Skip to main content

I'll selfishly throw out these two possibilities:

Baldwin DR-6-4-2000 / BP-20 Passenger Sharks.  The Weaver versions are old and over-priced, usually beat up, lousy runners from what I hear, and not nearly as detailed as a 3rd Rail offering would be.  I have to believe there are enough PRR fans out there to hit the minimum numbers based on recent projects like the Virginian EL-2Bs and the EA / E1 pairs.

Virginian EL-3A jackshaft electrics.  If VGN 2-10-10-2s and EL-2Bs can make the minimum, why not these?  It would be pricey as a set of three units but I believe no one has ever made them in O (MTH was going to years ago and then cancelled it).  I get it -- they don't have the aesthetics of the streamliners because they're boxcabs.  But you'll never get what you don't ask for, either.

@SANTIAGOP23 posted:

I strongly disagree with this statement. The amount of steam produced in our scale is negligible with the amount that has been produced in HO. It is also not representative in any way or form of the plethora of possibilities from prototype history.

The HO market also has a much larger number of customers with anwide range of interests. HO holds roughly 50% of all model train business. Furthermore, most HO scales are more interested in accurate, detailed modelers. The O scale market (2 and 3 rail) is much smaller, especially when you consider how many O scale hobbyists actually care about having accurate models; we are a small minority. Then further filter this group by our modeling interests and the list of people who are serious enough to purchase a more obscure model gets real short. I agree that there are plenty of steam models that have not been done in O scale, especially compared to HO. My point is that with what’s left on the table that hasn’t been done yet, how many of those locomotives are economically viable to produce? I argue not many

Jonathan partially addresses this in his response. Most of what’s left is very road specific and doesn’t have much crossover interest. This is why models that have universal interest among hobbyists have been produced to death and these more obscure prototypes don’t make it due to there not being enough customers.

@BlueFeather posted:

I'll selfishly throw out these two possibilities:

Baldwin DR-6-4-2000 / BP-20 Passenger Sharks.  The Weaver versions are old and over-priced, usually beat up, lousy runners from what I hear, and not nearly as detailed as a 3rd Rail offering would be.  I have to believe there are enough PRR fans out there to hit the minimum numbers based on recent projects like the Virginian EL-2Bs and the EA / E1 pairs.

Virginian EL-3A jackshaft electrics.  If VGN 2-10-10-2s and EL-2Bs can make the minimum, why not these?  It would be pricey as a set of three units but I believe no one has ever made them in O (MTH was going to years ago and then cancelled it).  I get it -- they don't have the aesthetics of the streamliners because they're boxcabs.  But you'll never get what you don't ask for, either.

Count me in for the EL-3A Jackshaft Electrics.

I wonder if there would be a market for foreign trains? Now that MTH has sold off all of their European tooling, we might never see any of those models in plastic. There are some pretty cool trains in India and Africa that would be interesting too.

Personally, aside from the Surfliner/San Joaquin Amtrak cars, I'd like to see Dash 8's and GP-60's.

@seank941 posted:

I wonder if there would be a market for foreign trains? Now that MTH has sold off all of their European tooling, we might never see any of those models in plastic. There are some pretty cool trains in India and Africa that would be interesting too.

The one of the few foreign motors that I would like to see produced is the Class 66; luckily for me, Dapol has stepped up to the plate; sometime later this year should see them available.

I'd love to see 3rd Rail do the B&O P7D streamlined Pacifics for the Cincinnatian, and I'm not even a B&O guy.  I just think they are some of the most beautiful locomotives.  I know Weaver did them, but they are hard to find and something just seems off about those versions to me.  They're certainly not on par with what a 3rd Rail version would be.

@PSM posted:

I'd love to see 3rd Rail do the B&O P7D streamlined Pacifics for the Cincinnatian, and I'm not even a B&O guy. 

Scott already did the P7D...about 10 years ago...concurrently with the Cincinnatian passenger train.

In a related Forum thread, Scott wrote on 10/21/14...

"The P7D production is limited to 50 units, because it was considered as an add on production to the P7E, already delivered. Only 50 units guys. 40 3R, 10 2R. That's it."

...and with the Weaver versions still out there...and available with a reasonable amount of patience...I'd say we're done seeing anymore runs of this engine in O scale.  At least in my remaining lifetime.

KD

Last edited by dkdkrd
@dkdkrd posted:

Scott already did the P7D...about 10 years ago...concurrently with the Cincinnatian passenger train.

In a related Forum thread, Scott wrote on 10/21/14...

"The P7D production is limited to 50 units, because it was considered as an add on production to the P7E, already delivered. Only 50 units guys. 40 3R, 10 2R. That's it."

...and with the Weaver versions still out there...and available with a reasonable amount of patience...I'd say we're done seeing anymore runs of this engine in O scale.  At least in my remaining lifetime.

KD

I had never seen that 3rd Rail did the P7D, nor have I ever seen a photo of one.  Does anyone have one they can share?

Good to know its out there, but I doubt many will ever come to market.

Also to be fair, in October of 2014 I was 2 months into my freshman year of college, so not buying any trains, much less from 3rd Rail.

@PSM posted:

I had never seen that 3rd Rail did the P7D, nor have I ever seen a photo of one.  Does anyone have one they can share?

Good to know its out there, but I doubt many will ever come to market.

Also to be fair, in October of 2014 I was 2 months into my freshman year of college, so not buying any trains, much less from 3rd Rail.

Someone ran a photo on the Forum of their 3rd Rail P7D pulling the GGD Cincinnatian a few months ago, I recall.  But, no, other than that I can't recall other photos.

I acquired the passenger train...to complement my Weaver P7D for which I paid a fair price from a reputable dealer.  I don't recall any formal announcements of the P7D...and I was well past my freshman year (1962) of college by then!!!   The 3rd Rail P7D build almost seemed to me to be an afterthought opportunity, somewhat 'clandestinely' evolving.  I found out about it almost too late...but I had already decided in ordering the GGD Cincinnatian set that this was an acquisition to complement what I already had (the Weaver engine), and not to rethink and re-budget (Someday you will probably experience that 'retirement' thing, too!) for the whole magilla.  It's one of those compromises one makes in life, I suppose.

And, yes, they will show up on the secondary market someday, but the price will probably be keeping up with inflation quite well.  I've told my wife (also into the hobby)...Take care of the trains, and they'll do their best to take care of you!
KD

I also would be in for a set of Virginian Squareheads. Along with my MTH ELC's and 3rd Rail EL-2b's that would complete my collection of Virginian electrics.

With Lionel, MTH, and Atlas investing in no new tooling and just recycling old tooling in re-releases, Scott should be commended for marketing lesser known models even if some of those don't make it into production. I really appreciate being able to obtain a Virginian AE 2-10-10-2, the EL2b's, FP-7's, the recently released C&O L1 Hudson, battleship gondolas, and the scale length RDC's. This is stuff the bigger guys would never consider making especially nowadays. I'm looking forward to the Chessie passenger set.

Ken

@Trainbros89 posted:

I have been petitioning  Scott to offer more rolling stock on the GGD line. The battleship gondolas were amazing, and there are a lot of models that have yet to be produced.

Curious about what rolling stock you would like to see Scott make? Between Lionel, MTH, and Atlas there is a lot of good, scale rolling stock available from them. What's missing?

Personally I would like to see a scale, 85 foot, early to mid 60's auto carrier with open sides. The modern, fully enclosed auto carriers aren't that interesting looking.

Ken

There is a dire need for proper scale caboose models in O scale. PRR cabin car models have only recently caught up to the amount of motive power offered by the makers over the years. I still can't believe your only choice for a steam era NYC caboose is a blocky Lionel or Rail King warmed-over repaint. With the all the Class As Lionel just pumped out, a decent brass CF or CG model like the hard to find Weaver would have sold well I think. I know Scott has made some nice seldom-modeled C&O and B&O models that were much needed in the recent past.

@kanawha posted:

Curious about what rolling stock you would like to see Scott make? Between Lionel, MTH, and Atlas there is a lot of good, scale rolling stock available from them. What's missing?

Personally I would like to see a scale, 85 foot, early to mid 60's auto carrier with open sides. The modern, fully enclosed auto carriers aren't that interesting looking.

Ken

Hey Ken,

Specifically, I have emailed Scott about appropriate classes of N&W Hoppers (H2A's, H4's ETC). I would love to see some watermelon cars as well. Yoder ones command a high price still, and having them be offered in plastic would be awesome. I am also sure there are some C&O and VGN cars we could think about too

Greg P

@TrainBub posted:

I personally won’t want to see any freight cars offered if they interfere in the manufacturing of the plastic diesel models. The Q is long and the progression to delivery of a model is slow as it is  !!!   No new impediments Please !!

I don't think this would be an issue any more than the gondolas were, or GGD passenger cars are.



@Norm Charbonneau is right- outside a few prototypes for the biggest roads, it's kind of ridiculous how few "correct" cabooses there are. I'd be in for correct ones from N&W, Southern, and several other roads. I can't imagine I'm the only one, either.

There is a dire need for proper scale caboose models in O scale. PRR cabin car models have only recently caught up to the amount of motive power offered by the makers over the years. I still can't believe your only choice for a steam era NYC caboose is a blocky Lionel or Rail King warmed-over repaint. With the all the Class As Lionel just pumped out, a decent brass CF or CG model like the hard to find Weaver would have sold well I think. I know Scott has made some nice seldom-modeled C&O and B&O models that were much needed in the recent past.

I would be a buyer of some N&W cabooses. Maybe even a dynamometer car

@kanawha posted:

Curious about what rolling stock you would like to see Scott make? Between Lionel, MTH, and Atlas there is a lot of good, scale rolling stock available from them. What's missing?

Personally I would like to see a scale, 85 foot, early to mid 60's auto carrier with open sides. The modern, fully enclosed auto carriers aren't that interesting looking.

Ken

Great idea on the mid 60s auto rack!

Safe-Pak autoracks spice up modern auto carriers.

NEW LAUNCH: Safe-Pak AutoRack Cars – Roka Models

Maxi-I are a big oppurtunity. No one makes these yet in O.

Proper 64' Trinitys are needed.

Ho Master 64' Trinity Reefer, Ho Scale Master | Atlas Model Railroad (atlasrr.com)

Smaller trinity offerings like the 3281, 3902 would be great to see in scale sizes.

@Andrew B. posted:

I don't think this would be an issue any more than the gondolas were, or GGD passenger cars are.



@Norm Charbonneau is right- outside a few prototypes for the biggest roads, it's kind of ridiculous how few "correct" cabooses there are. I'd be in for correct ones from N&W, Southern, and several other roads. I can't imagine I'm the only one, either.

I believe there are 3 factories. One each for brass, one for aluminum passenger cars, one for plastic models. Please correct  me if I’m wrong. 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

Last edited by TrainBub
@Andrew B. posted:

I don't think this would be an issue any more than the gondolas were, or GGD passenger cars are.



@Norm Charbonneau is right- outside a few prototypes for the biggest roads, it's kind of ridiculous how few "correct" cabooses there are. I'd be in for correct ones from N&W, Southern, and several other roads. I can't imagine I'm the only one, either.

Agree.  E.g. I had Brother Love build me a couple Virginian C-1 wooden cabooses.  They're gorgeous but pricey, but that's the only way I could get them at all!

I know there's way more $$ pursuing big scale motive power but not offering a caboose once in a while to go with them seems like money is being left on the table. If someone plunked down $1500+ on a state of the art scale steam engine, I doubt that person would balk at spending another ~$350 for a properly rendered scale caboose model.

I still can't believe your only choice for a steam era NYC caboose is a blocky Lionel or Rail King warmed-over repaint.

I don't model in 3-rail, but from what I can see of it, it seems that too much emphasis is put into "toy like" and fantasy equipment, and not nearly as much toward realistic 'normal' rolling stock.

I see threads on this forum often about 3-rail stuff that Norm (or anyone else looking for a more authentic model) couldn't use without a lot of work and re-painting and decalling.

And within the hobby in general, there seems to be too strong an emphasis on the head end. Too many companies focus on locomotives and sometimes, no correct cars to accompany them.

Heck, Bachmann made four different ET&WNC ten-wheelers in On30 and not a single freight or passenger car lettered for the same railroad. I asked a Bachmann rep at the NMRA convention in Portland about that and even he couldn't give me an answer.

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Ste 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×