Large Scale Central

Cost status of our hobby

General Discussion
#81

Yes, you’re reading that wrong.
The unit you have, a 37, you report as able to leap tall buildings with a …oh, wait…wrong thread…go around 1600 curves.

That unit was not mentioned prior to your posting.

To pick one unit of a line and then (originally) credit all components of the line with the same capabilities wasn’t quite as “open-minded” as I would have expected.

You do seem to be redeeming yourself…slowly.

I guess since a Ford GP-40 does 196MPH in a flat, I could expect my 1972 Ford Pinto to do the same.

I try to reference back to similar components from the same manufacturer, specifically itemizing changes (for better or worse) from earlier offerings.

THAT was what I was getting at earlier.
The short drawbar of earlier units created real issues in some instances.
Obviously, this one has been somewhat changed.

Personally, I would have worded it something like:

While earlier units from various manufacturers of larger brass locomotives seem to have had issues with shorter drawbars, limited truck throw, and piping, this wonderful new unit has gotten around this problem in a unique manner that is not obvious to the observer and does nothing to detract from the scale model appearance of the locomotive in use on broader curves. While it WILL go around ex-lgb 1600 curves, it isn’t pretty doing so, and we have not yet coupled cars to either end to see if that is a possibility on these sharper curves".

#82

Perhaps it’s a welcome sign of sanity that so few people have tried to run these large locos around such tight curves that some of their apparent inabilities to meet published specifications hasn’t generated more discussion.

In the mean time, those of us with tighter curves will have to relay a few feet of track, widen some bridges and tunnel portals, and extend our engine houses and turntables in order to accommodate the newer motive power. But hey, so did the prototype. Who says garden railroading isn’t the ultimate experience in realism? :wink:

Later,

K

#83

And like I told you on the phone, 15+ yars ago we built the CCRy “plus” sized, but it wasn’t enough.

6’8" radius, 10" trestle and tunnel clearances, and the turntable uprights…

I know from experience a brass 1:20 K-27 outside-cant cylinders WIL go through my gallows uprights…EXCEPT for the valve bodies.
And, to get the cab handrails to clear the rocks on the Gorge Line Grade, I had to put a hydraulic bottle jack sideways and jack them apart to clear.

Every re-alignment and upgrade to trackage has resulted in better clearances, but it’s still tight in places.

One of the reasons I like this Magnus so much…it fits EVERYWHERE!

#84

I draw the line when I have to replace my rail because the locos become too heavy for it. :slight_smile: That’s the ultimate in realism. (Or is it the Environmental Impact Study you have to do to build the branchline beside the house?)

Later,

K

#85

Maybe we’ll just have to shrink those engines!

#86
Doug Arnold said:
Maybe we'll just have to shrink those engines!
Doug,

There is something to be said for “Gummi” … look at balloons: inflate them, deflate them, knot them into “sausage hounds”, heart shapes, Mickey Mouse ears etc. etc. :lol:

Perhaps there should be a recommendation in all the LS fora: “If you’re not certain about scale, we suggest you start with 7/8 scale. The rest being smaller … all of it should fit.” :confused: :wink:

#87

Environmental Impact Study = The contemplation of effects of your wife’s response upon your enviornment.

:smiley:

#88

Yes. When you get ready to buy something you need to judge the size of groan you hear! If it’s not too big, work fast!