Brass got it start with the post WWII GI's stationed in Japan during the occupation. Back then, full dimensioned drawings were regularly featured in Model Railroader. So a modeler stationed there would get the many local craftsman, who were looking for work, to build him a model of that locomotive. This slowly became an industry where many small cottage parts makers would combine their efforts to one final assembly company to build a model(the United label that PFM used reflected this aspect). Things grew, models got better, drives improved as Japanese builders visiting the USA saw that modelers actually were using these models on layouts. But once inflation got out of hand in Japan in the 70s and early 80s, building of models moved to South Korea and remains there with the few builders that remain. Tenshodo still makes models in Japan for the home market(including some runs of USA locos) but due to the exchange rate, it makes these models very expensive for the American buyer. Many modelers that traveled to Tokyo in the 70s and 80's would visit the Tenshodo hobby shop in the Ginzu district and I heard it was and still is quite a shop! I got into brass in my early teens as you had PFM Shays or the noisy and usually poor running MDC/Roundhouse kit. PFM's logging engines were tanks and ran well, especially with a can motor retrofitted. I had a fleet of Tenshodo diesels, which date back into the 1950's, and while a bit noisy, with a can motor they ran well and pulled excellent. Tenshodo models, except for a few kits, came factory painted and lighted. Something not seen with other importers till factory painted models started appearing from Oriental Limited and Overland Models. Later run OMI diesels are very accurate normally, ran well once some split cups on the drive shafts are replaced.
When buying vintage brass, most of which will be unpainted, no light ect. One has to remember the era it was made. Modelers were expecte to, well model! You were responsible for final lubrication, fine tuning the model to run well as well painting, fitting a working headlight. The models were the RTR of their time, but not the RTR most of current new modelers expect in a new model were all they have to do it plunk it on the track and away it goes. That said, even at train shows today, a fine running brass model draws the ooo and awwwsss from the viewers. This can and should make the models owner feel proud of themselves. I still have a few early Tenshodo diesels, while crude by even 1970s standards, they are part of the early history of brass models, the factory paint looks great and they are just cool models to own and run once and awhile. They remind one how far the hobby has come. Have fun everybody, fun is what its all about. Mike
The one brass oddity I'd like to have on my layout would be a pair of "Brass Hustlers" wired together and powerd with NWSL power trucks. I don't even think I would paint these.
However, there are plenty of fake "Brass Hustlers" out there.
This one just popped up on eBay. It looks like it is just an Athearn Hustler painted brass, but it has green tarnish on it. It obviously has Athearn horns and power truck. Not sure what to make of this one.
Athearn Hustler shells:
This is what a "Real" example of a "Brass Hustler" looks like:
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Ran a PFM PRR late 60's run K4 for around 7 hours a day on my hobby shop pike for almost two years until I sold the store in1975.Overall I'd guess around 1000 hours of running time with nary an issue except having to clean drivers often due to plating be worn off. The AHM Casey Jones on the same pike.....well, let's not go there. I still have this K4 and it is resting now in one of my cases, but could have kept on going.
When I purchased brass models it was because I wanted to buy the very best models that I could (also knowing I'm not a good builder or painter). My dad and I did build a Bowser L-1 Mikado once, and when we tried to rivet the valve gear together, it didn't go well, so I simply bought an assembled set of valve gear to finish the model. Then Bowser's painter painted it for me to represent one of the three that went to Santa Fe during WWII.
Whether my own railroad is an "accurate" reflection of any given prototype and the mix of appropriate traffic or not--well I try. With a family, and sons in both sports and band, I prefer to buy ready-to-run equipment, but I don't have a huge roster.
There are brass engines I had that I traded away for something else--a few I wish I'd maybe kept, but I'm happy with the plastic diesels I have now.
There are still a handful of brass models I'd like to have someday, but I have to find a good example at a decent price. With brass diesels, I find that many have been mishandled by people who sloppily bend stuff and/or break it loose. I always want truly mint condition, which can be hard to find.
Also, with advances in today's molding technology, I find myself looking less and less at vintage brass as today's plastic models are getting better all the time.
Maybe someday I'll own a nice brass/nickel plated CB&Q E-5A, or a nice Santa Fe alligator RSD-15 (both Key and Overland did them). BLI's RSD-15 is not very correct for Santa Fe as it does not reflect their modifications and the battery boxes are incorrect even for as built Santa Fe. So to own a good RSD-15 for me it would have to be a brass one. So there are certain models that for me still hold up as the brass being far superior, on a case by case basis.
John
Until very recently and the advent of 3D printing, traction modelers were basically limited to brass, or an even smaller selection of plastic and white metal models. If you model interurbans, passenger or freight, brass was basically the only way to get most prototypes. I'm an experienced enough modeler to enjoy tinkering and detailing, so the extra work necessary are no obstacle, and even though there are 3D printed bodies for some interurban and streetcar prototypes available, they're generally just as much work. When you order a 3D printed steeplecab, you just get a plastic chassis, and still have to do all the under-the-hood labor yourself, including power, drivetrain, lights, and DCC/sound, using a material that's often either softer or more brittle and frequently far less forgiving than brass. So we're in the same boat as logging or narrow gauge modelers; brass is often the best choice for the kind of modeling we want to do.
ATLANTIC CENTRALOk, to my knowledge the 4-6-0 detailed was simplified.
The original Bachmann 4-6-0 with which I was familiar, was done in cast metal, mostly as an older-style locomotive...
...while the tender was mostly plastic.
While 10-Wheelers are among my favourites, I thought Bachmann's version was a little too old-looking for my late '30s layout. I also discovered that the metal boiler details, especially the walkways, were rather fragile, and prone to break-off, even under careful handling, and it didn't look to me as if those broken-off parts could be easily re-attached.
Instead, I removed the two loco's superstructures (cab and boiler), and replaced, them with cast metal boilers from MDC, but removed the cabs from both, replacing them with ones from Bachmann 2-8-0s (the Bachmann 2-8-0 body shell, boiler with cab, are available, and I have several boiler shells, (minus the cabs). If anybody needs a replacement plastic boiler (you'll have to provide your own cab), let me know.
I re-built the old-style slide-valve cylinders into piston-types...
...then added a few details...
The original tenders were overly-wide (wider than the original cabs), so I cut them in half and removed the excess, also shortening them in the process, then rebuilt the coal bunkers to accept loose "coal" (either Black Beauty sandblasting medium, or coke breeze (the "fines" from coke-making).
In service, they're pretty-decent pullers for their size, and no longer susceptible to damage through handling...
Wayne
dknelsonThe other big thing about brass is that it finally enabled a modeler's layout to stick to a particular prototype, and thus it played a role in retiring the old way of each model railroader creating and naming his own railroad, often a goofy name. Other than Pennsy modelers who had a range of freight and passenger locomotives from Penn Line, in most other cases until brass took hold you either had no locomotives at all that were accurate for some railroads, or you had such a limited choice that you could not have a true roster. For example, a B&O modeler had the Tyco/Mantua 4-6-2 and the Varney 0-4-0T Dockside switcher, as well as an old time 4-6-0 from Aristo Craft, but what about mainline freight steam? Or an SP modeler; they could get the Model Die Casting metal 0-6-0, but what about freight and passenger power? And guys who wanted to model the Western Pacific or the Great Northern had it even worse.
And absolutely forget about it if you wanted to model anything Canadian.
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
I model CNR so correct steam means brass. A couple of years ago I wanted a K5a Hudson. Samhongsa did a run of them in 1978 and produced 150. I found one for a decent price that met my main objective and that was a great paint job as I was aware of the high cost for a quality paint job. Anyway it looked great but ran poorly. I spent many hours fooling with it and with Dr. Wayne's help got it to run better. I found out from my LHS that there was a fellow locally with 40 years experience working with brass. He took the loco and for $100 he replaced the universal, put the bearings on the front axle the right sude up, installed a motor decoder and changed the headlight to led. It now runs smooth and quiet , as good as any of my plastic locos.
So if you can find someone with expertise brass is great. He said I was right about the paint. He would charge at least $300 to paint that engine due to the multi colours.
CN Charlie
The irony is that when brass locomotives from Japan were a new "thing" in the years just after WW2, one of the big attractions was that they were ... so cheap. Servicemen returning from Japan had been able to get stuff, often custom built or close to it, at prices that were shockingly lower than what you'd pay to get something similar in die cast metal from Varney or Mantua. That was an earlier era of brass - the pre-Pacific Fast Mail quality era. Some of those early Japanese made locomotives were not the jewel like masterpieces of later years, and often scale and proportions looked eyeballed rather than measured. The priest of my folks' church had served in Japan and came back with some of that sort of brass; I particularly remember a NYC Hudson. I am sure it looked at least a little better than the American Flyer HO Hudson, especially the drivers and valve gearm but not a whole lot better. Motors were also iffy in very early, pre 1954 brass.
Broadway Lion touches on another reason why brass became a "thing" and that is, it takes solder well. If you were the sort who wanted to modify a die cast zinc alloy locomotive model and add or remove detail, you had your work cut out for you, and the results were often not great.
If the only soldering you have ever done is soldering copper wire to nickle silver rail. soldering brass to brass is easier and more rewarding. (Plastic is easy to modify too, but remember that it took decades after the first Al Armitage articles about styrene before the type of hobbyist who was fussy about detail and accuracy was comfortable working with styrene plastic, and had an array of detail parts in styrene to choose from.)
The other big thing about brass is that it finally enabled a modeler's layout to stick to a particular prototype, and thus it played a role in retiring the old way of each model railroader creating and naming his own railroad, often a goofy name. Other than Pennsy modelers who had a range of freight and passenger locomotives from Penn Line, in most other cases until brass took hold you either had no locomotives at all that were accurate for some railroads, or you had such a limited choice that you could not have a true roster. For example, a B&O modeler had the Tyco/Mantua 4-6-2 and the Varney 0-4-0T Dockside switcher, as well as an old time 4-6-0 from Aristo Craft, but what about mainline freight steam? Or an SP modeler; they could get the Model Die Casting metal 0-6-0, but what about freight and passenger power? And guys who wanted to model the Western Pacific or the Great Northern had it even worse. They were looking at a laborious process of hacksaw and hammer and swear and sweat and chop and file to make a commercially available zinc alloy metal model look almost a teeny bit similar, kind-of, to their favorite railroad's steam power. Often the only accurate part of the model was the decals.
Brass was a key part of the "pre-history" of the prototype modeling movement that started with steam and eventually made its way to freight cars.
Dave Nelson
For many railroads if you are modeling steam brass is the only game in town that comes close. If you are in narrow gauge even more so. Besides Blackstone which it appears is out of the game at least for the time being there have been no rtr engines. The roundhouse stuff has dried up and is going for way too much on ebay. That leaves brass and if you are modeling something other than D&RGW or RGS you have to go to brass.
All that being said brass is pretty affordable compared to past years. If you are willing to work on stuff or shop carefully in estate sales antique malls and swap meets there are some real deals out there. Sometimes the best deals are missing their box or need a little work. Most of my fleet was bought that way.
trainnut1250Glad you enjoyed it. You did better than I would have if I were taking the quiz
I was just going with the brass/plastic question for the main boiler/cab assemblies. I could not have identified the makers or models for any of them except the Bachmann shay.
snjroy trainnut1250 There is still Ebay for some of the older, well detailed Spectrum models. Guy Absolutely. Is that not what we do for the brass engines? I wonder how much Bachmann really saves by putting on molded details instead of the plastic piping. I don't mind not having the detailed brake shoes (they get in the way when maintaining the engine anyway), and using cheapo couplers is not a big deal either as they are easy to replace. But molded on pipes and compressors on the boiler are a real pain to remove and replace. I do like the sound of the recent models - not Locksound quality but totally acceptable in my books. Simon
trainnut1250 There is still Ebay for some of the older, well detailed Spectrum models. Guy
There is still Ebay for some of the older, well detailed Spectrum models.
Guy
Absolutely. Is that not what we do for the brass engines?
I wonder how much Bachmann really saves by putting on molded details instead of the plastic piping. I don't mind not having the detailed brake shoes (they get in the way when maintaining the engine anyway), and using cheapo couplers is not a big deal either as they are easy to replace. But molded on pipes and compressors on the boiler are a real pain to remove and replace. I do like the sound of the recent models - not Locksound quality but totally acceptable in my books.
Simon
Ok, to my knowledge the 4-6-0 detailed was simplified. The Consolidation is still the same. The other small engines from the regular line always had molded on details. The newer releases, Mikado, Pacific, 2-6-0, are well detailed but not Spectrum level. Same with the 2-8-4, it has not changed. Even with less detail than the Spectrum line, at least Bachmann can put the correct bell, headlight and trailing truck on a B&O Pacific. More than you can say for Broadway.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRAL AND, many freelance modelers are really protolance modelers because while they may be building a fictional story, they want it to be a believeable story.
AND, many freelance modelers are really protolance modelers because while they may be building a fictional story, they want it to be a believeable story.
Exactly.
I'm a protolancer myself. I have posted the idea of mine enough times that it would be redundant to do it again.
Getting back to the main subject of the post, I have one brass caboose. As some have already stated it was purchased as it is a unique prototype for one of my proto roads that I follow. Unfortunately, the scheme on one side of the car was reversed. So when it comes out only the correct side faces out.
John-NYBW You got me on the Shays. The body on the 2 truck Shay (B), looks very much like the one on my Rivarossi Heisler so I guessed Rivarossi had produced a Shay and used the same shell on both.
You got me on the Shays. The body on the 2 truck Shay (B), looks very much like the one on my Rivarossi Heisler so I guessed Rivarossi had produced a Shay and used the same shell on both.
John,
Yeah the shays are upside down from what they should be...Does that mean the Bachmann is over achieving or that the brass is under performing
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
snjroy Great quiz Guy. I think I only got half of them right - but adding modified locos in the mix is a bit unfair, don't you think ? Kudos for the work on them, by the way. A few points about the Bachmanns: 1) the Shay runs great out of the box but those gears are super fragile. My brass Shays (and Climax's) run just as smooth and will probably outlive their owner. Changing the motor is fairly straightforward, if at all necessary. 2) I own a few 4-4-0s (including a retooled Civil war engine) and a 4-6-0 that run excellent, with very good detail. The 2-6-0 is also very good. Unfortunately, the other latest runs of Bachmann steamers have a lot of molded on detail. I bought a brass Mikado and Pacific for that reason. But I am still grateful that Bachmann still produces good steamers at low cost, with good after sales service and parts. Simon
Great quiz Guy. I think I only got half of them right - but adding modified locos in the mix is a bit unfair, don't you think ? Kudos for the work on them, by the way.
A few points about the Bachmanns:
1) the Shay runs great out of the box but those gears are super fragile. My brass Shays (and Climax's) run just as smooth and will probably outlive their owner. Changing the motor is fairly straightforward, if at all necessary.
2) I own a few 4-4-0s (including a retooled Civil war engine) and a 4-6-0 that run excellent, with very good detail. The 2-6-0 is also very good. Unfortunately, the other latest runs of Bachmann steamers have a lot of molded on detail. I bought a brass Mikado and Pacific for that reason. But I am still grateful that Bachmann still produces good steamers at low cost, with good after sales service and parts.
Simon,
Glad you enjoyed the quiz…The shay is kind of in a special category - looks great and runs well with the exception of the gears.
I am a little disappointed that the current Bachmann production seems to have moved in the direction of fewer details. I have a good number of the small stuff 4-6-0’s and 4-4-0’s as well as the shays and a few consolidations as well.
The Spectrum medium vandy tender was a great thing for us West Coast modelers looking for inexpensive SP stand ins…There is still Ebay for some of the older, well detailed Spectrum models.
.
SeeYou190 trainnut1250 Thanks for participating - "Don Pardo, tell our participants what the correct answers are...." Guy, thank you for doing that, it was fun. I did not post my guesses, but I was wrong on two of them. -Kevin
trainnut1250 Thanks for participating - "Don Pardo, tell our participants what the correct answers are...."
Guy, thank you for doing that, it was fun.
I did not post my guesses, but I was wrong on two of them.
Kevin,
Glad you enjoyed it. You did better than I would have if I were taking the quiz
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Autonerd John-NYBW I've always been a freelancer so prototype fidelity has never been a high priority for me. If I'm going to invent a fantasy world, is it really that important for my equipment to be accurate right down to the smallest detail? Fair enough, but as you no doubt know, a lot of hobbyists don't see model railroading as "a fantasy world" -- many of them want to produce accurate models of real trains, places and/or operation. For those who didn't have the time or skill to build those models, brass was a quick way to get there (or, before 1984 or so, to even get a good-looking diesel). Also, don't forget that some people simply don't have the time to invest. I have a friend in this situation: He likes highly-detailed, highly-accurate modeling, but enjoys other parts of the hobby more than building locomotives (particularly bench/trackwork, wiring, and operations). He does well financially, so he buys high-quality brass and/or plastic models and pays to have them modified to his liking. That way he can enjoy the trains he wants, the way he wants. Aaron Aaron, Agreed, I just want to add that the whole freelance vs prototype thing is not a yes/no thing. How accurate is accurate enough? 40 years ago, even very skilled modelers, had to work with what they had. Today we have all these wonderful highly accurate products - and there are STILL large wholes in accurate modeling of a lot of major railroads. AND, many freelance modelers are really protolance modelers because while they may be building a fictional story, they want it to be a believeable story. So there are still lots of compromise choices to be made, freelance, prototype, or in between....... Sheldon
Autonerd John-NYBW I've always been a freelancer so prototype fidelity has never been a high priority for me. If I'm going to invent a fantasy world, is it really that important for my equipment to be accurate right down to the smallest detail? Fair enough, but as you no doubt know, a lot of hobbyists don't see model railroading as "a fantasy world" -- many of them want to produce accurate models of real trains, places and/or operation. For those who didn't have the time or skill to build those models, brass was a quick way to get there (or, before 1984 or so, to even get a good-looking diesel). Also, don't forget that some people simply don't have the time to invest. I have a friend in this situation: He likes highly-detailed, highly-accurate modeling, but enjoys other parts of the hobby more than building locomotives (particularly bench/trackwork, wiring, and operations). He does well financially, so he buys high-quality brass and/or plastic models and pays to have them modified to his liking. That way he can enjoy the trains he wants, the way he wants. Aaron
John-NYBW I've always been a freelancer so prototype fidelity has never been a high priority for me. If I'm going to invent a fantasy world, is it really that important for my equipment to be accurate right down to the smallest detail?
Fair enough, but as you no doubt know, a lot of hobbyists don't see model railroading as "a fantasy world" -- many of them want to produce accurate models of real trains, places and/or operation. For those who didn't have the time or skill to build those models, brass was a quick way to get there (or, before 1984 or so, to even get a good-looking diesel).
Also, don't forget that some people simply don't have the time to invest. I have a friend in this situation: He likes highly-detailed, highly-accurate modeling, but enjoys other parts of the hobby more than building locomotives (particularly bench/trackwork, wiring, and operations). He does well financially, so he buys high-quality brass and/or plastic models and pays to have them modified to his liking. That way he can enjoy the trains he wants, the way he wants.
Aaron
Aaron,
Agreed, I just want to add that the whole freelance vs prototype thing is not a yes/no thing.
How accurate is accurate enough? 40 years ago, even very skilled modelers, had to work with what they had.
Today we have all these wonderful highly accurate products - and there are STILL large wholes in accurate modeling of a lot of major railroads.
So there are still lots of compromise choices to be made, freelance, prototype, or in between.......
My approach falls into the in between category. My road is fictitious but my goal is to make it look like it could have existed, rather than modeling one that did exist. I try to follow prototype practices. I try to keep my equipment to what was appropriate for my time frame (1956) although I will bend that rule a by a few years. My fictional layout is made up of fictional towns but it interchanges with real railroads and my staging yards represent real places. I don't know how many of my locos are prototypically accurate and I don't care. As long as they look like the real thing, that's good enough. If it takes a serious railroad historian to recognize the flaws, then to me they aren't flaws. Close enough is good enough.
trainnut1250Thanks for participating - "Don Pardo, tell our participants what the correct answers are...."
John-NYBWI've always been a freelancer so prototype fidelity has never been a high priority for me. If I'm going to invent a fantasy world, is it really that important for my equipment to be accurate right down to the smallest detail?
Autonerd I think you have to remember where the hobby was just before you discovered brass in the early 80s. Diesels: Athearn was state of the art, with generic, one-piece shells. If you wanted to model a specific prototype, you bought a bunch of Details West/Detail Associate parts, and for smoother running you had to rework the drivetrain (deburring the gears and soldering wires from truck to motor clip). Steam: Rivarossi was as good as it got in plastic, with molded-on detail and huge flanges. Or you could rework a Bachmann loco. Freight cars were limited to a few generic types and had to be heavily modified -- or you could get craftsman kits, resin, or other specialized kits from specific manufacturers. Passenger cars: Athearn made shorties, and a lot of modelers started with Rivarossi/AHM 85' cars which were little more than shells with trucks and had to be heavily modified. Or, again, you had to seek out and build specialist kits. Brass offered unusual models and road-specific details, as well as things we take for granted today: Seperate grab irons, see-through fans and grilles, realistic handrails, even sprung trucks. And brass locomotives ran MUCH more smoothly and quietly than anything else. Brass was largely built in South Korea, where craftsmanship was excellent and labor was cheap. As for being unpainted, that was to allow for multiple paint schemes and numbers; the assumption, I believe, was that if you could afford brass, you could afford a custom paint job (a thriving business in the '80s). Couple of seminal things happened in the early-to-mid 80s: Athearn's SD40-2 with scale-width hoods and (heavens to Betsy!) choice of dynamic or non-DB. Then the GP38-2 and (soon after) GP50 with visible fan blades (thanks to advances in injection molding) and dimples in place of molded-on grab irons. Then the Atlas RS-3/RSD-4/5 came along with the Kato drive -- first plastic engine that truly ran like brass. Still had molded-on grabs, though. I also think brass was a status thing -- you had to have $$ to afford it. Like Rapido today! Nowadays, CAD, better injection molding, the advent of DCC and the shift to Chinese assembly means plastic models can offer everything brass did in terms of detail and customization (and without the need for skilled labor) -- but it's killed off much of the craft in the hobby, the need to modify locos to get what you want (good for me, I never was very good at it anyway). By today's standards some brass locos look almost comically crude, but back in the 1960s-80s, that was as good as it got! Aaron
I think you have to remember where the hobby was just before you discovered brass in the early 80s.
Diesels: Athearn was state of the art, with generic, one-piece shells. If you wanted to model a specific prototype, you bought a bunch of Details West/Detail Associate parts, and for smoother running you had to rework the drivetrain (deburring the gears and soldering wires from truck to motor clip).
Steam: Rivarossi was as good as it got in plastic, with molded-on detail and huge flanges. Or you could rework a Bachmann loco.
Freight cars were limited to a few generic types and had to be heavily modified -- or you could get craftsman kits, resin, or other specialized kits from specific manufacturers. Passenger cars: Athearn made shorties, and a lot of modelers started with Rivarossi/AHM 85' cars which were little more than shells with trucks and had to be heavily modified. Or, again, you had to seek out and build specialist kits.
Brass offered unusual models and road-specific details, as well as things we take for granted today: Seperate grab irons, see-through fans and grilles, realistic handrails, even sprung trucks. And brass locomotives ran MUCH more smoothly and quietly than anything else.
Brass was largely built in South Korea, where craftsmanship was excellent and labor was cheap.
As for being unpainted, that was to allow for multiple paint schemes and numbers; the assumption, I believe, was that if you could afford brass, you could afford a custom paint job (a thriving business in the '80s).
Couple of seminal things happened in the early-to-mid 80s: Athearn's SD40-2 with scale-width hoods and (heavens to Betsy!) choice of dynamic or non-DB. Then the GP38-2 and (soon after) GP50 with visible fan blades (thanks to advances in injection molding) and dimples in place of molded-on grab irons.
Then the Atlas RS-3/RSD-4/5 came along with the Kato drive -- first plastic engine that truly ran like brass. Still had molded-on grabs, though.
I also think brass was a status thing -- you had to have $$ to afford it. Like Rapido today!
Nowadays, CAD, better injection molding, the advent of DCC and the shift to Chinese assembly means plastic models can offer everything brass did in terms of detail and customization (and without the need for skilled labor) -- but it's killed off much of the craft in the hobby, the need to modify locos to get what you want (good for me, I never was very good at it anyway).
By today's standards some brass locos look almost comically crude, but back in the 1960s-80s, that was as good as it got!
I've always been a freelancer so prototype fidelity has never been a high priority for me. If I'm going to invent a fantasy world, is it really that important for my equipment to be accurate right down to the smallest detail? Generic models work for me. Function is what is important. Whether locos or rolling stock, it has to operate well. If it does and looks reasonably like the real thing, that's good enough for me. If I don't know that a particular part is incorrect for a particular piece of equipment, it doesn't bother me at all.
John-NYBW MJ4562 My guesses: A, C, E and G are Brass. The others are plastic. Not a clue which runs betters. @Sheldon. What does "NOS" stand for/mean?? Not familiar with the acronym. MJ4562 My guesses: A, C, E and G are Brass. The others are plastic. Not a clue which runs betters. @Sheldon. What does "NOS" stand for/mean?? Not familiar with the acronym. My guess: A,C,E,F, and H are the brass.
MJ4562 My guesses: A, C, E and G are Brass. The others are plastic. Not a clue which runs betters. @Sheldon. What does "NOS" stand for/mean?? Not familiar with the acronym.
My guesses: A, C, E and G are Brass. The others are plastic. Not a clue which runs betters.
@Sheldon. What does "NOS" stand for/mean?? Not familiar with the acronym.
My guess: A,C,E,F, and H are the brass.
Thanks for participating - "Don Pardo, tell our participants what the correct answers are...." Jim before we get to that I need to mention that we have the cab forward set from Broyhill, sure to fit right in with any trainnut's decor..."
Sorry about the feeble attempt at humor..
Yes I agree some of the 80's brass diesels can look a bit crude today. There are others--the final versions imported by Overland (they often did later re-runs and made many improvements) that still hold up as being excellent models. Also--there are Division Point models available today that match or exceed anything Overland Models ever did but they come at a price, and I've never seen most of them in person.
From a manufacturing point of view, the enhancements in plastic molding technology available today exceed what could be chemically etched into brass sheet back then, so unless the paint film on the brass is rather thin it is easy for a custom painter to begin losing the fine detail.
I dabbled in brass and owned plenty through the years. Mainly for budgetary reasons I have all plastic diesels now. A handful of them are so well detailed that they exceed the best model diesels ever made in brass at 20% of the current price of that particular model in brass (if you can find it).
For years some people have been saying that the best plastic or hybrid models are detailed "better than" brass. Only yesterday did I finally pick up some HO diesels that for me truly rival or exceed the best of anything Overland Models ever imported. They even have the individual separately applied door handles just like some of the Overland models of Alco diesels did have.
For steam, there are limited fine models available in plastic including some of the Genesis steam and a few BLI steamers, and there have been a few gorgeous hybrid models where boilers may be diecast but with brass details, but in most cases, to get a particular steamer that one may need to have, it may only ever have been made in brass if at all. There are so many steam locomotive models that will not have the sales potential to be made and sold in plastic.
Although I'm sure there will always be some steam loco models made, at least locally where I live most of the sales are now diesel locomotive models. There still are steam engines getting sold just a lesser number than previously. It doesn't at all mean my friend, the new train store owner (took over a more than 50 year old business), is against steam--he gets what the customers will buy the most.