There are dozens of F unit builder photos in this thread.
big train posted:There are pictures of Santa Fe and SP units on RR Picture Archives.net that have a bigger tank. I'm sure there are others.
Given Atlas-O's attention to detail and the time expended to get roadname-specific items just right (like the stainless steel plating on the SF units), I'm sure they want their clients to be happy with the overall product. We just unfortunately seem to be hitting a time where the actual overseas manufacturing facilities need SO MUCH constant monitoring these days, the importers can't afford to take their eye off the ball for half a second.
David
Atlas O Rio Grande F7 looked good to me at the Big E. The photo of the Milwaukee Road units was taken at an angle that seems to accentuate the tanks. Looking at the few prototype photos of F7 units on my phone, the tanks di not seem far off. They do look quite high, but I want to wait until I see a comparison of model to prototype.
Attachments
Images (1)
I'd have to agree with Joe. Before getting emotional and flying off the handle, there should be some logical investigation to what the proper height should be and does our 3-rail world cause some of the limitations to accuracy.
I'd also agree with him that this is still 3-rail and a move to 2-rail scale should probably be the route for anyone wanting absolute accuracy. Then you have solid ground to stand on when griping.
Not only is the tank a touch high. The cowling over the top of it makes it look 100 times worse. It doesn't come down far enough and leaves too much of the tank exposed.
Scrapiron Scher posted:Atlas O Rio Grande F7 looked good to me at the Big E. The photo of the Milwaukee Road units was taken at an angle that seems to accentuate the tanks. Looking at the few prototype photos of F7 units on my phone, the tanks di not seem far off. They do look quite high, but I want to wait until I see a comparison of model to prototype.
Please note that THAT is a 2-Rail model!
I don't see anyone getting emotional and flying off the handle. We are all providing our opinions on these models and seeing as how I have $1500 worth of the "models" on order to pull my El Cap I think I can voice my concern about what Atlas told me to expect and what they are delivering. I'm not one to put up up with being sold one thing and being delivered one totally different thing. Doug, can you post photos of your3rd Rail units profile from track level so we can see how they should look.
Boo Man posted:This was my very first F series purchase and you guys really have me bummed that it isn't to scale. I should have just stuck with the SW8-9's and switching on my layout.
I have CB&Q F3 on order, but am really thinking that order is getting cancelled if the masses believe it looks that bad.
I came down off my cliff and went down and ran my F7's. You know what, I like them. I'll never notice the tank discrepancy when they are running around the layout. They run great. The tanks were accentuated because I photographed them against white plaster cloth beyond the track. I wouldn't have known the difference. If there is a fix, I'll address it. Otherwise, I'll just enjoy running them and will look forward to the Atlas O F3's when they are delivered.
graz posted:I'd have to agree with Joe. Before getting emotional and flying off the handle, there should be some logical investigation to what the proper height should be and does our 3-rail world cause some of the limitations to accuracy.
...
With all due respects, some days you guys really crack me up. You've obviously overlooked the photo I posted that compares Lionel's model from 2002 to Atlas-O's model from 2017. Doesn't get more plain than that.
Sure... I'll give Atlas-O the benefit of the doubt that we're not comparing the same roadnames -- and I'm still holding out hope that some Atlas-O roadname models will be closer to the appearance of the Lionel model in terms of battery/fuel tank height.
We shall see.
From what I recall reading on the forum a few weeks ago, I got the impression that Atlas-O does have the Santa Fe B-units in NJ. The issue holding up shipment to customers was reportedly with A-unit decoration. So it would be great if Atlas-O could post pics of the SF B-units. And I'm sure folks here will be posting photos of other roadnames too as they receive them. That will go a long way towards alleviating some of the anxieties caused by the Milwaukee Road photos earlier in the thread.
David
it appears to me that the bottom area of say the fuel tank is roughly even with the bottom of the bearing areas on the trucks.
Now I'm not in front of an actual set of drawings and using a ruler, I'm just looking at what you see.
I tend to think that people like the look of the lower tank bottom whether it's accurate or not. So I'm saying get the actual dimensions before attacking Atlas and going public with a "let's all cancel" "knee jerk" reaction post.
Well, looks like I will be ordering a set of Mario's fuel tank spacers. Wonder if his F2/F3 ones would fit. Anyone care to photograph these from underneath?
Here's a thread on the parts:
graz posted:I'd also agree with him that this is still 3-rail and a move to 2-rail scale should probably be the route for anyone wanting absolute accuracy. Then you have solid ground to stand on when griping.
We do already have solid ground for griping. The 3-rail units cost the same as the 2-rail units. Therefor we expect and deserve the SAME level of accuracy whenever possible. In the case of the fuel tanks it is POSSIBLE.
Some of the 2-railers on this forum need to get down off your high horse. Our money is as good as yours!
Here are some picks of the PRR and Amtrak units displayed at the "Big E"
IMO, the nice thing about the shell is on the PRR units, Atlas O has the PRR Marker lights on the rears of the A units as well as the B units. They are non functional and part of the casting but it gives PRR modelers the option to light them up if wanted. These are much better detailed that the PRR Lionel Legacy units from a few years ago!
Attachments
Images (6)
I get most of my diesel prototype information from Bob Hayden's Diesel Locomotives Cyclopedia - Volume 2.
I believe first, we must acknowledge that the appearance of the tanks on the F3's and F7's is very much different from those on, say, the SD40-2's. Those SD40-2 tanks appear to glide on the rails. The photos of F units in Hayden's book seem to align with what Engineer-Joe is noting, that the tanks seem about level with the bottom of the axle bearings. If anything the model seems higher on the trucks than the actual F7 locomotive. If lowering the body a little onto the trucks is an easy fix, I see no apparent departure for the prototype. Disclaimer: I don't own any F's as yet, so my comments are only my opinions from photographs here and in books.
Scott Mann has just announced a 3rd Rail rerun of F7's in limited road names including SF warbonnet, SP Black Widow and D&RGW. I will be cancelling my Atlas order for the Santa Fe units in favor of the 3rd Rail
Attachments
Images (4)
e-mail sent Joe!
Boo Man posted:I oiled and greased them up. They sound and run really nice. The 74A out of the box had a missing number board. I looked in the box and found it. I glued that on. The 74B had a screw lying on the bottom of the box so I looked around and found where it was missing from.
My layout is still in its infancy so I tried to find somewhere nice to photo them and here they are for your viewing pleasure. I can't wait to get the rest of the ABBA.
Look very nice running there. Don't know anything about the fuel or water tanks and I have no Milwaukee images to compare, fact is if you like them then enjoy them!
prrhorseshoecurve posted:e-mail sent Joe!
thank you, replied. You're first!
OK lets look
This Santa Fe B unit looks the same as above, just from a different angle and a bad shadow.
Santiago's work..... and we know, he knows what he's doing. Look where the sump is on the back of the tank, how low it is.
My Lionel F3's with lowered body.
From the book... The Santa Fe Diesel by Dr. Cinthia Priest ...... even without skirts the tanks do not sit that high Atlas
Maybe they were trying for this lol
Attachments
Images (8)
Its obvious at least to this viewer that the Atlas F unit body shells sit slightly higher on the trucks than the proto pics and your lowered units, the level of the bottom of the ladders in relation to the truck center spring is closer to the flat edge on the spring on real and your lowered units, Atlas step bottom edge clearly sits closer to top of spring [body shell sits higher tanks sit higher] JMO
Atlas Update from 2015! I guess they never retooled.
Update 5/12/15 - The following tooling adjustments will be included on the F-7s:
1) Santa Fe nose headlight – New tooling for the full-size headlight on the nose door of the Santa Fe version.
2) Fuel Tank – This applies to all F7s. The fuel tank is being retooled to have the correct height. This will also be available as a separate part to retrofit older models, including prior runs of F2s and F3s.
3) Passenger Pilot – This new tooling will be used as appropriate per road name. On this run, it will be used with the PRR and Milwaukee Road F7A models.
4) PRR Trainphone Antenna – The new part will also be used on the PRR models (A-units only, per the prototype).
I believe it should be pointed out that an F7 model can have its tanks too low to be prototypical. I believe lower looks better, but...
Does anyone know if EMD offered different tank capacities on their F7's, or if roads increased the capacity of their F7's? Hayden shows Southern's F7 #6702 with its air reservoirs on the roof to provide more space for fuel and water in the underbody tanks.
Hot Water,
Yes, that is two rail and I intend to install the fixed pilot and a Kadee. The fuel tank was not something that I noticed at the Big E. Like everyone else, I do not like locos that ride high nor have fuel tanks that are inappropriate. I am, however, less critical of some characteristics than others and I can probably live with it as it is.
i ordered an ABBA set of Rio Grandes and will post photos when they arrive.
Eliot
Attachments
Im with David, the Atlas O units just look wrong, somehow cartoon like or something
I would think that by now more people would have received their Atlas F7's. I hope we start seeing more pictures soon.
Just for grins, I tried to do a comparison. First, through a lot of searching I've found pictures of F7's with "high water tank" and some with tank that look like they're scraping the rails. This is taking into account camera angles.
I took 645's pic and the pic of the Atlas model, and drew a line center hub to center hub. I don't have a dog in this hunt, this is just an exercise to see what I see. Draw your own conclusions.
For me, it sure looks like if you reduce the height of the unit over the trucks, the tank would be at the height everyone seems to want.
Just my $.02
Attachments
Images (2)
I have a set of santa fe's on order. I am content to wait for them. IF they have high water tanks then I will install Mario's spacer. I think that will be a lot easier than doing all the work LOS did get his 3rd Rail F7s to look as good as they do. With the Atlas F units I will install the included fix pilot and install Atlas O 2 rail scale couplers on 3 of the 4 units and that will that. The Atlas units close couple from the factory and have working diaphragms. The Atlas 2 rail couplers are inferior compared to Kadee, no doubt about it, so I do install a kadee on the trailing A unit. Since I generally keep my F units in ABBA MU the fact the Atlas 2 rail scale couplers are inferior does not interfere with my operation of the MU. For me it is worth the wait. I have no desire to cancel my order and reserve as set of 3rd Rail f units and it is definitely not something for me to get worked up about. That is just my opinion, to each their own.
Hot Water posted:Scrapiron Scher posted:Atlas O Rio Grande F7 looked good to me at the Big E. The photo of the Milwaukee Road units was taken at an angle that seems to accentuate the tanks. Looking at the few prototype photos of F7 units on my phone, the tanks di not seem far off. They do look quite high, but I want to wait until I see a comparison of model to prototype.
Please note that THAT is a 2-Rail model!
There really isn't much of a difference between the 2 rail version and the 3 rail version as far as mechanical differences that could cause the 3 rail version to sit higher on the trucks and have a larger gap between the fuel tank and the rails.
What I don't understand is if Atlas indeed did not retool their fuel tank than these locomotives should have the same look as the F3s but people are saying they look cartoonish. I am sure Atlas used the same frame as the F3s so if these locomotives look cartoonish then why don't the F3s look the same?
Mine came in today but I haven't had time to take it out of the box.
Boo Man posted:This was my very first F series purchase and you guys really have me bummed that it isn't to scale. I should have just stuck with the SW8-9's and switching on my layout.
I think it's a mistake for you to get caught up in this nit picking. "The masses" don't believe it "looks that bad." There are just a relative handful of folks who happen to be commenting here, who are really into highly detailed scale. And they're not saying it "looks that bad," really - mostly just commenting about one little detail. You look at the comments made on the Forum about any new engine. There's virtually never one that doesn't get criticized for something or other.
Before this discussion, you seemed excited about your engines, and you should remain so. They're really beautiful, and wonderfully detailed. Fuel tank a little high? Even if it is, and it's subject to some debate, no person looking at these engines running on your pike is ever going to notice it. So forget about it, and don't let discussion about fuel tank height spoil your enjoyment. I wouldn't let any of this affect your order for the CB&Q engines, either. I'm sure they'll be beautiful as well.
You definitely should have F units on your new layout. They are truly iconic, and these are beautiful models of them.
It's not the height of the fuel tank that's my issue, it's the fact that it's way too short leaving the giant gap between the tank and the insides of the truck. Not one F unit photo I've looked at has a fuel tank that short from nose to tail. And if theymade those number boards any larger they'd have to put a Budweiser ad on them.
Personally I didn't see anything blairingly wrong with Atlas O F7's, esp when comparing them to the Lionel Legacy versions! Even looking at the arguments on this thread, I still can't get the high water mark of the fuel tank.
Breezinup is Right! Most will not notice what a few vocal nitpickers are trying to justify.... Other than " Look at me!!!! Look at me!" Heck, even on the 3rail scale forum thread on the second run of F7's, that poster Santiago is saying he rather get the Atlas O f7's than deal with the 3rd rail detail issues he had with his units.
Btw, in 3rd rail's second run, Scott M. Includes the demo paint scheme for reservation. I will go for that!
Well, I keep searching as no one seems to reply to the question. The fuel tank size seems like some kind of standard size (1,200 gal?). I'm trying to find variations.
The smallest looking one I stumbled across so far, looks like this (maybe it's just the camera angle?)
http://rrpicturearchives.net/s...cture.aspx?id=610338
Most pictures show the tank at angles where it appears to sit lower. Somewhere I'll find the data on what it should be off the rails.
The skirting mentioned above seems to be different on each road? Each Phase? Maybe it rotted away over the years and was removed or not added at all to some models?
breezinup posted:Boo Man posted:This was my very first F series purchase and you guys really have me bummed that it isn't to scale. I should have just stuck with the SW8-9's and switching on my layout.
I think it's a mistake for you to get caught up in this nit picking. "The masses" don't believe it "looks that bad." There are just a relative handful of folks who happen to be commenting here, who are really into highly detailed scale. And they're not saying it "looks that bad," really - mostly just commenting about one little detail. You look at the comments made on the Forum about any new engine. There's virtually never one that doesn't get criticized for something or other.
Before this discussion, you seemed excited about your engines, and you should remain so. They're really beautiful, and wonderfully detailed. Fuel tank a little high? Even if it is, and it's subject to some debate, no person looking at these engines running on your pike is ever going to notice it. So forget about it, and don't let discussion about fuel tank height spoil your enjoyment. I wouldn't let any of this affect your order for the CB&Q engines, either. I'm sure they'll be beautiful as well.
You definitely should have F units on your new layout. They are truly iconic, and these are beautiful models of them.
Breezinup,
You are absolutely right. You apparently missed my post from this morning that said,
"I came down off my cliff and went down and ran my F7's. You know what, I like them. I'll never notice the tank discrepancy when they are running around the layout. They run great. The tanks were accentuated because I photographed them against white plaster cloth beyond the track. I wouldn't have known the difference. If there is a fix, I'll address it. Otherwise, I'll just enjoy running them and will look forward to the Atlas O F3's when they are delivered."
To add to that, after some of the comments on this thread, I might even be able to pick up some Atlas O Sante Fe F7's due to cancellations. LOL!!! 
My only regret is there aren't any CNW F7's or F3's.
Lastly, I have to say I am happiest with the locomotives that I have gotten from Atlas over the years. I have three SW-9's that I love, a set of three GP9's, three RS-1's, and these F7's. I have a SW-9 and SW-8 on order along with the F3's mentioned. I may be selling some of the other locomotives that I have.
LOL!!! I'm taking names so when I have my first operating sessions, I won't invite any nitpickers since I don't want to listen to the complaints about the tanks all evening. LOL!!! But then again, after the first couple beers I wouldn't care anyway since we'd all be having a good time. 
Bob
Just a note, it seems like most people take photos angled down at their layouts and trains. I took the F7 photos at ground level. If I posted a different angle, I'm wondering if this discussion would be this frenetic.
Boo Man posted:Just a note, it seems like most people take photos angled down at their layouts and trains. I took the F7 photos at ground level. If I posted a different angle, I'm wondering if this discussion would be this frenetic.
Bob, don't lose any sleep over this. Everybody is gonna make whatever decision best fits their needs. I recognized one of the pics that LOS posted of the Santa Fe F7's as one of several I posted immediately following October 2016 York. So I went back and reviewed more photos I captured of Atlas-O's pre-production SF F7's. Of course, the photo angle and lighting always make a huge difference how our brain perceives an image. I don't have many photos that focus solely on the fuel tanks. But for those interested, here's a representative set of photos from York of the Santa Fe F7's overall. Again, please understand these are photos of the pre-production sample -- not the full production units that Atlas-O will be shipping to customers. At the time these were captured, we were told we might see these in December if everything worked smoothly. Alas, that wasn't quite the case, as we probably won't be seeing the SF units for a few months yet -- for whatever reason.
Upon reviewing these photos again, the fuel tanks don't jump out at me the way they did on your Milwaukee Road photos. And I can honestly say that I was happy when I saw these models at York. The fuel tanks and battery compartments do seem a bit lower on the SF models, but quite possibly the all silver trucks, silver fuel tank, silver battery compartment, and silver lower paint trim make these all blend together nicely and give a more pleasing appearance overall to my eye. Whereas with the MR livery, the black trucks, black fuel tank and black battery compartment stand in stark contrast to the paint trim -- making the "high" fuel tank and battery compartment much more noticeable (also depending on the angle of view).
Anyway, the most important thing is YOU'RE happy with the product you're running now.
David
Attachments
Images (7)
Norm Charbonneau posted:Well, looks like I will be ordering a set of Mario's fuel tank spacers. Wonder if his F2/F3 ones would fit. Anyone care to photograph these from underneath?
Here's a thread on the parts:
Thanks, Norm!
I was just going to post it! It's a 30 second fix and does wonders!
thanks!
-Mario
Attachments
Images (4)
Well, I got mine out of the box and after reading and following this thread I thought I was going to be very disappointed but I have to say that I am happy with the locomotive. Do I think that the locomotive sits a little too high on the trucks, yes a little but I think that about most O scale locomotives with the "China Drive" system. So I knew it would be like that before I ordered it. Is the fuel tank too high? To be honest, after looking at the prototype photos in this thread, if it is off in my opinion it is off by a very, very small margin.
The picture is the Atlas F7 next to an Atlas F3. The video is the F7 at speed step 1 on my DCC system.
Attachments
Images (1)
Videos (1)
