Mark V said:
Thanks Kevin…Nailed it.
He didn’t “nail” anything other than his toe.
Like Tim said, a lot of these are still being sold “new” by dealers/discounters. A whole new batch of folks is finding out exactly how you pronounce “Bachmann”.
TOC
Kevin Strong said:
“The Chinese are world famous for reverse engineering and copying the superior product of others. Why cannot Bachmann simply reverse engineer and copy the LGB Mogul drive for a high reliable drive?”
In a way, they have, though not LGB. (I wouldn’t want LGB’s “block” motor on a steamer anyway; you can’t do that and have a prototypical space between the boiler and the frame, or things like prototypical valve gear, etc.–but I digress.) Bachmann’s new C-19 is as good a runner as I have ever come across in large scale. It rivals the best efforts of Accucraft, LGB, and others reputed for their strong engineering and smooth performance. Pittman motor, large metal gears, decent gear ratio; to be frank (and no disparagement meant to Barry’s drives) it’s every bit equal to a BBT drive. It’s that good. All those years we’ve been posting on these forums that Bachmann should just copy Barry’s drive, they’ve listened. (Though clearly this is their own design, not a copy of Barry’s.) I’ve got a C-19 powered by one of Barry’s custom drives. I’ve also got a Bachmann C-19. The two locos are very evenly matched, with a slight nod going to Bachmann’s drive at start-up and very slow speeds.
You ever stop to think how that could be? Are you aware by any means of the timelines involved? Some are. Some look at the where and when, and the C-19 running like a BBT drive makes a whole lotta sense.
Especially when they finally get the ratios right.
Flash in the pan or sign of things to come? That has yet to be determined. Bachmann (and others) have a habit of re-inventing the wheel to some extent with each loco they produce. But consider this; we spend a lot of time talking about the “Connie” with its notorious gear issue (and the 4-4-0/2-6-0 that uses the same gear), or the Shay or some of Bachmann’s other notorious foibles. And those issues are legitimate. But more and more, they represent the early history of what Bachmann has produced. All of those locos have been out for at least a decade or longer; yet we talk about them as if they’re representative of the current state of affairs. I don’t think that’s fair commentary.
Early or not, the Shay still uses the same power block innards. Motors, gears, wheels, axles, drive mount plate measurements. If someone wants a 4-4-0 or 2-6-0, they just call up TW and buy one. Oh, and it’s motor, gearbox, gear, axle, drivers, boiler, cab, tender shell…and I’d have to look to see how much else is the same as I forget.
I’ve owned or operated a lot of what Bachmann has produced, for better or for worse. I can almost replace a broken gear in a “Connie” blindfolded. I’ve re-motored my 2-6-0 because the stock motor was underpowered. They’ve had their trip-ups. But they’ve also learned from the past. Since the K-27 (and despite the gear ratio debate with that loco), the drives have been pretty problem-free. The K-27–with or without Rodney’s gearhead reducer–runs very smoothly, and Bachmann fixed the original counterweight issue almost immediately. I had no complaints about the performance of mine on my own railroad (2% maximum grade) prior to installing Rodney’s gearhead reducer, though I readily admit the reduction makes it an even stronger performer (if a bit noisier). I’ve got two locos that use the trucks from a 45-tonner, and in both cases, the locos run very smoothly. The one that runs on my dad’s line does have some surging going down steep grades (4% or greater) with a heavy train in tow, but that’s a behavior common to many of the locos on his railroad no matter who makes them. (Still working on figuring out how to put a “retainer” on the caboose to stretch out the train. I may work on that for my trip east this Summer…) The one that operates on my railroad can just crawl at 1 scale mph and couple to a train. (Or–at that speed–push the train down the track without actually closing the coupler because there’s not enough force.) My 2nd-generation Climax runs just as smoothly.
Holy revisionist history. Bachmann fixed the counterweight almost immediately? I have evry one of the e-mails. It wasn’t “immediately”, as they told me it was ONE person who told them there was nothing wrong.
I also have the e-mail about the plastic drive pins in the K axle gear. Ignored, but sent nonetheless. You have that happen, no amount of Rodney gearbox reducer will fix it. I did, in the field, with metal rods instead of plastic.
The Forney, 2-6-6-2, re-engineered 2-4-2, Davenport, etc.–the forums are pretty quiet when it comes to these locos. Given how we (generally speaking) love to complain when things don’t work, I’d chalk this up to “no news is good news.” I’ve owned and/or worked on a few of these, and have no real complaints about their running characteristics. They’re all “average” or better.
I know exactly zero folks with the “new” 2-4-2. Pretty specific prototype there. That’s okay, there are folks out there who buy them, no problem with that. The Meyer…what a joke. You are serious, right? 1:20.3 was founded for those who adhered more closely to the prototype and to scale…fair statement?
And the drawings state Articulated…yet to make the R-1 boys happy (and it failed there anyway) they made it a Meyer.
There is a thread somewhere about that specific issue, I think.
“Rose colored glasses?” I’d like to think not. I don’t do anything “special” to my locomotives, in fact I probably do less than most. My experiences with Bachmann’s early offerings mirror most others’ experiences, so I have every reason to expect my experiences with their later ones to be similarly indicative of the overall class.
Rose coloured glasses. Coupled with blinders.
“The Connie frame side detail is more involved than the C-19 and yet there is now a very large retail price gap between the two models.”
These two locos are in completely different classes. The “Connie” doesn’t hold a candle to the C-19 in terms of detail, accuracy, performance, or complexity. Don’t get me wrong; the “Connie” is a nice locomotive–I love mine–but it’s pretty generic and the details are not necessarily accurate. (Don’t know that you’d really want to run the water line from the tender straight into the firebox.) If you want that loco to qualify as “super-detailed,” you’ll be spending a few evenings in the workshop with a drawer full of Trackside Details and Ozark Miniatures parts. The C-19, on the other hand, is “super-detailed” pretty much straight out of the box. I spent a good deal of time crawling over the C-19 at the Colorado RR museum when I was scratchbuilding mine. There’s not many details Bachmann missed–including prototypically operating clamshell firebox doors (okay, sans the pedal to operate the air to open them, but I had that on my model and it broke off very early on, so I’ll forgive them.)
Odd. The glasses sure helped you when the 2-8-0 was new. If I recall, the screaming about a 30" gauge Mexican locomotive were rebuffed by you, among others, weren’t they? Now, accuracy…we’re still talking Bachmann, right? Same design group? Same manufacturing plant? Same folks responsible for all the earlier stuff we’re talking about?
You ever in your life own an old Fiat? Even when they were new? Once they pulled sales out of the US, we all breathed a sigh of relief.
Now they’re back. Sorry, folks. I had one and worked on them in shops, and no way in hades will I ever do that again.
Likewise, if the “Connie” had the drive that the C-19 has in it, you wouldn’t be buying it for $275 from Trainworld. Do I wish the “Connie” had a more robust drive straight from the factory? Absolutely! But you’re not going to get BBT-level performance without BBT-level price tag. And the “Connie” was produced in a time when that wasn’t the business model.
My “connies” have drives like the C-19 in them. Amazing what proper gears ratios, material, gearboxes, and ball bearings can do.
So, to get the right gearboxes in 1:20.3 locos, we waited…is it 18 years since the first Shay?
Add to that the electronics in the C-19 that the “Connie” lacks, and the price differential is very easy to understand. When you look at the C-19, as well as the K-27, Forney, and their recent “high-dollar” models, they are worlds apart from the other, cheaper locos Bachmann has produced. You don’t get something for nothing. Those improvements in terms of detail, drive quality, and on-board electronics cost money.
There’s the rub, Kevin. Especially since one person responsible told everyone the electronics will add nothing to the cost of the locomotive. All that stuff comes out anyway. The connie has flicker. All I need. Smoke units all go in the trash anyway.
I remember writing letters to Kader FOR Dick Maddox when he ran Bachmann…and the quality issues on what was then museum quality models…nothing like it before…and no parts.
The bigger issue is whether the move towards $800+ locomotives will “scare” people from the hobby. I honestly don’t think so. When you put the B’mann K-27 or C-19 next to the Accucraft models at twice or three times the price, what are you getting for that extra money? Brass construction. So what? Put a coat of paint on it, and you’ll never know. (And in our scale, “unpainted brass” isn’t an option.) That’s the field these newer locomotives are playing in. In terms of detail and performance they’re on near equal footing. And, you can feel a heckuvalot better taking a razor saw to an $800 locomotive than a $2400 one. Or at least you can be a bit more assured of not sleeping on the couch after your spouse finds out you did.
If you take the time to talk to hobby shops, I believe there is a real issue in the entire hobby with the price increases. Lots of newbies…won’t be for long. They’ll be gone.
Your comments on Accucraft are odd. But interesting.
Trouble is, where does that leave the “budget-conscious” modeler? In reality, the same place they’ve always been. Thirty years ago, there was LGB. Adjusted to 2010 dollars, the prices of their locos were very similar to the $800 we’re paying for Bachmann’s latest locos. As a result, we bought fewer locos. From 1976 to 1985–the first 10 years dad and I were in the hobby–we bought all of 3 new locomotives. That was it! No large fleets, no 50-car trains to pull behind; it was “save up and buy a few cars or a new locomotive as you can.” Then the “inexpensive” alternatives started hitting the market, and we bought more and more as a result. We had to repaint or do some detailing to get them to match the LGB stuff, but what the heck… they were cheap enough!
Except folks had jobs then. And their retirement wasn’t decimated.
Those “inexpensive” alternatives still exist. They’re not specifically 1:20, or necessarily “new-in-box,” but they’re there. The “Annie” is still probably the best value for the dollar in large scale, and with very little effort can be “boosted” to 1:20.3. (I’ve got one in progress right now.) Or Bachmann’s smaller locos like the 0-4-0, etc., or for that matter, a NIB “Connie” and a BBT drive will only set you back around $500 total, or go cheap and get the metal replacement gear for $10 and if you’re adventurous, buy a replacement motor from NWSL for $40 to give it a bit more power. There are definitely things you can do for comparatively very little money. Not to be morbid, but none of us are getting any younger, and estate sales are a great way to pick up equipment on the cheap. You’ve got to be a bit more “plugged in” to the modeling scene to really take advantage of that, so for a newcomer it may be a bit difficult at first, but the deals are out there. (Commercial interruption: I’ve still got custom-weathered, DCC-equipped K-27 for sale.)
What’s “missing” from the equation is a line of specifically 1:20 equipment aimed at the “budget conscious” modeler like we had with the early stuff from Kalamazoo or Bachmann’s 1:22 stuff. But I honestly don’t think there’s much of a market for that, so I’m neither holding my breath nor looking to invest. I’d like to be proven wrong on that front, as I’d much rather plunk down $50 for a generic box car to which I can add my own details rather than shell out $100 for one I have to cut up. But I don’t think I’m the “typical” hobbyist. There have been other similar offerings over the years in the other scales, and none have gained any traction. (Think NWSL’s “Spartan” On3 locomotives from year back.) I think modelers who are of that mind are already buying the 1:22 stuff and modifying it to suit their needs, if not scratchbuilding, or just resigning themselves to building their collection a lot more slowly than they might otherwise do if prices were lower. Given the space that 1:20 equipment takes up, I’m not certain that’s a bad thing.
Amazing. That was the purpose of the Bachmann 1:20 freight cars (NOT the 20’ cars). Everyone wanted cheaper alternatives to Accucraft and such. Ever see what the pricing is nowadays?
The $64,000 question is whether a manufacturer can survive on $800 locomotives alone (or a mix of $800 locos and $130 box cars.) I think if the quality is there, then yes. (And it seems that the overall trend is for the quality to be there.) And the hobby will survive as well. Is it “sticker shock” for the modeler? Sure, but in an age where you pay $50 for a round of golf (to say nothing of $1,000 for a single club), or $600 to take your family to a single football game, I think it doesn’t take long for people to put things in perspective and bite the bullet. You can spend $1,000 for a golf club, it’s not going to help your swing. At least you know the loco will stay on the track.
They won’t survive on anything from me. Ever again. Glad you’re happy with it.
Later,
K
TOC
TOC,
Do you want some cheese to go with your whine?
(http://www.dimensionsinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Smallest-Violin.jpg)
“The real beef in this whole thread is, some have wine tastes on a beer budget and are upset that Bachmann wont give them the wine tastes with their beer budget. Its all about budgeting…”
From a previous post, yes, that is ONE reason.
The prominent, and consistent reason for dissatisfaction with Bachmann is quality.
LGB had the brand name in their back pocket through the 1980s -1990s until their conspiracy of confusion from sale and resale and sale…of the company.
LGB meant reliability to the most consumers of large scale.
No company in large scale has that level of quality endorsement.
Will there be?
Wine taste with a beer budget. There in lies the main issue for me, the haves and the have nots. The haves think the have nots are complaining because they are unable to afford the latest and greatest. WRONGGGGGGGGG!!!
We all have different tastes and outcomes for our railroading. Those who congratulate the Bachmann C-19 for its quality and price also compare it to the Accucraft C-19 that they also just happen to have. One could say a Chev Cortvette is better than a Ferrari (which it probably is) simply because it is cheaper than a Ferrari. Both are still expensive!! Gee am I jealous? No, the C-19 is not on my shopping list nor is any Accucraft product. I have been there with Accucraft and NEVER again - museum quality that should stay in a glass case in a museum.
I have no issue in the main with Bachmann, once I correct their production line mistakes. They mass produce to a price and quality suffers. Their production line staff could be assembling a large scale locomotive one day and an ‘N’ scale boxcar the next. Such is the problem with limited batch production. With LGB the staff were enthusiastic and experienced and knew their task inside out. They enjoyed their work and the company they worked for.
The C-19 is undoubtedly an excellent product and fulfills the wishes of those who want (and always wanted) a BIG locomotive. The issue for me is reliability, an inherent flaw in Bachmann’s DNA. They have an unenviable history in all scales that is hard to shift. The C-19 may help overcome this legacy, however, at $800.00 just how many will find out just how good it is.
The original MSRP for the Connie was $795.00 for many years. I purchased mine for $425.00 from memory and it sold down to $159.00 new. Bachmann’s legacy will be undoing the street price fiasco. If the loco was only worth say $300.00, then why was it not retailed for that. People view the current C-19 price with disdain. Is the loco actually worth $799.00 or really just $300.00 or even less? Bachmann have maintained the high pricing on both the K-27 and the C-19 to date.
Why was the new Climax twice the price of the older model it replaced? Bachmann had all the tooling onhand. Only real difference was the onboard electronics. Did these ‘no cost to the consumer’ additional items double the retail price?
Bachmann it seems are trying to shed a legacy by ‘investing’ in a premium range of locmotives and rolling stock. Alas, as with most families, there is a skeleton in the closet.
Quote: "Soooo…to sum it all up. Bachmann needs to keep doing what they are doing. Keep a lower priced offering in the Connie and Annie (Which is great they have address all past problems with). "
Jake,
I highly doubt any new production Connies will be seen. The Connie was the Uncle Arthur that all families seem to have. A likable old soul but a bit embarassing to be around.
The Annie will stay in their line up as it is instrumental as a low priced, very good quality starter locomotive to suplement their ‘Big Hauler’ rolling stock range. However, why did it take more than twenty years just to get the Annie right? The K-27, for many, they did not get right, but did wipe egg off their faces with the C-19 and at least got the gearing right. Now all they need to do is convince the masses of the benefits of their expensive no cost to the consumer onboard electronics.
Lastly, they need to get their product tested in the field by other than payroll staff or those with pecuniary interests in ensuring the product’s success.
Tim Brien said:
Quote: The Annie will stay in their line up as it is instrumental as a low priced, very good quality starter locomotive to suplement their ‘Big Hauler’ rolling stock range. However, why did it take more than twenty years just to get the Annie right?
One reason for the relative low price is the tooling was amortized almost 20 years ago. Howard is reputed to have said the most expensive part of the original battery Big Hauler was the box.
The K-27, for many, they did not get right, but did wipe egg off their faces with the C-19 and at least got the gearing right. Now all they need to do is convince the masses of the benefits of their expensive no cost to the consumer onboard electronics.
Lastly, they need to get their product tested in the field by other than payroll staff or those with pecuniary interests in ensuring the product’s success.
Didn’t that used to happen? Seems I remember something like that.
TOC
Curmudgeon mcneely said:
…
Didn’t that used to happen? Seems I remember something like that.
TOC
Of course it did, they just didn’t want to hear the results. There is a term for that “learning resistant”; which BTW also applied to LGB. At least once the cousins were running the show.
Crap! I think I missed the point of this thread somewhere?
Oh well always the bridesmaid and never the bride!
Dave,
perhaps if you actually read the thread you would be able to contribute. Maybe you would rather that manufacturers produced the items that some did back twenty years ago and never developed their items. Yes, LGB is one such manufacturer who sat on their laurels but then they had an excellent quality base to rest on. A manufacturer is not going to improve the range without some feedback from the consumer.
Apparently, you like some prefer we all crawl back into the woodwork with your cutesy comments which contribute nothing or those who cannot put more than 140 characters together or just post an image. Some are concerned at the direction the hobby is heading. Think of it as a ‘spring uprising’. It dislodged some recalcitrant despotic leaders in the middle east and north Africa and may dislodge some ‘dead wood’ from our manufacturers payroll. Long live the revolution (and I am not referring to any manufacturer’s remote control).
Dave who?
Dave(id),
eggs did not get into space simply because someone had a good strong arm. If rocket design had not been perfected then we would still be sacrificing astronauts on the launch pad. For interest research the history of post war Russian rocket researchers. A failure on the launch pad represented a long prison term in a gulag. Failure was not an option!
Online criticism allows our manufacturers to escape prison terms in gulags for past failures and fosters product development for our benefit. Look to the freedoms you experience today. If not for colonial dissenters nearly 240 years ago, you might still have British landlords.
“I believe there is a real issue in the entire hobby with the price increases. Lots of newbies…won’t be here for long. They’ll be gone.”
But without the price increases, lots of manufacturers won’t be here for long. The solution is to strike that ever-so-delicate balance between quality and affordability. The good news is that it’s us–the modelers–who get to dictate where that point lies. We vote with our wallets. The 1:20 Spectrum rolling stock is priced where it is because we–as a market–have said we’re comfortable with that price. Obviously we’d gladly pay less, but manufacturers charge what the market will bear, and it seems it will bear $100 to $150 per car. Time will tell if the market will bear $800 locomotives over the long term. It won’t if there’s no perceived value for the investment, but so long as the value is there and people are buying, more power to 'em.
The newcomer will always have inroads into the hobby. Swap meets, ebay, buy/sell forums… there’s always going to be modelers looking to unload stuff, so there will always be eager newcomers (and long-time modelers) looking for bargains. I know a good number of modelers who have never bought any equipment new. So if the manufacturers can stay afloat with $800 locomotives, let them, and then let the 2nd-hand market take care of getting those locos into the hands of modelers who don’t want to pay that high a price.
It’s not unlike automobiles… I’ve never owned a new car. There’s no value in it for me paying that high a price just to be the first to drive it. I’ll buy one that’s 5 or so years old that’s still got 100K - 150K miles left in it at half the price of new. But there are plenty of people who do, and they’re the ones keeping the manufacturers in business. I just keep the dealers in business.
So I wouldn’t worry too much about $800 locomotives killing the hobby. If that’s too high a price, the manufacturers will know pretty quickly when they don’t sell them, respond in kind and release the next loco at a lower price point. Hopefully they’d keep the mechanical quality in check and maybe cut back on some of the superfluous details to cut costs, or pick simpler prototypes, or… They want to stay in business as much as we want to save money but still have high-quality trains.
Later,
K
Everything is going up in price today except our salaries ugh…
Amen Shawn. Heck it costs me over $30 to go to McDonalds with the family when not too long ago it was around $20.
Tim Brien said:
Dave(id),
eggs did not get into space simply because someone had a good strong arm. If rocket design had not been perfected then we would still be sacrificing astronauts on the launch pad. For interest research the history of post war Russian rocket researchers. A failure on the launch pad represented a long prison term in a gulag. Failure was not an option!
Online criticism allows our manufacturers to escape prison terms in gulags for past failures and fosters product development for our benefit. Look to the freedoms you experience today. If not for colonial dissenters nearly 240 years ago, you might still have British landlords.
Tim,
Call him Rooster. Every time Shawn tells him “Shut up Rooster!”, he actually does. hehehe
Tim Brien said:
Dave(id),
eggs did not get into space simply because someone had a good strong arm. If rocket design had not been perfected then we would still be sacrificing astronauts on the launch pad.
When did we perfect it??? Instead of the launch-pad we moved it up a few thousand feet…Or re-entry.
OK, try a response negating the following conclusions regarding this initial topic:
1 -The major player that virtually “created” large scale and made the brand name the product, LGB, is no longer the leader.
2 - LGB made the ownership of large scale (“LGB Trains”) trusted.
3 - LGB created product trust specifically from reliability. Remember the white lab-coated kid and him pulling a LGB loco from a fish tank and then RUNNING it on camera?
4 - There is NO single manufacturer promoting reliability – none with the brand association with reliability such as KATO, ATHERAN, and Broadway Limited. The key word is PROMOTING reliability.
5 - The lack of reliability damages the reputation of the entire large scale hobby.
Wendell-
I have four converted LGB engines, one still track power.
One is kept on-shed, used regularly…an old UINTAH 51.
Two 2018D’s are in a closet. One I purchased new in 84 or 85, the other I picked up at a swap meet several years later. They are heavily modified from original, in that both have soldered brass road pilots with steps, the only 2 CSC oil bunkers for Moguls ever made, later LGB long smokebox with straight stack.
Used to use them to double-head passenger and snow plows. They just get dusty now…but it may be time to drag them out. They were and are dead reliable. Details were and are somewhat lacking.
I got so involved in making the second line run right, helping in development of new drives and gearboxes, I concentrated on those.
I can imagine I’d have pulled out a lot less hair had I not spent time making sure others could keep the PRC units running.
I am somewhat appalled at the cost of motors, however, and they’re not even the good ones we had before with removable brush blocks.
If I had it all to do over again, with all the brickbats and BS I had to endure…I’d have taken up golf.
And not a Volkswagen.
It was the lack of reliability that caused me to get involved. Started with Dick Maddox at Bachmann. We really made some strides over the years. At least there was someone at the top I could call when a problem showed up, and we’d get it sorted.
I remember the day it stopped.
More relief than you’ll ever know. The amount of time it took to figure out what was going on AND a procedure the average hobbyist could perform in the field.
One of the things folks I know still do is to first simplify. They gut as much of the electronics as they can. Start over.
But, ya know, folks like Strong indicate we’ve entered the Promised Land…no more troubles, no more problems…but I am not even going to try to find out.
TOC