|
|
Post by jaygee on Mar 1, 2017 18:35:34 GMT -8
Went to the LHS today to check out the Athearn RS3. What a POS ! Flimsy railings all over with the front and rear end plate hand holds completely missing ! Cab windows are a joke. Overall quality looks like this thingie was assembled by baboons in Nairobi ! Sure hope Bowser rises to the challenge on this puppy. Have to stick with my Atlas junkers for the time being.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Mar 1, 2017 19:46:12 GMT -8
Paul,
Thank you for posting the dimensions. While I am glad that Bowser went out and measured at least two existing RS3's, it is as I said before. We'll have another RS3 that likely won't look like the other two - Atlas and MDC/Athearn. It's for this reason that I sold my Athearn RS3's. The Phase 3 RS3's outnumbered the Phase 1's on the L&N. And, I really only need one Phase 3 RS3 to complete my collection of TC RS3's.
Jaygee, I understand your feelings. I remember going through a stack of Athearn L&N RS3 at a LHS before I found one that didnt have any visible flaws. IIRC, there were examples with scratched paint, dangling trucks, etc. in the stack.
James Bilbrey
LaVergne, TN
|
|
|
|
Post by shinobi on Mar 1, 2017 21:14:42 GMT -8
I have a copy of the Northern Pacific painters diagram here: myp48.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/img051.jpgI'm told it's an exact scale drawing because the painters had to scale the design to fit the locomotive. I think it's interesting to note that although the cab roof profile follows the same contour as the hood roof profile, the hood roof still appears flatter in the drawing because of the optical illusion created by the more extreme curves at the edges of the cab. It would be interesting to see how the various manufacturers compare with some other dimensions, such as height over hood, height over cab, length of frame, hood width, etc. It'd also be interesting to see how the Bachmann RS-3 compares. I ran Paul's measurements through conversion to mm and then worked out the discrepancy. real alco long hood length 113.3602mm hobbytown long hood length 115.1128mm +1.7526mm atlas long hood length 111.2774mm -2.0828mm athearn long hood length 114.9604mm +1.6002mm real alco short hood length 31.7754mm hobbytown short hood length 33.6296mm +1.8542mm atlas short hood length 31.369mm -0.4064mm athearn short hood length 30.4038mm -1.3716mm real alco cab length 21.082mm hobbytown cab length 21.082mm atlas cab length 21.6662mm +0.5842mm athearn cab length 21.6662mm +0.5842mm Based on this, it would seem that an Athearn long hood, Atlas short hood, and Hobbytown cab would be the best combination. The Atlas long hood is about 7 scale inches too short, while the Athearn is 5 scale inches too long. The Atlas short hood is only 1.5 scale inches too short. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Mar 1, 2017 21:39:30 GMT -8
Aw heck, just 3D scan one!
Worked for the Rapido FPA4, RDC and fishbowl...
|
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Mar 1, 2017 22:43:37 GMT -8
Well, at least they're all better than the AHM/Model Power Mehano RS2.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Mar 2, 2017 3:26:09 GMT -8
Well, at least they're all better than the AHM/Model Power Mehano RS2. I wuz wonderin' when somebody would mention those "highly accurate" RS2s.  |
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Mar 2, 2017 6:28:12 GMT -8
Heaven help Bowser on their RS3, because I can imagine the thread if they get something wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by roadkill on Mar 2, 2017 11:04:43 GMT -8
Heaven help Bowser on their RS3, because I can imagine the thread if they get something wrong. They're gonna hit one outta the park with their RS3, bank on it. |
|
|
|
Post by jaygee on Mar 4, 2017 16:14:08 GMT -8
Guess we're all betting on Bowser.....in the mean time I've got a new appreciation for my zillion year old Atlas Kato !
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Mar 5, 2017 3:38:29 GMT -8
Guess we're all betting on Bowser.....in the mean time I've got a new appreciation for my zillion year old Atlas Kato ! I don't think I'll be buying any Bowser RS-3s since I have a Atlas/Kato SCL RS-3 and have and a chance of obtaining the second SCL number Atlas did. The smart betters money is riding on Bowser making a detail or paint mistake on their RS-3 and thusly raising the ire of the forum. It's a mathematical certainly.  |
|
|
|
Post by Chet on Mar 6, 2017 8:22:39 GMT -8
I bought an Atlas (Kato) RS-3 when they first brought it out some time in the 90's just to see how they ran. I was so impressed with them I ended up with a fleet of RS=1's, RS-3's, RS-11's and RD-4/5. Twenty some years later they still run like a Swiss watch. I don't need any more as these have been serving me quite well for years. I am not a river counter and not really worried about the contours of the cab or body. The look just fine to me.  If for some reason I did need some more, I would probably get the Bowsers. |
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Mar 9, 2017 14:25:38 GMT -8
Well reviewing the dimensions, it is clear that all of the three favorites are off. The over all length seems to be about right. The compromise may have had to do with clearance on 18 inch radius curves, drive and external. The same maybe said for the roof issues. It may have been driven by the drive choice at design, fly wheels and motor.
In my generic motor testing, I am amazed at how certain shells restrict the motor combination that can be used. The FRP/BB GP38 and 40 shell widths are particularly restrictive. A few mm on each side would help, but the existing shell is already wider than the scaled dimensions. Hopefully today's material and plastic molding technologies and the available motors will give us a close match to the actual scaled dimensions were talking about here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Mar 11, 2017 11:58:27 GMT -8
FWIW,the Atlas/Kato RS-3 was supposed to be out by Christmas 1984. not sure exactly when they did arrive,but early 1985 seems reasonable. the RS-11 was supposed to be out by 12/85,so early 86 seems reasonable. the RSD-4/5 followed sometime after that,as did the RSD-12, C424/425s, RS-1s and S-2s,all 80s releases. note-- the S2/4s were Supplied by ROCO,they were never Kato locos. Spikre 
|
|
|
|
Post by steveturner on Mar 11, 2017 12:24:18 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Mar 11, 2017 12:50:24 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve Yeah, real motors...big amp-suckin' motors, or motors that didn't run worth a mouses' fart, often open frame, with no flywheels. Or the noisy buzzing pancake motors all the Life-Like, Tyco and Bachmanns were using. Or the Athearn gold-can motor that was hit-or-miss in running quality, that replaced the even older widebody "ring magnet" Athearn motor (another amp sucker). There's a reason why, despite the Athearn gold motor's varying QC, many people threw other manufacturer's shells on Athearn drives... |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 11, 2017 13:02:52 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Steve, I guess you weren't standing next to me. I've been complaining about cast-on grabs since the early sixties. And making every effort to avoid them. Back then, that was REALLY difficult. But the various wood craftsman kits qualified. Ed, who is modifying a Hobbytown drive as we "speak". Right now (well, when I leave this screen), I've got a chunk of brass in the milling machine. |
|
|
|
Post by roadkill on Mar 11, 2017 13:08:06 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Steve, I guess you weren't standing next to me. I've been complaining about cast-on grabs since the early sixties. And making every effort to avoid them. Back then, that was REALLY difficult. But the various wood craftsman kits qualified. Ed, who is modifying a Hobbytown drive as we "speak". Right now (well, when I leave this screen), I've got a chunk of brass in the milling machine. He wasn't around me, either. The first thing I did when I bought my first Atlas/Kato RS3 was to carve off the cast grabs and bend me some new ones. This was back in '85 when they first hit the market. |
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Mar 11, 2017 15:49:38 GMT -8
I bought an Atlas (Kato) RS-3 when they first brought it out some time in the 90's just to see how they ran. I was so impressed with them I ended up with a fleet of RS=1's, RS-3's, RS-11's and RD-4/5. Twenty some years later they still run like a Swiss watch. I don't need any more as these have been serving me quite well for years. I am not a river counter and not really worried about the contours of the cab or body. The look just fine to me. I really thought I had "arrived" in the hobby when I got a Kato RS3 in the late 80's [despite the molded-on grabs, the shell being painted the wrong color for the L&N, the "pyramid" exhaust stack, etc.]. Despite being the oldest locomotive I have, it still runs like, well, a Kato. The chassis no longer has a shell painted in the incorrect color; I replaced and repainted the shell, carved off the grabs, and added other details so that it matches my Atlas [China] RS3's. It's easy to discount the Kato RS3 now. But I would argue that it was a revolutionary product at the time of its release. To put things in perspective, the Athearn "Blue Box" SD40-2 had just been released. Atlas had some locomotives with "scale-width" hoods, but they were the single piece GP38/40 and SD35 shells. Just about every locomotive at that time had molded-on grabs and other details. Tread on the walkways - what was that? Ditto for see-thru steps and fans. And, those were the "top-tier" locomotives. The AHM, Bachmann, Life-Like, Model Power, and Tyco locomotives were worse - many only had one powered truck, square molded-on handrails that were about 6-inches in diameter, and details that were just plain wrong. I was really surprised to see the HO Collectors magazine running an article on repowering the Bicentennial C430 with a Bowser C430. My initial thought was who would spend that kind of money on such a project. Then, it hit me. There is a certain amount of nostalgia connected with these old releases. It is just like one of the most pleasing projects of mine from last year - taking a Bowser C630 shell [from one of their fire-sales] and mounting it on a Stewart Century frame] as it transported the friend that gave me the chassis back to his childhood in OH where he saw the early Conrail Centuries in service. We tend to forget nostalgic aspect of the hobby. James Bilbrey LaVergne, TN |
|
|
|
Post by steveturner on Mar 11, 2017 16:46:36 GMT -8
So guys did the separate grabs and detail thingy become about when production of our hobby moved to China. Not sure when I got into the hobby that separate details were common until the Proto 2000 units were born. My first unit was a mid 80s Atlas/Kato which still runs today and my first loco with separate details was a Proto GP 7. I'm sure it was awhile before Atlas did the separate added details. Time passes and I'm a bit fuzzy on the timelines. Looking at my old Proto 2000 units they are crisper and better put together than some of todays offerings. My Intermountain locos are terrible, detail drops off and execution of install of details not the greatest. In fairness I have had a few models from different MFGS lately either locos or cars where the Chinese workmanship quality has been some what below what I would expect compared to times in the past. But we work around these problems and fix them up when we get them. As of late I have been on an Athearn blue box crusade...............looking at the price of 3 to 5 dollars each I feel like I'm in another world putting them together HA!. Darn those detail lacking cars HA!.Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Mar 11, 2017 16:59:43 GMT -8
I bought an Atlas (Kato) RS-3 when they first brought it out some time in the 90's just to see how they ran. I was so impressed with them I ended up with a fleet of RS=1's, RS-3's, RS-11's and RD-4/5. Twenty some years later they still run like a Swiss watch. I don't need any more as these have been serving me quite well for years. I am not a river counter and not really worried about the contours of the cab or body. The look just fine to me. I really thought I had "arrived" in the hobby when I got a Kato RS3 in the late 80's [despite the molded-on grabs, the shell being painted the wrong color for the L&N, the "pyramid" exhaust stack, etc.]. Despite being the oldest locomotive I have, it still runs like, well, a Kato. The chassis no longer has a shell painted in the incorrect color; I replaced and repainted the shell, carved off the grabs, and added other details so that it matches my Atlas [China] RS3's. It's easy to discount the Kato RS3 now. But I would argue that it was a revolutionary product at the time of its release. To put things in perspective, the Athearn "Blue Box" SD40-2 had just been released. Atlas had some locomotives with "scale-width" hoods, but they were the single piece GP38/40 and SD35 shells. Just about every locomotive at that time had molded-on grabs and other details. Tread on the walkways - what was that? Ditto for see-thru steps and fans. And, those were the "top-tier" locomotives. The AHM, Bachmann, Life-Like, Model Power, and Tyco locomotives were worse - many only had one powered truck, square molded-on handrails that were about 6-inches in diameter, and details that were just plain wrong. I was really surprised to see the HO Collectors magazine running an article on repowering the Bicentennial C430 with a Bowser C430. My initial thought was who would spend that kind of money on such a project. Then, it hit me. There is a certain amount of nostalgia connected with these old releases. It is just like one of the most pleasing projects of mine from last year - taking a Bowser C630 shell [from one of their fire-sales] and mounting it on a Stewart Century frame] as it transported the friend that gave me the chassis back to his childhood in OH where he saw the early Conrail Centuries in service. We tend to forget nostalgic aspect of the hobby. James Bilbrey LaVergne, TN Thats why I adding the kaslo kit to the rivarossi u25c shell and custom drive. Some day I will get it done |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Mar 11, 2017 17:02:12 GMT -8
Athearn put drill dimples instead of cast grabs on their GP38-2 and GP50 models back in the 80s (remember the ads: "Beautiful Blombergs"?). Detail parts from DA and DW (among others) were widely available in any self-respecting train shop. So I'd say the detail revolution certainly began before the offshoring to China phenomenon.
For the record, I've never been satisfied with crappy motors and cast-on grabs. I've been remotoring and carving grabs off since I got into this racket when I was thirteen. Thirty years later and still doing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Mar 11, 2017 17:16:54 GMT -8
So guys did the separate grabs and detail thingy become about when production of our hobby moved to China. Not sure when I got into the hobby that separate details were common until the Proto 2000 units were born. My first unit was a mid 80s Atlas/Kato which still runs today and my first loco with separate details was a Proto GP 7. I'm sure it was awhile before Atlas did the separate added details. Time passes and I'm a bit fuzzy on the timelines. Looking at my old Proto 2000 units they are crisper and better put together than some of todays offerings. My Intermountain locos are terrible, detail drops off and execution of install of details not the greatest. In fairness I have had a few models from different MFGS lately either locos or cars where the Chinese workmanship quality has been some what below what I would expect compared to times in the past. But we work around these problems and fix them up when we get them. As of late I have been on an Athearn blue box crusade...............looking at the price of 3 to 5 dollars each I feel like I'm in another world putting them together HA!. Darn those detail lacking cars HA!.Steve IIRC, the first "super-detailed" locomotive was P2K's BL2 - probably not the most common locomotive to start this trend with, LOL. Around the same time, Bachmann came out with their "Spectrum" line. The trend really started in stages. Locomotives such as Athearn's GP38-2 and Atlas's U36C were the first stage where one didn't have molded on grabs. The shells were cast with "dimples" to locate the grabs, lift rings, cut-levers, etc. Then, you had some of the Atlas locomotives that included grabs but you had to install them. Finally, you had the P2K locomotives that included the details already installed. The older P2K locomotives were nice for what they were at the time, and I still enjoy improving them from time to time. One didn't have to worry about the details falling off as most of them were melted into the shell, which made stripping and repainting them "challenging" at times. And, the details that were included were often generic. James Bilbrey LaVergne, TN |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Mar 11, 2017 17:23:47 GMT -8
So guys did the separate grabs and detail thingy become about when production of our hobby moved to China.Steve Separate grabs and details have always been around. As I said, wood kits had separate parts. So did Walthers old passenger cars, IF you could manage to drill all the holes in the metal sides. And then there's the Athearn sheet metal kits. But cast-on grabs and ladders kinda went with die cast models, both metal and plastic. And there are also pluses with die-cast. It's awfully hard to do rivets on wood kits. But cranky people like me still wanted separate grabs/ladders on the die cast models anyway. I sorta have the feeling maybe Kurtz Kraft was the first to pull of a die cast model with separates, but I never saw any. My first plastic kit with separates was the Gold Spike reefer. MAN, I loved that kit. Anyway, there's always been a bunch of us rivet counting cast-grab hating complainers. BUT! You can STILL get those cast on details from Athearn and Atlas and Walthers. Lucky you. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by jbilbrey on Mar 11, 2017 22:09:47 GMT -8
Thats why I adding the kaslo kit to the rivarossi u25c shell and custom drive. Some day I will get it done I know that feeling all too well. This last fall I bought a Kaslo GP10 shell knowing full well that InterMountain will be releasing a R-T-R model of the same locomotive. Why? First, it was cheap [$40], and I have a drive on hand for it. And while I ordered the IM GP10, I will get around to building the Kaslo shell because I still like doing all the super-detailing on my own. It a decoder already installed, the R-T-R GP10 will be perfect to run at a local club. But, the P2K drive predates DCC so I will probably use it on only on my home switching layout. James Bilbrey LaVergne, TN |
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Mar 12, 2017 8:01:00 GMT -8
Thats why I adding the kaslo kit to the rivarossi u25c shell and custom drive. Some day I will get it done I know that feeling all too well. This last fall I bought a Kaslo GP10 shell knowing full well that InterMountain will be releasing a R-T-R model of the same locomotive. Why? First, it was cheap [$40], and I have a drive on hand for it. And while I ordered the IM GP10, I will get around to building the Kaslo shell because I still like doing all the super-detailing on my own. It a decoder already installed, the R-T-R GP10 will be perfect to run at a local club. But, the P2K drive predates DCC so I will probably use it on only on my home switching layout. James Bilbrey LaVergne, TN I was talking more of the nostalgia aspect of still having one of those old AHM releases running around (albeit upgraded) then the feeling of custom building, but I know what your saying. I also have a Kaslo GP10 kit, which is dead on for conrail 7566 that I will someday get to as well. Originally I thought IM was doing different versions so there would be no overlap. But I noticed that the IM road numbers is the same but their sales pictures and now the preproduction photos show that the IM lokies have 4 stacks but the pictures on rrpicturearchives only shows two exhaust stacks for all four of the IM #s. So it is either a bust by IM or conrail modified these soon after getting them? |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cutler III on Mar 12, 2017 8:05:54 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve I had to quote this whole screed because I haven't seen this level of "Get off my lawn!" or "Old Man Yells At Cloud" here for quite some time. All that is missing is the phrase, "Back in my day..."  Steve, do you know where the term "rivet counter" comes from? It comes from the release of the "scale" O-scale 700E NYC Hudson from Lionel. The advertising of the day screamed out that every detail was correct to the point that even every rivet on the tender was there. Well, some guy took that as a challenge. He sat and counted every rivet on the tender (1600 rivets!) and found that the model was a few shy of the prototype. He wrote a letter to Lionel, and they admitted that they had, indeed, shorted the rivet count. This didn't happen in the 1990's, it happened in 1937! So the idea that "folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements" until the 1990's is at least half a century off. Who changes out motor brushes? (Other than Chicago's MSI layout?) I've been in this hobby seriously since 1990 and I've never replaced motor brushes. What kind of distance does one have to run a model in order to seriously replace brushes? Yesterday's motors were junky compared to today's best. Give me a modern 5-pole skew-wound balanced-armature low-amperage motor over some big honkin' open frame Pittman-clone motor of the past. The difference between yesterday and today is that knowledge is easy to get. In the past, just finding a loco roster for your favorite RR meant buying a book or joining a historical society. Today, it's only a Google search away. The point is that it is easy to find prototype info to compare to a model and find that the model is lacking. It's also far easier to complain today. Before, you'd have to hang out at the local club or hobby shop to hear folks complain about accurate models (or lack thereof). Today, it's easy to broadcast complaints to the entire world...as on this forum. How do you know people didn't complain about models pre-1990? |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Mar 12, 2017 8:39:13 GMT -8
Paul, congratulations on being a bonafide model train trivia historian!
|
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Mar 12, 2017 9:50:23 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve Yeah and since then we discovered electricity, spaceflight, and cell phones. The Model T was a great car at one time too. Those days are done. You didn't hear any complaints because there was no internet then and mass communication in the hobby wasn't possible outside of printed media. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Mar 12, 2017 13:06:10 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve Yeah and since then we discovered electricity, spaceflight, and cell phones. The Model T was a great car at one time too. Those days are done. You didn't hear any complaints because there was no internet then and mass communication in the hobby wasn't possible outside of printed media. Dave Since Paul had to use the term......Back in the day.......Athearn locomotives were in the neighborhood of $20-25. The Atlas Kato RS-3 was $40. The paint on the Atlas/Kato RS-3 was horrible and being a Kato stripping it was a nightmare. The only good thing was there were plentiful undecorated models. The Atlas/Kato ran very well compared to even some brass models. How about those ALCO Models with a Pittman motor the size of the moon crammed inside? Athearn was getting better with the gold standard, scale width hoods on the SD40-2, GP38-2, GP40-2 and GP50. Athearn's truck frames still BLOW AWAY the most of the competition....even today. The trucks on the Atlas/Kato type-B trucks was okay but isn't all that great even in the mid-1980's. The Stewart/Kato EMD F-series was a step in the right direction in regards to the shell and mechanism. But the new plastic EMD type-B trucks on the old tired Globe F7 from Athearn were SO MUCH BETTER than the Kato produced trucks found on the Stewart. I chuckle at how people don't think that people complained about the aircraft carrier wide Athearn's, the junk from AHM, Tyco, Bachmann, Life-Like, etc. You'd go into any decent hobby shop which featured model trains and the Saturday morning bull session with the hobbyists was a gripe fest. Folks even back into the mid-1970's when I was a middle teenager where wanting A LOT MORE from their models. Details West and Detail Associates were born in the 70's and did a brisk business selling parts. People complained about the many artwork mistakes on Champ decals, Walthers decals were even worse and thicker too! Microscale had a fraction of the catalog it produces today. But people that really cared about their rolling stock spent the time to detail, paint, decal and weather their models. Most structure kits that were of decent scale reproduction were days and weeks worth of work in their construction. But, they were readily available. Suydam corrugated metal and card stock kits anyone? The hobby in the 70's and 80's was a hobby of building and spending hours and days to get things done correctly. Many of the building kits didn't fall together but were a box of wood toothpicks with some lengths of brass wire. Even into the 90's and 2000's the resin freight car kits from Sunshine and F&C were in high demand by the prototype modeler. Does anyone remember the magazine "Prototype Modeler"? How about "Mainline Modeler which debuted in 1980. Those two PUSHED the envelope of prototype modeling. Jim Six cut an Athearn GP35 in half and made it scale width hood. Andy Harman built the EL SDP45. That is the type of effort that prototype modelers were will to do to make models right. MANY people in historical societies, etc. counted the rivets and the spacing of the panels, etc.. If the majority was happy with cast on details, wide bodies, amp sucking motors, etc. then why do we have the quality in the models being manufactured today? Does ANYONE think that the sound and DCC which is almost taken for granted was not because of the prototype modeler? Modelers wanted sound and spent big bucks in the early 1980's on the PFM sound system. Keith Gutierrez IN 1979 gave us CTC-16. A system in which YOU CONTROLLED THE TRAIN - NOT THE TRACK. Upstart manufacturers began to market systems built on the CTC-16 system. Eventually it morphed into DCC with companies like Digitrax and NCE leading the way. Now the NMRA is introducing a standard for layout control through digital means. If we were so happy with our status quo of the 70's and 80's, we'd be running trains silently, with the good old power pack and miles of wire connecting to toggle switches. For all how think that there were no "rivet counters" in the 70's and 80's.......please go find copies of Model Railroader, Prototype Modeler and Mainline Modeler. If you think there was no push from the "rivet counters" for accuracy, please see those magazines and see how we modeled in that era. I lived in that era and modeled in that time frame, I remember it well. What do I miss from that time. Undecorated models and the availability of parts from the DA's and to a lesser extent DW. Athearn must know that people want details or they wouldn't be offering detail parts found on their Genesis models. Anytime any of you want to disparage us "rivet counters" of the 70's and 80's, just think how you'd like to still run the blue box Athearn SD45 with a roof so wide you could land aircraft. Scale-width hood was the type of the prototype modeling iceberg, correct horns, bells, doors, etc. were always part of the hobby. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Mar 12, 2017 17:16:15 GMT -8
Years ago and probably 80s and further along abit folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements. We still had molded on detail back then, didn't hear any complaints. Motors were real motors not the garbage tiny can motors of today. Back then you could even change out motor brushes. Now your hooped and probably out of luck especially when MFGS don't have motors to offer for replacement. You cannot compare modeling of yesteryear to todays standards. Modelers are a different breed today. Like everything today model requirements are of a higher standard................modelers go looking for fault in models expecting perfection. As an old guy I still enjoy my Atlas/Kato locos with molded on detail etc and big heavy duty Kato motors. No sense what soever in comparing yesteryear models to present.Only my opinion.Steve I had to quote this whole screed because I haven't seen this level of "Get off my lawn!" or "Old Man Yells At Cloud" here for quite some time. All that is missing is the phrase, "Back in my day..." Steve, do you know where the term "rivet counter" comes from? It comes from the release of the "scale" O-scale 700E NYC Hudson from Lionel. The advertising of the day screamed out that every detail was correct to the point that even every rivet on the tender was there. Well, some guy took that as a challenge. He sat and counted every rivet on the tender (1600 rivets!) and found that the model was a few shy of the prototype. He wrote a letter to Lionel, and they admitted that they had, indeed, shorted the rivet count. This didn't happen in the 1990's, it happened in 1937! So the idea that "folks didn't rivet count and worry about measurements" until the 1990's is at least half a century off. Who changes out motor brushes? (Other than Chicago's MSI layout?) I've been in this hobby seriously since 1990 and I've never replaced motor brushes. What kind of distance does one have to run a model in order to seriously replace brushes? Yesterday's motors were junky compared to today's best. Give me a modern 5-pole skew-wound balanced-armature low-amperage motor over some big honkin' open frame Pittman-clone motor of the past. The difference between yesterday and today is that knowledge is easy to get. In the past, just finding a loco roster for your favorite RR meant buying a book or joining a historical society. Today, it's only a Google search away. The point is that it is easy to find prototype info to compare to a model and find that the model is lacking. It's also far easier to complain today. Before, you'd have to hang out at the local club or hobby shop to hear folks complain about accurate models (or lack thereof). Today, it's easy to broadcast complaints to the entire world...as on this forum. How do you know people didn't complain about models pre-1990? |
|
