Re: Model kit hierarchy and heritage (UNCLASSIFIED)

Armand Premo

As for kit accuracy I tend to follow the "Three Foot Rule".As I aged and my eyesight got poorer I now use the "Two Foot Rule".Armand Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Brock
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Model kit hierarchy and heritage (UNCLASSIFIED)

The comment by Denis Storzek, "Thus, it has been traditional to put roadnames on injection molded kits that are only "close enough", and everyone's definition of close enough differs." seems to address two entirely different issues.

On the one hand we have the "problem" in which a manufacturer puts a bogus paint scheme on a plastic car. In this case, the car might or might not be similar enough to a prototype that the modeler accepts it due to his need. An example might be a stand in for the AAR Alternate Standard 2 bay hopper cars for, say, C&O which had about 27,000 cars. If you modeled C&O you would have little choice but to accept a model of an AAR Standard car. OTOH, a manufacturer might letter the same car for UP. UP, of course, had nothing remotely similar so such a car would clearly stand out as bogus to a UP modeler. UP DID have a 3 bay hopper car that was specific only to UP and probably NP. UP had only 1950 of these so the urgency for their presence would be much less. The old MDC car could be modified to make a usable stand in but, for reasons totally unknown to me, Trix/Marklyn produced a very nice model of one with the exception of the area between the hoppers and the ends of the car [ se e Ted Culotta's Prototype Railroad Modeling, Vol One, A tale of Two Hoppers {blush} on how to fix this. ]. There are many examples and many degrees of differences of such cars and, yes, it does seem to depend upon the modeler's need and how "close" it is to the prototype.

Elden Gatwood says:

"And to add on to Dennis' excellent response, from the viewpoint of someone who is developing a very specific fleet, only a small percentage of plastic kits currently match a small number of the classes I need, some brass models also do so, but the majority are only done in resin."

I'm a bit surprised at this conclusion. Perhaps it depends upon one's modeling time period or RR keeping in mind that an operational model railroad should have representatives from almost every railroad...depending upon the type of car. Certainly I don't have this problem. In 1953 [ my time period ] I have a huge assortment of "accurate" cars in plastic from which to choose including 1937 and 1944 AAR box cars, PS-1 box cars, X29 box cars, AAR box cars, GS-gons, tank cars by both IMT and P2K, more flat cars than I can count and almost all of the PFE and Santa Fe reefers that would be rolling in 1953. Who could ask for more? Why we even have "accurate" N&W H2a hoppers now. Note that I don't claim that the objective is to acquire a model of each car that a railroad possessed but, rather, a view of the cars rolling on a railroad in 1953.

I don't disagree that resin cars supply a significant need [ particularly those cars built prior to 1937 ] but a "small percentage"? Again, the time period may play a role. And, of course, it depends upon the term "accuracy"...I guess.

Mike Brock...heading down into my bunker

Join to automatically receive all group messages.