MTH Premier Savannah & Atlanta Stripe Issue

Yeah, that's glaring. I'm not a rivet-counter (OK, I estimate them, sometimes) either,

and the only reason I don't buy MTH more is that I prefer Lionel's operating system -

so, I'm surprised at the error - especially after seeing the HO version. MTH items are

really nice, usually.

Will they produce more bodies? I doubt it, but keep at it, and I sympathize. Not that that helps.

It also looks like they used the wrong color of dulux gold lettering and instead used gold. Their HO line rocks but they leave some O scale offerings out in the road. I don't understand this at all!!

Maybe because O scale is no longer what's important to them? Their European and HO stuff is where the money is at for them I believe.

Keep at them and hopefully this won't happen again.  It is a shame they cared so little about getting this locomotive right in O, but aced it in HO.

I too am a MTH guy but I have to say I think I am going with Lionel on the Heritage units. I seen a few of the es44ac's  in a hobby shop recently and liked what I seen. Lionel has the glossy paint(which I usually don't like, but do on the heritage units because the prototypes are glossy) and the semi fixed pilot is an awesome feature. Also, Lionel closes that ugly pilot gap which MTH cant seem to do. Lionel has the better sounds as well.

 I dont see MTH doing anything about the Savannah heritage unit. Too late for that.      Train companies don't seem to care if only a few are not satisfied.

And let us not forget that all of the O-Gauge NS-Heritage ES44 units are wrong.  But the new HO ES44 NS-Heritage units are correct with nose door on right side etc. and the HO are correct and NS/Monongahela unit even has a window in the door as prototypical correct.  He is even releasing a HO ES44 EVO unit #2010 correctly with nose door on left side.

So I also have been a BIG MTH fan but it now seems Mike does not care as much about his O-gauge products or buyers any more.

Send it back where you got it. Completely unaceptable. Every thing about that paint job is lousy . I wouldnt take it for free !!!! but then thats just me !  Dont keep it. CR john

Bryan:

I would like to compliment you regarding your well researched, informative and intelligently composed post concerning the deficiencies of the MTH O scale S&A heritage unit when compared to the prototype. Your approach lends credibility to the argument for more accuracy in our models, particularly when a specific piece of equipment is being represented. Your post is a refreshing change from the typical "hissy fit" response punctuated by 17 exclamation points, 26 question marks and a half-dozen red faced angry emoticons.

Regards,

Bob

Weil, now - I would definitely take it "for free".

Also, I think that Mike Wolf still loves us, so let's not go overboard on the "it's

all HO and Euro these days". No need to give him the ring back just yet.

Of course, when the New Baby (S scale) comes home from the hospital, we're really

going to have to tighten up and muscle through. All those AF types will just be so

full of themselves. 

Bob,

Thanks for the kind words.  I appreciate you and everyone else who took time to read and perhaps write positive comments in response to my post and hopefully direct your interest in this issue to MTH as well.  I really believe as a hobby community we can best affect actions from the manufacturers in this way in order to get the effect we all want, i.e. correct scale locomotives.  It's the market that drives the solution.

Cheers and Best Regards,

Bryan

P.S. I neglected to add in my original post that online comments can also be left with MTH via the "Contact Us" link on the left side of the MTH Trains.com homepage.  Although it sometimes takes awhile, their customer service folks have always responded to one of my inquiries.    Thanks again.

Bryan, did MTH ever respond to you about this?

I was about to purchase one to "lash-up" on point of my NS OCS F-units.  But NO way now, not spending moneys on something that is clearly incorrect.  The amazing thing is, that paint is the easiest and cheapest thing to get/make correct!

Ron 

Hi Ron,

No, no reply directly from them.  I heard indirectly via my LHS who spoke with a knowledgeable exec there that MTH went with an early design.  Seems odd since the Lehigh Valley had a major re-do on its nose after the prototype initially débuted and the new change made it to the MTH Premier version of that ES44.  The MTH LV came out before the S&A, so there's that mystery.

I intended to update the post if I heard more definite, but decided to reply since you asked.  Tried as I could, but I just could not get past the narrow stripe and the "no-vis" lettering.  The engine just could not stand out on the layout as a Heritage.  So after seeing a photo of the Lionel version on Eric Siegel's site, I returned the MTH version and ordered the Lionel in its place.  All from my great LHS!

Running with the OCS would look good.  I wanted to run the MTH S&A with my MTH NYC because of how the striping looked between the two.  I think the Lionel's broad stripe and more correct Dulux gold will stand out like in the below photo.  But I'm not sure how or if the Lionel and MTH will run together under DCS.  Guess I'll find out.

Best,

Bryan

"Early design" HOOEY, the only original design "concept" I know about was using the Southern nose seal.  But they decided to use the S&A herald from the tender of steam loco 750.  It is possible there may have been some initial though of the S&A green and yellow colors but not documented anywhere.

Only the NS/NKP and NS/LV where repainted after original paint out shop.

The 2013 volume 2 catalog depict the S&A with broad "white" (actually imitation aluminum) band with correct yellow gold (Dulux Gold)stripe and lettering.  BUT before that MTH published a four page brochure dated "2012 M.T.H. Electric Trains" depicting the S&A correctly.  The interesting thing is that in this 2012 brochure the road is shown as "7777." So someone is blowing smoke since the 2012 brochure depicts correct paint.

Also hate to tell you but Lionel and MTH engine will NOT "lash-up" to each other using DCS, TMCC, and/or Legacy.

Ron

Not the first time MTH has an expensive engine wrong on significant details.  They have now made two Union Pacific Challengers renumbered into the 3700 series with coal tenders rather than oil tenders.  How about the Pennsylvania J1as and Q2s with red cab roofs?  These types of transgressions are sales killers for this train buyer.  I have learned not to preorder some items without seeing the actual production model.  On the most recent Union Pacific Challenger (3711), MTH showed an oil tender in their catalog but produced it with an incorrect coal tender.

"The 2013 volume 2 catalog depict the S&A with broad "white" (actually imitation aluminum) band with correct yellow gold (Dulux Gold)stripe and lettering.  BUT before that MTH published a four page brochure dated "2012 M.T.H. Electric Trains" depicting the S&A correctly.  The interesting thing is that in this 2012 brochure the road is shown as "7777." So someone is blowing smoke since the 2012 brochure depicts correct paint."

Ron,

That is a great catch.  I know the 2013 v2 catalog photo bears a clear resemblance to the fantasy Southern SD70ACe 20-20111-1 where the top of the stripe is correct but goes all the way down to the walkboards with no black boot.  You are right.  The 2012 brochure is correct.  Both in O and HO.  I'll have to point that out at my LHS.  Not cool, MTH.  Not cool at all.

Not having any Lionels, I feared as much on the MUC in DCS. 

Bryan, last night was a bit restless so took the time and reviewed all info I have on the HS Heritage Fleet. 

In retrospect I have come to the conclusion that what your LHS guy said may have validity!  I am pressed for time right now but will edit this post later with what I found.

Ron, 0742 3/5/2014

I'm no"Rivet Counter" by any since of imagination, but maybe us as the customer/customers should confront Mike Wolf, about his QC, or if he plans on having a QC person to proof read projects before going to press, so to speak!

Bryan alright hopefully I have sufficient time.

In my night of restlessness I reexamined all info I have on this fleet.

This included the MTH 2013 V2 catalog and the MTH 2012 brochure.  And as we all know almost all the graphics in catalogs and brochures are produced by graphic artist from some available information maybe taking some license.  The images are not actual photos.  Both these MTH publications came out after the July, 2012 "Event."  Now the 2012 brochure shows a proportionally wide band with somewhat correct lettering colors.  But the letters are a little tall and high up on the side.  Also and remember this the cab number is "7777."  The catalog graphics show maybe a slightly narrower band with correct lettering and cab number with reporting marks.

I also have three published books on the NS Heritage Feet.  One of these book has a small insert of a graphic from "ElectroMotive" a Progressive Rail Services, A Caterpillar Corporation.  They painted the Heritage SD70 units including the S&A. 

The nose graphics show a scheme with the old Southern nose seal and narrow striped pilot with many stripes like the MTH production model.  The side profile clearing shows a narrow band wide darker/dull gold lettering AND a cab number of "7777" no reporting marks.  Again recall the MTH 2012 brochure shows a cab number of 7777 also without reporting marks.

So it appears that MTH may actually possessed two different sets of graphic info.  The problem they also apparently did NOT control this info.   BUT they got it correct for the HO products that appeared on the market the same time as the Premiere O-Gauge stuff.  MTH apparently dropped the ball.

I am just very disappointed that MTH could NOT/did NOT get it right(CORRECT) for us O-Scale three railers.  I wanted one!

Brandy, the problem is that our toy train makers rely on "Quality Control"(QC) and NOT on "Quality Assurance" (QA).  These are two very different concepts in the professional quality managements lexicon. QC by professional quality management definition is nothing more than "inspection."  When something is inspected it either meets the critical characteristics or it dose NOT.  Obviously if it dose it ships.  If it does not there are three gates.  You rework ($$), or scrap ($$$$$$$$$$), or ship as is (zero $) and let someone else deal with it.  If these cab bodies were inspected to a critical characteristic of a "narrow band" then they were actually acceptable at that point.  QA on the other hand would have controlled information revs and distribution to needed areas.  QA is a womb to tomb TQM total quality management system.

And know that based on posts there are a few foumites that understand this but unless someone is involved in profession quality one is not exposed to these concepts and definitions.  As example most people cannot define the word quality as someone in professional quality management knows it to be.  The dictionary definition dose not cut it.

Ron