Received my 3rd Rail January Update, and on the GGD Order form under the Named Trains section, there is the option to order the Northern Pacific North Coast Limited and the Great Northern Empire Builder in both 2 rail and 3 rail.
Original Post
|
Replies sorted oldest to newest
quote:Originally posted by gnnpnut:
Neither train had domes, but I know that the '51 cars migrated up to the '55 Builder that had the one full dome and conventional domes, but had corrugation on the sides.
Regards,
GNNPNUT
quote:Originally posted by ChipR:
Gentlepeople,
The announcement is for the Budd trains:
"Northern Pacific – North Coast Limited , Great Northern – Empire Builder Budd Trains".
Wouldn't this mean the dome cars, etc?
ChipR
quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Jerry,
I'm afraid if it is not in the Lowey scheme, it won't be the sellout or the hit Scott is looking for. Domes sell, and especially on the later NCL. I suspect he'll need this scheme to get the necessary reservations for the 3 railers also. The Lowey scheme seems to sell like gold in O. Let's face it, the Lowey is one of the most attractive schemes ever put on a train, in the top 5, and if Scott is going to do it I suspect he'll have to go with the most popular option. Perhaps after the initial run, he'll get to the butter knife.
I have to admit those full domes would be pretty nice too on the GN. But lets face it, the only 48 train anyone needs is coming out already. I suggest you reserve a 48 Century, and that way you can have the best of all worlds like me, and begin to model in first class.
quote:Originally posted by gnnpnut:quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Jerry,
I'm afraid if it is not in the Lowey scheme, it won't be the sellout or the hit Scott is looking for. Domes sell, and especially on the later NCL. I suspect he'll need this scheme to get the necessary reservations for the 3 railers also. The Lowey scheme seems to sell like gold in O. Let's face it, the Lowey is one of the most attractive schemes ever put on a train, in the top 5, and if Scott is going to do it I suspect he'll have to go with the most popular option. Perhaps after the initial run, he'll get to the butter knife.
I have to admit those full domes would be pretty nice too on the GN. But lets face it, the only 48 train anyone needs is coming out already. I suggest you reserve a 48 Century, and that way you can have the best of all worlds like me, and begin to model in first class.
I totally agree that the Lowey scheme would be a sellout / hit. However, since things are in the talking stages, and since the cars are I believe relatively common for everything but domes between the '48 and '54 / 55 NCL, why not do both paint schemes on the non-dome cars? I'm in for pine tree, but not for Lowey paint, as it is too new for my era. I've got to draw the line someplace, or I'll be overspending in this scale, something I have no intention of doing.
As far as modeling "first class", I'm already there, not modeling "bankrupt class" in the case of the railroad 20 years after the '48 ESE.
Regards,
Jerry
quote:Originally posted by ChipR:
Gentlepeople,
The announcement is for the Budd trains:
"Northern Pacific – North Coast Limited , Great Northern – Empire Builder Budd Trains".
Wouldn't this mean the dome cars, etc?
ChipR
quote:Originally posted by Erik C Lindgren:quote:Originally posted by gnnpnut:quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Jerry,
I'm afraid if it is not in the Lowey scheme, it won't be the sellout or the hit Scott is looking for. Domes sell, and especially on the later NCL. I suspect he'll need this scheme to get the necessary reservations for the 3 railers also. The Lowey scheme seems to sell like gold in O. Let's face it, the Lowey is one of the most attractive schemes ever put on a train, in the top 5, and if Scott is going to do it I suspect he'll have to go with the most popular option. Perhaps after the initial run, he'll get to the butter knife.
I have to admit those full domes would be pretty nice too on the GN. But lets face it, the only 48 train anyone needs is coming out already. I suggest you reserve a 48 Century, and that way you can have the best of all worlds like me, and begin to model in first class.
I totally agree that the Lowey scheme would be a sellout / hit. However, since things are in the talking stages, and since the cars are I believe relatively common for everything but domes between the '48 and '54 / 55 NCL, why not do both paint schemes on the non-dome cars? I'm in for pine tree, but not for Lowey paint, as it is too new for my era. I've got to draw the line someplace, or I'll be overspending in this scale, something I have no intention of doing.
As far as modeling "first class", I'm already there, not modeling "bankrupt class" in the case of the railroad 20 years after the '48 ESE.
Regards,
Jerry
Jerry, I agree.. kill two birds with one stone idea.. The Pine Tree is really interesting and a favorite with a lot of NP gurus!
quote:Time for GGD to expand its base to include the rest of us.
Larry S
quote:I am a sucker for passenger trains, but I only do up to 18". Time for GGD to expand its base to include the rest of us.
Larry S
quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Lar,
It must be opposite day, but I think the hobby has served up tons of 18" cars forever, in every road name one can imagine, and many not imagined. We scale nut jobs have been waiting for scale passenger cars for ages. After much campaigning on the old 3R forum over the years Scott has answered the call with GGD, in spite of the many naysayers that insisted there was no market for scale passenger equipment. It is a pretty safe bet that 3rd Rail/GGD will never offer non scale anything. But for obvious reasons you won't get much support here. Not that we don't like ya, but here scale is the whale.
quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
H-Man,
I wrote this "We scale nut jobs have been waiting for scale passenger cars for ages. After much campaigning on the old 3R forum over the years Scott has answered the call with GGD, in spite of the many naysayers that insisted there was no market for scale passenger equipment. It is a pretty safe bet that 3rd Rail/GGD will never offer non scale anything. But for obvious reasons you won't get much support here. Not that we don't like ya, but here scale is the whale."
No mention of length here.
Jack wrote this:
"Man, I sure hope not! None of us who model scale passenger equipment want Scott Mann to dilute his standards for scale fidelity at an extremely affordable price"
Rheil wrote this:
"The upcoming GGD express reefers are roughly 54 feet long which is scale length for this car."
It appears none of us are missing the point, and as scale guys are obviously aware different prototype passenger cars. None of us asked for or mentioned the infamous "21 inch" passenger car refrain. The only guy that missed the point was poor Larry, who I'm sure by now has realized most of us are nuts anyway.
Now the thread should turn back to a discussion on how we can get an accurate 3RS representation of the prototype and discuss the train. However, I have done my bit and will leave this to all the other modelers of the lesser roads.
quote:Time for GGD to expand its base to include the rest of us.
Larry S
quote:Originally posted by bob3:quote:Time for GGD to expand its base to include the rest of us.
Larry S
I would find such a move (to non scale cars) incredibly disappointing.
quote:Originally posted by Ed Bommer:
When it comes to the length of prototype passenger cars, one must also be aware of how the railroads actually measured them.
It was the late 1930s 'streamlined,' light-weight era that introdiuced a basic 85' long platform upon which cars built by the major manufacturers of the day used (Pullman, ACF and Budd), save a few shorter baggage and RPO cars.
In the heavy-weight era and even back to the 19th century wooden era, passenger cars were measured over their body length at the end sills.
This did NOT include the end platforms (or later, vestibules). So a 70' coach from that era was actually about 80' in overall length, allowing for 5' on each end for the platform/vestibules.
Pullman's heavy-weight 'battleship' sleeping and lounge cars also used a basic platform but it could vary by a foot or so depending on the car type being built.
For example, a 10-1-2 sleeper had a body length of 74' 6", but the car's overall length was 82' 11 3/4". A 1 drawing room - 3 compartment-solarium bservation on th other hand has a body length of 77' 9 1/2" and an over all length of 83' 11 3/4" as it had a vestibule on only one end and no rear platform. The classic 12-1 Pullman was 74' 6" over the body with an overall length of 83' 5 1/4". All close in relative length but not exact.
When translating this into production models (versus limited-run brass models), the makers will standardize the length in order to use as many of the same parts and tooling as possible for each car. So the GGD heavy-weight Pullmans, diners, observations, etc. all have the same length, whereas their prototypes could vary by a foot or two overall.
However in making models of light-weight streanmlined equipment, the basic 85' long overall plaform works for just about every such car - IF built by one of the major car maufacturers. A light-weight 10 roomette - 6 double bedroom car measures 85' overall with a body length of 79'2", as also does a 5 bedroom-buffet-lounge-oservation. Some home-built cars (the SP 3/4 length dome lounge comes to mind here) come up shorter than that 85' standard platform.
All that said, we model 1/4" to the foot SCALE.
So 15"=60', 16"=64', 17"=68', 17 1/2"=70' 18"=72', 19"=76', 20"=80', 21"=84' and 21 1/4"=85'.
Ed Bommer
quote:It is frustrating to see O scale suffer from scaling to match a box or a tighter curve.
quote:It is frustrating to see O scale suffer from scaling to match....a tighter curve.
quote:Add as much detail as we can comfortably afford and let the buyer worry about what track he/she will need to operate it. Sharp curves shouldn't even be a consideration anymore when designing a product. If it won't fit on my layout, I'll learn to live without or make adjustments
quote:you will NEVER get Lionel, MTH, and Williams to market their "toy train" products with THAT strategy!
quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:quote:It is frustrating to see O scale suffer from scaling to match....a tighter curve.
Interesting. As that is what HO does to allow nearly all their stuff to operate on tight curves.
quote:After seeing the Atlas passenger cars I hope there will be more from them as well.
quote:Budd car with PS car for comparison of construction in these trains.
quote:Originally posted by marker:quote:After seeing the Atlas passenger cars I hope there will be more from them as well.
The good news here is that when Atlas made the mold for the CZ, they made it so that the wheel skirting could be easily changed to the more common cut out opening as seen on this Budd car, so they are thinking ahead to more offerings.
Erik posted:quote:Budd car with PS car for comparison of construction in these trains.
Erik, does that mean the North Coast Limited should correctly have Budd and PS equipment in the consist, or was it all Budd at one point?
quote:Originally posted by gnnpnut:quote:Originally posted by Pete Kruimer:
Lar,
It must be opposite day, but I think the hobby has served up tons of 18" cars forever, in every road name one can imagine, and many not imagined. We scale nut jobs have been waiting for scale passenger cars for ages. After much campaigning on the old 3R forum over the years Scott has answered the call with GGD, in spite of the many naysayers that insisted there was no market for scale passenger equipment. It is a pretty safe bet that 3rd Rail/GGD will never offer non scale anything. But for obvious reasons you won't get much support here. Not that we don't like ya, but here scale is the whale.
Larry:
The Lowey NP train has been done in 18"
Sleeper and Diner
Regards,
GNNPNUT
quote:Speaking of food, would it eat into their "Scale car" sales to also offer 18" cars for those that want them? Or would it increase production and lower the fixed costs of common parts resulting in lower prices increasing sales?
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership