Improving the MTL Bay Window Caboose?

[daniel_leavitt2000]

I know we have done a head-to-head between the Athearn and MTL bay window cabs in the past. I like the Athearn one better, as the proportions look correct. It is also a decent stand in for the N7D Conrail class.

That MTL cab... I don't know what to do with it. They numbered the car as an N5H. This is a problem because that series does not have the squared out bay windows as the model has. The other issue is that the car sit both high and low. The car sits high on the trucks. The stairs sit low on the frame. The body sits about a scale foot above the Athearn. Has anyone attempted to fix these issues? It seems a lot more complex than just lowering the bolsters.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I just stocked up on Bluford cars.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

I just stocked up on Bluford cars.

Oh I did too. But I have a soft spot for Conrail cabs and have about 100 of them from various manufacturers. I have been able to update the looks of cars from Walthers, Bowser and others. But the MTL car has me stumped. It just looks off.

[bbussey]

It is off.  Solution: buy the Athearn bays.

[thomasjmdavis]

My recollection is that the MTL caboose is based on the last cabooses SP had built- after many railroads had already adopted the end-of-train-device.  I was under the impression it was accurate for what it was, but I'll take Bryan's word that "it is off." 

It does seem an odd choice for a manufacturer that tends to worry a lot about how many road names they can plaster on something.

A couple years ago, I was just about to start on a bay window project- attempting to rehabilitate a 70s vintage Atlas or MP (or ?) to paint for Erie.  But I luckily procrastinated just long enough for Bluford to bring out their caboose in Erie paint.

[bbussey]

The MTL and Athearn models are based on the same prototype. MTL announced first during development. Athearn caught everyone by surprise with their model. MTL was too far along to abort at that time. But the dimensions definitely are off, which is quite noticeable when you compare the two models side-by-side.

MTL will paint their models in any paint scheme, as long as their model is a fairly close representative of the prototype. Most of the other manufacturers do the same thing. As an example, there were only so many roads that owned 40-foot PS-1 boxcars, yet MTL has released over 200 prototype-based schemes on their model over the past 50 years.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

From what I remember, one of the reasons MTL liked these cars was that there was plenty of room for printing other stuff.
They needed a caboose that worked well for stuff like the planets, etc.

[Spades]

My recollection is that the MTL caboose is based on the last cabooses SP had built- after many railroads had already adopted the end-of-train-device.  I was under the impression it was accurate for what it was, but I'll take Bryan's word that "it is off." 

It does seem an odd choice for a manufacturer that tends to worry a lot about how many road names they can plaster on something.

A couple years ago, I was just about to start on a bay window project- attempting to rehabilitate a 70s vintage Atlas or MP (or ?) to paint for Erie.  But I luckily procrastinated just long enough for Bluford to bring out their caboose in Erie paint.

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=19396.0

Will show the difference between the two.  Why a SP prototype?  SP is a popular seller, the C50-5 thru 9 were produced at a minimum of 50 cars each. Like SW1500's ( I believe half or close too half of the SW1500 made were purchased by SP/SSW) SP Bay Window cabooses can be found on many short lines>

[Albert in N]

   I like my MTL bay window with only bay window windows (MoPac MTL item 130 00 110).  It looks good behind my UP locomotives for an 1980s look.  Like my Athearn bay window (SP Athearn item 23242) the wheel generator detail is present. Here are a couple of photos for this thread.  Also, I included an ancient Sekisui Con-Cor bay window with Rapido couplers and shiny pizza cutter wheels to show how far N scale has advanced.  Rivet counters can have a field day with the old Sekisui.  Yeah now that I posted, I notice an MTL caboose wheel off the track in the window photo.  Believe me, that is easy to do. 

[tehachapifan]

Athearn absolutely hit it out of the park on their model. Like WAY out of the park! It is simply stunning and it's also cool that there are some subtle detail differences between releases (frog eye vs single lamp rear marker lights).

[Sokramiketes]

Yeah, the MTL model was immediately identified as too tall, even before Athearn released theres.  If you really want to work on it, you have some cutting to do.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Yikes. That really shows how badly this is proportioned. What I find really strange is that all the vertical measurements seem to be off by the same ratio. One wonders if there was a mistake in scaling the 3d model before tooling the car. I just can't believe the metal steps of the underframe were screwed up at the same percentage as the plastic body.

[larry p mahoning division]

Yes, Athearn gets a thumbs up.