Large Scale Central

Interesting comments from MTH/Mike Wolf on G scale, LGB, Aristo

General Discussion
#41

At 21:10 Mike says that Marklin is interested in building models not toys. Did not say they will change, just that the new owners are interested. Be careful how you interpret.

Norman, I cannot understand your sentence: “I doubt that the old LGB molds will not be used for further production of out of scale and out of proportion cars.”

So that’s a double negative, you doubt that the old molds will not be used… so your statement says that you believe that the old LGB molds will be used for out of scale and out of proportion cars. Is that what you meant to say?

Clearly the old molds are, in most cases, out of scale and out of proportion, and will always be.

Regards, Greg

#42

Greg Elmassian said:

At 21:10 Mike says that Marklin is interested in building models not toys. Did not say they will change, just that the new owners are interested. Be careful how you interpret.

The new Allegra doesn’t fall into the toy category, OTOH the new E10 does.

#43

Hello:

“Clearly the old molds are, in most cases, out of scale and out of proportion, and will always be.”

My point was that the majority of the OLD molds… I think my point is indisputable, especially when you re-read the sentence.

What is your point if I may inquire?

Greg

#44

HJ, your argument that the WOW factor isn’t as important as scale fidelity holds as much water with me as a thimble made of sand.

I had purchased an A&B USAT F3 set to build a model of the NS Office Car train. Already had three coaches to paint. When the opportunity to get LGB F7’s came up, I sold the F3’s and the cars. The LGB ones are just so much bigger!

As the person assembling this train, with options in 32/29/26, the larger factor was a selling feature for me… along with the Mikado that will become No.611.

When laying down nearly $4000, one doesn’t do so without making certain he is happy with the purchase.

#45

J.D. Gallaway said:

HJ, your argument that the WOW factor isn’t as important as scale fidelity holds as much water with me as a thimble made of sand.

As I wrote:

I give Mr. Wolf credit for producing a product that is the proper scale to gauge ratio. To me that is a lot more convincing than all the talk about “The WOW factor”.

BTW while I was sceptical at first when Craig T started his “proper 1:29 track” project, I admire the tenacity to get it right. That attitude would serve many (most?) Large Scale mfgs well, but that train left the station long ago.

It’s WOW WOW WOW and never mind the discrepancies.

#46

In my opinion MTH is out of touch. Honestly though, I couldn’t sit through the entire video. I do admire Mike for sticking to scale but I think his business could be much larger if he would have jumped in the 1/29th market.

On the other side of the coin what would have happened if Lewis went with 1/32?

mind=blown (just kidding)

Terry

#47

It all depends on who says ‘WOW!’

I mostly operate 1;29 models, like and run ng 1:22.5 for a change, but it wasn’t WOW that crossed my mind when getting into 1:29 was a good price and a reasonably good UK availability.

But as far as ‘WOW’ is concerned then it usually my non-railroading visitors who say WOW!

#48

Terry Burr said:

On the other side of the coin what would have happened if Lewis went with 1/32?

As I see it, he very likely would have fallen flat on his face as did every other manufacturer up to that point who tried unsuccessfully to create a market for 1:32. Great Trains, Chicago Train Works, MDC… Every one of them flashes in the pan. Visually, the locos didn’t match what people already had (LGB, some Delton, maybe some Bachmann and Kalamazoo). They were smaller than the rolling stock people were running, and there wasn’t symbiotic rolling stock to go behind the locos that were produced. (MDC’s 1:32 hoppers and box cars hardly looked proper behind streamlined E or F units.)

Heck, even Delton’s 1:24 C-16 was often viewed at the time as being “too small” despite it being fairly accurate in that scale. The LGB Mogul towered over it. People at that point in time in the hobby were used to LGB’s pattern of “everything the same general size.”

Departing from that was a very hard sell. Lewis recognized that, and–really–just did the same thing LGB was doing relative to flexing overall proportions relative to the track gauge to match a general overall size of the model. He was just a good bit more rigid with the scale than was LGB, and stuck specifically to standard gauge prototypes.

Don’t discredit USA’s role in this as well–they started out doing 1:24-ish (virtual clones of LGB’s equipment at first, then some new pieces.) They–too–could have gone 1:32 with their standard gauge line, but saw the same potential in 1:29 as Lewis.

It’s worth noting that LGB’s standard gauge stuff as well as Piko’s products also draw from this playbook of expanding the scale to fit a pre-determined “loading gauge;” notable especialy in light of there already being a thriving 1:32 market in Europe, and particlarly interesting in LGB’s case since their sister company (Marklin) is a very heavy player in that market. It seems odd to me that a company would promote similar products in two very similar scales unless they saw potential for success in both markets, with little crossover.

Later,

K

(edit - corrected manufacturer’s name)

#49

Hmm. Wonder if there’d be an interest in 49.5mm track, bogies and wheels. That’s standard gauge / 29. Hmm. Locos would be a bit of a headache.

#50

I disagree Kevin, I think that if Aristo had gone 1:32 it would have succeeded.

I wanted to enter the garden railroad hobby, but when I looked at the price of LGB locos (like $1,200 years ago) and H&R stainless track (because I want track power), well I did not buy in.

Then when Aristo and USAT made “affordable” locos, I was in, but I AGONIZED for a long time about going non-scale… but 1:32 was so much more expensive, and many of the models were NOT for outdoor use, or had poor drivetrains…

So, I went with the scale that had $250 F units, not $800 ones (or whatever they were from LGB).

Yeah, if it started over and I could get reasonable quality and good prices and a selection, I would have been in 1:32 in a flash… yeah I like the larger size, but that would be offset by the more scale representation.

Greg

#51

About that 1:32 question and the success of such; maybe or maybe not! BUT since there was already 1:22.5 NG, why not go for 1:22.5 SG.

Now that would have been a real WOW proposition.

64mm track gauge.

The mfgs drawback would have been the inability to just copy someone’s existing track system.

#52

Greg, I think had Aristo gotten its start in the late 90s as opposed to the late 80s, you’d be correct. But given that the others who were promoting 1:32 in the late 80s and early 90s met miserable sales and ultimately went under, I can’t think of anything Polks could have brough to the table to allow them to be successful when the others were not. The demand simply wasn’t there. Proper scale/gauge relationship wasn’t part of the dialogue in the late 1980s.

There was a small “finescale” crowd, but most of us were doing 1:24 despite there being a 6" scale/gauge discrepancy. Hartford Products was the leader in that arena, and was dedicated to 1:24. There were a few attempts to popularize 1.5" gauge (Ryan Equipment, for example), but no one produced track, and the locomotives couldn’t be re-gauged. Those efforts fell flat fast. Tony Ferraro (sp?) was pushing “proper” 1:20 at the same time, and the response was equally abysmal. People liked the overall size and visual compatability of the trains regardless of prototype, era, etc. (The foundation of the “it’s large scale, run what you like!” psyche that still exists today.)

It would take another 10 years for the hobby to mature to the point where people acknowledged that the whole scale/gauge thing might play a factor in our buying decisions. Bachmann timed it well, and hit a home run with their Shay. The narrow gauge scene shifted overnight. What was lacking was someone to come in and hit a similar home run in the 1:32 world. I think had someone been able to do that–at that point in time–the landscape would have changed dramatically. I think it would have been possible at that time to do so even in the face of Aristo’s and USA’s line of 1:29 trains. But any time before that, the mindset wasn’t there.

Now, I think we’re past that point. 1:29 has dug its heels in. I think Accucraft probably had the best chance to do what MTH couldn’t do in terms of popularizing 1:32, but they opted to split their production between the two scales. MTH? Well, Mike’s words speak volumes for his take on 1:32 and MTH’s future.

Later,

K

#53

Don’t anyone think pricing had a lot to do with the hobby? Bachmann BIG HAULER series went for $69.95 when it first came out. Also the trains were for “kids” We bought trains for our sons at Christmass and added to them on birthdays etc. $69.95 was an afforable gift and the cars were in the $20.00 range to add to the set. Only a few dollars more than Lionel. Similarly ARistros FA was in the $100 range affordable. Rolling stock could be purchased for $20. Once you had a set you just kept adding to it with the same scale cars. All of the 1:32 were in the $500 dollar range. a whole lot more than anyone would spend for the “sons” It has only been since the late 90’s that model railroding became an adult hobby irrespective of scale. As adults we became more protype aware. But by then the “mould” so to speak had been cast.

#54

Hans-Joerg Mueller said:

BTW while I was sceptical at first when Craig T started his “proper 1:29 track” project, I admire the tenacity to get it right. That attitude would serve many (most?) Large Scale mfgs well, but that train left the station long ago.

It’s WOW WOW WOW and never mind the discrepancies.

Still working on it when I have time… But to me it’s not just proper gauge, it’s trying to replicate the movements in the smaller scales towards prototype modeling instead of just ‘modeling’. I personally see a difference. But than again spending eight years in the industry where you see stuff everyday might shape my opinion. This means holding the manufacturers accountable for making a product that is not a prototype… Reminds me of comments on the MFCL on Yahoo about BLMA (HO & N scale manufacturer) deciding to include a AEI tag on their latest release… How come we never have these types of conversations in large scale?

#55

YES, exactly my point, it was reasonable cost that allowed me to enter the hobby. I agree Thomas. Kevin, I know your theory is that price makes no difference… but you have the perspective of a few locos, a few cars and NG operation… by far the rest of us were running passenger trains, freight trains, and wanted lots of engines and lots of cars… thus price made a very big difference to me, since my goal was to have lots of locos and lots of cars… and now it shows I made the right choice, at least for my wants and desires.

If I ran short trains, and narrow gauge, I’d be in 1:20.3 and the heck with the price, I’d probably only have 10 or 20 locos.

thomas prevost said:

Don’t anyone think pricing had a lot to do with the hobby? Bachmann BIG HAULER series went for $69.95 when it first came out. Also the trains were for “kids” We bought trains for our sons at Christmass and added to them on birthdays etc. $69.95 was an afforable gift and the cars were in the $20.00 range to add to the set. Only a few dollars more than Lionel. Similarly ARistros FA was in the $100 range affordable. Rolling stock could be purchased for $20. Once you had a set you just kept adding to it with the same scale cars. All of the 1:32 were in the $500 dollar range. a whole lot more than anyone would spend for the “sons” It has only been since the late 90’s that model railroding became an adult hobby irrespective of scale. As adults we became more protype aware. But by then the “mould” so to speak had been cast.

#56

Greg,

It might have been a reasonable price for large scale when you entered the hobby, but looking at the smaller scales the prices of new products seems to be just as ‘high’ as the large scale. Granted a locomotive in large scale goes for the $300-500 range, and in HO it’s $100-200 that is still a long ways away from the “Blue Box” specials that I remember saving for.

I picked a random HO locomotive from Athearn and the price on the website is $289 (DCC, $189 for no DCC) for a single locomotive. How can that be reasonable for a HO product? Well it is what the market is willing to pay. Doesn’t the same apply to the large scale industry? I’m sure I could easily spend what I’ve spent on large scale for HO and not come away with that much more product for dollar spent.

#57

Not sure of your point Craig, but yes, I agree, the price of LS became not much more than HO, except for track (after a while).

So, I’m still convinced that reasonable prices are paramount to entering a hobby… yes later we can go nuts and get locos that cost 2k to 4k each…

Greg

#58

Craig I have made that “point” many times on many threads. But it doesn’t seam to grow roots. There is an HO locomotive I would like to have that is “on sale” in the $490 range. If I am spending that kind of cash, it will be on large scale.

#59

Greg Elmassian said:

Not sure of your point Craig, but yes, I agree, the price of LS became not much more than HO, except for track (after a while).

So, I’m still convinced that reasonable prices are paramount to entering a hobby… yes later we can go nuts and get locos that cost 2k to 4k each…

Greg

I would completely agree. But when have we seen anything priced at the entry level market in a while? Vic’s recent comments about the Camelback not being offered without sound, etc seem like a move towards unreasonable. Why not offer a non sound/DCC option as we see in the smaller scales? But back to MTH if MTH had offered their products without sound/DCS would they have done better?

#60

David Maynard said:

Craig I have made that “point” many times on many threads. But it doesn’t seam to grow roots. There is an HO locomotive I would like to have that is “on sale” in the $490 range. If I am spending that kind of cash, it will be on large scale.

So if price isn’t a factor (this can be debated) than why have most of us smaller scale guys moved to large scale over the years? Is it the “WOW” factor? The outdoor appeal? I’m not sure how many people on this forum had their first model train experience with large scale, but I’m guessing it’s a small majority. I would guess that most of us have moved to large scale from HO, N, and O for a variety of reasons. I can’t tell you why I moved away from HO? I have no answer at the moment.