|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 11, 2020 4:28:21 GMT -8
What's the consensus on the Atlas Trainman GP39-2? Are there any dimensional issues? Does it perform as well as any of the other Master line locomotives? How does it compare to the Athearn Genesis GP39-2?
I'm thinking about Cannon-izing one of these and I'm curious of its a good starting point or if I'll just end up discovering there are a bunch of issues that can't be corrected without scratchbuilding (Australian Terrier Jim's experience with the RPP GP35 comes to mind).
|
|
|
|
Post by middledivision on Jan 11, 2020 6:51:48 GMT -8
The driver is the same as a Master Series. Chunky handrails, you must add grabs, eye bolts, cut levers and hoses. It’s a one size fits all shell, no road specific details.
It’s heavier than a Genesis and I’ve found the Atlas drive to be bullet-proof.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChessieFan1978 on Jan 11, 2020 6:52:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by middledivision on Jan 11, 2020 6:54:07 GMT -8
^^^
Nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 11, 2020 18:36:03 GMT -8
Thanks guys. Is the sill part separate from the hood?
|
|
|
|
Post by sgoti on Jan 11, 2020 21:16:41 GMT -8
Thanks guys. Is the sill part separate from the hood? No, it's one-piece, like the Trainman GP38-2 |
|
|
|
Post by Funnelfan on Jan 11, 2020 21:44:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Jan 12, 2020 7:35:14 GMT -8
I passed on several Atlas models in favor of the Athearn Genesis GP39-2. But I wound up selling off those when I became aware of the missing door issue on the engineer side of the long hood. That and I had a D&H unit will gobs of glue along the sill around the handrail stanchions.
It’s been confirmed that missing door has been replace on the newest release of the Athearn model, so that’s not a problem anymore. That said, I think Athearn has the better shell.
Thanks, Mark J.
Reading, PA
|
|
|
|
Post by brakie on Jan 12, 2020 7:48:07 GMT -8
If I needed a GP39-2 I would go with Atlas and add the basic details-mu hoses, radio antenna sun shades and of course the needed grabs. A relaxing project with good background music on low for sure.
The reason I would choose Atlas is because of the smooth drive and the detailing project.. YMMV.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 12, 2020 8:29:56 GMT -8
Thanks again for the feedback, everyone. They are fairly nice shells with a really awesome drive, but the LED orange lights need to be replaced. I come from a era of super detailing Athearn Blue Box locomotives, So I don't mind upgrading the Atlas Trainman GP39-2 models. Same here. I had dozens of locomotives I'd custom built and painted but hadn't been brought into the DCC era yet. In fact, more than a few of them hadn't been powered. The ones that were powered were just the stock blue box drive that came with the model I started from. Anyway, the lights won't be an issue for me. When I finally put decoders in all those locomotives none of them had lights, so I came up with a cheap solution. I bought 1.5mm fiber optic rod, 1/32" 2:1 ratio heat shrink tubing and prewired 0402 warm white LEDs in bulk then made my own headlights. They fit easily in the headlights of most diesel models and where they don't fit it's a simple fix with a drill bit and pin vise.  Great tip on the handrails! I have an extra set of Athearn GP38-2 handrails so I shouldn't have a problem adapting them to the Trainman GP39-2. I may have to do a little modifying at the stepwells, but that's not a deal breaker by any means. When I take this project on I'll be building one of the ex-Kennecott Copper GP39-2s that Katy picked up. That means I'll be replacing the fans, inertial hatch, cab/nose/subbase and fuel tank for starters. By the time I dig in I may replace the radiator and inertial grilles as well. I just wanted to make sure a Cannon cab and subbase will fit against the hood without a major mismatch. I recall the GP38 had issues in the cab that couldn't be corrected by just replacing the cab. The subbase had to go as well. |
|
|
|
Post by bdhicks on Jan 12, 2020 8:38:49 GMT -8
As I recall, the Kennecott Copper GP39-2s (or at least the ones TCWR later picked up) are a slightly different phase than the Atlas model, I think the difference is mostly the fans and the placement of that door that was missing from the Athearn units. (in addition to the KCCX-specific changes).
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 12, 2020 9:03:09 GMT -8
As I recall, the Kennecott Copper GP39-2s (or at least the ones TCWR later picked up) are a slightly different phase than the Atlas model, I think the difference is mostly the fans and the placement of that door that was missing from the Athearn units. (in addition to the KCCX-specific changes). I saw the fans and inertial hatch difference, but didn't pick up on the door near the generator. I expected to have to change out some elements behind the cab because of the extra steps that had previously been installed for the high cab. I know for sure I'll be altering the steps and pilots quite a bit. I haven't found a Genesis model that has the features I'm looking for without having to spend nearly twice what I'd pay for the Trainman model, so that's been the main reason I started looking at alternatives to the Genesis GP39-2. |
|
|
|
Post by packer on Jan 12, 2020 9:15:48 GMT -8
I have a BN one and the cal-scale kit for them. I never used it, I guess it’s worth upgrading (thinking about maybe getting a Genesis unit instead)
@fr8kr, where’d you get all the separate pieces to make those?
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Jan 12, 2020 10:14:14 GMT -8
As I recall, the Kennecott Copper GP39-2s (or at least the ones TCWR later picked up) are a slightly different phase than the Atlas model... Roster of GP39-2's here: www.trainweb.org/jaydeet/gp39-2.htmDiscussion of phases here: railroad.net/viewtopic.php?t=62789Atlas has done a phase I and a phase II, according to them. I imagine it has something to do with the movement of the engine and the exterior indications of same. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 12, 2020 11:05:31 GMT -8
I have a BN one and the cal-scale kit for them. I never used it, I guess it’s worth upgrading (thinking about maybe getting a Genesis unit instead) @fr8kr, where’d you get all the separate pieces to make those? Ebay. I ended up with 100 meters of fiber optic rod because that was the only size spool I could get in 1.5mm diameter, but it was really cheap. The prewired LEDs are also very cheap. I lit up 35 diesel models for about $60 and I still have lots of supplies left over to make more. I use one LED per lens on my models, so the typical model uses four of them. SP and SSW use eight because I don't light up the UDE bulbs. I'm a pre-ditchlight era modeler so I don't have to worry about those. |
|
|
|
Post by bdhicks on Jan 12, 2020 15:30:19 GMT -8
Digging out the MR article from Feb '91, it describes the phases as I(1974), IIa(1977), IIb(1979), IIc(1980), and III(no year listed). What Atlas calls Phase II is Phase IIc.
Summarizing the phases as described in the article:
Phase I is basically a GP38-2 body with a turbo hatch
From I to II, the engine is moved back, shrinking the engine compartment and growing the generator compartment and the nose changes from 81" to 88"
The only difference between IIa and IIb is the placement of the generator door.
From IIb to IIc, the fans change, the turbo gets a silencer hatch, and the dynamic brake is moved toward the rear.
Phase III is the same body as a GP49.
Looks like the KCCX units are actually split between IIa and IIc
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Jan 13, 2020 12:29:46 GMT -8
Hello Ryan, The Trainman GP39-2 would make a decent starting point for a detailed model. Some of the clunky design features of the Trainman GP38-2 carried over to both phases of the Trainman GP39-2. When Atlas first announced the Trainman GP38-2 I thought, "Atlas?! This should be good," and immediately ordered two units. When the units arrived, let's just say, I was less than impressed. The chassis was solid, but the shell was just okay. The detail on dynamic brake hatch was generically rendered, as was that on the cab, nose, and battery box. The step wells were notched, but they were poorly executed. If you take a look here: Harry Wong's 2006 WPM Photo Album, starting on the bottom row and continuing onto the next page or so, you can see most of the changes that I made to the Atlas shell.  The GP39-2 shell looks a tad better than the GP38-2, but could still use a bit of "sprucing" up. The dynamic brake hatch was actually done well on this unit. The intake grilles are still thick, though not as much as on the GP38-2. The handrails are also thick, but the stanchions are decent, and can be drilled out in favor of .012" of .015" phosphor-bronze wire replacements. The battery box detail is rendered much better than on the GP38-2, as is the nose detail, however, the radiator grilles could use some depth.  |
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Jan 13, 2020 12:54:56 GMT -8
The Trainman 38-2 had dimensional problems, if I remember correctly. Were these rectified for the GP39-2?
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Jan 13, 2020 14:02:42 GMT -8
Judging by the two photos above, I would say yes. The Union Pacific GP39-2 looks much better proportionally than the undecorated GP38-2.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 13, 2020 15:24:33 GMT -8
Hello Ryan, The Trainman GP39-2 would make a decent starting point for a detailed model. Some of the clunky design features of the Trainman GP38-2 carried over to both phases of the Trainman GP39-2. When Atlas first announced the Trainman GP38-2 I thought, "Atlas?! This should be good," and immediately ordered two units. When the units arrived, let's just say, I was less than impressed. The chassis was solid, but the shell was just okay. The detail on dynamic brake hatch was generically rendered, as was that on the cab, nose, and battery box. The step wells were notched, but they were poorly executed. If you take a look here: Harry Wong's 2006 WPM Photo Album, starting on the bottom row and continuing onto the next page or so, you can see most of the changes that I made to the Atlas shell. The GP39-2 shell looks a tad better than the GP38-2, but could still use a bit of "sprucing" up. The dynamic brake hatch was actually done well on this unit. The intake grilles are still thick, though not as much as on the GP38-2. The handrails are also thick, but the stanchions are decent, and can be drilled out in favor of .012" of .015" phosphor-bronze wire replacements. The battery box detail is rendered much better than on the GP38-2, as is the nose detail, however, the radiator grilles could use some depth. OK, so I wasn't confusing the Trainman GP38-2 with the LL GP38-2: both had issues. It sounds like most of the areas that need attention will end up getting replaced. I should probably go with new grilles all around. |
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Jan 13, 2020 18:37:52 GMT -8
Wasn’t Cannon working on GP39-2 sides a couple years ago? If those are available, you might as well build up a whole new long hood using Cannon doors and grills.
Mark
|
|
chitownjeff
Junior Member
I'm here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and I'm all out of bubblegum
Posts: 68
|
Post by chitownjeff on Jan 13, 2020 20:44:33 GMT -8
Wasn’t Cannon working on GP39-2 sides a couple years ago? If those are available, you might as well build up a whole new long hood using Cannon doors and grills. Mark Hi Tech Details made sides for the SD39 which you used in conjunction with Cannon & Co doors, they are only available directly from Hi Tech. I seem to remember Brian Banna panning them here. As I think about it, I think Dave was going to do GP39-2 sides when he got his laser, it would be my guess now that Athearn and Atlas both have these models, his plans have changed. Jeff |
|
|
|
Post by bdhicks on Jan 13, 2020 20:59:42 GMT -8
The Cannon GP39-2 sides were laser-cut, rather than the injection-molded SD39 sides. I asked Dave Hussey about them at a BAPM meet a while back and he basically said they weren't happening.
|
|
|
|
Post by cannon on Jan 13, 2020 21:29:40 GMT -8
The Cannon GP39-2 sides were laser-cut, rather than the injection-molded SD39 sides. I asked Dave Hussey about them at a BAPM meet a while back and he basically said they weren't happening. There wasn’t an available dynamic brake section that was usable or available to go with the sides. That plus no walkway, and the release of ready to run alternatives made the project un realistic. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 13, 2020 21:48:10 GMT -8
I've drawn all the GP39-2 hood variations I could find, so if I have to replace the sides I'll just 3D print the sides rather than build them up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Jan 14, 2020 10:07:52 GMT -8
I've drawn all the GP39-2 hood variations I could find, so if I have to replace the sides I'll just 3D print the sides rather than build them up.
Honestly Ryan, (and I know you know this already) you have to figure out how far you want to take this project. Cannon parts are a slippery slope, and once you start upgrading parts, you're going to start seeing other things that need to be replaced to match the stuff you've already replaced. And If you've already gone that far, you may as well have scratch-built the whole thing, or at least everything from the walkway sill up. On my GP38-2, the only Cannon parts I added were a dash 2 cab, and a Cannon brake wheel hatch that was grafted into the Atlas nose. I did a little scratch-building on the dynamic hatch, added a little detail on the battery boxes, and altered the jacking pads. After considering what I started with, those few changes were as far as I wanted to go and still get the unit to look the I wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 14, 2020 19:36:32 GMT -8
I've drawn all the GP39-2 hood variations I could find, so if I have to replace the sides I'll just 3D print the sides rather than build them up.
Honestly Ryan, (and I know you know this already) you have to figure out how far you want to take this project. Cannon parts are a slippery slope, and once you start upgrading parts, you're going to start seeing other things that need to be replaced to match the stuff you've already replaced. And If you've already gone that far, you may as well have scratch-built the whole thing, or at least everything from the walkway sill up. On my GP38-2, the only Cannon parts I added were a dash 2 cab, and a Cannon brake wheel hatch that was grafted into the Atlas nose. I did a little scratch-building on the dynamic hatch, added a little detail on the battery boxes, and altered the jacking pads. After considering what I started with, those few changes were as far as I wanted to go and still get the unit to look the I wanted.You're right. I really want to avoid going crazy with this model, which is why I'm hopeful that the Trainman GP39-2 is at least close to being dimensionally correct. I've got a train show coming up this weekend. Maybe I'll get the chance to look over one in person. |
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Jan 14, 2020 21:00:49 GMT -8
You're right. I really want to avoid going crazy with this model, which is why I'm hopeful that the Trainman GP39-2 is at least close to being dimensionally correct. I've got a train show coming up this weekend. Maybe I'll get the chance to look over one in person.[/quote]
I saw Copper Basin #502 (a Phase 2 unit) at the "local" (58 miles away) hobby shop today, and it actually looked pretty decent. I kept looking at it thinking, "What would I change on this locomotive? Then, I noticed that I kept focusing on the roof, and thought, "I would probably start with replacing the dynamic fan with a Cannon fan, and replace the molded Q-fans with Athearn or Detail Associates Q-fans. The only other thing I might consider changing would be the inertial filter hatch because it sits flush with the sides of the long hood, with no noticable line of separation. On the other hand, this would be a real chore, and I could probably get away with lightly scribe a separation line in the paint, after painting the body, or maybe even creating the illusion of separation with creative weathering around that area." (Yes, a rather long thought!)
Realistically, I would detail this unit as-is, making only minor changes, especially if your under time constraints. |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jan 15, 2020 20:04:18 GMT -8
I saw Copper Basin #502 (a Phase 2 unit) at the "local" (58 miles away) hobby shop today, and it actually looked pretty decent. I kept looking at it thinking, "What would I change on this locomotive? Then, I noticed that I kept focusing on the roof, and thought, "I would probably start with replacing the dynamic fan with a Cannon fan, and replace the molded Q-fans with Athearn or Detail Associates Q-fans. The only other thing I might consider changing would be the inertial filter hatch because it sits flush with the sides of the long hood, with no noticable line of separation. On the other hand, this would be a real chore, and I could probably get away with lightly scribe a separation line in the paint, after painting the body, or maybe even creating the illusion of separation with creative weathering around that area." (Yes, a rather long thought!)
Realistically, I would detail this unit as-is, making only minor changes, especially if your under time constraints. Here are some prototype photos: rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3179489rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2936576rr-fallenflags.org/mkt/mkt380bbp.jpgThe last photo shows the flat inertial hatch, which isn't available from anyone but I think I can either modify the Cannon part or print my own. I've already printed the cab, nose and fuel tank. I'll definitely have to swap out the Q fans for regular radiator fans and replace the exhaust silencer with a regular exhaust, so at that point why not change out the dynamic fan? |
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Jan 16, 2020 9:43:42 GMT -8
I forgot that you were doing a Kennecott unit. Back when I worked for UP, Kennecott #705 came through West Colton. I caught some shots of it before it went to the GATX facility immediately east of the yard to have the cab and nose lowered. Also, I did work with UP #1204 on a couple jobs before it moved on. Good luck with the project! I anxious to see how it turns out.
Donnell
Kennecott #705 at West Colton
|
|
