Micro-Trains 10-1-2 Sleeper Schemes

[eric220]

I'm usually the first to defend MicroTrains' business model.  I really don't care what they release to make ends meet, as long as it means that they can also release nicely detailed, accurate cars that would be much harder for a lower volume manufacturer.

Having said that, I think Mike has a point.  The tooling on these cars is beautiful.  The information on accurate schemes and names is readily available.  If much of the market doesn't care what names get put on it, why not letter them accurately for those that do?

[wcfn100]

If much of the market doesn't care what names get put on it, why not letter them accurately for those that do?

That's not what Joe said.  They do care about the road name. So much so that it doesn't matter if it's not prototypical.


Jason

[Alwyn Cutmore]

As MTL would know from me in the past that I have put my point of view forward that I will not buy near enough is good enough. I vowed I would not buy their RPO because it does not even conform to the PRR prototype.
However, I have since relented and bought two for cutting up and making my own prototype. Now if you look at Dave Vollmer he is a great modeller and his recent post on the Brass K4 is indicative of his standard of modelling but even Dave could accept that the RPO was not even close to the prototype but it was a fair representation and of an acceptable standard for him.

So while I do not like the near enough is good enough standard I do understand where MTL is coming from. Just remember if the off the shelf modeller did not exist then we as more prototype modellers would not get anything.

Do not worry I have been up Joes ribs about not enough road numbers for the MTL 50ft Round Top X32 Box Cars. I am thankful that they did this car but it was only done because of the number of other roads who had the car or a car very similar in design. Joe we need more road numbers. One every three months for the next two years. But then Fine N Scale does do a great model as well.

[skytop35]

but the effort right now is to try and offer all the cars in the road names we have released in the past.  The overwhelming requests have been to do just that.  Our customers are wanting to do full trains in their favorite roads regardless if they are prototypical or not.

Perhaps I missed something since I don't live and die by the MT releases every month and correct me if I'm wrong. Has any of the road names released so far been available on every car in order to do a full train?

[gelboy45]

Joe,

I cannot tell you how much I appreciate you bringing such amazingly detailed products to market and how much I enjoy owning some of these truly beautiful new heavyweight passenger cars. 

With these comments in mind you cannot imagine my disappointment and I must say astonishment at the announcement of the long awaited coach (albeit with paired windows), lettered 'Pullman'.  Even I, (an Englishman) know this is wrong, yet here it was and so I thought it must be a simple mistake.

But now that you have explained your company's marketing policy in response to comments on this board may I still make a heartfelt plea for those of us that rejoice in fidelity that you please give prototypical paint schemes more importance.  Or how about coding the models with an F for foobie and P for prototypical so we know where we are? Just an idea;O)))

I'm disappointed and frustrated and so need to get a life!

Gerry

[sizemore]

I dunno, PULLMAN was the smartest name to put on the heavyweights. Proto or not, they fit the "good-enough" category. Anyone can buy them and throw them in a consist and for the most part be believably correct. You couldn't throw a B&O in its beautiful blue and grey into a UP Armour Yellow consist without getting the stink-eye from someone who doesn't know any better.

Also take into consideration (work with me on this), the other big manufacturers throw out 10 road names on 1 car in a release every 6 - 12 months. Most are 85% and higher on ranking with prototype. MT on the other hand throws out ~7 road names on ~7 different cars every month. Some are foobs, others "close-enough" and yet others that are 95-100%.

While there were more prototypical cars as Sokramiketes pointed out, it was probably smarter to throw a less than prototypical name on the car. If one month release includes a prototypical roadname, and the following monthly release includes a different roadname that is 95% correct, they will not get a residual sale from the same person the next month. I see their roadname choices as a way to roll sales month to month, which then allows them the ability to release something else that may not have residual sales next month. That UP modeler wont pick up the B&O car next month. While they could release said B&O car, it might not be as big a hit as the UP. If I was running the business I'd bank on the bigger guaranteed sale, month to month. But I'd definitely throw the prototype roadnames out there eventually.

My 2 Canadien Loonies,
The S.

[wcfn100]

Perhaps I missed something since I don't live and die by the MT releases every month and correct me if I'm wrong. Has any of the road names released so far been available on every car in order to do a full train?

GN, PRR and UP I think have all been released in each car except the new coach.

Here's the list.

140 00 040   Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car
141 00 040   Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe   10-1-2 Heavyweight Sleeper Car

140 00 030   Burlington   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car

144 00 080   Canadian Pacific   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car

140 00 010   Great Northern   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car
141 00 020   Great Northern   10-1-2 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
142 00 020   Great Northern   12-1 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
143 00 020   Great Northern   28-1 Heavyweight Parlor Car
144 00 020   Great Northern   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car

140 00 020   New York, New Haven & Hartford   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car

144 00 050   Pennsylvania   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car
140 00 050   Pennsylvania    RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car
141 00 050   Pennsylvania    10-1-2 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
142 00 050   Pennsylvania    12-1 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
143 00 050   Pennsylvania    28-1 Heavyweight Parlor Car

141 00 010   Pullman   10-1-2 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
142 00 010   Pullman   12-1 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
143 00 010   Pullman   28-1 Heavyweight Parlor Car
144 00 010   Pullman   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car
145 00 010   Pullman   Heavyweight Paired-Window Coach Car
145 00 010   Pullman   Heavyweight Paired-Window Coach Car

140 00 200   Ringling Bros. Extravaganza 'Miss Leitzel' Car   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car

142 00 040   Santa Fe   12-1 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
143 00 040   Santa Fe   28-1 Heavyweight Parlor Car
144 00 040   Santa Fe   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car

140 00 070   Southern Pacific   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car
144 00 070   Southern Pacific   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car
145 00 070   Southern Pacific   Heavyweight Paired-Window Coach Car
145 00 070   Southern Pacific   Heavyweight Paired-Window Coach Car

140 00 060   Union Pacific   RPO Heavyweight Passenger Car
141 00 060   Union Pacific   10-1-2 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
142 00 060   Union Pacific   12-1 Heavyweight Sleeper Car
143 00 060   Union Pacific   28-1 Heavyweight Parlor Car
144 00 060   Union Pacific   3-2 Heavyweight Observation Car

Jason

[Puddington]

I do not understand Mike why you get so bent out of shape about what MTL puts on THEIR products...Are you a share holder...? The only rule that applies here is "if you don't like it, don't buy it"....

And a further thought; Railwire is supposed to the haven for modelers... better modeling through peer pressure and all that stuff.....yet we have a thread by someone proported by many to be a serious prototype modeler bitter about the fact that a well executed prototype model has foobie paint...hmmm... The science of striping paint has come a long way and I dare say that the MTL cars are the best bashing bases I have yet come across... Hey, I model the CPR; none of the Pullman cars works for me as it, I have to make major modifications to them to make then close to CPR but they are a great base model.... you're complaining that they haven't decorated them for a specific prototype road... paint and decals are like the icing on the cake; and the cake has been perfectly baked for us.... seems like an odd argument for "modelers" to complain about something as simple as paint.... I mean; are we so out of practice that we need RTR...?

Sure; prototype schemes would be nice but MTL is in business to make money and I'm going to say, with some certainty that they know their business model way better than anyone here (well;, maybe not Joe, but that's not fair  ) I'm certain that they didn't sit around a say, "hey, a correct SOO LINE coach will sell better than one decorated for Pullman, but let's do Pullman anyway....."

It's a non issue to me......I own paint and decals...............

[bbussey]

... And before it comes up again, I'm not against adding in "close" schemes or even "fantasy" schemes.  What I'm against is not offering the prototype schemes in conjunction. 

I'm in total agreement on this point.  I do except that MTL does the fantasy/licensed schemes and the foobie schemes in order to supplement the prototypical schemes and new tooling.  Given that it's necessary to push a subsequent amount of fantasy product to insure a steady flow of prototypical product, I have no issues in that regard.  But when it comes to a model, especially new tooling, I see no reason why the prototypical road can't be released first - or at least in conjunction.  With the current model, why wasn't B&O released along with the Pullman fantasy scheme, instead of two fantasy schemes (or one fantasy and one foobie)?  There is no reason why the prototypical issue cannot be addressed along with selling popular-road models to the masses.

The other issue I take umbrage with is the advertising verbiage that strongly implies non-prototypical schemes are prototypical, but we've plowed that road before.

[skytop35]

GN, PRR and UP I think have all been released in each car except the new coach.

Jason

Looks like Santa Fe also. Thanks Jason. I stand corrected.

[bbussey]

... While there were more prototypical cars as Sokramiketes pointed out, it was probably smarter to throw a less than prototypical name on the car. If one month release includes a prototypical roadname, and the following monthly release includes a different roadname that is 95% correct, they will not get a residual sale from the same person the next month. I see their roadname choices as a way to roll sales month to month, which then allows them the ability to release something else that may not have residual sales next month. That UP modeler wont pick up the B&O car next month. While they could release said B&O car, it might not be as big a hit as the UP. If I was running the business I'd bank on the bigger guaranteed sale, month to month. But I'd definitely throw the prototype roadnames out there eventually.

It's not that foobie schemes are done that is the issue.  It's necessary in order to finance the prototypical releases.

The issue is that when a new model is released, you generally don't see prototypical schemes released initially.  Or, you see blatantly inaccurate schemes released prior to most of the prototypical schemes.

In the far past, MTL used to release the prototype scheme(s) first before moving to less-prototypical schemes.  The riveted mechanical reefer (FGE), outside post mechanical reefer (PFE), steel ice reefer (PFE), troop sleeper (Pullman), 50' round roof box (PRR), express reefer (REA) and 89' flat (TT) are examples of MTL models based on railroad-specific prototypes where the specific railroad in question was one of the first if not the first release on the model.  But that isn't the norm currently.  As an example, with the 28-1 parlor only PRR and GN from the actual roads that had the prototype has been done.  At least 11 other roads had the prototype, and five of them had the exact A/C configuration of the MTL model (of which PRR and GN did not).  There's no reason why some of those roads - some of them big name roads - couldn't have been represented on the model in place of some of the roads that have been done.  Especially when the heavyweights have tended to be released two schemes at a time when they appear.

[JoeD]

Not sure why I bother sometimes because there are folks who just don't like MTL (or me) and no matter what will find fault.  Those folks for the most part don't address me personally via email (except Bryan and a few others) about concerns or wants, but find the ego stroke better by posting here than sending me an email.  Hey, it's a hobby and it goes with the territory...I don't loose any sleep over it.

As to choice of schemes, we go where "our" market pushes us.  You may not like it, but it is what it is and frankly, given the total of our efforts each month, which far outstrips any other's out there, I think we do pretty good.  Was the Pullman Coach a foobie, call it what you want, but they are going out in the mail as I speak.  A lot of folks wanted it to complete the train...expect it on the Diner too. (give you a head start on the complaining)  Right now we are trying to make complete the different road names as these cars come out of tooling.  We have scheduled other roads to start the same sequence, 140 thru 145 or 6 with drop in's of specific color cars we think will be useful as stand alones or mixed in early consists with lightweights or head ends or what ever.  Each month we have capacity issues, meaning we have fixed staff, fixed expences and fixed production.  We have to build to those numbers each month.  Sometimes we have to flip a car to another month because we don't have all of freakin China to do our production. 

The prototype car was very expensive and too time consuming to do this month, but it is coming and in multipule numbers....

Joe

[Puddington]

Thanks for taking the time Joe...........

.....and rule number one still applies: "if you don't like it, don't buy it"........I'm buying some; they will become "something" I need....

[Dave V]

Just keep the Pennsy stuff coming!   

Oh, and don't forget a few yellow PC and CR MoW camp cars from the sleepers...  I have the two PRR MoW heavyweight sleepers done specially for the 2011 NSE convention in Hershey, and they're sweet!





Do that paired window coach in PRR and I might bite, so long as I can fit it with proper 2D-P5 4-wheel trucks.

Oh, and I rendered them non-collectable by Dullcoting and weathering them with an airbrush.  Sorry, collectors!   

[skytop35]

Thanks for taking the time Joe...........

.....and rule number one still applies: "if you don't like it, don't buy it"........I'm buying some; they will become "something" I need....

But that is kinda the point. Some of us aren't buying that would if some of those proto schemes were being done.  And once again, as has been stated twice already, no one is against the foobie or fantasy schemes. The actual question is why the proto schemes don't come out first. However it never gets answered and we somehow end up talking about the foobie and fantasy schemes again.