Future AF Suggestions

As far as those so called S "autoracks" from lionel....Bill, youd be suprised how many younger people that would totally rather use those as a wheel chock. They may vaguely reassemble an auto rack, but thats bout it. They are absolutely nothing close to what should have been made for S without extreme modification. Why would you do that to your customer base??????? Its almost rude really.

OK, How many younger people are in your sample?  

My guess is that it is under 10 in number.  

When you say younger what age range are you talking about?

Too often people make comments about the market, when in fact they are talking about the people they know.  If Lionel was wrong about what people would buy for an extended period they would be out of business.  We will see in 6 months if they cancel any of the items in the 2017 catalog.  If they do we know they guessed wrong about the market buying that or those items.  

I think they likely will cancel the items that they deem unworthy at the end of the early buy period.  I'm sure they will make the auto racks, the is no money spent on new tooling so it's not so much of a gamble.  

Im one of the 10 by the way....

To Banjo's point, I do agree, I don't expect Lionel to make a car that will not operate on the radius they make.  That likely would rule out some modern cars, no doubt, but there are plenty of other cars that are workable and relevant to the conversation at hand.   

And I (along with others) invested in the right to complain about Lionel's lack of commitment to the scale/Highrail market.  Lionel stated in 2012 when the SD70 came out that they would be making additional scale frieght cars in addition to the CH, I like many others invested in Lionel because Lionel made a commitment to us.  20 some SD70s, ES44s and U33s, Legacy system and ZW-L.  I paid for the right to say Lionel is not fulfilling the commitment they made to the market, regardless of changes in administration.  

Ben 

Bill, 10 is wayyyy off. in my sample im using just about every s scale guy that i come in contact with via social media, train shows and swap meets. The age range would be somewhere from the age of 15 to about 30 ish.  That number?...could be in the thousands to be quite honest. How many yiung people do you really see at these shows doing S? I bet wed see lots more if things were built with a little more future in mind of WHO is gonna carry the torch of S on into the future.

Im not saying EVERY single person under 35 agrees,  but id say a strong 85% do and they are not really interested in ALL the older, less detailed stuff. Not saying its no good. Not saying the American flyers legacy for all these years isnt extremely important, just simply saying that with todays technology and the things we see today, itd be nice to be able to model the modern era. Every single other scale does it with ease. WHY NOT S. WHY??? 

 

As far as the autorack car goes, ill give you my take since you brought this up about it not being possible. I never said ONLY the modern autorack is what we want. I said ROLLING STOCK.

Lets use some common sense here. I think everyone here can agree that most dont display a layout that would accommodate a 89 foot by scale car. Thats common sense.

However, what about modern 30,000 gallon tank cars? Modern covered hoppers, modern flat cars, modern center beam cars, modern stacker cars (exception of des plains, but they are only 48 footers) modern box cars, modern reefer cars. That is the BULK of whats seen out the the modern rails today. ALL of afore mentioned cars COULD be made. ALL could run R27 track and possibly R20 track and look really good doing it. 

Also, i dont bite the hand that feeds me. I have over 30 diesel engines i collect. Atleast half being Lionel. Im just not interested in much else they (lionel) offer at the moment.

 

 

 

banjoflyer posted:

Here's a question I obviously don't know the answer to. When we speak about American Models and the ability to sell highrail or scale as the customer desires...where is the modification made? In Ron's warehouse or at the point of manufacture wherever that may be. I'm guessing Ron changes out highrail wheels and couplers to scale wheels and couplers upon receiving an order for just that type of engine or car.

 

But to expect Lionel to install scale options here stateside like Ron does (if indeed he does it that way) is kinda wishful thinking IMO. Talk about delay in product delivery? Open all the shipping containers, find the engines to be altered, do the alteration, reassemble all the products to be delivered to customers large and small...? Holy cow! They don't even want to order extra parts! They disassemble returned engines to create a parts stash.

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone expects Lionel to play musical wheelsets in Concord.

The second run of SD70's and all of the ES44's required that the scale operator purchase scale wheels direct from Lionel.  Kadee mounting brackets were included with the locomotives. (Heck, even my early 2000's era Mikado's and Pacific's had Kadee mounting brackets included. Same for the Challengers, Y3's and U33C's.)

Sure, it's an added expense for the scale operator, but given we're only about 15% of the market, it's not an unreasonable method of doing things. 

There were also some scale operators that paid a third party $575.00 MORE for their Y3's to get them converted to scale wheels and have the DCC code included.  Which proves if you make something attractive to the scale operator, they will buy it.  Unfortunately, the third party has exhausted his conversion parts and is no longer in position to make more.

As far as scale wheels and/or trucks for freight cars go, we can always get them from American Models.  Or they used some old SHS trucks.  Which is exactly what myself and others did for the ill-fated cylindrical hoppers.

(I've even bought HiRail versions of AM cars (such as Fest or Spree cars) and changed the wheels and couplers myself.  I wasn't going to let an attractive car get away just because of the wheels and couplers.  No big deal.)

But the car has to be something worth converting to scale.  Something which the auto carriers are not, without a lot of effort chopping up the body.  I think a fair amount of scalers would overlook the compressed length, just as we do for AM's Budd cars.

I guess it's wrong for us to expect great things from Lionel, with that 100+ year reputation.  Seems like Lionel's getting into the method of just throwing something out there, expecting us to buy it, sit down and shut up.

Rusty

banjoflyer posted:

But to expect Lionel to install scale options here stateside like Ron does (if indeed he does it that way) is kinda wishful thinking IMO. Talk about delay in product delivery? Open all the shipping containers, find the engines to be altered, do the alteration, reassemble all the products to be delivered to customers large and small...? Holy cow! They don't even want to order extra parts! They disassemble returned engines to create a parts stash.

I'M NOT BASHING SCALE HERE. I personally think scale detailed  models are the desired  models. I just want the ease of highrail operation with large flange wheels that will run on the vast majority of track options. I don't want no stinkin' 70 year old hook shaped boxcar handles!

As to scale SIZED cars such as 89' auto racks. It's not going to happen IMO. Maybe you didn't see my post on the scale sized autorack I made out of a 2 X 4. It ran on r20 curves but looked crazy doing it. REALLY CRAZY. Lionel does not offer large radius curves in their S track offering FASTRACK. Do you honestly expect them to make cars that won't operate and look appropriate on the very track they are selling?  R20 track is in their starter sets. Wouldn't be too smart to sell cars that little Johnny can't operate easily on his new Christmas present.

 

Mark

 

 

I am having a really hard time following your logic here Mark.

You realize that Lionel currently makes O scale rolling stock that has mounting pads for Kadee couplers right? They don't install or sell them, they just give the modeler the option. MTH does EXACTLY the same thing, and by the way so did S Helper. Lionel has also developed O scale and S trucks that can be easily swapped out for scale wheel sets. MTH will sell you scale wheels/trucks as well, and once again S Helper had it figured out. I'm not sure where the notion of opening boxes and installing parts came from? I must have missed that.

I think you are making a large assumption with the car size. You are saying everyone is running on R20? That may be true for traditional Flyer folks or some High rail too but I took a Facebook Poll years ago asking what minimum radius the Scale folks were running and by far the majority of them were running 30"+ minimum radius. There is no free lunch. Once you start wanting scale length cars you have to start thinking like a scale modeler. If you want to run 89' cars then you need to build a layout with curves to support it. If your layout has 20R then why are you even considering it? You do know they also make 27R as well right? Your point about starter sets doesn't make sense either. Example: HO starter sets come with 18"R curves typically. That isn't big enough for an 89' HO car. So HO little Johnny is in the same position as S little Johhny. There is a huge difference between a starter set purchase and a hobbyist purchase. Starter sets are made to get people into the hobby. They are not meant to be the end all be all, and to say so is extremely misleading.

Final point to make is that the size of your flanges has nothing to do with the radius curves that you need. This is a common misconception because Hi-Rail equipment employs space saving tricks like lateral play and blind drivers. If you use those techniques on a scale model you will get the same results. Example: a scale wheeled SHS 2-8-0 will negotiate 20"R all day long because it has blind center drivers, same as the Hi-rail version.

Believe it or not I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just don't want someone that doesn't know any better reading these posts and taking some of these points as fact.

 

Let's skew the subject a little...

Behold, the American Flyer Waffle sided boxcar:

Now, Lionel went through the trouble and cost of investing in new tooling for this car.  The unfortunate part was the decision was made to take a 50' car and scrunch it down to be visually compatible with a traditional 40' Flyer boxcar.  Even the printed car data is for a 50'car. 

So, we wound up with a car that was neither fish or fowl.  Given it's cataloged for a second year with no additional roadnames, I would guess it did not meet expectations.

Which is a pity, even though the details are molded on, it's pretty good.  It would easily pass the 5 foot rule for scale appearance.  But then again, it's too short in height and length. 

Well, at least it wasn't a clone of the O27 version...

Had Lionel made this a true 50' car, they would have had something modern enough that it would look good behind the SD70's and ES44's, been different than the offerings from S Scale America and would have likely attracted some of the scale modelers.   It would have been a great 50' car.

Surely, if the typical Flyer enthusiast is willing to accept an oversized, under-length 64' auto carrier, they would be able to manage a full scale length 50' boxcar.

How much more trouble and cost would it have been to tool this car as a true 50' car or did Lionel just assume nobody would notice?

Rusty

Well, I think the obvious answer to why the car is made so short is that Lionel is/was too lazy to stamp out a longer sheet metal floor for the car--and maybe their plastic injection machine can't handle a longer die?? With all the detail they did on the new tooling, it is sad that no one at L thought to "think out of the box" as a 50' car would run just fine on traditional AF curves. It would also have been nice to have a car with different dimensions than the old stuff, just to break up the blandness of the train. I guess I'll have to email L, not that I expect ANYONE there to listen, and if they do, they'll probably be out of a job before the product is developed. The revolving door there does not lend itself to product continuity. Maybe that's why there appears to be no product continuity (other than re-hashing stuff based on the old ACG tooling)! And I'm not even a "Scale" guy!!!

Mark, 

I remember the poll on who voted for what. I hope your not assuming those numbers reflect EVERYONE thats in S. Remember, theres people in S thats never even heard of this forum, and doesnt participate the the online activities.

Just because someone isnt a diehard collector, does not and should not deem their opinion invalid. Those people are customers too and could be a huge factor in the end to what sells. 

How does someone begin this hobby?????? SOMETHING HAS aTO DRAW THEM IN. 

Also, no one ever answered my question. Why can we get great detail and modern equipment on a major level in ALL other Scales/gauges EXCEPT...S?

 

traindavid posted:

Well, I think the obvious answer to why the car is made so short is that Lionel is/was too lazy to stamp out a longer sheet metal floor for the car--and maybe their plastic injection machine can't handle a longer die??

Really now...  They can make 86' hi-cubes and 89' auto racks in O, 60' long S Gauge Gilbert based streamline passenger cars, 75' long heavyweight Polar Express S Gauge cars but can't handle a 50' S Scale box car?

Rusty

I can't remember where I read it, but I think the reason for the 50' compression waffle box car is because it is needed to fit in the tooling base for the past box cars that were made.  

Ben

Rusty Traque posted:

Let's skew the subject a little...

How much more trouble and cost would it have been to tool this car as a true 50' car or did Lionel just assume nobody would notice?

Rusty

Lionel corporate as an entity does not grasp the concept that S gaugers do not like selective compression. There is no "scale versus traditional size" in S gauge. All S gauge must be true to scale dimensions for S gaugers to be happy. Lionel planners refuse to get that basic concept. Every time Lionel makes a S gauge car with O-27 body tooling, the S gauge enthusiasts go ballistic.

It shows no signs of stopping.

Why don't you guys give up on complaining about and to Lionel all the time.  Perhaps your best chance at getting what you want would be to do a team effort with Ron of American Models.  S is his only market where Lionel and MTH play to many gauges.  Shouting to Lionel and MTH is like shouting to congress. 

Bill

I don't understand that attitude, maybe it does not help or does not result in change, I don't care, they were happy to take my money, they can also take my constructive criticism...and straight up b**ching.  

The problem with working with AM is that Ron does not have much of a presence on the internet, forums, social media and what not.  Lionel is present in this media, and so is MTH (even if they don't respond).  Ron seems to go his own way, and he is entitled to, taking in little input from what the world asks of him.  The only example I have heard of a project being spurred on by outside influence is the Frisco heavyweights, other than that I got nothing.  And, once again, I am invested heavily in Legacy because Lionel said they were invested in advancing it in S.  I can't look to AM for that. 

Ben

RoyBoy posted:

Rusty Traque posted:

Let's skew the subject a little...

How much more trouble and cost would it have been to tool this car as a true 50' car or did Lionel just assume nobody would notice?

Rusty

Lionel corporate as an entity does not grasp the concept that S gaugers do not like selective compression. There is no "scale versus traditional size" in S gauge. All S gauge must be true to scale dimensions for S gaugers to be happy. Lionel planners refuse to get that basic concept. Every time Lionel makes a S gauge car with O-27 body tooling, the S gauge enthusiasts go ballistic.

It shows no signs of stopping.

That's not quite 100% true.  98% true, perhaps.  AM's Budd cars are selectively compressed and are pretty well received by both sides of the S community.  Those that aren't happy with them have been waiting since at least 2001 for full length Budd cars.

AM's "short" heavy weights are based on shorter prototypes from the CNJ and NYC.

Rusty

 

Roundhouse Bill posted:

Why don't you guys give up on complaining about and to Lionel all the time.  Perhaps your best chance at getting what you want would be to do a team effort with Ron of American Models.  S is his only market where Lionel and MTH play to many gauges.  Shouting to Lionel and MTH is like shouting to congress. 

Sorry if your upset, Bill.  When Lionel and MTH do something right, I'm more than happy to sing their praises.  My reviews of the SD70, ES44  and comments about the Y3 and Challenger have been very positive.  Those locomotives show us that Lionel CAN do better.

When I reviewed the waffle side boxcar a while back I still managed to find some good points about it. 

Even the cylindrical hopper got good comments from me, except for the trucks which Lionel screwed up on big time.

I can't help but notice that Lionel will respond to the 3-rail side occasionally, but not a peep over here.

Frankly, it all boils down to this: As long as the general S market is willing to accept second-rate O27 hand-me-downs, that's what it will get.

Rusty

Ben: I am the one of the two guys who worked with Ron on the heavyweights for the Frisco.  I announced that he would take orders on the 27th of this month.

Approached right he is very interested in customer ideas as long as you understand his businesses limitations.  The best approach is to call him.  No, he does not watch online posts. Also, he does not watch or care what Lionel or MTH puts out in S.

Yes, I know some Lionel people watch what is posted here.  The person I communicate with at Lionel said he does.  With all of the rants and complaints here why does it seem they don't help?

I feel that sugar is better than vinegar.  A positive approach might work better.  When I work with Lionel and MTH people on articles for the S Gaugian I use a positive approach and it works.   

I don't know if Ron Bashista reads this forum or not, but he does respond to requests far more often than the Frisco heavyweights. The Budd dome car is an example. He does go his own way, and he never reveals his plans unless the project demands a huge investment, such as the Pacific for which he took advanced deposits. If one were to study gaps in S scale products, one could almost predict what he might offer: the first real F units, then the RS-3, low nose GP35s, a realistic GP7 with extra parts for GP9 and other variants. I would not be surprised if he were to introduce an SD40-2 at the S Spree in May. Most of the running gear could come from the SD60s, and the only significant tooling would be the body. (The terrific RS-11s are quite similar to the earlier RS-3s.)

His problem is one of size. It costs a lot of money up front for tooling costs, and there is always the risk of product that does not sell. As others have pointed out, the SD40-2 could be issued in multiple liveries to appeal to wide audiences. That is an advantage that the F40PH and GG-1 did not have.

An earlier post on this forum mentioned that American Models does not have faith in modern freight, and that may be reflected in sales of the 50-foot boxcar. That particular car lacked some detailing that would have helped it, and there are holes in the bodies for grab irons that did not accompany the final product. On the AM website, however, there are several of those cars that sold out; so perhaps it was a choice of road names.

Ron does not show his cards, so it is hard to say how he gets his information to make decisions. I suspect, however, that he is aware of far more than we realize. Lionel's cylindrical hoppers were a flop, but those who converted the mis-aligned, flood water scale trucks for more prototypical versions found that AM had plenty in stock for the conversion. Lionel is right about too many unique requests for particular S scale pieces; but prototypical auto racks, modern tank cars, and the SD40-2 seem to be the most frequently mentioned requests. AM can't afford to do more than one of those at a time, but I always budget for whatever surprise they announce in May. (I once wrote to Mike Reagan to consider a consulting fee to Ron or Don Thompson as way to better gauge what would be a success in the S scale/high-rail market. I never heard back. The 2017 "haven't-we-already-had-this" wood reefer with less detail and a higher price than the MTH version suggests that Lionel spoke to neither S expert.)

Rusty Traque posted:

Let's skew the subject a little...  The waffle-side boxcar.   We wound up with a car that was neither fish or fowl.  Given it's cataloged for a 2nd year with no additional road names, I would guess it did not meet expectations.  Rusty

1)  I am pretty sure 2017 is third year for the Flyer S waffle car. There were new road names added last year, the second year, though.

2) I am somewhat new to Flyer, having come over a couple of years ago out of curiosity after striking   boredom with O.  I happen to like this car!  I have purchased 3 of them in different road names.  The 50-foot / 40-foot length-compression issue doesn't matter to me at all.  I just enjoy them.  

Rusty, I was trying to give L an out by mentioning the injection molding--actually, I understand the heavyweights are made at a different plant. Ben's response indicated I might have been on the right track--also, they'd have to make longer boxes! We whine here because it appears that no one at L cares. I do like the looks of the waffle cars, too bad they didn't do them full-sized so the scale folks would like them too. I love my Y-2 steamers, I also Like my PE set, although there are some minor problems with them that "real world" testing would have uncovered--why is it we seem to get the "Beta" versions of everything? One complaint I have of the PE packaging is that the bottom plastic insert holds two cars upside down-- how hard would it have been to make a "middle level" where they'd be right side up, for those folks that only take their sets out once a year, and store them the rest of the time? That's the kind of thing that would have been done "back in the day." I really don't think the folks at "Big L" really run trains themselves! And the revolving door at management doesn't help any. BTW, I mentioned to Ron about the GS4, the J611 and his response was appreciative--but no commitment of course! Either one would be a major tooling commitment.

TOKELLY - On the note of AM and the SD40-2, if it's AM that makes it so be it, I will get TMCC put in it and be happy as a clam.  Really, I feel like I need to do a reverse robbery - pull a gun on someone and demand they take MY money.  I don't get it, how do we not have an SD40???? I mean, when looking at when to spend money on new tooling for a diesel, how did AM end up on the RS11?  The are wonderful, I have 2 of them, but still....over the SD40...as for the Budd vista, I'm glad he made it, and I have 3, but I think people have been asking for them for over a decade before they got made. 

Bill - I get what you are saying, sugar vs vinegar and all, but people who spend their disposable income on this hobby are going to passionate about it, and they should be. I'm not unreasonable in my expectations of Lionel, we were told one thing, and presented something different.  I made a significant financial investment in them because of it.  I have standing to let them know of their short comings, it's reasonable because I also commend Lionel on the products over the years that they make that I like, I have always given credit where it's due...that goes both ways. 

And to the notion that someone at L reads this page, I know they do, Ryan is all over the 3 rail side communicating, John Z is on from time to time and others...but not much here.  I mean, no one from L chimed in to answer the simple question of will the new GP7 trucks be oversized like the catalog shows.  Makes me think that they don't care enough to answer, OR they are going to give an answer that they know we won't like.  But really, why can't we get an answer??? We have seen over and over that answers that come from the "contact us" section of the website are far to often wrong.  

Communication does not seem hard to me, even if the answer is "don't know, I'll get back to you".  I don't expect the world from any of these people, just a little follow through and some communication.  That's the key to my wallet.  

Ben

To Train David and Radio Ron:

I never indicated the waffle sided boxcar was all bad.  Here's my review from a little over a year ago:

https://ogrforum.com/t...e-side-boxcar-is-out

I think it's a reasonably fair review of the car, even from my skewed scale perspective.  The only point I was trying to make earlier was that it could have been better.  As a certain secret agent used to say:

Rusty

 I don't get it, how do we not have an SD40???? I mean, when looking at when to spend money on new tooling for a diesel, how did AM end up on the RS11?  The are wonderful, I have 2 of them, but still....over the SD40...as for the Budd vista, I'm glad he made it, and I have 3, but I think people have been asking for them for over a decade before they got made.

I remember reading an interview with Ron in the S Gaugian about 20 years ago in which he stated that he would love to do an Alco road diesel such as the RS-11. It took him a long time to do it; and he used the same wheels, trucks, gears/motor (with some running improvements), and maybe even the same chassis design as the previous RS-3. A new body, excellent paint, directional LED headlights, and "DX" details are the major differences. So a decade wait for the Budd dome car came nearly twice as quickly.

I look at the 6-axle SD60 and E8 from AM, and I realize that the engineering is already done for a follow up diesel like an SD40-2. The SD60 is a tad over 71 feet. The SD40-2 is just under 65 feet, and the SD45 is just a foot longer than the SD40-2. The trucks differ on all models, but only by a small amount. I also remember that S Helper Service announced an E8 in the works, but the skunk works at AM introduced theirs to the market in a surprise move that halted SHS development. Des Plaines Hobbies S Scale America has hinted at and then pulled back on an SD45; so I wouldn't be surprised at all if AM used the SD60 basis to pop on a newly tooled body and trucks for the S scale diesel locomotive in most demand in another surprise move. If Ron announces an SD40-2 at the Spring Spree, I wouldn't be surprised at all. If he introduces nothing at the show, I wouldn't be surprised at all. I'd hate to play poker with him.

I agree.....a SD40-2 is one of the most reconized modern-day diesel Locos from the 70's and 80's and even 90's. Still alot of them in use today.

I agree with the rs11 comment Ben as far as AM goes. I also like the rs11, but i would have thought a sd40-s would have sold better.

Thats like the u33c also through me for a loop from Lionel. Why did they choose that over a SD40-2 i wonder. They made a sd40 longer and sold more of those than a u33c. 

I bet the sd40 had one of the biggest list of road names of almost any other Diesel locomotive out there. Just my opinion, i have no real date on that part.

Snow, I wonder if the U boat was picked because it (likely) had more room inside for what was likely bulkier legacy electronics.  I think it was 2010ish that they were catalogued.  I really like them, I only have one of the first releases, the rest I have are from the second run. Good runners, again, an example of what Lionel can do!!  If that is the reason the SD40 was passed up then, it should not be a problem now,boards are smaller.

Ben 

Random acts of thinking...

I view the AM RS-11 as a natural progression for their product line.  It probably would have come out 3 years earlier if it wasn't for the Sanda Kan mess.  I suppose we can theorize about AM doing an SD40/SD40-2, but it doesn't make it happen.  Personally, I'd like to see a Mikado chassis under the Pacific's boiler, but I think any new steam is dead at AM.

If nothing else, I would hope AM gets into a minimum one new product a year mode.

SHS did announce an E7 before they shut down.  It would be a good project for MTH to get some good will back.

If Lionel would've made an SD40-2 with the same drive as the U33C, the electronics would've fit.  Don't forget, the U33C has the motor in the fuel tank.

Rusty

I'm certainly for any new product by any manufacturer, but AM barely cuts it for me. The more recent models have certainly improved. The RS-11 is a nice model, but even that lags far behind the best of what is being produced in HO. Personally, that's what I want to see. I don't want to have to buy models that are 20+years old just because there isn't a better option. The AM models are a good starting point for a custom detailing project, but I would prefer RTR. That's why the pull back by Lionel has upset me so much. They brought us fantastic models like the Y3 and the ES44 with capability for TMCC, Legacy, AC, DC, and DCC and then they just stopped. It is so frustrating because they absolutely can deliver fantastic scale products. Far better than anything AM has ever done to be honest.

I would still be happy to support them if they offered scale detailed offerings again, but we'll have to wait until Jan. 2018 before we find out IF they are even considering it... I'm tired of waiting and wondering what Lionel intends to do or not do. If they want to stick with toy trains and traditional AF, then I wish them the best.

No one wants an Allegheny or Acela or GG1? I have always believed that Lionel could sell certain popular O gauge sets in S gauge and make a mint, Also how about a Post War Celebration S gauge line.

American Models has has had a GG1 for years.  What is a Post War Celebration Big John?

PWC would be like in O gauge, reproduction of popular post war sets.

Big John, Lionel has already done that in S for decades.  They have even remade some they made earlier.

Yes, Flyonel has done this ad nauseum, and pretty much everyone who wants one has one! What they haven't done is some simple changes, like do the GP in WP orange and silver with "tiger stripes" on the nose, like WP707 (a survivor, BTW). That's one marketing idea they haven't gone for, "The Survivors" -- locomotives that still exist, mostly in preservation. As for their complaint that a GS-4 has only one paint scheme, Ah, not so! There's Daylight, as delivered, there's black and silver as the last active years, there's Freedom Train (That scheme is more than just west coast fans), There's the BNSF scheme used for a few years in excursion work, and then there's the WP who had very similar locomotives. (War Babies). That particular 4-8-4 chassis and driver diameter could probably be used under other boilers too.

The problem with a "survivors" series is the available Flyer selection of locomotives is pretty thin, namely PA's and GP7's. 

There are only 4 PA's surviving, all 4 are ex-Santa Fe: One is being used to recreate a Nickel Plate Road PA, another will eventually restored to it's Santa Fe origins and the other two are in Mexico.  And Lionel is currently offering the Santa Fe's.

As to the GP7's there's the WP GP you've mentioned, then C&NW 1518 (the 1st GP7 built,) Illinois Terminal 1605 (reportedly the last GP7 built,) both at Illinois Railway Museum.  There may be other restored/unmodified GP7's floating around, but research is required.

There are no EP5's surviving and while there may be some Baldwin switchers surviving, the Baldwins don't appear to be big movers for Lionel.

Granted, the could be more variety with GP7 roadnames, I suspect the NKP GP7 is intended as a companion to the previously released Berkshire.  Santa Fe was only offered as the so-called GP20 back in MPC days and that paint job was only partially correct.  The FlyerChiefing of the GP7 may eventually result in more variety with this locomotive.

Rusty

Rusty, Rusty, Rusty, I wasn't thinking of just using existing tooling, I was thinking of new tooling (NEW TOOLING--ya gotta be kidding!). They could start the series with existing tooling, PA NKP190, GP7 WP707, and the first production GP20, WP2001 in Portola (OK, personal favorite there, since I painted & lettered it; I was the restoration specialist at Portola for a few years), but then onto others: SP GS4, N&W 611, SP 844 and 4014 (although they've been done already) and so on. . . Also, I think (not a rivet counter here, so bear with me) with new sideframes on the 3 axle drives they could create SD series diesels. Just trying to come up with some new marketing schemes, not unlike the "Historic American Railroads" series. While discussing "new" I think the Baldwin Switchers suffer from the "non-detailed" basis that ACG had; after all, it was an "introductory" engine used in the cheapest sets. If it were updated with handrails, etc. , it might move better. The improved drive train has certainly helped. This is another case where I think Big L just doesn't understand S gauge.

traindavid posted:

 Also, I think (not a rivet counter here, so bear with me) with new sideframes on the 3 axle drives they could create SD series diesels.

Actually, Lionel was somewhat ahead of you on that, except with the old Gilbert truck design:

They also did them in Canadian National, DM&IR, UP, Chessie System and A.C.Gilbert.  This is a catalog illustration, but surprisingly, they don't look too bad in real life.  Even though I don't buy traditional Flyer anymore, I get weak in the knees every time I see the Burlington one on a swap table...

Rusty

Rusty,

 Hmmm, somehow I missed those.  OK, so another possibility for a "Survivor"--I' assuming some SDs made it into preservation.

traindavid posted:

Rusty,

 Hmmm, somehow I missed those.  OK, so another possibility for a "Survivor"--I' assuming some SDs made it into preservation.

IRM has an SP SD9 and a CB&Q SD24.

Rusty

Rusty Traque posted:

traindavid posted:

 Also, I think (not a rivet counter here, so bear with me) with new sideframes on the 3 axle drives they could create SD series diesels.

Actually, Lionel was somewhat ahead of you on that, except with the old Gilbert truck design:

They also did them in Canadian National, DM&IR, UP, Chessie System and A.C.Gilbert.  This is a catalog illustration, but surprisingly, they don't look too bad in real life.  Even though I don't buy traditional Flyer anymore, I get weak in the knees every time I see the Burlington one on a swap table...

Rusty

Whew... to me that thing is hideous.

AF diesels have never been very appealing to me. The F unit is the worst... then a tie with the GP7 and the Baldwin.  The proportions are just not appealing at all. (Huge trucks on the GP, bubble head cab on the Baldwin, etc.) The PA does look nice, though, but the gaping hole at the pilot detracts for me.

Now, from my limited exposure, it appears that quite a few of the AF steam engines look pretty darn good.  To me, some of them could make nice looking "Hi-Rail" candidates with the addition of some Kadee's at the tender (and maybe modify the front pilot for same?), some added details, and repainting/relettered and tastefully weathered.  Very pleasing proportions on many of the AF premium steam engines.

Lionel and MTH and their involvement in S:

They need some industrial-strength Viagra injected into them.

Both have been very disappointing to this previous S scale modeler and now interested bystander.

 

Hmm, well Laming, if your willing to upgrade the steamers, the "gaping hole" on the PAs can be upgraded too. True, the PA nose isn't 100%, but it's pretty darn close; as close as some details on the steamers. As for the F units---well, they're not even "real" ACG stuff! I agree--UGH!! Although I'd like to find one someday to put on a display shelf (it would have to be inexpensive--no, wait, it would have to be CHEAP!