Saw the new BLI boxcar with mule sounds today... (Eval on Page 8+)

[mmagliaro]

For somebody who doesn't like sound in general, I am surprised at myself because I think the idea of a mooing stock car would be fun.  Sure, I'd leave it turned off most of the time, but I still think it would be fun. 

But I couldn't live with the appearance.

Is there any video of the actual N Scale version (not the HO) that will let me hear what it sounds like in N (with smaller speakers)?   If I could get one on the cheap, it might be worth putting a good shell on it to have good looks and the mooing sound.

And no, this has nothing to do with the fact that I like cows and named my website with the word "cow" in it.   

[peteski]

And no, this has nothing to do with the fact that I like cows and named my website with the word "cow" in it.   

Right!  So what is the story behind that Max? 

Also, I never thought I would say something like this, but to me it seems that this new-for-2106 model is cruder than even a 30-year-old Bachmann boxcar!     It was probably designed using the latest CAD-CAM techinology, and yet, a 30-year-old model designed on paper and made using manually-cut molds is better executed.

[Missaberoad]

Those bachman boxcars are getting close to 50 years old now. Even the Microtrains stock car is 40 years old... 

Thankfully this is an anomaly. Companies like Atlas, Trainworx, ESM, Bluford, Fvm and others are pushing the boundries of fine detail...

[dougnelson]

Wow...

Sometimes I wonder if we're out of touch with "mainstream" N scale. 

I have long realized that, as N scale prototype modelers, we are a distinct minority and that we do not drive the economics of the large manufacturers.  MicroTrains has probably remained profitable because of all those Christmas, Halloween, states, presidents, Pepsi and other non-prototypical cars.  While these cars are annoying to me, they make it possible to have heavyweight passenger cars and other more accurate models.  The point for BLI however, is that it really does not cost more to make an accurate car than that stock car thing.  We would buy a few more cars, although perhaps small potatoes, more is better than less.

BLI did learn this lesson with their HO steam locomotives.  They worked extensively with the PRRT&HS modeling committee to get the details right on their PRR steam locomotives.  Getting the details right really did not cost them more and resulted in some increase in sales.  A good thing.  BLI needs to understand that some N scale modelers do care about accurate models.

[peteski]

The point for BLI however, is that it really does not cost more to make an accurate car than that stock car thing.  We would buy a few more cars, although perhaps small potatoes, more is better than less.

Not just BLI - this applies to lots of other models produced by various companies.  It makes no sense to me, but it keeps on occurring.

[chessie system fan]

This post is not praise by any means.  The solid sides do show what has to be willful ineptitude.  And the only other model I can think of in the history of N with solid steps is the DI/GHQ flat, but that was a pewter casting.  Yes, the solid sides puts it in the "worst of the scale" category, but to me the rest of the model doesn't look that bad.  The ladders look about the same as the overscale ones on Intermountain boxcars.  The roofwalk looks about like a Microtrains one.  The metal side supports (the right word escapes me at the moment) are thick because they're thick on the prototype.  The rivets look pretty good.  Ride height seems decent. 

People here are posting like it's the worst looking model ever made, but there are many poorer models out there.  I think the solid sides make the model look much worse than it actually is.

[wcfn100]

but to me the rest of the model doesn't look that bad.

And that's how ended up here. 


Jason

[Mark5]

Here's a factory pic of the model for those that are curious:


http://www.broadway-limited.com/stockcarswithsound.aspx

Mark

[tehachapifan]

I bet a black wash in the recessed areas would go a really long way in improving the see-thru (or at least the see-into) effect on these cars.

However, one should probably take precautions so the wash doesn't stray and seep into any electronic areas.

[peteski]

I guess if you are into extremely exaggerated features, the car doesn't look bad at all.  But to me it sure looks like some artistic representation of a railroad car rather than a close-to-scale replica.  This type of exaggerated details is usually seen in kids toys.

The outside bracing looks especially heavy-handed, but the ends and ladders don't look much better. I guess some modelers just don't see that or consider that as a negative (when it comes to fidelity of a model.

[bbussey]

The ride height is too high also.

[Catt]

IMPO this car is butt ugly and if my butt was that ugly I would never leave my train room.

I wonder how many of these will get someone else's body shell so the car at least looks decent.

[bbussey]

The majority of these that were purchased I would think were the non-sound version, show switching body shells does nothing in that regard.  I had planned on buying a non-sound Pennsy car since it was based on the Pennsy prototype, but I quickly scrapped those plans when I learned in Kansas City that the solid body shell was being utilized for the non-sound versions.

And, the model looks just as bad in person as it does in the photos.

[Dave V]

I'm as disappointed as anyone but we could throttle back a hair on the vitriol.

That said,

This post is not praise by any means.  The solid sides do show what has to be willful ineptitude.  And the only other model I can think of in the history of N with solid steps is the DI/GHQ flat, but that was a pewter casting.  Yes, the solid sides puts it in the "worst of the scale" category, but to me the rest of the model doesn't look that bad.  The ladders look about the same as the overscale ones on Intermountain boxcars.  The roofwalk looks about like a Microtrains one.  The metal side supports (the right word escapes me at the moment) are thick because they're thick on the prototype.  The rivets look pretty good.  Ride height seems decent. 

People here are posting like it's the worst looking model ever made, but there are many poorer models out there.  I think the solid sides make the model look much worse than it actually is.

I will have to respectfully disagree.  Take a look at Eric's comparison post:

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=39680.msg486135;topicseen#msg486135

The ride height is indeed too high, but that's barely the beginning.  I look at that brake staff and those ladders and am reminded that this is the same company that delivered such beautifully rendered fine details on the M1 and I struggle--given the cost per unit--to understand why that same level of precision could not have been applied here.  The solid stirrups are a complete mystery...I know of no other N scale manufacturer who has had to do that in this century.  Those odd notches on the one slat which I guess are supposed to represent the joists for the upper deck on the prototype make the car look worse to my eye.  The lack of filler boards where the keystone logo goes is also an issue.

I happily run Trainman cars on my layout, intermixed with the finer Atlas, DI, FVM, and ESM offerings...but after seeing this in photos and videos I would only consider one at a crazy-low blow-out price.

With respect to others who have decreed that they will never buy another BLI product, I must also disagree.  Maybe BLI needs to reevaluate their approach to the N scale rolling stock business (although I wish they'd do their PRR P70s in N scale...properly), but I don't foresee any other source for N scale Pennsy steam locomotives.  You want Pennsy steam?  It's going to be BLI.  And frankly, the M1s are pretty darn amazing.  As long as that's their standard for N scale steam, I'll be happy.

It pains me to complain about an N scale PRR-specific model because it plays to the perception that we SPFs are never satisfied.  In this case, however, I think the execution thereof warrants complaint.

[bbussey]

Isn't the Bachmann heavyweight model based on the P70?  Given the BLI price points, I can't see them releasing a potential P70 model at a lower cost than the Bachmann model.  And, the tooling on the Bachmann model really is well done, down to the etched pattern in the bathroom window glass, whereas the hit-and-miss BLI quality does not instill confidence that a potential BLI P70 would be a quality piece.  The MSRP is ridiculously high, but they can be found at more reasonable street prices or in blowout sales.

Regarding the vitriol, I suspect my feelings are clouded by the shall I say laissez-faire attitude I experienced in regard to the fidelity of the product and the concern (or lack thereof) as to how the model would be perceived by the consumer base.

I'm still annoyed.  Not by the quality of the model, but by the response and attitude I witnessed.