Date
1 - 20 of 27
MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
Randy Hammill
Well, since I hadn't seen anybody posting on these, I was wondering how well they were done. So I picked one up. I had to special order it, since none of the shops in my area carry MTH HO models.
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
Bill Welch
Dear Randy
Are your photos posted somewhere. I tried your website and if they are there I could not find them. Thank you for your review.
Bill Welch
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Are your photos posted somewhere. I tried your website and if they are there I could not find them. Thank you for your review.
Bill Welch
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@...> wrote:
Well, since I hadn't seen anybody posting on these, I was wondering how well they were done. So I picked one up. I had to special order it, since none of the shops in my area carry MTH HO models.
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
jerryglow2
I had the same problem locating them. I think he posted them in the photos section here but they haven't "passed inspection" yet as the folder is empty.
Jerry Glow
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Jerry Glow
--- In STMFC@..., "lnbill" <fgexbill@...> wrote:
Dear Randy
Are your photos posted somewhere. I tried your website and if they are there I could not find them. Thank you for your review.
Bill Welch
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@> wrote:
Well, since I hadn't seen anybody posting on these, I was wondering how well they were done. So I picked one up. I had to special order it, since none of the shops in my area carry MTH HO models.
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
Randy Hammill
Yep, I figured I'd post them here so folks wouldn't have to leave the site. I didn't realize they wouldn't be available right away.
I'm not sure if I'll get a chance before Christmas, but I'll try to pull together a better review and pictures to post on my site. I'm very interested to know what others think about the models.
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I'm not sure if I'll get a chance before Christmas, but I'll try to pull together a better review and pictures to post on my site. I'm very interested to know what others think about the models.
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@... wrote:
I had the same problem locating them. I think he posted them in the photos section here but they haven't "passed inspection" yet as the folder is empty.
Jerry Glow
--- In STMFC@..., "lnbill" <fgexbill@> wrote:
Dear Randy
Are your photos posted somewhere. I tried your website and if they are there I could not find them. Thank you for your review.
Bill Welch
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@> wrote:
Well, since I hadn't seen anybody posting on these, I was wondering how well they were done. So I picked one up. I had to special order it, since none of the shops in my area carry MTH HO models.
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
Randy Hammill
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@...> wrote:
Yep, I figured I'd post them here so folks wouldn't have to leave the site. I didn't realize they wouldn't be available right away.
I'm not sure if I'll get a chance before Christmas, but I'll try to pull together a better review and pictures to post on my site. I'm very interested to know what others think about the models.
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@ wrote:
I had the same problem locating them. I think he posted them in the photos section here but they haven't "passed inspection" yet as the folder is empty.
Jerry Glow
--- In STMFC@..., "lnbill" <fgexbill@> wrote:
Dear Randy
Are your photos posted somewhere. I tried your website and if they are there I could not find them. Thank you for your review.
Bill Welch
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@> wrote:
Well, since I hadn't seen anybody posting on these, I was wondering how well they were done. So I picked one up. I had to special order it, since none of the shops in my area carry MTH HO models.
I am certainly not an expert on these cars. From what I've read here and elsewhere, the complaints for the existing models are:
1. The side center side panels on the Tichy hopper are too wide, and thus all of the ribs are moved too close to the ends
2. The Accurail ones are very accurate, but have molded on details
So I was hopeful that this model would be as accurate as Accurail, but have the fidelity of detail as the Tichy. And as far as I can tell, they have.
I've added a gallery of a few pictures to let you judge for yourselves. I stacked an Accurail hopper on top of this one, and although I didn't quite get them centered, you can see the ribs and panels are pretty much identical. In fact, in terms of the body itself, it looks like it's almost a copy of the Accurail. I don't know if that speaks to the accuracy of both models, or if they copied the Accurail one (and yes, I know their ads show a picture of the Accurail).
The double rivet line along the bottom is a little closer together, and the rivets for where the two hoppers meet in the center are at a slightly lower angle. The interior rivet detail is pretty much the same as the Accurail - that is there is no rivet detail on the interio of the sides, just the slope sheets.
The interior does have a center brace that is snapped into place, and there are two additional cross beams that the modeler installs. They snap into place as well, but it's loose and they have a tendency to rotate, so I'll glue them. These extra cross bearers are not shown in the pictures I took (I hadn't found them yet).
The end detail is great. All grabs are wire and there are wire uncoupling levers. The train line and air hoses are plastic. The Wine latches have rods that connect to the mechanism between the two hoppers on each side. There are no brake levers.
The brake detail looks very good. It looks 'right' to me, I don't know if it's accurate. The surprising thing to me, though, is that it's a K-brake system. It includes piping to the retainer valve, and between the brake components. It includes a dirt collector, the connection to the train line, and the main brake lever.
It weighs 2 oz without the plastic coal load which adds another 1/8 oz. The center sill is metal, and additional metal weight is squeezed in between the two hopper bays, and between the hoppers and the bolsters.
They have released them in various delivery schemes appropriate for K-brakes, as well as non-prototypical schemes. But they are notating these with their "Imagination and Fun" logo, an orange circle with an 'I' in it. The non-prototypical schemes product numbers start with 81-, so they'll be easy to avoid.
So I'm happy with the quality of the models. I will have to see how easy it is to strip and refinish them in a later paint scheme.
Aside from hearing what others think about the models, what I'm curious about is:
Would any of these still have K-brakes circa 1947-1953, which is when I'm modeling. I've asked MTH if they have plans to release later paint schemes with AB brakes, I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, take a look at the pictures and let me know what you all think. I can take more if needed.
And no, I have no affiliation with MTH. In fact, this is the first product of theirs that I've purchased.
Thanks!
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
ken_olson54022 <kwolson@...>
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@...> wrote:
It's bothersome that it appears that the paint is already chipping on the hand grabs, and there is evidence of a finger print on the end.
Can you tell us if the fingerprint is yours, or if it came that way? Worst case situation would be a print etched into the paint because of solvent or adhesive on someone's finger during assembly.
Thanks,
Ken Olson
Thanks, Randy.
Photos are here for now: http://www.flickr.com/photos/16761215@N02/sets/72157625651838888/
Randy
It's bothersome that it appears that the paint is already chipping on the hand grabs, and there is evidence of a finger print on the end.
Can you tell us if the fingerprint is yours, or if it came that way? Worst case situation would be a print etched into the paint because of solvent or adhesive on someone's finger during assembly.
Thanks,
Ken Olson
jerryglow2
Thanks for going the extra effort. I'm not about to strip a model that finely detailed so unless they offer my road (MP) or undec, I'll pass. I can't believe they would do ficticious roads but not cater to prototype modelers. I guess, once a toy train company, the habit is hard to break.
Jerry Glow
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Jerry Glow
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@...> wrote:
Yep, I figured I'd post them here so folks wouldn't have to leave the site. I didn't realize they wouldn't be available right away.
I'm not sure if I'll get a chance before Christmas, but I'll try to pull together a better review and pictures to post on my site. I'm very interested to know what others think about the models.
Randy Hammill
http://newbritainstation.com
Randy Hammill
Hi, Ken -
I didn't pay too much attention to the finish, simply because of the early paint scheme and my plan to try to strip it. The finger print was funny, I didn't even see it until I looked at the picture. It was almost impossible to see on the model, it's pretty impressive that the camera picked it up.
I was able to clean it off, so it's not a permanent finger print. I suspect it was mine, but I didn't compare it to my fingers so I can't be 100 sure.
The only real assembly flaw I noticed later is that the hole for the brake lever comes through to the inside of the hopper. It looks like a little too much solvent was used because you can see daylight through the hole, and it's a little sloppy. It's not noticeable from the outside since the hand lever is in front of it. It should be an easy thing to fix, but I would certainly agree that you shouldn't have to.
I still find it odd that they did the delivery scheme and K brakes, though. A lot of roads built clones of these cars, didn't they? I would think there would be a lot more options for paint schemes with AB brakes.
I looked a little more closely at the way these are assembled, and it will not be easy to make modifications.
The center sill, bolsters (which includes a weight between the bolsters and hoppers) and the bracing that goes from the bolster to the corners is a single cast metal piece. There are two screws in the weight behind the bolsters that attach it to the car body. But in order to remove the center sill you'd have to remove all of the Wine door latching mechanisms (the latch, and the various angle bracing parts). In addition, the air hoses/trainline is a single piece. The trainline is glued to the bottom of the car body, as well as to the end sills which are cast as part of the car body. So this will also need to be removed to take the center sill out.
The brake gear is glued to the center sill casting and the car body. This includes the retainer line which is wire, and runs from the K brake cylinder and all the way to the retainer in a single piece. It's glued at both ends.
Ideally, you would be able to remove the center sill, and the brake gear would be attached to that so you could then replace it with AB brake gear. Then you could strip/repaint the body. So it won't be that simple.
So, this certainly makes it much less of a choice for those modeling in the later steam era, at least in terms of upgrading the brake gear. If you're modeling an era where you can use this out of the box it still looks like a really good model to me. For those of us modeling later years, I hope this does well enough that they'll produce a later version as well.
Which leads me to another question. I don't know anybody who carries MTH HO models. But they've got a sizeable amount of product in their HO catalogs. I give them credit for this, because it appears they've really committed to an HO scale product line. But who are they selling it to?
Randy
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I didn't pay too much attention to the finish, simply because of the early paint scheme and my plan to try to strip it. The finger print was funny, I didn't even see it until I looked at the picture. It was almost impossible to see on the model, it's pretty impressive that the camera picked it up.
I was able to clean it off, so it's not a permanent finger print. I suspect it was mine, but I didn't compare it to my fingers so I can't be 100 sure.
The only real assembly flaw I noticed later is that the hole for the brake lever comes through to the inside of the hopper. It looks like a little too much solvent was used because you can see daylight through the hole, and it's a little sloppy. It's not noticeable from the outside since the hand lever is in front of it. It should be an easy thing to fix, but I would certainly agree that you shouldn't have to.
I still find it odd that they did the delivery scheme and K brakes, though. A lot of roads built clones of these cars, didn't they? I would think there would be a lot more options for paint schemes with AB brakes.
I looked a little more closely at the way these are assembled, and it will not be easy to make modifications.
The center sill, bolsters (which includes a weight between the bolsters and hoppers) and the bracing that goes from the bolster to the corners is a single cast metal piece. There are two screws in the weight behind the bolsters that attach it to the car body. But in order to remove the center sill you'd have to remove all of the Wine door latching mechanisms (the latch, and the various angle bracing parts). In addition, the air hoses/trainline is a single piece. The trainline is glued to the bottom of the car body, as well as to the end sills which are cast as part of the car body. So this will also need to be removed to take the center sill out.
The brake gear is glued to the center sill casting and the car body. This includes the retainer line which is wire, and runs from the K brake cylinder and all the way to the retainer in a single piece. It's glued at both ends.
Ideally, you would be able to remove the center sill, and the brake gear would be attached to that so you could then replace it with AB brake gear. Then you could strip/repaint the body. So it won't be that simple.
So, this certainly makes it much less of a choice for those modeling in the later steam era, at least in terms of upgrading the brake gear. If you're modeling an era where you can use this out of the box it still looks like a really good model to me. For those of us modeling later years, I hope this does well enough that they'll produce a later version as well.
Which leads me to another question. I don't know anybody who carries MTH HO models. But they've got a sizeable amount of product in their HO catalogs. I give them credit for this, because it appears they've really committed to an HO scale product line. But who are they selling it to?
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., "ken_olson54022" <kwolson@...> wrote:
--- In STMFC@..., "rhammill" <nhrr@> wrote:Thanks, Randy.
Photos are here for now: http://www.flickr.com/photos/16761215@N02/sets/72157625651838888/
Randy
It's bothersome that it appears that the paint is already chipping on the hand grabs, and there is evidence of a finger print on the end.
Can you tell us if the fingerprint is yours, or if it came that way? Worst case situation would be a print etched into the paint because of solvent or adhesive on someone's finger during assembly.
Thanks,
Ken Olson
Randy Hammill
Hey, Jerry -
I sort of understand your point. I'd like an undec version (or a kit would even be better).
On the other hand, with my limited knowledge of these prototypes as delivered, they've produced what appears to be an accurate model, with separately applied details, and even got the mix of paint schemes and appropriate brake gear. So I'd say they did a pretty good job of trying to cater to the prototype modelers.
What puzzles me is why they'd make an accurate model of an early prototype. In reading the few posts about the reefer, it's also an early prototype, instead of a rebuilt version that would be much more likely to be purchased by a wider audience.
So in my assessment they ended up catering to a very small subset of prototype modelers.
Here's a list of the road names released:
What MTH is listing as accurate:
CCC&StL
C&O
Clinchfield
NYC
PRR
What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB Brakes?
Randy
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I sort of understand your point. I'd like an undec version (or a kit would even be better).
On the other hand, with my limited knowledge of these prototypes as delivered, they've produced what appears to be an accurate model, with separately applied details, and even got the mix of paint schemes and appropriate brake gear. So I'd say they did a pretty good job of trying to cater to the prototype modelers.
What puzzles me is why they'd make an accurate model of an early prototype. In reading the few posts about the reefer, it's also an early prototype, instead of a rebuilt version that would be much more likely to be purchased by a wider audience.
So in my assessment they ended up catering to a very small subset of prototype modelers.
Here's a list of the road names released:
What MTH is listing as accurate:
CCC&StL
C&O
Clinchfield
NYC
PRR
What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB Brakes?
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@... wrote:
Thanks for going the extra effort. I'm not about to strip a model that finely detailed so unless they offer my road (MP) or undec, I'll pass. I can't believe they would do ficticious roads but not cater to prototype modelers. I guess, once a toy train company, the habit is hard to break.
Jerry Glow
water.kresse@...
Do these cars have as built Blackall folding lever hand brakes or updated vertical staff with horizonal wheel hand brakes? Do they have three tie rods?
MTH images only show the A-ends. C&O AMC Roman livery appears to be representative. C&O eventually went to AB brakes but not powered gear hand brakes . . even into 1954.
Al
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
MTH images only show the A-ends. C&O AMC Roman livery appears to be representative. C&O eventually went to AB brakes but not powered gear hand brakes . . even into 1954.
Al
----- Original Message -----
From: "rhammill" <nhrr@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 11:46:04 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
Hey, Jerry -
I sort of understand your point. I'd like an undec version (or a kit would even be better).
On the other hand, with my limited knowledge of these prototypes as delivered, they've produced what appears to be an accurate model, with separately applied details, and even got the mix of paint schemes and appropriate brake gear. So I'd say they did a pretty good job of trying to cater to the prototype modelers.
What puzzles me is why they'd make an accurate model of an early prototype. In reading the few posts about the reefer, it's also an early prototype, instead of a rebuilt version that would be much more likely to be purchased by a wider audience.
So in my assessment they ended up catering to a very small subset of prototype modelers.
Here's a list of the road names released:
What MTH is listing as accurate:
CCC&StL
C&O
Clinchfield
NYC
PRR
What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB Brakes?
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@... wrote:
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
From: "rhammill" <nhrr@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 11:46:04 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
Hey, Jerry -
I sort of understand your point. I'd like an undec version (or a kit would even be better).
On the other hand, with my limited knowledge of these prototypes as delivered, they've produced what appears to be an accurate model, with separately applied details, and even got the mix of paint schemes and appropriate brake gear. So I'd say they did a pretty good job of trying to cater to the prototype modelers.
What puzzles me is why they'd make an accurate model of an early prototype. In reading the few posts about the reefer, it's also an early prototype, instead of a rebuilt version that would be much more likely to be purchased by a wider audience.
So in my assessment they ended up catering to a very small subset of prototype modelers.
Here's a list of the road names released:
What MTH is listing as accurate:
CCC&StL
C&O
Clinchfield
NYC
PRR
What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB Brakes?
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@... wrote:
Thanks for going the extra effort. I'm not about to strip a model that finely detailed so unless they offer my road (MP) or undec, I'll pass. I can't believe they would do ficticious roads but not cater to prototype modelers. I guess, once a toy train company, the habit is hard to break.
Jerry Glow
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Benjamin Hom
Randy Hammill asked:
"What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB
Brakes?"
The problem lies beyond the type of brakes on the models.
Completely bogus (i.e., road did not own USRA HM or clones):
CNW
D&RGW
ERIE
MILW
N&W
UP
WM
Bogus paint schemes:
B&O: Car is decorated as a Class N-12 subclass car, which this model does
not accurately represent. B&O did have a significant number of true USRA
hoppers in Class N-17 and sublclasses, including cars directly allocated to the
B&O and others acquired through merger with the M&K and BR&P, so I'm not sure
why MTH went with this paint and lettering when it would be just as easy to
correctly letter this model for the correct car class. (Refer to Hom's Theorem
of Twin Hoppers: NOT ALL TWIN HOPPERS WITH SEVEN SIDE POSTS ARE USRA HOPPERS.)
Under review (I don't have my copy of Lane's article with me at work and need to
verify these; the paint schemes may still be bogus):
CRP
LNE
P&WV
Ben Hom
"What MTH says is not prototypically accurate:
B&O
CNW
CRP
D&RGW
ERIE
L&NE
MILW
N&W
P&WV
UP
WM
Would any of the roads they list as inaccurate be correct if they had AB
Brakes?"
The problem lies beyond the type of brakes on the models.
Completely bogus (i.e., road did not own USRA HM or clones):
CNW
D&RGW
ERIE
MILW
N&W
UP
WM
Bogus paint schemes:
B&O: Car is decorated as a Class N-12 subclass car, which this model does
not accurately represent. B&O did have a significant number of true USRA
hoppers in Class N-17 and sublclasses, including cars directly allocated to the
B&O and others acquired through merger with the M&K and BR&P, so I'm not sure
why MTH went with this paint and lettering when it would be just as easy to
correctly letter this model for the correct car class. (Refer to Hom's Theorem
of Twin Hoppers: NOT ALL TWIN HOPPERS WITH SEVEN SIDE POSTS ARE USRA HOPPERS.)
Under review (I don't have my copy of Lane's article with me at work and need to
verify these; the paint schemes may still be bogus):
CRP
LNE
P&WV
Ben Hom
water.kresse@...
The B-end image I got thru my viewer was very dark and shinny . . . I'll try copying it and trying PhotoShop. I am guessing a lever type hand brake?
Al Kresse
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Al Kresse
----- Original Message -----
From: "Benjamin Hom" <b.hom@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:21:00 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
Al Kresse asked:
"Do these cars have as built Blackall folding lever hand brakes or updated
vertical staff with horizonal wheel hand brakes? Do they have three tie rods? "
Take a look at Randy's photos - they illustrate the answers to your questions
quite nicely.
Ben Hom
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
From: "Benjamin Hom" <b.hom@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:21:00 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
Al Kresse asked:
"Do these cars have as built Blackall folding lever hand brakes or updated
vertical staff with horizonal wheel hand brakes? Do they have three tie rods? "
Take a look at Randy's photos - they illustrate the answers to your questions
quite nicely.
Ben Hom
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Randy Hammill
It's a lever brake, but I couldn't tell you what kind. As an enthusiastic ameteur I'm not sure what you mean by 3 tie rods, so I can't help you there unless somebody can clarify.
Randy
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
Do these cars have as built Blackall folding lever hand brakes or updated vertical staff with horizonal wheel hand brakes? Do they have three tie rods?
Benjamin Hom
Randy Hammil wrote:
"As an enthusiastic ameteur I'm not sure what you mean by 3 tie rods,
so I can't help you there unless somebody can clarify."
DSC07194.jpg in your Flickr album illustrates what Al Kresse is asking about:
http://tinyurl.com/MTH-USRA-HM-crossbeams
As you might think, these took a terrific beating in service and were replaced in later designs (and depending on prototype, retrofitted to older cars) with large gussets. See the Accurail USRA twin model for an example of a car with gussets.
Ben Hom
"As an enthusiastic ameteur I'm not sure what you mean by 3 tie rods,
so I can't help you there unless somebody can clarify."
DSC07194.jpg in your Flickr album illustrates what Al Kresse is asking about:
http://tinyurl.com/MTH-USRA-HM-crossbeams
As you might think, these took a terrific beating in service and were replaced in later designs (and depending on prototype, retrofitted to older cars) with large gussets. See the Accurail USRA twin model for an example of a car with gussets.
Ben Hom
Benjamin Hom
I wrote:
"Under review (I don't have my copy of Lane's article with me at work
and need to verify these; the paint schemes may still be bogus):
CRP
LNE
P&WV"
CRP: CNJ did receive 500 cars (65000-65499); further investigation is needed to determine how many were transferred to CRP during that era of creative accounting by CNJ.
LNE, P&WV: Neither road were allocated these cars by the USRA.
Given this information, I'm inclined to take MTH at their word regarding these cars as foobies. I'm still really disappointed in the B&O model - a legitimate 1920s N-17 could have been had for a simple e-mail.
Ben Hom
"Under review (I don't have my copy of Lane's article with me at work
and need to verify these; the paint schemes may still be bogus):
CRP
LNE
P&WV"
CRP: CNJ did receive 500 cars (65000-65499); further investigation is needed to determine how many were transferred to CRP during that era of creative accounting by CNJ.
LNE, P&WV: Neither road were allocated these cars by the USRA.
Given this information, I'm inclined to take MTH at their word regarding these cars as foobies. I'm still really disappointed in the B&O model - a legitimate 1920s N-17 could have been had for a simple e-mail.
Ben Hom
water.kresse@...
I was referring to the three cross-ties beams or rods on the inside of the bodies. Both CBC drwg and C&O Freight Car Diagram sheets show them. After the USRAs came out the C&O had to point out 3, 1 or no cross-ties on their rib-sided hopper car sheets.
Al Kresse
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Al Kresse
----- Original Message -----
From: "rhammill" <nhrr@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:52:32 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
It's a lever brake, but I couldn't tell you what kind. As an enthusiastic ameteur I'm not sure what you mean by 3 tie rods, so I can't help you there unless somebody can clarify.
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
From: "rhammill" <nhrr@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:52:32 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: MTH USRA 55-ton twin hoppers
It's a lever brake, but I couldn't tell you what kind. As an enthusiastic ameteur I'm not sure what you mean by 3 tie rods, so I can't help you there unless somebody can clarify.
Randy
--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
Do these cars have as built Blackall folding lever hand brakes or updated vertical staff with horizonal wheel hand brakes? Do they have three tie rods?
tbarney2004
On 12/22/2010 6:47 PM, benjaminfrank_hom wrote:
Tim Barney
I wrote:Unfortunately Ben, MTH seems to be the only manufacturer who appears to refuse to deal with any RR T&HS, as has been pointed out by at least one's modeling committee members who have been repeated told flat out that MTH does NOT want any outside help with research whatsoever...even when such help was basically offered gratis.
"Under review (I don't have my copy of Lane's article with me at work
and need to verify these; the paint schemes may still be bogus):
CRP
LNE
P&WV"
CRP: CNJ did receive 500 cars (65000-65499); further investigation is needed to determine how many were transferred to CRP during that era of creative accounting by CNJ.
LNE, P&WV: Neither road were allocated these cars by the USRA.
Given this information, I'm inclined to take MTH at their word regarding these cars as foobies. I'm still really disappointed in the B&O model - a legitimate 1920s N-17 could have been had for a simple e-mail.
Ben Hom
Tim Barney