Large Scale Central

Who makes which scale?

General Discussion
#81
Curmudgeon said:
3) If it can be made more "to-scale" to suit the "scalies", then everybody wins.
While the rest of the world may win, I will only win if they continue to make the non-scale, 300mm locos and freight, as that is what I truely enjoy collecting. I must say, the beautiful equipment out there that is more closely to scale is beautiful, and fascinating to watch. The movies and pictures that I have seen on the internet have been amazing! Just no matter how much I like the looks of the majority of the USA diesel line, it wont go round my layout.
Curmudgeon said:
5) To have the Ventilators come out in their little group screaming to apparently stop all discussion is not only bad for their credibility, but for the ex-company and those who would be pretenders to the throne.
I have seen this term, "ventilators," and I hope I have not been lumped into this group. I just really like the stuff that takes kindly to my indoor layout that doesnt immediatly have to be a small switching loco and mining equipment. Sorry if I appear as such.
Curmudgeon said:
All the Big Three have gone to non-R-1 requirements on their larger stuff.
And I really like their stuff. I just wont purchase most of it because it cannot travel over my R1 switches and curves.

Again, I am not saying that the scale equipment is not great, completely the opposite. I just hope that someone continues to make the small stuff for me and others like me.

#82

Well, you certainly have not been foaming at the mouth, so probably not a part of the “Ventilators”.

Smaller prototypes work on R-1 without the flexible chassis necessary in larger locomotives.

To run said large locos on R-1, while they may be designed to do so, look bad doing it.

You have any experience with early Moguls?
They did not like R-1 curves.
I have 2 of them.
They slow down considerably at curves.
Later ones, with more play in #2 axle and spring-loaded axle, worked much better.

That design was okay.

The 2-4+4-2 fexible chassis design in initial units was not, and I have a problem with a model of a prototype that had the drivers turning corners.

Lots of manufacturers have done lots of odd things…even my Magnus K-27 has a most odd drive, but you cannot see any of what it does.

If one must use R-1, to even have any hope of looking right, one must use very small prototypes.
Stainz, 2015 and 2015, and the small dismals were very good examples of that.
One can only hope that if (and when) the line is re-lit, we will continue to see some of those, maybe under a “Lehmann Classic” badge.

But at some point they need to become competitive again.

That means, like Ford Motor Company, while the Model “A” was a stellar seller, they had to move to the “B” to stay competitive, and go to the V-8.
Henry did oppose a 6 until he died.

I’d like to be able to buy a new Model “A”, but that ain’t gonna happen, as nobody else does.

We shall see what happens on the 26th.

#83
dave wiskochil said:
Curmudgeon said:
3) If it can be made more "to-scale" to suit the "scalies", then everybody wins.
While the rest of the world may win, I will only win if they continue to make the non-scale, 300mm locos and freight, as that is what I truely enjoy collecting. I must say, the beautiful equipment out there that is more closely to scale is beautiful, and fascinating to watch. The movies and pictures that I have seen on the internet have been amazing! Just no matter how much I like the looks of the majority of the USA diesel line, it wont go round my layout.
Curmudgeon said:
5) To have the Ventilators come out in their little group screaming to apparently stop all discussion is not only bad for their credibility, but for the ex-company and those who would be pretenders to the throne.
I have seen this term, "ventilators," and I hope I have not been lumped into this group. I just really like the stuff that takes kindly to my indoor layout that doesnt immediatly have to be a small switching loco and mining equipment. Sorry if I appear as such.
Curmudgeon said:
All the Big Three have gone to non-R-1 requirements on their larger stuff.
And I really like their stuff. I just wont purchase most of it because it cannot travel over my R1 switches and curves.

Again, I am not saying that the scale equipment is not great, completely the opposite. I just hope that someone continues to make the small stuff for me and others like me.


I’m a scalie, more or less, and also in the R1 boat, by choice, but I do not demand or expect everything made to go around those tight curves. Instead I chose my model types accordingly with my track choices, thats the way it should be. Why in Gods name would I want or expect a Dash 9 or a Big Boy to bend around my tight curves, that would be ludicrous.

So I chose small NG industrial engines, small kitbashed geared climaxes and heislers, and short 20’ maximum rolling stock that works fine on my R1s. Anything large like a GP9 while it might make it around an R1, would just look too tinplate for me!

I also hope we R1ers dont get forgotten with all the “bigger is better” movement going around. Seems dumb to me, we’re getting 3 different Big Boys, yet another GG1, and now a Triplex from MTH but still not a decent affordable 2-8-0 in standard gauge, can you say “a$$-backwards?”…I knew you could.:smiley:

#84
Victor Smith said:
SNIP I also hope we R1ers dont get forgotten with all the "bigger is better" movement going around. Seems dumb to me, we're getting 3 different Big Boys, yet another GG1, and now a Triplex from MTH but still not a decent affordable 2-8-0 in standard gauge, can you say "a$$-backwards?"...I knew you could.:D
A 2-8-0 would not have the famous "WOW" factor the bigger models have.

I say more power to those that like non scale small stuff.
Personally I would like to see more smaller realistic models that don’t look ridiculous going around R1 curves.

#85

And I have no problem with that.

If we run R-1, we don’t need mallets…
Or, Meyers.

#86
Victor Smith said:
......................................

I also hope we R1ers dont get forgotten with all the “bigger is better” movement going around. Seems dumb to me, we’re getting 3 different Big Boys, yet another GG1, and now a Triplex from MTH but still not a decent affordable 2-8-0 in standard gauge, can you say “a$$-backwards?”…I knew you could.:smiley:


Vic,

The duplication and “copies” in triplicates have always been very annoying!! The only side benefit: Compare the different “identical models” to each other and the proto.

The “now defunct” outfit made that duplication a habit to keep the competitors at bay. It was “me too, me too” as soon as one of the producers announced a certain item. For some strange reason the “me too, me too” didn’t result in a better product, even in those cases where the “now defunct” outfit started from scratch and replaced an item that was “the same type” in the existing product line. They still couldn’t get it right!

#87
TonyWalsham said:
Victor Smith said:
SNIP I also hope we R1ers dont get forgotten with all the "bigger is better" movement going around. Seems dumb to me, we're getting 3 different Big Boys, yet another GG1, and now a Triplex from MTH but still not a decent affordable 2-8-0 in standard gauge, can you say "a$$-backwards?"...I knew you could.:D
A 2-8-0 would not have the famous "WOW" factor the bigger models have.

I say more power to those that like non scale small stuff.
Personally I would like to see more smaller realistic models that don’t look ridiculous going around R1 curves.


I agree with both of you. Big Boy is a niche loco’ and yet we have 3 of them.

I give credit to LGB and Bachmann for daring to produce models of smaller and lesser known prototypes. I’d like to see the return of the “mining mogul”, some small modern era loco’s, and even a Britsh outline mainline steamer (at something less than the price of a Chevvie).

Even the little engines look better on wide radius curves.