The John Deere tractor models that I would be looking for in the '40's would be the far more ubiquitous Models A and(especially) B. These two models covered the midwest, and there was scarcely a "Green" farm that did not have one or the other. The Model D (not a row-crop tractor) was pretty scarce by then, generally saved for heavy duty stationary work such as powering threshing machines, or heavy duty plowing on very large fields.

The lugged wheels were becoming pretty obsolete by the forties due to state and local laws banning them from paved roads.

Of the three tractors, I would guess that the Model 60 would be about the only one that one might have reasonably been seen as rail-borne new-deliveries during the predominant area of interest generally expressed by this group (i.e. c. 1935-55).

Other writers are correct about John Deere and its licensing. Right out of the box, Deere has been relentless in controlling and then licensing the use of its brand name. It is not cheap, the conditions must be steep, and the money to be made high when one sees Athearn grovel and cheapen itself by lettering and painting just about every product that it has with JD green and lettering.

This latter is more evidence of the headlong rush by significant parts of the hobby into the new HO Toy Train market.

Denny

Denny
--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento, California

A goodly portion of model railroaders trust the manufacturers.Any paint
scheme is considered authentic.It takes some consumer education before they
start looking beyond the box and its contents.I am sure most of us were not
as sophisticated nor critical when we started in the hobby.I strongly
suspect that a more discerning hobbyist has led to more prototypically
accurate offerings.Armand Premo

I think this is a good time to add a thanks to Branchline for adding useful
information (e.g., dates) on their boxes. It isn't Sunshine or Westerfield
caliber, but it's darn useful.

Dave Nelson

I have loaded a low res photo of a typical load of Deere tractors here:
http://www.drgw.org/rsw/DRGW6540.jpg

I believe people will be able to access this particular portion without problems, but if problems develop, perhaps the group-meister alternate can move it into the photo section - I could not as I got an error when I attempted it.

Would anyone be able to answer a hoper car question for me? I model the
coalfields served by VGN, C&O, N&W and NYC in August 1954. My question is; would
the red 50 ton NYC coal hoppers be correct for this time period?

Aubrey Wiley
Lynchburg, Va.

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@s...> wrote:

You are of course free to infer what you want, Jeff. But that's

not

what I meant to say.

Of course you did not. But since so many comments on this thread
refer to cost control and economies, let's look at the market and what
it says. It seems to me modelers are willing to pay premium prices on
kits form Westerfield and Sunshine, which kits are sometimes so
specialized in detail and era, that they would never support a mass
market. Yet over and over I hear, and have myself experienced the
well documented kits. If nothing else it gives me a warm fuzzy
feeling that the finished product will be an accurate replica.

More firewwod - Micro Trains (often) supplies one side of their jewel
box liner with enough car history that you also get the idea they did
their homework. In this case, the well over 100 body styles cannot
support 100% accurate models, but I think people know that and do not
expect more for 15-20 bucks. Yet the paint schemes and colors, style
of lettering, and placement do reflect a prototype. That little
insert lets us know it, and was in each car box before they started
giving some history. So how much did that cost??
A reputable manufacturer will do at least a basic research job, yet
many modelers do not have the access to research material, have the
skills to ferret it out, and many can ill afford to spend valuable
model building time researching info that has already been done.
Somewhere there is another (unspoken) dynamic here since the cost
differential of a slip of paper cannot be the ruling factor.

Bob Kutella

Has anyone heard any more news about continuing the volumes on C&O
cars. Volume 1 was the hoppers and gons. Vol 2 & 3 were implied, but
I've not seen any word that it's going to happen.

Curt Fortenberry

The thing that amazes me about this discussion is that I often hear
manufacturers say "Most customers don't care" or words to that effect.

For God's sake, manufacturers, listen to what you just said. If most
customers don't care (about extra information concerning the
prototype) then they don't care. Get it? They don't care so it
won't hurt sales.

On the other hand, if I can't identify that a product (1) matches its
prototype, (2) is correctly lettered and (3) is appropriate for 1950
or earlier, I don't buy it. If I can't find the information and the
manufacturer doesn't provide it, I don't buy. And I know I'm not the
only one with that attitude.

I can name two products from two different manufacturers for which I
provided the prototype data. Folks, it ain't that hard. And it at
least one instance it boosted the heck out of sales. More than
double the expected sales were realized.

Gene Green

It is actually safe to say, that ANY type of prototype which was built in the past, is still in existence today.

That is to say that, if a 1936 "farm tractor", for example, was once built in that era, and was used then in it's "heyday", then yet they still exist in the front of farmer's homes and in museums and displays. I see it all the time.

Therefore I do not see how dating a model would be detrimental to the consumer, or adverse to their wanting to purchase it. I actually think it would enhance purchasing.

All "dating" would do is define for everyone the date of it's origin and supply "period modellers" with that basic info, and refer "others" to the concept of that, "Yeah! My 'Grandad' used to have a tractor like that! I want to put one in my 1950, or even 1999, railroad scene."

What would "label printing costs" be?; an extra 1/1000 cents/per?

Paul Hillman

My hobby dealer informs me that he can no longer get Athearn models
through Walthers of Milwaukee. Those John Deere tractors are about the
only item that I would want to buy. I was really dissatisfied with those
USRA
2-8-2's they imported a few years ago. If their freight car models catch
up with Intermountain or Red Caboose and L-L Proto 2000 I may go back
and take another look!

Edwin C. Kirstatter, B&O Modeler.

________________________________________________________________
Get your name as your email address.
Includes spam protection, 1GB storage, no ads and more
Only $1.99/ month - visit http://www.mysite.com/name today!

In a message dated 9/25/04 4:05:52 PM, lgreen@... writes:

I can name two products from two different manufacturers for which I
provided the prototype data.  Folks, it ain't that hard.  And it at
least one instance it boosted the heck out of sales.  More than
double the expected sales were realized.

Rio Grande Models, since 1970, has been putting prototype info on the
instruction sheet for almost all of their kits. The only time it was not there is
when either the kit was more or less generic or info was not available.

A short history of the period the model would be appropriate for and colors
it was painted as well as lettering.

Most modelers appreciate this small bit of information and one of the
questions most asked is what period of time did woud it be approprate for.

eric

Jeff Aley sez:

So, Tony, I infer that you think it's stupid for manufacturers to allow
such silly things as "cost" to influence their thinking. Given that the
broader MR market will not pay more for a kit just because it has 2 lines
of data at the end of the box, you're talking about increasing cost for a
fixed selling price. Please explain why doing this makes sense to you --
it sure doesn't make sense to me!

You are of course free to infer what you want, Jeff. But that's not what I meant to say. Probably in your business, as in many, there are real economies and false economies. There are economies that are sensible and genuinely help the bottom line, and there are economies that say "damn the customer." And there are foolish economies that save very little. I'd put the deliberate concealment of information in the latter category (and maybe in some other categories too).
Yeah, the MR market won't pay "more" for two lines of information on the end of the box . . . or will they? What if the cost difference is 10 cents? That's what the "day of overhead" Charlie mentioned would cost over even a rather small run of kits. And for bigger players, it's in the single numbers of pennies.
And if cost really IS fixed? though I very much doubt it--would those pennies buy you more customers or not? I don't really know, but I sure don't think it's clear that they would COST you a bunch of customers. Volume matters, too, just as I'm sure it does in your business.
I don't think customers expect, nor are likely to get, a Lofton or Westerfield information sheet in a Branchline kit (just to choose one example)--but especially if the preparation of that sheet were farmed out to a consultant or historical society (with appropriate controls), it might not cost much at all. I think it is fairly foolish to assume that ANY added cost, no matter how small, would break the model manufacturing business. Instead of debating that, let's debate costs AND benefits.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

On Sep 24, 10:09pm, Anthony Thompson wrote:

Subject: Re: [STMFC] Consumer Prototype Protection

But less information is cheaper,
and as Charlie points out, that tends to dominate the thinking (if
that's not too grand a term) for the decisions many manufacturers make.

So, Tony, I infer that you think it's stupid for manufacturers to allow
such silly things as "cost" to influence their thinking. Given that the
broader MR market will not pay more for a kit just because it has 2 lines
of data at the end of the box, you're talking about increasing cost for a
fixed selling price. Please explain why doing this makes sense to you --
it sure doesn't make sense to me!

Is there some kind of new economics that applies to Horizon Hobbies and
Athearn that does not apply to steel mills and computer chip makers?

Regards,

-Jeff



--
Jeff Aley jaley@...
DPG Chipsets Product Engineering
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533

Tony Thompson wrote:

Manufacturers usually (certainly not always) do have photos,
plans, and roster info: how else do they construct, paint and letter
the models? Is it too much to ask that some of it be passed on? Oh,
heavens no, somebody might not buy something . . . and others WOULD buy
if they knew what they were getting. But less information is cheaper,
and as Charlie points out, that tends to dominate the thinking (if
that's not too grand a term) for the decisions many manufacturers make.

One of the forever mysteries that sticks in my mind was when UPHS did their
GS gondolas as a convention car a couple years ago. The finished car was
furnished in an accurate mix of UP's freight car red, but included unpainted
black ends. The buzz was that this was accurate since they were apparently
delivered with the ends "painted" in freight car cement. More times than I
care to count, I heard and read of inquiries as to a source of paint to
match the unpainted ends with the painted remainder of the car. True, the
model may have been accurate, but no one took the time to say so in the
instructions, or even in a note in UPHS's The Streamliner magazine. Someone
did the research. Why oh why didn't they share it?

Don Strack

Tony Thompson wrote;

Manufacturers usually (certainly not always) do have photos,
plans, and roster info: how else do they construct, paint and letter
the models? Is it too much to ask that some of it be passed on?

************************************************************************************
That's what I'm saying too. The least they could do is just print,

"Circa 1941" or "First built 1929"

There wouldn't have to be any huge info, really, more than that. Any deeper investigation could then be at the consumer's own quest. But, Westerfield really does an excellent job on era, don't they?

Paul Hillman

Thanks for the heads up! I just ordered a kit direct from Walthers...

Charlie Vlk wrote:

I have direct knowledge of the model preparation process and the kind of
documentation that has been suggested would add another
day at least in overhead for each model and would be incomplete in many
instances. Because you have research information on hand to do the model
does not mean that it is in the format necessary to write up a narrative on
the history of the prototype. Often times you are lucky to find enough
pictures of the model you want to do much less have the information or time
to do the detective work of when the prototype was delivered, what the first
use of the scheme was, and how long it lasted.

I can't tell here if Charlie is saying that manufacturers don't HAVE the info, don't want to take the trouble to write it up, or don't want to PUBLISH it. He certainly seems to be saying they don't really want to know the details of the prototype history. But surely they DO have some of it.

How do you verify the correct dates a particular car or paint job (or for
that matter, car number in that paint job) is truly correct for?

Yeah, yeah, research is hell. Paint it however it looks good, right, Charlie?

how reliable do you think any information on the outside of a box over the
full range of manufacturers is going to be?

So tell us again, how good is the information NOW on the end of the box?

Is any manufacturer going to turn over control of their products to
a bunch of volunteers before they are allowed to market them?

Control? Hello? The NMRA might check for accuracy (gasp! mfgrs. fainting all around) but hardly would be able to, or want to, CONTROL anything. Gosh, Charlie, maybe once we get past all these straw men you're throwing up, we can discuss the real issues.
Manufacturers usually (certainly not always) do have photos, plans, and roster info: how else do they construct, paint and letter the models? Is it too much to ask that some of it be passed on? Oh, heavens no, somebody might not buy something . . . and others WOULD buy if they knew what they were getting. But less information is cheaper, and as Charlie points out, that tends to dominate the thinking (if that's not too grand a term) for the decisions many manufacturers make.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history

Ted, I'm fairly sure that was the Series 50. This is a new model,
following the Model B, and the 50 series, chronologically. There
is lots of tractor info online e.g.

http://johnnypopper.com/jdnumb1.shtml

Tim O'Connor

A gentleman called me today looking for an ex-Yankee Clipper 1924 ARA
standard BAR or B&M box car, now F&C 6551 and 6000/6001, respectively. If
anyone wants to sell one, contact Ed Maskell at 916-801-8310 (he has no
email).
- Al Westerfield

The topic of Consumer Prototype Protection comes up now and then. Some in
the NMRA were pushing for such product identification a few years ago.....
they wanted everything to have a California label on it ....even the Atlas
Snap Track Bridges would have to carry a Cooper Rating on the packaging!!
I have direct knowledge of the model preparation process and the kind of
documentation that has been suggested would add another
day at least in overhead for each model and would be incomplete in many
instances. Because you have research information on hand to do the model
does not mean that it is in the format necessary to write up a narrative on
the history of the prototype. Often times you are lucky to find enough
pictures of the model you want to do much less have the information or time
to do the detective work of when the prototype was delivered, what the first
use of the scheme was, and how long it lasted.
The problem is none of this would increase sales and would likely have the
opposite effect.
How do you verify the correct dates a particular car or paint job (or for
that matter, car number in that paint job) is truly correct for? If you are
modeling a particular time and place how can anybody know if the car was
likely to show up there? How many people really care in the greater
marketplace? (remember, Prototype Modelers, while they may be an important
segment, are only a small percentage of sales for most production
companies.
Look at the range of discussions that take place here...in a forum of
experts....with all the digging and research that goes on there are still a
lot of unknowns....
how reliable do you think any information on the outside of a box over the
full range of manufacturers is going to be? Who would police and decide
this? Is any manufacturer going to turn over control of their products to
a bunch of volunteers before they are allowed to market them? No way.
The NMRA does have an important role....which they at one time shared with
the manufacturing community... the establishment and maintenance of
technical interchange standards..... which has been sorely neglected since
the 1950s.
I think that the marketplace is doing a great job of shaping the quality of
product.... and the internet (through forums like this one and those of the
railroad historical societies) are improving the knowledge base for both
modeler and manufacturer.
Charlie Vlk