|
|
Post by nw611 on Aug 25, 2016 12:41:17 GMT -8
Walthers' new run of F7s, announced a few weeks ago (ATSF, CP, CB&Q, PRR, SP and SOU), was downgraded from Proto to Mainline. According to the descriptions it seems that all the Proto features will be maintained, but the announcement says "all new tooling". Any comments? Ciao. RG
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 25, 2016 12:53:02 GMT -8
With Walthers it's always a wait and see proposition. That's my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by scl1234 on Aug 25, 2016 13:02:34 GMT -8
Here's a link that leads to the option to open PDF for the Mainline F7. "Newly tooled" could mean something as simple as removing road-specific details to make the now more generic model "close-enough" for more road names...much like Bachmann would do, but with a more reliable drive. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2016 13:26:27 GMT -8
I don't think they were ever announced as being in the root line? My take is they're more generic and lacking road specific details.
|
|
|
|
Post by theengineshed on Aug 25, 2016 14:16:38 GMT -8
If it is all new tooling, lets hope they took a hard look at a Highliner shell.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Aug 25, 2016 16:54:31 GMT -8
This weekend I was thinking about the Southern F's in this announcement. Ignoring that ANOTHER F7 has been announced, the Mainline F7 has left me baffled. At first, I was thinking that it was a way to get less "popular" roadnames out at a cheaper price. If so, then why include ESPEE and PRR? The next thought was they were thinking of a less expensive locomotive to go with their Mainline passenger cars. The only problem with that is most of the SOU F7A's and F7B's did not have steam generators, and I think the ATSF scheme was for freight F's. Concerning at least the Southern F's, it would probably be about on par with the initial Genesis F's, minus grabs and lift rings, as far as detailing go. One advantage might be the fuel tank area, but the revised Genesis F's already have where one could model the removed skirting.
James Bilbrey
LaVergne, TN
P.S. On a personal note, but as nice as a A-B-A set would look, the simple fact of the matter to me is that a Genesis GP9 in Southern which is coming out around the same time would look more at home on my layout. And, I already have a CofG plywood-sheathed caboose kit. With limited funds, it almost becomes a no-brainer as far as how I will likely spend my $$$.
|
|
|
|
Post by dharris on Aug 25, 2016 18:00:26 GMT -8
Doesnt Waltners own the Proto 1000 F unit tooling?
Related maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 26, 2016 1:18:54 GMT -8
Doesnt Waltners own the Proto 1000 F unit tooling? Related maybe. The Proto 1000 F tooling was IIRC, F3's with chicken wire between the portals. Nothing else. |
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Aug 26, 2016 10:13:01 GMT -8
 Walthers could use the former Penn-Line/Life Like F7 shell. its already in some train sets. Forward,,,into the Past ! Spikre 
|
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Aug 27, 2016 14:15:19 GMT -8
I would guess it to be a cheapened P1K. I would guess the shell will be generic with some additional molded on features. It will be interesting to see what they do about the drive. The P1K had an excellent can motor that was not very compatible with sound. I'm sure they will Waltherize the truck gears and pickups. It will be quiet. It will be interesting to see how its performance stacks against the other options out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Aug 27, 2016 15:11:39 GMT -8
. The P1K had an excellent can motor that was not very compatible with sound. . Can you explain that? I'm just looking for info how that would be? I don't have any P1K just curious. I have excess F units as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Aug 27, 2016 16:19:36 GMT -8
Karl,
I am in the midst of a test series where I compare various motors in the same environment. I also subject them to different electronic modules to see that impact as well. I have been using three different P1K can motors from P1K F3's. I am comparing with stock P2K, Athearn BB, Mashima, Sagami, Helix humper, Athearn high performance DCC ready, Kato, Atlas and Roco. I am using a DOE of sorts, so the results will be extendable when finished. I have a bunch of numbers and a few plots. Unfortunately, None of the comparisons are ready to show here. Based on my performance criteria the P1K is setting the standard in these tests. I base this on the performance criteria I have defined for this testing. The criteria is developed on my site. I have noticed the P1K motor drive combination is making more noise at 9 volts and above, then say the Sagami or Mashima can motors. These tests are being run with a pure DC signal. No pulse wave.
At this point I feel the P1K can motor is excellent for performance, but makes more noise than a sound unit would tolerate.
Sound creates a quandary. Noise is from a vibration. Power in the motor creates a vibration. The more power the larger the potential vibration/noise. A potential solution to this problem is to down size the motor power. To the point where the motor will not spin the engines wheels at 12 volts on level track. I have seen a number of these motors. They are very quiet. However, they run slow, low momentum. The do not generate much draw bar force, limited torque. This is with fifty percent more weight on the engine than the average. The balance is a delicate one. If all one wanted to here was bells whistles and a generic growl, then the P1K motor would be fine. However if your wanting to hear the particular diesel motor noise during all phases of it operation, then this motor is not the one to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 27, 2016 16:32:42 GMT -8
I recall back when the P1K F3's were first out the reviews give them high marks for running qualities.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Aug 27, 2016 22:12:47 GMT -8
Yeah, I've got a bunch of units with those P1K/P2K can motors (they used the same ones in certain units across the line - SW9/1200's, RS10/11/18's, C-liners, F3's, GP38-2's, SD45's, and other later releases) and they are very smooth and quiet performers, even at top speed. Perhaps you actually need to expand your sample size above 3 units of one specific model...bad batches and unbalanced flywheels can happen, creating noise and vibration issues. I put more faith in real-world testing (read as actually running the models in question, and a wide sample size of them from different production batches at that) than excessive scientific testing of a few select models on a workbench. Walthers' new run of F7s, announced a few weeks ago (ATSF, CP, CB&Q, PRR, SP and SOU), was downgraded from Proto to Mainline. According to the descriptions it seems that all the Proto features will be maintained, but the announcement says "all new tooling". Any comments? Ciao. RG CP never had any F7 A-units, only FP7's and F7B's. Therefore the CP F7A they're doing is one giant foooobie. |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 28, 2016 4:55:38 GMT -8
The Proto1000 F3's were one of the earlier decent F unit after Stewart offered. I didn't need any in that configuration as D&RGW never had the chicken wire grills; that didn't stop LL from painting them for D&RGW however.
For years the Athearn/Globe was the only commonly available plastic F7 available in HO. Then in the late 1980's Stewart began producing their much nicer shell with their excellent KATO drive.
By the mid-late 1990's, from memory around 96/97, Proto 1000 began offering their F3s and they looked quite good and got good scores for running characteristics. Mind you, this was before the Highliner/Genesis F's or the Intermountain F's so for a significant number of years the P1K F's filled an important niche in the fairly limited HO plastic F model market. The only down side was P1K was only offered in one body style, the F3A was a mid-phase version so it did limit what was possible to offer prototypically. If a modeler wasn't concerned too much about wrong phase, the P1K was one of the nicer, lower cost but good running F units until the Genesis, Intermountain and later day Walthers P2k came along. Of course there were some other makes that came along in the 90's such as MRC, Bachman Plus etc. but those weren't really in the running for modelers who wanted a good looking F body.
|
|
|
|
Post by bar on Aug 28, 2016 6:16:50 GMT -8
The P2K F3 as produced was well-suited to my B&A layout plan, as the RR rostered 4 early models with high fans, including the preserved 502, with a quiet, durable drive. In the late 1990s they could be had for $20 a piece, so I stocked up. The Proto BL2, GP9 and F made it easy for me to run pulpwood and paper trains in northern Maine.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Aug 29, 2016 18:22:35 GMT -8
IIRC, the only complaint concerning the running qualities of the P1K F3 was that it ran slightly faster in one direction than the other. This was due to the directional lighting and having only one bulb.
Still, I don't think this new F7 will be related to the P1K F3. The tooling for the fans, sides, screens, and possibly the ends would need to be changed. The molded on grabs removed and new holes for grabs. Also, the fuel tank and battery box area is simplified on the old P1K F3 when compared to the Proto F7.
James Bilbrey
LaVergne, TN
|
|
|
|
Post by trainguy99 on Aug 30, 2016 3:31:54 GMT -8
"All-new tooling" doesn't sound like the Proto 1000 F3 to me. It would make sense if the body shell looked like the Walthers Proto F7 without all the details added.
Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 30, 2016 4:38:02 GMT -8
"All-new tooling" doesn't sound like the Proto 1000 F3 to me. It would make sense if the body shell looked like the Walthers Proto F7 without all the details added. Ralph Yes, if it's being advertised as a Mainline F7, the body details if not modular, would require a totally new mold for the shell anyway, since the F3 of the old P1K with the chicken wire between the portals and other F3 details require a new mold to get to an F7. No other way around it that I can see. |
|
|
|
Post by roadkill on Aug 30, 2016 7:35:59 GMT -8
If it is all new tooling, lets hope they took a hard look at a Highliner shell. Given their, er, "attention to detail" on the upcoming GP35 Phase 2 I wouldn't hold yer breath... |
|
|
|
Post by nw611 on Aug 30, 2016 14:40:35 GMT -8
IIRC in the past F3s and F7s were both offered as P2Ks. Now Walthers has announced a new run of F7A/Bs in the Proto brand (ATSF warbonnet, BN, CN, C&O and UP) for delivery in April 2017 and in the Mainline brand (all new tooling) for delivery in February 2017. There is still something that I don't undestand. Why is Walthers announcing "all new tooling" in the Mainline brand when it already has decent tooling for the Proto brand? Ciao. RG
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 30, 2016 14:55:58 GMT -8
Perhaps they want to cast the ladder grabs (or whatever they're called--the vertical ones) onto the body. A typical P1K sort of thing.
And, for that matter, there may be other items that are separate on the P2K that they don't want separate--fans come to mind.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by GP40P-2 on Aug 30, 2016 15:28:49 GMT -8
Since we don't have nearly enough F-units yet, now we can have multiple different F-units from the same manufacturer. Even though Genesis and Rapido pretty much nailed them.
Let's sign up each current manufacturer of F-units to budget, regular, operator, train set, museum, and Chuggington versions, each with their own tooling. And bring back the dead from Tyco, etc as well. And no skimping on the FP and FL versions.
And Scale Trains, Exactrail, Tangent, Moloco, Rivarossi, and Atlas each need to get on the bandwagon as well!
MORE F-UNITS NOW!!!!!!! <sarc off>
|
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Sept 1, 2016 4:51:09 GMT -8
Hey, MRC can bring back the Tyco ones in the Mantua line.
And don't forget those Model Power F2s that use the old Marx shell.
Oddly, Walthers already has a low-end F7 shell with cast-in details. They inherited Life-Like's old one, which started out as a Penn Line piece, and came to LL via Varney (and is itself another clone of Athearn/Globe). Although very possible the tooling is worn out by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Sept 1, 2016 6:23:58 GMT -8
Hey, MRC can bring back the Tyco ones in the Mantua line. And don't forget those Model Power F2s that use the old Marx shell. Oddly, Walthers already has a low-end F7 shell with cast-in details. They inherited Life-Like's old one, which started out as a Penn Line piece, and came to LL via Varney (and is itself another clone of Athearn/Globe). Although very possible the tooling is worn out by now. How do people keep track of who has who's tooling? The history behind this is amazing. |
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Sept 2, 2016 6:18:10 GMT -8
When you deal in "tinplate" and collector HO you need to be able to identify the pieces. The rest is a combination of existing books, old catalogs and ads, and online resources.
|
|
|
|
Post by antoniofp45 on Sept 2, 2016 19:32:12 GMT -8
IVRR325Respectfully...Yipes...........I hope not! I had a pair of those way back in the 70s. Once I became "a modeler", my single biggest turn-off were those huge windshield openings. I may be nostalgic, but I don't miss those shells one bit! From my limited understanding the shells of the upcoming units will look decent, dimensions-wise, with limited detailing. I have a Stewart Hobbies NYC F7 that I bought back in the mid 1990s. If the shells of the new Mainline "F's" look as good or better in comparison, then I'm definitely interested. Hey, MRC can bring back the Tyco ones in the Mantua line. And don't forget those Model Power F2s that use the old Marx shell. Oddly, Walthers already has a low-end F7 shell with cast-in details. They inherited Life-Like's old one, which started out as a Penn Line piece, and came to LL via Varney (and is itself another clone of Athearn/Globe). Although very possible the tooling is worn out by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by dolben13 on Jul 2, 2018 19:50:10 GMT -8
I wanted to reply on this, I just received my F7 Southern Pacific unit - I guess I was hoping for more than I got. Its a Bachmann, can not tell any difference in the shells. But on another note and I guess I will find out but the unit had to be returned already for the following issues. 1. when engine moves forward the entire engine rocks to the direction the motor is turning, in reverse the entire engine rocks to the other direction leaving the engine running on its side down the rails instead of straight. - This problem I dont think there going to be able to fix which I will have to return unit. 2. the packaging that the unit is shipped in rubbed the paint off the shell in two locations. 3. The sound unit has a buzz noise when engine sitting on track idle, noise goes away after unit starts to move. But in review the Walthers F7 unit are the same as the Bachmann F7 units and at this point the Bachmann wins hands down mainly better sound! I will wait for its return to see how Walthers service repairs these issue, because I have the Milwaukee Road unit on order and not sure at this time if I will cancel that order yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 3, 2018 5:26:37 GMT -8
Has Bachmann tooled a new F unit shell? Otherwise isn't the heritage from the old Bachman Plus F7 which has an odd mix of phase details and the batton strip on the pilot is not centered as it should be but rather bottom justified. The way I can tell a Botchman Plus heritage is the odd mix of phase details and the bottom justified batton on the pilot. Now if Bachman has tooled an all new F7 shell, then it's something I wasn't up on.
The Walthers Mainline F7 I would have assumed is based on the Walthers Proto 2000 F units of which I have some from around 2009 or 2010, and while the shells are not Genesis level, they are pretty decent in terms of having the EMD look and contours.
|
|
|
|
Post by trainguy99 on Jul 3, 2018 8:31:55 GMT -8
AFAIK the Bachmann unit is not a plausible F unit. The new Mainline F units appear to be based on the Proto F and to be a plausible F7 configuration. That's a big difference to me, even if neither unit has a Genesis or Proto level of detail.
Did you contact Walthers about your locomotive?
|
|
