|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Dec 8, 2022 8:35:48 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? I suggest you read my post with the photos of UP 942 in it, especially the part surrounded by quotation marks. It's about 20 posts back--big yellow diesels, with photos of the headlight featured. I checked the history of UP 942 on UtahRails, and there is no comment about a wreck rebuild. There IS for UP 938, so I am sure there would have been such a comment for 942, if it had happened. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Dec 8, 2022 9:48:52 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? Also, do we know the wreck & rebuild history of said scanned unit? because if that unit had been in a wreck that damaged the nose, or had a new headlight added, that may account for the rather odd-looking proboscis.
The excuses never end.
It's not "The Chinese". It's not the factory. It's not some historical society that provided a paint chip.
It's not the scanner. It's not what was scanned. It's not an illusion.
It's Rapido. Remove the veil.
|
|
ictom
Full Member
Posts: 104
|
Post by ictom on Dec 8, 2022 11:14:41 GMT -8
There were no scanners at the EMD plant. Those perfect curves were banged out by men with steel hand tools & wood forms.
Rapido translated their labor into a digital nightmare.
Ever heard of a drop press? I've worked around several before - one was more than half the size of my house. It was there at least since 1943 (probably with plenty of women operators, too - not men). I'm sure EMD had access to something similar, rather than banging it out with hand tools and wood forms. How about Kirksite, otherwise known as Zamac 2? I'm sure you've heard of Zamac. Don't they use it in model railroading? ;-) Anyway, Kirksite was often used as molds for sheet metal, including in the drop presses I mentioned. Again, I'm pretty sure EMD had access to something like that instead of wood. |
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Dec 8, 2022 11:22:04 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? Also, do we know the wreck & rebuild history of said scanned unit? because if that unit had been in a wreck that damaged the nose, or had a new headlight added, that may account for the rather odd-looking proboscis. If you scroll up a bit, someone has posted photos of the actual UP unit they scanned. |
|
ictom
Full Member
Posts: 104
|
Post by ictom on Dec 8, 2022 11:23:29 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? I suggest you read my post with the photos of UP 942 in it, especially the part surrounded by quotation marks. It's about 20 posts back--big yellow diesels, with photos of the headlight featured. I checked the history of UP 942 on UtahRails, and there is no comment about a wreck rebuild. There IS for UP 938, so I am sure there would have been such a comment for 942, if it had happened. Ed To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit and its comparison in the supplied photos with an accuracy-uncertain model, instead of the prototype. I can find photos where the paint job makes the headlight look like a proboscis and others where it looks like the lens is almost flush with the nose. The UP unit appears to have a 45 degree intersection of the headlight cylinder with the compound curve of the nose. I don't see that on my IC units, but the orange goes all the way the length of the headlight, so it's difficult to tell. |
|
|
|
Post by ssw on Dec 8, 2022 11:24:55 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? Also, do we know the wreck & rebuild history of said scanned unit? because if that unit had been in a wreck that damaged the nose, or had a new headlight added, that may account for the rather odd-looking proboscis. They scanned the UP 942 at the Southern California Ry. Museum in Perris, CA |
|
ictom
Full Member
Posts: 104
|
Post by ictom on Dec 8, 2022 11:28:07 GMT -8
In all seriousness, does anyone know which E-unit they digitally scanned? Also, do we know the wreck & rebuild history of said scanned unit? because if that unit had been in a wreck that damaged the nose, or had a new headlight added, that may account for the rather odd-looking proboscis. They scanned the UP 942 at the Southern California Ry. Museum in Perris, CA This one: That youtube is very high-quality and short - a good one to watch! |
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Dec 8, 2022 11:41:40 GMT -8
There were no scanners at the EMD plant. Those perfect curves were banged out by men with steel hand tools & wood forms.
Rapido translated their labor into a digital nightmare.
Ever heard of a drop press? I've worked around several before - one was more than half the size of my house. It was there at least since 1943 (probably with plenty of women operators, too - not men). I'm sure EMD had access to something similar, rather than banging it out with hand tools and wood forms. How about Kirksite, otherwise known as Zamac 2? I'm sure you've heard of Zamac. Don't they use it in model railroading? ;-) Anyway, Kirksite was often used as molds for sheet metal, including in the drop presses I mentioned. Again, I'm pretty sure EMD had access to something like that instead of wood.
Of course EMD used big presses. But the final nose curves were hand-made and included a lot of bondo.
From Railfan & Railroad magazine September 2019:
"The routine went like this. The nose sides, being relatively simple, were made of flat sheet metal. The top was cut to the profile of the nose, then curved to match its arched profile. The front of the nose, meanwhile, was also constructed of sheet metal, bent to match the shape of the pilot. So far, so simple. Then, to join all these planes and arcs, the EMD assemblymen went to work, by hand, with body filler. All those beautiful compound curves on the bulldog nose? Sculpture, made from off-brand Bondo. And, given they were built by hand, no two noses were ever exactly the same."
Drawings & text from US Patent Office
There are photos "somewhere" showing wooden nose forms on the shop floor.
This is not news in railfandom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Dec 8, 2022 11:48:28 GMT -8
I suggest you read my post with the photos of UP 942 in it, especially the part surrounded by quotation marks. It's about 20 posts back--big yellow diesels, with photos of the headlight featured. I checked the history of UP 942 on UtahRails, and there is no comment about a wreck rebuild. There IS for UP 938, so I am sure there would have been such a comment for 942, if it had happened. Ed To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit...
I went back and edited my previous post re: excuses & added "It's not an illusion".
|
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Dec 8, 2022 11:57:19 GMT -8
To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit and its comparison in the supplied photos with an accuracy-uncertain model, instead of the prototype. Someone mentioned that was a Highliners nose, there IS NO uncertainty. The Highliners nose is as close to dead on as we are ever going to get in scale, and I've never heard ANYONE who thought otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by cera2254 on Dec 8, 2022 12:14:45 GMT -8
Would be nice to have the other MFRs pay to license use of the highliners nose tooling…
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Dec 8, 2022 12:28:01 GMT -8
To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit and its comparison in the supplied photos with an accuracy-uncertain model, instead of the prototype. Someone mentioned that was a Highliners nose, there IS NO uncertainty. The Highliners nose is as close to dead on as we are ever going to get in scale, and I've never heard ANYONE who thought otherwise.
Photo worth 1000 words. Highliners on the left. Rapido on the right.
|
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Dec 8, 2022 12:42:10 GMT -8
Ever heard of a drop press? I've worked around several before - one was more than half the size of my house. It was there at least since 1943 (probably with plenty of women operators, too - not men). I'm sure EMD had access to something similar, rather than banging it out with hand tools and wood forms. How about Kirksite, otherwise known as Zamac 2? I'm sure you've heard of Zamac. Don't they use it in model railroading? ;-) Anyway, Kirksite was often used as molds for sheet metal, including in the drop presses I mentioned. Again, I'm pretty sure EMD had access to something like that instead of wood.
Of course EMD used big presses. But the final nose curves were hand-made and included a lot of bondo.
From Railfan & Railroad magazine September 2019:
"The routine went like this. The nose sides, being relatively simple, were made of flat sheet metal. The top was cut to the profile of the nose, then curved to match its arched profile. The front of the nose, meanwhile, was also constructed of sheet metal, bent to match the shape of the pilot. So far, so simple. Then, to join all these planes and arcs, the EMD assemblymen went to work, by hand, with body filler. All those beautiful compound curves on the bulldog nose? Sculpture, made from off-brand Bondo. And, given they were built by hand, no two noses were ever exactly the same."
Drawings & text from US Patent Office
There are photos "somewhere" showing wooden nose forms on the shop floor.
This is not news in railfandom.
Yeah, we know, we know; the noses varied slightly from locomotive to locomotive.
But there's no way on God's green earth they varied to the extent that a Rapido, a Walthers, a Stewart, a Highliners, a Broadway and an Ajin brass model all vary from each other. No way, no how.
|
|
Tom
Full Member
Posts: 235
|
Post by Tom on Dec 8, 2022 12:56:02 GMT -8
To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit and its comparison in the supplied photos with an accuracy-uncertain model, instead of the prototype. I can find photos where the paint job makes the headlight look like a proboscis and others where it looks like the lens is almost flush with the nose. The UP unit appears to have a 45 degree intersection of the headlight cylinder with the compound curve of the nose. I don't see that on my IC units, but the orange goes all the way the length of the headlight, so it's difficult to tell. Here's the 3D CAD from their page. Does it look like the production model? $399....
|
|
|
|
Post by chuckcc on Dec 8, 2022 13:55:35 GMT -8
To be fair, we may be looking at an optical illusion, brought on by the green anti-glare paint shape of the UP unit and its comparison in the supplied photos with an accuracy-uncertain model, instead of the prototype. I can find photos where the paint job makes the headlight look like a proboscis and others where it looks like the lens is almost flush with the nose. The UP unit appears to have a 45 degree intersection of the headlight cylinder with the compound curve of the nose. I don't see that on my IC units, but the orange goes all the way the length of the headlight, so it's difficult to tell. Here's the 3D CAD from their page. Does it look like the production model? $399....
The main nose differences between this sample and the prototype are the sharp creases on the model vs more rounded creases on the on the prototype. The contours of the green paint on the UP model makes those differences look much worse than they are. I'm looking at a PRR model nose right now and it doesn't look as bad as the UP model nose with those weird green paint contours. |
|
|
|
Post by slowfreight on Dec 8, 2022 15:06:05 GMT -8
Well, I have my E8B now. And unless Rapido recuts the nose I'm not buying an A unit. Still, at a street price of $268, the sagging snow deflectors is pathetic. That's a manufacturing defect in my book, only tolerable because I'll remove them during kitbashing.
These are simply sub-par, and Rapido is pretending nothing is wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by elsdp45 on Dec 8, 2022 18:52:36 GMT -8
Can somebody post a photo of the Highliner nose and Rapido nose face to face from the side?
Thanks, Chris
PS. Wonder if a plastic surgeon could give it a nose job?
|
|
abm
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by abm on Dec 8, 2022 21:57:17 GMT -8
Here you go:  In case it's not obvious, Highliners on the left (old Athearn Genesis F7A) and new Rapido E8 on the right. Both black, though not the same shade. Just happened to have the F7 in a box near the hobby bench, sorry, it's a little dusty. What follows is totally my subjective observations/opinions: The Rapido headlight housing looks a smidge "longer" and isn't quite as well blended to the rest of the nose. The camera angle is a little off and makes the top of the Rapido nose look not quite as sloped, but holding the two models in my hand, it's better than the photo makes it look. The black paint probably does hide some sins. Even the Highliners headlight/nose transition isn't blended quite as well as the prototype... compare to the photos of UP 942 on the previous page. Standing by itself, I think 4316 looks fine. To me the bulbous class lights are a greater distraction. The windshield angles-and-dangles seem pretty good but Rapido's way of doing the windshield glass can't hold a candle to the Highliners method. BUT... that's the way all of Rapido F's have been (windshields set too far back). I'm not going to crucify them over it... these are 1:87 models and compromises are inevitble. The build quality on 4316 is, I think, excellent... which, understandably, makes the issues shown on the UP units that much more frustrating. There is some leftover mold parting line/transition visible on the side of the nose (you can see it in the photo), it's more pronounced on the F side than the E. Considering how dented/battered most real F's and E's were, it doesn't really bother me. I could go on... |
|
abm
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by abm on Dec 8, 2022 22:15:44 GMT -8
Couple more just for fun. Sorry, I'm a real whizz the iPhone as you can tell.   |
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Dec 9, 2022 1:06:19 GMT -8
Didn't Rapido make F-units? How bad are those? I would be amused if they're better and Rapido could have had better E-units just by copying that part of their previous tooling.
|
|
|
|
Post by cera2254 on Dec 9, 2022 3:15:56 GMT -8
Almost looks like the rapido nose comes in too far in the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Dec 9, 2022 5:26:05 GMT -8
Didn't Rapido make F-units? How bad are those? I would be amused if they're better and Rapido could have had better E-units just by copying that part of their previous tooling. They did and they also touted all the effort they put into getting the details on the nose correct. I also recall reading that they sent the factory a multi-page document describing all the refinements and changes that were required to correct the first sample. Here is a quote from Jason’s 07-20-10 post on train order ( link to original post): “Hi all,
Last year we showed the first test shot of our FP9 at the National Train Show and, as many of you know, the nose needed to be completely redone.
We have since redone the nose once and the windshield and headlight twice, to get it bang on. Here are the images of our latest sample. The high res images are on Bill's machine so I apologize for the low res copies.
Some notes:
- the shell has not been polished so the mould parting lines are still visible
- we could not have the tops of the number boards as close to the nose as we wanted, because the plastic would have been too weak.
- many of the details have not yet been added (ladder rests, nose grabs, side sun shades, etc.) - the factory rushed to get us this sample in time for the show
- check out the detail INSIDE the headlight
- the grills will not warp. Later this week we are testing this by putting the model in the fridge for an hour and then in the sun for an hour, just to be sure.
We are extremely happy with this model. Over a thousand hours of work have gone into it. I'm convinced that we got this thing bang on, or as bang on as possible given the limitations of the injection process. Once you see the actual model in person, some of you will agree with me, and some of you will disagree. But this is the best we can possibly do and I will gladly stand by it.
I will try and take an exact comparison shot with a prototype photo in the next week or two and post it here. It will be tricky with a camera 87 times oversize... ;-) The comparison shot below is not from the same angle.
Thanks for looking,
Jason”
Maybe someone with a Train Order account can repost the photos referenced in the quote above. Thanks, Mark |
|
|
|
Post by schroed2 on Dec 9, 2022 5:42:32 GMT -8
Maybe someone with a Train Order account can repost the photos referenced in the quote above. Thanks, Mark the photos were not on Trainorders, but linked to the Rapido Page (for Telegraph 26 - their newsletter, I guess) and are no longer available. Maybe somebody here still has the newsletter in their archive...my archive is on another computer |
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Dec 9, 2022 6:41:08 GMT -8
Didn't Rapido make F-units? How bad are those? I would be amused if they're better and Rapido could have had better E-units just by copying that part of their previous tooling. They DID make F-Units, and they ARE better. Just another case of Rapido messing up a good thing they'd already done in the past.e I have noticed that whenever Rapido does a project that could build off another one (F units to E units are a perfect example), rather than using aspects of the previous project that COULD have carried over to the new one, they pretty much always just start again from scratch instead - even when the previous thing was well executed. This, in recent times at least, has tended to lead to completely un-necessary mistakes. The horrible E-unit nose is a perfect example. Another is when they literally re-invented the wheel for their recent run of 3800 hoppers, and ended up with an objectively far worse wheelset. |
|
Tom
Full Member
Posts: 235
|
Post by Tom on Dec 9, 2022 6:45:58 GMT -8
Didn't Rapido make F-units? How bad are those? I would be amused if they're better and Rapido could have had better E-units just by copying that part of their previous tooling. They DID make F-Units, and they ARE better. Just another case of Rapido messing up a good thing they'd already done in the past. The FL-9 looks quite good, so apparently standards don't exist. Weird. |
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Dec 9, 2022 6:47:09 GMT -8
Now that I've seen it, I can't unsee the cannon-sized headlight housing.
Some have argued that it is less offensive on the all-black Amtrak unit, but I disagree. It's still there, and I still noticed it immediately.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2022 7:48:36 GMT -8
|
|
abm
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by abm on Dec 9, 2022 8:05:37 GMT -8
Rapido's New Haven FL9 locomotive v E8A Amtrak nose shots. Not sure of the prototypical validity of the FL9 to E8A side by side comparison. As a side note, the marred spot on the E8A nose (conductor side) is from the locomotive packaging. Steve That's a better set of photos than mine, Steve, thanks for sharing them. I have a few FL9's around here and didn't even think to compare them until this morning. If the E8 headlight housing is too long, the FL9 almost seems a little too short and abrupt, but it is blended better. The windshield treatment seems almost identical. Same bulbous class lights, but whatever. I can't un-see the numberboard housings, but that's my pet-peeve. |
|
|
|
Post by rockfan on Dec 9, 2022 8:23:50 GMT -8
Maybe rapido needs to take the FP7/9 nose and with computer magic put it on the E8.
|
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Dec 9, 2022 9:55:07 GMT -8
Here are some EMD photos of nose assemblies that may be helpful for reference. I can’t confirm that these are specifically E8 nose assemblies; however they are still interesting photos. Factory floor showing some assembly jigs and a partially completed nose assembly. You can see pretty clearly how the headlight assembly meets the surround nose metal.  (Enlargement of nose) Notice how the seam looks like an inverted “Y”.  It looks like they used lead to smooth the seam although that’s just a guess (it could have been plastic filler).  This later shot of assemblies being reworked in 1957 again shows the head light to nose seam. And here the work is applying plastic filler to the side of the cab. (Those lifting lugs on the front were added to aid with moving the assemblies around in the shop.)  (Source for all images is Electro-Motive Builder Photos Facebook page.) Thanks, Mark |
|
