MTL SW1500 test shots.

[peteski]

Sorry to deflate your little balloon, Peteski, but Ian's been using that phrase since before you were a member.

Damn, you're right again!  The ballon is tiny (picture a stent), and I'll now go hide in the basement for a bit. 

[Denver Road Doug]

What it does mean is that no other manufacturer will touch it for awhile now that this one is on the market soaking up market share.

I'm not so sure.   It is my contention that some locomotives can support multiple manufacturers.   See GP38-2 and soon SD40-2.   As MTL is learning, the SW1500 is an iconic locomotive of the ilk of the aforementioned Dash 2's.

SO, I think this may simply be "much ado about nothing".   The MTL will be a nice, semi-proven design that will probably perform well.   Releases will trickle out, and like a lot of MTL releases, the schemes everybody really wants will either never materialize or will be done sparingly.  (Good news for the IHB modellers, Roscoe, Snyder and Pacific, etc.  Heck, I might even get an MKT out of the deal!    )    They'll show up in the trainsets, and will still be a nice option to have after Atlas or FVM or someone does a "Master Line" version.

I'm just excited that my grain elevator SW1200 will now finally have a DCC mech that will (apparently) pull well.   And for that, I say thank you Micro-Trains!

[Sokramiketes]

You know, this photo of the mechanism shows something so obvious, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned.  The motor itself is thin enough for a scale-width hood. But it sits in a plastic cradle which probably adds about 0.060" to the overall width of the frame.  Lose that cradle and the loco can have scale-width hood!  There are plenty of locos out there which utilize this type of a design. 

And many more....

So what you're saying is there is already a source for the unobtainium motors, since MTL is using it?

Gasp. How will this be spun next?

[Puddington]

What it does mean is that no other manufacturer will touch it for awhile now that this one is on the market soaking up market share. 

..... because we all know that they were lining up at the door to release a uber proto model of the SW 1500....

I always bristle when I hear people say "now no one will make a uber proto model of xxx because yyy is offering their version."  This isn't necessarily true, there are several duplucation examples in recent years but more importantly; any mfg has the right to mske any model any time they like. if someone out there us planning a uber proto SW 1500 I'm not sure that they will be disuaded by the MTL version; they are targetting the $200.00 plus DC $275.00 DCC/sound version market, not, as Joe said, train set worthy locomotives. (albeit, what looks like a quality "train set" locomotive.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

If MTL wanted to, they could have made this scale width USING the SW1200 drive train components. They would need new frames and a motor cradle, but it would have been possible. Now, could it be profitable... well that is the question. From my understanding of the order, MTL would need to order the SW1200 mechanisms in bulk, take them apart at their factory and rebuild them with new frames and motor cradles. I can totally see how this project now becomes a huge mess as you are basically producing the same thing on two continents save for a few parts.

Hood width matter quite a bit to me as I often look at my models from the top. Even the Kato wide bodies annoy me. Would I pay an extra $20 for the correct width? Absolutely! Would anyone else? I'm not so sure.

The difference is that MTL knows their market much better than I do. If they can't make it work, then there is a reason.

[Philip H]

See, minor hood width issues don't bother main the least.  Especially for a road switcher this small.  Maybe I've gotten too used to compromises from modeling KCS - but most of the equipment I've had to paint up over the years required either a lot of modification or just acceptance anyway.

I'll just be glad to be able to run a 1500 in my MP 15's chasing my SD40-2s . . .

[johnh35]

  To the comment about the decoder...Digitrax is making one...the reason no one made it for the Life Like Chassis in the past is that there was no way to isloate the motor from the chassis without some trick hand work. Given the drive for everything to be RTR and Drop in, the cost to do it was probably prohibitive.  Now that we have made the components to make the change, if we offer those seperate, the conversion becomes a bit easier.

Joe

Hi Joe,

That is exactly what I had approached TCS about on the SW9. It is easier than you think to get the power to the motor. All you have to do (on the LL) is swap the motor contacts that clip onto the brush holder from top to bottom. The one that was originally on top is longer and if placed on the bottom will extend up past the frame sides providing a surface to solder to. Then all you have to do is have a decoder that takes the place of the light board and you are home free.

[johnh35]

Joe, since the wheel contacts are still exposed and not making contact with the frame halves, what is the method of transferring the power? Is it going to be like the LL wipers?

[packers#1]

If MTL wanted to, they could have made this scale width USING the SW1200 drive train components. They would need new frames and a motor cradle, but it would have been possible. Now, could it be profitable... well that is the question. From my understanding of the order, MTL would need to order the SW1200 mechanisms in bulk, take them apart at their factory and rebuild them with new frames and motor cradles. I can totally see how this project now becomes a huge mess as you are basically producing the same thing on two continents save for a few parts.

Hood width matter quite a bit to me as I often look at my models from the top. Even the Kato wide bodies annoy me. Would I pay an extra $20 for the correct width? Absolutely! Would anyone else? I'm not so sure.

The difference is that MTL knows their market much better than I do. If they can't make it work, then there is a reason.

+1...it seems not to be a matter of let's make the most money we can by making a compromised product, but as has already been said, a matter of having to make certain compromises in engineering because of logistics and pricing reasons. There's cutting corners to make profit, but then there's compromising to make a locomotive that works and won't break the bank. So thank you MTL for making the SW1500, I'll be waiting to snag one with the right base to make an LTEX SW1500

[Ian MacMillan]

Damn, you're right again!  The ballon is tiny (picture a stent), and I'll now go hide in the basement for a bit. 

Its circa 2007 TRW.  Commonly used in a thread to mark where babble has become inane.

[Sokramiketes]

..... because we all know that they were lining up at the door to release a uber proto model of the SW 1500....

I always bristle when I hear people say "now no one will make a uber proto model of xxx because yyy is offering their version."  This isn't necessarily true, there are several duplucation examples in recent years but more importantly; any mfg has the right to mske any model any time they like. if someone out there us planning a uber proto SW 1500 I'm not sure that they will be disuaded by the MTL version; they are targetting the $200.00 plus DC $275.00 DCC/sound version market, not, as Joe said, train set worthy locomotives. (albeit, what looks like a quality "train set" locomotive.

Which duplication examples are you talking about?  BLI's E units? Because most that I'm thinking of were developed around the same time and the competing manufacturers chose not to give up all their research and/or tooling costs and make a go of it.  PA's, FT's, Trinity Reefers, SD70ACe's, SP Cabooses, S2/S4's... you don't think each of the manufacturers involved in those wished they weren't competing in the small pool of N scale?

In fact, if a manufacturer works the back channels and finds someone else is moving to tooling on a model, they will almost always stop their project, different market niche or not.  The times that models are duplicated by design, are times when a competing model has been on the market (LL E7 & Kato E8 vs Broadway, Intermountain SD40-2 vs Kato) for awhile and the new manufacturer thinks there is market share available still based on paint scheme or model availability.  Yes, that can happen with the SW1500 like you say, but I also think it will be some years down the road like I'm saying... and only after MTL lets the model disappear like the FT's or doesn't hit enough paint schemes in a timely matter like Kato and their SD40-2. 

Definitely and interesting debate though, if I'm missing some example let me know.

[Denver Road Doug]

MP15's and GP38-2's....which mostly fall into your 1st category.   But in the case of the MP15 there were very clearly two classes of locomotives being manufactured.   I think that is the closest correlation to what we have with the SW1500 assuming Atlas announced tomorrow. (although, I wouldn't consider the MTL in the same (low) class as the Con-Cor, by any stretch.   Well, unless the first release is silver warbonnet.    )

The GP38-2 race would have probably been a closer race had Walthers included a freaking sight glass.

[MRL]

If someone would request a MTL factory printed "custom" number or numbers could it be done for say $5 or a little more per locomotive?

[johnh35]

Yes, that can happen with the SW1500 like you say, but I also think it will be some years down the road like I'm saying... and only after MTL lets the model disappear like the FT's or doesn't hit enough paint schemes in a timely matter like Kato and their SD40-2. 

I would almost bet that Bachmann will release the SW1500 sooner than later. Their recent releases show that they can manufacture a great running switcher with scale hood widths. Now if they would only get the rest of the details right they could hit a home run.

It is a shame that no manufacturer took steps to develop a universal mechanism that could have been used for SW9/SW1500/Alco S series lokies. Since the wheelbases are all the same, it should have been a no-brainer. 

[Kisatchie]

If someone would request a MTL factory printed "custom" number or numbers could it be done for say $5 or a little more per locomotive?

Doesn't Atlas offer multiple road numbers on their locos? Micro-Trains should do the same.


Hmm... who would want
multiple numbers on a
loco...?