|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Nov 13, 2019 17:29:31 GMT -8
Mike; I rather not ridicule anyone, especial an esteemed Boilermaker,,,,I really didn’t get it. Now I do see the point. Sorry it was taken as fan flaming....just an outsider trying to see the wheat thru the chaff....
|
|
|
Post by drsvelte on Nov 13, 2019 17:40:38 GMT -8
<blockquote class="imgur-embed-pub" lang="en" data-id="a/534z0h4"><a href="//imgur.com/a/534z0h4"></a></blockquote><script async src="//s.imgur.com/min/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="imgur-embed-pub" lang="en" data-id="a/F4VHeAv"><a href="//imgur.com/a/F4VHeAv"></a></blockquote><script async src="//s.imgur.com/min/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 13, 2019 17:43:06 GMT -8
Easy. 3D-scan one unit, and from that scan develop the different versions and variations. That 3D scan of a TTI/CSX unit was probably used to make the CSX frame version, then altered in another file to make the Conrail version, and a Southern version etc. Then it's up to Rapido to pick and choose which ones to tool up for which variations. Evidently, for whatever reason (if we are to believe, intentionally as a cost-driven decision, which is entirely possible) the CSX version didn't get tooled up for the CSX units. Yeah? So then don’t make a big press release at reservation time with a big color three-quarter shot of a TTI (Ex-CSX) unit and show more photos of your guys scanning it, under the guise of “look how much effort to get it right we are putting in!” , and then not add that you’re gonna use a one-size-fits-all stepwell. It’s misleading.....Whether intentional or just an oversight. NO ONE is going to convince me otherwise. How many more times are you going to edit your post with lame jabs, comrade?
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Nov 13, 2019 17:59:09 GMT -8
Yeah? So then don’t make a big press release at reservation time with a big color three-quarter shot of a TTI (Ex-CSX) unit and show more photos of your guys scanning it, under the guise of “look how much effort to get it right we are putting in!” , and then not add that you’re gonna use a one-size-fits-all stepwell. It’s misleading.....Whether intentional or just an oversight. NO ONE is going to convince me otherwise. How many more times are you going to edit your post with lame jabs, comrade? Well, you might have to tell Rapido to be more specific about every single detail on every single version then, because by your own admission, the poor wording about pilots versus stepwells seems to have confused a number of people. But rest assured, after they spend the time reading page after page of this entire thread about all the rage surrounding a bottom step being wrong, they'll either never ever get it wrong again...or just choose not to do any more oddball CSX versions. Editing? As many times as I like, when I'm busy replying to multiple posts made by multiple members and trying to consolidate them all into one reply. Oh, gotta go swing the election again, be back later comrade!
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 13, 2019 18:12:50 GMT -8
That’d be fine, I will just send my dollars to Scaletrains or Atlas, Rapido have already more or less said they want me and the other CSX guys to walk off a short pier and that they don’t want our business. Fair enough.
And by the way, your avatar isn’t all bad, at least it gives me a heads up that I should take the accompanying post with a HUGE grain of salt even before I start reading.
I don’t see what politics has to do with this whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Nov 13, 2019 20:56:19 GMT -8
Despite the step/pilot error, the locomotive appears to be well done. The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record. These discrepancies are not necessarily deal-breakers for me, but for $229.95, and data developed from a digital scan... Donnell
|
|
|
Post by csxt8400 on Nov 13, 2019 21:58:15 GMT -8
If calling things like I see it is construed negatively, then I guess so be it. So many things that I have openly critiqued were simple things that got screwed up. And if the people involved in the art and development process took more pride in double or triple checking things, I would have been left with nothing to complain about. And boy, that would suck! As if i'd much rather have a terrible looking SDP45 that I can publicly chastise, instead of the beautiful unicorn that represents an era that is dear to my heart.
For those not in the know, the B36-7 project wasn't just one guy. I know people who spent considerable time in designing what would have been near perfect artwork on the CSX and SBD units that Rapido produced. Jason already mentioned that it was not deemed to be cost effective nor simplistic enough to use, which I'm sure is true depending on where you want to draw the line. Other companies have somehow been able to do unit specific detail changes, or decal placement, for years now but that's not up to me to decide. Granted, Rapido did several more roadnames than the few other locomotive manufacturers, but I still think if they REALLY wanted to produce an even better model they would have been interested in the superior artwork.
Would a VIA FP9 not be taken more seriously?
Rapido caters to the higher end modelers who want a model done to the satisfaction of prototype schematics. So that being the name of the game, these manufacturers should not be allowed to delve into the abyss of specificity, fail to deliver, then be praised for trying. Preordering based on artwork that doesn't match what shows up in 10-12 months? You're damn right I'm going to be upset, especially if I was someone who provided hours of research or my own photographs/color chips to make sure there would be no issues.
-CSX rivet counter
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Nov 14, 2019 0:13:30 GMT -8
And where was this clearly stated by him? On this forum? In a reply on Rapido's page? In a newsletter? While he was still an employee or after termination? Because, there's a bit of suspicion involved with employees that no longer work for companies. If it was a "former" product developer that was terminated, there's the potential that by saying that, they may have been trying to muddy the waters to the detriment of their former employer to get back at them. Citation needed, please. Let me try this again, in a slightly different way. Rapido. Made. A. Business. Decision. To. Only. Tool. One. Stepwell. During. The. Development. Phase. But. Were. Aware. Of. Both. They. Scanned. A. CSX. Unit. That. Is. A. Fact. Stated. During. Said. Development. Via. None. Of. Your. Business. Believe what you want. I find YOU suspicious and water muddying. Brian Bennett
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Nov 14, 2019 0:17:18 GMT -8
Despite the step/pilot error, the locomotive appears to be well done. The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record. These discrepancies are not necessarily deal-breakers for me, but for $229.95, and data developed from a digital scan... Donnell Ya know, I'm glad you said that, because I had the same exact thought but it was during a high point of indifference about the model when I discovered the direction it had taken, so I never circled back and revisited it and examined closer. I'll now add that to this list of things to look into and be distraught about as a prototype CSX modeler. (I'll clarify for the trolls I mean "distraught" in the context of a hobby. A hobby I'm passionate about, no doubt. But still, a hobby.) ~ The Other Brian B.
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 14, 2019 3:24:00 GMT -8
And where was this clearly stated by him? On this forum? In a reply on Rapido's page? In a newsletter? While he was still an employee or after termination? Because, there's a bit of suspicion involved with employees that no longer work for companies. If it was a "former" product developer that was terminated, there's the potential that by saying that, they may have been trying to muddy the waters to the detriment of their former employer to get back at them. Citation needed, please. Let me try this again, in a slightly different way. Rapido. Made. A. Business. Decision. To. Only. Tool. One. Stepwell. During. The. Development. Phase. But. Were. Aware. Of. Both. They. Scanned. A. CSX. Unit. That. Is. A. Fact. Stated. During. Said. Development. Via. None. Of. Your. Business. Believe what you want. I find YOU suspicious and water muddying. Brian Bennett I pounded the like button on this one. Ten times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 4:47:14 GMT -8
They could have been better served to use the sill...and replace the CSX and Seaboard units with a late phase B23-7 with the same truck centers and perhaps the B30-7A.
After sales go through the roof on those three versions (B23-7; B30-7A; B36-7); tool the Seaboard System/CSX sill and step well for the second release. Hyper accuracy fulfilled.
Additionally, they add MP and Union Pacific; among other Class 1's with the phase "3" B23-7 and B30-7A (which is actually a souped up B23-7 with a 3000 HP engine and 82:10 gearing).
But they didn't...and that's their decision. Like Brian Bennett stated...it was a business decision...but in the name of accuracy...I would have left the Seaboard, TTI, and CSX units off the first release...and did the correct sill and pilot like what was advertised on the subsequent run they alluded to in their new video showing the units off.
|
|
|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Nov 14, 2019 5:22:23 GMT -8
Coulda, shoulda, woulda, the bane of human existence....with a pinch of if only for taste
|
|
|
Post by sd80mac on Nov 14, 2019 7:52:01 GMT -8
And where was this clearly stated by him? On this forum? In a reply on Rapido's page? In a newsletter? While he was still an employee or after termination? Because, there's a bit of suspicion involved with employees that no longer work for companies. If it was a "former" product developer that was terminated, there's the potential that by saying that, they may have been trying to muddy the waters to the detriment of their former employer to get back at them. Citation needed, please. Let me try this again, in a slightly different way. Rapido. Made. A. Business. Decision. To. Only. Tool. One. Stepwell. During. The. Development. Phase. But. Were. Aware. Of. Both. They. Scanned. A. CSX. Unit. That. Is. A. Fact. Stated. During. Said. Development. Via. None. Of. Your. Business. Believe what you want. I find YOU suspicious and water muddying. Brian Bennett Just because you repeat the same baseless accusation again and again, doesn’t make it true. Random new guy with 7 GD posts shows up telling us “Rapido made a decision not to tool the right sill! It’s a fact!!!1”. Yeah, keep on dreaming! YOU are muddying the waters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 8:18:15 GMT -8
Let me try this again, in a slightly different way. Rapido. Made. A. Business. Decision. To. Only. Tool. One. Stepwell. During. The. Development. Phase. But. Were. Aware. Of. Both. They. Scanned. A. CSX. Unit. That. Is. A. Fact. Stated. During. Said. Development. Via. None. Of. Your. Business. Believe what you want. I find YOU suspicious and water muddying. Brian Bennett Just because you repeat the same baseless accusation again and again, doesn’t make it true. Random new guy with 7 GD posts shows up telling us “Rapido made a decision not to tool the right sill! It’s a fact!!!1”. Yeah, keep on dreaming! YOU are muddying the waters.
How about a direct quote from Jason of Rapido Trains: Which for the suspicious, was posted on this site here - link
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2019 9:31:36 GMT -8
Well, welcome Rapido, to playing with the "big boys".
If I recall correctly, every single one of the "larger" or perhaps more "well-known" manufacturers has eventually been flamed on these forums (or the previous original Atlas forums) for some detail that was perhaps a budget decision or an outright mistake (in one case easily fixed with a new truck bolster and a new fuel tank) or a paint color mistake (for example: Genesis LV New Cornell Red).
Welcome Rapido. I'm sorry to see the recent negativity.
I want perfect models too--but I grasp that not every legacy product can be economically retooled to provide every possible phase variation. I guess because they already exist, people vote with their wallets.
How much is having it "right" really important at 3' away? My eyes are starting to go as it is.
Gee, maybe if I need virtual perfection I should pony up and buy brass to get my road's version. The unpainted brass prices are dropping anyway.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by 12bridge on Nov 14, 2019 9:37:02 GMT -8
Despite the step/pilot error, the locomotive appears to be well done. The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record. These discrepancies are not necessarily deal-breakers for me, but for $229.95, and data developed from a digital scan... Donnell Funny, when I was looking at photos the other day, I had the same thoughts but could not pinpoint it. Now that you say it yeah, that nose looks a bit off.. Another thing is that Stratolite. That thing is god awful. I mean, come on. We have had really nice Stratolites as detail parts for 20+ years. There are more then enough in collectors hands. There is a zillion photos of them. The dome is way too tall and square, and the effect is only in the lower half of it, leaving an empty upper portion. The SP UDE Gyralight is just as bad.
|
|
|
Post by csxt8400 on Nov 14, 2019 9:54:28 GMT -8
Well, welcome Rapido, to playing with the "big boys".
If I recall correctly, every single one of the "larger" or perhaps more "well-known" manufacturers has eventually been flamed on these forums (or the previous original Atlas forums) for some detail that was perhaps a budget decision or an outright mistake (in one case easily fixed with a new truck bolster and a new fuel tank) or a paint color mistake (for example: Genesis LV New Cornell Red).
Welcome Rapido. I'm sorry to see the recent negativity.
I want perfect models too--but I grasp that not every legacy product can be economically retooled to provide every possible phase variation. I guess because they already exist, people vote with their wallets.
How much is having it "right" really important at 3' away? My eyes are starting to go as it is.
Gee, maybe if I need virtual perfection I should pony up and buy brass to get my road's version. The unpainted brass prices are dropping anyway.
Jack Using eye sight to pretend something isn't important doesn't really cut it. The pad printing they apply to these models is hard for all of us to read, yet they put it on anyway. Brass engines are often inferior to what is in plastic nowadays anywho. The later Overland SD70 and AC44 stuff being the one exception I can think of, though I don't own any. And guys, this isn't flaming. It's just a statement of facts and if a manufacturer says "We are offering such and such" then I am expecting it to be what they promised.
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Nov 14, 2019 9:54:43 GMT -8
The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record.
What was their response when you provided them with this feedback and good quality supporting detail photos?
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 14, 2019 10:09:01 GMT -8
Despite the step/pilot error, the locomotive appears to be well done. The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record. These discrepancies are not necessarily deal-breakers for me, but for $229.95, and data developed from a digital scan... Donnell Funny, when I was looking at photos the other day, I had the same thoughts but could not pinpoint it. Now that you say it yeah, that nose looks a bit off.. Another thing is that Stratolite. That thing is god awful. I mean, come on. We have had really nice Stratolites as detail parts for 20+ years. There are more then enough in collectors hands. There is a zillion photos of them. The dome is way too tall and square, and the effect is only in the lower half of it, leaving an empty upper portion. The SP UDE Gyralight is just as bad. Aw gee, now you've done it. I mention the UDE lights look like goiters and I'm all but strung up over it.....
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 14, 2019 10:14:22 GMT -8
And guys, this isn't flaming. It's just a statement of facts and if a manufacturer says "We are offering such and such" then I am expecting it to be what they promised. Anybody who has cared enough and bothered to weigh both sides can clearly see this isn’t flaming and hasn’t been from the get go. You’ve got the head of the company playing the coy victim angle and you’ve got about four diehard Rapido fanboys, Canadian and northeast corridor modelers, that are trying their best to paint it as if we are a small group of debased nutjobs out for blood at all costs.
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 14, 2019 10:22:25 GMT -8
One more thing, quite interesting to note how many new members have signed up since this whole thing about the B36-7 errors started. Wouldn’t surprise me if we “double” the number of average new accounts soon.....
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 14, 2019 10:25:26 GMT -8
They could have been better served to use the sill...and replace the CSX and Seaboard units with a late phase B23-7 with the same truck centers and perhaps the B30-7A. After sales go through the roof on those three versions (B23-7; B30-7A; B36-7); tool the Seaboard System/CSX sill and step well for the second release. Hyper accuracy fulfilled. Additionally, they add MP and Union Pacific; among other Class 1's with the phase "3" B23-7 and B30-7A (which is actually a souped up B23-7 with a 3000 HP engine and 82:10 gearing). But they didn't...and that's their decision. Like Brian Bennett stated...it was a business decision...but in the name of accuracy...I would have left the Seaboard, TTI, and CSX units off the first release...and did the correct sill and pilot like what was advertised on the subsequent run they alluded to in their new video showing the units off. The thing is....the later B23-7’s , and all the BQ units, along with the B30-7 units on Family Lines/ Seaboard had the same unique stepwell.
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 14, 2019 10:25:31 GMT -8
One more thing, quite interesting to note how many new members have signed up since this whole thing about the B36-7 errors started. Wouldn’t surprise me if we “double” the number of average new accounts soon..... It smells of sock puppet in here.
|
|
|
Post by sgoti on Nov 14, 2019 10:49:12 GMT -8
One more thing, quite interesting to note how many new members have signed up since this whole thing about the B36-7 errors started. Wouldn’t surprise me if we “double” the number of average new accounts soon..... Well, I've been here since 2015, so not exactly new, I just don't post much.
|
|
|
Post by drsvelte on Nov 14, 2019 11:07:41 GMT -8
Well, I've been here since 2016, so not exactly new, I just don't post much.
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Nov 14, 2019 11:42:16 GMT -8
The cab looks great, but there is something "off" about the nose. It looks like the edge radii are too broad, especially along the top front edge. If you compare the model to prototype photos, you'll see what I mean. And, the snowplow is still wrong, on several roads. I mentioned this early on after the preproduction shots, for the record. What was their response when you provided them with this feedback and good quality supporting detail photos?
To be honest, I only recently looked closely enough at the nose to notice since seeing the painted production units. I noticed the snowplow back in March 2018 right away, but didn't say anything until January 2019, after they showed video of the deco-samples, thinking that they would have addressed the issue by then. Going back over the undecorated preproduction shots, the nose issue was indeed present back then. The B36-7 wasn't really that high on my "want list", so I didn't pay too close attention to the body contours. I suppose that's on me. However, they 3-D scanned a real locomotive, so did I really have to show them photos? Donnell
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Nov 14, 2019 11:51:37 GMT -8
What was their response when you provided them with this feedback and good quality supporting detail photos?
....did I really have to show them photos?
Well, I wouldn't think so, but judging by some of the recent threads on here, it seems if we don't go through official channels of communication and provide photographic backup, we have little room to complain.
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Nov 14, 2019 12:12:02 GMT -8
I don’t have a dog in this hunt as the B36-7 is too new for my modeling era. However, I’m following this thread just the same. Here is a photo of the nose of Conrail 5031 (source Robert Russel, Conrail Cyclopedia): It’s really hard to tell where the top radius starts at the vertical sheets. I don’t want to comment on the Rapido model without seeing one in person. Could this be the start of another “radius” debate like the Athearn/P2K GP7-9 roof radius? Thanks, Mark J. Reading, PA
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Nov 14, 2019 12:47:28 GMT -8
....did I really have to show them photos? Well, I wouldn't think so, but judging by some of the recent threads on here, it seems if we don't go through official channels of communication and provide photographic backup, we have little room to complain.
I will give you that. It has been brutal over the past few weeks. And, my point is not to make any manufacturer look silly, or to demean them, or to prove myself to be right about a certain issue. However, these are projects that they have chosen to develop and produce for consumers, using marketing phrases such as - "high-end manufacturer of model trains and accessories"
- "top-of-the-line features, finely nuanced detailing"
- "road-name and road-number-specific detail"
- "dedicated to the creation of fine-scale replicas"
- "precision and authenticity"
- "historically accurate replicas"
- "high quality realistic trains"
By all means, they should say these things because their inference indicates that there is something about their product which gives them a competitive edge over their rivals, BUT, they also need to deliver on what was advertised. Personally, I have seen Athearn, ScaleTrains, Rapido, and others do exactly this. Yes, there were times where certain issues needed to be addressed, with certain companies going as far as retooling an entire locomotive after already investing in tooling an entire locomotive! *cough-Rapido-cough* That is why I don't get irate when certain things don't exactly turn out right. Either the manufacture will fix them, or I will. Or, I will just pass on the offering altogether and figure something else out! Donnell
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Nov 14, 2019 12:48:29 GMT -8
Atlas got it (nose corner radius) way too sharp on their b23-7, I guess Rapido went the other way and got it too broad.
|
|