Gentlemen,
“Bash 'em if yuh got 'em.”
For me,
I actually get tired and bored seeing the same out- of- the- box dismals that run on the local GR’s.
My last LGB Mogul purchase has a heavily bashed tender. If nothing else, at least I paint the bells bronze, blacken the wheels, tone down the drivers, etc.
jb
Heh, “rivet counter” sounds like an electronic device. Or a department at the hardware store… “Hello, Home Depot? I’d like to speak with someone at the rivet counter, please.” 
Seriously, I think modeling is an art, like illustration. You can ask several artists to illustrate a specific locomotive and get various results depending on their preferred style. One guy might do a detailed, precise CAD drawing. Another might do a realistic painting in oil or acrylics. A third might do a beautiful, yet less precise, watercolor or pencil sketch. Someone might even do a whimsical cartoon. Each style is a valid piece of art and each has its place.
Same with modeling. Some modelers prefer rivet-for-rivet precision, others prefer a more impressionistic approach. The former is no more “correct” than the latter.
Steve Featherkile said:
brian donovan said:
As a proud card carrying, almost bleeding heart liberal, to you Sir I say
-Brian
Was that really necessary, Brian? BTW, nice bash.
Thanks Steve. Was it necessary? No, but I do think it’s funny that you pointed out my making fun of Dave’s liberal bashing and not his name calling. I think we know where your heart lies. -Brian
Tim, I personally enjoy watching your builds and wish I had the Guts to go out to the Garage and tear into one of my Annies (Still haven’t been to the PO to check on shipping for you)…but alas, I go another way…all the while watching you, Vic, Chris and others come up with some Great Engines!
I believe that one of my biggest problems is time…Being the Stay at home dad of 3 (3 and under) makes for little time to really sit down and concentrate on a project. In addition to that…I am also in the process of converting a Saddle Tank and Rail Truck to RCS…I do have a Rogers, that I have disassembled, that I may use for my first Project…I really like the engine, but want a bunker on the rear…who knows…maybe a forney type loco?-Ideas anyone?
Anyways, I join my buddy TOC in the chant…let them count, you build, and we’ll see what inspires others-in the end!
Continue the great work, please post photos here on LSC so we can admire and stay close to ‘home’
cale
brian donovan said:
Steve Featherkile said:
brian donovan said:
As a proud card carrying, almost bleeding heart liberal, to you Sir I say
-Brian
Was that really necessary, Brian? BTW, nice bash.
Thanks Steve. Was it necessary? No, but I do think it’s funny that you pointed out my making fun of Dave’s liberal bashing and not his name calling. I think we know where your heart lies. -Brian
The difference, Brian, is that Dave was very general in his “dissing,” where you were very specific and personal. Or did you miss that? He did not call you any name.
Steve From how I read it, Brians jab at TOC was equally in jest as TOCs initial comment…or did you miss the “rasberries” smilie 
Dont forget their might be some who might take offense with your signature, not me, I get the joke, but I find keeping a sense of humor, an open mind (and a thick hide) helps. 
heres another example of the “rasberry” purely intended in jest, of course
Steve,
I was just poking a bit of fun at Dave’s comments. Really, I’m not sure what political persuasion or auto emissions laws has to do with model trains. Dave has been a big help to me and many others with various problems and is a great resource but he knows that I and a few others stand on the other side of the political fence. I am not sure why calling a group of people names is any better than calling individuals names. BTW - I do get the joke and I’m no Hillary lover.
-Brian
Cale,
time comes easily to me as I am retired (at an early age - my employer made me an offer too good to refuse). When it comes to modelling I simply do what I can when I can. Sometimes it will be ten minutes, other times ten hours. Modelling needs to be done in moderation, or one will burn out their enthusiasm. I find by taking my time, ideas evolve and enthusiasm is maintained. I do all my modelling inside the house (occasionally going outside to do the really messy stuff or to paint). I long ago ‘objected’ to being banished to a workshop to do my hobby work.
The hardest part is overcoming the inertia to commence that first project. I have built dozens of locomotives and yet would be very nervous to take a LGB loco and start cutting. I simply am unable to do it. A Bachmann loco I will not even blink when cutting into it. They are extremely easy to work with and very adaptable. All it takes is a little forethought about how you want the project to turn out. When you cut a chassis you need to put back the strength that you removed by sectioning it. Modelling is good fun and very personally rewarding, irrespective of what any detractors may say.Brian and Vic,
You both have mail.
Steve
Tim,
I understand the problem of overcoming the inertia to start that first project. I have yet to do it in any real way. What I don’t understand is the hesitancy to start cutting the LGB. Now, if it were a Lionel O-Gauge, that I would understand…
Tim,
I have people at the marina that are afraid to drill a hole in their boat. I have no problem doing it and can fill it in and drill another one right next to it, if I get it wrong. So, with that thought in mind, send your LGB stuff to me and I’ll cut it for you. Please draw good lines where you want it cut. Or just let me make it into a lot of little pieces and you can reassemble any way you need to.
Just trying to be helpful.
brian donovan said:
Steve,I was just poking a bit of fun at Dave’s comments. Really, I’m not sure what political persuasion or auto emissions laws has to do with model trains. Dave has been a big help to me and many others with various problems and is a great resource but he knows that I and a few others stand on the other side of the political fence. I am not sure why calling a group of people names is any better than calling individuals names. BTW - I do get the joke and I’m no Hillary lover.
-Brian
Hey Tim, I’m a little surprised at your post, nothing over at the other place I frequent indicated any resentment in your work from what I could see. If the lack of posts is an indication of ‘lack of intertest’ I would say not so. Most people do infact like to watch and enjoy, while not actually posting any ‘atta boys’ (which are often critcised in their own right! - you cant win mate!). Despite that, you do need to stick to what you like doing, and take enjoyment from it. That being said… folks there is no need to critise others for their desire to try and come that much closer to prototypes that actually existed, and detail them to certain time frames, based on real info, real engineering documents etc…we dont get it right, but we enjoy trying…never used google for loco research…got much better recources, and not from mags either! As for TOC’s Hudson story - heard that one over and over from the guy. Man thats about as bad a Rivet counters can get. I’ve never known a rivet counter actually count rivets! I wouldn’t have a clue how many are meant to be on my models, or even how many I applied, nor do I know any one who actually counted rivets in that context. I just apply a spacing rule to make them look right. I dont know how many rivets the Hudson tenders had, but I would take a guess than no two of them had the same number, and certainly between the various J classes, probably had different numbers too…what did he base his assumption on? None exist to be counted, and errection drawings of this loco that I’ve seen have no rivets shown in detail. Tim, just keep doing what you’re doing, and keep showing it. People DO enjoy seeing it, and any remark you might find a little more questioning than you like, make note that its probably not personal or an attack, just a question. There is almost always a prototype for everything - I like to find the prototype and then find out as much as about it as I can, for own pleasure it adds meaning to what I model…also it take a lot more effort to craft something to based on something real than a near enough approach (which I enjoy too). Others freelance and surprise themselves when a prototype shows up that actually looks looks similar. If folks carry on that a 1:22.5 scale Pacific is rediculous I present to you one Meter Gauge Baldwin Pacific, 1948 that I ran across during some time I spent in India (Delhi) for work.
On 45mm track, she should be 1:22.5. The 4-8-0s in the blackhill I spoke of were the small Schenectady locos, here’s one pulling a coach suprisingly like the Bachmann J&S cars! I wonder if they compressed the scale back in the 1890s for the sharp curves like Bach did!
Finally, some of the guys who aspire to higher levels of prototype accuracy (the rivet counters title is insulting as is most of this thread), it is exactly these louder people who caused the Bachmann shay to be what it is (along with a lot of TOC’s efforts in the drive department!), these are also the people who created the market that demanded that the 4-6-0 be upgraded to something resembling the prototype - hence the Annie, which you all like cutting up - good models, good value and good for kit bashing. Without these people the style and detailing would not have evolved from the 80s, where only wheel arrangement counted, rather than actual locos based on a real prototypes…equally look at the evolution of 1:29 diesels since the 80s due to that higher demand for prototype accuracy. David.
David,
thanks for the words. My comments are more directed to ‘if it did not exist then it should not be built’ attitude. Some months ago, I built a freelance loco combining a shortened Heritage Express Prairie chassis to a shortened Bachmann Annie body. Well, some weeks later while following a link on the Bachmann forum, I came across a website for ‘Steamtown’. Sure enough there was a loco (standard gauge unfortunately), the spitting image of my freelance prairie loco, complete with tapered boiler.
This morning, I had my modified Bachmann pacific in unfinished form, running for a while. There is something beautiful about a 'large' locomotive. I can understand the passion of those who run mudhens, mikados, etc. For too long we have been 'brainwashed' in narrow-gauge (1/22.5 scale) that an Annie or a LGB mogul is a large engine. I really do not care if a model such as I build ever existed. I build what I like. I respect the work of those who research and build a highly detailed model, but resent being told what I should build. That is my decision. I appreciate helpful tips, etc, but at the end of the day it is my model and must satisfy my needs.
Just a question about the loco in the lower r/h corner of the lower photograph. It has a permanent cowcatcher setup and headlamp on the tender, with a towing link. I always believed that the link was a temporary towing attachment should the loco fail. The loco looks setup as permanent tender first operation (probably no turning facilities on its line).I agree Tim, I see your issue here is members of other web sites ‘telling’ you what you should build. Show me where?
I’ve never seen those sentiments directed to you on these Bachmann bashes. I’ve seen questions asked and genuine interest…where’s the beef? When questions about whether such locos existed are asked, they are asked because people would like to know if they did exist because they like what they see and would like to know more, its not a cristism, and other help out showing locos that did look similar, infact helping you. Enjoy it, and enjoy the banter that your threads create. I dont see anyone pushing you to do anything other than you are doing.
David.
David,
let us say that I have had personal correspondence and leave it at that.
Tim those are link and pin couplers on th lr loco .
[img/]
Dennis,
thanks for that. I can understand that a ‘normal’ coupler is not able to be used with a full cowcatcher, however, I was not aware that it was a normal operating practice to use a link arrangement like this on a passenger train.
David Fletcher said:I agree, however the guys who demand better quality from manufacturers are not the problem. I think even the most casual model railroader would not object to manufacturers producing more accurate models. (Except maybe when greater accuracy limits the model's ability to run on the average layout.)
Finally, some of the guys who aspire to higher levels of prototype accuracy (the rivet counters title is insulting as is most of this thread), it is exactly these louder people who caused the Bachmann shay to be what it is (along with a lot of TOC's efforts in the drive department!), these are also the people who created the market that demanded that the 4-6-0 be upgraded to something resembling the prototype - hence the Annie, which you all like cutting up - good models, good value and good for kit bashing. Without these people the style and detailing would not have evolved from the 80s, where only wheel arrangement counted, rather than actual locos based on a real prototypes...equally look at the evolution of 1:29 diesels since the 80s due to that higher demand for prototype accuracy.
I think what people object to is when Person A denigrates Person B’s models (whether scratchbuilt or store-bought) simply because they don’t meet Person A’s chosen standard of accuracy.
Link and pins were used till around 1873 or so , and even till much later on logging railroads . Brakemen could be idenified by how many fingers they had lost , much like the furniture factory workers and all their missing body parts …untill safety laws were enforced
more info
In 1893, satisfied that an automatic coupler could meet the demands of commercial railroad operations and, at the same time, be manipulated safely, the United States Congress passed the Safety Appliance Act. Its success in promoting switchyard safety was stunning. Between 1877 and 1887, approximately 38% of all railworker accidents involved coupling. That percentage fell as the railroads began to replace link and pin couplers with automatic couplers. By 1902, only two years after the SAA’s effective date, coupling accidents constituted only 4% of all employee accidents. In absolute numbers, coupler-related accidents dropped from nearly 11,000 in 1892 to just over 2,000 in 1902, even though the number of railroad employees steadily increased during that decade.
When the Janney coupling was chosen to be the American standard, there were an amazing 8000 patented alternatives to choose from.
The only significant defect of the AAR (Janney) design is that sometimes the drawheads need to be manually aligned.