Although I have many diecast steam locos, I had never given diecast rolling stock much attention. Lately I've began to pick up several MTH dicast rollers. I wonder if it really matters to most folks or if detail and/or weight is the reason they would purchase such? Which do you prefer?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Although I have many diecast steam locos, I had never given diecast rolling stock much attention. Lately I've began to pick up several MTH dicast rollers. I wonder if it really matters to most folks or if detail and/or weight is the reason they would purchase such? Which do you prefer?
Personally, I do NOT care for diecast rolling stock. Although they are indeed usually highly detailed, I don't care for them for two reasons:
1) They are WAY TOO heavy for the long trains I prefer to operate.
2) They are much more difficult to up-grade to scale size Kadee couplers. Been there, done that, and no more!
how long are your trains, Hot Water?
As long as the model looks great, and runs well, die cast does not matter to me. Even steamers. I'd take a well-detailed plastic boilered one as long as it's weighty enough to pull. Rolling stock should be just heavy enough to track well. No need to burden the locomotive with heavy cars.
I have many diecast cars from the original K-Line and MTH and possibly Lionel. I like the diecast cars because of their weight and really good tracking ability. Most of them also have excellent detail and paint. I buy diecast cars whenever I can.
The downside to diecast cars is also their weight. Engines can't pull as many diecast cars as they can lighter plastic cars. Sharp curves and steep grades adds to this problem. This is why many modelers prefer plastic over diecast cars. This disadvantage can be somewhat overcome by lubricating the axels on the diecast cars. Most model railroads don't have enough space to operate long enough trains where this is a significant limitation.
A second disadvantage of diecast cars is that they need to be placed at or near the front of a long train if they are operated with plastic cars. Diecast cars at the rear of a train will tend to pull lighter plastic cars in front of them off the track.
A third disadvantage of diecast cars is that a box full of them is very heavy when transporting them to and from my club's layout. They run great when I get them on the track, however.
Joe
how long are your trains, Hot Water?
On the home layout, at least 20 cars, with upwards of 30 when operating "reefer blocks". My C&O 2-Bay hopper coal train is 55 cars, and the Western Maryland 2-bay hopper coal train is over 30 cars (I can't quite remember).
When operating on the modular layout, I prefer at least 40+ cars.
MTH's excursion into this material/technology for rolling stock was, IMHO, a 'flash-in-the-pan', poor choice, not well thought out.
Too much weight. Doubtful there was any real cost advantage...even when manufactured in a country having zippo regulations on the process from an environment, health, safety, et al viewpoints.
Now, I will readily admit that a handful of our customers (LHS) delving into the nostalgic would want to buy grandpop a new Lionel train for Christmas...."But I want one made of diecast....like they made back in the 30's, 40's, 50's...not the cheapy plastic ones!" Several would argue your intelligence (or youthful naivete....I'm 70!) that a 1950 'postwar' boxcar was plastic and sheet metal, not diecast. Oh well.
Model Power also made a brief excursion into the realm of diecast HO cars. We carried them in the store for about one order's worth. They were DEFINITELY NOT a hit when put into a train behind an engine that had traction trouble...even with rubber tire(s)!
Of course, back in the 40's-50's, Silver Streak, Mantua, Athearn, Roundhouse, et al HO rolling stock kit manufacturers used diecast metal extensively. Perhaps one of the worst casualties of regulations/costs impacting diecast processes in model railroading was when Central Valley hung it up for their iconic series of trucks. They were the Lexus/Cadillac/Continental/S-Class of freight and passenger trucks for HO railroads. Durable, smooth rolling, well-detailed, functional springs, low cg for car weighting,....they were the trucks-of-choice. They still do very well on the secondary/auction market.
Enough. No more diecast rolling stock, please.
Just MHO, of course.
KD
I have a bunch of the K-Line diecast coal hoppers. I use 2 or 3 powered UP Heritage diesels when running 20 to 25 of these heavy hoppers. Makes for an impressive consist with 2 diesels on the lead and one pushing.
I Like these.
Ray Marion
I've never had an interest in diecast cars, because of their weight and the attendant problems others have mentioned.
die cast locomotives.
I don't like the die cast rolling stock because its to heavy
and I cant pull many cars at the shows.
I like the MPC plastic or 8" plastic with needle bearing
axles. I can pull many many many of those cars.
I do use some post war rolling stock with the die cast trucks, although I can only
pull 8-12 of them and they put a strain on my locomotives.
Why would anybody buy diecast freight cars? Little detail, too heavy and they look hideous.
I have the die cast MTH RK box cars, reefers and tank cars; many of the K Line die cast chassis tank cars and some Lionel die cast tank cars. I like them all-not exactly sure why-but there is something about their "appearance" that I like. On the rail, one has to deal with them more like real trains-being careful to start up with the cars compressed and allowing longer stopping distances.
As long as it weighs within recommended guidelines, I have no preference for the material. Diecast metal, plastic, even wooden, cam be made to look very good (or not, depending on the cratsmanship). A lot of diecast cars weigh too much, though.
I also prefer die-cast rolling stock. The metal does feel different to touch when compared to plastic (in a desirable way). At this time, most of my trains are stationary & so my preferences could change when I get to building a working layout. I just replaced my plastic MTH Premier Husky Stack cars with die-cast Lionel Husky stack cars. Cars from both these manufacturers were converted to 2-rail.
Comparing just these 2 cars, it seemed like the die-cast Lionel cars had relatively more details than the plastic MTH cars. Even though this level-of-detail is independent of the material of the car, I assume that the manufacturer (in this case, Lionel) chose to add more details since they could sell it for a higher price than a plastic freight car while MTH wanted to make a car at a more affordable price (to the hobbyist) & achieved that by using plastic & omitting smaller details. Or it could be that MTH was the first to come out with a scale-sized husky car & Lionel was forced to come up with an improved version to motivate people who already had the MTH cars, to buy theirs & they chose to make it as a die-cast car with more details.
But I do believe that the plastic cars could be made as well detailed as a die-cast car. I have never owned an Atlas Trinity Grain hopper but having seen it at my local hobby shop & at train shows, it has an impressive level of detail. But if another manufacturer wants to reduce Atlas’ market share in Trinity Hoppers, they might have to come up with a newer version of this hopper with even more details & then make it as a die-cast car just to differentiate it from the plastic version.
These are just my opinion.
Thanks,
Naveen Rajan
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
