IMRC F-7b unit problems

[Lenny53]

Not at all, but I do take responsibility for my purchasing decisions, & I don't think that ranting & raving on a forum will make dreams come true, whereas working with a manufacturer to fix a problem, either directly or through the salesman or dealer, just might.

Unfortunately in today's pre-order world one has to make their decisions on a product sight unseen.

[Mark5]

Not at all, but I do take responsibility for my purchasing decisions, & I don't think that ranting & raving on a forum will make dreams come true, whereas working with a manufacturer to fix a problem, either directly or through the salesman or dealer, just might.

Unfortunately in today's pre-order world one has to make their decisions on a product sight unseen.

I always inspect my locos before paying. Even on pre-orders. I reserve the right to refuse.

[Mark5]

Kinda dumb that IM didnt do the 50-60 series. :

No big deal for me, though as WM is a secondary road for me, the purchase was sort of a whim - a nod to my days watching WM Fs as a youth.

The things run fantastically, just gotta fix the coupler gap.

[Lenny53]

I always inspect my locos before paying. Even on pre-orders. I reserve the right to refuse.

My LHS is really good about that, however they have got stuck with extra inventory a couple of times.

[wm3798]

Well, there ya go.  The RS-3 is a good example.  I've been told that the Atlas/Kato model of yore is the wrong phase for WM also, but I couldn't tell you the difference.  Might be two louvres on a battery box instead of three or something extremely subtle like that.  There was a Bev Bel version for WM, but it still had the improper number boards and lacked spark arrestors.  No big whoop.  Not to mention the truck mounted couplers.



I've got three of these, and have worked my magic to bring them up to speed, at least to my satisfaction.  So why oh, why can't I quit worrying and learn to love the IM F?

Lee

[Mark5]

The Atlas RS3 is the wrong phase for N&W too.



But IM really didn't have any excuse for using the wrong road numbers. On the other hand - me thinks they pre-announced the road numbers, so someone out there should have caught that.

[TiVoPrince]

At some point
I will be shopping for an F7B to use with a rotary snowplow.  Since this will be a detailed foreground model the errors noted will weigh heavily in my purchase decision.  Wondering why the tooling was not designed to prevent incorrect assembly?  Almost every model I see raises the bar for tooling design...

[wm3798]

They pre-announced the numbers, but they didn't specify a Ph I model, and stated "road specific details".  That being said, we the pre-ordering public had to have faith that they wouldn't gum it up.

Lee

[Mark5]

 :'(

Is IM doing multiple phases?

[John]

I wasn't looking to re-hash the A-board thread, I'm just trying to reconcile my usually relaxed approach to modeling details with my disappointment over the IM product.

Lee

Lee .. was not trying to single anyone out .. I just dont want it to get too "pasionate"

[wm3798]

IIRC when IM announced the F series, there were statements to effect that they were going to present models of every phase, FT-F9.  Now that I think of it, I believe they were to be presented in chronological order, thereby making it logical that this run of 7's would be ph-I.  If I had been playing my violin and smoking my pipe in my flat in Baker Street, I would have deduced that the announced WM numbers were in error months ago!!

Curses!  Foiled again!

S. Holmes

[keystonecrossings]

IIRC when IM announced the F series, there were statements to effect that they were going to present models of every phase, FT-F9.  Now that I think of it, I believe they were to be presented in chronological order, thereby making it logical that this run of 7's would be ph-I.  If I had been playing my violin and smoking my pipe in my flat in Baker Street, I would have deduced that the announced WM numbers were in error months ago!!

Curses!  Foiled again!

S. Holmes

In July 2004, Marty McGuirk -- then in Matt's spot at InterMountain -- reiterated in the Atlas Forum that they were going to do all phases, eventually, but he did not specify "in order".

However, I sincerely doubt they will do all phases, at least not for some time, as I doubt there is enough market for it.

Most of the differences in the F7 are topside, definitely the features people care most about; so I can see where doing the two major phases of F7's would be feasible by just swapping out the available roof inserts. But doing the various F3 phases actually requires new body molds. I'd jump at F3 phase III and IV units in a heartbeat.

[wm3798]

I still find it hard to fathom that there isn't enough market for F units.  Just about every road had some, many had several iterations, and a lot of them survived into the short-line era with a bunch still pulling tourist trains and commuters.  Consider also that the same mechanism can be used for just about all of them, (the slightly longer wheelbase -P and 9's can be done with modified gear towers in the trucks) and I would think you have a "can't miss" model to sell

With the exception of pre-war steam modelers, there's room for an F unit or two on just about everyone's roster.  A good running, regularly available, nicely detailed, and reasonably accurate set of F's in a variety of road names should be a cash cow.  Intermountain has succeeded in meeting 4 out of 5.

Lee

[John]

I still find it hard to fathom that there isn't enough market for F units.  Just about every road had some, many had several iterations, and a lot of them survived into the short-line era with a bunch still pulling tourist trains and commuters.  Consider also that the same mechanism can be used for just about all of them, (the slightly longer wheelbase -P and 9's can be done with modified gear towers in the trucks) and I would think you have a "can't miss" model to sell

Lee .. I think the market for these things might actually be smaller than we think .. the percentage of people who actually remember these is shrinking, and many of us model contemporary .. so ... I for one have no need for them, but then again, I am only 1/250,000 of the N scale market

[keystonecrossings]

I still find it hard to fathom that there isn't enough market for F units.  Just about every road had some, many had several iterations, and a lot of them survived into the short-line era with a bunch still pulling tourist trains and commuters.  Consider also that the same mechanism can be used for just about all of them, (the slightly longer wheelbase -P and 9's can be done with modified gear towers in the trucks) and I would think you have a "can't miss" model to sell

Lee .. I think the market for these things might actually be smaller than we think .. the percentage of people who actually remember these is shrinking, and many of us model contemporary .. so ... I for one have no need for them, but then again, I am only 1/250,000 of the N scale market

Not only is the pool of those who remember F units shrinking, so are those who remember the roads that ran them! Furthermore, the pool of railroad modelers is shrinking as well. More of us are dying off than the number getting into the hobby. I'm afraid the hobby is slowly disappearing.

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but the art of modeling a physical layout, I believe, will be replaced by modeling a virtual layout. Modern computers are so quick, inexpensive (relatively speaking), and capable of superb graphics. It's already possible to create your own computer railroad with some rather spectacular scenery. I envision the day when someone can host their layout on a server and invite others to operate it collectively in real time... a virtual op session! I'm not promoting, but I see it coming.