Large Scale Central

LGB's Amfleet Car

Reviews
#1

An LGB Amfleet car arrived at the StJ&FC today, so I figured it was time to give it a review.

There have been other reviews and pictures…and it looked good running on other layouts. But the question was: How will it stand up to the standards of the StJ&FC? The StJ is 1:29 Standard Gauge that leans heavy on passenger service. While I’m not a rivet counter, I do expect things to be reasonably close, you might say like they do in the R/C aircraft hobby…stand off scale. It has to have reasonable proportions and look proper with other equipment that I run. My layout is operations oriented which means everything gets mixed together and has to look good together. I have a fair amount of USAT cars and some of the Aristo smoothsides that are getting modified to lower them. I also run Aristo’s RDC’s. Does the LGB Amfleet car fit in, or is it going to be an orphan? That’s what this review will focus on. If you are one that just puts a train on the track and sits back to watch it run then this review isn’t for you. I will say this for those that just run to railfan, the car is a beautiful car and it wears it’s proportions nicely. It will make up a fine train of all Amfleet cars behind the Genesis. You will get a good product that will give you many hours of running enjoyment. If your railroad’s standards are similar to mine, then read on. First, let’s take a look at the real car. Below you will find the specifications for an Amfleet car.

Quote:
Principle Car Statistics Length over Couplers…85’4" Width…10’6" Height-Rail to Roof Top…12’8" . Top of Rail to Step Level…17" Top of Rail to Vestibule Floor…51 1/2" Approximate Car Weights (ready-to-run): Amcoach…160,000 ibs. Amcafe…110,000 ibs.

This was taken from Trainweb.com (http://www.trainweb.com/accommod/amfleet.html) How does the LGB car measure up at 1:29 scale? Length of body…31 1/2"…76’ 1 1/2" width…4 1/2"…10’ 10 1/2" Height-Rail to Roof Top…6"…14’ 6" The BIG question is "How does it look with other manufacturer’s equipment?..a moment of real truth. Below is a series of pictures I took with various equipment my trains are expected to be able to run with. The first picture is the car with an UNlowered Aristo smoothside.

An Aristo Roadrailer

The LGB RBox car sold as a Material Handling Car in Amtrak colors.

USAT’s GP38

And lastly, a USAT passenger car (Typical car height is 13’ 6" rail to roof top)

I have an orphan! This last 2 pictures seal the fate of the Amfleet car on the StJ. It just looks horrible!! I can accept the fact that the car is 4" too wide, and I don’t even find the shortened length objectionable, but the height is totally unacceptable. As to whether I can figure out a way to lower the car to an acceptable height remains to be seen. In it’s current state it’s unlikely I will buy more unless I decide I want to have a traveling train for shows and other layouts that doesn’t have to match up with other trains in an operating scenerio. :frowning:

#2

Warren:

Too bad, as the car looks pretty sharp otherwise.

Using your dimensions, I calculated the following scale ratios for each axis:
Length: 1:32.5
Width: 1:28
Height: 1:25.3

As you wrote, the length difference can be overlooked, and is really the most common way to do selective compression. The width is only a little wide. It’s the height that really looks bad.

I would guess your reaction will be typical of a considerable number of modern equipment operating LSers. On the other hand, if LGB had made all three axis ~1:29, I can’t imagine a ‘toy train’ collector / operator threatening to “not purchase the cars due to their highly accurate scale dimensions”.

There can’t be any reason for this other than obstinance and / or a total lack of market savy on the part of LGB. It certainly didn’t save any mold cost or plastic! Do we wonder why they have financial troubles??

Happy (Scale Does Matter) RRing,

Jerry Bowers

#3

Gentlemen,

Warren, nice review with the elementary information and the most glaring discrepancies.

If one considers the statement; “As close to 1:29 as I can get it” (Jack Lynch, LGBoA Sales/Marketing Manager) this is quite remarkable, but not surprising.
BTW I questioned the height and a few other matters as soon as Jack posted the first pictures on the GR forum in the early part of last year.

Should LGBoA decide to run their own development and production, we will soon enough see if they can get closer to the “defacto” 1:29 scale. I for one am not holding my breath, firstly it won’t affect me with my RhB empire, secondly I really have my doubts! Too many legacy issues!

#4

Even if they had gotten all the dimensions dead on for 1/29th scale it could never be accurate - it’s running on 1/32 scale track! (same goes for USa and Aristo cars).

#5

I’ve always wondered about that. If you were to make it 1/29 in all dimensions, it would end up being about .1" extra wide on each side over the trucks. I’m not sure you’d really notice, would you? Or do they go ahead and compromise on the width so it “looks right”?

While I can certainly understand some compromises are necessary, I really don’t think that each axis should have it’s own scale.

#6
John Joseph Sauer said:
Even if they had gotten all the dimensions dead on for 1/29th scale it could never be accurate - it's running on 1/32 scale track! (same goes for USa and Aristo cars).
And all along I thought it was 1:20.3. Imagine my surprise!
#7
Quote:
. . . "As close to 1:29 as I can get it" (Jack Lynch, LGBoA Sales/Marketing Manager) . . ."
If that is as close as they can get it, they need to get some new engineers, designers and measuring tools. This really is just more of the same ". . . we only make toys . . ." thinking that does little to move the hobby forward.

There are discussions on some other websites of LGBoA’s 0-6-0 announcement in the latest GR. Anyone want to bet on how many scales will be employed there? The ownership statements at the bottom of the ad are also good for a grin!!

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#8
John Joseph Sauer said:
Even if they had gotten all the dimensions dead on for 1/29th scale it could never be accurate - it's running on 1/32 scale track! (same goes for USa and Aristo cars).
JJ,

Now, now. What kind of a “rivet counting attitude” would that be?? :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Imagine everyone’s surprise!
WOW, LGB managed to get by with just the one scale - the defacto scale as adapted for SG in NA for 45mm track. And that for every one of the three dimensions - length, width and height all to the same scale. WOW!

Surprise, surprise! It would fit with other 1:29 products without having to ask “Hmmmmmmmm something looks a little odd. I wonder what it is?”

BTW on that 1:32 track for the 1:29 Aristo and USAT products, have you ever considered why that is less noticeable, than the “tall Fat Baby” syndrome practised by LGB? It’s only the track gauge that’s at odds; set that stuff on Code250 track and things look pretty good.

Try that with the LGB wares!

PS …OTOH it would be quite “Suitable for G scale”. :wink: :smiley: :smiley:

#9
Jerry Bowers said:
Quote:
. . . "As close to 1:29 as I can get it" (Jack Lynch, LGBoA Sales/Marketing Manager) . . ."
If that is as close as they can get it, they need to get some new engineers, designers and measuring tools. This really is just more of the same ". . . we only make toys . . ." thinking that does little to move the hobby forward.

There are discussions on some other websites of LGBoA’s 0-6-0 announcement in the latest GR. Anyone want to bet on how many scales will be employed there? The ownership statements at the bottom of the ad are also good for a grin!!

Happy RRing,

Jerry


Jerry,

While it mentions “Perfection by Design”, it wisely avoids any scale other than “G”. But it will be “Perfect”. :wink:

On those ownership statements, I doubt that the folks at Clambake asked if those were factual or just a “nice try”. The folks at Clambake tend to forget to ask questions like “what scale is it really”, a little footnote in an ad hardly registers. :wink: :slight_smile:

#10

I would not even consider the track as being part of the problem. What kind of rail do you see on Real RR all sizes. Yes eventally there will be the larger rail that prevails but for now the car fits the track. Later RJD

#11
R.J. DeBerg said:
I would not even consider the track as being part of the problem. What kind of rail do you see on Real RR all sizes. Yes eventally there will be the larger rail that prevails but for now the car fits the track. Later RJD
RJ

Correct, with one little snag, I have yet to see track that would scale down to Code332 when 1:32 or 1:29 scale applies.

BTW the same goes for Meter gauge. I have seen lots of proto track all over the place, none scales to Code332 in 1:22.5.

Pictures of some of the most “rickety” track originate from places where they even have elephants. :smiley:

But apart from that, no, the track isn’t the problem.
The “scale” which can be anything between ca. 1:25 through ca 1:34 on any “model” applying to any dimension is a bit more of a “problem”. Of course if one is happy to run “looks pretty good”, “Has a nice finish” or “I don’t care” equipment, there most certainly isn’t a problem! :wink: :slight_smile:

#12

Back when there were the first pictures of the Amfleet “models” showing up I was planning to do a detailed review i.e. check every bit on the “model”. Unfortunately with the delivery delays in NA that went out the window, but I’ve just read a nice write up (ConrailRay on MLS) of most of the items that need correcting to get a model.
Sounds even more involved than what I’m doing with the RhB coaches.

“As close as I can get it to 1:29”??? Indeed, indeed!! Sheeesh!

PS With the delivery delay I saved some money, who knows what one of those would go for on eBay!

#13

I bought a set and I think they look great with the Genesis loco.
I guess it’s a good thing I’m not as anal retentive about “scale” as some of you guys are!

#14
John Joseph Sauer said:
I bought a set and I think they look great with the Genesis loco. I guess it's a good thing I'm not as anal retentive about "scale" as some of you guys are!
JJ,

Is it possible that some of us followed a different career path than you?

A career path that included looking at how close a “model” actually is to being a model; you know when one learns what “scale” means at an early age it seems to “stick”. :wink: :slight_smile:

Frankly, in the many years in the tooling, machining and associated fields business, I have yet to see an inaccurate model resulting in an accurate product.
But as I mentioned, that must depend to some degree on the career path, I know that the anal retentiveness of “precision” was also drilled into me from an early age. Has stood me in very good stead! :wink: :lol: :wink:

BTW an appreciation of scale also leads to admiration for those manufacturers who actually manage to “get it right”. And those who come up with novel manufacturing methods. :wink: :slight_smile:

#15
John Joseph Sauer said:
I bought a set and I think they look great with the Genesis loco. I guess it's a good thing I'm not as anal retentive about "scale" as some of you guys are!
JJ, part of paying attention to detail (being anal retentive about "scale" as you say) is paying attention to what is written.
I quote myself and said:
If you are one that just puts a train on the track and sits back to watch it run then this review isn't for you. I will say this for those that just run to railfan, the car is a beautiful car and it wears it's proportions nicely. It will make up a fine train of all Amfleet cars behind the Genesis. You will get a good product that will give you many hours of running enjoyment.
Then I said:
If your railroad's standards are similar to mine, then read on.
I'm NOT a stickler for perfect scale, but I am a stickler for all my trains looking good together. The last 2 pictures of my review clearly show what I'm talking about. The Amfleet cars look horrible with the USAT heritage cars and THAT is what they have to measure up to. I can let the 3 1/2 scale feet troo short slide by. I can let the 4 scale inches too wide slide by. I have no problems with my track being 5 scale inches too narrow.... but I CANNOT ignore 2 scale feet too tall..!! It's just too far whacky to look good on my layout. That has nothing to do with being anal retentive. Some of us run railroads, and others of us play with trains. Just as you won't see my USAT passenger cars being pulled with my Bachmann Connie, you also won't see them being pulled with either MTH or LGB F units.
#16

Warren,

I’m curious- how close are the USAT cars to 1/29th scale? Has anyone done a comparison chart for them like the one you did for the amfleet cars?

#17

I believe one was done several years ago when they first came out. One would have to dig in the archives over at MLS to find it…if they go back that far. They are fairly close. USAT does a good job of getting things built to scale (excluding the track gauge that everyone complains about), then they screw it up in the paint shop…:frowning:

I’ve put my trusty ruler to the car in the above picture and here’s how it measures up:

Length of body…33"…79’9"
Length over coupler face…34.25"…82’9"
Height…5.6875" (5 11/16")…13’9"
Width…4.125"…10’0"

Prototype cars generally measured as follows…with some variance depending on model (These figures are off the top of my head without reference in front of me):

Length over coupler face…80’ to 85’
Height…13’6"
Width…10’ to 10’ 6"

Numerous Model Railroader prototype articles should give dimensions and drawings for various prototype cars. I’ve seen some Budd cars that look far shorter than other cars and would guess the length to be about 72’. I’ve never found dimensions for them. Also I’ve seen baggage cars as short as 55’. These were single door rebuilds from old troop cars and were used with the Amfleet cars in the NW corridor.

#18

I’m pretty sure that if some company made this car and this person, the Defenders would say it looks just fine, and you’re a rivet counter if you don’t like the way it scales… Besides, people come in all different sizes…

#19

Actually the Amfleet cars are kind of in the position of the Aristo heavyweights, once the height is about right, the width is ok, and they are a bit short. The length disparity is not as noticible as when they are too tall.

Aristo streamliners were in need of lowering too, although they are way too short.

If I wanted Amfleet cars (I don’t because I model the transition era), and they were the only model out there, I’d probably buy a set, grit my teeth, figure out how to lower them, and then not let the “little bit short” bother me. Of course I would prefer the dimensions to be right at the outset, but there is little chance someone else will make them in the short term.

Regards, Greg