TheRailwire
General Discussion => Product Discussion => Topic started by: JoeD on March 05, 2014, 10:15:28 AM
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vTYNSgcsAYM/Uxc-Z9MxebI/AAAAAAAAASc/70X1DsJOSuU/s1600/SW1500.jpg)
We are getting close to finishing the last few small parts molds and tuning up the ones we have done. Some sink issues on the deck around the couplers are taken care of. Modified chassis are in house, another order has been placed and we are shaking cans of paint. :D
Cheers
Joe
-
[and we are shaking cans of paint. :D
Cheers
Joe
Ok, but generally speaking Joe I've found pushing the little button on the top helps the paint come out... I mean, I'm just sayin....... :D
Nice work gents !
-
Eagerly begging for Flexcoil trucks on the wonderful model.
All CSX had flexcoil.
I've been waiting for an SW1500 for about 25 years (I think that is how long ago a brass manufacturer announced one--- and never made it.)
Good work.
-
Don't forget, Joe. I need a New Orleans Public Belt SW1500:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=286387
Be sure to get the railings right.
Hmm... fat chance... I mean
fat chance of getting a
NOPB loco...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
I'd like to purchase some of those air tanks if/when they become available.
-
Looks great!
-
The handrails look exceptional. Really looking forward to this.
scott lupia
-
Looks nice. Treadplate?
Any ideas on the order of future detail changes - Roller Bearings, Flexicoils, Hood Railings?
Jason
-
Great looking model so far! This will be a great addition for any small, tight radius urban layout. Just make it available and if you don't make a road I want, I will look forward to getting out the paint and decals.
-
I'd like to purchase some of those air tanks if/when they become available.
Any ideas on the order of future detail changes - Roller Bearings, Flexicoils?
Jason
Uh... the tanks and truck sideframes are all LifeLike/Walthers aren't they?
(http://www.spookshow.net/files/llsw8.jpg)
-
Anything less than perfection with this iconic locomotive will result in censure, lambasting and outright hostility from the modelling community. It needs to be executed with absolute perfection, with every conceivable detail variant available for a reasonable price, flawless measurement fidelity, and with every obscure paint scheme in the first run. The motor should purr, the lights just the right kind of golden, the windows flush, but not too thick. The rivets have to be properly convex. We want DCC, we want sound, we don't want DCC, we don't want sound, we want it to clear our driveway of snow and wash our car, we want it all- and you'll never see a penny of our money if you don't deliver! And if you don't... we'll never forgive this slight to the scale and hobby, ever. Oh, wait a minute, who is making this model? :trollface:
I jest. It is very nice looking and the handrails look finely done. Thanks for sharing.
-
Uh... the tanks and truck sideframes are all LifeLike/Walthers aren't they?
That may very well be the case, but do you know where/how they can be obtained? From Walthers? Nope.
It's much more likely that MT can make some available.
-
Uh... the tanks and truck sideframes are all LifeLike/Walthers aren't they?
They look like it, but does that matter? Above all else they have to do Flexicoils for this model right?
If it is the Walthers trucks, having drop in Flexicoils for the SW1200 would be awesome.
Jason
-
The shell looks great!
Joe, could you comment on the airtanks/fuel tank. I haven't done an exhaustive search of all possible SW1500s, but don't they have a different style?
For example: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=580106
Not trying to be a pain, but some clarification might help douse the torches and return the pitchforks to the compost pile. ;)
Best wishes, Dave
-
Joe, could you comment on the airtanks/fuel tank. I haven't done an exhaustive search of all possible SW1500s, but don't they have a different style?
For example: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=580106
Not trying to be a pain, but some clarification might help douse the torches and return the pitchforks to the compost pile. ;)
Best wishes, Dave
Ah, excellent point. I thought something looked amiss. :facepalm: That is a pretty key spotting feature. :scared:
-
The wheels are definitely better looking that the life Like/Walters model. The MT model has low profile wheel flanges.
-
The wheels are definitely better looking that the life Like/Walters model. The MT model has low profile wheel flanges.
Gosh... good point. If they were cross-compatible, I surely wouldn't mind dropping the SW9 bodies I have on a better chassis. Sadly, the SW1500 itself is a miss for my prototype/period. :(
-
We have our own air tank...it wasn't molded when I took this shot...sorry for the confusion.
Joe
-
The wheels are definitely better looking that the life Like/Walters model. The MT model has low profile wheel flanges.
I noticed that too. Very nice shape to them.
Thanks for posting this early shot Joe!
The SW1500 is an exciting model to see in N. Looking forward to a trio in SP when the right details are available.
-
We have our own air tank...it wasn't molded when I took this shot...sorry for the confusion.
Whew! That's a relief.
Hmm... Kiz was about
to take a handful of
aspirin...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
We have our own air tank...it wasn't molded when I took this shot...sorry for the confusion.
Joe
Thanks Joe! It is a great looking model and I hope that it is a big success for MTL.
Best wishes, Dave
-
we are shaking cans of paint
So you injected paint in your buttocks ?
(http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Homer-Mooning.gif)
-
They look like it, but does that matter? Above all else they have to do Flexicoils for this model right?
Jason
I'll let you start holding your breath first.
-
The wheels are definitely better looking that the life Like/Walters model. The MT model has low profile wheel flanges.
The wheels were upgraded by Walthers somewhere along the line. Here's a more recent release:
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDMwWDEwMDA=/z/gdYAAMXQC-tTDCl7/$_57.JPG)
-
We have our own air tank...it wasn't molded when I took this shot...sorry for the confusion.
Joe
I assume the fuel tank as well...
-
I'll let you start holding your breath first.
I won't be losing any sleep as it's not a model I need, but somewhere on my list were an MNS and MTFR SW1500's. One needs roller bearings and the other Flexi's.
Jason
-
The BNs should have rollerbearings.
And being this frame should be DCC ready, wonder if this frame will fit under an LL/Walther's SW1200
-
Bittersweet.
But, could be improved with flexcoils, number boards and a proper light package...
Excellent call for a LL chassis swap. Almost certain that I have a pair of SW1200R that need such a treatment...
-
I don't need this particular loco, but I do have to say that the preproduction model looks very promising!
-
Looks good! Is there any way we could get a sneak peak at the mechanism? :)
And how much "air" is there underneath the loco? The 1:1 scale is quite beefy down there.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=257579 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=257579)
-
I am amazed. All this oohing and ahing over a picture that you really can't make out the detail on. Is the the same crowd that lambasted the announcement of the IM SD40-2? Don't get me wrong, I am happy to see it but as I look at the picture I have to wonder if the long hood is scale width. Any chance of a shot from the front?
-
I am amazed. All this oohing and ahing over a picture that you really can't make out the detail on. Is the the same crowd that lambasted the announcement of the IM SD40-2? Don't get me wrong, I am happy to see it but as I look at the picture I have to wonder if the long hood is scale width. Any chance of a shot from the front?
johnh FTW folks!
-
johnh FTW folks!
+1!
-
Yes, this warm welcome is kind of funny after the IM -2 thread. Maybe because MT has a decent track record with the quality of their N scale model locomotives. Um, a single locomotive (FT). :)
-
Flexicoil trucks and light package for the SP, plus the alternative version with the handrail on the shell is phase two. This modified chassis will fit the standard SW1200/9 series just fine. Digitrax is will be doing a drop in decoder. (http://www.rits.org/www/equipment/sw1500/RI942.JPG)
Hope this answers some of the questions here.
...so you don't have to hold your breath :D (http://www.ssloan.net/trains/sp/_images0001/sp2578_0001.jpg)
Joe
-
Will the chassis be available separately?
-
at this point probably not for awhile. We will be pulling out all the stops just to take care of pre orders...I may request conversion parts for repairs and for folks wanting to swap their chassis innards.
Joe
-
On behalf of the Railwire community.... let me just say...
(http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/shocked/fainting-smiley-emoticon.gif)
-
Joe,
Thanks again. Quick question, working headlights in front/rear or just the front?
Best wishes, Dave
-
Yay! Glad to hear about the SP-specific details Joe.
Question about the decoder...are you only talking with Digitrax or are other manufacturers also in the know?
Flexicoil trucks and light package for the SP, plus the alternative version with the handrail on the shell is phase two. This modified chassis will fit the standard SW1200/9 series just fine. Digitrax is will be doing a drop in decoder.
Hope this answers some of the questions here.
...so you don't have to hold your breath :D
Joe
-
Hope this answers some of the questions here.
That RI has Roller Bearings.
So, yes on that?
Jason
-
Hmm... you could do one or two of the last group of SW1500s the Southern acquired. Obtained when the SOU purchased the Kentucky & Indiana Terminal, some of the earliest K&IT SW1500s had AAR-A trucks while all of Southern's were Flexicoil equipped.
http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3183032 (http://rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3183032)
-
Flexicoil trucks and light package for the SP, plus the alternative version with the handrail on the shell is phase two. This modified chassis will fit the standard SW1200/9 series just fine. Digitrax is will be doing a drop in decoder.
As the hood width is narrower on the SW1500, when you say the mechanism will fit the standard SW1200/9 does that mean with a spacer between the mechanism and the shell?
-
BTW, I remember someone on one of the forums suggesting that the chassis from the LL SW9 was being used for this effort. I am beginning to wonder if there is some truth to that since the pic shows the SW fuel tank and possibly the trucks from the later run. Is this a modified LL mechanism, or possibly just parts thereof?
-
Flexicoil trucks and light package for the SP, plus the alternative version with the handrail on the shell is phase two. This modified chassis will fit the standard SW1200/9 series just fine. <snip> pctures</snip>
Joe
Nice...
Couple of follow up questions.
1. Do you expect drop in decoder to support more than just two headlights?
2. Will cab with number boards be available as a spare part?
This is good news for me. But not for Mr. Wallet...
-
Flexicoil trucks and light package for the SP, plus the alternative version with the handrail on the shell is phase two.
Runner Pack? :D
Looks nice Joe.
-
Nice.... Very Nice.......
Looking forward to a pair of Conrails.. And 'Phase 2' :D
~ Ian in Iowa
-
Runner Pack? :D
Looks nice Joe.
yeah...and a graffiti special edition? Plenty of photos of some rough looking SP switchers!
-
Ok a few questions. Will the hood be scale width? If you are using the Walthers SW1200 mechanism, then is would be way too wide. Are you making your own frames and using the Walthers running gear?
Second, what about the roller bearing ARA trucks? Will you be making these as well. The only SW1500 with friction bearing trucks were ones that used trade-in trucks which was relatively uncommon.
Three. If you are unable to tool the tread walkway on your models, might I suggest you print them using the same technique as you for your graffiti cars. You can build up layers of paint to imitate the diamond tread pattern without having to tool it.
The side looks very good except for the fuel tank and friction bearing trucks. I would love to see some end shots as well.
-
Second, what about the roller bearing ARA trucks? Will you be making these as well. The only SW1500 with friction bearing trucks were ones that used trade-in trucks which was relatively uncommon.
But still wanted.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2150252 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2150252)
I don't think Transfer had enough locomotives to trade in for 7 SW1500's with friction trucks. I'm dubious about that information.
Jason
-
They may have been trade-ins from other railroads. I think a few were even based on Baldwins with new mounting hardware.
-
Hmm... Digitrax decoder. Not very good. While I have no problems with their motor control, their Lighting FX do not play well with LEDs. At least up to the 5th generation of the decoders (as in DZ125). And light bulbs are so 20th Century... :facepalm: Their 6th generation supposedly is LED friendly, but none of those are made for N scale.
This brings up a point of how many functions will the decoder have? Many of these switchers had all sorts of flashing and non-flashing lights and beacons added by the railroads. If the decoder only has 2 functions, then what you do when you want to add a beacon or another light? Are you SOL? Or do you attempt to shoehorn another decoder in, just for the lights?
-
I'd like to see some Union Railroad
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/URR_02_zpsdb717fb9.jpg)
and Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW15000001.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW1500-1571.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/PLESW1500-1564.jpg)
SW1500's, Just saying :D
-
Hmm... Digitrax decoder. Not very good. While I have no problems with their motor control, their Lighting FX do not play well with LEDs. At least up to the 5th generation of the decoders (as in DZ125). And light bulbs are so 20th Century... :facepalm: Their 6th generation supposedly is LED friendly, but none of those are made for N scale.
This brings up a point of how many functions will the decoder have? Many of these switchers had all sorts of flashing and non-flashing lights and beacons added by the railroads. If the decoder only has 2 functions, then what you do when you want to add a beacon or another light? Are you SOL? Or do you attempt to shoehorn another decoder in, just for the lights?
What about the DZ143? I've not had any issues with Digitrax decoders and LED's, when it comes to head lights. Are you having a issues when using LED's for ditch lights or strobes and a Digitrax decoder?
-
Why do people keep assuming that this model has anything at all to do with the LL/Walthers SW? :?
Cheers,
-Mark
-
Get rid of the molded in lowered drop-step. You can mold it into the end handrails (in the raised position) for the units that have them, with the corresponding chain. Then have another set of end handrails without chain and drop-step.
-
Why do people keep assuming that this model has anything at all to do with the LL/Walthers SW? :?
Cheers,
-Mark
Hmmm...maybe the trucks and tank? Maybe the alluded to "modified" mechanism? Dunno....just asking if they are sharing components.
-
Get rid of the molded in lowered drop-step. You can mold it into the end handrails (in the raised position) for the units that have them, with the corresponding chain. Then have another set of end handrails without chain and drop-step.
If that's all Robb has to say then I guess they look pretty good :lol:
-
Why do people keep assuming that this model has anything at all to do with the LL/Walthers SW? :?
Cheers,
-Mark
Because that looks like what the shell is sitting on with no explanation.
-
Why do people keep assuming that this model has anything at all to do with the LL/Walthers SW? :?
Cheers,
-Mark
Spookshow
What a great resource your website is. To answer your question. 1.) Fuel tank and truck look like LL's SW which has the right length but is a little too wide. 2.) Mirco Trains sells and uses LL locomotives. http://www.micro-trains.com/pl-NLocos.php 3.) I am the ultimate Nostra dumb a$$ at predicting this stuff, but I will buying some SP units. Just to give Joe comfort SP owned about 30% of the SW1500 production and I am sure they will sell, but I really hope the hoods are scale width.
G
-
I hope this turns out well, I have my Progressive Rail decals waiting...
-
Why do people keep assuming that this model has anything at all to do with the LL/Walthers SW? :?
Cheers,
-Mark
Why are you assuming that I'm assuming? ;)
It has everything to do with an MTL tooled shell on an existing chassis as a quick and dirty SW1500. It's not a 100% new locomotive.
-
Why are you assuming that I'm assuming? ;)
It has everything to do with an MTL tooled shell on an existing chassis as a quick and dirty SW1500. It's not a 100% new locomotive.
While I suppose it could use some of the same components, it simply can't be the existing LL SW chassis with a scale-width hood. The frame has to be narrower, the motor has to be turned 90 degrees and how the trucks insert into the frame all have to be modified. I researched this 10 ways from Sunday when I did my SW1500 kitbash and wanted to use the LL SW chassis...which was 100% impossible.
-
While I suppose it could use some of the same components, it simply can't be the existing LL SW chassis with a scale-width hood. The frame has to be narrower, the motor has to be turned 90 degrees and how the trucks insert into the frame all have to be modified. I researched this 10 ways from Sunday when I did my SW1500 kitbash and wanted to use the LL SW chassis...which was 100% impossible.
You can't turn the motor 90 degrees, it is already on it's side.
-
Not in the LL chassis, as I recall, it's laying flat (long ways horizontal).
If it's not laying flat then it's the same width as the frame and would need to be a different (narrower) motor for the 1500.
-
Until I see the model in person or hear it from Joe I will assume it's just the rantings of a malcontent and disregard the opinion regarding the possible source of any parts. .... Moving on..
-
Not in the LL chassis, as I recall, it's laying flat (long ways horizontal).
If it's not laying flat then it's the same width as the frame and would need to be a different (narrower) motor for the 1500.
I have one right here in front of me and it is not laying flat. The frame halves have sides that extend half-way up the motor, leaving the top half of the motor partially exposed. I am curious to see the mechanism. The method used by Bachmann for the Alco S-4 would lend itself to this engine as well.
-
Until I see the model in person or hear it from Joe I will assume it's just the rantings of a malcontent and disregard the opinion regarding the possible source of any parts. .... Moving on..
Rantings? Malcontent? Really? So in your mind any of us that asked the question after seeing the details in the photo are lesser than?
-
I have one right here in front of me and it is not laying flat. The frame halves have sides that extend half-way up the motor, leaving the top half of the motor partially exposed. I am curious to see the mechanism. The method used by Bachmann for the Alco S-4 would lend itself to this engine as well.
I remember it differently but will take your word for it on motor position. What I do know is the existing frame could not be used. Wait!...you're right on the motor....'cause now I remember the frame wrapping around the motor is what's holding everything together and is why you can't simply mill-down the existing frame. The frame structure would be lost. An entirely new frame would need to be made. This I know for sure. I also believe the way the trucks secure in the 8/9/1200 would need to be modified as there's parts that reach to the very edge of the (wide) frame.
At any rate, as far as I'm concerned, they can use all the parts they want from the LL SW anyways. Those run sweet! :D
-
What about the DZ143? I've not had any issues with Digitrax decoders and LED's, when it comes to head lights. Are you having a issues when using LED's for ditch lights or strobes and a Digitrax decoder?
Yes, all FX which dim LEDs are really poorly represented on Digitrax 5th generation decoders (and earlier). That includes rotating beacons, mars lights, alternating ditch lights, etc. Simple on-off headlights are no problem. Most other decoders handle LEDs just fine. Digitrax finally caught up to the rest with the 6th generation decoders (or so says their decoder manual).
-
I remember it differently but will take your word for it on motor position. What I do know is the existing frame could not be used. Wait!...you're right on the motor....'cause now I remember the frame wrapping around the motor is what's holding everything together and is why you can't simply mill-down the existing frame. The frame structure would be lost. An entirely new frame would need to be made. This I know for sure. I also believe the way the trucks secure in the 8/9/1200 would need to be modified as there's parts that reach to the very edge of the (wide) frame.
At any rate, as far as I'm concerned, they can use all the parts they want from the LL SW anyways. Those run sweet! :D
I don't think anyone is complaining about using parts from the LL SW-9 per se. I think the biggest concern is maintaining scale hood width if they do. Yes, the LL SW-9 ran nice (after you replaced the plastic worms as they have done on the latest run).
-
I don't think anyone is complaining about using parts from the LL SW-9 per se. I think the biggest concern is maintaining scale hood width if they do. Yes, the LL SW-9 ran nice (after you replaced the plastic worms as they have done on the latest run).
Agreed. Looking at the pic, it doesn't look like the hood is too wide in that angle. It would need to be really wide to use the existing LL chassis. This coupled with the fact that the original post says "modified chassis are in-house", I think we're golden! :D
Now the question is; what the heck do I do with these now? Finish them? Try to put the new drive under them when it comes out and if it becomes available separately? :? (the old Con-Cor/Kato switcher chassis under the 2596 is a bit fussy).
(http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/500/SW1500_Rear_Wedge.jpg)
-
Agreed. Looking at the pic, it doesn't look like the hood is too wide in that angle. It would need to be really wide to use the existing LL chassis. This coupled with the fact that the original post says "modified chassis are in-house", I think we're golden! :D
Now the question is; what the heck do I do with these now? Finish them? Try to put the new drive under them when it comes out and if it becomes available separately? :?
[imghttp://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/500/SW1500_Rear_Wedge.jpg[/img]
I am sure yours are leaps and bounds ahead in the detail department. Hopefully the mechanism fits and you will be home free.
-
That would be nice if it fits! This bash approach renders a model that comes out exactly 1 scale foot longer than the prototype, but I think I can live with that unless they look way off next to the MT models (the extra foot comes from 6" more distance between the jacking pads and the pilot face on each end on the MP15DC, which was used. The spacing between jacking pads is actually correct).
-
Hi Russ, while I plan on getting the Conrail versions, I will also get a few of the slower selling schemes when they go on sale to power my two kit bashes.
-
Good idea, Daniel! Maybe I'll do that too! :D
-
Ok, now I'm getting excited.
-
While I suppose it could use some of the same components, it simply can't be the existing LL SW chassis with a scale-width hood. The frame has to be narrower, the motor has to be turned 90 degrees and how the trucks insert into the frame all have to be modified. I researched this 10 ways from Sunday when I did my SW1500 kitbash and wanted to use the LL SW chassis...which was 100% impossible.
I hope you're right, I really do. Recent Z scale locomotives from MTL haven't given me a fuzzy feeling about MTLs concern about scale-width hoods...
-
Until I see the model in person or hear it from Joe I will assume it's just the rantings of a malcontent and disregard the opinion regarding the possible source of any parts. .... Moving on..
First post says modified chassis. Photo shows Walthers/LL trucks and fuel tank. I don't understand how it's now an "opinion" that they are using Walthers/LL parts.
-
If that's all Robb has to say then I guess they look pretty good :lol:
That's just my first suggestion off the top if my head from looking at the picture. I don't have time right now to do any thorough research. Joe could always send me a sample ;)
-
Good stuff...I don't really have a dog in the hunt, but I may eventually pick one up. BNSF didn't really use true switchers in the area I model until very late in my era. (however, I am VERY interested in the possibility of using the mech for my SW1200 grain switcher!) I am actually very excited at prospect of MTL using the LL DNA for their mech, as long as the hood width isn't botched in the process.
Any chance we'll see weathered versions? Obviously it's a little bigger risk on a $100 loco versus a $25 freight car, but I could see "low risk" things like faded paint, some vent weathering, etc. being done. Here's your first subject: http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=42902 8) (Except, please NO conspic striping!) There is precedence...Atlas has offered at least a couple of (slightly) faded paint jobs on their locos.
I know....baby steps. :)
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vTYNSgcsAYM/Uxc-Z9MxebI/AAAAAAAAASc/70X1DsJOSuU/s1600/SW1500.jpg)
The coupler and coupler pocket seems to protrude a little too much!?!??!?! Sort of like a cushioned underframe!!!!!
-
The coupler and coupler pocket seems to protrude a little too much!?!??!?! Sort of like a cushioned underframe!!!!!
Yes, but don't worry...just like the circus cars, they'll sell you the conversion to fix it!!! :trollface: :facepalm:
-
I'd say my largest concern now would be the lack of space between the bottom of the deck and the trucks/frame. There is a lot of roominess there on the Proto.
A shot of the rear would be nice, also. It's hard to see if the rear sand boxes on the deck have the taper as they should.
-
The coupler and coupler pocket seems to protrude a little too much!?!??!?! Sort of like a cushioned underframe!!!!!
Z905's!
Joe D
-
I'd say my largest concern now would be the lack of space between the bottom of the deck and the trucks/frame. There is a lot of roominess there on the Proto.
A shot of the rear would be nice, also. It's hard to see if the rear sand boxes on the deck have the taper as they should.
I would bet money that we're looking at a mockup using some components from the LL drive, so we could see some early pics of the shell (for which I thank MT for), and is not representative of the final model. Perhaps the trucks and fuel tank are even Photoshopped in(?). At any rate, I really doubt this is what the final model will be like because looking a the pic as it is right now, the pilot bottoms would drag on the track once the wheel flanges dropped inside the track. I still think we're golden!
-
Winner, winner chicken dinner.
Seems everyone is trying to find problems with everything.
Back up, and punt. And go find another product to bash and pick apart.
Wyatt
-
Hey Wyatt, nobody's trying to find problems. Observations are being made, plain and simple. It's the "hey back up and punt crowd" that fan the flames, IMO.
-
Edited to avoid wrath of :tommann: . :P :trollface:
(I don't really think I was necessarily an offender, but I was giving a friend some ribbing that might be misinterpreted by others.)
-
Guys - everyone needs to take a break here. Don't intentionally start an issue if you know/think it is a sore spot, and if you perceive someone is bashing something, please don't fan the flames by stating the obvious. Just move on and not try to escalate anything.
And one more thing: this thread has at least two posts that take opposite sides: one states everyone loves this loco and hates the IM product, and two states that this MTL product is being bashed. :? None of this is helpful to Joe's intent of presenting a future product and wanting constructive criticism.
Now back to the forum... :tommann:
-
In my opinion the SW1500 looks great. I'm just hoping we see a second version that does not have the side sill handrails, but uses the carbody handrails similar to what was used on the P&LE (keeping fingers crossed)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/PLESW1500-1564.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW1500-1571.jpg)
I know the extended sandboxes might be pushing it, but what if I said pretty pretty please :D :facepalm:
-
I hope this turns out well, I have my Progressive Rail decals waiting...
That reminds me to find my stash of Hancock Air Chimes (did Progresive still have those?).
If Flexicoils come out, I'll have to do the MNS.
Jason
-
That one P&LE photo really illustrates the space above the trucks well.
-
I am not trying to start any war. It seems to me , here lately.That there are sharks in the water ready to tear anything apart.
I believe it is a mock up. If not..oh well.
Wyatt
-
That one P&LE photo really illustrates the space above the trucks well.
The 1500 sits higher than the 1200 (I really hope MTL knows this. :oops:). Here's a couple good examples.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3231021 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3231021)
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1874729 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1874729)
So if it's sitting all the way down on the LL frame, that's why there's not enough clearance.
Jason
-
You might be able to sqeeze a P&LE out of me. :lol:
-
The 1500 sits higher than the 1200 (I really hope MTL knows this. :oops:). Here's a couple good examples.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3231021 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3231021)
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1874729 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1874729)
So if it's sitting all the way down on the LL frame, that's why there's not enough clearance.
Jason
Those are really good examples!
Joe, make sure to pay attention to this.
However, given what you just showed, it DOES indicate that kitbashing my holy grail diesel, the SW1001 may finally be within reach.
-
It would be the ultimate irony for MTL to produce a model that is criticized for being too low. 8)
All my friends know the low rider....
/>
Best wishes, Dave
-
In my opinion the SW1500 looks great. I'm just hoping we see a second version that does not have the side sill handrails, but uses the carbody handrails similar to what was used on the P&LE (keeping fingers crossed)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/PLESW1500-1564.jpg)
8) Mauw Ha Ha ha more power!
I would really like this one...
:) Chris
-
I hope that MTL doesn't take the easy way out with this project. The couplers do seem to stick out too far, and it'd be better that they are at the correct length right out of the box rather than just schlep the work onto whomever cares to fix it own their own. 905s aren't a direct solution since some may prefer reliability over minute fidelity.
Although I don't have a hat in this ring since my cut off is 1956 (and I try to stay away from anything that would have been brand-spanking-new in 1955 or 1956) I'd like to see MTL put forth a real winner.
-Cody F.
-
I'm actually looking forward to this a little bit more versus the S2, since an SW1500 fits my modern shortline theme much more readily; the shortline back home used an LTEX SW1500 to haul clay and other products until thier GP30u's were painted and showed up...I might have to build the LTEX SW1500, if I ever get a shot.
Does anyone know if the shells would be seperate? I'd rather buy a locomotive and an extra shell to do the modeling on so that I have a unit which can run during the whole process
-
Just like the IM SD40-2s I'll wait till I have the loco in hand before I judge it.By the when did Joe say the pictured model was the final version? :?
-
Just like the IM SD40-2s I'll wait till I have the loco in hand before I judge it.By the when did Joe say the pictured model was the final version? :?
Yeah, lets not say anything until it's too late. Good plan. :P
I've been in manufacturing (not model trains) and been in the engineering meetings. Something like how low the shell is sitting (just as an example) is a perfect candidate for something that could get missed or forgotten about along the way. With the new shell and LL mech in hand, someone who isn't as proto knowledgeable might assume that's how it's supposed to be because of the fit.
And lets not forget, if it is the LL mech, the tabs for the power pickup come off the sill. so with the sill raised, a new pickup method may be required. I'll be curious how they do that without it being totally visible. There are questions that can be asked or concerns addressed even at this early stage.
TLT could have saved some money on their Newprint cars if they had done something like this. So could have Exactrail on their cars with(out) the Pullman roof.
For me, the more eyes the better, even if Joe has to endure the usual zealous dialog. This is an excellent chance for MTL to get back into the locomotive market, let's help in whatever way we can or they will let us.
Jason
-
Yeah, lets not say anything until it's too late. Good plan. :P
I've been in manufacturing (not model trains) and been in the engineering meetings. Something like how low the shell is sitting (just as an example) is a perfect candidate for something that could get missed or forgotten about along the way. With the new shell and LL mech in hand, someone who isn't as proto knowledgeable might assume that's how it's supposed to be because of the fit.
And lets not forget, if it is the LL mech, the tabs for the power pickup come off the sill. so with the sill raised, a new pickup method may be required. I'll be curious how they do that without it being totally visible. There are questions that can be asked or concerns addressed even at this early stage.
TLT could have saved some money on their Newprint cars if they had done something like this. So could have Exactrail on their cars with(out) the Pullman roof.
For me, the more eyes the better, even if Joe has to endure the usual zealous dialog. This is an excellent chance for MTL to get back into the locomotive market, let's help in whatever way we can or they will let us.
+1
"Let's just sit here and be quiet and not criticize ANYTHING" is why we get missing sight glass on GP38-2's, missing cons stencils on freight cars, incorrect road number, a hundred runs of TTX 89-footers with perpetually incorrect reporting marks, etc. etc. I'm not saying that in EVERY case a manufacturer is sitting here patiently taking notes from the Railwire rants. But, hey, Joe posted the photo...I don't expect it was strictly a courtesy call. He probably is keen on selling things. (and hey, it only took 20 years for them to take heed of the TTX issue....that's huge!!! Progress abounds at Micro-Trains... :trollface: )
Imagine if Kato would show us their paint colors beforehand....we could suggest the 64-crayon pack versus the 16 they're using now. :facepalm:
-
Imagine if Kato would show us their paint colors beforehand....we could suggest the 64-crayon pack versus the 16 they're using now. :facepalm:
Except for rule number 4 of the "Guide to making model trains"... which clearly states "Ask 3 modellers what ________ is correct and get 23 answers, all of which are likely wrong.... :-X
This isn't to say input isn't incredibly valuable; it is ! We have had many modellers point out stuff we've looked at 100 times and missed or help us source a colour, photo or detail, but please, never think that asking for input is the complete answer, quite the opposite, depending on the topic it's likely to cause more errors (and by the way, hard feelings)... and I have seen this first hand... :oops:
-
Excellent points! I consider myself to be somewhat of an SW1500 expert but only fairly recently noticed some came with 5 step stepwells as opposed to the normal 4. This sort of thing could easily go unnoticed by a manufacturer unless someone points it out.
-
I think Joe says right in his post "modifed chassis is in house", which implies to me that it is not the same as the one on the model in the photo.
-
I think Joe says right in his post "modifed chassis is in house", which implies to me that it is not the same as the one on the model in the photo.
:facepalm:
"...modified chassis are in house..."
And if the shell fits on an unmodified chassis, according to everything Tehachapifan has told us, then the shell would have to be really wide. That's even more scary than it being on the modified chassis in the photo posted.
-
:facepalm:
"...modified chassis are in house..."
And if the shell fits on an unmodified chassis, according to everything Tehachapifan has told us, then the shell would have to be really wide. That's even more scary than it being on the modified chassis in the photo posted.
I'm convinced by the photo that the shell shown is not wide enough to fit over an un-modified LL chassis. The walkways and the outer cab windows would be really, really narrow if it was that wide. Everything looks correct for an SW1500 to me...even though the angle shown is really not the best to determine hood width.
-
Except for rule number 4 of the "Guide to making model trains"... which clearly states "Ask 3 modellers what ________ is correct and get 23 answers, all of which are likely wrong.... :-X
Yeah, I wasn't really thinking about the "that's not the color I remember" type of critiques. I'm talking about the stuff Kato has rolled out that NOBODY thinks was the color they remember...except for that one night with the bad mushrooms. (SD45's come to mind)
Look, I think we all get it that most models will have compromises, and some that are significant, and some that are bone-headed. It's one thing to have a compromise based on "there are a dozen phases and we can't make them all". But stuff like the incorrect housing on the tunnel motor, missing sight glass on a -2....those are pretty "out there" for a company that is supposed to understand their product. The wide hood falls there....if that's the case then we've really got another Con-Cor MP15, and the market is still open to someone to do them "better"....plain and simple. (I've said from the first hint of an MTL SW1500 that this will be the case anyway...simply due to release frequency) And "it is what it is" at this point...that ship has sailed. Fortunately, this is one loco that can support multiple manufacturers in the market, I believe. (along with the GP38-2 and SD40-2, and perhaps a few others)
I suspect than when Joe posts something like this he is expecting neither "Ooh Joe that's awesome...YOU'RE awesome....can I have your autograph?" nor "oh GOOD GAWD what were you thinking!?!?". Anything in between those is probably valuable to the effort. ;)
-
I would think that it would be pretty easy, if it weren't already accounted for ;), the space above the trucks to the bottom of the sill/shell.
The tooling would just need to be cut deeper in that sill/shell area to provide the height necessary.
-
I suspect than when Joe posts something like this he is expecting neither "Ooh Joe that's awesome...YOU'RE awesome....can I have your autograph?" nor "oh GOOD GAWD what were you thinking!?!?". Anything in between those is probably valuable to the effort. ;)
No doubt about that. I was referring in general to the comment that a number of people have made over the years that goes something like " if they'd only have asked me I could have told them that XXXX was the right yyyyy".... Not to be outdone, person two gives you exactly the opposite answer two minutes later and both are absolutely convinced that they are right.... :facepalm:
By way of example; we recently were working on locating a railway logo on a upcoming product... where do we put their logo.... you get the actual company painting document; compare it with a photo.... great...um... except, what about this photo....? Oh, um... Hey; then there is this photo......oh...um.. HMMM.... Hey expert 1 says that we should use that photo - it's the right one... But expert two says only if you were in "Nowehereville NB" because that shop never got the company painting diagram... use THIS photo..... except that this photo shows the logo 12" higher.... Let's ask the SIG.... what's that; they have seven possible answers............. :scared: :scared: :scared:
More often than not the "right answer" isn't clear; because there may not be ONE right answer.....I firmly believe that more often than not there isn't one standard for many things in railroading (Ok; some dimensional stuff, physical measurements may be consistent but little else seems to be - light position, location of door handles, gaskets, stack heights... we've seen wild and wide variations with no explainations.... its like when the L&N SIG had two former L&N paint shop employee speak to them and try and help solve the debate about what was L&N blue... they had photo's, paint chips, formulas, paint company documents and after the two old boys looked at it all they said "L&N blue was whatever me and Harry could buy at the paint store in town and mix with whatever we had left in the paint drum....."
Who said this isn't a fun industry to work in ? :D
-
No doubt about that. I was referring in general to the comment that a number of people have made over the years that goes something like " if they'd only have asked me I could have told them that XXXX was the right yyyyy".... Not to be outdone, person two gives you exactly the opposite answer two minutes later and both are absolutely convinced that they are right.... :facepalm:
By way of example; we recently were working on locating a railway logo on a upcoming product... where do we put their logo.... you get the actual company painting document; compare it with a photo.... great...um... except, what about this photo....? Oh, um... Hey; then there is this photo......oh...um.. HMMM.... Hey expert 1 says that we should use that photo - it's the right one... But expert two says only if you were in "Nowehereville NB" because that shop never got the company painting diagram... use THIS photo..... except that this photo shows the logo 12" higher.... Let's ask the SIG.... what's that; they have seven possible answers............. :scared: :scared: :scared:
More often than not the "right answer" isn't clear; because there may not be ONE right answer.....I firmly believe that more often than not there isn't one standard for many things in railroading (Ok; some dimensional stuff, physical measurements may be consistent but little else seems to be - light position, location of door handles, gaskets, stack heights... we've seen wild and wide variations with no explainations.... its like when the L&N SIG had two former L&N paint shop employee speak to them and try and help solve the debate about what was L&N blue... they had photo's, paint chips, formulas, paint company documents and after the two old boys looked at it all they said "L&N blue was whatever me and Harry could buy at the paint store in town and mix with whatever we had left in the paint drum....."
Who said this isn't a fun industry to work in ? :D
I'm not going to deny anything you're saying Mike, but there is no minute detail or paint color conversation in this thread. It is strictly dealing with the physical dimensions of an SW1500, which are a pretty concrete thing.
Later when we start debating paint schemes, lettering fonts, and all that good stuff, you can bring up these "there's no right answer" debates again!
-
Now I'm confused.
Should I be happy or concerned.
-
I've seen nothing yet that's a cause for concern for me at all. Can't wait! :D
Also, in re-reading this thread, I noticed that it was stated that the SP versions WILL include SP light packages! Whereas, I thought it was stated previously that they would have the numberboards and flexicoils but not light packages. This is great news!
-
Now I'm confused.
Should I be happy or concerned.
:D :scared: :o :| :facepalm: ???
-
(http://i569.photobucket.com/albums/ss133/exprail/Picture1.jpg)
(http://i569.photobucket.com/albums/ss133/exprail/12665856544_64a725a949_b.jpg)
Yes, Jason Progressive Rail did have a locomotive equipped with Nathan air chime whistle which sounded similar to a steam locomotive. The locomotive was #2347 ex NS/K&IT and first used my me as engineer on PGR's "Dan Patch" (former MN&S High Line) in Bloomington, MN beginning in 2000. Originally painted in an unusual scheme of teal, with mauve (pink?) lettering and aqua handrails it was later re-numbered to #34 and re-painted to the former MN&S, blue/red colors as more locomotives were added to the fleet.
The air whistle was pretty soft and couldn't be depended upon to alert traffic at grade crossings so another "regular" and louder whistle/horn was added for that purpose. About the only time we used the nathan was if a railfan was filming us at work or on the engine/caboose Santa Train at Christmas time.
Attached are a couple of pictures showing me as engineer and other PGR guys along side the locomotive, former MN&S caboose #102 and the first delivery of CAT equipment to Ziegler Cat in over 20 years.
BTW the caboose was also unique as it was our "yard office" with a roof top, solar, panel providing electricity to charge batteries to power a portable, wireless fax machine and lites. It also had an Amtrak type whistle under the body for crossing protection when making shoves, headlights and markers on both ends and an interior oil, heater for refuge during those cold Minnesota, Winter mornings while waiting for the 2347 to warm up.
Outside of a pallet of extra brake shoes, a few spare air hoses, a knuckle or two , some switch brooms, shovels and pry bars that's all we had to run this nine mile line. There was no "office building" (that was at the head quarters in an industrial park 15 miles away) only parking for a couple of vehicles where we tied up and the caboose was spotted on a spur. Fuel was delivered once a week on Fridays by truck and locomotive tests/maint./repairs performed on site by contractors. The only additional "facility" was a fenced in "pen" on the lead into Ziegler which just barely held the engine and caboose and which allowed during cold weather the ability to plug the locomotive heater/pumps to prevent the block from freezing while shut down.
There you have it a complete short line facility in about 90 feet. In addition to the Zielgler pix I' ll also include one of the 34 and another unit after re-painting.
Barry
-
No doubt about that. I was referring in general to the comment that a number of people have made over the years that goes something like " if they'd only have asked me I could have told them that XXXX was the right yyyyy".... Not to be outdone, person two gives you exactly the opposite answer two minutes later and both are absolutely convinced that they are right.... :facepalm:
By way of example; we recently were working on locating a railway logo on a upcoming product... where do we put their logo.... you get the actual company painting document; compare it with a photo.... great...um... except, what about this photo....? Oh, um... Hey; then there is this photo......oh...um.. HMMM.... Hey expert 1 says that we should use that photo - it's the right one... But expert two says only if you were in "Nowehereville NB" because that shop never got the company painting diagram... use THIS photo..... except that this photo shows the logo 12" higher.... Let's ask the SIG.... what's that; they have seven possible answers............. :scared: :scared: :scared:
More often than not the "right answer" isn't clear; because there may not be ONE right answer.....I firmly believe that more often than not there isn't one standard for many things in railroading (Ok; some dimensional stuff, physical measurements may be consistent but little else seems to be - light position, location of door handles, gaskets, stack heights... we've seen wild and wide variations with no explainations.... its like when the L&N SIG had two former L&N paint shop employee speak to them and try and help solve the debate about what was L&N blue... they had photo's, paint chips, formulas, paint company documents and after the two old boys looked at it all they said "L&N blue was whatever me and Harry could buy at the paint store in town and mix with whatever we had left in the paint drum....."
Who said this isn't a fun industry to work in ? :D
Pud,
I can make sure Rapido never has to worry about that again; I'll tell you exactly where the keystone needs to go on all your future releases! :trollface:
-
I am unsure where some got the idea that people were bashing this release. A photo was shown, and questions were asked. The only part I am not clear on is why there has been no response to the questions.
When this project was first announced, DCC was not a certainty. Now we have clarity on that issue. Would the effort have been made to make it DCC ready if people did not proffer an opinion. Now there are additional questions/concerns about the hood width and ride height. The hood width question should be easy to answer since the shell is tooled.
I remember people bashing the Bachman Alco S-4 over a perceived wide hood (which turned out to be within a couple of scale inches IIRC) but MT publishes a picture and gets a pass?
-
Everyone get this straight
Critique = Pointing out errors or omissions that have merit.
Bashing = Just plain BS that is based on opinion alone and not merit.
I like turtles.
-
(http://i569.photobucket.com/albums/ss133/exprail/Picture1.jpg)
(http://i569.photobucket.com/albums/ss133/exprail/12665856544_64a725a949_b.jpg)
There you have it a complete short line facility in about 90 feet. In addition to the Zielgler pix I' ll also include one of the 34 and another unit after re-painting.
Barry
great story .. how much traffic did you handle on a typical week ..
-
Quote from: Catt on Today at 04:15:50 AM
Just like the IM SD40-2s I'll wait till I have the loco in hand before I judge it.By the when did Joe say the pictured model was the final version?
Yeah, lets not say anything until it's too late. Good plan.
As usual Jason your missing the point,but don't let that stop you. :D
-
Pud,
I can make sure Rapido never has to worry about that again; I'll tell you exactly where the keystone needs to go on all your future releases! :trollface:
See, that kind of selfless offer is what makes Dr. Dave a man among men! :lol:
-
great story .. how much traffic did you handle on a typical week ..
I agree, great info. That line can be quiet at time, but the entire Progressive System handles thousands of cars a year. The Progressive served AirLake Commercial Park by itself can use 3000 cars a year.
The Ziegler facility next to the PROG pen also handles rebuilds and maintenance on the TC&WRs CAT powered fleet, so it was a pretty common site to see their units in the neighborhood.
-
Hi John:
Thanks, for the comment.
For the first five years I ran the operation we probably averaged 50 cars a week but recently some industries have closed/moved on because they serve an older "maturing" suburban area, where folks want condos and walking parks more than industries and jobs.
PGR did however lease the former John Deere distribution warehouse and they do quite a bit of warehause/trans loading out of it. I would guess that most of the business is made up of boxcars/flats of lumber going to their "freight house" transload, hoppers of plastic pellets, a tank or two for an lube oil distributor, baby hoppers of cement for a batch plant and occasionally gons of steel for a fabricator.
While Jason is correct in that there are three other PGR operations in the Twin Cities area which all contribute to the total cars moved there are pretty much disconnected and separate ones existing on the ebb and flow of local business. The exception is the Lakeville Industrial park where all types of commodities are handled, the connecting line down to Northfield for interchange with CP/UP and the branch up to Randolph and Cannon Falls where they are loading a lot of frac sand. All in all it's an interesting operation.
Barry
-
Pud,
I can make sure Rapido never has to worry about that again; I'll tell you exactly where the keystone needs to go on all your future releases!
Under a coating of Conrail blue?? :D
-
Under a coating of Conrail blue?? :D
I'm not sure this is getting any better...... :D
-
Studying the photo posted, I think we can make a few assumptions:
1. The pilot and steps are BELOW the wheels. This makes perfect sense if this is just a test chassis. The production model would of course have a shell mounted higher which would give the prototypical distance between the walkways and trucks.
2. I can not locate any area that looks out of place as to width. The front screen matches up almost exactly to the Atlas MP15 when viewed from the same angle.
I can't wait to see more Joe!
-
OK, I believe Spring is officially here. How close are we to seeing these babies? Seriously....this is my most anticipated loco since getting into the hobby (especially SP versions) and I can't stand it! ;)
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2aU5iqea1S0/Uy3NZdsFB8I/AAAAAAAAATE/ltFuFIOJjKo/s1600/sw1500.jpg)
-
Thanks for the clarification on ride height. :D This looks spot on to me as the prototype has a jacked-up-with-a-lift-kit sort of look as compared to the SW1200.
-
Needs more Conrail!
Joe this is great! I want one... now.
-
Hahaha.
Needs flexcoil trucks.
Looks great!
-
Joe
Looking good! Keep up the good work! Looking forward to the SP units.
-
Finger
lickin' good. How many numbers do you expect in first run of SP? Bonus points for baked units with red lettering and SPSF paint.
Mr. Wallet needs some quiet time to prepare for battle...
-
Reservations were beyond estimates for the first two paint schemes. I think we can take the number of UP units and add 40% on the SP. :D It will have the correct trucks as well... We have one or two small molds to finish and we should start painting soon. Not sure of the exact release date but it can't be too far down the road.
Joe
-
Vermont Railway #501, please... ;)
Cheers NB
-
Well Joe I didn't make any reservations, but I'll be getting a some of the UP's and SP's.
Keep up the great work you guys are doing at MTL
Thanks
Rodney
-
While we are here a reminder about the Weyerhaeuser units :). I believe these were discussed in the first thread. Since these would probably be less popular then mainstream railroads, perhaps a special/limited run built to pre orders only?
-
PWRS does custom MT offerings in interesting or less common (or ignored) schemes. Maybe what it takes is a company to partner with MT to work on these special projects. I'm not sure who that would be in the US, but there must be a company with that business model.
-
Put me down for five pairs or so of these:
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures/24550/ihb%209205.jpg)
That is all.
-
Put me down for five pairs or so of these:
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures/24550/ihb%209205.jpg)
That is all.
Only 2? I would take an entire fleet. Please make these when you do the flex coil truck version.
-
So, what Northeast roads had the 1500?
-
So, what Northeast roads had the 1500?
Penn Central,Reading,Conrail..Guess I'm gonna need a few..
-
Hi Lou,
Guess I'll need some black and blues.
Joe D
-
Any more variation on the sills? Or will they all be SP three step w/ drop steps?
-
Only 2? I would take an entire fleet. Please make these when you do the flex coil truck version.
Haha you must have misread. I said five pairs. Or so. Which generally means in the MR-world double. I'd say I'd end up with a dozen. Too important for my 1995-era layout.
Hey Shipsure, what are the chances these would be done? I'd just like to know so I can purchase undecs if this falls into the no chance category.
-
Haha you must have misread. I said five pairs. Or so. Which generally means in the MR-world double. I'd say I'd end up with a dozen. Too important for my 1995-era layout.
Hey Shipsure, what are the chances these would be done? I'd just like to know so I can purchase undecs if this falls into the no chance category.
If you paint it custom, it will be done commercially.
-
Here you go, Joe at Micro-Trains - Southern Rwy locos:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2944919
I'd need at least 6 of these black beauties.
Hmm... gorillas are black
too, but they aren't
beauties...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
So, what Northeast roads had the 1500?
NorthEast.
Joe. Do this one normal- I'll patch it up!
(http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photos/SW1500/1315rf&p.jpg)
And of course THIS one is the highest on my list. A VERY very rare paint scheme. Only a couple of CSX bright future locos had the "reverse slant." Normally the slant is at the cab end. And this is the ONLY SW1500 painted this way. DO this one Joe!
(http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photos/MP15AC/1129CSX-bc.jpg)
-
That is neat... I think the BF looks better when not broken up by the cab. It sort of reminds me of the Eastern Airlines hockey stick.
-
Nothing in the first group for me. Awaiting the PC and Reading units and then I'm in for a few.
-
Waiting to see how the pickup is done and how it runs as a result. That was one of the week points of the LL drive.
Any chance of getting a paint template?
Jason
-
I wouldn't mind a Conrail one
(http://www.trainweb.org/csxphotos/photos/SW1500/1097cr.jpg)
Just not patched
-
I'm saving up money now for when these schemes are done!
(http://www.locophotos.com/pix/77/Southern%20Pacific%20SP%202466_Anaheim%20CA_Craig%20Walker_1997-03-22_77495.jpg)
(http://www.locophotos.com/pix/77/Southern%20Pacific%20SP%202552_Stanton%20CA_Craig%20Walker_1997-04-10_77594.jpg)
(http://www.locophotos.com/pix/77/Southern%20Pacific%20SP%202575_Carson%20CA_Craig%20Walker_1986-11-03_77612.jpg)
-
Waiting to see how the pickup is done and how it runs as a result. That was one of the week points of the LL drive.
Any chance of getting a paint template?
Jason
Out of the box the LL drive runs great, but it is certainly goofy that the pick up strip tension affects gear mesh. I messed up more than one drive before figuring that out, and they can be finicky to get right even once you know what the issue is.
-
Haha you must have misread. I said five pairs. Or so. Which generally means in the MR-world double. I'd say I'd end up with a dozen. Too important for my 1995-era layout.
Hey Shipsure, what are the chances these would be done? I'd just like to know so I can purchase undecs if this falls into the no chance category.
Well, someone I sort of trust told me MT told them the IHB was in discussion for a future paint scheme, but maybe not right away, probably somewhere well down the line. As in, right after I pay someone to custom paint some in IHB scheme.......
-
I would hope that we do all the schemes we can do with the body styles we have...At the moment I see all these being pre ordered so we can guage the interest. Couple the IHB with an SP run or some other big road and we can offset costs. I'm also pushing for offering undeck shell components right out of the box, so if you like something like that, let your LHS know so they can let us know how popular that would be. I want to offer those sooner than later and if there is a demand, it's easer to get done...sooner :D
Joe
Well, someone I sort of trust told me MT told them the IHB was in discussion for a future paint scheme, but maybe not right away, probably somewhere well down the line. As in, right after I pay someone to custom paint some in IHB scheme.......
-
I would hope that we do all the schemes we can do with the body styles we have...
Joe
Just like the PS 4427 Covered Hopper, right? ;)
-
Joe,
That would be wonderful of MT to consider lesser known roads including IHB. Actually, from me, you would get one SP sale, since IHB leased some former SP SW1500's. Right now, I have an Atlas MP15 as a stand in, but know the pickers of nit would notice such an unholy thing in a heartbeat......
Can't wait for the IHB run, and perhaps many others. Glad to hear this looks like a home run for MT, although not surprised. Its my fave switcher, very common, and in fact, wondered why other mfgs hadn't latched on to this model as one of the most likely to succeed.
-
I would hope that we do all the schemes we can do with the body styles we have...At the moment I see all these being pre ordered so we can guage the interest. Couple the IHB with an SP run or some other big road and we can offset costs. I'm also pushing for offering undeck shell components right out of the box, so if you like something like that, let your LHS know so they can let us know how popular that would be. I want to offer those sooner than later and if there is a demand, it's easer to get done...sooner :D
Joe
Undecorated shells would be nice! Thanks for putting this out there sooner than later. I'd like at least two.
-
I'm also pushing for offering undeck shell components right out of the box, so if you like something like that, let your LHS know so they can let us know how popular that would be. I want to offer those sooner than later and if there is a demand, it's easer to get done...sooner :D
Joe
Hopefully these will not be glued together, and handrails not installed. Unlike what some other manufacturers do. :facepalm:
-
I just have to put in a plug for KCS. Three schemes to pick from too, White, Gray and Belle. Still, I believe this will be a great engine that was worth the wait.
-
I just have to put in a plug for KCS. Three schemes to pick from too, White, Gray and Belle. Still, I believe this will be a great engine that was worth the wait.
I've plugged this directly to Joe . . . but its why I reserved one in UP Borg to strip - actually, the satisfaction from that will be enough. :trollface:
-
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures/569/BNScan152.jpg)
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures/569/BNScan153.jpg)
-
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-HyEjC3wPBq8/T9LNbgBDJiI/AAAAAAAAALo/226VWVMT_mA/s800/111.JPG)
-
I keep getting faked-out by these showing up as part of the MT monthly releases each month at some stores as if they're out. Just happened again for April, but nooooooo! :| :D
-
(http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures/569/BNScan153.jpg)
5150...the crazy train.
-
It would appear the NS units are out. I thought I saw a couple sitting down by the bay this AM. ;)
-
5150...the crazy train.
I believe that's Eddie Van Halen's train.
-
I believe that's Eddie Van Halen's train.
:facepalm:
-
:facepalm:
Same.
-
I believe that's Eddie Van Halen's train.
OU812?
-
I believe that's Eddie Van Halen's train.
Jeez, finally....two-and-a-half months later..... :P
-
i am tempted to buy a bn one, i will wait to see some better pics first though. anybody getting a norfolk southern one that are up for sale?
-
I played around with the NS unit at the local hobby shop yesterday. Both units that the shop had didn't have headlights. I thought these models would be equipped with at least a front headlight.
Scott Lupia
-
It has lights, during assembly the LED was not positioned properly in some of the engines, a general recall has been issued so we can fix them I am doing a "how to" that we will post for those who want to adjust it themselves. Simple, just remove the shell and bend the LED up a bit. Sorry for the problem.
Joe
-
Any one have shots of what's under the hood?
Also, is this DCC ready? What I mean is, is there a drop in decoder or do you need to use a wire lead type decoder.
Jon
-
Digitrax is working on the Decoder, it has two sockets our wires plug into. I don't have their working stock number here at home, and I don't know what their delivery schedule looks like at the moment.
Joe
I'll post a shot later tonight.
-
Wow.
I've been gone over a week on a business trip and just got home.
No one has one yet?
No photos?
These were appearing on ebay before I left.
-
I thought the chassis was a LifeLike SW1200.
-
I thought the chassis was a LifeLike SW1200.
I was under the impression that the LifeLike chassis was just a stand-in for the photograph, until MTL could get an actual chassis to put under the shell.
Hmm... and I just bought a
Cadillac on a Yugo chassis...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Dee for the win! :D
-
Wow.
I've been gone over a week on a business trip and just got home.
No one has one yet?
No photos?
These were appearing on ebay before I left.
They just surfaced at one NJ hobby shop this week. MTL has two here at the convention. Deco is exactly as it appeared in the Newsletter.
-
So is it a new mech or a rehashed lifelike mech?
-
I feel like if there were no bashing to be done, we'd already have seen a pic from Shipsure..man do I hope I'm wrong.....I can deal with a foobie NS paint job, but a foob-ish SW1500, notsomuch...
-
There is a pic of the mech on the Digitrax web site. Bob.
-
There is a pic of the mech on the Digitrax web site. Bob.
Got a link? I couldn't find the picture.
Hmm... insert weakest
link joke here...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
It is with the new decoder.
-
DN126M2
-
Too easy mate. ;) http://www.digitrax.com/static/apps/products/mobile-decoders/dn126m2/documents/DN126M2.pdf
And it does look very similar to the LL chassis. Even with the same power pick-up which we all know wasn't LL's best. Looks like the new DN126M2 will fit, with some modifications to the motor, also into the LL models.
Jane
-
must.....resist.....pointing out those are not roller bearings...... :facepalm:....and sure looks like the same LL chassis to me....bummer....
-
MTL said they were using the LL chassis. This is why the hood is about 6" too wide. The only changes to the design was light board and wired contact strips to the motor.
It looks like this decoder would be a great choice for all of the LL SW1200 as well.
Does anyone know if Dixitrax decoders play nice with ESU and NCE systems? I remember hearing that there were some issues.
-
I don't really have a need for one of these (unless they do a WC with flex coils), but it appears to me that adding a decoder means sacrificing the headlight. I am far, far from being a DCC expert (I can barely spell it), but this seems unusual to me. Maybe I am missing something? If so, this would be a Digitrax issue in my opinion, not a MTL issue.
Best wishes, Dave
-
Must refrain from saying something.
Must refrain from saying something.
Must refrain from saying something.
-
Okayyyyy.....It would be good to have a working headlight. I am confused. The decoder info lists light control capabilities. Is it typical to have to add all your own LEDs to detectors like these?
Best wishes, Dave
-
Okayyyyy.....It would be good to have a working headlight. I am confused. The decoder info lists light control capabilities. Is it typical to have to add all your own LEDs to detectors like these?
Best wishes, Dave
It looks to me, and this is merely a casual observation, that this might not be the world's most well-thought out locomotive project.
-
Um... there is a surface mount LED on the decoder. That is the little white thing where the LED would be. There also appears to be solder pads for a backup (cab) light on the right hand side of the decoder.
-
This is why the hood is about 6" too wide.
Where has this been said?...I just re-read this whole thread, and I didnt see any confirmation of this until now???..I don't doubt it, but seeing as how we can't seem to get a pic of an off the shelf model.....
-
SW1200 hood width - .04" = 6 scale inches too wide.
MTL could have done new side frames that use the LL mechanics and get a scale width hood, but it may have been too expensive to be practical. I will get the Conrail version, but I won't stop making my own SW1500s from the Atlas MP15 and milled Kato SW1200 drives.
-
Um... there is a surface mount LED on the decoder. That is the little white thing where the LED would be. There also appears to be solder pads for a backup (cab) light on the right hand side of the decoder.
I agree with Daniel, it appears the amber object near the front center of the decoder is a LED for the front headlight.
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Model%20Railroad%20Photos/DZ126M2_zps23965cb6.jpg)
-
Ok I am perplexed now. If the two SW1500's that I saw at the hobby store without working headlights just need the LED aimed differently, how does this drop in decoder from digitrax work with its headlight. The boards are roughly the same size and sit in the same place. I would assume the LED's are in the same place on both boards. So if the MTL LED needs to be modified, will the Digitrax LED need to be modified as well?
As far as the hood width, it is noticeable. The proportions are just a little off on the engine. Most people probably wouldn't think much of it but some would. I noticed it but then again, I run these things for a living.
Scott Lupia
-
Got a link? I couldn't find the picture.
Hmm... insert weakest
link joke here...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
Um would that be "missing " link....... :facepalm:
-
Does anyone know if Dixitrax decoders play nice with ESU and NCE systems? I remember hearing that there were some issues.
You might be thinking of the now ancient early run of DZ121. There was a problem with these not working right with Lenz and CVP EasyDCC. Digitrax offered a decoder exchange and later runs had no problems. That brings me to a gripe about Digitrax, but that is a story for another thread.
-BTW, there already is a lengthy TRW thread about this model (with plenty of pre-production photos and bashing too).
-
Um would that be "missing " link....... :facepalm:
Uhm, Dee isn't too bright.
Hmm... I heard that...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
I agree with Daniel, it appears the amber object near the front center of the decoder is a LED for the front headlight.
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Model%20Railroad%20Photos/DZ126M2_zps23965cb6.jpg)
Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't sure and it seemed odd.
Best wishes, Dave
-
Must refrain from saying something.
Must refrain from saying something.
Must refrain from saying something.
+1
-
Would like to get a Reading one but with no roller bearing trucks it's a no buy for me.
-
Back in our day, locomotive trucks were part of the project.
(http://www.iannaccone.org/wp-content/uploads/grumpy_old_men.jpg)
But back in our day, we waited until the product was in hand or in a store to see before making blanket criticisms.
Maybe it will have working headlights. Maybe it won't.
Last I checked, I am a few scale inches too wide myself. :scared:
-
Hahaha
This thread is killing me.
-
But back in our day, we waited until the product was in hand or in a store to see before making blanket criticisms.
Um, the product was in hand which is how I came across the headlight issue. Is asking questions considered criticism?
The headlight issue is a very real issue for the hobby shop owner since he has to sell these to people who will care.
Scott Lupia
-
It's easy to see which side of the aisle some people reside. :trollface:
-
(http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz205/unobrandon/South-Park-rabble-rabble-rabble.jpg)
-
Photos of actual model anyone?
Ted (Teditor) Freeman
From the Land Down Under.
-
Is the tiny component in the front of the Digitrax board a yellow surface mount LED?
It looks like it - so it would appear as if that may not be an issue.
- Lou
-
Is the tiny component in the front of the Digitrax board a yellow surface mount LED?
It looks like it - so it would appear as if that may not be an issue.
- Lou
I thought it was a magical diet pill that made the engine 6" thinner with DCC installed.
Ohh wait..
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Model%20Railroad%20Photos/DZ126M2_zps23965cb6.jpg).
:) ~Ian
-
Great - I thought so....
-
Um... there is a surface mount LED on the decoder. That is the little white thing where the LED would be. There also appears to be solder pads for a backup (cab) light on the right hand side of the decoder.
I see three different pads on this board but nowhere on the Digtrax site do they say anything about these. :x
Jon
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Model%20Railroad%20Photos/DZ126M2_zps23965cb6.jpg)
-
Photos of actual model anyone?
Yes, I would also like to see a photo of a production model!
-
Yes, I would also like to see a photo of a production model!
Apparently criticism of Micro-Trains products is now prohibited on this forum. I'll assume that includes photos of their products... :trollface: :trollface: :trollface:
-
The real problem is the vast amount of misinformation in this thread.
DFF
-
The real problem is the vast amount of misinformation in this thread.
DFF
What mis-information... ? (and I'll take a deletion on stating the facts)
---- Information (What it's based on)
--The Shell is 6" too wide (MT)
-- Both engines have wide pilot stripes (MT)
-- NS 2302 frame stripes are wrong. (Protophoto)
-- The DCC Decoder has an LED (Decoderphoto)
-- The LED Stock light board on some models is misaligned. (MT)
-- The engine does not have a cab LED. (MT)
-- The engine is built on the Lifelike SW1200 frame. (MT)
-- The Trucks should have Roller bearings (Protophoto/MT)
Am I missing something? Outside of the humor (sometimes adult humor) and constructive criticism that this group is known for..
Please don't turn this place into the Atlas Forum!..
~Ian
-
Please don't turn this place into the Atlas Forum!..
~Ian
LOL! You should have thought about this couple of years ago when TRW let bunch of former A-board members on board. :trollface:
-
MTL page about the headlight:
http://www.micro-trains.com/NSLocoLightRepair.php
-
Yes, I would also like to see a photo of a production model!
http://www.micro-trains.com/nr-1406_NSlocos.php (http://www.micro-trains.com/nr-1406_NSlocos.php)
Prototype:
http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=47706 (http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=47706)
-
LOL! You should have thought about this couple of years ago when TRW let bunch of former A-board members on board. :trollface:
As Tom once said to a former A-Border...: "Who ever said this was a family forum....?"
:ashat:
~Ian
-
FWIW.. I think 2 photos (side view and top down view) of the MT SW1500 nose to nose with an Atlas MP-15 from about 1' away would be worth 1000 forum posts.
I estimate..
75% will realize all the fuss is over very hard to notice details..
25% will storm off in a huff and proclaim the model is crap..
(I'm guessing I'll be part of the 75%)
~Ian
-
I estimate..
75% will realize all the fuss is over very hard to notice details..
25% will storm off in a huff and proclaim the model is crap..
~Ian
I bet those numbers would have been different before the A-board migration......One of the reasons I joined this forum was the higher standard I seemed to get a sense of,..We have some really great model-makers here, some of the finest in N-scale...If good enough is OK with any of you, fine by me,,,,,but I WANT to know what to look for on a particular model, right or wrong. I WANT correct models, and go to some great lengths to get or make them...as do many others here.... ...if MT still wants to use a wonky ruler in this day and age, so be it.....I don't buy their older cars due to this, and probably won't pick up one of these either.....but that's my choice, based on what I'm looking for out of my "toy" trains....I certainly don't dislike MT, I think they've done great things for N scale....I just think every time we get a close-but-not-quite model, that means we won't get a correct one for a LONG time.....hood width in particular seems to still be an issue with some companies, much to my amazement..considering there is this other scale, called Z, which is even smaller...and uses smaller motors... :?
-
I bet those numbers would have been different before the A-board migration......One of the reasons I joined this forum was the higher standard I seemed to get a sense of,..
As an ex-A-board member I joined TRW after A-board was shot down. I also think I'm a decent modeler. So, if I say that this model is crappy, will it make you feel better? :facepalm:
My honest opinion about this model is that by cutting corners, MT has not come up with a winner. I see this in all the examples shown so far. I'm not planning on buying this model (I have no need for it), but if I did, I wold probably be more vocal.
As far as the idealistic standards of perfection in the TRW go, I think that there is still plenty of griping taking place here about inaccuracies, or about inferior mechanical designs. Just look through the message history. And it is all fairly recent (after A-board migration). So cheer up, the TRW standards are still quite high. :)
-
As an ex-A-board member I joined TRW after A-board was shot down. I also think I'm a decent modeler. So, if I say that this model is crappy, will it make you feel better? :facepalm:
Actually, yes, a little... :D
I don't mean that things have gone downhill around here, I think the A-board mixed in pretty well actually!!!..And I think those of us who are unimpressed with this model have been fairly well behaved!...I just want correct models, preferably off the shelf...but wishes are just that....
-
What I don't understand is that there was ton of bitching because there was no sw1500 offered. MT decided to come out with one. Yes there are some compromises. Everything I have seen from MT is above board about these compromises. So take it for what is is worth. Buy it or don't. I have a hard time believing that MT just half a$$ed it and gave their best guess and hoped it was close enough. You have two schools of thought. They mailed it in and have all kind of inaccuracies and are charging a premium and making a killing. Or that they made the sacrifices needed to keep the price in line with where they need to be sell enough units to make the project worth while. I highly doubt it is the prior. I am looking at a yard stick across the room and thinking to myself, six inches really.......
-
... Okay lets try this.. .
1: 25% will realize all the fuss is over very hard to notice details and be satisfied...
2: 50% will realize all the fuss is over very hard to notice details, B*tch about it.. but buy it anyways because it's the closest we've got..
3: 25% will storm off in a huff and proclaim the model is crap (and not buy it)..
(With that.. I'd say I'm in the 50%.. but I'd jump to the satisfied group if they come through with the promise of body mounted handrails and Flexcoil trucks..)
-- I'll bet SP modelers will do if they do the SP light package.
Truth is.. Many of us have Kato SD40s, SD45s, C30-7s, Atlas/Kato GP30s and GP35s (all too wide).. You notice it.. but it doesn't keep you awake at night...
IMO.. at the end of the day, the MT SW1500 fills a LARGE Void, with a model that is much closer than previous attempts. The idea that it's a large void being filled leads people to review the model with great scrutiny, hopeing that it's great model.. and critical on any issues.. (Same goes with the IM SD40-2).
I think they (MT) are doing the best they can with the resources they have (and the price point they are shooting for) on the execution of the physical model itself.. As far as the first paint scheme, definitely some inexcusable corners cut..
On the bright side... Looks like the revised artwork on the UP scheme is pretty close..
-- Lets hope they keep that up for Conrail and BN..
--- And while we're on the subject of artwork.. the number font on the Reading unit in Bryan's picture looked a lot more like Penn Centrals number font than Reading's Number font.... So lets push for that adjustment...
As far as TRW vs Atlas... I'd hate to see this place moderated to the point of people being silenced/removed for a heated debate over a model.. and I don't want "Foobie" to be automatically changed to "Model with detail inaccuracies.. " or whatever the heck they did..
FoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobieFoobie
:)
~Ian
-
What I don't understand is that there was ton of bitching because there was no sw1500 offered. MT decided to come out with one. Yes there are some compromises. Everything I have seen from MT is above board about these compromises. So take it for what is is worth. Buy it or don't. I have a hard time believing that MT just half a$$ed it and gave their best guess and hoped it was close enough. You have two schools of thought. They mailed it in and have all kind of inaccuracies and are charging a premium and making a killing. Or that they made the sacrifices needed to keep the price in line with where they need to be sell enough units to make the project worth while. I highly doubt it is the prior. I am looking at a yard stick across the room and thinking to myself, six inches really.......
Bitching will happen no matter how accurate the model is. This is how forums (full of excellent and nitpicky modelers) work. :) Even if the model is 100% accurate for one road, another model will bitch that the version painted for his railroad is not 100% accurate. But in this case more serious compromises have been made (not just the wide hood). To me this indicates that MT has lowered their standard. After all, I thought that this was supposed to be a brand new model (not some professional "kit-bash" of parts from other models). But as always, some modelers will be ecstatic, while others will be ticked off. Then the collectors will buy their share. Especially if it is decorated for some special run made by NSC NSE. I know, I'm a member. After all, it is made by MT. ;)
Putting other inaccuracies aside, I'm puzzled by the light board/decoder thing. If the 3mm LED on the light board has to be bent up about 30 degrees to illuminate the headlight, how will the front-facing tiny LED on the Digitrax decoder illuminate the said headlight? You can't bend the LED or the circuit board. :facepalm:
HeY, but at least they are using brass worms! Happy days are here again! :D
(http://www.micro-trains.com/Cuts/NSRepair-instr.jpg)
-
Fact-based criticism is more than welcome here; it always has been and always will be. It's also fine to express your opinions about a model. The thing that often poisons MTL threads here is the implicit or explicit lack of respect for other people's opinions, or the integrity of MTL's employees. If you treat the other camps with respect while making your points, everything will be fine; if you don't, we shut it down.
-
First of all, there is no manufacturer I have more respect for than MTL - if it wasn't for them, there probably wouldn't even be a serious N-scale today.
The SW1500 will be a fine runner and I am sure a good seller. My only disappointment is that it's 90% to perfect - so why not go the rest of the way?
Probably because it's not deemed necessary to be a success. A few idiots like me complaining about the trucks or the frame stripes is not going to change anything. 99% of prospective buyers have never heard of Railwire.
In my view, this is all about a conversation regarding what is - and what could be - and nothing more.
-
Putting other inaccuracies aside, I'm puzzled by the light board/decoder thing. If the 3mm LED on the light board has to be bent up about 30 degrees to illuminate the headlight, how will the front-facing tiny LED on the Digitrax decoder illuminate the said headlight? You can't bend the LED or the circuit board. :facepalm:
Pete, I was thinking the very same thing. :|
Jon
-
In my view, this is all about a conversation regarding what is - and what could be - and nothing more.
Well said. I think if most folks had this mindset about these discussions there would be much less back seat moderating. Like I always say...it's a discussion forum... ;)
-
First of all, there is no manufacturer I have more respect for than MTL - if it wasn't for them, there probably wouldn't even be a serious N-scale today.
The SW1500 will be a fine runner and I am sure a good seller. My only disappointment is that it's 90% to perfect - so why not go the rest of the way?
Probably because it's not deemed necessary to be a success. A few idiots like me complaining about the trucks or the frame stripes is not going to change anything. 99% of prospective buyers have never heard of Railwire.
In my view, this is all about a conversation regarding what is - and what could be - and nothing more.
Well Jimmy Page and Robert Plant may disagree with the ACCURACY of the last statement :trollface: :D 8) But seriously I like a lot of MTL's stuff except the compressed stuff! I will probably get some of these in B&O and Chessie.
-
What I truly would like to know is, what was the reason given for the pilot stripes not being correct? This is not a bash of MTL products, 80% of my rolling stock is MTL cars. In my opinion MTL always raises the bar when it comes to the printing on their rolling stock. That is why I was shocked to see the pilot striping incorrect on the NS locomotives, when I've seen the correct striping applied to other manufacture locomotives.
AAR switcher trucks will work just find for me, I'm just wondering if MTL will be selling undecorated SW1500?
Unless they are planing a few of the following:
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/URR_02_zpsdb717fb9.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW1500-1571.jpg)
If that is the case, then I'll just put my airbrush and decals away now :D
-
The SW1500 will be a fine runner and I am sure a good seller. My only disappointment is that it's 90% to perfect - so why not go the rest of the way?
I'm betting it's cost. Joe from Micro-Trains already said the pilot stripes couldn't be made thinner due to technical reasons - no way to hold the SMALL pilot while it's pad printed, as I recall. (I did a search and couldn't find the original comment)
And adding a light to the cab? How much extra engineering and labor would be required? Lots, I'm guessing.
As for the hood being 6 scale inches too wide... is that so an N scale motor could fit? I really wouldn't want an N scale model to have a Z scale motor in it. I'm thinking, very little pulling power. What if the z scale motor could haul only 2 or 3 cars? Riots in the streets!
Hmm... I'd better bring
some popcorn then...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Pete, I was thinking the very same thing. :|
Jon
From my experience, the round LED's tend to be directional emitting most of their light in a forward direction, while the square LED's emit a brighter light in a wider pattern.
-
As for the hood being 6 scale inches too wide... is that so an N scale motor could fit? I really wouldn't want an N scale model to have a Z scale motor in it. I'm thinking, very little pulling power. What if the z scale motor could haul only 2 or 3 cars? Riots in the streets!
Not quite. The motor is a standard N scale motor which is narrow enough for scale width hood. But the way LifeLike model was designed, there is a plastic motor cradle which extends outside of the motor frame. This is a legacy of the original design. There are many N scale locos which are designed not to use this type of a cradle with thus type of a motor. I have shown multiple examples (from Spookshow's site) in an earlier post in this thread. If MT designed their chassis from scratch (even using the same motor with a new cradle), the hood could have been made narrower. Yes I know, the cost would have been higher.
-
From my experience, the round LED's tend to be directional emitting most of their light in a forward direction, while the square LED's emit a brighter light in a wider pattern.
Ok, but it is not the best design. The father away the "light pipe" or the headlight itself is so far away (and an an angle) from the light source is, the dimmer the headlight will be.
-
Um, the product was in hand which is how I came across the headlight issue. Is asking questions considered criticism?
The headlight issue is a very real issue for the hobby shop owner since he has to sell these to people who will care.
Scott Lupia
I was just asking, not meaning to imply anything. Glad someone has been able to see one in person, which I won't be able to do unless Caboose Hobbies has a few left sitting next week when I am in Denver.
The headlight thing is puzzling, but I bet all the "deficiencies" being pointed out relate to the cost to produce. MT after all, had to be able to sell these to the masses, most of whom probably are easier to please than some of TRW more observant modelers.
If you want an SW1500 this is probably your chance to buy one to run in our oversized rails in highly compressed scenes. It's about how much compromise you want to tolerate.
-
The biggest fault I find with it are those crap wipers carried over from the LL SW9. Really? We couldn't do something different there? I can live with the wide hood and the lack of cab rear lights, but those wipers have always been a problem and though I know the fix, at this price I expect something to be right. I will probably buy one, albeit begrudgingly.
-
How did MTL get those chassis of a loco that it seems Walther's has giving up on?
-
How did MTL get those chassis of a loco that it seems Walther's has giving up on?
Walthers just recently came out with another run of SW1200s. M.B. Klein still has some:
http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/N-Scale-SW9-1200-Locomotives-s/3401.htm
Hmm... I wonder if I
could buy a few using
termites instead of cash...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Walthers just recently came out with another run of SW1200s. M.B. Klein still has some:
I wonder if that run was related to the MT release of SW1500....
-
Those of you that are talking about the different kinds of peeps here on TRW, I think you left off one category.
The folks who know the shortcomings of a loco and then show everybody how to improve it.
Several folks here have done a wonderful job of this. It is one of the things I especially like about discussion boards.
-
I wonder if that run was related to the MT release of SW1500....
No.. But I believe Walther's Proclamation that the SW1200 was "DCC Friendly" was related to the SW1500 development (Before the SW1500 was announced...) and we all laughed..!!.. :trollface:
-
I believe, in my mind that MT weighed internally, what was important to some and not to others with respect to potential sales and rolled the dice.
It's no secret that this was a much desired model and they sought to strike while the iron was hot but IMO failed to "go all the way"
I think if MT had designed new truck side frames with roller bearings, engineered more reliable electrical contacts, lit headlights at both ends and given the illusion of the prototype's sill height above the trucks in addition to closer prototype wheel diameters, it would be receiving accolades rather than having stones cast at it.
I think they could have accomplished so much more than they have and/or will with this model but instead, have stepped on their Dicks, so to speak.
-
They got the writing on the cab in the wrong place on the prototype, it should be under the line like the model, can't NS get anything right?
-
Those of you that are talking about the different kinds of peeps here on TRW, I think you left off one category.
The folks who know the shortcomings of a loco and then show everybody how to improve it.
Excellent point. While I have voiced my concern over the shortcomings of this model I have been racking my brain trying to figure out how to make a decent model out of it. I did it with the Intermountain SD45-2's and have done more with less in the past. I am just not sure to model my way out of the hood width issue. It is noticeable to me. This engine doesn't fit my modeling era but I got my hands on one just because I wanted to see where I could take it. Challenges are fun and without them we never improve our skills.
Scott Lupia
-
So what was the history of the Walther's model? I remember they were going to have all sorts of improvements (or at least they were announced that way) and it never happened. Were they canceled or were they just made exactly like the old ones? New jewel case :trollface: I can't remember.
Guess they got brass worms in 2012: http://www.spookshow.net/llsw.html
-
I'm surprised the authenticity of the couplers hasn't been questioned!
-
can't NS get anything right?
Well it seems they can ... 13%+ dividend growth rate in the last 3 years. Now where should they put that paint ?
-
I'm probably still going to get a pair, but if the scouting reports are all right, I'm set to be pretty disappointed.
I don't care what the "realities" are. I want a good product, not a half assed 1980s era attempt.
MTL has been a leader in the past: the first reliable trucks and couplers, the first really good freight cars.
But this is does not sound like the product of a leader and innovator. It sounds like a GM product from the 80s and 90s: value engineered, and full of problems that "nobody will care about".
Hood width is not a joke. Sure, I've got a few Kato units that have a similar problem, but... they were also all tooled back in the 1980s and 90s. I thought we, as a scale, have moved on from that. It's a very noticeable thing on an engine like this, especially if you mix them in with the scale width hooded Atlas MP15s. I don't know, maybe it won't be so bad when I see it, but I'm pretty sure it's gonna bug me. It just strikes me as a negative outcome of a cut corner.
The trucks are another thing. Sure, people who have their engines pulling their popsicle and hersheys trains might not care, but I'm a prototype modeler, and I do care about the friction bearing vs roller bearing thing.
If these things were great, or even good, I was going to buy a slew of them. Modeling industrial Conrail in the 1980s, these were THE engine. But now? If they're as mediocre as they seem, I may get a token pair.
And then, the thing that MTL is usually really good at: decoration. The stripes on the pilot of the NS model look nothing like the real ones. Other than "they are stripes". The pitch is off, the width is off, they're just completely wrong. It'd be almost better to have just made the pilot white, so people could at least just use a decal to fix it. Again, not a huge problem, but another one that adds up to move these from great to mediocre.
I remember when MTL used to call themselves the "Cadillac of N Scale". Well, that analogy still seems to be holding true... with value engineered products that underwhelm the consumer and are only loved by people with sentimental attachments.
I really hope MTL figures this out and rights their course, because, unlike the domestic auto industry that was large enough to be a national issue if it collapsed, if MTL falls apart, there will be no bailout, and we, as modelers, will be worse off for it.
-
They got the writing on the cab in the wrong place on the prototype, it should be under the line like the model, can't NS get anything right?
Between these hard to model high hoods, headlights in the wrong place and insistence on ordering 1 of a kind locomotives, I really think NS should be ashamed of itself....
-
So is it a correct assumption to say that the MTL SW1500 mech will work as a replacement for an LL SW1200 mech? So, in other words putting my LL shell onto the MTL mech will work? If so I plan to pick one up out of the bargain bin at some point.
For those disappointed with the MTL offerering, I would suggest patience. This is a locomotive that WILL be done by someone else, and probably soon. I have no insider info....just my gut feeling derived from several pretty solid facts. No need to get all bent out of shape about this one, as frustrating as it is. 8)
-
Didn't Joe say MTL was going to tool the right sideframes in the last thread that was locked?
-
Not sure about roller bearing versus friction bearing.
But I think he did assure us that Flexcoil would eventually be done. (and that is what I need since every last SW1500 that CSX inherited from multiple sources had flexcoil trucks).
If my fuzzy gray matter is working.
-
http://www.micro-trains.com/nr-1406_NSlocos.php (http://www.micro-trains.com/nr-1406_NSlocos.php)
Prototype:
http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=47706 (http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=47706)
I have seen these and umpteen proto photos, what I meant was a photo of one bought from a retailer.
-
Here is a thought, with the few number of engines made by MT I wonder if some of these issues are being forced down on them by the manufacturer. I know from past first hand experience that when a company comes in that is not a large player we pretty much told them what we were willing to do because the economy of scale was too small to make it worth it. No hard feelings, just here it is and if works great, if not we see you at the next trade show.
-
SO against my better judgement :facepalm: I'll wade in and say MTL may not have done so bad with respect to the KCS loco. While their page lists the road numbers as TBD (http://www.micro-trains.com/cs-N_1501_kcs.php (http://www.micro-trains.com/cs-N_1501_kcs.php)) the 4330 is a real KCS SW1500 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=151072 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=151072)). So if they choose taht one they get a point from me. And looking at a Protophoto from approximately the same angle (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=136863 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=136863)) it also appears the only initial change I'll need is the horn (both type and placement). Again a point from me. I don't like how the ride height looks in the MTL drawing, but I put in for one of the UP ones due out later this month to strip and paint white, so i'll have a first hand before I do the Grey Ghost.
And as Ron pointed out, if we all do a few threads on improving this one, we may find the results fairly rewarding.
-
MTL now shows the KCS road #s as 4330 and 4361 and coming in January 2015.
And a photo of the two together:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=269839
Yes, I am getting both! Thank you MTL.
-
While we are busy offering advice to Micro Trains....I have reserved a pair of READING SW1500s.
Thank you Micro Trains. :)
Best,
8) Chris
(http://i763.photobucket.com/albums/xx274/cjjd6901/N%20Scale%20images/2012aug007.jpg) (http://s763.photobucket.com/user/cjjd6901/media/N%20Scale%20images/2012aug007.jpg.html)
-
Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?
Cheers,
-Mark
-
Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?
Cheers,
-Mark
+100000000 :D
Mike
-
Mark, I was thinking about what you said about the hood with and the fact that it is only about 1/27" too wide. I was in agreement with you that that seems insignificant. When I looked at in context and realized the fact that the width of the hood is about a 1/2" overall, that 1/27" extra is pretty big. If my brain were better put together I could figure out the percent of overage that this 1/27" is on the overall width of the hood. I thought about it for a second and the only image in my brain was the TV screen during a game of Pong on the old Atari system. If this were a larger engine the 1/27" would be less noticeable. Like I said a few pages back, I look at the model and I see the extra width but that is only because I spent time with them at work. Most people might not. I can fix the other issues (paint, trucks, lights... etc.) but I can't fix the hood width.
Scott Lupia
-
I'm probably still going to get a pair
:facepalm: ummm, you might want to re-phrase that.... :facepalm:
is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
Maybe for extreme closeup pics. But certainly not when viewing from the side, or from any kind of working distance (even with magnifiers). OTOH things like oversized couplers and wheel flanges will stand out like dog balls even from a distance, since you have a relative visual reference point.
(Disclaimer: That's NOT a dis of MT or this model! Most models in every scale have that!)
Ed
-
Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?
Cheers,
-Mark
With the distance most people view their trains from I would have to agree. How about some photos with the mixed units showing a glaring difference. Funny thing is how many people actually routinely view the prototypes from the same perspective as their models.
-
I could live with the hood width and the trucks....
Hopefully the Conrail units will be correctly decorated, although there is plenty of room for similar mistakes there as well.
My issue is that SW1500's look like they are on tippy-toes - they sit way higher than other switchers.
It's their MOST distinguishing spotting feature to me, and MTL blew it - entirely to save $$$ and use an
existing mechanism.
If Kato or Exactrail did this, egads, the fury would be heard everywhere.
Oh and I will probably get one anyway.
Unless the shade of blue is way off..... :facepalm:
However, it means nothing in the overall scheme of things. 95% of customers at our LHS will pick up a nice little black locomotive to match their train, and could not care less about the distance between the frame and the trucks.
-
Color might make a difference too.
So far we have undecorated (grey) and black. Get this painted in a bright red then let's see how noticeable it is.
I will probably get one when either the hood handrail version comes out or if/when the flexi-coil trucks come to be. As for the roller bearings, I think we're looking at a pretty easy modification, file flat add RB caps (is there more?). Maybe someone will make a casting.
Jason
-
My issue is that SW1500's look like they are on tippy-toes - they sit way higher than other switchers.
It's their MOST distinguishing spotting feature to me, and MTL blew it - entirely to save $$$ and use an
existing mechanism.
But it can be done, there is even a drive out there which would have the tippy-toes height. http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70392 (http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70392) Well done Daniel.
Jane
-
My issue is that SW1500's look like they are on tippy-toes - they sit way higher than other switchers.
It's their MOST distinguishing spotting feature to me, and MTL blew it - entirely to save $$$ and use an existing mechanism.
My issue also. I probably will not buy one now but wait for the Flexicoil version to see if there is any improvement in this area. Who would have thought we would complain about a loco sitting too low!!
-
Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?
Cheers,
-Mark
To put it in perspective place the Con Cor MP15 next to the Atlas MP15. Yep, it's very noticeable
-
My issue is that SW1500's look like they are on tippy-toes - they sit way higher than other switchers.
It's their MOST distinguishing spotting feature to me, and MTL blew it - entirely to save $$$ and use an
existing mechanism.
Looking at this photo of the loco, I don't see where it's sitting too high:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Norfolk-Southern-SW1500-2202-Micro-Trains-MTL-986-00-021-N-Scale-New-Release-/310988027909?pt=Model_RR_Trains&hash=item486854b805#ht_605wt_0
Just click on the image for a larger view.
Hmm... all the chairs in my
treehouse are too high...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Looking at this photo of the loco, I don't see where it's sitting too high
Hey Dee Rayle tell your boss the problem is the model sits too low.
Jane
-
Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).
I don't have any stake in this model, but I really think this is a matter of the "eye of the beholder".
I've had people tell me repeatedly what I can and can't see (rail height, flange size, hood width, color, etc), and I've concluded that some people either can't perceive it or don't care, while others to varying degrees can perceive the size differences and it matters (again, to varying degrees).
This hobby is full of compromises, some people compromise more than others. There is room in the hobby for all of us!
Mark
-
But it can be done, there is even a drive out there which would have the tippy-toes height. http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70392 (http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=70392) Well done Daniel.
Jane
but should you have to :?
-
but should you have to :?
John, definitely not, no. I am just saying there is already a mechanism out there which is tippy-toes high and more accurate than the LL one. And if using the LL mechanism, instead of engineering a new one, has saved MTL some $$$, I am just wondering why not chose the right one ?
Jane
-
Hey Dee Rayle tell your boss the problem is the model sits too low.
Jane
Oh... you know, I've been reading some things wrong lately. Oops, just sneezed out another chunk of brains.
Hmm... and it only gets
worse...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Guys, let's slow the criticism until someone can post photos of the production model (not the MTL-provided one). Joe was on here a month back and showed us photos of a version with the corrected ride height. I bet that the photo MTL used was just an old, pre-preproduction model.
Edit: This is Joe's later photo showing the corrected ride height:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2aU5iqea1S0/Uy3NZdsFB8I/AAAAAAAAATE/ltFuFIOJjKo/s1600/sw1500.jpg)
-
Guys, let's slow the criticism
LOL, good luck with all that. Last time I checked, this was Railwire -> :ashat:
Cheers,
-Mark ;)
-
On a positive note, you just can't put a price on this kind of advertisement. 19 pages of chatter and going.
Scott Lupia
-
Guys, let's slow the criticism until someone can post photos of the production model (not the MTL-provided one). Joe was on here a month back and showed us photos of a version with the corrected ride height. I bet that the photo MTL used was just an old, pre-preproduction model.
Edit: This is Joe's later photo showing the corrected ride height:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2aU5iqea1S0/Uy3NZdsFB8I/AAAAAAAAATE/ltFuFIOJjKo/s1600/sw1500.jpg)
Yes, and if you look closely you can see the frame mechanism poking out below the shell, especially the part that fits under the battery boxes in the rear. Not a viable solution in my book.
-
Yes, and if you look closely you can see the frame mechanism poking out below the shell, especially the part that fits under the battery boxes in the rear. Not a viable solution in my book.
Meh, just paint the bare metal frame black and the problem is solved! :trollface:
-
Joe was on here a month back and showed us photos of a version with the corrected ride height.
You could be right, take a closer look at the pictures on fleebay, the rear pilot is touching the ground, the pilot is even lower down than the wheel flanges, the shell is sitting way too low on the mechanism. Makes sense and would explain why the LED has to be pushed upwards. <sarcasm>Some styrene stripes on top, or some duct tape on the side of the mechanism would keep the shell at the right hight.</sarcasm>
Jane
-
Just needs some styrene C channel frame strips like the Lifelike Alcos needed.
-
Just needs some styrene C channel frame strips like the Lifelike Alcos needed.
The difference is that the C424 mech filled the shell.
-
Photo of the REAL THING - and it looks like the height WAS CORRECTED..... Why we are forced to dork around looking for these photos to prove/disprove a point is amazing to me, since 90% of this stupid argument could have been avoided if they had posted a picture of the damn thing on their website. Viral marketing???
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDgwWDY0MA==/z/Z2sAAOSwFTRTpK3h/$_57.JPG)
[From an Ebay COMPLETED Listing]
-
What I want to know is why doesn't a decent photo of this thing exist?
-
What I want to know is why doesn't a decent photo of this thing exist?
It's pretty obvious that the Masonic Bilderberg Trilateral Illuminati is behind this....
-
What I want to know is why doesn't a decent photo of this thing exist?
Looking at that video, it is wearing a totally wrong costume. There are also no visible couplers anywhere on the body. The color scheme is not bad, but not perfect. This Sasquatch must not be a genuine MT item. :D
-
Why we are forced to dork around looking for these photos to prove/disprove a point is amazing to me, since 90% of this stupid argument could have been avoided if they had posted a picture of the damn thing on their website.
What fun would that be?
-
Photo of the REAL THING - and it looks like the height WAS CORRECTED..... Why we are forced to dork around looking for these photos to prove/disprove a point is amazing to me, since 90% of this stupid argument could have been avoided if they had posted a picture of the damn thing on their website. Viral marketing???
.. Apparently nobody on this list model's NS so they don't have the model available for detail photos :trollface:
If the first release was Conrail.. Photos of every vent and door inside and out would be plastered all over the place here!!! :)
~Ian :D
-
Photo of the REAL THING - and it looks like the height WAS CORRECTED.....
EXCELLENT! Let's not forget that this is
(http://whiteriverandnorthern.net/images/banner-60a.jpg)
-
^ I beginning to think that sometimes that frame of mind is a negative conotation.
Overly critical on everything isn't good.
-
I can accept some inaccuracies depending on what they are, but riding to high and not doing research on basic details is ridiculous for something to be called a model it should have all the major details accurately placed and sized I know that a mfg cannot make all versions of a prototype that is unquestionably true, but pick the best version and do it right thats all! I feel any dimension that is off by say 3/64" or less is ok. But do not compress dimensions to accommodate an incorrect ride height or under frame length ( one size fits all!!) I bought a lot of MTL boxcars and gons thinking they were accurate and found later they were compressed and quite buying them and replaced them with better models as they came available, MTL has some very good models and can really do things right if they put the extra effort in. Why make locomotives and cars that have incorrect ride height :? I don't see why they choose to do that.
-
I can accept some inaccuracies depending on what they are, but riding to high and not doing research on basic details is ridiculous for something to be called a model it should have all the major details accurately placed and sized I know that a mfg cannot make all versions of a prototype that is unquestionably true, but pick the best version and do it right thats all! I feel any dimension that is off by say 3/64" or less is ok. But do not compress dimensions to accommodate an incorrect ride height or under frame length ( one size fits all!!) I bought a lot of MTL boxcars and gons thinking they were accurate and found later they were compressed and quite buying them and replaced them with better models as they came available, MTL has some very good models and can really do things right if they put the extra effort in. Why make locomotives and cars that have incorrect ride height :? I don't see why they choose to do that.
But it rides too LOW......not too high..
*edit...MAY sit too low, as we have yet to see an off the shelf model!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :facepalm:
-
Overly critical on everything isn't good.
While I somewhat agree, I also think that this is somewhat the personality of this forum. Some may not like, or feel comfortable with it, but I don't think it necessarily a *bad* thing. (unless/until it gets personal or over-the-top vicious toward a manufacturer)
The one angle where I think your statement is very valid is "boy who cries wolf" syndrome. At some point, the message gets lost or at least diluted if the same over-the-top blasting of the same problem with the same manufacturer gets beat to death and then beat some more. This mostly happens with MTL since they have such a high volume of products, and also tend to have what most on this forum would consider "an agenda that doesn't optimize us as customers". :P
A good example is the squashed boxcar tooling....been that way for a looong time. Seems like newer tooling isn't following suit, but it is painful to see nice schemes released on those boxcars and yet they're really almost an automatic NO for most of us. (admittedly I've bought a few of the weathered cars.) So continuing to beat that dead horse just dilutes the overall message, methinks.
Likewise, it's obvious that the MTL SW1500 is NOT an innovative model railroad product. I think that's been obvious for some time, and I *get it* that we keep hoping beyond hope that something magical would happen when the product hit the streets. That didn't happen, so I agree with some of the others....let's move on and start figuring out how to improve it. 8)
-
wait... now the problem is that we don't have a problem.... :facepalm:
I think Lou answered the question, maybe his photo of bigfoot SW1500 wasn't clear, but I think he knows what he is looking at. (Yes Ride height is high as per proto...)
-
wait... now the problem is that we don't have a problem.... :facepalm:
I think Lou answered the question, maybe his photo of bigfoot SW1500 wasn't clear, but I think he knows what he is looking at. (Yes Ride height is high as per proto...)
Exactly... and kudos to MTL for fixing this - as they said they would. I think it's odd they didn't rush out photos of the corrected model to end this debate - although I know there are other problems that people have brought up. This was the big one for me, the signature look of the loco and I am anxious to see one up close.
-
Likewise, it's obvious that the MTL SW1500 is NOT an innovative model railroad product.
For innovative the Atlas S2 may end up being the one.
-
Exactly... and kudos to MTL for fixing this - as they said they would. I think it's odd they didn't rush out photos of the corrected model to end this debate - although I know there are other problems that people have brought up. This was the big one for me, the signature look of the loco and I am anxious to see one up close.
Yes, excellent! I may have to re-think my no purchase now statement, especially since they are coming out with a Groom Lake Belt Line version (#51 of course)! 8)
-
The one angle where I think your statement is very valid is "boy who cries wolf" syndrome. At some point, the message gets lost or at least diluted if the same over-the-top blasting of the same problem with the same manufacturer gets beat to death and then beat some more. This mostly happens with MTL since they have such a high volume of products, and also tend to have what most on this forum would consider "an agenda that doesn't optimize us as customers". :P
Which is really what I'm referring too. This particular thread has had so many "wolf" moments it's kind stirred into a bash thread without much foundation. There was three or more pages of complaints about the fuel tank being completely innaccurate, when Joe clearly indicated weeks earlier with a picture that the correct fuel would be on the model. I think this group gets a little to quick with trigger finger on prototype fidelity innaccuracies, and to then state "well it's Railwire, it should be expected" is a bad course of action.
-
And back to the model!
-
I can accept some inaccuracies depending on what they are, but riding to(o) high
Kiz, looks like someone else besides you hasn't been paying attention. :D
-
Kiz, looks like someone else besides you hasn't been paying attention. :D
Whew! I thought I had to suffer alone.
Hmm... Kiz, could you
suffer to make me a
loan...?
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
Ride height was always the same...we didn't change anything and when it was first brought up I posted and end to end photo of ours and the SW 1200 stock. Interesting how these conversations morph. (not picking on ljudice) :D
Joe
Exactly... and kudos to MTL for fixing this - as they said they would. I think it's odd they didn't rush out photos of the corrected model to end this debate - although I know there are other problems that people have brought up. This was the big one for me, the signature look of the loco and I am anxious to see one up close.
-
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/32057562.jpg)
-
Ride height was always the same... Interesting how these conversations morph.
Unfortunately the pictures on your website as well as the pictures on ebay all show a shell which is sitting way too low on the mechanism. How did that happen ? Why is there no clear picture from the manufacturer, who I assume would like to sell many of this model, available on your website ? A clear picture would have eliminated all most of the conversations.
Jane
-
Yes, and if you look closely you can see the frame mechanism poking out below the shell, especially the part that fits under the battery boxes in the rear. Not a viable solution in my book.
This is hardly an issue... at least when compared to those extended electrical pickup tabs...
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDgwWDY0MA==/z/Z2sAAOSwFTRTpK3h/$_57.JPG)
Unfortunately the pictures on your website as well as the pictures on ebay all show a shell which is sitting way too low on the mechanism. How did that happen ? Why is there no clear picture from the manufacturer, who I assume would like to sell many of this model, available on your website ? A clear picture would have eliminated all most of the conversations.
This.
-
Ride height was always the same...we didn't change anything and when it was first brought up I posted and end to end photo of ours and the SW 1200 stock. Interesting how these conversations morph. (not picking on ljudice) :D
Joe
Joe, I have a question about that picture. It would appear that the mechanism is not completely seated into the shell in that picture. You can clearly see the metal protrusions that fill the battery boxes on the SW9 sticking out below the shell on the SW1500. Is the shell manufactured to fit in that manner?
-
I had no idea I was such a prophet years ago.
(http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/500/Nbearden_Cover.JPG)
:tommann:
-
This is hardly an issue... at least when compared to those extended electrical pickup tabs...
This.
The Atlas C40-8W also has prominent pickup leafs, though this is certainly more visible. I won't mind as long as the tabs are better designed than the ones on the LL shell.
Joe, lets lighten the mood... announce a 5 bay PD hopper!
-
The Atlas C40-8W also has prominent pickup leafs, though this is certainly more visible. I won't mind as long as the tabs are better designed than the ones on the LL shell.
Joe, lets lighten the mood... announce a 5 bay PD hopper!
If you look at the pictures on the MT website, they appear to be secured(?) to the sill in the same manner as the SW9, that is to say deformed plastic.
-
Who actually has these in stock besides the seller on Ebay? There is a seller advertising for $79.75 buy it now + $5.25 shipping. Is that price a little lower than anticipated?
-
Ride height was always the same...we didn't change anything and when it was first brought up I posted and end to end photo of ours and the SW 1200 stock. Interesting how these conversations morph. (not picking on ljudice) :D
Joe
Now I'm confused?! You mean this:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vTYNSgcsAYM/Uxc-Z9MxebI/AAAAAAAAASc/70X1DsJOSuU/s1600/SW1500.jpg)
and this:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2aU5iqea1S0/Uy3NZdsFB8I/AAAAAAAAATE/ltFuFIOJjKo/s1600/sw1500.jpg)
are the same?
-
Now I'm confused?! You mean this:
and this:
are the same?
They look like they're on different chassis. The fuel tanks are different, the bottom photo having the correct chassis.
Hmm... it's like telling
the difference between
different species of
termites...
(http://bayouline.com/o2.gif)
-
(http://memes.onlinememegenerator.com/memes/Willywonka/9353b35ba7371e1/Willywonka-meme-9353b35ba7371e1.jpg)
-
Looking at that video, it is wearing a totally wrong costume. There are also no visible couplers anywhere on the body. The color scheme is not bad, but not perfect. This Sasquatch must not be a genuine MT item. :D
Pfftt... Looks like the model was painted in a room full of shedding cats..
Waiting to see one in person myself. And the new Digitrax decoder is not bad either.
-
So, this thing has been out for how long, and we STILL don't have a pic?...Did ANYBODY on this forum buy one?..I remember reading someone was going to share a pic....???? :?...last friday... :facepalm:
Is this an elaborate MR April Fools joke? :P :ashat:
-
So, this thing has been out for how long, and we STILL don't have a pic?...Did ANYBODY on this forum buy one?..I remember reading someone was going to share a pic....???? :?...last friday... :facepalm:
Is this an elaborate MR April Fools joke? :P :ashat:
Either nobody following this thread models NS, or they own the model but don't know how to post photos to the forum. :D
-
Who actually has these in stock besides the seller on Ebay? There is a seller advertising for $79.75 buy it now + $5.25 shipping. Is that price a little lower than anticipated?
Probably most sent them back... I got this from BLW today
Well, we had 'em ... but have sent them all back to Micro-Trains. Though equipped with operating headlights -- the lights were not getting through. Micro-Trains wanted them to be perfect, and requested that all be sent back for adjustment. We returned them for modifications, so when you get your SW-1500 from BLW, it will be perfect. Sorry for resulting delay.
Joe mentioned this earlier that they had been recalled to fix this. That might be why MBKlien's hasn't listed them either. However, one of the local Cincinnati stores had them on display Saturday (6/28) so not everyone has sent them back.
-
The undec model body with the gray cab in the above photos is clearly setting on a Kato NW2 chassis. You can see the end-axle pickups through the truck sides. The undec model with the black cab looks like its on the 'real' LL-derivative.
Those Kato chassis are significantly lower than some other chassis as I've hacked all of them at least once making SW1's.
Now before you guys pull out the electron microscopes here.... take a look at this photo. Best comparison shot you could ever want on the frame height difference:
http://www.dhke.com/ihbarchive/images/ziegold-new.jpg
Probably isn't too high despite how it looks in comparison. Sort of like the LL C424 with the big truck-to-frame gap that has to be filled but otherwise is the proper height.
Ron, I'd never seen that spoof N scale cover before. Needless to say, I burst out laughing!
-
WOw.
Well that has to cost some money.
Maybe we can get 22 more pages before they get here! :tommann:
Randgust- Gosh, I made that in late 2006. When people complain that they missed a issue of N-Scale when Hundmann sold out, I often say.... Well, I got one. You didn't?
But look at what has happened in that time:
A 44 tonner came out.
Someone put sound in a 44 tonner.
We don't quite have an Atlantic, but we got the Hiawatha.
We are anxiously wanting to count rivets on an EMD switcher.
I'm still waiting to see your powered motorcycle (running ahead of your dog sled).
-
So, this thing has been out for how long, and we STILL don't have a pic?...Did ANYBODY on this forum buy one?..I remember reading someone was going to share a pic....???? :?...last friday... :facepalm:
Is this an elaborate MR April Fools joke? :P :ashat:
I ordered the UP to strip and paint white. they aren't out yet.
-
BLW sent an email last night stating that they sent all of the units back for correction. I'm guessing MBK did the same. Some hobby shops have them, but they are scarce at the moment. There are two at Kenvil Hobbies in NJ that I know of. Other than that, the only ones I've seen are the two that MTL had in Roanoke (which were production-run models). But I didn't take a close look at them.
-
The undec model body with the gray cab in the above photos is clearly setting on a Kato NW2 chassis. You can see the end-axle pickups through the truck sides. The undec model with the black cab looks like its on the 'real' LL-derivative.
Those Kato chassis are significantly lower than some other chassis as I've hacked all of them at least once making SW1's.
Now before you guys pull out the electron microscopes here.... take a look at this photo. Best comparison shot you could ever want on the frame height difference:
http://www.dhke.com/ihbarchive/images/ziegold-new.jpg
Probably isn't too high despite how it looks in comparison. Sort of like the LL C424 with the big truck-to-frame gap that has to be filled but otherwise is the proper height.
Ron, I'd never seen that spoof N scale cover before. Needless to say, I burst out laughing!
We show you a PRE-PRODUCTION sample and all hell breaks loose, I just love the way things are blown out of proportion here on Railwire.
Both are the same chassis, the top one has the LL fuel tank , the bottom pic shows the SW1500 fuel tank that we produced. The top pic shows the shell before stops were added to the inside of the shell to set the correct height. We took a decent running locomotive that has been in production for quite a few years, that was not DCC ready, and in collaboration with Digi-Trax, came up with a way to make the chassis DCC ready, so all those existing locomotives out there can now be DCC controlled. Your welcome.
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
-
flexicoil- Mmmmm. Mmmmm. good.
Thanks.
-
We show you a PRE-PRODUCTION sample and all hell breaks loose, I just love the way things are blown out of proportion here on Railwire.
Yeah, it is pretty UN-inspiring. Not just the waste of time and energy, but also to see that the forum as a whole is getting a bad rep. :facepalm:
Does the forum have an 'ignore' button that can be applied to specific threads? It would be nice if there were a way to keep this from showing up in the "Show unread posts from last visit" list.
Ed
-
We took a decent running locomotive that has been in production for quite a few years, that was not DCC ready, and in collaboration with Digi-Trax, came up with a way to make the chassis DCC ready, so all those existing locomotives out there can now be DCC controlled. Your welcome.
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
Welcome Steve .. I for one am glad to see that you worked with Digi for a decoder .. I have a couple of LL SW9s switchers that I've never been happy with the DZ121s .. I will reserve my judgement on the rest of the model for when I see it ..
-
Yeah, it is pretty UN-inspiring. Not just the waste of time and energy, but also to see that the forum as a whole is getting a bad rep. :facepalm:
Does the forum have an 'ignore' button that can be applied to specific threads? It would be nice if there were a way to keep this from showing up in the "Show unread posts from last visit" list.
Ed
There is no "ignore button" .. but you can ignore individual users .. the feature is in your profile .. unfortunately, it doesnt work for admins or mods :(
-
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
(http://getoffmyinternets.net/avatars/stimpy-glee.jpg)
-
We show you a PRE-PRODUCTION sample and all hell breaks loose, I just love the way things are blown out of proportion here on Railwire.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
I dunno, maybe show us a production model to shut us up ?
Joe
I'll post a shot later tonight.
Unfortunately the pictures on your website as well as the pictures on ebay all show a shell which is sitting way too low on the mechanism. How did that happen ? Why is there no clear picture from the manufacturer, who I assume would like to sell many of this model, available on your website ? A clear picture would have eliminated all most of the conversations.
Jane
THIS...
-
Steve,
Thanks for signing up and posting.
We sure do appreciate Joe taking the time to share some photos with us. Unfortunately, some of the criticism was over the top and personal, and therefore I issued a ban to a member. However, this thread is dragging on because there a lot of members would like to see what the actual model looks like, as Joe's sample photos don't match the "official" MTL release photo. Amazingly, no one seems to have a photo to post, which puts this model in the same category as Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster: few have seen, no one has a definitive photo. :D I reached out to a hobby shop owner yesterday so have him post a photo, but he already sold out.
-
The undec model body with the gray cab in the above photos is clearly setting on a Kato NW2 chassis. You can see the end-axle pickups through the truck sides. The undec model with the black cab looks like its on the 'real' LL-derivative.
Randy, both Kato and Life-Like models use the end-axle pickups, so (as it has already been pointed out) both photos had a model on a LL chassis.
-
I've renamed my Fob "a$$hat" seems fitting.
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10382881_837712852920732_287287057085803828_n.jpg)
-
We show you a PRE-PRODUCTION sample and all hell breaks loose, I just love the way things are blown out of proportion here on Railwire.
Both are the same chassis, the top one has the LL fuel tank , the bottom pic shows the SW1500 fuel tank that we produced. The top pic shows the shell before stops were added to the inside of the shell to set the correct height. We took a decent running locomotive that has been in production for quite a few years, that was not DCC ready, and in collaboration with Digi-Trax, came up with a way to make the chassis DCC ready, so all those existing locomotives out there can now be DCC controlled. Your welcome.
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
It is good to see Joe has some reinforcements!! Keep up the good work!
-
Nice Joe! You chose an unusual angle to show the ride height. :trollface: But judging by the extended power pickup leafs clearly visible in this photo, the body certainly looks to be sitting much higher than a SW1200.
-
Cool Joe, thanks.
-
You REALLY think showing a picture will shut everyone up? I gotta bridge you may want to buy.
Joe
I dunno, maybe show us a production model to shut us up ?
THIS...
-
Here is an end to end shot with my Paul Graf Fob. :D
(https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10313546_837721379586546_7596070326052161104_n.jpg)
-
Joe, could you lower it a little bit :trollface: and maybe to the left :trollface:
-
We show you a PRE-PRODUCTION sample and all hell breaks loose, I just love the way things are blown out of proportion here on Railwire.
Both are the same chassis, the top one has the LL fuel tank , the bottom pic shows the SW1500 fuel tank that we produced. The top pic shows the shell before stops were added to the inside of the shell to set the correct height. We took a decent running locomotive that has been in production for quite a few years, that was not DCC ready, and in collaboration with Digi-Trax, came up with a way to make the chassis DCC ready, so all those existing locomotives out there can now be DCC controlled. Your welcome.
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
Thanks Steve for the information. So I was correct concerning the insertion depth of the chassis into the shell. I can appreciate your effort with digitrax, as I was trying to persuade TCS to do something similar with their z2 decoder. Anyhow, since there is additional space in the top of the SW1500 shell, there is plenty of clearance for the pin/wire arrangement MT used. Do u perchance know if there is enough room under the SW9 hood to accommodate the pins/wires?
-
You want me to wash your back too?? :D
Joe, could you lower it a little bit :trollface: and maybe to the left :trollface:
-
You REALLY think showing a picture will shut everyone up? I gotta bridge you may want to buy.
Joe
Actually, with the pic you posted, I think we can all agree the height looks corrected....
Thanks for posting the pics, don't be afraid to share a whole truckoad more...
-
Joe, thanks for the pics. Along with Steve's post I think all is clear now in my mind.
-
There is about the same amount of room under the hood. dropping a sw 9 on our modified chassis with the DCC board requires no extra work.
Joe
Thanks Steve for the information. So I was correct concerning the insertion depth of the chassis into the shell. I can appreciate your effort with digitrax, as I was trying to persuade TCS to do something similar with their z2 decoder. Anyhow, since there is additional space in the top of the SW1500 shell, there is plenty of clearance for the pin/wire arrangement MT used. Do u perchance know if there is enough room under the SW9 hood to accommodate the pins/wires?
-
LOL Joe! This is a prefect thread demonstrating why I keep visiting TRW - it is amusing as hell!
Now about those pickup leaves/springs...
JK
-
(https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10313546_837721379586546_7596070326052161104_n.jpg)
Cab side looks a little low (bottom of pilot looks like it's touching rail, and coupler is a bit low..
Appears to be just out of adjustment on the frame.
Nose side height looks good..
Angle shot looks good... 6" is hard to notice..
But.. Ask any woman.. They say 6" doesn't matter.... but.. It matters :trollface:
I'm looking forward to the Conrail in December!!! :)
~Ian
-
Ride height looks good in the above photo with the somewhat scary "Graf Fob" in the way. As far as the pilot looking like it's on the rails on the cab end, a wheel looks like it's off the rails on that end.
-
There is about the same amount of room under the hood. dropping a sw 9 on our modified chassis with the DCC board requires no extra work.
Joe
Joe, what are the actual chassis mods? Can you share that with us?
-
Ride height looks good in the above photo with the somewhat scary "Graf Fob" in the way. As far as the pilot looking like it's on the rails on the cab end, a wheel looks like it's off the rails on that end.
Didn't catch that..
-
See? It can't even stay on the rails for a photo!....The sky is falling! ;)
-
As we say down in Alabama....
Joe is just messin' with y'all now.
-
I wonder who got the old heave ho.......
-
Haha... so this is the ultimate "Pics or it didn't happen". We get photos, demand more then get an annoyed post from the producer.
The Railwire: 4Chan for modelers
-
I've renamed my Fob "a$$hat" seems fitting.
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10382881_837712852920732_287287057085803828_n.jpg)
+1
-
I wonder who got the old heave ho.......
:tommann: :tommann: :tommann: :tommann: :tommann:
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10382881_837712852920732_287287057085803828_n.jpg)
That picture has potential to end up in the left upper corner, right ? :D
Jane
-
Tom Mann Early Years Fob overseeing the uncoupling of a new Teddy Load. The coupler height is correct on the production models, I just don't have the shim in it the lab unit. When we got the production batch of chassis, for some reason they sat differently than the samples we had. It's been resolved and we also had Walthers work on the insulated spacers for a better fit and proper spacing between chassis halves.
(https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t1.0-9/10338268_837763522915665_6406164607100957937_n.jpg)
-
Ok, so if MT had to work with Walther's on an N scale offering that explains all issues.....Walther's hates N scale. Let's all mull that one over now! LOL!
-
What does Fob stand for, anyway?
F********* o** b***********? :tommann:
-
" a small object that is a decoration on a watch chain or a key ring" It's also a term we used at Disney for small sculpts. These are small 1" Vinyl toys I made for my friends to decorate as a keepsake.
-
That picture has potential to end up in the left upper corner, right ? :D
Jane
I agree with Jane.
Except maybe this shot.... cropped, etc
And then the header
RAILWIRE
Seeing things Differently
Hahaha
(https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t1.0-9/10338268_837763522915665_6406164607100957937_n.jpg)
-
Joe, what are the actual chassis mods? Can you share that with us?
The thin metal leads from the motor brushes that use to pick up power from the chassis have been extended to the top of the motor cradle and isolated from the chassis with insulating tape. Then solid core wire is soldered to the strips and run along the top of the motor cradle and plug into a socket on the light board. Pop the wires out of the board, pull out the light board, slip in the digitrax board and plug the wires into the sockets, you now have DCC control.
-
Thanks for the photos. Now could you post one of the SW1500 next to a single window coach? :P
-
Just so you all know, I'm in the process of designing Flexi-Coil truck side frames for future releases and later we will be doing the body mounted hand rail version.
Steve Ward
Micro-Trains Line Designer
Looking forward to the body mounted hand rail version and if at all possible maybe add on extended front sandboxes?
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW1500-1571.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc239/gizzmaxx/Prototype%20Photos/SW15000001.jpg)
Thank you in advance Steve and Joe :)
-
The thin metal leads from the motor brushes that use to pick up power from the chassis have been extended to the top of the motor cradle and isolated from the chassis with insulating tape. Then solid core wire is soldered to the strips and run along the top of the motor cradle and plug into a socket on the light board. Pop the wires out of the board, pull out the light board, slip in the digitrax board and plug the wires into the sockets, you now have DCC control.
Fantastic. I have used the TCS Z2 and swapped the motor leads top to bottom to get the bottom lead above the frame halve to solder to and fee the power to the Z2 from the original light board. I had showed this arrangement to TCS trying to get them to put the Z2 on a board similar to their CN decoders with wires to run back to the motor. Looks like MT and Digitrax beat them to it. Kudos for the DCC arrangement, and thanks for the information on everything else. I feel a lot better about purchasing the BN units sight unseen after knowing what provisions have been made. There are a few druthers, but all in all, I'll take it.
-
When the Flexi-coil trucks are tooled, would you consider re-tooling the AAR trucks with roller bearings?
-
I LIKE TURTLES
-
I LIKE TURTLES
HUH???
and what is the Zeus dam "Boat Movie"??? :D :facepalm: :|
-
Fantastic. I have used the TCS Z2 and swapped the motor leads top to bottom to get the bottom lead above the frame halve to solder to and fee the power to the Z2 from the original light board. I had showed this arrangement to TCS trying to get them to put the Z2 on a board similar to their CN decoders with wires to run back to the motor. Looks like MT and Digitrax beat them to it. Kudos for the DCC arrangement, and thanks for the information on everything else. I feel a lot better about purchasing the BN units sight unseen after knowing what provisions have been made. There are a few druthers, but all in all, I'll take it.
I just installed a couple of TCS CN decoders on a Atlas/Kato GP35 and Life-Like GP38-2 and really like them. Nothing against Digitrax as my current system is a Digitrax Empire Builder, but hopefully TCS will create a decoder for this new MTL locomotive as well. Just my 2 cents, but I feel it's always good to have more than one option ;)
-
I just installed a couple of TCS CN decoders on a Atlas/Kato GP35 and Life-Like GP38-2 and really like them. Nothing against Digitrax as my current system is a Digitrax Empire Builder, but hopefully TCS will create a decoder for this new MTL locomotive as well. Just my 2 cents, but I feel it's always good to have more than one option ;)
TCS tells me they are still working on the decoder for the SW9, but sound is their bigger push. I like the dual mode function of the digitrax (switcher vs road engine) but prefer the motor control of the TCS decoders.
-
Just wanted to plead guilty to criminal stupidity on the wrong mechanism ID under the pre-production photo...... apologies offered, wounds licked.
Violated rule #1, never post before coffee.
I am very glad to see, however, that Joe has now equipped his cat avatar signature with proper PPE to be on this forum. Now for the flame-retardant suit...
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/-Lone_wolf-/legendarythreadrc1.jpg)
-
I wonder if the tiki torches at the anual MTL July 4th picnic with have effigy of all the Railwire members in this thread.
-
I've renamed my Fob "a$$hat" seems fitting.
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10382881_837712852920732_287287057085803828_n.jpg)
Sorry to keep this going...I am a supporter of this model and intend to buy a few flexicoil versions when available and the ride height question has been answered but.........is there something askew with the model in this photo?
-
Sorry to keep this going...I am a supporter of this model and intend to buy a few flexicoil versions when available and the ride height question has been answered but.........is there something askew with the model in this photo?
I'm a supporter as well.. ... I'm in for both Conrails in December.. and I'm saving my pennies for when the nose handrail version comes out..
I can appreciate Micro Trains working with Digitrax to bring a decoder to market for the LL SW8/9/1200 as much as anything..
This is the closest alternative beyond building your own..
(http://www.irwinsjournal.com/a1g/a1glocos/GMDemoCow.jpg)
~Ian
-
Looks pretty close and good to me. Looks like a white stripe on the front sill is missing.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019776 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019776)
-
Looks pretty close and good to me. Looks like a white stripe on the front sill is missing.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019776 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019776)
That picture is of the back end, did you want this:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019775 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3019775)
-
Horse, it's what's for dinner. Anyways, I was just thinking about the decoder and the lighting situation. Since the current LED has to be bent upward to properly illuminate the headlight, I am pondering what will happen when the decoder is installed. I realize the smaller LEDs used on the boards are brighter, and that in itself may present a problem. If I understand correctly, the sides of the shell were made thinner in an attempt to keep the overall hood width as close to scale as possible. Have provisions been made to keep the decoder LED from lighting up the shell (a visible glow)? Or has this angle been checked? Has a shield with a light pipe been considered to ensure that the headlight is properly illuminated when the decoder is installed?
-
Yes, we are waiting for a board so we can look at designs for light pipes that will take into account the surface mount LED that's being used.
Happy 4th.
Joe
-
Yes, we are waiting for a board so we can look at designs for light pipes that will take into account the surface mount LED that's being used.
Happy 4th.
Joe
Fantastic!
-
Yes, we are waiting for a board so we can look at designs for light pipes that will take into account the surface mount LED that's being used.
Happy 4th.
Joe
Any chance those light pipes could extend into the cab.... :P Please :) ~Ian
-
So curious what the chances of roller bearing AAR-A trucks being tooled up is?
I know all of the BN units came either with roller bearings or Flexicoils. The NS units released should have roller bearings.
-
It maybe annoying but its not hard to modify the trucks to RB. All you need to do is file down the friction boxes and add RB caps from another truck such as Bachmann's SD45 Flexcoil. That is what I did with my SW1500 bashes.
-
It maybe annoying but its not hard to modify the trucks to RB. All you need to do is file down the friction boxes and add RB caps from another truck such as Bachmann's SD45 Flexcoil. That is what I did with my SW1500 bashes.
However I don't have extra trucks to steal from. So while it can be easy, its hard when one doesn't have the other parts.
-
Parts can be ordered from the manufacturer at nominal cost.
-
Any freight car truck can be scavenged for Timken bearing caps as well. Every model railroader has freight car trucks laying around.
Randy
-
BLW is showing NS units in stock. Maybe now we'll get the pix we want ;)
Joe D
-
Violated rule #1, never post before coffee.
Well that explains all of the boners I have made over the years on this forum... its been about 5 years for me...
Any freight car truck can be scavenged for Timken bearing caps as well. Every model railroader has freight car trucks laying around.
Not every modeler. Besides, I would suspect that because of the weight of the switchers the RBs would be larger and most would have covers. At least some models that they can be stolen from are fairly cheep on the 'bay...
-
Since this thread is full of all kind of speculation......
I would recommend a new thread when someone actually starts getting them in their hands.
Just a suggestion.