OOh! Now with knuckle couplers...

[peteski]

Sarcastic expression of joy missed in my original post.

We need more emojis - see the Admin section! 

[BobRunty]

If the early stuff would of come with knuckle couplers back then, I might not have switched to HO in the early 70's. I hated those Rapidos back then because they made uncoupling and switching ridiculously difficult and being a lawn mowing 14 year old with little skills or cash, switching over to Microtrains couplers was quite an ordeal. Plus I didn't know any better. On the other hand I could drop a pair of Kadee #5's in an Athearn car in seconds for about a buck with no tools involved. Well I saw the light and finally switched back about 5 years ago and haven't looked back. And once in a while I'll pull out my old Minitrix, Atlas, and ConCor stuff I kept from back then and realize how far we've come.

Bob

[SP-Wolf]

Here's what I did with Model Power's stock car: (Sorry for the dark photos- working on getting better lighting)






Thanks,
Wolf

[daniel_leavitt2000]

I always wondered why the MP and  Bachmann ACF Centerflow hoppers looked so damn dumpy. Never could put my finger on it.

[peteski]

Hey, at least the wagon-wheel-style brake wheels are separate!

Guys, we should that these more like nostalgic models.  This is the stuff I used to pick up in Toys-R-Us in the early '80s for couple of bucks per car.

Where else can you pick up freshly produced cars with black (unpainted?) plastic roofwalks and Lionel-style spotlight on a depressed center flat car? 





Bob, these knuckle couplers look to be non-automatic-uncooupling and they are probably tougher to uncouple than Rapidos.  BTW, only US seem to have stopped using Rapidos. The rest of the world is still happily using them as N scale couplers.

[cjm413]

I always wondered why the MP and  Bachmann ACF Centerflow hoppers looked so damn dumpy. Never could put my finger on it.

Unfortunately, these and the original Atlas/Roco cars are the only option for the early 5250's with the pre-1971 carbody...

I have a few factory decorated cars that I've temporarily upgraded with Plano roofwalks and proper 100T trucks, but as you point out, they still aren't up to snuff with other (but admittedly different) Centerflow models.

Has anyone had a chance to measure any of them (whether MP, Botchmann, or Atlas/Roco) to determine if the dimensions are at least correct?

[daniel_leavitt2000]

The Roco version looks to be mostly to scale. It is missing the end slope supports and air brake detail. The Bachmann car has end supports, and also TWO sets of air brakes! The body seems wide, tall and the details soft. The MP car is crisper, but the sides look flat to me. I can't place what is wrong with this car.

Someone really needs to do a good 5250 in both pre and post 1971 versions. Its a damn crime not to have a great model of such a popular car.

[Dave V]

[Mark5]

The Roco version looks to be mostly to scale. It is missing the end slope supports and air brake detail. The Bachmann car has end supports, and also TWO sets of air brakes! The body seems wide, tall and the details soft. The MP car is crisper, but the sides look flat to me. I can't place what is wrong with this car.

Someone really needs to do a good 5250 in both pre and post 1971 versions. Its a damn crime not to have a great model of such a popular car.

I always thought the MP car was a ripoff of the Atlas/Roco car ... will have to take a closer look.

Agreed that we need "modern" tooling for the pre and post '71 versions.

[jdcolombo]

OK.  We can make fun of these cars, but . . .

They offer an opportunity to get into the hobby cheap.  For an 8-10 year-old, they might be just the ticket.  And I guess I have a soft spot for the 40' reefer, because long before there were PFE reefers available from Intermountain, I made my own PFE fleet by taking a bunch of these cars, stripping them, repainting, decaling with Microscale decals; replacing the trucks with MT's; body mounting the couplers, and using Gold Medal Model roofwalks and foot stirrups.   The final product wasn't too bad:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I made about 40 of these over a one-year period, and I still run them today.

And . . . Model Power also made a bay window caboose that became these:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

So I guess I have something of a soft spot for these, no matter how awful they may look today . . .

John C.

[cjm413]

The Roco version looks to be mostly to scale. It is missing the end slope supports and air brake detail. The Bachmann car has end supports, and also TWO sets of air brakes! The body seems wide, tall and the details soft. The MP car is crisper, but the sides look flat to me. I can't place what is wrong with this car.

Someone really needs to do a good 5250 in both pre and post 1971 versions. Its a damn crime not to have a great model of such a popular car.

I found a video of MRC discussing the re-release of the former Model Power 5250 with knuckle couplers:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vw2CrY9Igs

[Mark5]

OK.  We can make fun of these cars, but . . .

***SNIP***

So I guess I have something of a soft spot for these, no matter how awful they may look today . . .

John C.

Those cars look pretty good. Many of the early cars can be made to look decent, but others are just cartoonish.

I have a bunch of old tooling projects, as always in progress ...

Mark

[Dave V]

If the industry wants to attract young people into the hobby, what's really needed is a new generation version of these old clunkers but that look like the kind of cars you see on the rails today.  40' reefers and stock cars are long gone from today's rails.

That also suggests Trainman-like or Bachmann standard versions of modern locos.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

If the industry wants to attract young people into the hobby, what's really needed is a new generation version of these old clunkers but that look like the kind of cars you see on the rails today.  40' reefers and stock cars are long gone from today's rails.

That also suggests Trainman-like or Bachmann standard versions of modern locos.

This.

A Trainman GEVO, GP38-2, or SD70M-2 (or a pair, with one a dummy... I know, but it keeps costs down while allowing for prototypical consists) would be a great gateway model. Do em in CSX, BNSF, UP, NS, and all the fancy NS schemes, and price em cheap (forget grabs, forget proto variations, etc...).

Then do trainmanesque rotary gons, oil tankers, and double stacks. 

Also, cheap Amtrak stuff or commuter stuff, you know, the stuff that people actually interact with, would also probably do pretty well.

It doesn't have to be perfect because it's not for us.

[cjm413]

This.

A Trainman GEVO, GP38-2, or SD70M-2 (or a pair, with one a dummy... I know, but it keeps costs down while allowing for prototypical consists) would be a great gateway model. Do em in CSX, BNSF, UP, NS, and all the fancy NS schemes, and price em cheap (forget grabs, forget proto variations, etc...).

Then do trainmanesque rotary gons, oil tankers, and double stacks. 

Also, cheap Amtrak stuff or commuter stuff, you know, the stuff that people actually interact with, would also probably do pretty well.

It doesn't have to be perfect because it's not for us.

Aside from the name, what would be the difference between any new "Trainman" locomotives vs one from the "Master" or "Classic" series?

I could think of several Atlas locomotives in either the "Master" or "Classic" series that I'd consider to be "inferior" to the Trainman GP15-1.