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.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALIn 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..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
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
Larry,
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.
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.
Tom
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
Chuck - Modeling in HO scale and anything narrow gauge
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.
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.
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.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
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"!
-Kevin
Living the dream.
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.
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.
- Douglas
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
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
Like many discussions, those here often wander from the original topic, and, in my opinion, are often better for it.
Wayne
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.
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
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
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."
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.
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 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
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.....
Here are a few:
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.
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 given the very low entry level qualifications to be an internet critic