The Bachmann NW-2

[peteski]

Which I did state above.  R&D also costs money.

Ok, I give up (insert rolling my eyes smiley here).  There is so much freely available research and photographic material online, and the salaries of Chinese R&D are probably not outrageous. But I give up.  We just have to give up our constructive criticism and just let Bachmann produce all these new inferior entry-level models.

Too bad that some of those not-quite-accurate models, such as the 44-tonner are Bachmann-exclusive.  There is no a better quality brand-B ready-to-run 44-tonner that I could buy, instead of the Bachmann.

[johnh35]

I feel your pain. I'm stuck with those Atlas GP30's that have hoods that are too wide and incorrect fan spacing to boot....

[bbussey]

... There is so much freely available research and photographic material online ...

Not nearly as available as you'd think.  Especially when tracking down data over half a century old, created by entities that have not existed for decades.

[MVW]

Jason, I just had an epiphany.

I admit some of your posts on prototype discrepancies have annoyed me. (I know ... big deal.) I guess it's because of this dismissive vibe I'm picking up.

Anyway, it just occurred to me that your propensity for finding flaws could become a great resource for the hobby. Think of what Spookshow has done in regard to critiquing the mechanical performance of N scale locomotives. You could build a similar encyclopedia, only focusing on what manufacturers get wrong (and right) in regards to prototype fidelity.

Hell, if I wanted to find out what's wrong with the appearance of the Bachmann NW-2, I couldn't ask for a better illustration than what you provided with your OP. I'm sure others would point out additional problems. Even better, maybe there are suggestions for improving (or 'bashing) the model.

Anyway, seems like collecting these kind of reviews in one place would not only provide a handy reference guide, but perhaps provide even more visibility in your quest to improve the models we all play with.

Jim

[peteski]

Not nearly as available as you'd think.  Especially when tracking down data over half a century old, created by entities that have not existed for decades.

Ok, but there are lots of photos out there showing shapes and locations of the doors, louvers, and whether windows have metal surrounds, rubber gaskets, or no visible edges around them.  But that is just too much to expect from the Bachmann designers.

This might also boil down to the fact that different people have different qualities. Their personality traits  often show up in their work. Some people are methodical and fastidious, while others don't care if they do a half-assed job.  Maybe that is what we are seeing here.  Just like that sloppy car mechanic who forgets to tighten the oil filter on your car, some model designers might simply be content to to a crappy job designing a model train.

Oops - sorry. I said that I was giving up the fight. I'll be quiet from now on. 

[GaryHinshaw]

I think Jim makes a good point Jason.  You have a lot of great info in your head, and/or resources to draw upon.  You should make an effort to reach out to the manufacturers in a positive way to share it in a way that can make a difference.  (I don't know how you actually do that, but Jim's suggestion is a good start.)  The approach you are taking now has, at best, negligible impact, and at worst a negative impact.  The manufacturers -- especially Bachman -- are never going to see it here, and by characterizing the bulk of your colleagues as ignoramuses, you are creating a lot of needless pushback.  Stay positive.

I'm going back to my Happy Place now.  Kthxbye. 

[peteski]

That's an idea Gary. I wonder if manufacturers of entry-level models who have limited R&D budged could just crowd-source their research.  Or at least the verification of their final design drawings. There are plenty of knowledgeable modelers who would most likely assist them for free (well, their "payment" will be their satisfaction that a more accurate model will get manufactured).

[Chris333]

I highly doubt Bachmann cares. This is one time where posting to their website wouldn't help either I'd bet. I mean if you go through all the trouble you might get a "I'll pass it along".

[spookshow]

Anyway, it just occurred to me that your propensity for finding flaws could become a great resource for the hobby. Think of what Spookshow has done in regard to critiquing the mechanical performance of N scale locomotives. You could build a similar encyclopedia, only focusing on what manufacturers get wrong (and right) in regards to prototype fidelity.
Jim

Actually, I do pay attention to these sorts of discussions and try to include information about prototypical inaccuracies in my encyclopedia entries whenever it seems pertinent to do so. I'm a lot more forgiving of these sorts of issues than most (or at least some), so unless its something really glaring (think Atlas/Kato GP7/9) it usually doesn't impact the overall grade. But excluding out and out rivet-counting, I do try to mention it.

Cheers,
-Mark

[Puddington]

That's an idea Gary. I wonder if manufacturers of entry-level models who have limited R&D budged could just crowd-source their research.  Or at least the verification of their final design drawings. There are plenty of knowledgeable modelers who would most likely assist them for free (well, their "payment" will be their satisfaction that a more accurate model will get manufactured).

Ask three modellers one question you will get seven different answers, the authours of which will defend as they would their own children. Photographic evidence is rarely 100% conclusive; just when you think you have it another photo shows up to muddy the waters. You choose to follow one photo and modellers slay you fir not making another example. It's easy to jusy say "do research" - it's not NASA; we don't all have a think tank room of researchers waiting for the next project. In small and medium sized firms its often the same guy who answers the phone and loads the trucks who is researching the next model.

If you can get original plans, builders photos and commit to making an as built model you have a chance if making few mistakes (if you do your job right that is) but after that you are playing with fire and are going to be critequed by a small group of people who frankly seem to enjoy pointing out faults more than recognizing achievement.

Bachmann has a business model and a series if products that are the result of that model and they are still in business so I guess it works. Model train manufacturing is a business; model trains are a hobby - never confuse the two.

[bbussey]

Ok, but there are lots of photos out there showing shapes and locations of the doors, louvers, and whether windows have metal surrounds, rubber gaskets, or no visible edges around them.  But that is just too much to expect from the Bachmann designers.

This might also boil down to the fact that different people have different qualities. Their personality traits  often show up in their work. Some people are methodical and fastidious, while others don't care if they do a half-assed job.  Maybe that is what we are seeing here.  Just like that sloppy car mechanic who forgets to tighten the oil filter on your car, some model designers might simply be content to to a crappy job designing a model train.

Oops - sorry. I said that I was giving up the fight. I'll be quiet from now on. 

Aside from the fact that photos have perspective and their interpretation is subjective ... if people want a manufacturer to change, they can vote with their wallets.  That's already been the case to a point because the Bachmann changes over the past decade have been extensive.  But you always can continue to send the message.  If revenue isn't affected, and if there is no evidence from their viewpoint that a large segment of the consumer base is unhappy with the product, then there is no reason to change.

[bbussey]

Also — the caliber of modeler in the Railwire is a very small slice of the consumer base, but most here have the ability to modify purchased items and many are capable of scratchbuilding them outright.  So while waiting for retooled models that are more faithful to the prototype ... try upgrading the current ones, which is a lot easier than scratchbuilding.  If the overall dimensions of the 70-Tonner are correct for example, all the surface detail can be removed and replaced for less cost and effort than it would take to scratchbuild.

[basementcalling]

I still vote with my wallet on some manufacturers. Some I will buy online with reservations sight unseen, but other companies do not get my dimes unless I can see, touch, and hear it first, especially with engines.

I wonder if crowd sourcing would cause problems simply because most manufacturers like to keep new releases under wraps until they can make a big announcement. Maybe the super secret we don't want another company to scoop our prototype are fading with most of the common engines now offered, but trade secrets remain a concern for companies.

[mcjaco]

I for one will NOT buy any Bachmann diesel locomotive. Pure hideous junk to the eyes. They do not care enough to take the time to get it right. My $$$$ go elsewhere. Same goes for Atlas Trainman. Can't stand it. Why dumb down a product.

So they can get entry level people into the hobby to spend more $$$ later.  It's simple.  Why do we rehash this argument over and over?

Honestly, for the price with DCC, I'd buy this.  Then I'd get out my gear and start doing upgrades.  You know, like modeling. 

[arbomambo]

Modelling?....Modelling?......
We don't NEED no stinking modelling....