|
|
Post by stottman on Jul 22, 2015 22:15:38 GMT -8
My only compliant/suggestion is stop doing repeats!
Its one thing if you are "replacing" a 40 year old Athearn bluebox covered hopper, its another when the item being replaced only has minor deficiencies that 90% of modelers don't notice.
I would much rather see an unmodeled variation.
Prime example of what NOT to do, and what to do are Exactrail and Atlas.
Exactrail has done several repeats; PS5344, FMC ABOX 5277, etc... Sure, the Athearn's were not as detailed, but they were hardly Bluebox. Yes, they were a little too wide, but 90% of modelers didn't notice or don't care... Would it have killed Exactrail to do the "Plate B" version, or the PCF ABOX? I would have bought some. Hard to justify spending $30 a new car when I already have a 90% model.
Compare that to Atlas' FMC cars. Rather then just do a "new and improved" version of the Athearn cars, they did "Plate B" variations. As a result, I bought about 20 in total.
|
|
chuckc
Junior Member
Posts: 57 
|
Post by chuckc on Jul 23, 2015 17:59:24 GMT -8
My only compliant/suggestion is stop doing repeats! Its one thing if you are "replacing" a 40 year old Athearn bluebox covered hopper, its another when the item being replaced only has minor deficiencies that 90% of modelers don't notice. I would much rather see an unmodeled variation. Prime example of what NOT to do, and what to do are Exactrail and Atlas. Exactrail has done several repeats; PS5344, FMC ABOX 5277, etc... Sure, the Athearn's were not as detailed, but they were hardly Bluebox. Yes, they were a little too wide, but 90% of modelers didn't notice or don't care... Would it have killed Exactrail to do the "Plate B" version, or the PCF ABOX? I would have bought some. Hard to justify spending $30 a new car when I already have a 90% model. Compare that to Atlas' FMC cars. Rather then just do a "new and improved" version of the Athearn cars, they did "Plate B" variations. As a result, I bought about 20 in total. |
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Jul 23, 2015 20:58:19 GMT -8
stottman and chuckc--
Welcome!
I must respectfully disagree.
The Athearn boxcars not only have problems with excessive scale width, but the PS 5277 also has issues with rib/panel spacing. Ever since I learned the width is way off, it has been rather noticeable to me in my freight trains--so I have eliminated (sold off) all those Athearn boxcars from my layout.
I had replaced them with the Intermountain PS 5277 and the Exactrail PS 5344 boxcars...prior to changing my focus to primarily late steam era.
I'm glad that both Intermountain and Exactrail offer some very nice "modern" PS boxcars even if they cost more than Athearn and are, for some, "nearly" duplicates. (Saying that does an injustice to both Intermountain and Exactrail's products, which are very clearly better models).
Respectfully--
John
|
|
|
|
Post by drolsen on Jul 24, 2015 3:51:21 GMT -8
I have to agree with John. While the Athearn ABOX, based on the upgraded MDC tooling, and the PS 5344 are decent, the ExactRail versions are superior models, and I'm glad that I held out for them. As much as I'd like to see a PC&F ABOX, they were built in much smaller numbers than the FMC version (400 vs. 2050), so the FMC prototype was a logical choice for ExactRail, especially since they were willing to tool the two different roofs to replicate the two orders (ABOX 50400-50999 vs. 51000-52449). The separate door locking bars and the underbody detail really set the model apart, in my opinion.
The Athearn PS 5344 is pretty nice, and a good starting point for a detailing project, but the ExactRail model, with its correct width and underbody detail, wins out for me. I never bought more than 4 or 5 of the Athearn cars (mostly undecorated), so the duplication doesn't really affect me. One thing to keep in mind is that we don't know how long ago Chris Clune tooled their model, so if they already had the tooling on hand, I don't blame them for capitalizing on a popular prototype.
I do agree that we could use a Plate B PS 5144, PS 5077, or at least a PS 5277 with early sine wave ends (the Intermountain and Athearn/MDC models have the square end corrugations). I'd like to see a PCF 5077 also. The problem is that when faced with a choice between a PS 5344 with a couple dozen prototype roadnames and the PS 5144 (only NOPB as the original owner?) or even a PS 5077 (a dozen or so), an manufacturer is probably going to opt for the model than can produce 5 or 6 runs of different roadnames to get a good return on their investment. With the limited run approach to manufacturing nowadays, one manufacturer's model will sell out and be pretty scarce for several years, so it's hard to fault another manufacturer for seeing an opportunity to sell a quality model of a popular prototype. There are tons of interesting prototypes out there - box cars, tank cars, gondolas, etc. - but unfortunately, they're not all going to sell well just because they haven't been made before.
Definitely looking forward to seeing what these new guys come out with!
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 24, 2015 4:43:29 GMT -8
I don't know if it is realistic or not, but but I'll but a plug in for the SP 40' rebuilt box cars which appeared in all over the place freight trains of the 70's (in many photo's) and have wanted models of them for years. Here are a few photo's from rr-fallenflags.org:    References from Railgoats website: www.railgoat.railfan.net/spcars/bytype/box/40_yellow_stripe_rebuilds.htmI honestly don't know how popular they would be but they sure were seen in a lot of freight trains all over the midwest and west through the 1970's and early 1980's. Cheers, Jim Fitch |
|
|
|
Post by drolsen on Jul 24, 2015 5:08:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 24, 2015 5:44:16 GMT -8
Dave,
Yes, I am aware of that - for better or worse. There has been a lot of "crickets" for quite some time - a lot of dead air. I have asked a number of times and got nothing but radio silence.
If it is a dead project, by golly I'd sure like to see someone else pick it up. So I'm all for rattling some cages to see if I we can get some action out of somebody! If Hi-Tech has lost interest, then by all means, let it go so someone else can bring it to fruition within our life time!
Jim
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 9:12:12 GMT -8
I only ask for undecorated locomotive models and NO GRUE BROBS!
My best guess for the first release is a freight car. Probably a covered hopper type car.
Brian
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 28, 2015 9:36:03 GMT -8
I only ask for undecorated locomotive models and NO GRUE BROBS! My best guess for the first release is a freight car. Probably a covered hopper type car. Brian grue brob pie is grude with icue gream! oh.... glue blobs! I had to run that through my unbgb-discombobulator machine! Covered hopper would be welcome - of course if it's something that falls with in the 1965-1985 time frame naturally! |
|
|
|
Post by hovehicle on Jul 28, 2015 10:30:23 GMT -8
A covered hopper would be welcome of course, if it's something that falls within the 1990-2010 time frame.
Vito L.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 28, 2015 13:58:52 GMT -8
hah hah, can't please everyone! Oh well, we get what we are given!
|
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Jul 28, 2015 14:10:22 GMT -8
 its about Time the Greenville GV-2 Covered Hoppers were done. and don't just do the more common 2 Bay cars,do the 3 Bay cars also. then move up to the GV-4000 and larger cars. Greenville,the Rodney Dangerfield of Car Builders !! Spikre 
|
|
|
|
Post by islandmodelworks on Jul 28, 2015 16:53:01 GMT -8
NJ Transit's fee's are reportedly outrageous!! Yes they are!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Jul 28, 2015 17:40:19 GMT -8
NJ Transit's fee's are reportedly outrageous!! Yes they are!!!! Shocker. This from the geniuses that said taking pictures of their trains was illegal. Jersey. |
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 28, 2015 21:22:28 GMT -8
Shocker. This from the geniuses that said taking pictures of their trains was illegal. Jersey. they still do and the cops even tell railfans that njtransit owns the sidewalks araound the stations lol |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 22:01:33 GMT -8
Hello,
Just a little wish list :
- ACF 4600 and 5250 covered hoppers
- Thrall 86-footers (welded)
- Greenville 86-footers
Maybe one day we'll have state-of-the-art models of these...
Regards,
Pierre BARBE
|
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 29, 2015 13:26:13 GMT -8
I recommended to them articulated 2 or 3 car municipal waste cars. Like these. Plus they gotta offer the smaller containers since nobody else does. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by bigblow69 on Jul 29, 2015 13:28:22 GMT -8
I recommended to them articulated 2 or 3 car municipal waste cars. Like these. Plus they gotta offer the smaller containers since nobody else does. Never seen those before but would be a neat model. |
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 29, 2015 13:33:05 GMT -8
I recommended to them articulated 2 or 3 car municipal waste cars. Like these. Plus they gotta offer the smaller containers since nobody else does. Never seen those before but would be a neat model. Shane? Shane?  Look, look, something different and people like it, make it happen!! LoL |
|
|
|
Post by bdhicks on Jul 29, 2015 18:18:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Jul 29, 2015 18:31:23 GMT -8
Garbage trains don't sell well.
Only a few die hard model them.
ACF hoppers!
|
|
|
|
Post by ScaleTrains.com on Jul 29, 2015 18:51:57 GMT -8
We have several FCA models on our "to do" list. We've contacted FCA numerous times over the past several months and have not been successful finding the right person who can provide documentation. If any forum members know someone at FCA who can assist or point us in the right direction, please e-mail me at Shane@ScaleTrains.com. We would greatly appreciate the help. Sincerely, Shane Shane Wilson President ScaleTrains.com, Inc. |
|
|
|
Post by runs2waynoka on Jul 29, 2015 19:54:00 GMT -8
I recommended to them articulated 2 or 3 car municipal waste cars. Like these. Plus they gotta offer the smaller containers since nobody else does. Yeah I'd love to see these done as well, as they're a common sight in my area. There was an article in RMC serveral years ago on building them. I think these are primarily used for more dense commodities like dirty dirt, so they travel to landfills all over the country in general non-unit train service. Up until several years ago, BNSF used to serve a transload facility at Grote, CO, east of La Junta, that recieved many of these, the "EPIC", EPIX versions, every week loaded with dried municipal sewage from New York and New Jersey. The containers were transloaded and the sludge was dumped on farm fields. Needless to say, you could always smell them, especially in summer, so they were referred to as "sh*t stacks" on the railroad, lol. Brad |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Jul 29, 2015 20:42:09 GMT -8
Garbage trains regularly traverse my favorite railroad. I have zero desire to model them. I know they're an element of the entire scene. Perhaps someday I will feel compelled to model them. Not today. And not tomorrow.
Oh, yeah. Graffiti. For some reason I just can't explain, I'll pass on modeling that, too.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsftcdiv on Jul 30, 2015 9:45:30 GMT -8
Though solid garbage trains don't exist here, these EPIC 2 articulated spines do get out this way in onsie-twosie sets on the BNSF Northern Transcon. Not sure where they go to. but I see enough of them to justify having a few. They run in manifest trains, so i suspect some customer up the line west. They kinda have the look of the spines front range did, and the containers likely wouldn't be too tough to do either. But, I'd rather not have to do them….and those spines were @#$%^&*!
Dave Burman
modeling the modern Twin Cities
Trempealeau, WI
|
|
|
|
Post by 12bridge on Jul 30, 2015 9:51:10 GMT -8
Amazingly enough, not everyone models grain either.
For me, those 2 unit spines make up a good portion of my railroads business. They were loaded in Brooklyn, NY and shipped to Texas.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Jul 30, 2015 10:10:17 GMT -8
Hopefully this new company will have the business awareness to avoid a niche garbage car.
At least out of the gate.
For its long term prosperity I hope.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 30, 2015 10:50:37 GMT -8
I think Shane is pretty Savvy and will focus on items which will have some fairly broad appeal. No company wants to produce products which are too niche that they will be mega limited because it's just not going to serve enough people on both sides if you know what I mean. A product needs to be a money maker so the company can continue to re-invest, be profitable and we all can be happy customers, by-and-large - to borrow a catch phrase from Wall-e, heh heh ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by notabob on Jul 30, 2015 11:17:32 GMT -8
Hopefully this new company will have the business awareness to avoid taking business advise from random folks in online forums. Out of the gate as well as down the road. Thankfully, I'm pretty sure that they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Jul 30, 2015 11:20:36 GMT -8
Hopefully this new company will have the business awareness to avoid taking business advise from random folks in online forums. Out of the gate as well as down the road. Thankfully, I'm pretty sure that they do. Including yourself ? Tangent has done well picking cars that sell over and over again. I am sure this one will as well and avoid niche runs of cars like the garbage car. Or Ingalls. Or carbon car. Etc. The freight car company reference makes many widely seen coal cars, and regular intermodal cars. |
|
