I mainly model the west coast but it is hard to resist NYC engines sometimes.
For the amount of big boys, challengers, FEFs, and all the popular UP steamers that get produced I'm suprised at the lack of UP Steam layouts. I think I have seen one or two on youtube. Mostly just modern era UP
My days of buying on impulse are almost over. I say almost because I still cruise eBay every once in a while. I keep an eye out for anything unusual that might fit my theme. I like to buy older rolling stock from the 1940s, 50s and 60s like the metal bodied Athearn cars and nicely assembled wood craftsman kits.
That is in huge contrast to when I first started in the hobby when, if it looked good, I bought it. I have a bunch of billboard reefers which I will probably never run.
One thing that severely curtailed my impulse buying was the huge increases in shipping costs.
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
BradenD I mainly model the west coast but it is hard to resist NYC engines sometimes. For the amount of big boys, challengers, FEFs, and all the popular UP steamers that get produced I'm suprised at the lack of UP Steam layouts. I think I have seen one or two on youtube. Mostly just modern era UP
Well Braden that is actually easy to explain.
You need more than Big Boys, Challengers and FEF's to actually "model" the UP in the steam era.
Other UP steam options are limited, or are just close generics (that is not terrible in my view, but many today have pretty steep expectations).
I model the mid Atlantic region at the end of the steam era.
My roster has a few "big and famous" steam locos, but they are heavily out numbered by the (10) 2-8-0's, (10) 4-8-2's, (3) 2-10-2's, (8) 2-8-2's, (4) 4-6-2's, (2) 0-8-0's, (2) 4-6-0's, (1) 0-6-0 and (1) 4-4-2. Against that list there are (13) articulated locos total, (5) of which are little "junior" 2-6-6-2's that would not be considered big or famous if one had not been recently restored.
Modelers who want to represent real life, want a real life selection of locos.
There were 25 Big Boys, there were 33,000 2-8-0's......
There were only 1000 4-8-4's in all of North America, there were 14,000 2-8-2's.
Sheldon
One of the main reasons I have changed my mind regarding which railroad I "modeled" (or collected) is because I realize how difficult it is to assemble a reasonably complete roster of locos and freight cars for some railroads. I do not have the time, patience or skills to kitbash steam power to get what I might have wanted to have.
Yes, I often buy new locos that are just too neat to pass up.
Athearn made fantasy scheme "Legendary Liveries" SD70 (standard cab) diesels this spring (the last EMD standard cab diesels ever delivered in real life for US use, except some CR units also made at about the same time in 1999). They did Illinois Central correct model versions, but painted them in two schemes that the prototype engines (35 of which survive to this day on CN, some still in the last IC paint scheme) never wore: the IC black with green diamond paint scheme and ICG orange and white. I had to have both paint schemes, and multiple units of the orange and white.
They are still foobie locos, and the prototype guy in me is sorta uncomfortable with owning versions that never existed, but I like them, so they are here.
John
This was my last impulse buy at a train show.
4 undecorated Athearn RDCs for $25.00 ? ? ? Yes Please!
-Photographs by Kevin Parson
How could I not buy them?
-Kevin
Living the dream.
PRR8259 One of the main reasons I have changed my mind regarding which railroad I "modeled" (or collected) is because I realize how difficult it is to assemble a reasonably complete roster of locos and freight cars for some railroads. Good reasonably priced steam locos to thoroughly fill out a loco roster to represent something realistic have historically been difficult to obtain, unless your railroad was PRR, or a small handful of other railroads. You can get a few signature engines for some roads, but not the bread and butter average locos. John
One of the main reasons I have changed my mind regarding which railroad I "modeled" (or collected) is because I realize how difficult it is to assemble a reasonably complete roster of locos and freight cars for some railroads. Good reasonably priced steam locos to thoroughly fill out a loco roster to represent something realistic have historically been difficult to obtain, unless your railroad was PRR, or a small handful of other railroads. You can get a few signature engines for some roads, but not the bread and butter average locos.
Agreed, to a point. And this fact is part of the complex reasons I have always been a combination "protolance" and "prototype" modeler.
I like well detailed correct (or reasonably so) models.
But I am in this hobby for lots of reasons, I like trains, I like building models, I like history, and it is a nice fantasy escape from the real world.
I don't need every model to be "perfect", only close and representitve.
I have my OCD quirks, passenger cars need diaphragms that touch, Freight cars need equalized trucks whenever possible, signaling is a "must have".
But an Athearn blue box freight car with Kadee couplers, equalized trucks and some light weathering is just fine.
And I like the "history of the hobby" I have preserved with equipment from Varney, Athearn metal cars, Silver Streak, etc. - not just on a shelf, but on the layout, mixed in with the blue box cars and the latest high end offerings.
In addition to the "average" roster of steam outlined above, I have a similar roster of "average" first generation diesels. Six of this, 12 of that, 4 of those, 8 of that other kind - so it looks like a working railroad - not a museum.
It has taken 56 years to gather up all this "stuff".
SeeYou190 This was my last impulse buy at a train show. 4 undecorated Athearn RDCs for $25.00 ? ? ? Yes Please! -Photographs by Kevin Parson How could I not buy them? -Kevin
Are those powered?
I have a lot of those, but it was not an impulse decision. I like RDC's, they fit my era, one of my earliest train rides as a child was on an RDC.
And just like most of my passenger cars, I like the fact that the Athearn model is "selectively compressed".
My latest RDC project is to expand my roster of B&O RDC's with a baggage/cafe/coach to model the Daylight Speedliner, even though it will be a sight era "stretch".
I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era
ATLANTIC CENTRALAre those powered?
No, all dummies.
If they ever get painted, they will be part of the prop-fleet.
If the never do get painted, it was only $25.00 spent.
MJ4562 I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era
Without detailing this thread, i must respectfully disagree completely on this issue. There are many steam locos I can name off the top of my head that are totally unique to one or rarely two railroads. NO amount of detailing is going to change a UP designed challenger into either a correct Rio Grande L105 challenger or a correct WP challenger though it is considered a cousin of the UP. The boilers of these other signature locos are completely different. The tenders are completely different. Its not like just remove UP domes from a boiler and add new domes. If you showed me pictures with roadnames removed I could identify a lot of big steam classes just by overall boiler shape and wheel arrangement. They were most definitely not like diesels where only a few appliances were added or changed here or there but purpose built and tailored to the road. I was never happy with the Bachmann 2-8-0 and the idea it is "close to" an IC or GM&O 2-8-0. To my eyes that is not true at all. There are many who look at loco specs and say things like the ATSF mikado is close to or the daddy of the USRA mikado. Real Santa Fe fans know that nothing could be farther from the truth. The basic specs are comparable but not the look. The Santa Fe mikes were all very different from USRA locos.
With diesels I can easily buy something that is road specific correct right off the shelf. However, the WP, D&H, and WM challengers though cousins were all very different. They just were.
To me buying a generic 2-8-0 and detailing it...if I even had the time and patience I would never be happy with the result. Even the famous PFM brass ATSF 2-8-0 matches only certain ATSF locos correctly. Only a few of them at a moment in time. Real work is required to do the others. There is a book that tells you which road numbers are correct and how you can modify the PFM brass models to do a couple others.
With diesels it is easily possible to be correct for a given road number of a loco right down to variations of lettering on just that one loco road number-- right off the shelf.
I always preferred prototype modeling to making up my own road. Ymmv.
Absolutely! And to my financial detriment. An impulse buy of a couple of B&M locos has led to a bunch more cars and locos and... and... and...
But all in good fun!
Like you I go straight for the used section of every LHS. For me, the hunt is part of the thrill!
Aaron
PRR8259 MJ4562 I think the idea that steam locomotives are too unique to model a prototype railroad is a myth. Rather than derail this thread I will start a new one in that. In short though, although there are some unique steam locomotives out there the overwhelming majority are similar enough that modelers of the steam eta can be as close to the prototype as diesel modelers. Every time a locomotive entreed the shop there was opportunity for additional equipment to be added and modifications. As such it is impossible to be totally accurate for Any railroad regardless of era Without detailing this thread, i must respectfully disagree completely on this issue. There are many steam locos I can name off the top of my head that are totally unique to one or rarely two railroads. NO amount of detailing is going to change a UP designed challenger into either a correct Rio Grande L105 challenger or a correct WP challenger though it is considered a cousin of the UP. The boilers of these other signature locos are completely different. The tenders are completely different. Its not like just remove UP domes from a boiler and add new domes. If you showed me pictures with roadnames removed I could identify a lot of big steam classes just by overall boiler shape and wheel arrangement. They were most definitely not like diesels where only a few appliances were added or changed here or there but purpose built and tailored to the road. I was never happy with the Bachmann 2-8-0 and the idea it is "close to" an IC or GM&O 2-8-0. To my eyes that is not true at all. There are many who look at loco specs and say things like the ATSF mikado is close to or the daddy of the USRA mikado. Real Santa Fe fans know that nothing could be farther from the truth. The basic specs are comparable but not the look. The Santa Fe mikes were all very different from USRA locos. With diesels I can easily buy something that is road specific correct right off the shelf. However, the WP, D&H, and WM challengers though cousins were all very different. They just were. To me buying a generic 2-8-0 and detailing it...if I even had the time and patience I would never be happy with the result. Even the famous PFM brass ATSF 2-8-0 matches only certain ATSF locos correctly. Only a few of them at a moment in time. Real work is required to do the others. There is a book that tells you which road numbers are correct and how you can modify the PFM brass models to do a couple others. With diesels it is easily possible to be correct for a given road number of a loco right down to variations of lettering on just that one loco road number-- right off the shelf. I always preferred prototype modeling to making up my own road. Ymmv.
John, I agree, lots of steam locos are very unique and distinctive.
But guess what, most people who don't have an "engineering eye" like you or I don't notice or care. One big modern 2-8-0 looks pretty much like many, not all, of the rest of them.
In my case I only care up to a point. After that, close enough is good enough - no matter what I know about the prototype.
I'm not buying locomotives with 4 digit price tags - simply not going there. In fact, not really interested in getting past the first half of the 3 digit price range.
So the price of that level of high accuracy is way past my point of diminishing return. I have fleet of 140 locomotives, that I am very happy with - most aquired over the last 25 years - dollar cost average price - about $125
Now here is my Devils Advocate position.
If the models have to be that accurate, why not the track radius, the turnout sizes, the bridge spans, the pasing siding lengths, etc?
Building a "complete" model railroad is both art and engineering - one of those arts is "selective compression", and another is "representation".
We don't have complete information on the history and evolution of every locomotive that ever ran on every railroad.
Where do we draw this line about "accuracy? Well we are going to draw that line in OUR OWN minds, and it will always be different from what others do.
Take a look at any of the great modelers your have known, or that have been published in the model press over the years. If they had your view on this issue, they would have never completed a layout to an operational and scenic stage.
You can and should persue this hobby in whatever way makes you happy. But I can assure you very few others take this aspect as seriously as you do.
There are few others on this forum who are very critical of my casual approach some of these "accuracy" issues - they no longer want any lowly "Athearn blue box" trains on their layouts - their choice, I'm fine with that.
I will take donations of steam era blue box rolling stock........
And it seems the previous trend in the hobby of every model needing to be a perfect example of how locomotive XYZ appeared on October 10th, 1938 at 12:46 pm is changing.
I see lots of nice layouts on facebook, great scenery, realistic trains, and little or no talk of anything that could be called "rivet counting".
John, have fun, however that works for you.
But fun for me that is an $80 Bachmann 2-8-0 lettered WESTERN MARYLAND with a few changed details like the pilot.
Fun for me is not obsessing over the nose profile of an F7 or a PA1.
And remember I do both, my own road and three "prototype" roads.
Hi Sheldon-
I am just trying to stick to the facts. We are losing so much historical steam locomotive information...the people interviewed by William Kratville and others, who were actually there when these things were built, are now gone, as are many of the authors. In online discussions there are many genuinely well meaning but not fully informed statements that will later be cited as some kind of a source. From the very outset much of diesel loco construction was standardized to prevent the issues that occurred previously in the steam era.
You are correct that those of us who consider ourselves to be modelers of one sort or another should model the broad curves and gentle grade transitions, should avoid vertical cuts which in real life are very unstable, should do a better or more prototypical job on bridges and other structures, and do better at signaling.
I am as you say just trying to enjoy running trains. My scenery is very basic. Right now I am wrestling with my recent impulse purchases thinking about only keeping units in correct paint schemes despite liking the foobies. At least I currently can say I have every single IC or ICG freight diesel paint scheme represented even into CN recent repaints that are still running with IC initials on them.
Wherever possible without replacing the layout I already have flattened every curve (a mountain and 2 curved tunnels prevent further improvements). I can get any model American loco through my curved tunnels with clearance to spare. This includes all articulateds, but some brass ones would not like the track curvature into the tunnels. I can't fix that.
Just bought three new Athearn light equipped WV cabooses for ATSF, BN & FW&D. I don't "need" them, but gives me RTR options instead of relying on me finishing projects. Given the current state of my vision, lighting projects are not happening right now.
PRR8259 Hi Sheldon- I am just trying to stick to the facts. We are losing so much historical steam locomotive information...the people interviewed by William Kratville and others, who were actually there when these things were built, are now gone, as are many of the authors. In online discussions there are many genuinely well meaning but not fully informed statements that will later be cited as some kind of a source. From the very outset much of diesel loco construction was standardized to prevent the issues that occurred previously in the steam era. You are correct that those of us who consider ourselves to be modelers of one sort or another should model the broad curves and gentle grade transitions, should avoid vertical cuts which in real life are very unstable, should do a better or more prototypical job on bridges and other structures, and do better at signaling. I am as you say just trying to enjoy running trains. My scenery is very basic. Right now I am wrestling with my recent impulse purchases thinking about only keeping units in correct paint schemes despite liking the foobies. At least I currently can say I have every single IC or ICG freight diesel paint scheme represented even into CN recent repaints that are still running with IC initials on them. Wherever possible without replacing the layout I already have flattened every curve (a mountain and 2 curved tunnels prevent further improvements). I can get any model American loco through my curved tunnels with clearance to spare. This includes all articulateds, but some brass ones would not like the track curvature into the tunnels. I can't fix that.
John,
I know a fair amount about trains, prototype and model, but I'm not deep into some of the history like you are.
Honestly, I simply don't have the time, and modeling is a bit more important to me that railfanning or real deep rail history.
I don't think anyone is suggesting we somehow erase the hisotrical facts about steam locomotives.
In my mind that has nothing to do with building a model that is a "stand in".
This question is about being practical, building or buying models, and having fun with model trains, that's all.
I'm trying hard to make time to build a good sized layout, with broad curves, big turnouts, wide open natural looking spaces and plan to run representively long trains.
And still there will be a LONG list of "selective compression" and "representation", where "close enough is good enough".
And if others don't like it they can leave. I'm sure I will have no trouble finding a qualified crew for opps sessions and will be happy to welcome interested visitors.
But it will be an artistic interpretation with rolling stock that will range from 70 year old products to the newest high end models.
I suspect you do have some idea how hard it is to field a roster of "correct" models for a layout set in 1954. Nearly impossible to cover a wide range of rolling stock to a high level of accuracy and detail.
So close enough will have to do in many cases.
Honestly, I laugh at some of my critics on this forum when it comes to this issue. Many of them model more modern eras and will only buy high end "perfectly correct" models.
I suspect most of them could come see my layout and not know which models are correct for my era and which ones are generic.
As 40 of the roll by, an Athearn, Bowser or Accurail 34' hopper is a more than adequate model to represent my era.
Building a believable protolance private road layout is more involved than most people think.
Take a look at this loco, the picture is before it hit the paint shop:
This is a LIMA built heavy Mikado, that could have exisited. Are you familiar with the DT&I 800 class?
Well this is its 69" drivered big brother, not quite a Berkshire.
I did extensive study of all the large Mikado classes, and of the developement of the Berkshire before proceeding with this kitbash for the ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
LIMA could have built this loco if someone had asked. It would have required C&O or PRR class trackage, it would have been as powerfull as many Berks.
Heck, a great many actual railroaders considered the Berks nothing more than bigger Mikes.
I have built 5 of these from Bachmann 2-8-4's, three sub classes spread over the five locos. Here is another, not as good of a picture.
I created the sub classes buy mixing and matching the proto correct details offered on the three versions offered by Bachmann, and added long haul Vandy tenders to one sub class.
I like my accurate B&O, C&O and WESTERN MARYLAND modeling, but I also like doing this.
Bachmann just re-released some USRA Pacifics, no DCC, including B&O. I think I will get a few, and turn a B&O version into a B&O P6 - just need a Delta trailing truck (I think I have some that will fit) and a medium Vandy tender.
And the ATLANTIC CENTRAL could use another Pacific or two....
Sheldon,
You produced here two interesting and believable models wth a good context story. A small detail I would add to both models is some kind of view block below the firebox. For my taste, the gap between the trailing truck and the firebox is a bit large.
JW
Sheldon--
PFM released a book on the Berkshire and Texas Types that covers every single prototype version. Yes, I like loco history, and I've read every single word of that excellent book, many pages several times through the years, but then I sold it...The DT&I 800's probably saw photos but I'm not as familiar with. I was or would have been a Nickel Plate fan, but as others have noted, unless you like to roll your own equipment, which is really not me, modeling NKP was a major challenge until just a few years ago.
You better believe I totally appreciate how hard it is to model 1954, or any other year you might pick (that's why I gave that up), and my son just wants to model what he sees today, which is actually easier in many ways, but we still allow way too much room for prototype license.
I was never able to stick to any one year--much less a decade. There's too much I like. My son is interested in the new CPKC and is looking forward to whichever of 5 paint scheme candidates the railroad employees choose (management is allowing the employees to make the decision).
DrW Sheldon, You produced here two interesting and believable models wth a good context story. A small detail I would add to both models is some kind of view block below the firebox. For my taste, the gap between the trailing truck and the firebox is a bit large. JW
I have done that on some other kitbashed locos, but have not found an effective solution for these.
The trailing truck uses a drawbar that hinges at the pivot point of the trailing truck. This provides better tracking, considering the long firebox on these locos.
The white piece of styrene simulates rear bearing block of the Delta truck.
I could agree it's a believable mikado. I still like steam, but feel at the same time not connected to it in any way.
When you realize that NKP literally did scale down the C&O 2-10-4, it could be more plausible.
John, The DT&I 800 Class:
https://www.rr-fallenflags.org/dti/dti-s800.jpg
As you can see, looks just like an S class Berkshire, just has 63" drivers, smaller firebox, and the all weather cab.
These were not as heavy ths the NKP S Class or the C&O K-4's, but they were heavy as Mikados go and had a high trailing truck loading.
And there were a number of roads who built Mikes as heavy or heavier than the these "famous" 2-8-4's, several with 69"/71" drivers. The GN O-8 had large drivers and a weight on the drivers and axle loading that exceeded even the over weight C&O K-4. And the NYC H10 and the B&O Q4 were pretty hefty. The B&O experimented with 70" drivers, the results were good, but the cost was considered excessive, so no additional locos were converted.
So, all these locos of both wheel arrangements were similar in weight and power.
So the ATLANTIC CENTRAL has their own unique Mikes.
PRR8259 I could agree it's a believable mikado. I still like steam, but feel at the same time not connected to it in any way. When you realize that NKP literally did scale down the C&O 2-10-4, it could be more plausible.
Well, I feel very little connection to current prototypes, I can't even identify any of these modern engines and don't care one bit.
And I feel no connection to the "trains of my youth" in the 60's and 70's.
I love first generation diesels, they are just so cool, like the automobiles of that era, another interest of mine.
As for steam, my connection comes from two things. When my father got me started in this hobby, he had the Mantua Pacific and Mikado, and then I built several other Mantua steam loco kits.
The second thing is Strasburg, I have never lived more than 1-1/2 hours from there my whole life. My parents started taking us kids there on a regular basis when I was 5 or 6. I'm 66, I bet I have been there 100 times, not to mention a number of other steam tourist lines.
For the last 29 years I have lived less than an hour from Strasburg. Two or three times a season is typical.
But I am modeling a time period from before I was born, so the "connection" is not based on first hand experiance anyway. It is partly based on an overall interest in the past, and past technologies.
It is based not on a detailed history of a steam loco, but on a broad knowledge of the complete history of our country and culture.
Architecture - I restore 120 year old Victorian era houses for a living.
All my favorite cars where built before 1970 (but I do like the tech that makes new cars so good).
One of my other hobbies, the 27 year old garden tractor that was built to the same core design from 1971 to 2001.
I have 1700 vinyl records I still listen to.
I feel connected to all these old things and places.
It was my desire to be true to prototype fidelity and history that led me to conclude that 'good enough' is the most realistic standard for my model and probably for most prototypes. The exceptions are the famous, well documented prototypes that were wealthy enough to purchase standardized locomotives in batches. For every Big Boy, Challenger, and other famous locomotives there were thousands of 4-4-0, 2-8-0 etc.
In my prototype case, the railroad used pre-owned locomotives acquired through merger with numerous short lines that themselves had gone through multiple ownership structures and had originally bought their locomotives second hand.
I model a poor area of South Texas. I've spent years reviewing maps, researching archives, walking down long gone right of ways, and talking to historical societies. Very little has been documented and few photos exist. Locomotives passed through too many hands and few had the time or money to document so guesses are what we have.
I wish I had time to write more but that will have to do for now.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Modelers who want to represent real life, want a real life selection of locos. There were 25 Big Boys, there were 33,000 2-8-0's...... There were only 1000 4-8-4's in all of North America, there were 14,000 2-8-2's.
I understand your point.
Depending upon the railroad in question there is actually very good documentation available. It just is not online and the books are rare anymore, so it can be a hunt.
For example, just about every single class of Santa Fe steam locomotive built since about 1908, with a few railroad rebuild exceptions, has been documented and even modeled in HO brass. This includes some locos from the KCM&O. There are two book editions that cover every single brass model steam loco ever made in HO for Santa Fe, what is correctly modeled and what is not, what road numbers are correct in what years for that model, and other close models that can be done with minor modifications. So Santa Fe steam is pretty well documented.
As is PRR.
But indeed many other railroads are not well documented or as fully modeled.
The other issue is that most of those Santa Fe brass models are costly now and require considerable work to run well. That is why I stick to modern diesels.
My free-lance "St.Paul Route" is based on two real 19th century railroads. It's happened several times that I've bought say an engine for the St.Paul Route just because I liked it, and then after the fact find out that one of the real railroads actually had an engine like that. I even built a scene on the layout (railroad bridge over water) that turned out to resemble an actual scene on one of the real railroads - but I didn't see pictures of the real place until years later.
My son Johnny is an impulse buyer. If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
PRR8259If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
Nothing wrong with that.
Some of the best layouts I have visited had motive power from all over the place. The owner ran what he liked.
If you know what you enjoy, you are better off not listening to people that tell you otherwise.
PRR8259 My son Johnny is an impulse buyer. If he likes the paint scheme, he wants one. I think he is trying to get a pair of units for each of the 6 remaining Class 1 railroads.
I agree with Kevin.
I will also admit that an attractive paint scheme is very important to me, even if its a plain solid dip scheme. Its a visual hobby, and the trains have to please the eye. I find myself attracted to the Union Pacific, and have bought UP locos even though its not part of my railroad.
I would say your son has a plan. He plans to buy a pair of units for each Class 1. It may be a different plan that doesn't fit a traditional modeling approach, but I would not really call it impulsive.
I hope that he finds what he wants and enjoys it a lot.
- Douglas
During the 2% of the time Johnny is using his own money, at Timonium mainly, I let him buy what he wants as long as it has metal wheelsets. I dont talk about fat too wide boxcars so as not to crush his dream. He bought a couple cars at last Timonium show. I forgot one was a fat boxcar...
The reason he wants two of every diesel is because he is not happy with short trains, and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims. We cannot even correctly speed match ESU Loksound 5 equipped locos from one manufacturer with other loksound 5 units from the same manufacturer. Some move on speed step 1 of 28 and many others on speed step 2, which results in wheelspin. Adjusting vmin does not help. I tried.
And forget about matching Loksound 5 to others like Tsunami 2. You have to disable back emf which we actually want to use. I have learned that I don't like dcc at all and have already replaced most of my dual mode decoder locos switching back to plain dc.
We are having ongoing motor failure issues w one manufacturer. They are cooperating nicely even sending replacement locos overnight. However the fact is that one replacement failed in a bit over 3 hours and we are still testing others. They are working to find a solution and thought they had it fixed. I can't name them yet as they are honestly going the extra mile to work with us. I do not want to create a bigger problem. Said manufacturer wants us monitoring loco run time to failure which is fine with us. They will replace or remotor all our failed units once we know...It appears to be a builder issue in China. The motor design was not changed for many years and is still the same save one minor improvement. Possible material or assembly defect at builder. Are they cheating the importer? Maybe.
Some units are ok and some are just not. For us failure percentage is sbout 50%.
PRR8259and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims.
I've only speedmatched & MU'd a few of my locomotives using my Power Cab. However, I have not experienced the limitations you've run into, John.
When configuring Vmin, did you speedmatch your slower locomotive to your faster loocomotive? Your faster locomotive will only go as slow as it is capable - i.e. presuming a properly lubed drivetrain. The slower locomotive has be speed up to match the faster locomotive's slowest Vmin. Once Vmin is matched adequately (and it does NOT need to be perfect - a little tugging between couplers is okay), match Vmax for both locomotives.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
PRR8259 During the 2% of the time Johnny is using his own money, at Timonium mainly, I let him buy what he wants as long as it has metal wheelsets. I dont talk about fat too wide boxcars so as not to crush his dream. He bought a couple cars at last Timonium show. I forgot one was a fat boxcar... The reason he wants two of every diesel is because he is not happy with short trains, and despite all the reported promise of dcc it factually does not deliver what it claims. We cannot even correctly speed match ESU Loksound 5 equipped locos from one manufacturer with other loksound 5 units from the same manufacturer. Some move on speed step 1 of 28 and many others on speed step 2, which results in wheelspin. Adjusting vmin does not help. I tried. And forget about matching Loksound 5 to others like Tsunami 2. You have to disable back emf which we actually want to use. I have learned that I don't like dcc at all and have already replaced most of my dual mode decoder locos switching back to plain dc. We are having ongoing motor failure issues w one manufacturer. They are cooperating nicely even sending replacement locos overnight. However the fact is that one replacement failed in a bit over 3 hours and we are still testing others. They are working to find a solution and thought they had it fixed. I can't name them yet as they are honestly going the extra mile to work with us. I do not want to create a bigger problem. Said manufacturer wants us monitoring loco run time to failure which is fine with us. They will replace or remotor all our failed units once we know...It appears to be a builder issue in China. The motor design was not changed for many years and is still the same save one minor improvement. Possible material or assembly defect at builder. Are they cheating the importer? Maybe. Some units are ok and some are just not. For us failure percentage is sbout 50%.
I think some of your comments should be copied over to Sheldon's DCC thread. Try to get that thread back on topic instead of it lingering in the OT discussion of borderline electronics Coding......
Relating this to impulse buying, I think it is important to stay within the confines of what you know best. I used to be a strictly Atlas buyer, at least they were predominately the products I sought. When Athearn finally installed LEDs, and offered a bunch of versions with LED ditchlights, I became a solid Athearn locomotive buyer, and that introduced me to their line of rolling stock too.
I have the luxury of filling a small roster with what I want instead of having to seach various manufacturers for a specific locomotive or freight car. So I can keep my purchases dominated by one manufacturer, and Athearn offers a wide variety of equipment anyway.
Some swear that Loksound sounds better, and I agree their PM is probably better than T2, but I still can't get the horn volume up to where I want it in relation to the PM...its just not loud enough. And I have also experienced different operating behaviors with ESU when OEM installed into different manufacturers locos. The light board and motors are not going to be the same, and I think those differences nuance the performance enough to be noticably different.
Just like back in my DC days where Life Like Proto would change the lightboards nearly every run, so some locos ran slower than others depending upon what the vintage was. I don't think OEM DCC truly solves that problem. You have to approach it by hardwiring every decoder into each locomotive, and still be aware of the vintages of the different motors and possibly gearing you're trying to run together.
So my impulse concerns are now relegated to mainly Athearn products, and Atlas for rolling stock. Not much else piques my interest, although I have a Bowser RS3M and a Rapido High Hood GP38 on order. Impulsive orders to a degree, but I am also curious as to how good these locos might be....ordered partly to satisfy a curiosity.