Manufacturers - An annoying product marketing compaint

[wm3798]

Bryan,
I totally dig what you're saying, [party pooper] but you have to understand that 99.9% of model buyers don't give a rat's patoot.  They buy because the paint scheme is cool, or they like covered hoppers, or green is their favorite color.  Your brethren here at the Railwire might be more tuned in to the vibe, but face it, we're the vast minority.[/party pooper]  The good news is, we're also more likely to make with the decals and fix the fark up ourselves, because we care, and we can.

There is validity to the point, however, that it takes as much effort to do something right as it does to do it wrong, but for the vast unwashed model railroading public, it just doesn't matter.

Particularly, dare I say, when the only evidence that gives it away is 1 point type that we're going to weather into oblivion anyway.

Lee

[Craig Martyn]

Some information is very difficult, if not impossible, to find.  For a car built back in the mid-sixties, you're lucky to find photos with high enough resolution from which to pull important paint scheme data.  When you find that photo(s), you often only have a photo date; that doesn't give you information on when they were modified, etc., etc.  That said, considering there are hundreds or thousands of a single prototype, the 'shop' dates will vary over years as the cars go in for service, making it nearly impossible to categorize a car as "shopped between 19XX-19XX."

So, often it's not a matter of purposely withholding information from the public, but rather a lack of extremely specific information on a specific prototype.  Again, we can guarantee our PS-4000's have perfect lettering but ONLY for a specific time and place.  I can't speak for others, but we do our best to supply every bit of information we uncover.  

Welcome to the world of manufacturing.   

[bbussey]

... ESM? Not sure where you're keeping the info you claim, Bryan. When I click on a body style, then a specific paint scheme, I get nuttin' but a generic statement about prototype at model's front page, poor quality photo of each model but a few larger photos (hit or miss but certainly can't read the build/service date on either), and no specifics about car modeled, except N&W cars, kinda (no out-of-service/scrap/repaint dates). In other words. no consistency. Maybe I'm using the wrong website? Oh wait, it's yours...

Always quick to criticize instead of doing some legwork.  And you wonder why no one provides answers to your liking.

Look at the individual item releases, and you'll see the service dates.  You are always so quick to bark about the item prices, yet I'm not even mildly surprised you don't see the other information in the same tables.  Of course, you would have noticed the service dates if your primary purpose truly was to gain the information you seek rather than spew insults and pick fights.

When are you going to post something constructive?  Still waiting for that to happen.

[Dave V]

Don't know what the fuss is all about...  I certainly appreciate would prefer manufacturers put the latest restencil date on their product announcements/descriptions because I can't always read it in the picture or in the jewel case at the hobby shop counter.

But as for when a car may have been in service (i.e., how late did it last, when did it get X paint scheme, etc.), well, that's the kind of fun research I enjoy doing myself.  It gives me an excuse to read through my personal library of color guides and roster books as well as to hit the incredible selection of websites dedicated to that sort of research on them Interwebs.

I may just be a nutjob.  And, I noticed the "new" stencil dates on all of the ESM products in their catalog.  Thanks, Bryan!

[Denver Road Doug]

Most of Intermountain's cars have the build date included in their web listing, just for the record.  I think if you have a specific question about a specific car from a manufacturer, a quick e-mail will get you more info than you probably want to know.  Over the years I've gotten good replies from: Bluford Craig (then at DI), FVM Matt (then at Intermountain), BLMA Craig (then in Junior High), Frank at Intermountain, Dave C, Paul G, and Cory at Atlas, Pat at Trainworx, George (prev at Deluxe Innovations), Dave (DI), Joe (MTL), Kato, Athearn, RC, etc. etc.   Like I said, they're not necessarily opposed to providing the info, they're just not gonna spoon feed it to you.  

Also, you can usually get a decent idea about era by looking at photoarchive sites and finding similar number series. (or the exact car)

Regarding the BN locos, well, locos are usually the easy part since they are the most photographed/documented.  Not sure if you were truly interested in the BN units or just using them as an example, but I can probably find out whatever you want to know about them.

[sizemore]

Some information is very difficult, if not impossible, to find.  For a car built back in the mid-sixties, you're lucky to find photos with high enough resolution from which to pull important paint scheme data.  When you find that photo(s), you often only have a photo date; that doesn't give you information on when they were modified, etc., etc.  That said, considering there are hundreds or thousands of a single prototype, the 'shop' dates will vary over years as the cars go in for service, making it nearly impossible to categorize a car as "shopped between 19XX-19XX."

So, often it's not a matter of purposely withholding information from the public, but rather a lack of extremely specific information on a specific prototype.  Again, we can guarantee our PS-4000's have perfect lettering but ONLY for a specific time and place.  I can't speak for others, but we do our best to supply every bit of information we uncover.  

Welcome to the world of manufacturing.  

Your argument that "there are many shop dates..." is moot. I really dont understand why the manufacturers that represent themselves here complain "well we don't have 100% information" yet they still throw some dates on the cars anyway. If you put a build date of '63 and a shop date of '83...well guess what there ya go.

Ok fine it's not 110%, but at least post the build date and any repaint/restencil/shop dates you physically put on the artwork that goes on the model. Is it really that hard? I don't care about manufacturing and unclear pictures, you selected two dates based on your research that you threw onto the model when it got squirted/stamped/fondled with paint. I can pretty much go far out on a limb, "us" rivet counters will accept the dates you use and move on with the rest of our lives knowing that a car will largely "fit" our timeframes that we particularly model. It takes about 30 seconds to put this information into your descriptions.

The S.

[GaryHinshaw]

Tim has a good simple suggestion - post the build/shop dates put on the model.

Like Dave, I actually like thumbing through books & web sites (railcarphotos, etc.) as a form of research, though the latter works best for modern modelers.  Then I hit the tank car section and just give up since they're practically made to order.  

At some point better is the enemy of good enough, but each has his own definition of good enough.

[Ian MacMillan]

Well what seems to have been a thread started for an understandable request has gone towards inane. 2 mfgrs have given their points and pretty much Matt and Joe would give a similar answer.  Sometimes saying, "Hey could you guys do this?..." instead of something like "Why the f#%! don't you do this!?..." works better.

I'd like built/shop dates on all listings as well but I'm not put out doing it myself as I could learn something in the process doing that research. Part of being a protoist or rivet counter is not having it spoon fed to you in the quest of correctness.