BATMANtwo of 8,500,000 different species into a 510' boat
But he forgot the unicorns. Dang guy couldn't do anything right.
richhotrain God doesn't need any of that BB crap. He is running everything on dead rail, solar powered. Rich
God doesn't need any of that BB crap.
He is running everything on dead rail, solar powered.
Rich
Heck ya! I mean he did get a 600-year-old man to load two of 8,500,000 different species into a 510' boat and sail them around for a year. I hear the next Ark has a trainroom in the plans and it is solar powered. I keep trying to book my passage but keep getting locked out.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
n012944 Doughless Are there any 1:87 scale vehicles Genesis level? Yes. Rapido's recent GM New Look bus and Chevy Caprice come to mind. It is a small market that seems to be growing. It is a natural growth of the hobby. As people have gotten used to, and demanded more detailed models, that will naturally spill into the "supporting cast" for a layout. Highly detailed structures that are not craftsman kits, and the like are appearing as well. An exciting time to be in the hobby.
Doughless Are there any 1:87 scale vehicles Genesis level?
Are there any 1:87 scale vehicles Genesis level?
Yes. Rapido's recent GM New Look bus and Chevy Caprice come to mind. It is a small market that seems to be growing. It is a natural growth of the hobby. As people have gotten used to, and demanded more detailed models, that will naturally spill into the "supporting cast" for a layout. Highly detailed structures that are not craftsman kits, and the like are appearing as well.
An exciting time to be in the hobby.
For my modeling era, I have lots of MiniMetals vehicles and I would put them in a pretty high class detail wise.
As for Rapido, the New Look Bus is superb, the Caprice looks a little clunky to my eye. Both are out of my era so not on my shopping list.
While limited in selection and availablity Athearn has made some nice vehicles, Checker A6 cab, Model A Ford, a few different pickup trucks, B model Mack trucks, some older buses, etc.
And as a 1950's piggyback modeler the MiniMetals 32' Areo Vans are superb.
Sheldon
An "expensive model collector"
Doughless ATLANTIC CENTRAL Doughless AEP528 Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt. This is pretty much where I've landed after re-entering the hobby about 23 years ago. The RTR train locomotives and rolling stock are simply components of a larger model...the railroad....or are pieces to a larger puzzle than simply the car itself. As far as structures, since structure kits very rarely suits my space needs, they need to be heavily reworked. An old poorly built kit found at train shows that can be disassembled and cut up is often more efficient than buying new structures. This post has some interesting points that can be interpreted various ways. IF, the locomotives and rolling stock are just parts of the "larger model", the railroad, that can be the basis of a very effective argument that their fine accuracy may have a point of diminished return and that so long as they give an effective "impression" of their prototype they have done their job. Then it might follow, especially as layout size increases, and average viewing distances increase, models like Athearn Blue Box freight cars might be more than acceptable for the task. I would also agree wth both posters that structures may actually represent an area of greater importance to the effectiveness of the modeled scene. And that as such deserve more of our modeling skill and attention. BUT this flies directly in the face of recent trends to only model a very narrow strip of the world on each side of the tracks. This limits the interest and variety of structures unless your ONLY interest is in the gritty industrial happenings allong the tracks. I will never build a narrow shelf layout again - I promise. I strongly dislike this idea of only modeling what is close to the tracks and directly railroad related. It provides no depth of context as to why the railroad exists. I will never replace my Athearn Blue Box grade rolling stock - why? With a little light weathering, mixed among the 1000 plus freight cars on my layout, they look fine at the typical 3-5 viewing distances I have as they roll by in 40 car trains at a scale 40 mph. I do buy my share of current (which for me means the last 20-25 years) RTR rolling stock - some of it high detail/accuracy, some not so much. I do have mostly high detail locomotives produced in the last 25-30 years. The locos from my first 20 years in the hobby are largely gone. But as a combination freelance/protolance/prototype modeler, I still build, paint and decal a fair percentage of equipment. And I like it. Sheldon Good points. My equipment is now mainly Genesis level stuff, from various manufacturers. But, will they will stand out in a sea of non-Genesis levels of scenery details? If there is a high level of detail to the equipment, does everything on the layout need to be at that level of detail for the entire view to look right? I can't see me detailing structures to Genesis level. What about the backdrop details? Trees? Are there any 1:87 scale vehicles Genesis level? With my narrow shelf layout, I'm comfortable having the trains stand out, and the rest of the characters sort of making up a softer look by which to show off the trains. I'm not into layout photography, where different levels of detail would stand out badly. I've seen highly detailed scenicked layouts (George Selios, and some others that are very modern era). While very impressive and very skilled work, its not really my cup of tea. I've said before, if God reached down and picked up all model trains and left us with nothing but BB and MDC level stuff, I would still be a happy model railroader.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Doughless AEP528 Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt. This is pretty much where I've landed after re-entering the hobby about 23 years ago. The RTR train locomotives and rolling stock are simply components of a larger model...the railroad....or are pieces to a larger puzzle than simply the car itself. As far as structures, since structure kits very rarely suits my space needs, they need to be heavily reworked. An old poorly built kit found at train shows that can be disassembled and cut up is often more efficient than buying new structures. This post has some interesting points that can be interpreted various ways. IF, the locomotives and rolling stock are just parts of the "larger model", the railroad, that can be the basis of a very effective argument that their fine accuracy may have a point of diminished return and that so long as they give an effective "impression" of their prototype they have done their job. Then it might follow, especially as layout size increases, and average viewing distances increase, models like Athearn Blue Box freight cars might be more than acceptable for the task. I would also agree wth both posters that structures may actually represent an area of greater importance to the effectiveness of the modeled scene. And that as such deserve more of our modeling skill and attention. BUT this flies directly in the face of recent trends to only model a very narrow strip of the world on each side of the tracks. This limits the interest and variety of structures unless your ONLY interest is in the gritty industrial happenings allong the tracks. I will never build a narrow shelf layout again - I promise. I strongly dislike this idea of only modeling what is close to the tracks and directly railroad related. It provides no depth of context as to why the railroad exists. I will never replace my Athearn Blue Box grade rolling stock - why? With a little light weathering, mixed among the 1000 plus freight cars on my layout, they look fine at the typical 3-5 viewing distances I have as they roll by in 40 car trains at a scale 40 mph. I do buy my share of current (which for me means the last 20-25 years) RTR rolling stock - some of it high detail/accuracy, some not so much. I do have mostly high detail locomotives produced in the last 25-30 years. The locos from my first 20 years in the hobby are largely gone. But as a combination freelance/protolance/prototype modeler, I still build, paint and decal a fair percentage of equipment. And I like it. Sheldon
Doughless AEP528 Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt. This is pretty much where I've landed after re-entering the hobby about 23 years ago. The RTR train locomotives and rolling stock are simply components of a larger model...the railroad....or are pieces to a larger puzzle than simply the car itself. As far as structures, since structure kits very rarely suits my space needs, they need to be heavily reworked. An old poorly built kit found at train shows that can be disassembled and cut up is often more efficient than buying new structures.
AEP528 Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt.
This is pretty much where I've landed after re-entering the hobby about 23 years ago. The RTR train locomotives and rolling stock are simply components of a larger model...the railroad....or are pieces to a larger puzzle than simply the car itself.
As far as structures, since structure kits very rarely suits my space needs, they need to be heavily reworked. An old poorly built kit found at train shows that can be disassembled and cut up is often more efficient than buying new structures.
This post has some interesting points that can be interpreted various ways.
IF, the locomotives and rolling stock are just parts of the "larger model", the railroad, that can be the basis of a very effective argument that their fine accuracy may have a point of diminished return and that so long as they give an effective "impression" of their prototype they have done their job.
Then it might follow, especially as layout size increases, and average viewing distances increase, models like Athearn Blue Box freight cars might be more than acceptable for the task.
I would also agree wth both posters that structures may actually represent an area of greater importance to the effectiveness of the modeled scene. And that as such deserve more of our modeling skill and attention.
BUT this flies directly in the face of recent trends to only model a very narrow strip of the world on each side of the tracks. This limits the interest and variety of structures unless your ONLY interest is in the gritty industrial happenings allong the tracks.
I will never build a narrow shelf layout again - I promise. I strongly dislike this idea of only modeling what is close to the tracks and directly railroad related. It provides no depth of context as to why the railroad exists.
I will never replace my Athearn Blue Box grade rolling stock - why? With a little light weathering, mixed among the 1000 plus freight cars on my layout, they look fine at the typical 3-5 viewing distances I have as they roll by in 40 car trains at a scale 40 mph.
I do buy my share of current (which for me means the last 20-25 years) RTR rolling stock - some of it high detail/accuracy, some not so much.
I do have mostly high detail locomotives produced in the last 25-30 years. The locos from my first 20 years in the hobby are largely gone.
But as a combination freelance/protolance/prototype modeler, I still build, paint and decal a fair percentage of equipment. And I like it.
Good points. My equipment is now mainly Genesis level stuff, from various manufacturers. But, will they will stand out in a sea of non-Genesis levels of scenery details? If there is a high level of detail to the equipment, does everything on the layout need to be at that level of detail for the entire view to look right?
I can't see me detailing structures to Genesis level. What about the backdrop details? Trees? Are there any 1:87 scale vehicles Genesis level?
With my narrow shelf layout, I'm comfortable having the trains stand out, and the rest of the characters sort of making up a softer look by which to show off the trains.
I'm not into layout photography, where different levels of detail would stand out badly.
I've seen highly detailed scenicked layouts (George Selios, and some others that are very modern era). While very impressive and very skilled work, its not really my cup of tea.
I've said before, if God reached down and picked up all model trains and left us with nothing but BB and MDC level stuff, I would still be a happy model railroader.
I can agree with all that. I have my share of high detail RTR, I just don't feel any need to replace all the older stuff, for a list of reasons I have explained before.
I like scenery, I like modeling the non railroad scenery as much as the railroad related parts. That is why the new layout has a lot of sq ft and a limited amount of track per sq ft.
There will be a 40 sq ft city, and almost all scenes are 3-4 feet deep minimum.
I really don't have a problem with various levels of detail, be it the equipment or the structures/scenery.
But I don't care for stuffthat is exaggerated, I would rather err on the side of too little than too much.
I never personally had the "TYCO" train set experience. I was actually given a working 90 sq ft model railroad when I was twelve years old that was equiped with stuff like Athearn, MDC, Varney, Ulirch, Lindberg, older Mantua, American Beauty, Silver Streak, etc.
I learned about lesser quality RTR later, when I started working in the hobby shop.
I have generally avoided those older RTR brands thru my whole 55 years in the hobby. Little to no TYCO, AHM, early LifeLike, etc.
By age 14 I was building wooden freight car kits like Silver Streak and loco kits from Mantua and MDC.
In fact, I don't think I bought anything RTR until the first of the better stuff started showing up in the 80's.
maxman Doughless if God reached down and picked up all model trains and left us with nothing but BB and MDC level stuff, I would still be a happy model railroader If the reached up and left you nothing but tyco stuff, would you still be happy?
Doughless if God reached down and picked up all model trains and left us with nothing but BB and MDC level stuff, I would still be a happy model railroader
If the reached up and left you nothing but tyco stuff, would you still be happy?
I'll answer NO!!! Athearn rescued me from Tyco level junk. I probably would have given up. I identify pretty closely with Little Timmy's response earlier. Throw BBs my way if you must throw... MDC too for that matter.
I appreciate that while opinions about the subject matter vary greatly here, nobody has been judgemental or sharp tongued at others for their take on it.
Dan
Alton Junction
- Douglas
I still run BB's retrofitted DCC locos, but I don't use sound. I dress them up with grabs, ditch lights, fans, etc., and I think $60 for a BB loco is bit pricey.
I've become a Kato fan, as I found a few for $60 and less.
Mike.
My You Tube
AEP528Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt.
With the advent of all the new super detailed RTR diesel locos, the supply of specific paint colors, decals, and detail parts is not as plentiful as it used to be.
A few other points often overlooked in these "quality/detail" discussions:
While all the later Blue Box drives are very similar, the same can not be said for the different body shells.
Some are pretty basic, some are amazingly good for a shell with a limited number of separate parts. Some are way off in scale or accuracy.
The model the OP bought is one of the newer more accurately detailed models.
And while the F7 was cutting edge in 1953, without a few mods it only represents one version.
The GP7/9 is pretty "generic" and has the "wide hood".
So not all blue box locos were created equal. So one model may meet the standards set by a particular person, and others my fail that persons standards.
This same point is very true of the Blue Box (yellow box originally) rolling stock. The origins of the rolling stock line are spread over almost 4 decades - some are better models than others.
Some BB rolling stock is really generic, other pieces are very representitive, others are very accurate models.
Each piece needs to be judged on its own merrits and compared to the alternitive choices.
But wait - not every one of those models has a high accuracy, high detail, RTR equivilant. OR - such models simiply may have been made once or twice and are no where to be found today?
So some people don't have an "accuracy theme/era" to their layout even if they want only high accuracy models.
I guess that makes it easy to just ignore prototype cars that would logically be present.
Some of us don't want to do that - we are trying to convey a bigger picture with a correct historical perspective. Leaving stuff out is not preferred. Something close and reasonable is better than a blank.
I think this becomes more true as the desired model era moves farther back in time.
While there are, or have been, some very nice 40's/50's prototypes made in the last 20 years with high detail and accuracy, it is still one of the "neglected eras" in the current high end products.
One example - the selection and accuracy of early 50's piggyback flat cars remains limited in all rspects. Some of the best were, and still are, kits. So Athearn still sells out of 50' flats with vans every time they make them...... despite the fact that tooling is from 1958.
A few simple modifications and they are pretty representive.
Especially as a whole train of 40 of them rolls by.
Little Timmy For those of you who do not care for the BB's : I will HAPPILY take them off your hands. I thoroughly enjoy adding details to almost everything I build. Sure the newer stuff is loaded with everything a guy could ask for, ... but where's the fun in that ? I build models , because I like building models. Who buys a puzzle that's already assembled ? As for the OP , How much would that same locomotive cost of it was Brass ?
For those of you who do not care for the BB's :
I will HAPPILY take them off your hands.
I thoroughly enjoy adding details to almost everything I build. Sure the newer stuff is loaded with everything a guy could ask for, ... but where's the fun in that ?
I build models , because I like building models.
Who buys a puzzle that's already assembled ?
As for the OP , How much would that same locomotive cost of it was Brass ?
I have long since sold off or threw out my BB models, so sorry. It is nice that you are fine with spending a long time detailing a model, and don't mind having an inferior one after all that work compared to one that you can buy off the shelf. After all, there is room for everyone in this hobby. Since I doubt the OP's finished product was on par with a brass model, your last question is a little off the mark.
AEP528 Little Timmy For those of you who do not care for the BB's : I will HAPPILY take them off your hands. I thoroughly enjoy adding details to almost everything I build. Sure the newer stuff is loaded with everything a guy could ask for, ... but where's the fun in that ? I build models , because I like building models. Who buys a puzzle that's already assembled ? As for the OP , How much would that same locomotive cost of it was Brass ? If you enjoy it, great. Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt. The puzzle analogy is just bizarre. Do you handlay track to go along with your rolling stock kits? If not, there I highly doubt you're a Proper Model Railroader. See how easy it is to make ridiculous jugdements?
If you enjoy it, great. Personally, I have grown to hate detailing, painting, and decalling locomotives and rolling stock. I find it mind-numbingly boring and tedious. So I buy RTR models and spend my modelling time elsewhere - for example, every structure on my layout is heavily kitbashed or scratchbuilt.
The puzzle analogy is just bizarre.
Do you handlay track to go along with your rolling stock kits? If not, there I highly doubt you're a Proper Model Railroader.
See how easy it is to make ridiculous jugdements?
Little TimmyFor those of you who do not care for the BB's : I will HAPPILY take them off your hands. I thoroughly enjoy adding details to almost everything I build. Sure the newer stuff is loaded with everything a guy could ask for, ... but where's the fun in that ? I build models , because I like building models. Who buys a puzzle that's already assembled ?
Hi Little Timmy,
That is perhaps the most eloquent statement that can be made about those who enjoy upgrading Athearn BB locomotives!! Well said!
Personally I don't upgrade the BB locomotives, but I thoroughly enjoy upgrading Athearn BB boxcars. In fact, one of the things that I spend my money on Bay these days are the really old BB freight cars with brass stamped bodies and wood floors. Are they accuate as far as detailing goes, not really. Do I enjoy sprucing them up, absolutely yes!! I guess I'm into a bit of nostalgia on my layout.
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Rust...... It's a good thing !
I picked up a pair of Atlas ATSF zebra striped GP7s to supplement my Blue Box F7s. They ran flawlessly out of the box. Still have them, 40 years later. Picked up another a couple of years ago as a consignment item at a hobby shop; $80. Sure, I have proto and Genesis Geeps; but I still love my early acquisitions.
Seems to me that I remember those early Atlas units, even though being good runners, had some sort of non-prototypical notch along the top of the fuel tanks.
Jim's (drgwcs) history is what I remember prior to the late 80s when I started raising a family in earnest.
However, I owned several Atlas-Roco GP38s and they were all low-hood. My only complaint was that they were ICG, but still had dynamic brakes.
Regardless, they were of much higher quality and ran noticeably better than Athearn BB. I still liked the Athearn BB locos and thought their orange-gray ICG GP38 was an excellent model.
These days, I'm shocked at the current draw of the older BB units. Seems the motors need changing before ever considering to DCC them.
You did a nice thing for your son so that is something thats hard to put a price on.
The wide bodies I do not care for. The rest can be made to run and look fairly well.
I picked up this F45 at a show before the Genesis came out. I paid 29.00 dollars for it NIB. It was a rattle trap so put it aside.
Not too long ago I used the Aline/PPW repower kit including the motor mount weight and NWSL wheels. Hard wired it with silicone wiring and LED lighting. Maybe another 45 dollars into it.
Its real quiet and MUs perfectly with my WC KATO SD 45s. Details to follow such as fuel filler, sight glass, antenna, plow etc.
All the other engines in the backgound are Kato, Atlas and P2k but I think this one will fit in okay.
Jim
I would say that the old BB engines could be worth having , but only as long as you recognize that they are 60 year old engines, not equipped like something coming out of Walthers today. They don’t have DCC, and the motors are as old as the engines. The wheels are old, too, and many don't have lights or even simple improvements like glazed windows. For some reason, the geep I bought as a kid sticks in my mind. As I recall, new-in-the-box it was $7.
Yes, you can upgrade them.. I am not sure the cost and effort is worth it. But if you're happy with a dummy engine to add to a freight consist, and you don’t mind the extra width off an Athearn GP9, go ahead. A cheap sound and lights decoder and a couple of LEDs will make you smile.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL In a day when this hobby was quite different, the Blue Box loco was affordable excellence. Half the brass diesels on the market ran like crap until you fine tuned the mechanism. Kits like Hobbytown of Boston took time and intermediate or better skill to assemble. RTR train set locos typically had one truck powered and ran poorly. But that era ended when two things happened: Atlas imported the first Kato and Roco built locos. Lifelike created Proto2000 with a cloned the Athearn drive, a better motor, and body shells with high detail and reasonably high accuracy. So by the time you entered the hobby, the "product revolution" was well underway. From there it just exploded - Stewart, Intermountain, and others - AND Genesis from Athearn, new tooling from MDC/Roundhouse, better products from Bachmann. Bowser buys Stewart and goes all in, Broadway (although I have never been impressed by their diesels), and more. So the once mighty Blue Box was relegated to entry level/"train set" status - more or less. Understand this - when introduced in 1953, the Globe/Athearn plastic F7 shell was state of the art, head and shoulders above every other EMD F unit model out there - including most brass. That fact is supported by the recent retirement of that tooling - 70 years after its introduction. The original drive, and the first couple of improvements to it, were better than a lot of the other products out there as well. But that was then - that ship sailed by about 1990 to be sure. Cheap? Never cheap but truely "affordable quality" in their day. Sheldon
In a day when this hobby was quite different, the Blue Box loco was affordable excellence.
Half the brass diesels on the market ran like crap until you fine tuned the mechanism.
Kits like Hobbytown of Boston took time and intermediate or better skill to assemble.
RTR train set locos typically had one truck powered and ran poorly.
But that era ended when two things happened:
Atlas imported the first Kato and Roco built locos.
Lifelike created Proto2000 with a cloned the Athearn drive, a better motor, and body shells with high detail and reasonably high accuracy.
So by the time you entered the hobby, the "product revolution" was well underway.
From there it just exploded - Stewart, Intermountain, and others - AND Genesis from Athearn, new tooling from MDC/Roundhouse, better products from Bachmann. Bowser buys Stewart and goes all in, Broadway (although I have never been impressed by their diesels), and more.
So the once mighty Blue Box was relegated to entry level/"train set" status - more or less.
Understand this - when introduced in 1953, the Globe/Athearn plastic F7 shell was state of the art, head and shoulders above every other EMD F unit model out there - including most brass. That fact is supported by the recent retirement of that tooling - 70 years after its introduction.
The original drive, and the first couple of improvements to it, were better than a lot of the other products out there as well.
But that was then - that ship sailed by about 1990 to be sure.
Cheap? Never cheap but truely "affordable quality" in their day.
Well said Sheldon,
I guess I would also note a couple of things I would describe this as more of a slow transition in several phases. The first wave of Roco powered Atlas in 1975 or 6 I would split from the later wave which was seperated by several years. It never really came close to knocking Athearn sales down. While the detailing (including scale width hoods and already assembled delrin handrails) and the running were greatly improved Atlas chose slight oddballs here. While the GP40 was spot on as one needed for the GP38 they did a high hood model. Then the SD units were a high hood SP24 and a low hood SD35 both a bit oddball. For the F unit they did a FP-7 which was used by relitively few railroads and no B-unit. There was actually an article to kitbash a B-unit as the roof curvature was different beween the Atlas and Athearn units. Their pricing was roughly double that of Athearn.
It wasn't till 85 that Atlas introduced the Kato powered RS-3 and several Alcos that really changed everything.They followed up these with quite a few others and really broke open the market.
Athearn in the mean time was responding- they released the SD40-2 in 83 (beating GSB) and the GP38-2 in 85-86 which had the scale width hood, a better motor with lower current draw and brass flywheels, and redesigned trucks with plastic sideframes. The motors were carried over to the other units. Back then the current draw didn't make as much difference but they did run better however this is a factor for today. They also carried over the new trucks on units that matched truck styles. Athearn however on the BB's required you to add the handrails although they had improved them some. The delrin ones on Atlas and Life Like were much preferable.
Life Likes BL-2 and the following models started about 89 or 90. In retrospect it is a wonder that Athearn did not sue them for patent infringement as they copied the then new Athean drives almost exacly with the exception of wiring rather than the contact strips. The seperately applied details including grab irons were a real game changer.
So it took about 15 years for this to start to transition away from Athearn's dominance and still it would go on for a while longer. Everything also transitioned toward ready to run with the details applied. Today sometimes you still see Athearn BB's missing handrails so either they came out or people did not want to mess with them even then. Still however they are still robust well running engines not quite as good as todays stuff but somehow I suspect there will be athearns still running many many years after some of these others don't. Tough little units.
DigitalGriffin Are blue box's worth it any more?
Are blue box's worth it any more?
I'd say it depends on your tastes. Take me for example, I love them and have a good number of them in my active fleet. Counting only powered units, I have two Alco PAs, one SD40-2, one SDP40, one SD40T-2, one SD45, one FP45, and one GE P42DC. All are good runners and fairly quiet. Interestingly, someone upgraded the P42 with DCC, but no sound. So, my opinion is if you're someone like me who is old school and runs DC only or mostly DC, and isn't a rivet counter, then they are absolutely worth it. However, if you like detail and want DCC and sound, then they probably aren't worth it and you'd be better off buying new.
DigitalGriffin So I picked up an Athearn BB P40 for $60 for my son. It was in good running condition non assembled, but noisy.So first thing I did was buy:1) $120 sound decoder TCS WOW2) $50 Genesis Motor3) $30 A Line drive axel kit (after shipping)4) $10 high bass speaker $210. That's on top of the $60 I spent for it unassembled. I also had to do a good bit of grinding on the frame to get the Genesis motor to fit.Total: $270Brand new Genesis P42 Amtrak with sound assembled: ~$320I'm six hours in soldering up micro-leds to hot glue them. But now that I look at the total cost, It's not really worth $50 savings given the 7 hours time and less detail it will have. And Athearn doesn't support parts for blue boxes.Some Blue Boxes really need extensive work on their gearing too. Are blue box's worth it any more?
So I picked up an Athearn BB P40 for $60 for my son. It was in good running condition non assembled, but noisy.So first thing I did was buy:1) $120 sound decoder TCS WOW2) $50 Genesis Motor3) $30 A Line drive axel kit (after shipping)4) $10 high bass speaker
$210. That's on top of the $60 I spent for it unassembled. I also had to do a good bit of grinding on the frame to get the Genesis motor to fit.Total: $270Brand new Genesis P42 Amtrak with sound assembled: ~$320I'm six hours in soldering up micro-leds to hot glue them. But now that I look at the total cost, It's not really worth $50 savings given the 7 hours time and less detail it will have. And Athearn doesn't support parts for blue boxes.Some Blue Boxes really need extensive work on their gearing too. Are blue box's worth it any more?
I have seen BB engines at train shows for less than $20. I would not hesitate to buy that for a child to run around on his bedroom floor. To use on anything that approaches a detailed layout? Not a chance. As you pointed out, they can be made to look decent, however once add in the cost of the details and electronics, plus the value you put on your time, you might as well just purchased a higher quality model. The same goes for BB rolling stock.
Sheldon, you're correct.
i entered the HO scale side of the hobby in early 2004, and I could choose from three different manufacturers: Life Like P2K, Atlas Classic and Athearn Genesis.