Next MTL Freight Car - 60' Flat Car ???

[Rivet Miscounter]

I was simply making a general statement on things I have observed.  Trying to provide you an answer to why some might take offense to it.  I said nothing specific to your post.  If I have a problem with you or your post I will tell you directly.

Fair enough.   Sorry for the assumption.   And for the record, I haven't downvoted anything here, or anywhere for that matter, in some time.  (likely at least a year)

And thanks to whoever evened me out above.  (EDIT: Well, now I'm minus one again)

[nkalanaga]

Peteski:  I upvoted yours to cancel the downvote.

I don't vote either way often, usually only an upvote for a post showing actual modeling, or news that I consider significant.  Probably no more than a dozen downvotes as long as I've been here, and then only for truly offensive (usually social or political) comments.  There aren't very many of those, as we seem to have a polite crew.

[MK]

(EDIT: Well, now I'm minus one again)

Took care of you. 

[bbussey]

@Ed Kapuscinski,

Just for grins and giggles, I downloaded the monthly releases and bodystyle Excel files from the MTL website, added a vlookup between the two, created a pivot table off that detail and sorted by date last released.  Here's a screenshot of everything that hasn't appeared within the last five years.  Some surprising entries on the list.  These are all appearances regardless of prototypical or fantasy schemes.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[thomasjmdavis]

The list posted by Bryan reminds me of one of my quibbles with MTL- specifically, 039 bodystyle - boxcar w/vertical brake wheel.  I'm never completely sure what that means, because...
Here is what MTL marketed (not currently listed under "parts" on their site) as a vertical brake wheel:


photo from ebay

And here is what the New York Air Brake company says is a vertical brake wheel:


photo from online ad for NYAB.

Anytime I see "vertical" brake on a model, I go looking for a photo of the prototype to find out which "vertical" it is supposed to have, and compare to the model.

[John]

I believe the brake wheels shown in the micro trains add are for the old time cars where the brake wheel extended up to the roof, and The Breakmen walked on the roof to brake cars.

[Lemosteam]

I believe the brake wheels shown in the micro trains add are for the old time cars where the brake wheel extended up to the roof, and The Breakmen walked on the roof to brake cars.

I.e. Vertical Brakehwheel SHAFT.

[thomasjmdavis]

@Ed Kapuscinski,

  Here's a screenshot of everything that hasn't appeared within the last five years.  Some surprising entries on the list.  These are all appearances regardless of prototypical or fantasy schemes.

(Attachment Link)

When you consider the number of body styles they have, not doing 21 of them within a 5 year period really isn't surprising.  I will admit surprise that some haven't been done in 15 or 20 years or more.  I wonder if in some cases tooling was damaged, or they just had a "flop".  And on 2 bay hoppers, there is a LOT of competition, initially Atlas, and Bowser, but for the past 10 years, Bluford has dominated that particular niche with several prototypes in many roadnames.  Of what's on the list, if they were to do new runs, the one I would likely purchase would be the 060 and 061 composite gondolas. I don't know what the specific prototype is, but a lot of composite cars show up in freight yard photos from the 50s, and I think they are generally underrepresented in model form.

Speaking only for myself, I find that I am more interested in MTL's potential new releases than in re-runs of "generic" cars - meaning the ones from 30 years ago where we still don't know the prototype for certain, or the "standard" (more or less PS1) boxcar in backdated schemes, or 50' gondolas painted and lettered to represent 53' gondolas. I have enough of all of those.  On the other hand, if they do a version of their new PS-2 with the earlier "channel" ribs, I'm a likely customer. And I'm hoping to see the new mill gons soon.  And, of course, I do hope to see a combine in my lifetime.

[peteski]

I think the largest MTL "flop" was probably the scale test car, although I think it was really neat that MTL produced it. I did buy couple myself (but will have to custom paint them for B&M).  The main issue is that railroads only had one or few of them in their fleet.  I'm sure MTL was aware of it, but they still made them.  Maybe they hoped that the collectors would go nuts and start collecting every roadname they produced of that cute tiny car.

[thomasjmdavis]

I believe the brake wheels shown in the micro trains add are for the old time cars where the brake wheel extended up to the roof, and The Breakmen walked on the roof to brake cars.

Well....errr....yes, I do know what the MTL brake wheels are for.

My point was that MTL was using the same nomenclature to describe what my freight car books call a "non-powered vertical shaft (or sometimes vertical staff) handwheel" (where the wheel itself is horizontal)  that the manufacturers of brakes use to describe a brake wheel that mounts  to the brake equipment at the end of the car (with the wheel vertical).

This becomes confusing with the MTL USRA cars in particular because they make them both ways- with vertical shaft brakes with the shaft extending above the roof (modeling the cars of the late teens or early 20s) OR vertical wheel brakes on the ends of the cars (cars manufactured in the later 20s, or original cars fitted with new brakes).

I appreciate that MTL has made the part available, I just find it an unnecessary confusion.

[reinhardtjh]

@Ed Kapuscinski,

Just for grins and giggles, I downloaded the monthly releases and bodystyle Excel files from the MTL website, added a vlookup between the two, created a pivot table off that detail and sorted by date last released.  Here's a screenshot of everything that hasn't appeared within the last five years.  Some surprising entries on the list.  These are all appearances regardless of prototypical or fantasy schemes.

(Attachment Link)

It's too bad the attachments don't show up on a quote.

When you consider the number of body styles they have, not doing 21 of them within a 5 year period really isn't surprising.  I will admit surprise that some haven't been done in 15 or 20 years or more.  I wonder if in some cases tooling was damaged, or they just had a "flop".  And on 2 bay hoppers, there is a LOT of competition, initially Atlas, and Bowser, but for the past 10 years, Bluford has dominated that particular niche with several prototypes in many roadnames.  Of what's on the list, if they were to do new runs, the one I would likely purchase would be the 060 and 061 composite gondolas. I don't know what the specific prototype is, but a lot of composite cars show up in freight yard photos from the 50s, and I think they are generally underrepresented in model form.

Back in June 2016 I wrote MT and asked about the 86, 87, 88, 90 series hoppers because I had just gotten a bunch of the 85 series (last release) and the Product Planning Coordinator replies saying they had no plans for running any of those body styles for "undecorated production" (I had asked about undecorated availability) and as Bryan's chart shows, they haven't done them since, either.  Coming up on 7 years since the last for the 85 series and much longer for the others.  I like the Bluford hoppers, I've bought a bunch, but a lot of their releases aren't in my time period and even at 6 cars per release it takes a while to fill a C&O coal yard.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

@Ed Kapuscinski,

Just for grins and giggles, I downloaded the monthly releases and bodystyle Excel files from the MTL website, added a vlookup between the two, created a pivot table off that detail and sorted by date last released.  Here's a screenshot of everything that hasn't appeared within the last five years.  Some surprising entries on the list.  These are all appearances regardless of prototypical or fantasy schemes.

(Attachment Link)

Whoa! Something was last done in 1995. I wonder: Did they exhaust all the paint schemes?  Did the molds break? Did they not sell? Very interesting.

Thanks for "doing the math".

[bbussey]

MTL smartly has tooled many of their models over the years with multiple slides, so that a basic mold will cover multiple cars.  The two bay hoppers, 50' gondolas and flats, the 40' and 50' PS1 boxcars all produce multiple models from one mold by changing the side/end/top slides.  The truck styles are the same way, which is how ESM gets Dalman and National B-1 trucks w/o couplers for the G26 mill gondolas even though they've never been released as stock items.  So the notched two-bay hopper being absent is surprising in that aspect, because it simply takes a change of the end slides on the standard mold to make it.

The three that stood out for me were the 51' ribbed mechanical reefer (ten years!), the 50' PS1 double plug door and the 60' excess height double plug door.  All three have been released in multiple schemes so it's not as if they were poor performers.  The other two that surprised me were the two 40' wood outside-braced boxcars.  The 039 series is just a variant of the original car with Ajax brakewheel.  But the 043 series dates back to the early days, with many early 20th century automobile-carrier-designated schemes.

[bbussey]

I think the largest MTL "flop" was probably the scale test car, although I think it was really neat that MTL produced it. I did buy couple myself (but will have to custom paint them for B&M).  The main issue is that railroads only had one or few of them in their fleet.  I'm sure MTL was aware of it, but they still made them.  Maybe they hoped that the collectors would go nuts and start collecting every roadname they produced of that cute tiny car.

I don't think it was a flop.  They've released 16 schemes to date, the first in January 2007 and the last in July 2020.  Most likely it will resurface within the next few years, since every road can justify one.  Pretty good run for a very oddball piece of equipment.

[peteski]

Well....errr....yes, I do know what the MTL brake wheels are for.

My point was that MTL was using the same nomenclature to describe what my freight car books call a "non-powered vertical shaft (or sometimes vertical staff) handwheel" (where the wheel itself is horizontal)  that the manufacturers of brakes use to describe a brake wheel that mounts  to the brake equipment at the end of the car (with the wheel vertical).

This becomes confusing with the MTL USRA cars in particular because they make them both ways- with vertical shaft brakes with the shaft extending above the roof (modeling the cars of the late teens or early 20s) OR vertical wheel brakes on the ends of the cars (cars manufactured in the later 20s, or original cars fitted with new brakes).

I guess by not knowing the "real" RR lingo, I was never confused.  Kadee (and later MTL) have been using the same naming convention for decades (likely since they made their first wood reefer with the vertical (staff) brakewheel.  This is a first time I have seen someone call them out on their nomenclature, and first time I've seen someone cite the "real" RR literature.  I guess this is due to more modelers using  real RR sources  information for reference.

I was also never confused by the MTL's descriptions of the wood reefer different brakewheel options.  The model description would not mention brakewheel for the horizontal (shaft) brakewheel, but it would state in the description when the model had a vertical (staff) brakewheel.  I'm just used to it I guess.