Importance of prototype details !

[JaxTerminal]

Inquiring minds want to know!

We're working on new projects and want to refresh our understanding.

Thanks for participating.

JTC-Steve

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I would argue that "who can see the details anyhow" is going to lead you to some less than truthful answers.

It's not that "I can't see the details", it's that container detail differences are very far down my hierarchy of attention, so I generally don't stress about it that much.

That said... I can absolutely imagine that there is a difference of opinion there with modern modelers where cans make up a far greater part of the overall scene.

[Scottl]

While we have your attention, 40' NSC well cars would be a great product.

[John]

With the election we just had, this poll will be about as reliable as the mainstream media polls

[MK]

With the election we just had, this poll will be about as reliable as the mainstream media polls

Hopefully we'll get the results before Arizona does.   

[MetroRedLine]

Some manufacturers treat containers like mere loads.

JTC treats their containers like MODELS.

[sirenwerks]

JTC stated they're working on new products. Are we presuming these are more container models? More N scale containers wouldn't be bad thing, per se, but JTC's promotional material doesn't say anything about their limiting themselves to containers.


That being said, I am a huge an of the fine ladders and door detail you offer. I wish N scale manufacturers who make box cars would pay attention to JTC, I hate plug door detail and the like or end ladders that are molded on. For one, N scalers are now focusing in on their work (literally, with cameras) and it's appearing in magazines and online, and the molded on details are the last bastion of N scale as toy mentality. Second, and this is admittedly a selfish one, easily removable details provides better kitbashing fodder. So, please JTC, don't drop the bar you have provided.


I think a great bar to set is, if the original manufacturer offered 'it' as an option (like door types/sizes) then model manufacturers should try to make it an option on their models. Model manufacturers may never offer all of the paint scheme versions that will make modelers happy, but at least the base model will be there for them to paint/decal on their own.  Of course, that's more of a concern for models that aren't prototypically brand spanking new, since they collect paint scheme and detail options as they age.

[thomasjmdavis]

Unfortunately, JTC doesn't make any products that fit my mid-1950s modeling era (to the best of my knowledge), but I answered the poll anyway, just in case they ever start doing earlier equipment. (my answer being....if an accurate version is available, I'll choose that).  I do accept "stand ins", and understand that tooling costs money, but if company A makes an accurate model and company B paints something similar but not correct, I will opt for company A's model and be willing to pay more for it (assuming I can fit it in my budget somehow).

[Jbub]

Hopefully we'll get the results before Arizona does.   

1........2.........3.........Oh S*** I lost count 1........2......................4..............

[robert3985]

Containers don't fit my transition era time period, but...I appreciate model manufacturers who take a little extra time and get it right.  I would think that having a reputation as a manufacturer who gets the details right would be advantageous, and those who don't care will still buy the product, and accuracy will attract the more hard-core realists.

Can't lose by doing it right the first time IMHO.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Dave V]

Containers don't fit my transition era time period, but...I appreciate model manufacturers who take a little extra time and get it right.  I would think that having a reputation as a manufacturer who gets the details right would be advantageous, and those who don't care will still buy the product, and accuracy will attract the more hard-core realists.

Can't lose by doing it right the first time IMHO.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

I'll echo Bob here...  Neither of my modeling efforts involve containers either. And while my Colorado Midland is a "close is good enough" effort from an equipment perspective, my main focus--the HOn3 Rio Grande Southern--is what it is in part because I want everything to be as correct as possible. Were you to pluck a boxcar off the rails and turn it over, it will have the correct brake rigging for that particular car in its entirety. Why? Because it's worth taking that time to do it right the first time. And I know even if no one else does. Also, with smart phones what they are today, there's almost no way not to take high-resolution photographs that will reveal any shortcuts or inconsistencies to people also in the know.

In HOn3, that's a large part of what made Blackstone so revolutionary. RTR HOn3 stuff with all the details exactly right for each unique car number (or locomotive number) as researched from photographs. Just like I do with kits. I appreciate that very much.

[Tristan Ashcroft]

TLDR for what I'm about to write: I care as far as manufacturers can reasonably go.

Beyond that, I suspect you're going to get more answers than there are modelers, because for me alone it varies.  I care more about the railroad I'm modeling (Conrail) than I do other roads.  I care more about the primary and secondary aspects of what I'm modeling (a PRR coal branch that was actually abandoned in 1959 but I like it anyway - with coal trains; and the paired daily manifest trains that Conrail ran on the Buffalo Line - it's a tick odd, but whatever), other things, meh.

I'm generally happy with the right overall proportions of the locomotive or freight car and just enough detail to have individual grabs or ladders.  So much detail that it will immediately break off doesn't move me.  My primary exception to individual grabs/ladders is 100T hoppers, because no one has yet made 100T hoppers with individual grabs that help me, and I'm not sure I would shell out the dollars for a whole train if someone did.  I do want the paint scheme to be reasonably accurate.  Such as, I will cope with imperfect reweigh dates, but I'm not running any TTX (as opposed to Trailer Train) flats on my pre-July 1991 layout. 

Examples (this is HO):
- If a CR SD40-2 doesn't have flexicoils or an easy way for me to convert them to flexicoils, I'm not dealing with it.
- I'm over having plastic lift rings on HO locomotives.  On mine, they're all broken.  Someday, I'll paint match and add brass ones.  - maybe.
- I do buy aftermarket cab signal boxes for CR locomotives - and I love that Athearn includes them.
- I scoured ebay one spring for Harold King RDG block lettering for 100 T hoppers, because the only plastic hopper with a reasonably approximate slope sheet angle for a Reading HTg is the Bachman 100T hopper - and Bachman never ran them in RDG block lettering.
- I pay attention to the car numbers on my Bowser CR H43s, because I want an appropriate mix of car numbers representing CR H43s, H1Bs, and H1Cs (and one of the Bowser numbers is an H1G, too, and that's fine).
- If a manufacturer has pictures of a Conrail freight car among the 6 numbers they're running, I buy that one - because it was Conrail, and their paint shops were legendarily creative.
- SP shipped a lot of lumber in double door boxcars, so I have a few, and I don't overly know or overly care if they're the exact right kind of FMC double door 50 ft boxcar or whatever - they're boxcars that are going to a lumber yard.
- I buy boxcars from Moloco I don't need, because I'm confident Nick got the paint job right down to the data.
- I actually love that Tangent barely models underframe detail on gons, because I'm never gonna see it when the layout is functioning properly, and I figure I'm saving 5 bucks a car.

Right, no one read this far.  And I don't blame them.  Hope this helps.

[lock4244]

- I actually love that Tangent barely models underframe detail on gons, because I'm never gonna see it when the layout is functioning properly, and I figure I'm saving 5 bucks a car.

Right, no one read this far.  And I don't blame them.  Hope this helps.

It does seem odd the focus of some manufacturers on underbody details on certain car type. To me it's more relevant on hoppers, covered hoppers and tank cars than pretty much anything else. I'd rather save a little and just deal with low fidelity on a part of the car rarely seen.

[DirtyD79]

I would argue that "who can see the details anyhow" is going to lead you to some less than truthful answers.

It's not that "I can't see the details", it's that container detail differences are very far down my hierarchy of attention, so I generally don't stress about it that much.

Same here. I'm more a 3 foot rule kind of guy to be honest. I want my stuff to look somewhat realistic but I'm not going to toss and turn all night just because I placed the moss covered three handled family gradunza a scale millimeter off from where it was on the prototype. What I'd really like is more road names and more road numbers not just with containers but well everything. Or one better make an un-numbered version and a sheet of numbers with it so we can number them ourselves to make all we want.

[randgust]

I'd rather have a fuzzy detail one with the right paint and general appearance than a spot-on detail one to the last rivet that looks like it's been chrome plated or has the incorrect scheme to the point it's going to have to be stripped and redone anyway.

But I evolved an entire train from old Herpa/Con Cor stuff to Trainworks trailers and containers when those came out.

I'm always amazed when you look at TOFC in particular at how grayed and weathered so many trailers are in that service.  Double stacks not so much as it seems like containers are almost a disposable entity and never get enough multiple trips to take a true beating.

I'm just a little surprised that MT has never done (to my knowledge) even light weathering on their trailers or containers, don't need the full smear or graffiti but some general fade and dusting and even the diesel exhaust plume effect behind the cab would be appropriate.