Locomotives with Molded-In Details or Pre-Drilled to Add Details?

[sundowner]

I prefer molded on detail. But if there is one version that already has the detail mounted on I would probably buy that one as long as is reasonably price and comes DCC ready. One of the reason I have avoided FVM locos it because they look bare and cheap and I do not have the motor skill, time and patience anymore to mount all those delicate little parts.

[johnb]

Well that is the part that I do not quite follow.   If scale-sized details are too small to see at normal operating distance, why would you want to see oversized (molded-on) ones?   Wouldn't it look more realistic just to omit them?

Ed

the molded on grabs tend to be closer to scale than the free standing ones

[sirenwerks]

I understand the grab iron concept (though not all roads had the same grab iron placements) but other details , like horns and bells, aren't always placed in the same place so the pre-drilled/dimple concept means an awful lot of holes/dimples to fill and touch up.  Ergo, just give me molded on and I'll take care of it myself.

[ednadolski]

the molded on grabs tend to be closer to scale than the free standing ones

I'm glad we seem to agree that scale parts are preferable to oversized ones.

However I think it holds that most (if not all) molded-on parts are over-sized as well.   This is not a great pic, but you can still see where I shaved off the molded-on grabirons, and the 'shadow' is substantially larger than the scale-sized wire parts:



This also shows how much work it really takes to get rid of molded-on parts.  To do a good job of it, the model pretty much has to be stripped and re-painted.

Which brings us back to the original point:  Whether molded or free-standing, if the details are scale sized (or pretty close), then you can't normally see them on an Operator-level model where the typical viewing distance is an arm's length or more  (note that 'dimples' likewise disappear at that distance).  So if they were simply omitted, operators would not notice their absence.

That's really the simplest solution.  It keeps the cost of the model down, and it also helps detailers by eliminating all the tricky shaving and re-painting.  Win-win 

Cheers,
Ed

[Cajonpassfan]

This may be off topic a little, but freestanding detail or not, let's start with a quality finish. On N scale models, no amount of detail, freestanding or not, can survive a mediocre paint job. Peteski's pic below illustrates the point nicely.
Otto K.

[GaryHinshaw]

Agreed, the fundamentals need to be sound before any questions about detailing start to matter.  For example, I still prefer Kato's GEVO to FVM's because of the smoothness of its mechanism, the crispness of its shell tooling, and the quality of its paint job (at least BNSF).  I wish Kato would adopt FVM's approach to grab irons.

I hope Scale Trains can match Kato in the fundamentals.

[Mark5]

Bummer about it not being a SD40-2 ... maybe in the 2020s N scale will get a good SD40-2.

Since we are referencing other manufacturers, please avoid the fluorescent "glow in the dark" hand rails that I see on many Kato hood units - for me these destroy what otherwise might be a good paint job.

I like the dimple idea.

Mark

[GaryHinshaw]

He has said it is NOT an SD40-2.

Really?  Could you remind me when or where that was said? 

[peteski]

Agreed, the fundamentals need to be sound before any questions about detailing start to matter.  For example, I still prefer Kato's GEVO to FVM's because of the smoothness of its mechanism, the crispness of its shell tooling, and the quality of its paint job (at least BNSF).  I wish Kato would adopt FVM's approach to grab irons.

I hope Scale Trains can match Kato in the fundamentals.

If we use this photo as a reference then the answer is no.  The fit of the windshield panes is terrible and the eyebrow grabs show just how out of scale they look.  Kato's windshields fit the shell much better.

[davefoxx]

If we use this photo as a reference then the answer is no.  The fit of the windshield panes is terrible and the eyebrow grabs show just how out of scale they look.  Kato's windshields fit the shell much better.

I can't argue with your critique, Pete, but do we know whether that is a photo of a production model or a pre-production model?

DFF

[Missaberoad]

I will ad to that while Kato's F unit windshields fit their shells they are equally incorrect having a sunken in appearance compared to the prototype.
I can't compare the "eyebrow" grabs since Kato left them off their model. 

edit: for spelling.

[peteski]

I can't argue with your critique, Pete, but do we know whether that is a photo of a production model or a pre-production model?

DFF

Correct. But when I get my paws on the production model I'll be sure to take a very close look and post my findings on TRW.

Maybe the windshields will be installed better but I doubt the grabs will be any different.

[Seligman Sub]

Shane did say in the Train Masters NTS piece that these are preproduction windshields and they weren't where they wanted them. FWIW

[mu26aeh]

Really?  Could you remind me when or where that was said? 

I swore there was a post on one of these scaletrains threads that it wasn't an SD40-2, and someone quoted it saying they hoped it was a CF7 .  I remember the CF7 part because it was written in really small font and CF7 was repeated quite a few times.  I cannot find it right now, whether it was here on TRW or one of other boards., but it is mentioned quite a few times on their facebook page thread asking for the same input as here regarding molded/pre-drilled/dimples.

https://www.facebook.com/scaletrains/posts/1144044642284711

[Missaberoad]

I was mistaken see posts below
There have been no official announcements from @scaletrains either on here (including the show report thread) or on the facebook thread you linked to...

As far as I know no prototype has been confirmed or denied.

Edit: it is interesting how overwhelming the responce on Facebook for separately applied details is however...