Rapido Announces the GARX 37' Meat Reefer in N scale

[Sokramiketes]

Gee this has been fun to watch.... Makes me wonder why we should do N scale - other than to keep my friend Puddington happy!

So, a few general comments. Like many reefers, these cars were built with V-grooved siding, so the gaps or grooves between boards would be more obvious than a car sheathed with flat boards. having said that, I agree that the grooves on the Oscar Mayer image - for whatever reason - look larger than they are. I'm attaching a few shots of our gray sample. As Puddington said, in person they look great. The real model is 2-3/4" long, my screen image is 13" wide. Kind of a cruel thing to do to any model....

Bill Schneider
Rapido Trains

Bill-

I understand that these cars, as most wood cars, were sided with v-groove car sheathing.  And it looks like the designer tried to keep the proper board width/joint spacing on the car, so that is good.  However, the grooves, being bigger and deeper, are now proportionally so much of the width of a board that the look is off.  The photo you posted of the roof hatches shows these proportions pretty well... look at the board joints and how much more flat surface there is than joint surface.

So, this is one of those cases where a tool maker also needs to be an artist.  The joints still need to appear on the model, otherwise it looks like a plywood sided car if too close to scale!  However, the joints shouldn't be so deep that they cause a hard shadow and a gap for printed lettering. 

Here's a similar photo of an Atlas car from the M:160 galleries:
 


While a fancy piece of tooling, the wood grain on the car shouldn't be there unless this is a survivor car with weather beaten siding in the 1970s.  It affects the look of the car.  Yes, tooling can be too fine and detailed.  However, also look at the treatment at the eave so the roof boards don't look like sausages.  The depth of the joints is less deep up there, but still too deep on the sides.  The ladders, especially rungs, are much finer.  These are the things that I think could be improved on future Rapido N scale offerings.  Examining existing models will help recalibrate your eye to N scale from HO, and we can get beyond the immediate "wow that's small and cool" and really start looking at the details of the tooling versus the state of the N scale art. 

It's not a bad attempt at the first Rapido N scale freight car.  But it suffers from being slightly bulky, heavy handed in the treatment of details, and doesn't push the limits of China's tool making ability.  Those limits seem to be what Rapido is interested in pushing in HO, just don't loose focus on the N scale stuff just because it's small and cute.

[John]

Would the hatches be open on empty cars to "air them out" back to their loading docks?

[wazzou]

I have  a question for any reefer expects here.  Why were the meat reefers so short?

Because meat is heavy.

[peteski]

Mike,
thanks for pushing this cause again.  My attempt to critique the size of the gaps (V-groves or whatever) was a bit ham-fisted (and I got spanked) so I shut up.  The latest photos posted here again show the problem.  Hopefully you won't get an earful from Bryan for comparing Apples to Oranges Atlas to Rapido.    Personally, I clearly see the point you are making (whether the photos are identically scaled or not).

While I'm critiquing again, one other thing I originally didn't mention was the oversize ladders.  I am well aware that there is a limit of the injection molding technology which does not (yet?) allow for making properly scaled ladders.  Photoetched parts? Maybe. But not plastic.  MT has the same problem on the hi-cube cars where they also started using separately applied ladders.  IMO, in N scale properly sized molded-in ladders look way superior to any separately added ladders.

[MVW]

And a big thank you to Rapido for continuing to hang out here, as opposed to complaining about Railwire (as if all 1000+ members here are some formless, mashed-up entity) on another forum.

Henceforth, when you East Coasters gather, it shall be known as a formless mash-up.

Jim

[bbussey]

Mike,
thanks for pushing this cause again.  My attempt to critique the size of the gaps (V-groves or whatever) was a bit ham-fisted (and I got spanked) so I shut up.  The latest photos posted here again show the problem.  Hopefully you won't get an earful from Bryan for comparing Apples to Oranges Atlas to Rapido.    Personally, I clearly see the point you are making (whether the photos are identically scaled or not).

While I'm critiquing again, one other thing I originally didn't mention was the oversize ladders.  I am well aware that there is a limit of the injection molding technology which does not (yet?) allow for making properly scaled ladders.  Photoetched parts? Maybe. But not plastic.  MT has the same problem on the hi-cube cars where they also started using separately applied ladders.  IMO, in N scale properly sized molded-in ladders look way superior to any separately added ladders.

Since you called me out by name ...

Except, Pete, that you criticized the Atlas model as well.  You feel that the two Micro-Trains reefer models are the only ones that meet your approval.  I see the point Mike Skibbe is making.  And I say 1) there's nothing wrong with the Atlas model,  and 2) the differences between the Atlas and Rapido models won't be noticeable at full size.  That said, Mike McGrattan stated back on Page 1 of this thread that they were looking at the wood relief.  So, not only is it academic at this point, but to keep saying the grooves are too deep when Rapido already has stated they were reviewing the groove detail it is counterproductive in my opinion.

Regarding the stand-alone parts, some concessions have to be made for mass-market production.  Plastic ladders are more practical than etched ladders, and the detail by necessity will be slightly more bulky than molded-on detail.  That's the manufacturing reality in 2014, unless people are willing to pay significantly more for the product.  Which they aren't.

[Dave V]

Bill-

I understand that these cars, as most wood cars, were sided with v-groove car sheathing.  And it looks like the designer tried to keep the proper board width/joint spacing on the car, so that is good.  However, the grooves, being bigger and deeper, are now proportionally so much of the width of a board that the look is off.  The photo you posted of the roof hatches shows these proportions pretty well... look at the board joints and how much more flat surface there is than joint surface.

So, this is one of those cases where a tool maker also needs to be an artist.  The joints still need to appear on the model, otherwise it looks like a plywood sided car if too close to scale!  However, the joints shouldn't be so deep that they cause a hard shadow and a gap for printed lettering. 

Here's a similar photo of an Atlas car from the M:160 galleries:
 


While a fancy piece of tooling, the wood grain on the car shouldn't be there unless this is a survivor car with weather beaten siding in the 1970s.  It affects the look of the car.  Yes, tooling can be too fine and detailed.  However, also look at the treatment at the eave so the roof boards don't look like sausages.  The depth of the joints is less deep up there, but still too deep on the sides.  The ladders, especially rungs, are much finer.  These are the things that I think could be improved on future Rapido N scale offerings.  Examining existing models will help recalibrate your eye to N scale from HO, and we can get beyond the immediate "wow that's small and cool" and really start looking at the details of the tooling versus the state of the N scale art. 

It's not a bad attempt at the first Rapido N scale freight car.  But it suffers from being slightly bulky, heavy handed in the treatment of details, and doesn't push the limits of China's tool making ability.  Those limits seem to be what Rapido is interested in pushing in HO, just don't loose focus on the N scale stuff just because it's small and cute.

Skibbe,

Maybe not a question for you as much as Rapido, but since you brought it up... How much does groove width have to account for paint thickness?  Rapido's shown an unpainted car here, so how much of that gap detail gets filled in by paint?

I did note the other painted sample shown still shows the board gap as fairly profound.  That said, even after PRK, my eyes don't work like a high-resolution camera, so some exaggeration--as you note--is no doubt desirable.

[chicken45]

I have  a question for any reefer expects here.  Why were the meat reefers so short?

My meat reefers are plenty long.

[Spikre]

 
  Meat Reefers Rarely ran with the Hatches open ,think the Ice/Brine mixture didn't
  need drying out as Melted Brine was contained in Tanks under the car.
   most Meat cars carried about 30-35 tons of Product.think the Customers didn't
  want more at one time.there were older lighter cars,and some newer heavier rated
  cars like the Swift 38' Steel cars of the late 40s.
  then there was the loading bay door theory that kept the cars under 40' mostly.
   Meat Cars were operated a bit differently than Produce reefers.
  Edit- these cars mostly carried "Dressed Sides Of Beef,Pork,Lamb,etc " from the Slaughter
         Houses to the Branch Packing Plants.
        they could carry finished products to Meat Wholesalers,Super Market warehouses,or
      to other Company Packing Plants that didn't make certain products.
        Spikre
       

[rapidotrains]

Skibbe,

Maybe not a question for you as much as Rapido, but since you brought it up... How much does groove width have to account for paint thickness?  Rapido's shown an unpainted car here, so how much of that gap detail gets filled in by paint?

Bill's hand-painted sample photos use MUCH thinner paint than what is used at the factory in China. 

I'll throw some cold water on this "those grooves are 27 microns too wide" discussion.  If this reefer doesn't sell well, then it will not only be our first N scale freight car, but it will also be our last N scale freight car.  Our models have to make money, or we simply don't make them. 

We'll have painted samples at Springfield and we'll see how the general public responds to them.  That will help determine whether the car is a success or failure.  I'm not too bothered by online criticisms of pre-production photos blown up to 10 times the real size of the car.  If anyone here can see that level of detail when the train is on your layout, I am coming to your place with a scalpel and stealing your eyes.

I am frankly amazed by the depth of analysis these pre-production photos are generating.  It reminds me of the guys over on the Doctor Who forum who dissect the 30-second new season preview shot by shot and then determine from that how much they will love or hate it.  Yes, there are guys who write off an entire season of Doctor Who as being "pants" based on the 30-second preview.

"Pants" - now that is an awesome word.  In the UK, pants means "underpants."  There is no real North American translation for saying something is "pants."

If someone truly thinks our reefer is "pants," I may just have to put that in our next advertisement...

RAPIDO'S NEW MEAT REEFER - COMPLETELY PANTS!   

-Jason

[chicken45]

Will you be selling meat reefers in pants, or will the pants be provided separately , or must we provide our own?

[Dave V]

Will you be selling meat reefers in pants, or will the pants be provided separately , or must we provide our own?

You would be in fear and awe of my pants meat (reefer)...

@rapidotrains Jason,

I asked about the paint thickness more as a defense of what you'd chosen to do versus a complaint.  I've only been in N scale 12 years and the amount of improvement I've seen by companies like ESM, Bludford, FVM, BLMA, and now Rapido in N scale is just mind-blowing.  That new reefer of yours looks worlds better than anything I had in HO 12 years ago.

Seriously, this kind of analysis is done all the time here...and yet the vast majority if us still buy.  Now for some folks (speaking of meat), calling out the most esoteric variation from the prototype is the equivalent of pulling their junk out of their pants to establish their alpha status among train geeks.  I--for one--find these discussions very educational if only academic and oft times pedantic.  The fact is, even the guys giving you the most crap here are still gonna buy.  This is the Railwire, and it's sort of a point of pride that we do these analyses, although I do wish they were more constructive than they are.  Remember that we are anything but mainstream N scalers.  If the Railwire regulars will snatch these up as it looks like they will, imagine how they'll fare among mainstreamers.

[rapidotrains]

You would be in fear and awe of my pants meat (reefer)...

@rapidotrains Jason,

I asked about the paint thickness more as a defense of what you'd chosen to do versus a complaint. 

I know, and I appreciated it!   

-Jason

[tom mann]

I would like to see one decorated for "Ed K's Little Meat and Bacon".

[Sokramiketes]

Pete and Bryan have both mentioned that the "standalone" ladder is oversize... but when I look at it I interpret the ladder as being molded into the car side.  That's why I'm concerned... it looks so oversize that our minds are comparing it to other oversize add-on ladders.  But if it was separate, why pad print the black paint on it like the one pre-production shot?  And look at the shadows, there is nothing to make it look like the rungs are standing off the car body.

Jason- Appreciate your take it or leave it attitude.  These things go back to my 75/25 (or 60/40 or 80/20%, depending on how big or small you think the prototype segment is) comments where 75% of N scalers will buy whatever floats their boat and based on nothing at all other than, "hey cool I don't have one yet."  But if you want a successful product, why not hit all the marks and scoop up that picky 25% of guys as well?  It's still more sales, but some companies decide the 25% isn't work the effort.  (Now we're back to the 80/20 rule... 20% of the work to get 80% right, 80% of the work to get the last 20%!)

Look, I understand the process of sending info to China, seeing some pretty and crisp 3D files to review, wondering how big to make certain dimensions and what will work in plastic, and then actually physically seeing it in plastic.  And once it's in plastic, that means there's a heavy chunk of steel sitting there already and modifications just got a whole lot harder.  But, some of us are just pointing out that this tooling is a little heavy handed compared to other modern N scale releases, hopefully to let you know what we're looking for and where the N market is trending (since you and Bill have decided that selective compression and oversize trains are more fun than real prototype modeling in N)