Getting a shell to stay put on IM SD40-2s

[squirrelhunter]

Yes- and my efforts have led me to believe that among the shortcomings noted by others here, there is another they seem to have- the axles are situated too low in the frames- it looks to me that too much of the bottom of the wheels is showing. I think it adds to the ride height problem.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

While we're on the subject of these and ride height. I had a very enlightening discovery the other week. While these are a bit high in the saddle due to all of these reasons, the issue is compounded by Kato's long running gaslighting.

The Kato SD40-2 is right, right? Wrong!

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Look at the sill depth compared to the prototype.


https://conrailphotos.thecrhs.org/photos/cr-6360-sd40-2

[peteski]

. . . the issue is compounded by Kato's long running gaslighting.

What does that mean Ed?  Not familiar with your lingo.  There are no gas lamps in the locos,  and these run on diesel, not gas. 

Also, how do you guys deal with coupler height when you lower the shell (since couplers are attached to the shell)?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

What does that mean Ed?  Not familiar with your lingo.  There are no gas lamps in the locos,  and these run on diesel, not gas. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Basically, we've been lead to believe that the prototype is lower than it is because we trust Kato to have gotten that right and have been using their stuff as a reference for close to 40 years.

[ednadolski]

.. we've been lead to believe that the prototype is lower than it is because we trust Kato to have gotten that right and have been using their stuff as a reference for close to 40 years.

I guess we will have to wait and see what the new ScaleTrains looks like.

Ed

[wazzou]

I actually think from the photos posted that the KATO sill depth is closer than that of the Intermountain's.

[squirrelhunter]

If we assume the Atlas GP40/38 series are pretty accurate, the Kato sill is too thick and the IM sill is too thin.

Does anyone know if there are smaller diameter wheelsets that are compatible with the Atlas 6 axle trucks? I think the axles are situated too low in the Atlas trucks, making the wheels show too much below the bottom of the truck, making the truck itself ride too high- if there are easily swappable smaller diameter wheels and axles, I'd like to test my theory.

[peteski]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Basically, we've been lead to believe that the prototype is lower than it is because we trust Kato to have gotten that right and have been using their stuff as a reference for close to 40 years.

Thanks Ed!  I knew I could Google it, but I thought it would be more fun having you explain it (especially in this instance).  I learned something new.  I wish we had more gaslighters in today's world, especially when it comes to certain subjects or beliefs.

[oakcreekco]

I actually think from the photos posted that the KATO sill depth is closer than that of the Intermountain's.

All that I can say is that my Kato SD40-2 early/mid production units look very good on my rails.

The shells snap in place and stay there, and either truck is miles ahead of the Atlas units.

I'm done with "home engineering" factory flaws like IM puts out on a premium priced loco. Got my fill with their Tunnel Motors.

Amazes me how they keep releasing items like this, and folks keep buying them, and then try to make them look and function "right."

To each their own I guess.

[peteski]

Amazes me how they keep releasing items like this, and folks keep buying them, and then try to make them look and function "right."

To each their own I guess.

Yes, we often bitch (especially in online forums) about shortcomings and flaws of newly released models, but in the end if no other equivalent model is available, many of us purchase them (while holding our noses).

Then those who can't, just run them as they are, and those who can, make lemonade out of those lemons by modifying them to better represent the prototype.

[oakcreekco]

I guess that the Katos just are a good lemonade to my tastes.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[kiwi_al]

In accordance with the forum rules --> thread drift
The sort of  thing that Ed found has put me off the later IM offerings.
I bought 6 IM SD45-2's back in the day when they were released and was a bit shocked at how they were put together and molded. No walkway treads, cab glued on, longhood glued, very thick paint, ride height seems ok.

With the SD40-2 I have wanted to try one but now not so bothered, however we do have Kato - yes a bit wide, we also have offerings from BLI (haven't seen these up close). I noticed Bachmann is releasing one too (SD40-2) again!. Hopefully IM will stop stuffing up,  they used to have a good reputation but since the last few loco releases they are a bit crap.

Anyway just a collection of random thoughts from an old fart 

EDIT: I missed out scaletrains and yes I preordered one, high expectations, so we'll see.

[gi-depp]

I think the Kato SD40-2 is still loocking good.
And more important, a well runner.

[squirrelhunter]

The Kato SD40-2 is a very good solution is you model certain eras of the BN/ATSF/BNSF, UP, or CN/IC.

The BLI SD40-2 only comes in an early phase, and BLI decoders do no support a braking function.

So for someone like me who models the MP (no dymanics on vast majority of SD40-2's) and MKT (late phase without ditch lights) you either need to do a custom paint kitbash job, work on the IM models, or do without. I'm pretty sure CR modelers like Ed are in the same boat. If you use the ProtoThrottle you can cross the BLI units off the list too.

Hopefully the ScaleTrains SD40-2 is the ultimate version with an ESU decoder, scale width hood, correct details for each phase, correct ride height and flexicoil trucks for the CR guys. But until then I'm going to work on making my IM ones better.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

The Kato SD40-2 is a very good solution is you model certain eras of the BN/ATSF/BNSF, UP, or CN/IC.

The BLI SD40-2 only comes in an early phase, and BLI decoders do no support a braking function.

So for someone like me who models the MP (no dymanics on vast majority of SD40-2's) and MKT (late phase without ditch lights) you either need to do a custom paint kitbash job, work on the IM models, or do without. I'm pretty sure CR modelers like Ed are in the same boat. If you use the ProtoThrottle you can cross the BLI units off the list too.

Hopefully the ScaleTrains SD40-2 is the ultimate version with an ESU decoder, scale width hood, correct details for each phase, correct ride height and flexicoil trucks for the CR guys. But until then I'm going to work on making my IM ones better.

Yep. Exactly.

My 6366 was made from an extensively modified Kato snoot nose. I love her. But I also know her faults.

I was hoping that IM's would've been THE answer. And they're close. But the problem is getting them 100% (not like, 100% accurate but to my level of satisfaction) is surprisingly hard. Everything from fixing "build quality" issues (like aligning the body panels and replacing shitty horns), engineering choices (like adding underframe details), customer pandering (like replacing the long shank couplers with 1015s), and detailing issues (cab signal boxes, the right trucks), they're almost as much as of "fixer upper" as an undec Kato unit is.