Atlas Trainman vs. Master Series

[bbussey]

Not for the manufacturers I mention..Every car I have rides high.I have cars from Atlas,Athearn,IM,MT,ER,FVM,BLMA,older Roundhouse and Red Caboose..

We could be discussing cars from different eras.I don't have any cars from the manufacturers you mention other then the Top Gons from BLMA and all my Atlas cars has truck mounts..

So if you were referring to only the manufacturers you mention in this preceding quote, all does not apply, correct?  First off, you didn't specify, you made a general statement.  Second, you're not in a position to make such a statement, regardless of its accuracy, if you don't have examples from all of the manufacturers to compare.  Third, some of the manufacturers you mention have recently-tooled models that do stand at the proper height.  Look at the beautifully-designed Atlas USRA Rebuilt boxcar in Dave Vollmer's second photo.  Proper height, without modifications.

Those few examples [of body-mounted couplers] doesn't make it true for the majority of today's cars including Atlas's "Master Series".We're not talking about tooling that is 20-30 years old-FVM and ExactRail has shown that.
It will be many years before body mounted couplers becomes a standard simply because of the curves you mention.

I disagree.  If you look at the newly tooled models that have been released since the G26 mill gondola, a good percentage if not most of them have body-mounted couplers and ride at the correct height.  BLMA's CD4000 hopper (and four additional imminent models that meet the standard).  IMRC's steel milk cars and ATSF caboose.  Bluford's coal hoppers.  Atlas' Magor caboose.  Rapido's lightweights.  MTL's four heavyweights (and a covered hopper on the way).  Athearn's Airslides, centerflows and bay window cabooses.  ESM's XIH boxcar.  It won't be "many years."  It's happening now.  Current tooling that predates the G26 isn't going to be thrown away while it's still viable.  But the new stuff is moving in the correct direction.

Even EXR's last three gondola models, while still with truck-mounted couplers, ride at the correct height over the rails.  And the Atlas Trainman three-bay Centerflow is exquisite.

As far as scale handrails I agree they will be fragile to the touch but,I won't completely rule them out..Of course that is many years down the road.

Won't happen.  These aren't designed to be museum pieces.  They have to be able to withstand handling.  And they have to be priced reasonably.  You can't make handrails and grab irons that small out of plastic or brass.  They'd have to be steel wire, which would boost the MSRP significantly due to both materials, production and labor.  It can't be done and be priced so that the product would sell.

Compare the modern 50' boxcars..Those are the true look alikes between brands.

Again, that is one group of cars, not all of them.  And while the Con-Cor 50' double-door boxcar is 40-year-old tooling, it was state-of-the-art at the time and it does stand at the proper height over the rails.  So do the Con-Cor 40' boxcar, 50' flat and 50' gondola.

[Brakie]

Bryan,I am not going to waste my time fussing over the facts.I have measured the ride height and all of my cars ride high.

Believe as you will.

It doesn't change one inch of the ride height or the common knowledge the Majority of the cars ride high-including many of the newly tooled cars..

[tom mann]

So Larry is arguing that his own personal collection of cars ride high?  Sure, if he doesn't have any of the cars that Bryan mentions, then he is absolutely right.  But to use this as evidence that all cars ride high is bad logic.

[Brakie]

So Larry is arguing that his own personal collection of cars ride high?  Sure, if he doesn't have any of the cars that Bryan mentions, then he is absolutely right.  But to use this as evidence that all cars ride high is bad logic.

I will add this before shutting up.

Its common knowledge that 97% of  N Scale cars ride high..

The newer 3% that comes with body mounted coupler and correct ride height just may change the standards in the coming years but,doesn't lower the 97% that rides high one scale inch..

Hopefully that 3% will set the new manufacturing standards in the coming years.

[DKS]

Its common knowledge that 97% of  N Scale cars ride high..

The newer 3% that comes with body mounted coupler and correct ride height just may change the standards in the coming years but,doesn't lower the 97% that rides high one scale inch..

How exactly did you come up with these figures? What's the source of your information? "Common knowledge" is not a reliable source, I'm afraid.

[bbussey]

I am not going to waste my time fussing over the facts...

That is apparent.

It doesn't change one inch of the ride height or the common knowledge the Majority of the cars ride high-including many of the newly tooled cars..

While you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.  Most of the cars tooled in the last three years ride at the correct height.

The newer 3% that comes with body mounted coupler and correct ride height just may change the standards in the coming years but,doesn't lower the 97% that rides high one scale inch.

Do you realize that a scale inch in N is .00625" in reality?  If you meant a scale foot, that scales out to .075" which is still inaccurate.  While a number of N scale models currently produced do stand too high, the only model that might be a foot too high is the MTL Ortner hopper.  You have no idea what you're talking about.

It's also within your power to either a) lower the cars to a more appropriate height or b) only buy models that already stand at the proper height.

[bbussey]

Larry, there is one additional major point that is being overlooked here.

How can you credibly demand that manufacturers produce models with body-mounted couplers and/or scale ride height when you don't own any of the current two-dozen or so models that fit that criteria?  If consumers (i.e. you) buy the products made to those specifications, then more products will be introduced.  Barking at the trees about what has happened in the past when the present is meeting the exact criteria you're barking about doesn't help your credibility.
 

[Mr. G]

One thing that still has me confused about the Master vs. Trainman comparison is the locomotives.  That seems to follow a different set of rules.  Older tooling, call it Master or Master Classic.  Newer, call it Trainman.  I've heard that Master has road specific details.  Based on the ones I have, that's pretty far from true.  I've also heard that Trainman motive power is not phase specific, but that doesn't sound quite right either.  Any clue what the difference is?