First taste of MTL SW1500

[eja]

can't NS get anything right?

Well it seems they can ... 13%+ dividend growth rate in the last 3 years.  Now where should they put that paint ?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I'm probably still going to get a pair, but if the scouting reports are all right, I'm set to be pretty disappointed.

I don't care what the "realities" are. I want a good product, not a half assed 1980s era attempt.

MTL has been a leader in the past: the first reliable trucks and couplers, the first really good freight cars.

But this is does not sound like the product of a leader and innovator. It sounds like a GM product from the 80s and 90s: value engineered, and full of problems that "nobody will care about".

Hood width is not a joke. Sure, I've got a few Kato units that have a similar problem, but... they were also all tooled back in the 1980s and 90s. I thought we, as a scale, have moved on from that. It's a very noticeable thing on an engine like this, especially if you mix them in with the scale width hooded Atlas MP15s. I don't know, maybe it won't be so bad when I see it, but I'm pretty sure it's gonna bug me. It just strikes me as a negative outcome of a cut corner.

The trucks are another thing. Sure, people who have their engines pulling their popsicle and hersheys trains might not care, but I'm a prototype modeler, and I do care about the friction bearing vs roller bearing thing.

If these things were great, or even good, I was going to buy a slew of them. Modeling industrial Conrail in the 1980s, these were THE engine. But now? If they're as mediocre as they seem, I may get a token pair.

And then, the thing that MTL is usually really good at: decoration. The stripes on the pilot of the NS model look nothing like the real ones. Other than "they are stripes". The pitch is off, the width is off, they're just completely wrong. It'd be almost better to have just made the pilot white, so people could at least just use a decal to fix it. Again, not a huge problem, but another one that adds up to move these from great to mediocre.

I remember when MTL used to call themselves the "Cadillac of N Scale". Well, that analogy still seems to be holding true... with value engineered products that underwhelm the consumer and are only loved by people with sentimental attachments.

I really hope MTL figures this out and rights their course, because, unlike the domestic auto industry that was large enough to be a national issue if it collapsed, if MTL falls apart, there will be no bailout, and we, as modelers, will be worse off for it.

[ljudice]

They got the writing on the cab in the wrong place on the prototype, it should be under the line like the model, can't NS get anything right?

Between these hard to model high hoods, headlights in the wrong place and insistence on ordering 1 of a kind locomotives,  I really think NS should be ashamed of itself....

[Denver Road Doug]

So is it a correct assumption to say that the MTL SW1500 mech will work as a replacement for an LL SW1200 mech?  So, in other words putting my LL shell onto the MTL mech will work?   If so I plan to pick one up out of the bargain bin at some point.

For those disappointed with the MTL offerering, I would suggest patience.   This is a locomotive that WILL be done by someone else, and probably soon.   I have no insider info....just my gut feeling derived from several pretty solid facts.  No need to get all bent out of shape about this one, as frustrating as it is.   

[packers#1]

Didn't Joe say MTL was going to tool the right sideframes in the last thread that was locked?

[u18b]

Not sure about roller bearing versus friction bearing.

But I think he did assure us that Flexcoil would eventually be done. (and that is what I need since every last SW1500 that CSX inherited from multiple sources had flexcoil trucks).

If my fuzzy gray matter is working.

[sdodge]

http://www.micro-trains.com/nr-1406_NSlocos.php

Prototype:

http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=47706

I have seen these and umpteen proto photos, what I meant was a photo of one bought from a retailer.

[CBQ Fan]

Here is a thought, with the few number of engines made by MT I wonder if some of these issues are being forced down on them by the manufacturer.  I know from past first hand experience that when a company comes in that is not a large player we pretty much told them what we were willing to do because the economy of scale was too small to make it worth it.  No hard feelings, just here it is and if works great, if not we see you at the next trade show.

[Philip H]

SO against my better judgement  I'll wade in and say MTL may not have done so bad with respect to the KCS loco.  While their page lists the road numbers as TBD (http://www.micro-trains.com/cs-N_1501_kcs.php) the 4330 is a real KCS SW1500 (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=151072).  So if they choose taht one they get a point from me.  And looking at a Protophoto from approximately the same angle (http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=136863) it also appears the only initial change I'll need is the horn (both type and placement).  Again a point from me.  I don't like how the ride height looks in the MTL drawing, but I put in for one of the UP ones due out later this month to strip and paint white, so i'll have a first hand before I do the Grey Ghost.

And as Ron pointed out, if we all do a few threads on improving this one, we may find the results fairly rewarding.

[PacRail]

MTL now shows the KCS road #s as 4330 and 4361 and coming in January 2015.

And a photo of the two together:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=269839

Yes, I am getting both!  Thank you MTL.

[cjjd6901]

While we are busy offering advice to Micro Trains....I have reserved a pair of READING SW1500s. 

Thank you Micro Trains.

 Best,
  Chris

[spookshow]

Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).

I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?

Cheers,
-Mark

[mike in bc]

Just curious, is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).

I can see worrying about incorrect trucks and/or headlights not shining properly... but that one? Really?

Cheers,
-Mark

+100000000

Mike

[Scott Lupia]

Mark, I was thinking about what you said about the hood with and the fact that it is only about 1/27" too wide.  I was in agreement with you that that seems insignificant.  When I looked at in context and realized the fact that the width of the hood is about a 1/2" overall, that 1/27" extra is pretty big.  If my brain were better put together I could figure out the percent of overage that this 1/27" is on the overall width of the hood.  I thought about it for a second and the only image in my brain was the TV screen during a game of Pong on the old Atari system.  If this were a larger engine the 1/27" would be less noticeable.  Like I said a few pages back, I look at the model and I see the extra width but that is only because I spent time with them at work.  Most people might not.  I can fix the other issues (paint, trucks, lights... etc.) but I can't fix the hood width. 

Scott Lupia

[ednadolski]

I'm probably still going to get a pair

   ummm, you might want to re-phrase that....   

is anyone actually upset that the hood is supposedly 6 scale inches too wide? I doubt that my eye could even register a discrepancy of .0375 inches (approximately 1/27th of an inch).

Maybe for extreme closeup pics.  But certainly not when viewing from the side, or from any kind of working distance (even with magnifiers).   OTOH things like oversized couplers and wheel flanges will stand out like dog balls even from a distance, since you have a relative visual reference point.

(Disclaimer: That's NOT a dis of MT or this model!  Most models in every scale have that!)

Ed