September 19 ESMC Boxcar Arrival

[Missaberoad]

I think you guys are being unfair to the review and the reviewer.  Remember when I did my technical review of Arnold SW1?  I not only commented the box, I even commented on the instruction sheet.  Nobody complained.  But then again, my comments were mostly positive. I wonder if I strongly disliked something about the box or instructions, would I have been chastised?  I made some positive and negative comments about the design of the model, and again, I was not raked over the coals for it.

Why is Jenna's (George's) review different, and deserving of all these attacks?  When less then stellar comments are made, justifications for them is also presented.  Go figure.  The lynching mob is out full force.  Ease up guys. 

Because he was completely dismissive of the product and of prototype modelers as a whole, it's not exactly a helpful review if it contains the line "nobody knows or cares"

This definitely wasn't a technical review, and if someone is dismissive of how I enjoy the hobby (the root of my "he is what's wrong" comment) then I feel I can poke some fun at their expense... 

[peteski]

I do have to concede that some parts of the review seemed whiny (like about the door that doesn't open), but it also pointed out some positive things about the model.  But it was someone's personal opinion, not some "official" review in some publication, so I give the author a bit more leeway on perosnal opinions.  I guess I'm bit more open minded about this since I occasionally write similar reviews (sprinkled with my subjective opinions and observations).

[nscalbitz]

...way to ruin a positive product announcement... 

[bbussey]

I think you guys are being unfair to the review and the reviewer.  Remember when I did my technical review of Arnold SW1?  I not only commented the box, I even commented on the instruction sheet.  Nobody complained.  But then again, my comments were mostly positive. I wonder if I strongly disliked something about the box or instructions, would I have been chastised?  I made some positive and negative comments about the design of the model, and again, I was not raked over the coals for it.

Because your reviews are fully constructive and based on a thorough examination of the product. And, you’re not dismissive of elements of a model simply because they don’t appeal to you. Just wanted to state the difference between your reviews and the X72 review.

[chicken45]

lol "Jenna"

[learmoia]

  But it was someone's personal opinion, not some "official" review in some publication, so I give the author a bit more leeway on perosnal opinions.

I still believe that 'official publication' reviews are biased on how big the ads are in the magazine.  Although publication reviews are almost always 'glass half full' reviews to begin with..

~Ian

[daniel_leavitt2000]

If you're going to do a detailed review, at least cover the basics : are the details correct? Dimensions? Paint? Lettering? None of these were covered.

I am really glad to see the X72 come out. It's a good model of a very basic box car and I think some people get a little confused between a good model of a basic car and a basic model of a more complex prototype.

My only issue with this car was that I thought the PC green was a bit too dark. It may be correct, but they certainly didn't last long like that. Most photos of the car show it to be a much lighter mint color. But that is easily fixed with a fade wash so not a biggie.

[bbussey]

The PC Deepwater Green is spot on to the prototype.  Got paint samples from the PCHS back when the G26 was done and it remains in our paint reference catalog at the factory. It does match a fresh coat of paint, so you will have to fade it to have a more seasoned model.

[Englewood]

I am reminded of all these unboxing videos on the net these days. Sometimes I think that they talk about the packaging because they don't have anything of substance to talk about, or to make their reviews a little longer.
Personally, I prefer smaller boxes but I would never not buy rolling stock because it came in a big box.

[Ike the BN Freak]

I think most of the Walthers cars I bought with the exception of the Log Flats came in way too large, flimsy cardboard boxes with a clear acetate window.

I got a couple of those log cars that came in the cardboard box

[wazzou]

I got a couple of those log cars that came in the cardboard box

That's odd.

[learmoia]

The Ballast cars, PD hopper, GSC Flats (bulk and regular) OB Boxcar, Composite Gon,  Coil Car, Cryo Freezer, Grain Hooper, Russel Plow and Bay Window Caboose... (the stuff from the big N push in the 1990s.. maybe pulp flats too, and I think I'm missing 1 or 2 others) came in cardboard boxes..

Anything released in the mid-late 2000s and 2010s came in jewel cases..
Rock hoppers (new), Side dumps (new), Passenger cars (new), GSC Flats, NE Cabooses (old LL), Log Flats, and a few others? came in ESM style Jewel cases (heavily advertised as a model feature  )

Anyways Walthers did bring out 1 or 2 re-runs from the 1990s stuff but ignored most of it... I'll bet Walthers could have sold more cars re-running the tooling they already had vs investing in tooling for 2 new cars..

It is nice that Atlas is putting its inital focus on the cardboard era cars.. 

But they all use the same design as the awful ESM Jewel case.
 (I think.. I need to check my plow..)..

[Scott Lupia]

Wow, that review is an incredible addition to the model railroading hobby and industry.  I think the quality of the ESM car speaks for itself and the reviewers need to complain about the jewel case speaks volumes of where her head is at.  I used to do product reviews for RMC when I was Associate Editor.  You are in a tight spot because the manufacturers send you product to review and also pay for ads in your publication.  Many times I found that I could not review a product because I couldn't give it a good review.  A manufacturer of sound equipped HO diesel and steam locomotives had sent us a box of about $3000 worth of product.  I managed to get a review on one of the diesels because I could actually get that one to run.  The other stuff we couldn't give an honest review.

I don't think anybody here really needs a product review to help them make a decision about a product like freight equipment.  There are a lot of talented modelers here who can overcome any kind of obstacle that might be presented by rolling stock.  The reviewer of the ESM car probably can't properly seat a dislodged wheel.  It seems easy enough to figure out what is causing drag on a model and to mention that in her so called review.  She chose not to.  It comes off as more of a hit piece targeted at dissatisfaction with the price of the car backed up by a ridiculous complaint about the box the car came in and the fact that she can't figure out how to make a car roll. 

Oh and for what its worth, when Bryan was at my house shooting the product video for these new cars, we had to be careful because the Mt. Pocono module we shot on was not level and the cars would roll of the end if we did not have a locomotive coupled to them to hold them in place.  Take that Jenna!

Scott Lupia

[Bendtracker1]

Her reviews are anything but constant.  (It is a gal who is doing the reviewing by the way.)
I usually just skip past them when I see she posts one.
As others have stated, most seem like personal opinions rather than a unbiased view.

Here is the last one that I actually wasted my time reading.
https://trovestar.com/generic/blog.php?Article=221

Here's the link to her review page for anyone who is interested.
https://trovestar.com/generic/blog.php?Collection=4

[learmoia]

ROTFLOL..... She loved the Rapido Reefer!!!!!!  (But the jewel case was too big... she specifically states she prefers smaller Micro-Trains Jewel cases in the review.)    (No innuendos intended.. its in the review!  )

 

~Ian