the market does not factor into what we are able to buy but rather a small but very vocal subset of the market which is rather loudly clamoring for the utmost levels of detail has a disproportionate influence over the rest of the market. Not everybody in the marketplace is clamoring for near-brass levels of detail, only a few--but they are the loudest few, and have no qualms about telephoning manufacturers and demanding what they want. The squeaky wheel gets the grease...until said manufacturer finds out the hard way that certain things do not sell...which has actually happened.
Fortunately for my layout the Atlas steam era rtr boxcars fit the bill quite nicely, and I do not any longer need the newer (too new for steam era) high end, high detailed cars.
John
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Like Wayne, Mike and others have suggested, I think too many have unrealistic expectations considering the massive scope of North American railroad history. No doubt, there is an exhaustive amount of items across the last some 80 years that most products are covering. Probably the fact that model companies have increasingly raised the level of accuracy during the past 20 years has caused some modelers to have unrealistic expectations, it's true. Me having started in the hobby as a teen in the 1970's, I'm tickled pink with what I can buy and realize we have it better than we ever have. Sadly, there are some who don't appreciate what we have today - in what I consider the golden age of the hobby (when you combine present, recent and past products we can access). What else can we do but let folks know that the world will never be perfect and try to appreciate what we have these days. The best models out there only represent a single digit percentage of the stuff I need to build a cohesive layout, and I don't have time to scratch build the rest. And, I want to build and run trains, not spend my life doing research. Sheldon Perhaps in model form the percentage is very small, but we have the best selection we have ever had, and with a little effort, we can build trains which are far more realistic looking compared to 20 or 30 years ago. I continue to be amazed at what Nick Moloe and David Lehlbach are offering - they even have photo's of the prototype that the model matches on their website to prove they are not foobies or stand-in's. At least for 1960's thru 1980's, which I know a little about, there is quite a bit from intermountain, Athearn/Genesis, Tangent, ExactRail, Moloco, Wheels of Time, Scale Trains, Atlas and Trainworx, that are very close matches to many prototypes. Maybe 1% but the ratio of foobies to close to prototype models has been changing for the better. With a mininum of research using online resources and some printed material, you can find a lot of good stuff without taking a ton of time. As Harry Wong said not long ago: "Model Railroading is insanely good these days". I agree.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Like Wayne, Mike and others have suggested, I think too many have unrealistic expectations considering the massive scope of North American railroad history.
No doubt, there is an exhaustive amount of items across the last some 80 years that most products are covering. Probably the fact that model companies have increasingly raised the level of accuracy during the past 20 years has caused some modelers to have unrealistic expectations, it's true.
Me having started in the hobby as a teen in the 1970's, I'm tickled pink with what I can buy and realize we have it better than we ever have. Sadly, there are some who don't appreciate what we have today - in what I consider the golden age of the hobby (when you combine present, recent and past products we can access). What else can we do but let folks know that the world will never be perfect and try to appreciate what we have these days.
The best models out there only represent a single digit percentage of the stuff I need to build a cohesive layout, and I don't have time to scratch build the rest. And, I want to build and run trains, not spend my life doing research. Sheldon
And, I want to build and run trains, not spend my life doing research.
Perhaps in model form the percentage is very small, but we have the best selection we have ever had, and with a little effort, we can build trains which are far more realistic looking compared to 20 or 30 years ago. I continue to be amazed at what Nick Moloe and David Lehlbach are offering - they even have photo's of the prototype that the model matches on their website to prove they are not foobies or stand-in's. At least for 1960's thru 1980's, which I know a little about, there is quite a bit from intermountain, Athearn/Genesis, Tangent, ExactRail, Moloco, Wheels of Time, Scale Trains, Atlas and Trainworx, that are very close matches to many prototypes.
Maybe 1% but the ratio of foobies to close to prototype models has been changing for the better. With a mininum of research using online resources and some printed material, you can find a lot of good stuff without taking a ton of time.
As Harry Wong said not long ago: "Model Railroading is insanely good these days". I agree.
Jim, completely agreed.
I don't know how accurate the Proto E unit nose is, but my eye and my standards if fits what you are saying... it is wonderful that we have such great models.
To the OP's original complaint, which he was very vague about in his opening post, nose contures aside, the model in question is pretty accuate for an as built E8 or E9. This idea that every paint scheme, every renumbering, every trip to the shop can be represented with a different RTR version of a product is simply beyond the pale in terms of unrealistic expectations.
And while the OP said he was not complaining about prices, he seemed to be of the mind that prices are based on intangables like accuracy. Prices are based on cost to produce and dustribute, because if not, someone always undercuts your price.
riogrande5761 BRAKIE Jim,You and I seen the types that write if your models isn't 100% accurate you're just playing trains and they're not trolling by a country mile because they fully and truly believe it. You know, maybe in my teens and twenties I might have been bothered by those people, but I'm long long past caring about them now. Just get yourself a can of "Troll B-Gone" and spray them with it when they approach!
BRAKIE Jim,You and I seen the types that write if your models isn't 100% accurate you're just playing trains and they're not trolling by a country mile because they fully and truly believe it.
Jim,You and I seen the types that write if your models isn't 100% accurate you're just playing trains and they're not trolling by a country mile because they fully and truly believe it.
You know, maybe in my teens and twenties I might have been bothered by those people, but I'm long long past caring about them now. Just get yourself a can of "Troll B-Gone" and spray them with it when they approach!
Jim,I don't pay attention to them and some times I fell sorry for them since they don't see the big picture.
I've been in clubs that had members from all walks of life from high school students to a attorney yet,we held one thing in common our shared interest for model trains and railroads..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
How does what the market demands have anything to do with this topic?
In the context of this thread, the market obviously demands that Proto make a less than accurate E7/8.
So I would assume that what the market demands is not the issue. The issue appears to be that a small group of people constantly complain that the producers produce less than accurate models.
They complain that producers ARE meeting market demand.....but not their own.
- Douglas
ATLANTIC CENTRALLike Wayne, Mike and others have suggested, I think too many have unrealistic expectations considering the massive scope of North American railroad history.
riogrande5761 What is the saying about people who look down their noses at others, some might call them trolls these day? The thing trolls want is attention, they thrive on it.
I suppose I cause a few of those good old boys to spit coffee or their drinks over they computer screen because I have said several times I still enjoy switching with my BB GP7 as much as I do with my Walthers P2K GP7 or my Genesis GP9. Some may consider that trolling but,it's the truth and they say the truth will stand when the worlds on fire.
I am also just as proud with my collection of BB and Roundhouse cars as I'm my Atlas,Walthers,Exact Rail,IM and Red Caboose cars. I have a small collection(around 30 cars) of KD 40' boxcars
Why do I have those KD cars?
I been thinking of a steam era ISL and that's how the collection started..
riogrande5761 There is plenty of room for everyone, but it is often that extreem proto group that is quick to look down their nose at others. But why even give them acknowledgment? What is the saying about people who look down their noses at others, some might call them trolls these day? The thing trolls want is attention, they thrive on it. Best thing is to not feed the troll or the hyper critical train guy. Pay them no mind, seriously. I see way too much attention given to the negative Nancy's in the hobby. We've had enough of them. Please ... fugetubit! As pointed out above, it is questionable as to if there even was one "nose profile" at EMD, considering how they were made. One profile, plus or minus 2-3 inches. Sheldon Well and good, but I think there IS a consensus that there are a couple of models out there that do get the old EMD nose about as right as you will ever see, and those would be the Lubliner, Highliner F (Genesis F) and Rapido's FP7A (laser scanned from a prototype). I don't think we've seen an E unit done to quite that degree yet - I don't have a dog in that fight but that does seem to be the consensus - I'll givem them that due without a rebutt. PRR8259 No, I utterly reject the notion that the market determines what we get to buy. What, like the demand for RTR over kits? nuff said right there. Oh, and what about the most excellent, match the prototype, models from Moloco and Tangent? In fact, a relatively small, but very vocal, sub-segment of the market, which does want...basically the ultimate in detail...is determining what the rest of us are able to buy. But you rejected the market determines what we buy (above)? Aren't these very vocal customers a "market"? Ask Nick Molo, ask Jason Schron, ask David Lehbach, Ask Shane Wilson, ask Blaine Hadfield, etc... I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it. John I'm going to agree with Mike on that one, you can't listen too much to others - there is a point you have to enjoy the hobby on your own terms and leave the critics behind. There is a happy medium there after all, and don't forget ... ModelRailroading is Fun!
There is plenty of room for everyone, but it is often that extreem proto group that is quick to look down their nose at others.
But why even give them acknowledgment? What is the saying about people who look down their noses at others, some might call them trolls these day? The thing trolls want is attention, they thrive on it. Best thing is to not feed the troll or the hyper critical train guy. Pay them no mind, seriously. I see way too much attention given to the negative Nancy's in the hobby. We've had enough of them. Please ... fugetubit!
As pointed out above, it is questionable as to if there even was one "nose profile" at EMD, considering how they were made. One profile, plus or minus 2-3 inches. Sheldon
Well and good, but I think there IS a consensus that there are a couple of models out there that do get the old EMD nose about as right as you will ever see, and those would be the Lubliner, Highliner F (Genesis F) and Rapido's FP7A (laser scanned from a prototype). I don't think we've seen an E unit done to quite that degree yet - I don't have a dog in that fight but that does seem to be the consensus - I'll givem them that due without a rebutt.
PRR8259 No, I utterly reject the notion that the market determines what we get to buy.
No, I utterly reject the notion that the market determines what we get to buy.
What, like the demand for RTR over kits? nuff said right there. Oh, and what about the most excellent, match the prototype, models from Moloco and Tangent?
In fact, a relatively small, but very vocal, sub-segment of the market, which does want...basically the ultimate in detail...is determining what the rest of us are able to buy.
But you rejected the market determines what we buy (above)? Aren't these very vocal customers a "market"? Ask Nick Molo, ask Jason Schron, ask David Lehbach, Ask Shane Wilson, ask Blaine Hadfield, etc...
I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it. John
I'm going to agree with Mike on that one, you can't listen too much to others - there is a point you have to enjoy the hobby on your own terms and leave the critics behind. There is a happy medium there after all, and don't forget ...
ModelRailroading is Fun!
Agreed, I was just responding to John who brought up that group who are even fussier than the OP, who was complaining about about port hole counts on AMTRAK E units.
As you and I know and have discussed, how close is close enough, and what do you do regarding models not available or for which good documentation does not exist for the day, time and year you are modeling? Just like the endless variations of closed up port holes on 30 year old AMTRAK E units?
Like Wayne, Mike and others have suggested, I think too many have unrealistic expectations considering the massive scope of North American railroad history.
The best models out there only represent a single digit percentage of the stuff I need to build a cohesive layout, and I don't have time to scratch build the rest.
doctorwayneI won't go so far as to knock what's available today, but the market has changed (or been changed) and many prefer their models to be r-t-r, with no need for further embellishment. I think that Bachmann locomotives offer a reasonably-priced entry into that former era where the modeller could make something that was truly his, as most of those detail parts are still available. It's certainly not for everyone, but the sense of satisfaction at creating what you want, rather than simply buying it, should not be underestimated.
Wayne,
I think you touch on an important point. People are often shy about working on such projects. They think that they can't do as good a job as the folks at tthe factory, so why bother? But the only way to get those skills is to try and improve. Sure, the first project will be intimidating and likely won't meet your expectations.
But if RTR is not meeting your expectations, then what do you really have to lose? The next project turns out a little better, then the next, and pretty soon you no longer fear making a new RTR loco or car worse, you're anticipating improving it.
Then you start thinking about what you can build from scratch.
Obviously, not all of us turn into skillful modelers with such confidence. Even once you're able to turn out great models, there are ones that turn out not so great -- but you built it and still usually don't mind having it on the layout despite the imperfections. Heck, you have to get right up close and know what to look for with many "mistakes." At 3 feet, it's fine.
What really matters is not how perfect the models you modify or build are, it's the freedom of knowing you're no longer stuck with what the mfgs are willing to build. The what's "uinprototypical" about their latest release either doesn't matter or is a simple challenge to your improving skill set.
Bottom Line: Don't let your lack of confidence in your own abilities stand in the way of getting what you want. They will improve, but only if you choose to put them to work.
steemtraynThe Bachmann CNJ GP7 looks nice...
I agree, and I'm guessing that it's not too pricey....
steemtrayn...if only it had the train lighting bulges at the end of the long hood.
A razor saw and some styrene could fix that, although you could have a little more trouble with the lettering...I'm not aware of what might be available.Back when I was still modelling the diesel era, there wasn't much in the way of well-detailed ones available, but that was at a time when diesel detail parts manufacturers began cranking out all manner of detail parts, so anyone who wanted their diesels to be "more prototypical" could buy pretty-well whatever they needed to improve the stock model. I won't go so far as to knock what's available today, but the market has changed (or been changed) and many prefer their models to be r-t-r, with no need for further embellishment. I think that Bachmann locomotives offer a reasonably-priced entry into that former era where the modeller could make something that was truly his, as most of those detail parts are still available. It's certainly not for everyone, but the sense of satisfaction at creating what you want, rather than simply buying it, should not be underestimated.
Wayne
The Bachmann CNJ GP7 looks nice, if only it had the train lighting bulges at the end of the long hood.
Dave
Just be glad you don't have to press "2" for English.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ_ALEdDUB8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hqFS1GZL4s
http://s73.photobucket.com/user/steemtrayn/media/MovingcoalontheDCM.mp4.html?sort=3&o=27
BRAKIE Sheldon,Thanks for posting the photos of those F7s..That's one of the many things I like about the hobby its a continual learning process. I'm still going to continue the research since I find it very interesting.
Sheldon,Thanks for posting the photos of those F7s..That's one of the many things I like about the hobby its a continual learning process.
I'm still going to continue the research since I find it very interesting.
No worries Larry, happy to share what I know.
My memory was off on how many existed, mainly because I was also thinking of the many F3's that also had steam generators.
And a considerable number of F7B units were sold with steam generators for use with F7's and the FP7's, also making the Athearn B unit correct for a great many locomotives.
And my first post about the ATSF was correct, the passenger ABBA F7 sets had steam generators in the B units and extra water tanks in the A units.
So as built the Athearn shell may only be correct for 50 or so locos, but it is easy to remove the details if you are detailing a unit........
The real trouble with proto stuff is that just when you say something never happened, up pops a picture. I have seen some really weird stuff both on the net and personal. Also of note, many years ago someone said a particular enginge was never owned by SP, even the historical society said so, untill one day a pic showed up, seems they got one second hand and did the paint job, only to get rid of it not long after they had aquired it.
mlehman PRR8259 I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it. John, As we can see from this thread, it's hard enough figuring out how to please yourself. If you worry about pleasing everyone else...well, that's just impossible, especially goven the very low entry level qualifications to be an internet critic
PRR8259 I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it.
John,
As we can see from this thread, it's hard enough figuring out how to please yourself.
If you worry about pleasing everyone else...well, that's just impossible, especially goven the very low entry level qualifications to be an internet critic
Mike--
Additional backstory: I was someone who personally lobbied for years for said project to get produced at all. It went from being a joke 30 years ago when I was a kid to reality. Perhaps I was a bit too "emotionally invested" in the project.
Yes, anymore I pretty much don't care what others think. I like certain Rio Grande and SP steamers, not the same ones everyone else does, but the ones that appeal to me, and those are what I am hunting for in the future. 2-10-2's, 4-10-2's, and DRGW 4-8-2's and 2-6-6-2's. I might also go for an L-107...saving up cash...Keeping best steam engine I have and trying to sell a couple for modest profit.
Well said Mike!
PRR8259I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it.
If you worry about pleasing everyone else...well, that's just impossible, especially given the very low entry level qualifications to be an internet critic
Larry,
Here are a few:
PRR8259 No, I utterly reject the notion that the market determines what we get to buy. In fact, a relatively small, but very vocal, sub-segment of the market, which does want...basically the ultimate in detail...is determining what the rest of us are able to buy. Sure, there are Bachmann-type less detailed models, but a whole lot of recent releases cater to the higher end of detail desired by some very vocal critics. I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it. I did not appreciate the number of posts and degree of negativity directed toward the particular manufacturer (who subsequently fixed the issues and offered free replacement parts--a very stand up way to handle the situation). So, in a nutshell, I would agree with Sheldon that sometimes the "experts" do indeed go a little bit too far. Yes, none of that detail is noticeable once trains start moving on a layout. Perhaps one reason I'm getting into brass steam power is the "experts" out there have either left the regular day-to-day-able-to-post-online-and-critique scene, or they have little interest/funds to be able to purchase/critique/modify said models to suit themselves. It is a little bit easier to appreciate a fine steamer when people aren't shredding it online, like some seem to do with the latest fill in the blank diesel. John
In fact, a relatively small, but very vocal, sub-segment of the market, which does want...basically the ultimate in detail...is determining what the rest of us are able to buy. Sure, there are Bachmann-type less detailed models, but a whole lot of recent releases cater to the higher end of detail desired by some very vocal critics.
I purchased a brand new model of a diesel from one manufacturer, and posted a simple thread on another forum about how much I liked it. Unbeknownst to me, there were a couple omissions and things the manufacturer subsequently did fix on those models, but in the meantime, they were taken to task for the few things they did wrong, so much so that in the end, I found absolutely no joy in owning my particular slice of realism in that model, and sold it. I did not appreciate the number of posts and degree of negativity directed toward the particular manufacturer (who subsequently fixed the issues and offered free replacement parts--a very stand up way to handle the situation).
So, in a nutshell, I would agree with Sheldon that sometimes the "experts" do indeed go a little bit too far. Yes, none of that detail is noticeable once trains start moving on a layout.
Perhaps one reason I'm getting into brass steam power is the "experts" out there have either left the regular day-to-day-able-to-post-online-and-critique scene, or they have little interest/funds to be able to purchase/critique/modify said models to suit themselves. It is a little bit easier to appreciate a fine steamer when people aren't shredding it online, like some seem to do with the latest fill in the blank diesel.
John just another thing that makes us so different, the opinions of others, no matter how informed, has no sway over how I feel about the models I buy......or the models I build.
Maybe because I am an introvert who's self esteem is not heavily invested in what others think of me or my choices. I am totally confident in my likes, dislikes, choices, etc.
You don't like how or what I model? That's OK - I didn't do it for you........
Guess it goes hand in hand with only buying what I need/want for my specific goals and seldom if ever changing my mind about those goals.....
PRR8259Perhaps one reason I'm getting into brass steam power is the "experts" out there have either left the regular day-to-day-able-to-post-online-and-critique scene, or they have little interest/funds to be able to purchase/critique/modify said models to suit themselves. It is a little bit easier to appreciate a fine steamer when people aren't shredding it online, like some seem to do with the latest fill in the blank diesel.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
Or we can just read the operators manual, which seems to confirm the existance of steam generators in F7A units.....
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/manual/f7-om.pdf
Model Railroader Cyclopedia Volume 2 Diesel Locomotives shows F7B units with Steam Generators.
B&M F7As did not appear to have SG, but the B units did.
Old Fat RobertWould somebody, anybody or everybody please tell me what the original post was about? And then tell me what it is about now?
Like many discussions, those here often wander from the original topic, and, in my opinion, are often better for it.
Sir Madog Old Fat Robert Would somebody, anybody or everybody please tell me what the original post was about? And then tell me what it is about now? Old Fat Robert Not worth the trouble trying to dig into this thread.
Not worth the trouble trying to dig into this thread.
It's about not being about the high cost of models. All the while complaining about the high cost of highly detailed models.
Or maybe it's a lament about the inadequacy of manufacturers who make poor copies of E8's - that 99.9% of us can't tell the difference and 99.8% don't care.
Or maybe it's about modifying the Mars Rover to look more like a PRR K4s.
I'm not sure anymore.
Paul
So, I'm just going to quickly slip in here, and ask the members of the 100% prototypical modelers (I do respect your knowledge), who love to use the term "Not even close!", could you please explain to me what the "ultimate" E unit should look like? as I believe this thread started out about P2K E's.
I just spent some time looking at however many pictures I seen on google images, and it seems that are not too many that are exactly alike.
So, just wondering what your version of the "perfect", or "ultimate" would look like?
Mike.
My You Tube
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL John, do you know the meaning of "expert"? Someone who knows more and more about less and less........ That is basic definition of someone with a Phd. I decided to quit with a Masters, however. =P These models are 1/87 the size of real life, and that is what some of these guys need......a life. Sheldon Shouldn't there be room in the hobby for a diverse group of hobbyists without belittling some of them? Get a life? I don't need E units, which is a good thing because I agree, the ultimate E unit nose hasn't been done yet. Jim over at Atlas Rescue Forums has been doing some great modeling with his E units and I really can't fault him, he is having fun at 1/87th scale and going for all the detail and realism he can muster.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL John, do you know the meaning of "expert"? Someone who knows more and more about less and less........
John, do you know the meaning of "expert"? Someone who knows more and more about less and less........
That is basic definition of someone with a Phd. I decided to quit with a Masters, however. =P
These models are 1/87 the size of real life, and that is what some of these guys need......a life. Sheldon
Shouldn't there be room in the hobby for a diverse group of hobbyists without belittling some of them? Get a life?
I don't need E units, which is a good thing because I agree, the ultimate E unit nose hasn't been done yet. Jim over at Atlas Rescue Forums has been doing some great modeling with his E units and I really can't fault him, he is having fun at 1/87th scale and going for all the detail and realism he can muster.
As pointed out above, it is questionable as to if there even was one "nose profile" at EMD, considering how they were made. One profile, plus or minus 2-3 inches.
I am not sure what it was originally about. My interpretation was that manufacturers were charging $$$$$ but only delivering middle of the road product. That could be wrong.
Now it is just about F7A's with steam generators, roof panels on FP7's, rivet counting, prototype fidelity, value for your money, whatever.
I keep coming back to it, so it has some appeal.
DSchmittExample of set number 918A-918B-918C-918D A and D were A units, B and C were B units. The D's all had steam generators.
Here's what I found so far..915B had a steam gen but,not the As but,I'll keep looking..
What's with the steam headlight on some of those B units?
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/wp/wp918Drsa.jpg
mlehman RMax1 The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical. It may be prototypical it may not be. If what you mean by prototypical you mean an exact copy done in scale, there is no model that meets this standard. Period. Nor is there ever likely to be. If yiu use that standard, then you will always be unhappy. So where are the Prototype Police to enforce a common standard? Despite some who believe they've been deputized to enforce a code of prototypical accuracy, in fact no such standrad exists in agreed on form. It's up to the consumer to judge, "Is it prototype ENOUGH for me?" I don't begrudge the knowledge a lot of folks have. I try to leartn from them. But there's allways a certain tendency in reviews, particularly in online reviews and discussion, to focus on what the reviewer perceives as deficiencies. This is a great way to score points in competitive prototypicalness, but often does poor service to many otherwise good models.
RMax1 The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical. It may be prototypical it may not be.
If what you mean by prototypical you mean an exact copy done in scale, there is no model that meets this standard. Period. Nor is there ever likely to be.
If yiu use that standard, then you will always be unhappy.
So where are the Prototype Police to enforce a common standard? Despite some who believe they've been deputized to enforce a code of prototypical accuracy, in fact no such standrad exists in agreed on form. It's up to the consumer to judge, "Is it prototype ENOUGH for me?"
I don't begrudge the knowledge a lot of folks have. I try to leartn from them. But there's allways a certain tendency in reviews, particularly in online reviews and discussion, to focus on what the reviewer perceives as deficiencies. This is a great way to score points in competitive prototypicalness, but often does poor service to many otherwise good models.
Excellent point Mike. Let me say that this is a broad hobby with each person persuing that hobby as they see fit.
If they want to model a loco exactly how it is seen in a photo, fine.
If they want to be the first person in their circle to compare a new model to prototype blue prints and beat the next guy to the internet forum to point it out...uh...I mean race to the internet to......educate the public......, fine too.
But I draw the line when people bash a manufacturer for not making an exact copy of the prototype. That's not the manufacturers job. The producers don't claim to be selling an exact copy, and never have.
And usually the expectation to have an exact copy of a prototype...how it may have appeared in a few photographs during its 25 year life...is somehow justified when they mention the price and what they expect to get for their money. It seems insincere to me.
mlehmanIf what you mean by prototypical you mean an exact copy done in scale, there is no model that meets this standard. Period. Nor is there ever likely to be.
Has anyone ever seen the 1/32 railroad models produced in brass by Fine Art Miniatures?
https://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/064634/1-32-Scale-G-Brass-FAM-Fine-Art-Models-PRR-Pennsylvania-4-4-4-4-T-1-Duplex-5500-As-Modified
These are as close to perfect models as you can buy. If I had a discretionary $10,000.00 I would buy their model of the USS Missouri in a heartbeat (it is smaller than 1/32, but about 10 feet long).
The pickers of the nits still find gripes with these models. This is in spite of the fact that these are the only railroad models that the insurance industry recognizes as works of art.
1/87 at less than $500.00?
Well... Forget about it!
The words "prototypical roadname specific details" never mean that rivet placement is accurate down the the scale 0.001"!
RMax1The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical. It may be prototypical it may not be.
When mfgs use prototypical in advertising and marketing verbiage, are they referring to something that does not exist?
No, they are not.
They are referring to a model that has many features like the prototype. Since no model ever will meet the standard of prototypical perfection, they have no reason to be making any claim about a non-existent model. They are referring to something they will hope will sell to those who follow a certain prototype.
People obsess that if they buy something they initially liked, but are fearful their associates will give them grief over having the model that Joe Purrfect Reviewer panned in the XY&Z Historical Society newsletter for having a grabiron 3" off in what he considered to be a sensitive spot WITHOUT even looking at the model. Or they look and when that look at that grabiron, they only have images of their buddies laughing at them if they buy one and can't get past that to consider the model as a whole. Golly, it's in that neato and very prototypical (it even says so in the ad inside the latest MR!) one-of- a- kind paint scheme he'd never consder doing, so it's the mfg's fault that grabiron is wrong and oh! what a horrible model it is...
Is the mfg wriong for saying they've produced a prototypical model? Heck no.
What should the consumer do? Decice whether to buy it or not.
Is there any point in splitting hairs on the definition of prototypical here? I don't think so, but if you must, then state the facts and move on. If you want to buy and not do, that's just the way the world is.
There are constant improvements. Write a nice cheeerful note to the mfg saying you hope they can fix that grabiron ijn the next run. But it may be that there's a production reason on the model that the wayward grab can't go exactly where someone thinks it should. Life is hard sometimes when you're unwilling to do for yourself, but you get a lot more buzz if you set out sugar and not vinegar on such matters in reviews, online discussions, and communications with hobby vendors, It just seems like this is a bigger deal than it it because the internet often focuses on more often our remaining defects than it celebrates our accomplishments.
RMax1 To the price trolls< The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical.
To the price trolls< The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical.
As for your remark about the last few replies underscoring what this thread is all about, you have changed your tune considerably from your initial post and you still have avoided responding to Sheldon's question about how the WaltherProto E8/9 differs so dramatically from the prototype.
Rich
Alton Junction
I am aware that there are very informed railfan/modelers who can identify errors in the EMD F and E unit nose contour at a glance. I respect their specialized knowledge.
My problem is this: I look at prototype photos, including (or I should say, especially) photos that show multiple locomotives in the same shot, often in the very same profile, and I come to the conclusion that there was no "EMD F and E unit nose contour" but rather there were contours, within a range. I see many differences, some quite subtle, some not so subtle. And upon seeing how the bulldog noses were actually fabricated, this is not at all surprising. These were not castings. So is there ONE nose contour these experts are using as the standard of comparison? Or are they saying the P2Ks meet NONE of the choices, assuming they agree that there are actually choices?
Dave Nelson
To the price trolls< The only part of cost associated with this post is that the manufactures are charging you for what they are claiming to be prototypical. It may be prototypical it may not be. The last few replies have underscored what this post is about. Is it a F7 or an FP7? How do you tell? does it have this? Or does it have that? Is this in the right place if at all? The whole thing can get confusing and there are a number of reasons why. So it all gets down to, is it close nough? Do I like it? Does it fit into your value range what ever that may be? You can not take some things in this hobby as black & white. Like a lot of you have said do your homework if you can it helps. As for what I sometimes do is impulde buy, sometimes I get the bear and sometimes it gets me. i have a UP Dash-8 and a AT&SF C-liner that I use for testing and cleaning track. Weird but they looked cool at the time.
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL In fact, I would bet there were more F7's with steam generators than there were FP7's. Sheldon I would like to agree but,the only F7s I know of was either straight freight cab units or FP7s. I can't find any reference to a straight F7 with steam generator..
ATLANTIC CENTRAL In fact, I would bet there were more F7's with steam generators than there were FP7's. Sheldon
I would like to agree but,the only F7s I know of was either straight freight cab units or FP7s. I can't find any reference to a straight F7 with steam generator..
Half of Western Pacific's F7A had steam generators
F7's were purchased in 4-unit sets ABBA. Roster
https://www.thedieselshop.us/WP.HTML
Example of set number 918A-918B-918C-918D
A and D were A units, B and C were B units. The D's all had steam generators.
Chuck - Modeling in HO scale and anything narrow gauge
This post has given me fits & has had to be ediited a couple times because I posted it & it disappeared & I tried to repost it again and ...... no, you don't want to know. Anyway, my intention was to amplify on Sheldon's observation that a lot of B&O's F3's has steam generators, and I think I finally got it nailed down.
[quote user="ATLANTIC CENTRAL"]
The B&O bought most (maybe all) of its original F3's with steam generators.
B&O's first F3's were seven AB sets purchased in 1947. They had the typical high fans of the time, plus steam generators, streamlined pilots, and higher speed gearing for passenger service. The A unit numbers were 82, 82A, 84, 84A, 86, 86A, and 88. Each A unit had a matchinmg B unit with an X suffix.
B&O's first forty freight F3A's were delivered in 1948 without B units and were intended for service on Western lines. They had low fans and stubby freight pilots. The gear ratio was 62:15. They were numbered 113 and 113A through 151 and 151A (odd numbers only). If the two units were separated, the one with the A suffix assumed the next higher even number (i.e., 113A became 114). It was expected that they would occasionally be pressed into passenger service for extra movements or to relieve disabled passenger units. Therefore, the lead unit carried a steam generator and the second unit carried water tanks to feed the lead unit.
B&O's last 20 F3A's were actually F5's that looked about like the freight F3's except for their grilles. Like the freight F3's, they were intended to operate as two unit AA sets, but they were assigned to the more heavily graded area between Wheeling, WV and Buffalo via Pittsburgh, so the gear ratio was 65:12, the same as B&O employed on their later F7's, for greater power and lower speed in the mountains. These units were 153 and 153A through 171 and 171A. Like the other F3's, they had generators in the primary unit and water tanks in the A suffix unit for occasional passenger sevice. Numbers 153 - 171 were later spliced with matching F7B units 151X - 171X in order to eliminate helpers.
I'm not going to get imnto the later renumberings.
As for the noses on E's and F's. remember that the old Globe shell (also Athearn BB) was thought of as a great improvement over the previous Varney offering, and most of us thought it was just fine for years. Then better products came from Stewart and others, with a better roof, nose, and windshield contour, and we saw that better was possible. It's true that my P2K E6's and E7's display inaccuracies, particularly in the area where the side windows meet the windshield and nose areas. In comparison with other models, and in light of the engines' overall good appearance and operating characteristics, I consider these to be minor issues. I have other projects that warrant more time, effort, and expense. I'm much more of a steam guy anyway.
The following roads:
ATSF - possably as many as 50 steam heat equiped F7A units
Northern Pacific - 45 steam heat equiped F7A units
Great Northern - 6 steam heat equiped F7A units
Rock Island - 3 steam heat equiped F7A units
There may have been others.
And, OK, the Athearn model is an F7, but if we count F3's and F5's, the number of STANDARD LENGTH F unit cab models with steam heat, the number grows considerably, look them up, lots of roads had them.
ATLANTIC CENTRALIn fact, I would bet there were more F7's with steam generators than there were FP7's. Sheldon
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL Larry, respectfully I must disagree. An FP7 is longer than an F7, has an extra roof panel, an extra space in front of the fuel tank for large water tanks, and the prototype photo above does apear to be an FP7. I fully agree..The Athearn FP7 was to short but,it came equipped with steam generator details on the roof. EMD built 378 FP7s. http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATH76110
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Larry, respectfully I must disagree. An FP7 is longer than an F7, has an extra roof panel, an extra space in front of the fuel tank for large water tanks, and the prototype photo above does apear to be an FP7.
I fully agree..The Athearn FP7 was to short but,it came equipped with steam generator details on the roof. EMD built 378 FP7s.
http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATH76110
Larry, there were LOTS of F7's with steam generators. Why is that so hard to understand?
In fact, I would bet there were more F units with steam generators than there were FP7's.
This is one of those threads that come along on occasion that, initially, gets overlooked by some of us until enough replies have been offered that curiosity trumps the vagueness of the subject title.
RMax1 The model railroad industry has raised the prices and claim look at the great details you are getting for the money and I will agree with them. Today's models are absolutely beautiful in details. The Problem is when you purchase something and it is so prototypically inaccurate but advertised as being are you getting what is advertised. An example would be the LifeLike/Walthers Proto 2000 E8/9's. They are beautiful but not accurate. Not even close. So all the prototype modelers are not getting accuracy and the casual modelers are paying more for trains. Modeling is the point of being a modeler but looking for the middle ground. I hope this is not it.
The model railroad industry has raised the prices and claim look at the great details you are getting for the money and I will agree with them. Today's models are absolutely beautiful in details.
The Problem is when you purchase something and it is so prototypically inaccurate but advertised as being are you getting what is advertised. An example would be the LifeLike/Walthers Proto 2000 E8/9's. They are beautiful but not accurate. Not even close.
So all the prototype modelers are not getting accuracy and the casual modelers are paying more for trains. Modeling is the point of being a modeler but looking for the middle ground. I hope this is not it.
RMax1 Sheldon NO ONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT PRICES!!! Yet I agree with those that prices are high. What I am saying is that if you advertise "Exquiste Prototype specific Detailing " Make sure the thing actually existed.
Sheldon NO ONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT PRICES!!! Yet I agree with those that prices are high. What I am saying is that if you advertise "Exquiste Prototype specific Detailing " Make sure the thing actually existed.
RMax1 The whole point of my post is I am stuck like a lot of others going what is close enough and are the model that are being offered and charged for something more than just someone in China sticking plastic detail parts on a normal shell.
The whole point of my post is I am stuck like a lot of others going what is close enough and are the model that are being offered and charged for something more than just someone in China sticking plastic detail parts on a normal shell.
"Stuck in the middle", what exactly is this referring to? Ahh, what is close enough to the actual prototype and are modelers paying more than for what they are being offered.
So, it's all about price? The OP says it is not about price, in fact three separate protests to that effect.
Supposedly it is about being charged for something that you are not getting. But, as far as I can tell, the OP has not answered Sheldon's question about how the WalthersProto E8/9 does not measure up to the prototype. I have compared side by side photos of the Walthers/Proto model to the actual prototype, and I fail to see any shortfalls in the detail.
It seems to me that you get what you pay for. You can see photos of the model on the Walthers web site. That should confirm or deny that the model reflects the prototype.
ATLANTIC CENTRALLarry, respectfully I must disagree. An FP7 is longer than an F7, has an extra roof panel, an extra space in front of the fuel tank for large water tanks, and the prototype photo above does apear to be an FP7.
RMax1 Thank you Larry! I am not totally crazy! I actually thought that the BB F7 was closer to an FP7. Athearn was probably the worst at inaccurate things and even today in their standard lines they do the same thing. There are several different models out there claiming to be F7's but then again MR had an article years ago that showed several different variants of F7's. Back to the top. I'm stuck in the middle! LOL
Thank you Larry! I am not totally crazy! I actually thought that the BB F7 was closer to an FP7. Athearn was probably the worst at inaccurate things and even today in their standard lines they do the same thing. There are several different models out there claiming to be F7's but then again MR had an article years ago that showed several different variants of F7's. Back to the top. I'm stuck in the middle! LOL
How can you say that an Athearn F7 is closer to an FP7 than an F7? Again an FP7 is longer, has different side and roof panels, etc, .....
As explained above, the Athearn model is simply an F7 with a steam generator, of which there were many in real life.
And in 1950 whatever, when it was tooled, the Athearn/Globe F7 was the closest, best detailed F unit in all of HO trains, bar none.
Most of the Original Blue Box Athearn kit line is freelanced to some degree, yes. If that bothers you don't buy them. But many are very close and have very good overall proportions matching lots of prototypes very closely.
I have hundreds, no plans to get rid of them, and if you came to my layout, I bet you would not know what us exactly correct and what is not.
RMax1 I actually thought that the BB F7 was closer to an FP7......
I actually thought that the BB F7 was closer to an FP7......
Nope...it's an F7. Like several have stated above, it is 4 feet too short. Not too hard to make it an FP7, though, by splicing a couple of shells together and lengthening the frame. I did one in the early 90's and I also kitbashed one a couple of years ago in N scale using Kato F7A parts.
There was a good article in a late 70's RMC doing the bash.
The model is a generic Athearn BB F7 that I sprayed with Testors Italian gloss red just because. Then I got looking at it and took a black morks alot to the roof. After that I sprayed it with dulcoat. The MKT unit is an FP7 if I remember photographed here in Dallas. The color temperature of the lighting is really bad on the Athearn picture. It looks really close colorwise to the MKT FP7 in daylight. I have been playing with it for quite a while just to see what I can do with it. As for close? Probably as close to a model MKT FP7 that will be around for a while. Added note. My local hobby shop had it sitting around on a table. The chassie is actually a B unit with no lights and the Undec shell. I bought it just to mess with. I have DCC now in it and need to finish it off.
The giveaway is the space between the first porthole and the first set of louvers. On the F7, the porthole is midway between the door and the louvers, but on the FP7, the louvers are four feet further back. This can be clearly seen on pics taken at an angle, like the pic of the prototype.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Again I repeat, if you are building a "whole" model railroad, "impression" is as important as "accuracy", especially when accuracy can not always be documented. Various forms of this discussion have come up a lot recently, guys who will not buy anytihng not accurate, etc. To which I ask my third question, how do you deal with the "missing elements" needed to make a scene complete? Personally, I have a lot of very accurate models, and a lot of not so accurate models, but only a handful of people know the difference, and the overall effect is what counts to me. Sheldon
Again I repeat, if you are building a "whole" model railroad, "impression" is as important as "accuracy", especially when accuracy can not always be documented.
Various forms of this discussion have come up a lot recently, guys who will not buy anytihng not accurate, etc.
To which I ask my third question, how do you deal with the "missing elements" needed to make a scene complete?
Personally, I have a lot of very accurate models, and a lot of not so accurate models, but only a handful of people know the difference, and the overall effect is what counts to me.
BRAKIE Dave,The Athearn BB F7A is really a FP7 even though they marketed it as a F7 just like the BB GP9 is actually a GP7 but,once again Athearn marketed it as a GP9. When Athearn released their "SW1500" back in the mid 60s it was a SW7 and not a SW1500 but,again it was marketed as a SW1500.
Dave,The Athearn BB F7A is really a FP7 even though they marketed it as a F7 just like the BB GP9 is actually a GP7 but,once again Athearn marketed it as a GP9. When Athearn released their "SW1500" back in the mid 60s it was a SW7 and not a SW1500 but,again it was marketed as a SW1500.
Larry, respectfully I must disagree. An FP7 is longer than an F7, has an extra roof panel, an extra space in front of the fuel tank for large water tanks, and the prototype photo above does apear to be an FP7.
But the Athearn model is an F7 with a passenger steam heat boiler, of which there were many, maybe as as much as 25% to 30% of total F unit production.
A great many roads bought F units (FT's thru F9's) with steam generators. Many also bought the longer (FP7 and FP9) when introduced in June of 1949.
After passenger service declined, some roads removed the steam generators from their F units.
Some put steam generators only in the B units and used the A unit space for additional water tanks - ATSF comes to mind. Not being a ATSF expert, I recall they may have had some ABBA sets both ways, A's with steam generators and A's simply set up to run with the generator equiped B's. Someone can correct me on that.
Again this is the same length an appearance loco as a freight only F unit, except for water fill hatches and steam generator vent on the rear roof panel.
Here is a better picture of the longer FP7
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=JhlNLJFo&id=95345C07835B640EDD06F43FEDF8B084EE34DAE6&thid=OIP.JhlNLJFoj4iJ6qdYKB0RrwEsDG&q=emd+fp7&simid=608013078185774093&selectedIndex=0
The FP7 is 55' long, and F7 (with or without a steam generator) is only 50' long.
This is of particular interest to me, my ATLANTIC CENTRAL has a number of both, F7's (with and without steam generators), and FP7's. We still run lots of passenger trains.......
My FP7's and a great number of my F units are Intermoutain - Do I obsess about bulldog nose contours? No. I also have a few seriously rebuilt detailed Blue Box F units - including an FP7 kitbashed from two Athearn shells from and old article in RMC I believe, as well as Genesis units and a set of Protos in C&O. As well as three sets of Proto E8's. They all meet my modeling standards just fine......
ATLANTIC CENTRAL, C&O, B&O and WESTERN MARYLAND are all represented by F units on my railroad......ALANTIC CENTRAL, B&O and C&O all have E unit sets......
RMax1 Larry I think you have hit the nail on the head. Whatever you want to put on the rails at any given time, if it makes you happy it's all good. Some parts of this hobby people need to take with a grain of salt. There are somethings you just can't get there from here. I too love my BB stuff. So what if it's not even close to the real things. Those up front I know they are not. Most are just generally what they are. The highly detailed ones bug me and those that just do not exist. I still buy and run what I like and trying to be strictprototype is frustrating. BTW here is what is pulling my new gondola: the real thing
Larry I think you have hit the nail on the head. Whatever you want to put on the rails at any given time, if it makes you happy it's all good. Some parts of this hobby people need to take with a grain of salt. There are somethings you just can't get there from here. I too love my BB stuff. So what if it's not even close to the real things. Those up front I know they are not. Most are just generally what they are. The highly detailed ones bug me and those that just do not exist. I still buy and run what I like and trying to be strictprototype is frustrating. BTW here is what is pulling my new gondola:
the real thing
The model in the pic is an F7. The prototype pic looks like an FP7.
mlehmanTony said some very important general things that needed to be said about prototype modeling. First, it's what pleases you that's most important.
Deep sigh..I've been saying that for years on this and other forums.
About prototype knowledge..Yeah right..When I went to work on the PRR in '66 I found out I knew next to nothing about railroading. Another important lesson was finding out that the shops at Russell, Kentucky was not above using a regular can of spray paint that didn't exactly match the true railroad colors for touch up work. In short a spray can of dark blue would be used. Then who can forget that Chessie GP9 with a blue replacement hood door that caused that GP9 to proclaim it was a "hessie System" locomotive? Yet if any modeler model that engine it would be "wrong" in the eyes of "experts" even though the engine is correctly lettered after the hood door was replaced.
All things railroad is guaranteed to take a big bite out of your back side.
Sheldon wrote:
"Again I repeat, if you are building a "whole" model railroad, "impression" is as important as "accuracy", especially when accuracy can not always be documented.
Various forms of this discussion have come up a lot recently, guys who will not buy anytihng not accurate, etc."
Interesting exactly what what is for the prototype modeler...I was going to start a thread in reaction to Tony Koester's May 2017 column. Tony said some very important general things that needed to be said about prototype modeling. First, it's what pleases you that's most important. Second, one should maintain standards to that level it takes to do that when building a layout. Third, what exactly these yardsticks are varies greatly between modelers.
But then I was left feeling a lot like this by how the column ended sorta vaguely. Maybe it was a build-up to a follow-up tyhis month, which I haven't read yet? In any case, I'd bet a lot of people were left thinking similarly to this:
Only you can decide what yardstick brings you enough satisfaction from your modeling to motivate you to pursue it. That yardstick can only be developed in light of your knowledge and passion about the subject. You don't have to buy anything -- given the internet makes a wealth of info available to cover at least the basic for just about any line -- to get to this point.
For whatever reason, some folks see the whole issue of proototype knowledge to be a form of competitive hazing. Throwdown and see who's the best? Sounds boring and confrontational to me. I tend to prefer a more cooperative approach where knowledge is shared and expanded on, trying to help as many as possible know more, rather than trying to pick the one person who can stare us all down on a line. No one person knows it all and even if they did, if they got hit by a bus, everyone else would have to do without it. That's why I choose to emphasize the cooperative nature of info sharing, It's what works best for the benefit of all.
I will venture that the rule I use, which sounds similar to some of what Shedlon describes, is that the closer it is to or on the track, the more important it might be in terms of accuracy or insisting on it not be compromised. So a loco is pretty darn big in terms of priority, but a gon, maybe not so important. Something next to the tracks can be important, a signal, or disregarded, if you just aren't that into signals. Once you far away from the tracks, then you have to make a strong argument for it to have much of a priority for your modeling.
Does this mean that every piece of rolling stock has to be dead accurate? As Sheldon (and Tony) suggested, prototype modelling isn't just adding up increasingly accurate models, but creating a believeability in what you depict.
peahrensThe market (we modelers) determines (and will determine) the price / detail / prototypical correctness balance.
The market has left me behind.
I want DC (don't even care about DCC ready) locomotives, all undecorated, with all details left off. The Life-Like Proto 2000 series were my dream! My SD-7 came with no details installed, and EVERY prototype option in the box. Why can't that happen again?
I know the money is in sound equipped modern locomotives with DCC decoders factory installed.
At least I can afford brass now. I will be fine. Tangent has put out a couple of undecorated kits I can use, and they are magnificent. Maybe Walthers will add something decent to the Proto 2000 freight car line (no they won't). Maybe some Intermountain undecorated kits will not be marked "out of stock" on their website.
Yes, the market will decide, and it has already decided I won't get what I want.
The market is probably right. How many kits of a 40 foot AAR boxcar with double doors will I every buy? 2 or 3? That is not enough to even cover the cost of printing the boxes. I understand.
I re-read the thread and read the original post a 3rd time. I interpret the OP's main concern as not cost, given that recent models have more detail, but prototypical accuracy. And he notes that he hopes this is not the middle and we're not stuck in this ("the middle") future.
My reactions have probably been covered but here I go anyway as tonight's NBA game is of little interest.
1. On the issue of whether things stay this way in regard to prototypical-ity (prototypical-ness?) it strikes me the answer is obvious. The market (we modelers) determines (and will determine) the price / detail / prototypical correctness balance. The suppliers will adjust to demand for what is supplied, with some give and take variability over time. I model the UP generally. The recent Big Blow from Scale Trains looks like a value given the detail and I presume it's reasonably correct. But I haven't bitten that bullet yet. I have LL Proto P2K / P1K E6s, PAs and Erie Builts. I converted all but one to DCC and they were a real value as far as I am concerned. It they were more accurate and had cost twice as much I would have fewer. I'm happy. If they are incorrect I could (probably won't) do some research and superdetail them some. But I can't change the nose shape. I don't even know if it's off and, for me, no big deal. I'm happy to buy NOS LL Protos and save some $$ over a newer offering that may be more detailed or correct.
2. My second main reaction is "different strokes for different folks". But this follows from Item #1. The ultimate answer is "it is what it is". The state of things might drift slowly to more correctness but that would add to the manufacturing cost somewhat. That's why Henry Ford said (IIRC) they can have their model T in any color, as long as it's black).
3. Another thought (3 in one day is a stretch). I probably prefer, on balance, the detail to per-loco (or RR) correctness on the margin. I like the diesels with lifting lugs (so I can repair them) etc. Perhaps my ignorance on port windows, etc will change over time but I'm stuck in my own "middle".
I'm ok with the balance available. I like what I can get for the $ today versus the Varney diesel I got in junior high or the Athearn BB rubber band drive diesel. And I don't want to pay much more than I'm paying. I wish someone would make a UP DC 4-4-2 or non-USRA pacific, but I may have to live with that. I think the ultimate answer for the OP (and ther rest of us) is to decide with our wallets (demand) and meanwhile live with what we got or dive into superdetailing, kitbashing, etc.
Just my perspective.
P.S. - the poor Jazz! (And please help our Spurs).
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
RMax1 Good points and almost exactly what I am talking about. What point and who determines if it is close enough. In the end I think the consumer. I like to buy ready to go prototype stuff sometimes and other times depending on the model would rather do things myself. The whole point of my post is I am stuck like a lot of others going what is close enough and are the model that are being offered and charged for something more than just someone in China sticking plastic detail parts on a normal shell. For lack of a better term the hobby is a rats nest of research and information sources from all over the place. I gather new stuff being discovered all the time and in somewhat limited order. Some of it is interesting, some frustrating. You can get as detailed as you like or even go the toy train route. What started all this was I bought a Thrall gondola that should have fit my time period just right. looked at the data on the car and looked on the net to find it to decorate it. The car was no where to be found on any resource I looked at. Someone on the forum found that the series of cars it was in was sold and renumbered by the BN 6 months after the time the car was modeled for. The hobby has so much to it it is easy to go crazy. Thanks everyone for the input.
Good points and almost exactly what I am talking about. What point and who determines if it is close enough. In the end I think the consumer. I like to buy ready to go prototype stuff sometimes and other times depending on the model would rather do things myself. The whole point of my post is I am stuck like a lot of others going what is close enough and are the model that are being offered and charged for something more than just someone in China sticking plastic detail parts on a normal shell. For lack of a better term the hobby is a rats nest of research and information sources from all over the place. I gather new stuff being discovered all the time and in somewhat limited order. Some of it is interesting, some frustrating. You can get as detailed as you like or even go the toy train route. What started all this was I bought a Thrall gondola that should have fit my time period just right. looked at the data on the car and looked on the net to find it to decorate it. The car was no where to be found on any resource I looked at. Someone on the forum found that the series of cars it was in was sold and renumbered by the BN 6 months after the time the car was modeled for. The hobby has so much to it it is easy to go crazy.
Thanks everyone for the input.
RMax1, Yes it is a big, diverse, complex hobby.
May I suggest that you take a minute to think about what YOUR personal goals are in this hobby.
Right them down, set YOUR OWN standards, leave out what does not interest you.
It will be more fun, not frustrating, and you will find plenty of people still appreciate what you do.....and some will not, so what?
IIRC, one of the main features of Railroad Model Craftsman was the articles on detailing a generic store-purchased (fillintheblank) into a prototype-on-specified date model of (fillintheblank as of date on railroad.) Of course, this only covered a dozen or so pieces of rolling stock a year. Given the E-unit discussion above, a couple of dozen dedicated researchers and an equal number of skilled modelers could fill a volume the size of the Manhattan phone book with similar project articles on that locomotive type alone - and still leave huge gaps in the coverage.
My own work is influenced by the fact that I consider rolling stock, including locomotives, as simple counters in a game called, "Let's operate a railroad." I insist on accurate car and locomotive numbers - but those car numbers are probably painted on little tin boxes with wheels, 1960-era 1:80 'scale' tinplate toys. Granted, that 2-8-0, 96386, is actually a Spectrum model (I may kitbash it some day, if I live long enough) and the tender has too many wheels under it. As long as it leaves Tomikawa on schedule with that local freight it's doing what I want it to do.
I'm much more particular with the wild kitbashes and scratchbuilds that run up kilometers on the Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo. The TTT is home for the 'what ifs' and imaginings of a frustrated equipment designer, having no presence in mundane reality. I am the sole authority, and I want my creations to be RIGHT. Even then, I don't obsess about microdetails not readily visible at a meter's remove. My target is an impression, not perfection.
(And they still have to operate on schedule!)
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - but not detail-obsessively)
So here is some of my "unprototypical" modeling:
Athearn 50' piggyback cars kit bashed to make them "closer" to correct, with no concern for all the stuff still "wrong".
As someone who knows way too much about early piggyback, I can tell you everything that is incorrect about these cars, but I don't care.
As 40 or 50 of them roll by they give that classic impression of every prototype early piggy train photo I have ever seen - mission accomplished!
What was done? Trailers converted to single axle, landing gear relocated to correct location, spare tires added to vans, deck rub rails modified for better appearance, bridge plates and bridge plate retainer chain stakes added, fifth wheel jacks added (not totally correct, but close enough)
What's not correct? Side brake wheel flats seldon if ever used in piggy service, flat cars too short, vans undersize, some roadname/paint schemes not correct, chains/binders left off, and a bunch more more minor stuff.
I also have "other" piggyback cars, Walthers 75' cars, Walthers 53' GSC cars (old kits and new RTR), the new Bachmann cars (also modified) all intermixed with the Athearn cars.
Vans are old Walthers 32', Classic Model Works 32' vans, Athearn 25' vans, and others with various detail upgrades.
Close enough is good enough - I run two piggy trains of 35-45 cars each, I have over 100 piggyback cars.
A few are from more advanced kits - 40' cars from resin kits, old Ulrich 40' cars, etc. (there were actually lots of 40'/45' piggyback flats for single 33'/35' vans in the early days)
mlehman I won't respond to everything raised here, but I think that the whole idea of being a prototype modeler has gravitated for many people from being someone who takes the time and effort to educate themselves to be knowledgable about certain prototypes into someone who buys (or thinks they can buy) prototypically "correct" models. I'd argue that the idea of consuming the protitype, rather than knowing about the prototype, is just a someone looking for a shortcut to real knowledge and understanding. That rarely happens in any area of knowledge and it sure doesn't happen with railroads. If you're in the position to critique a model you've become dissatisfied with, you're probablyt in position to do the sort of due diligence a prototype modeler does. You do your research prior to purchase if it means that much to you. Otherwise, you should be thrilled with the detail of today's models and the way they make it easier than ever to acvhieve a even more detailed model based on your knowledge. And if you actually lack that knowledge, then you're rteally in no position to critique what the MFG did beyond adding "me, too" the reviews by knowledgable prototype modelers, who sometimes expect too much from advertising copy.
I won't respond to everything raised here, but I think that the whole idea of being a prototype modeler has gravitated for many people from being someone who takes the time and effort to educate themselves to be knowledgable about certain prototypes into someone who buys (or thinks they can buy) prototypically "correct" models. I'd argue that the idea of consuming the protitype, rather than knowing about the prototype, is just a someone looking for a shortcut to real knowledge and understanding. That rarely happens in any area of knowledge and it sure doesn't happen with railroads.
If you're in the position to critique a model you've become dissatisfied with, you're probablyt in position to do the sort of due diligence a prototype modeler does. You do your research prior to purchase if it means that much to you. Otherwise, you should be thrilled with the detail of today's models and the way they make it easier than ever to acvhieve a even more detailed model based on your knowledge.
And if you actually lack that knowledge, then you're rteally in no position to critique what the MFG did beyond adding "me, too" the reviews by knowledgable prototype modelers, who sometimes expect too much from advertising copy.
Well said Mike.
The big question is, even if you have the knowledge and skill, how close is close enough?
And the second big question is what do you about all the stuff that you can find no good research on?
Also, I like to build stuff, but I don't want to get so caught up in one project that it is the only thing I complete........
Is anyone complaining about price???? Ah NO.
trwrouteI even like the BB F7A nose more than the P2K E unit.
I have seen a few F unit models where the nose just did not look right. These were either really old models or toys. I remember reading an F unit product review in Model Railroader where the reviewer said the nose was just not right, but did not give any measurements.
There are so many curves on the nose of an F unit that the only real way to measure it would be by sectioning it by about 1/2" at a time. I doubt any line drawings with measurements could ever provide enough information to measure the curved surfaces.
I'll bet someone could make a good 3D renering of one now, but what would the point of that be?
I spent a good amount of time around the F unit that belongs to the Seminole Gulf Railway. That is the only prototype reference I have. I have never been next to a prototype E unit, but I understand that the E8 and E9 are the only ones that share the nose of an F unit. Is that true?
-Kevin.
trwroute ATLANTIC CENTRAL I kit bash lots of stuff, I don't obsess over the nose contours of F and E units down to a few inches, or exact deminsions of windshield mullions. That's the kind of stuff I'm refering to. You will never convince me that much of that can be noticed by eye once you get into models as good as Proto, Intermountain, etc. Sheldon Now, I will agree that some might take it a lot farther than I would, but you gotta admit, the nose of a P2K E unit just ain't right. I even like the BB F7A nose more than the P2K E unit. Guess you have to draw the line somewhere.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I kit bash lots of stuff, I don't obsess over the nose contours of F and E units down to a few inches, or exact deminsions of windshield mullions. That's the kind of stuff I'm refering to. You will never convince me that much of that can be noticed by eye once you get into models as good as Proto, Intermountain, etc. Sheldon
That's the kind of stuff I'm refering to. You will never convince me that much of that can be noticed by eye once you get into models as good as Proto, Intermountain, etc.
Actually, I have never considered the question. I don't have an original GM drawing to compare to, and they all look close enough for me.
A long time ago I got into that sort of modeling for a short time - quickly decided I was having no fun.
I'm more of a big picture kind of modeler, I kitbash to get things that don't exist at all, or to make obvious short comings better, not striving for museum perfection.
Later when I get back to my desk, I will post a photo or two.
As my dad used to say, "Some people would complain if you hanged them with a new rope."Also, if you take an American Flyer 1956 GP7 and adjust its price to today's dollars, it would be just under $230.Anybody who complains prices are "too high" is loaded chock full of male bovine digestive residue.
"Reservoir Dogs" ruined that song for me.
I have that record, bought it when it was a hit.......
I haven't posted for quite a while about anything. But the title of this thread is just too much to bear and it keeps popping to the head of the queue. I've resisted as long as is humanly possible because I can't get rid of the song in my head.
Stuck In The Middle With You.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DohRa9lsx0Q
Andre
PRR8259Apparently, there are actually considerable issues with the nose lines, contours, and especially cab front windows, but also the roof details even for "as built" model configurations. To the guys on the Atlas Rescue Forums, there is no one "good" E unit on the market--they all have their various plusses and minuses that have to be fixed to make a model anywhere close to "correct".
I often wonder why more folks who are into ultra correct detail don't model in P48. In O, everyone can see the details.
In smaller scales I think an impressionistic approach is better. Of course being in S scale, I'm happy with anything that's close. Case in point being the EBT 0-6-0 that I will use on my Maryland and Pennsylania RR layout. It's not the same as any casual comparison will show. But it's the only 0-6-0 with a slope back tender and 3 domes in S scale that's ever been offered (Currently there are no 0-6-0's available new in S scale except an American Flyer 0-6-0T). So I will happily use the 2 I have. They capture the flavor of the Ma&Pa and that works for me.
Sheldon,
My ratty F unit started life as a BB undec and I had nothing better to do so I spray painted it Italian Gloss Red. I started messing with the top and a black marks alot marker. Hmm.... looks familiar??? So I sprayed it with dull coat and boom. It actually looks better in person and close to the MKT F. While I like detail if I am paying for it. This one is a mistake that I am happy with regardless of detail. Once I finish playing with it it may look better. If it doesn't I still like it.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL You will never convince me that much of that can be noticed by eye once you get into models as good as Proto, Intermountain, etc.
You will never convince me that any of this stuff matters, or can be noticed, once a layout starts running. When the trains are moving, suddenly all that stuff you pick out in photographs no longer matters.
I doubt many people who obsess over such things have a running layout.
trwroute ATLANTIC CENTRAL These models are 1/87 the size of real life, and that is what some of these guys need......a life. Sheldon Sheldon, while I agree with a lot of things you say, this is a silly comment. So, it seems, that anyone that takes it upon themselves to make a model look better, needs to get a life? You've never kitbashed anything? Come on...
ATLANTIC CENTRAL These models are 1/87 the size of real life, and that is what some of these guys need......a life. Sheldon
I kit bash lots of stuff, I don't obsess over the nose contours of F and E units down to a few inches, or exact deminsions of windshield mullions.
ATLANTIC CENTRALSome years ago Proto came out with F unitsd for the first time. I ordered an undecorated set for my ATLANTIC CENTRAL, set in 1954. When they came in they had modernized shells with snow plows, fuel tank skirts removed, etc, all changes from the 1960's and 70's. But I wanted "as built" F units for my 1954 time period.
I had the same problem with the Athearn 40 foot Airslide hopper cars. They offered lots of variations for the specific prototypes to be accurate, but the undecorated model I ordered came with only "late" options that were not appropriate for the 1954 SGRR.
I sent an email to Athearn, and they sent me the parts I needed. They did not need to do that, and now I can use the car. That made me very happy.
PRR8259 For those interested in the nitty gritty details of E units-- I'm saying this nicely so please don't take it any other way: You need to read the plethora of threads over on the Atlas Rescue Forums about those Proto E Units and also the BLI E units. Some of the folks might possibly be described as "too particular" but the real deficiencies of those models are discussed thoroughly, along with how those modelers went about rebuilding the diesels to fix the deficiencies--and there are plenty of color photos of models in progress at various stages. Apparently, there are actually considerable issues with the nose lines, contours, and especially cab front windows, but also the roof details even for "as built" model configurations. To the guys on the Atlas Rescue Forums, there is no one "good" E unit on the market--they all have their various plusses and minuses that have to be fixed to make a model anywhere close to "correct". As someone who is "too close" to some manufacturers, my opinions were not necessarily welcomed over on those forums...but the modeling they do is indeed very good. Respectfully submitted-- John Mock
For those interested in the nitty gritty details of E units--
I'm saying this nicely so please don't take it any other way: You need to read the plethora of threads over on the Atlas Rescue Forums about those Proto E Units and also the BLI E units.
Some of the folks might possibly be described as "too particular" but the real deficiencies of those models are discussed thoroughly, along with how those modelers went about rebuilding the diesels to fix the deficiencies--and there are plenty of color photos of models in progress at various stages.
Apparently, there are actually considerable issues with the nose lines, contours, and especially cab front windows, but also the roof details even for "as built" model configurations. To the guys on the Atlas Rescue Forums, there is no one "good" E unit on the market--they all have their various plusses and minuses that have to be fixed to make a model anywhere close to "correct".
As someone who is "too close" to some manufacturers, my opinions were not necessarily welcomed over on those forums...but the modeling they do is indeed very good.
Respectfully submitted--
John Mock
These models are 1/87 the size of real life, and that is what some of these guys need......a life.
Still very happy to model "close enough from 3 feet as they roll by"........and having great fun despite how much I know about real trains.......
I do not know much about train operation, but I do know quite a bit about transit bus operation.
Busses are purchased from GMC (not anymore), Gillig, New Flyer, or NABI. These are put into fleets.
EVERY morning one bus MUST "pull-out" for each route. This is not an option. Failure to meet full pull-out is unacceptable. I assume railroads are under similar requirements. Routes must be met...period.
This results in continuous "shop modification" of busses. Exhaust diffusers get pulled off "down" busses to get something else "on route". Body panels get swapped. Bike racks get shuffled about. Wheels get swapped and mis-matched on a single unit.
This happens daily.
To try to model a particular bus, say Dade County #5023, would be impossible. You would need photographs of the bus from all sides, front, rear, and top, and all taken on the same day. Busses get repainted, repaired, or touched up. Usually at about 700,000-800,000 miles the bus gets a major shop rebuild that includes some updates. Don't forget about manufacturer campaigns and recalls. These will change ther appearance of the bus also.
What if you were a hobby manufacturer making a model of Dade County #5023? The only real option is to model that bus as delivered. Eveything else is just speculation.
Model Railroad manufacturers need to make the same choice.
I somewhat understand the "stuck in the middle" argument.
The more you study the more one realizes it is impossible to offer every variant in rtr HO plastic. There were, for example, numerous variations in details of Alco Century diesels, as production changes were ongoing and nearly constant. There are actually more variations than the various phases of Alco Century diesel models identified in the excellent books published by Withers Publishing/Diesel Era. The manufacturers who have made HO models actually took those books, the available drawings, and actual field measurements and discovered even more variations than what was previously known. Some are very subtle, and unique to perhaps only one railroad, and cannot be economically modeled in mass production.
BRAKIEI'm just as happy has a two headed woodpecker in a bucket of worms switching cars with a BB GP7 and BB and Roundhouse freight cars as I am my Walthers GP7 or my Genesis GP9 and my highly detailed cars..The same holds true for my BB GP35 or my Kato GP35 or any P2K or BB GP38-2s I owned.
I'm with you on that, Larry! I have the mix of 1st and 2nd generation diesels, from BB to Genesis and much in between, and as long as they run well, I'm happy with them. I may some day make the prototypical modifications to some of them, like the BB GP9 that was custom painted for the EL that I acquired back in 1995 at a hobby shop near Steam Town in Scranton PA. Not all of these modifications are what I would call doable, or maybe even worth it, but I can make the model close to the prototype. I do, in fact, have a photo of the prototype with that particuular 1230 road number from the late 60's. these are the kinds of projects that I enjoy: making a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
ACY Around 1952, B&O replaced the streamlined pilots on their E6's and early E8's with shorter bulldog pilots, making the E6's, in particular, look very strange indeed.
Tom,How about those GP9s C&O sent to the B&O to shore up B&O's motive power problem after C&O took control of the B&O? These Geeps kept their C&O looks and numbers in fact all the B&O did was remove the C and replaced it with a B and removed all "C&O for progress" hearalds and placed a Capitol Dome on the short hood.
http://www.trainweb.org/chessiephotos/photos/GP9/5928b&o.jpg
Even when locomotives were new, those bought by one railroad might not be exactly the same as those bought by another. Sometimes switchers had no MU, or had MU on one end only. Maybe the horn was different, or maybe one road preferred a passenger pilot over the EMD bulldog pilot. Maybe one wanted a Mars light and the other didn't. There were lots of options. As the equipment aged, modifications were made. Porthole windows were sometimes replaced with solid panels. Around 1952, B&O replaced the streamlined pilots on their E6's and early E8's with shorter bulldog pilots, making the E6's, in particular, look very strange indeed.
You are welcome to ask manufacturers to ensure 100% accuracy on everything. Good luck on that one. As modelers, we have three choices:
1. Accept, without question, whatever the manufacturers produce. Just have fun with it.
2. Do your homework. Find out what the prototype railroad did, and figure out what needs to be done. Then, many will decide that the conversion is too much work, or beyond their capabilities, or too expensive to have somebody do it for them, and they will just accept it as-is (i.e., compromise, as Sheldon wisely suggests) or decide to get rid of the model.
3. Do your homework. Find out what the prototype railroad did, and figure out what needs to be done. Then do it.
You have begun the process for option 2 or 3. Now you can decide which option will be your final choice.
In the end, each of us has to decide what kind of model railroader he wants to be. There is nothing wrong with buying everything off the shelf, putting it in the track, and running it. That's called "running trains". It's not modeling. Modeling is the active process of building something that is a miniature representation of a prototype. Many very good commercial models, such as those you mentioned, can become more accurate with some changes. Sometimes they are minor and sometimes they are major, but the willingness to put out that effort is what distinguishes modelers from folks who "run trains".
If you think there's a problem with diesels, you really need to look at the steam situation. Here's an example: B&O had 30 light USRA Pacifics and 100 light USRA Mikados. BLI, Bachmann, and others produce, or have produced models of those engines. The mass produced models reflect the as-delivered appearance of the engines. The problem rears its ugly head when we reflect that very few of us are modeling the 1918-19 period when these engines were delivered, and B&O made numerous changes over the years. Some manufacturers have tried to accommodate B&O (and (PRR) modelers by putting a high headlight on these engines, and most purchasers appreciate that effort. However, it's not enough for a purist. B&O also changed the running boards and front ladders, changed the sand filler hatches, changed the injectors, added low water alarms, modified or replaced the tenders on most of the Pacifics and a few of the Mikados, added brakeman's extensions to the fireman's side of the cab on the Mikados, and cut back about 12" of the water leg of the tenders of those Mikes. There were other changes, and no two engines were identical by the 1950's, but I have mentioned the major detail differences. Nobody has ever produced a B&O USRA Mikado or Pacific that accurately represents all of the major details of the last years of steam. This is true whether the model is plastic, die cast, brass, or silly putty. The brass Key Limited Pacific came fairly close, and so did the brass Westside Mikado. But to be 100% accurate, they all fall short. That doesn't mean they are bad models. It only means a good modeler can make them better.
It's your choice, but please don't blame a manufacturer, who puts out a good product, for failing to do everything for you.
RMax1,
Respectfully, that problem is just in your head.
Again, I have been at this for 49 years. I like detail and I like accuracy, but one has to consider what their real goals are.
My goal, to build a layout that conveys a realistic vision to the the average viewer.
The averager viewer, even one who is in the hobby or knows a lot about trains does not know all these things you are obsessing about. Sure you will find that guy who knows a few of the things that you have let slide - so what?
Also, I do want my models to be reasonably accurate, but it also OK if they "romance" the truth just a little.
In addition to my freelanced ATLANTIC CENTRAL I model the B&O, C&O and WESTERN MARYLAND. They all interchange with my fictional ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
But even with all this great product today, do you realize that no one makes any early 1950's B&O name train passenger cars other than old brass? So what's a guy to do? Scratch build them? I could, I have the info and the skills. I can afford the materials. But the time it would take would prevent me from completing other aspects of my railroad.
So I settle for kit bashed ConCor smooth side shorties - why? Because they convey the "feeling" of the cars the B&O rebuilt into streamliners in their own shops. Without spending a mint on brass or a lifetime building one train.
And, I find that selectively compressed (shorty) passenger cars look much more realistic to me on our model curves - even my 40" radius ones.
So we all make the the compromises we make, relax and learn how to have fun.
Nope Roger you're not confused. All the little biing on some models can never make them exact and it's not even worth trying to. I think everyone has answered the question with little parts here and there. There is no way you can model exactness or at least for a given period with todays records and information. So you have to be happy with close enough and if you like the product. The industry that is railroad industry has done things on a need to basis and nothing is cookie cutter standard. I guess this gives a reason to do more research and find out all we can about the prototypes and increase accuracy. So paying for the little fru fru details on a locomotive and calling it prototypical may not be 100% but it is I guess far better than not having them. And yes a better product is most likely worth a higher price. My complaint is that this hobby is frustrating because there is some many different things to deal with, history looks, accuacy, geography and pure time span. Thus I am stuck in the middle like the title of the post going in several directions looking for correct answers and everything is correct but it is not. If that makes sense.
Well, I'm just very confused by your whole post. You saw P2K/Walthers E-8's are inaccurate and you expect better. If I remember this right the E's from P2K came with the correct pilots, headlights, steam generators and many other road specific features. I understaood Walthers carried these details to an even finer degree. I can't see what could be wrong unless you are modeling a specific locomotive in a specific year after half a century of service brought on changes to that locomotive. Portholes, generators, headlights come and go. Sheetmetal changes galore, different handgrabs, fans, engines. I believe the UP E-8/9 fleet now has 645 diesels rather than 567's. The Juniata Terminal Pennsy E's have some unusual DB arrangement on the roof. Just how many changes would Walthers have to make to please everyone with one particular.
Then........you tell us you are totally happy with BB GP-7s and a ratty looking Athearn F-7A unit? I give up!
Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works
Inaccurate? Not just possible, but probable given not just the the reality of plastic molding, commercial practicality, and prototype variations (not just by unit, but by year and month -- getting a C&NW E8 "just right" is a challenge given what those units went through or where they really came from, and even having photos of both sides can mislead unless they were taken on the same day).
But in my opinion "not even close" goes too far, given some of the oddities we have put up with over the years. There are some models where the "not even close" phrase hits the nail on the head but the LifeLike/Proto E8 is not (again in my opinion) one of them. It is close.
RMax1 Sheldon NO ONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT PRICES!!! Yet I agree with those that prices are high. What I am saying is that if you advertise "Exquiste Prototype specific Detailing " Make sure the thing actually existed. Another example would be Bachman (Not advertising prototypical) GP40. The AT&SF only had 1 GP40 and it was numbered 2964, not 3509, 3501 or 3500 which they were all GP38's. And yes I can agree with you that it has got to be a monsterous task with all the changes over such a long lifespan. In German armor the life expectancy for a panzer was less than 2 years at most. An E8/9 can span over 50 years. To make matters worse when you shrink the time frame in model trains it causes more problems. So I guess if you like it buy it! If it's close enough to pass, well ok. If you change it to make it closer for your liking even better. All the loose ends are what make this hobby frustrating but it is loaded with a lot of good qualities. History, technology and geography to mention only a few.
Sheldon NO ONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT PRICES!!! Yet I agree with those that prices are high. What I am saying is that if you advertise "Exquiste Prototype specific Detailing " Make sure the thing actually existed. Another example would be Bachman (Not advertising prototypical) GP40. The AT&SF only had 1 GP40 and it was numbered 2964, not 3509, 3501 or 3500 which they were all GP38's. And yes I can agree with you that it has got to be a monsterous task with all the changes over such a long lifespan. In German armor the life expectancy for a panzer was less than 2 years at most. An E8/9 can span over 50 years. To make matters worse when you shrink the time frame in model trains it causes more problems. So I guess if you like it buy it! If it's close enough to pass, well ok. If you change it to make it closer for your liking even better. All the loose ends are what make this hobby frustrating but it is loaded with a lot of good qualities. History, technology and geography to mention only a few.
Comparing the history of US railroad to WWII German armor is truely apples and oranges.
So I will ask you the question I have asked others who are so hung up on such details - Should the manufacturers not make ANYTHING that they cannot document to September 14, 1973 at 2:35 PM?
And where does that leave the modeler who is more concerned with the "overall impression" if he cannot buy models because the manufacturers don't make them because they cannot documnent them well enough for the 5% or less who are that picky?
I glanced at a few online photos of AMTRAK E units, I did not keep track of unit numbers, but I found every possible port hole combination multiple times. So its not like every AMTRAK E unit had the first three port holes closed up. That would be something a manufacturer might be able to deal with.
Again, accurate reliable data simply does not exist even in the internet age, to acheive that level of correctness on every model produced.
I will give you a reverse example. Some years ago Proto came out with F unitsd for the first time. I ordered an undecorated set for my ATLANTIC CENTRAL, set in 1954. When they came in they had modernized shells with snow plows, fuel tank skirts removed, etc, all changes from the 1960's and 70's. But I wanted "as built" F units for my 1954 time period.
Walthers had no undecorated as built shells to give me or sell me, even though various roadnames they offered had as built shells and details - I sold off the units.
Exactly your complaint in reverse - but I did not get on the internet and complain.
RMax1An E8/9 can span over 50 years. To make matters worse when you shrink the time frame in model trains it causes more problems.
As was mention a E8/9 could go through a lot of changes in that 50 years..
There are hundreds of GP9s still working and very few is stock from EMD. Don't confuse the GP8,GP10s,GP11s,GP16s and GP7u with a modified stock GP9 that may have a Horst air filter and blanked out DB fans.
With that said those GP8,GP10s,GP11s,GP16s and the Topeka cab GP7u started life as GP7s,GP9s and GP20s and was heavily rebuilt..
A little basic history, EMD built them with the 4 port hole windows. Different owners, at different times, in different shops removed or altered port holes, grills, all sorts of details.
It would be nearly impossible for the manufacturers to offer every variation that happened to each locomotive throughout its lifetime. By the time AMTRAK got that stuff, it was 20 year old handed down, patched together junk from a long list of railroads happy to be rid of passenger service.
In most cases, it is only recently because of the internet that we now have access to tens of thousands of private photos that only START to tell the story of each loco.
Any shop records of this stuff is likely long gone or in private hands.
Personally, I have a bunch of Proto E units and they are great - BUT, I don't model the AMTRAK era so it is not an issue for me.
In my view, your expectations in this area are unrealistic, yet you want to complain about prices? The models you want will cost three times what they cost now.
Have you ever brought this sort of product to market? Do you have any idea the work or costs required? It is amazing that in the last 20 years these companies have made the quality of detail and number of variations that they have - let alone following every loco through every home shop change.
Tell you what, close up the port holes, brush some silver paint on there, and weather it like the neglected piece of junk in the prototype photo, and no one will ever notice if you did a good job closing up the port holes or not.
I went back and looked at the Walthers releases versus the Lifelike releases. Here are two examples from the Lifelike releases.
Walthers on recent releases has made the numbering correct for 4 portal units. Lifelike would just put them out there. Still as far as I know there are no units without portals that are correct. At some point units without portals had them but not very long. No one is complain about price.
Walthers on recent releases has made the numbering correct for 4 portal units. Lifelike would just put them out there. Still as far as I know there are no units without portals that are correct. At some point units without portals had them but not very long.
No one is complain about price.
ATLANTIC CENTRALwhat is so terribly wrong with the Walthers/Proto E units
I am curious about this also. I do not own any E units. I use Stewart F7s to pull my passenger trains, Santa Fe style. However, I have always thought the E units were beautiful, I just prefer F units.
Am I just easily impressed? What is so offensive about these models?
ATLANTIC CENTRALWhich then begs the question with ANY of these models - How close is close enough?
Sheldon,How close? IMHO whatever pleases the modeler after the number one person a modeler needs to please is his/herself.
I'm just as happy has a two headed woodpecker in a bucket of worms switching cars with a BB GP7 and BB and Roundhouse freight cars as I am my Walthers GP7 or my Genesis GP9 and my highly detailed cars..The same holds true for my BB GP35 or my Kato GP35 or any P2K or BB GP38-2s I owned.
If I may and speaking for myself?
I really don't need the latest models to be happy.. I admit I just bought a IM GP10 because I been wanting a GP10 for years and the closest I ever came was a stand in Walthers GP9m that I added IC frog eyes and a Detail Associates Horst paper air filter.
RMax1 The model railroad industry has raised the prices and claim look at the great details you are getting for the money and I will agree with them. Today's models are absolutely beautiful in details. In the past models would be produced and sold with no prototypical equal. You would have and still do have locomotives that roads never owned and any time being produced as models. The real thing never existed. I actually purchase whatever I like the looks of but there are times I like to research and learn the history of certain pieces. The Problem is when you purchase something and it is so prototypically inaccurate but advertised as being are you getting what is advertised. An example would be the LifeLike/Walthers Proto 2000 E8/9's. They are beautiful but not accurate. Not even close. So all the prototype modelers are not getting accuracy and the casual modelers are paying more for trains. Modeling is the point of being a modeler but looking for the middle ground. I hope this is not it.
The model railroad industry has raised the prices and claim look at the great details you are getting for the money and I will agree with them. Today's models are absolutely beautiful in details. In the past models would be produced and sold with no prototypical equal. You would have and still do have locomotives that roads never owned and any time being produced as models. The real thing never existed. I actually purchase whatever I like the looks of but there are times I like to research and learn the history of certain pieces. The Problem is when you purchase something and it is so prototypically inaccurate but advertised as being are you getting what is advertised. An example would be the LifeLike/Walthers Proto 2000 E8/9's. They are beautiful but not accurate. Not even close. So all the prototype modelers are not getting accuracy and the casual modelers are paying more for trains. Modeling is the point of being a modeler but looking for the middle ground. I hope this is not it.
So please enlighten us with what is so terribly wrong with the Walthers/Proto E units?
And are these flaws only with the new retooled Walthers versions or do they go back to the original LifeLike versions?
Which then begs the question with ANY of these models - How close is close enough?
Having been doing this for nearly 50 years, and having literally grown up in the hobby shop, and watched these products evolve for the last 50 years, I suspect my views on this are a little more pragmatic.
But again, please enlighten us, heaven forbid there is a rivet missing.........
As for costs, China is no longer a cheap labor third world country - get over it.
Adjusted for inflation, correctly detailed or not, and considering value added improvements, model trains are still cheaper than they were in the 1950's or 1960's.
If your own personal purchasing power has not kept up with inflation, that is a topic for a political forum somewhere - not here.
RMax1The Problem is when you purchase something and it is so prototypically inaccurate but advertised as being are you getting what is advertised. An example would be the LifeLike/Walthers Proto 2000 E8/9's. They are beautiful but not accurate. Not even close.
I'm not real familiar with these, can you be more specific? In what way are they inaccurate? Wrong details?
The answer is the same as it was in grade school, middle school, and high school. Do your homework. Part of the reality of being a proto modeler is that as much time is spent on research, reading and looking at pictures, as it is on shopping.
A wealth of information is available from historical society publications and other articles online and in print. You do the best you can.
I model a small part of a large railroad which is not as well served as the Southern Pacific, Santa Fe and others with active historical groups, but it doesn't take too long to find relevant data.
Model companies are selling replicas now that have far better detail and operating characteristics than brass models of 20 years ago, and the variety available is impressive. The time you save with buying an RTR can be spent correcting the few details that may be relevant to your prototype.
In the '70s, '80s, and '90s the drumbeat from the large model magazines was big, big, big -- large layouts, dozens and dozens of cars, fleets of locomotives. People are now rediscovering the fun of more manageable layouts. Look up Rob Spangler and Keith Jordan to see the superficially simple railroads that people are building.
People will say "looks like a boring trackplan" but there is, in fact, a lot of depth and operating potential in their around-the-walls sort of plans.
Kevin I thought about that and it would be a lot easier. And it makes sense. But if you enjoy the part of this hobby that is the history it becomes quite frustrating. Part of me likes finding out the history and how things operate. I am and airline brat and I am having to learn railroading from scratch. The only exposure I ever had to it as a kid was the Katy went thru the woods next to our apartment in West Dallas. So I spend a lot of time going whats that? There are a lot of things I am clueless about. Modeling is not so much the problem as researching. I modeled WWII armor mostly German Tamiya kits. I loved Revell model airplanes. My first train's memory still sticks in my mind. It resembled more of a flashlight because it ran on either c or d cells and loaded like one.
Robert
Hmmm...
Maybe you should start up a Free-Lanced Private Roadname. Everything on the STRATTON & GILLETTE is 100% prototypical, and I have found some great bargains.
The only downside of a private roadname is how hard it is to find undecorated models. However, at least when you find them, the details are all correct.