New HO scale USRA hopper?


Eric Hansmann
 

I just noted this on the July 23 release bulletin at the Model Railroader website:

United States Railroad Administration 55-ton steel twin hopper. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago
and St. Louis ("Big Four," New York Central herald); Chesapeake & Ohio; Clinchfield; New York
Central; and Pennsylvania. Also offered in non-prototypical paint schemes: Baltimore & Ohio;
Central RR of Pennsylvania; Chicago & North Western; Denver & Rio Grande Western; Erie RR;
Lehigh & New England; Milwaukee Road; Norfolk & Western; Pittsburgh & West Virginia; Union
Pacific; and Western Maryland. Metal wheelsets and magnetic knuckle couplers. Individual cars,
$29.95; six-pack, $169.95 (two differently numbered packs available). Ready-to-run. M.T.H.
Electric Trains

The MR link is:
http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=3352

Nothing noted on the M.T.H. Electric Trains website.

I see an interesting special line in this text, which must be from the press release, "Also
offered in non-prototypical paint schemes:". Odd that they include the B&O on that list, unless
the B&O paint and lettering used on the M.T.H. models does not follow what the B&O used on
their USRA hoppers.

Eric




Eric Hansmann
Chagrin Falls, Ohio
Starting over in a new house:
http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/


StephenK
 

This is on MTH website. Go to:

http://www.mthhotrains.com/catalog/2009HOV2Catalog.pdf

and go to page 24.


Steve Kay

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Hansmann" <eric@...> wrote:

I just noted this on the July 23 release bulletin at the Model Railroader website:

United States Railroad Administration 55-ton steel twin hopper. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago
and St. Louis ("Big Four," New York Central herald); Chesapeake & Ohio; Clinchfield; New York
Central; and Pennsylvania. Also offered in non-prototypical paint schemes: Baltimore & Ohio;
Central RR of Pennsylvania; Chicago & North Western; Denver & Rio Grande Western; Erie RR;
Lehigh & New England; Milwaukee Road; Norfolk & Western; Pittsburgh & West Virginia; Union
Pacific; and Western Maryland. Metal wheelsets and magnetic knuckle couplers. Individual cars,
$29.95; six-pack, $169.95 (two differently numbered packs available). Ready-to-run. M.T.H.
Electric Trains

The MR link is:
http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=3352

Nothing noted on the M.T.H. Electric Trains website.

I see an interesting special line in this text, which must be from the press release, "Also
offered in non-prototypical paint schemes:". Odd that they include the B&O on that list, unless
the B&O paint and lettering used on the M.T.H. models does not follow what the B&O used on
their USRA hoppers.

Eric




Eric Hansmann
Chagrin Falls, Ohio
Starting over in a new house:
http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/


rwitt_2000
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "up4024" <thekays100@...> wrote:

This is on MTH website. Go to:

http://www.mthhotrains.com/catalog/2009HOV2Catalog.pdf

and go to page 24.


Steve Kay


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Hansmann" eric@ wrote:

I just noted this on the July 23 release bulletin at the Model
Railroader website:

United States Railroad Administration 55-ton steel twin hopper.
Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago
and St. Louis ("Big Four," New York Central herald); Chesapeake &
Ohio; Clinchfield; New York
Central; and Pennsylvania. Also offered in non-prototypical paint
schemes: Baltimore & Ohio;
Central RR of Pennsylvania; Chicago & North Western; Denver & Rio
Grande Western; Erie RR;
Lehigh & New England; Milwaukee Road; Norfolk & Western; Pittsburgh
& West Virginia; Union
Pacific; and Western Maryland. Metal wheelsets and magnetic knuckle
couplers. Individual cars,
$29.95; six-pack, $169.95 (two differently numbered packs
available). Ready-to-run. M.T.H.
Electric Trains

The MR link is:
http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=3352

Nothing noted on the M.T.H. Electric Trains website.

I see an interesting special line in this text, which must be from
the press release, "Also
offered in non-prototypical paint schemes:". Odd that they include
the B&O on that list, unless
the B&O paint and lettering used on the M.T.H. models does not
follow what the B&O used on
their USRA hoppers.

Eric




Eric Hansmann
Chagrin Falls, Ohio
Starting over in a new house:
http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/
From photo in the M.T.H. catalog the hopper is lettered for the B&O
class N-12B series 220500 to 220999, 500 cars built in 1913 by American
Car & Foundry the third group of class N-12 hoppers ordered by the B&O.
The car illustrated in the catalog carries the same number as the AC&F
builder's photo in the Barriger Collection.

Why they choose to lettered it for a non-prototype may remain one of
those manufacturers' mysteries. It potentially will have limited appeal
as it the wrong car body and has the as-built lettering for 1913. Maybe
they choose it because they discovered the AC&F builder's photo at the
Barriger Library. I will admit that some in the B&O community believe
the two car bodies are essentially the same so maybe this is a self
inflicted bogus model.

Bob Witt
Indianapolis, Indiana


Tim O'Connor
 

I just noted this on the July 23 release bulletin at the Model Railroader website:
United States Railroad Administration 55-ton steel twin hopper. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago
and St. Louis ("Big Four," New York Central herald); Chesapeake & Ohio; Clinchfield; New York
Central; and Pennsylvania. Also offered in non-prototypical paint schemes: Baltimore & Ohio;
Central RR of Pennsylvania; Chicago & North Western; Denver & Rio Grande Western; Erie RR;
Lehigh & New England; Milwaukee Road; Norfolk & Western; Pittsburgh & West Virginia; Union
Pacific; and Western Maryland.

MTH photos can be found here:
http://www.mthhotrains.com/catalog/2009HOV2Catalog.pdf

The MTH B&O model doesn't look like this Keyser Car Shops car
http://www.keysercarshops.com/img/REV%20B&O-TICHY%202%20BAY.pdf
but it does appear to be stenciled N-17, so maybe it's an earlier
paint scheme. Then again, maybe they just made it up.

The catalog says "decorative brake wheels" (!) Since the original
cars did not have power hand brakes, it seems MTH is going to have
some anachronism issues. There are no visible door locks or
Enterprise mechanisms visible but all 17 photos show only the
right side/A-end of the car. (The Enterprise mechanism was on
one side only.) There are no interior detail photos.

Tim O'Connor


jim_mischke <jmischke@...>
 

Lack of research works in mysterious ways.





--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "rwitt_2000" <rwitt_2000@...> wrote:
<snip> < .... subject is MTH USRA hoppers in an inaccurate B&O lettering and number series.....>


Why they choose to lettered it for a non-prototype may remain one of
those manufacturers' mysteries. It potentially will have limited appeal
as it the wrong car body and has the as-built lettering for 1913. Maybe
they choose it because they discovered the AC&F builder's photo at the
Barriger Library. I will admit that some in the B&O community believe
the two car bodies are essentially the same so maybe this is a self
inflicted bogus model.

Bob Witt
Indianapolis, Indiana


spsalso
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

The catalog says "decorative brake wheels" (!) Since the original
cars did not have power hand brakes, it seems MTH is going to have
some anachronism issues. There are no visible door locks or
Enterprise mechanisms visible but all 17 photos show only the
right side/A-end of the car. (The Enterprise mechanism was on
one side only.) There are no interior detail photos.

Tim O'Connor
Also of interest is that the high angle photo of one corner of a car shows wire grabs, while the full-model photos show cast-on grabs. One can be charitable and conclude that they still have some decisions to make. I DO like the foobie warning, though.

Ed

Edward Sutorik


Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "spsalso" <Edwardsutorik@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@> wrote:

The catalog says "decorative brake wheels" (!) Since the original
cars did not have power hand brakes, it seems MTH is going to have
some anachronism issues. There are no visible door locks or
Enterprise mechanisms visible but all 17 photos show only the
right side/A-end of the car. (The Enterprise mechanism was on
one side only.) There are no interior detail photos.

Tim O'Connor
Also of interest is that the high angle photo of one corner of a car shows wire grabs, while the full-model photos show cast-on grabs. One can be charitable and conclude that they still have some decisions to make. I DO like the foobie warning, though.

Ed

Edward Sutorik

I'm thrilled. This is the second time this has happened... First Ertl used one of my resin boxcars, displaying it as a "pre-production" model of their new kit (which turned out to be a different car, considerably more grossly detail) and now MTH thinks enough of the Accurail USRA hopper to feature pages of them. I wonder why they didn't feature the side with the Enterprise locks? Maybe they have no need for those tiny extra parts?

As it is, I don't understand why someone would want to pay $30 per car when for a few bucks more they could buy a three pack of Accurail kits, unless it's the keep those Chinese rice bowls filled.

Now that I look at the other freightcars in the catalog, I wonder whose kits they are? An Intermountain 60' TTX machinery flat, and a Red Caboose reefer, maybe?

Wonder what the REAL MTH offerings will look like?

Dennis Storzek
Accurail, Inc.


Tim O'Connor
 

Dennis

It's pretty ironic too when you consider that MTH collected
millions and millions from Lionel (and brought down the mighty
Samhongsa) for stealing MTH's intellectual property...

Well maybe someday we'll have a repeat of ERTL and there will
be bins of MTH models at train shows for $3 apiece. (ERTL of
course famously copied your box car, Tichy's flat car, and an
RPI resin MEC gondola kit.)

Tim O'Connor

I'm thrilled. This is the second time this has happened... First Ertl used one of my resin boxcars, displaying it as a "pre-production" model of their new kit (which turned out to be a different car, considerably more grossly detail) and now MTH thinks enough of the Accurail USRA hopper to feature pages of them. I wonder why they didn't feature the side with the Enterprise locks? Maybe they have no need for those tiny extra parts?

As it is, I don't understand why someone would want to pay $30 per car when for a few bucks more they could buy a three pack of Accurail kits, unless it's the keep those Chinese rice bowls filled.

Now that I look at the other freightcars in the catalog, I wonder whose kits they are? An Intermountain 60' TTX machinery flat, and a Red Caboose reefer, maybe?

Wonder what the REAL MTH offerings will look like?

Dennis Storzek
Accurail, Inc.


spsalso
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Storzek" <destorzek@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "spsalso" <Edwardsutorik@> wrote:

Also of interest is that the high angle photo of one corner of a car shows wire grabs, while the full-model photos show cast-on grabs.
As it is, I don't understand why someone would want to pay $30 per car when for a few bucks more they could buy a three pack of Accurail kits

Dennis Storzek
Accurail, Inc.
Explanation: I'm really un-fond of cast on grabs/ladders.

Ed

Edward Sutorik


Mark
 

I like accurail! I like USA made stuff. MTH prices are crazy.

Mark Morgan

--- On Mon, 7/27/09, Dennis Storzek <destorzek@mchsi.com> wrote:

From: Dennis Storzek <destorzek@mchsi.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: New HO scale USRA hopper?
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, July 27, 2009, 5:42 PM






 





--- In STMFC@yahoogroups. com, "spsalso" <Edwardsutorik@ ...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups. com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@ > wrote:
The catalog says "decorative brake wheels" (!) Since the original
cars did not have power hand brakes, it seems MTH is going to have
some anachronism issues. There are no visible door locks or
Enterprise mechanisms visible but all 17 photos show only the
right side/A-end of the car. (The Enterprise mechanism was on
one side only.) There are no interior detail photos.
Tim O'Connor
Also of interest is that the high angle photo of one corner of a car shows wire grabs, while the full-model photos show cast-on grabs. One can be charitable and conclude that they still have some decisions to make. I DO like the foobie warning, though.
Ed
Edward Sutorik


I'm thrilled. This is the second time this has happened... First Ertl used one of my resin boxcars, displaying it as a "pre-production" model of their new kit (which turned out to be a different car, considerably more grossly detail) and now MTH thinks enough of the Accurail USRA hopper to feature pages of them. I wonder why they didn't feature the side with the Enterprise locks? Maybe they have no need for those tiny extra parts?



As it is, I don't understand why someone would want to pay $30 per car when for a few bucks more they could buy a three pack of Accurail kits, unless it's the keep those Chinese rice bowls filled.



Now that I look at the other freightcars in the catalog, I wonder whose kits they are? An Intermountain 60' TTX machinery flat, and a Red Caboose reefer, maybe?



Wonder what the REAL MTH offerings will look like?



Dennis Storzek

Accurail, Inc.































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

I doubt showing an existing model in an ad counts as "stealing intellectual property". Copying it and producing it as their own, yes. Showing it with a label indicating that what you'll buy won't look the same, no.

It's interesting that Ertl was mentioned. In the 90's they produced injection molded kits of some large and exotic USAF bombers that had only appeared as vacuum formed kits about 15 years earlier. If you know about vac kits they generally have soft/non-existant details, while the injection kits were quite nice. Apparently they bought some of the vac kits and built them up to take around to trade shows (as "Coming Soon!!") and even photographed them for the new kit's boxes when the test shots were delayed. On two separate occasions I picked up the Ertl kit at the hobby shop, but after looking at the rather mushy airplane shown in the box photos, decided it wasn't a great kit and put it down without buying it. Talking to others over the years I've run into a number of folks who did the same thing, and were amazed to see the fine kit inside when it was finally purchased. Clearly an advantage in making your first impression your best.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim O'Connor

It's pretty ironic too when you consider that MTH collected
millions and millions from Lionel (and brought down the mighty
Samhongsa) for stealing MTH's intellectual property...

----- Original Message -----


Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> wrote:

I doubt showing an existing model in an ad counts as "stealing intellectual
property". Copying it and producing it as their own, yes. Showing it with
a label indicating that what you'll buy won't look the same, no.
Kurt,

I'm not complaining. It's not unusual for manufacturers to use other products to mock-up for ad photos, I've done it myself, once using one of my old resin kits, other times using kit moldings from predecessor companies where we now owned the tooling. Unlike some other manufacturers, whose mock-ups looked better than their production run, I always took great pains to not show something other than what you were going to get. I often joke about writing an April Fools Day article on how to add molded on grabs to a car scratchbuilt from Evergreen styrene, because I've done it... but unfortunately, in the rush to meet a deadline, never took any pictures.

I bring this up because the Ertl affair was simply laughable; we had people on various lists waxing eloquently about the detail on the new Ertl boxcar, and correctly claiming the prototype was a NYC boxcar, only to have the actual product model the URSA DS car, with far coarser detail and huge grab irons. Separate, but huge.

Could happen again. The fact that MTH took great pains to not show our handbrake or Enterprise hardware means they don't want you to see them... for whatever reason. And, other kit producers who tried separate wire grabs on hoppers found that you simply can't core two intersecting .013" holes through a .040" square corner post and have things hold together... something's gotta give. So, we'll see.

I'm surprised that no one has ever done what I did with hopper grabs when I was looking at ways to improve the state of the art when designing our 70 ton triple; that is, grind an X-acto blade to clear the side sill, reach inside the body, and scrape the the molded on grabs thinner from the back. It doesn't take very long to do a car, and while it doesn't help with the grabs molded onto the body, it does eliminate the "bookshelf" look of the open ladders.

I'll be interested to see the model MTH actually produces. Meanwhile, we're still at $12.98 per kit.

Dennis Storzek
Accurail, Inc.


Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis Storzek

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@...> wrote:

I doubt showing an existing model in an ad counts as "stealing intellectual
property". Copying it and producing it as their own, yes. Showing it with
a label indicating that what you'll buy won't look the same, no.
Kurt,

I'm not complaining . . .


----- Original Message -----

I know, Dennis. I was responding to the post following yours.

KL


Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
 

Tim,

Having I believe more experience than most on this list in working with Samhongsa I'd like to learn what prompted the comment regarding MTH having "brought down the mighty Samhongsa".

Thanks, Don Valentine

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Dennis

It's pretty ironic too when you consider that MTH collected
millions and millions from Lionel (and brought down the mighty
Samhongsa) for stealing MTH's intellectual property...

Well maybe someday we'll have a repeat of ERTL and there will
be bins of MTH models at train shows for $3 apiece. (ERTL of
course famously copied your box car, Tichy's flat car, and an
RPI resin MEC gondola kit.)

Tim O'Connor


ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Storzek" <destorzek@...> wrote:
As it is, I don't understand why someone would want to pay $30 per car when for a few bucks more they could buy a three pack of Accurail kits, unless it's the keep those Chinese rice bowls filled.


And I wonder how many average Joes are going to opt for a much more expensive model when the less expensive one is almost as detailed? How many STMFC nuts are going to buy these new cars?

Just about every I know is a little strapped for cash these days.

Ed


Charlie Vlk
 

I think the originator is confused; Samhongsa was involved only to the extent that the accused were former employees that brought over digital files to a new employer and used substantial parts of their previous work for another client.
Much of the basis of the judgment, in my opinion, was really baseless...... it would be like an architect changing firms not being allowed to do a steel framed Burger King because for the previous firm he had worked on such a building for McDonalds (the "technology trade secrets" portion)..... but the stupidity of doing the same locomotive for a new client using the original files right down to the title block was justly rewarded to those involved. The real stupidity is the head-to-head competition between some importers.... with the wide range of prototypes available, why tool something that has already captured a share of the potential market? Unless a model "needs" to be redone because of errors or advancements in features or outright unavailability, move on!!! It is hard to justify buying duplicates of what you already have but we ALWAYS need more trains ( different steam era freight cars)!!!
The growing market for consumer goods made in Korea and the collapse of the brass market brought down the train companies, not importers or lawsuits.
The slowdown in China train factories that has impacted delivery of products over the last year or so is due to the same problem..... other factories making higher volume goods can hire away skilled management, engineers, and workers and it is difficult to maintain the highly skilled workforce necessary to produce precision model trains. Only the Aerospace and Medical industries have higher tolerances and difficulty of tooling than your normal Model Railroad Hobby locomotive.....or hopper car.
Charlie Vlk

Tim,

Having I believe more experience than most on this list in working with Samhongsa I'd like to learn what prompted the comment regarding MTH having "brought down the mighty Samhongsa".

Thanks, Don Valentine

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
>
> Dennis
>
> It's pretty ironic too when you consider that MTH collected
> millions and millions from Lionel (and brought down the mighty
> Samhongsa) for stealing MTH's intellectual property...
>
> Well maybe someday we'll have a repeat of ERTL and there will
> be bins of MTH models at train shows for $3 apiece. (ERTL of
> course famously copied your box car, Tichy's flat car, and an
> RPI resin MEC gondola kit.)
>
> Tim O'Connor
>



.

__,_._,_