|
Post by lvrr325 on Mar 30, 2019 23:59:58 GMT -8
The SW7 isn't bad for 1966; the hood dimensions were limited more by the motor size than anything. By today's standards somewhat crude. On the other hand I can sell them all day long at $20-$40. The Bowser Baldwin I have for $110 I've had six months and no one's even said will you take $100 for it.
I have a Kato NW2 that's supposed to have DCC in it, I haven't even tried to test it (was a bargain buy), I couldn't see how to remove the shell to see what exactly is inside. Looked like the couplers have to come off first.
|
|
|
Post by loco8107 on Mar 31, 2019 7:59:07 GMT -8
The SW7 isn't bad for 1966; the hood dimensions were limited more by the motor size than anything. By today's standards somewhat crude. On the other hand I can sell them all day long at $20-$40. The Bowser Baldwin I have for $110 I've had six months and no one's even said will you take $100 for it. I have a Kato NW2 that's supposed to have DCC in it, I haven't even tried to test it (was a bargain buy), I couldn't see how to remove the shell to see what exactly is inside. Looked like the couplers have to come off first. But I’m not so sure the GP35 body was good for 1966 standards lol (don’t get me started about the fuel tank). Was that also make room for the motor like the GP7? And the BB’s still sell for more than they should IMO despite their good modeling potential.
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Mar 31, 2019 13:15:58 GMT -8
Slightly before my time, but I believe the legend goes that everything Athearn before the SD40-2 in 1983 was widebody due to the motor they used during that era. They went to the gold-case, flat-sided motor with that model or else it'd probably be a widebody as well.
I had a few widebody U-boats in C&O and Chessie when I was getting out of the trainset mentality of preteen youth, they would've been halfway relevant for much longer than they were..... if it wasn't for the widebody adjustment. Remember that before Atlas started ramping up in the late 90's, it was your only choice for U boats unless you went brass.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 31, 2019 14:14:15 GMT -8
Slightly before my time, but I believe the legend goes that everything Athearn before the SD40-2 in 1983 was widebody... Except for the SW7. The Baldwin IS too wide, enough so that I never wanted to buy one--looks weird from the front. Ed
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Mar 31, 2019 14:37:42 GMT -8
The SW7 prototype’s hood was wide enough to scale down and fit over the early Athearn motor without “adjustment”. It wasn’t made a wide body only because it didn’t NEED to be.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Mar 31, 2019 17:16:26 GMT -8
The SW7 prototype’s hood was wide enough to scale down and fit over the early Athearn motor without “adjustment”. It wasn’t made a wide body only because it didn’t NEED to be. There were a few Athearn models from that era that ended up having scale-width hoods by virtue of the prototype being wide enough to fit the older fatter motor in, including the SW7, Train Master, and of course the cowls like the F-units, F45, etc. I think I recall someone mentioning the SW7 hood was not bang-on but quite close the same width as the prototype. I recall reading that the source of a lot of inaccuracies for some of the early Athearn stuff was because they were based on EMD sales drawings and literature, thus you got things like the DD40 that never ended up existing in real life, and somewhat questionable details on other offerings.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 31, 2019 17:54:29 GMT -8
Prototype SW7 hood width, in HO = .96"
Athearn hood width = .98"
Not great, but you'd never know.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Mar 31, 2019 17:59:11 GMT -8
I'd take your word for it, I'm not sure I could accurately recite the hood width of a prototype Train Master or Baldwin diesel if you held a pistol to my cranium. Outside of the 70-tonner, my interest in diesels goes back as far as the GP30, and not much before that. In fact, when I hear "Train Master" I think of a hobby shop in metro ATL and when I hear "Baldwin" I tend to think of musical items with 88 keys or washed-up actors with unfunny political impressions, before the locomotives that bear that name.
In fact I don't recall ever seeing the Athearn models of those in person, but it could admittedly be selective omission...
|
|
|
Post by loco8107 on Apr 1, 2019 9:13:54 GMT -8
Slightly before my time, but I believe the legend goes that everything Athearn before the SD40-2 in 1983 was widebody... Except for the SW7. The Baldwin IS too wide, enough so that I never wanted to buy one--looks weird from the front. Ed I remember all BB’s being the same motor. And I had the BB 38-2’s (and the 35’s 7’s and both switchers) that came out in the late 80’s. Agreed about the S12- Bowser’s look so much better (and correct).
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 1, 2019 9:37:26 GMT -8
I just had a quick visit to Ebay, and found two sizes of the Athearn "oval magnet" motor: Short and long magnet.
And that's about as early as BB's get.
Ed
Who once had an Athearn rectifier loco. AND a GP30.
|
|
|
Post by bdhicks on Apr 1, 2019 14:34:54 GMT -8
Slightly before my time, but I believe the legend goes that everything Athearn before the SD40-2 in 1983 was widebody... Except for the SW7. I was going to call you on this, but I did a quick google to make sure and it turns out that this old widebody trainset SW7 that I have lying around is actually a Revell shell on an Athearn chassis that Con-Cor sold. That would explain why the shell and the frame don't really attach.
|
|
|
Post by grahamline on Apr 1, 2019 17:22:47 GMT -8
The old Revell is sort of acceptable in a quick glance sort of way when all Cannon'ed up with a new cab and other bits, and there are Con-Cors out there riding on Kato drives.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 1, 2019 19:31:43 GMT -8
Wow. Try to come up with a picture of a Revell NW2 online.
You call that a SEARCH engine, Bunky?
Anyway. I'm convinced that the Revell is a copy of the Varney. The big difference is the Varney is metal. Which adds a bit of weight, something an (HO) switcher can always use.
But do note that we're seriously talking about a model that goes back to 1950--about 70 years, now.
And I'm working, off and on, with one of those: Varney NW2 body on a low-speed Hobbytown drive, with Loksound decoder and Kato motor.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by grahamline on Apr 1, 2019 20:33:38 GMT -8
Will see what I can do about pictures. IIRC, the Lionel engraving on the underside of the shell replaced something else. Friend has Varney on his layout some years back. I think it weighed about a pound and a half. Earlier Con-Cors have Athearn "Jet" motor drives.
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Apr 2, 2019 1:09:44 GMT -8
The Revell NW2 and Varney switcher was basically killed by Athearn's miscalled SW1500 cow(a SW7 actually)..However and if you could stand the gear noise Train Inc SW8 cow and calf set was the better choice..
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Apr 2, 2019 1:15:47 GMT -8
Nope. Revell not a copy of Varney. It's it's own thing. Varney is more crude, plus the earlier Varney the steps/pilot are separate parts. Varney is metal, Revell plastic.
Aught to be able to find photos on eBay easier than Google.
What's interesting on the Revell is it has a couple of drive incarnations. The first ones have a rubber band which is always long gone, with a cast frame. The later ones have a plastic frame and the motor rides on one truck and both are driven with universal through the fuel tank area. Then of course Con-Cor ended up with the tooling and put it on first Athearn, then Kato drives.
Revell had come and gone by the time the Athearn came out. Varney was still around but per the guide they discontinued the NW2 in 1965. I suppose you could argue either way.
Athearn used the wide motor until the desire for more prototypical models led to it being re-engineered for the SD40-2, and the GP38-2/40/50 that followed. The GP7/9, GP30, 35, SDP40, SD45, DD40, the S12 and the U28-30-33 all have too wide hoods. The F7, F45, FP45, "SW1500"/SW7 and PA are correct or close. The Train Master I'm not sure of.
The Athearn Rectifier was a collaboration with Lionel from the period when Lionel contracted it's HO out to Athearn, 1958-1959. It's just a shell made to fit the GP9 frame, and the tool went to Lionel when they began producing their own HO trains with a combination of new tooling, leftover Athearn parts and Hobbyline tooling. I've read they did some test shots of it when the line was revived in the 1970s but either it was damaged or there was some reason they didn't use it (instead they came up with the U18B via cloning of Athearn's U30B shortened again to fit the same drive as the GP9).
The Athearn GP30 simply looked bad, and after a few years the tool was recut to become the GP35. I have a few of them just for fun in the tinplate HO collection. It's amazing how just a few changes in proportion turn a nice looking engine into something you wouldn't want to get caught drunk hanging out with.
The GP30 tank is odd because it was the first I think to get an Athearn made gear drive, and the earliest ones are different from those in 1966-up design engines. The motor is a tad different too, with the frame pocket for it also different and I think that's why the strange fuel tank shape. This same frame was used on the GP35. Initially it and the SD45 both had the same metal type coupler cover as the freight cars use. It got some revisions to the motor mount area and the truck mount areas as well.
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Apr 2, 2019 1:26:08 GMT -8
Guys,I suppose we should add the Linsey line of EMD end cab switchers as competition for the Revelle and Varney switchers.
The Linsey EMD and a BLW switchers wasn't to bad for their time.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Apr 2, 2019 1:41:35 GMT -8
I hope Rapido will move on to the other EMD switchers; the SW7 was I think the most popular model after the SW1200.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 2, 2019 7:00:32 GMT -8
Nope. Revell not a copy of Varney. It's it's own thing. Varney is more crude, plus the earlier Varney the steps/pilot are separate parts. Varney is metal, Revell plastic. There's copy, and there's copy. The Revell version has a toolbox under the front radiator fan intake. The Varney does not. On t'other hand, Revell was expert at copying; since most or all of their molds were made by copying a larger model with a pantograph tracing cutter. I don't have my Revell version handy, but I just compared my Varney metal body with an Athearn. I can see no way that the Varney is in any way cruder than that one. If there was any copying going on, it would seem to have been done by Athearn. For example, the Varney overall hood dimensions are too large, in the same amount as the Athearn (which might contradict the idea that it was Athearn who made their body too big so as to fit their own drive). Ed
|
|
|
Post by milgentrains on Apr 2, 2019 7:37:22 GMT -8
I hope Rapido will move on to the other EMD switchers; the SW7 was I think the most popular model after the SW1200. Personally, I hope not. They make beautiful models but they are way out of my price range.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Apr 2, 2019 9:03:51 GMT -8
I hope Rapido will move on to the other EMD switchers; the SW7 was I think the most popular model after the SW1200. Personally, I hope not. They make beautiful models but they are way out of my price range. Man, we can't win here! This thread is bemoaning the lack of new switchers. BLI already makes an SW7 if the Athearn Blue Box SW7 isn't good enough. If we're going to get an any better model, it's going to be more expensive. You can't have it both ways!
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Apr 2, 2019 10:13:25 GMT -8
Colin, Let's not forget the Walther P2K EMD switchers which are beautiful models.
Do we need a high end switcher? I suspect that depends on who you ask. My LL P2K SW8 lettered for SCR gets the job done.
Be that as it may.
A highly detail SW1200 might get my attention as much as a highly detailed SW1.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Apr 2, 2019 10:28:47 GMT -8
Larry, yes, agree -- I was just using some available SW7s as the example here -- but you're just making my point stronger: there are existing models at all price points -- anything new is only going to be done if the manufacturer thinks they can do it a lot better. And that means a higher price.
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Apr 2, 2019 10:31:54 GMT -8
Nope. Revell not a copy of Varney. It's it's own thing. Varney is more crude, plus the earlier Varney the steps/pilot are separate parts. Varney is metal, Revell plastic. There's copy, and there's copy. The Revell version has a toolbox under the front radiator fan intake. The Varney does not. On t'other hand, Revell was expert at copying; since most or all of their molds were made by copying a larger model with a pantograph tracing cutter. I don't have my Revell version handy, but I just compared my Varney metal body with an Athearn. I can see no way that the Varney is in any way cruder than that one. Ed Ed,I suspect a lot of us old timers will disagree seeing how ugly the Varney switcher was.. A complete hand rail rebuild was in order,if you could get by the to short wheel base that gave that engine a "Tooterville trolley" look. The Revell required a complete handrail job.. Both was terrible. The Lindsay GMC switcher by far the better choice of EMD switchers..
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 2, 2019 11:30:16 GMT -8
Larry, Regarding the Varney, I'm talking ONLY about the body casting. Which IS the main part of the model. And I've got a Varney switcher body casting in front of me now. And I've got an Athearn switcher in front of me now. The body casting of the Athearn is in no way superior to the body casting of the Varney. Now, the Varney handrails may suck. I don't know, as I don't have any. And the drive may suck. Actually, I'm convinced already. Which explains my use of a Hobbytown. Here's a Lindsay: I'm not exactly bowled over with this one, I'll telll you. And the handrails suck, too. They're detailed. But they suck. By the way, the Lindsay has the tool box on the front, like the Revell. Here's a view of the Revell: Note the handrails. And also note the "ladder" grabs up the side--they're cast on--apparently a first, as Lindsay, Varney, and Athearn didn't do it. Wonder who I can gift my Revell to, when I finally find it. Ed
|
|
|
Post by milgentrains on Apr 2, 2019 13:00:18 GMT -8
Colin, Let's not forget the Walther P2K EMD switchers which are beautiful models. Do we need a high end switcher? I suspect that depends on who you ask. My LL P2K SW8 lettered for SCR gets the job done. Be that as it may. A highly detail SW1200 might get my attention as much as a highly detailed SW1. I agree about the LL SW-8, mine is one of my best running locos, id does not have all the bells and whistles and I for one am glad that it does not.
|
|
|
Post by grahamline on Apr 2, 2019 13:22:52 GMT -8
Posted some Con-Cor photos in a separate thread here.
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Apr 2, 2019 15:50:14 GMT -8
Ed,Those Lindsays was the better choice of the three switchers.. Note the handrails on the Lindsay compared to Revell and Varney switchers a major handrail replacement job was needed.
Even back in the day serious modelers avoid the Varney and Revell switcher due to the drive and the needed handrail replacement. Ugh! What was Varney and Revell thinking?
Athearn was the better choice between the Varney and Revell switcher because of the drive and better handrails.
Lindsay's NW2 was still tough to beat in several areas including out pulling the Athearn SW7. I never own one but,saw them in action at the Columbus(Oh) HO club back in the 60s.
Lindsay made a very nice Baldwin switcher-IIRC a VO-1000. I bought one of these Baldwins used and it was my pride and joy simply because of the pulling power. Oddly enough this engine was a very smooth and slow runner for its day.
Is that your Lindsay? That engine looks new.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 2, 2019 17:11:12 GMT -8
Larry,
No, it's not mine. I snagged the shot online. It's kinda sorta nice looking, from a distance.
Ed
|
|