I am so looking forward to getting my Boston and Maine E7! I am sure it will be worth the wait.
Scott, please consider doing Maine Central or Bangor and Aroostook E7s in a future run (of which I'm sure there will be many).
When I spoke to Scott last week only 2 runs had been committed to. Then on to the FL9s followed by the FP7s.
I would suggest if anyone wants other liveries made in the second run that have not been announced they make what I would call a write in reservation with Scott. You never know.
I want a Train of Tomorrow version and later CB&Q version with the angled number boards and stainless side panels, anyone else.
Richard
I would suggest if anyone wants other liveries made in the second run that have not been announced they make what I would call a write in reservation with Scott. You never know.
I want a Train of Tomorrow version and later CB&Q version with the angled number boards and stainless side panels, anyone else.
Richard
Why did the UP paint the E7's with only a partial roof in grey?
quote:Originally posted by DominicMazoch:
Why did the UP paint the E7's with only a partial roof in grey?
Dominic,
I'm not sure, but it probably had something to do with the roof getting dirty from the exhaust.
Seaboard originally had a yellow roof on their Citrus paint scheme, then changed to dark green in an attempt to hide the soot and other crud that accumulated on the roof. They kept the dark green roof when they switched over to the Mint Green scheme.
3rd Rail has listed a second run of Burlington units and one of the listings shows a California Zephyr unit.
What would that mean?
Did the California Zephyr have certain units assigned?
Which number board would it have?
The E unit be appropriate for what years?
I have also seen shots with the Zephyr pulled by Burlington F units. Does anyone know the history of Burlington's locomotive assignments to the CZ?
I'm ready to place my order, I would just like to get a little more info.
What would that mean?
Did the California Zephyr have certain units assigned?
Which number board would it have?
The E unit be appropriate for what years?
I have also seen shots with the Zephyr pulled by Burlington F units. Does anyone know the history of Burlington's locomotive assignments to the CZ?
I'm ready to place my order, I would just like to get a little more info.
The Burlington purchased EMD F units in A-B-A sets, two sets if I remember correctly, to handle the start-up of the Cal Z. service. The assumption on the Burlington's part was that motive power wou;d "run through" between the Rio Grande and the Western Pacific. Things didn't work out that way, so the Burlington quickly began assigning ANY of their E units to the CZ, from E5s, to E7 and then E8s and E9s. The A-B-A sets of silver F units had their steam generators removed and subsequently assigned to freight service.
Depending on what era you are modeling, the E units would have had the black nose striping, i.e. prior to about the late 1950s. The red nose striping appeared after that, and ALL E type units where eventually changed to the red nose striping, buy the early 1960s.
Concerning the two different number boxes, the E5s obviously where delivered with the earlier "small" number boxes. The first delivery of E7As also had the "small" number boxes, while later E7As had the larger "F7 type" number boxes. Without my Burlington Bulliten handy, I am currently unable to give you the specific road number breaks between early E7A units and later E7A units concerning the different number boxes.
One other thing to remember about the Burlington, there where NEVER ANY E7B, E8B, nor E9B units. Even though the Burlington ordered their E type units in A-A pairs, with the "rear" A unit of that pair numbered as a "B", they ONLY had actual B units for their E5 group.
Lastly, during the late 1950s, the Burlington began rebuilding the E7A units and many received stainless steel carbody side panels (just like the newly delivered E8As and E9As). However, not all the E7A units received the "stainless steel" treatment, so the specific E7A units that retained the "silver painted carbodys" are the specific road numbers (both "small" and "large" number boxes) that Golden Gate Depot is modeling.
Depending on what era you are modeling, the E units would have had the black nose striping, i.e. prior to about the late 1950s. The red nose striping appeared after that, and ALL E type units where eventually changed to the red nose striping, buy the early 1960s.
Concerning the two different number boxes, the E5s obviously where delivered with the earlier "small" number boxes. The first delivery of E7As also had the "small" number boxes, while later E7As had the larger "F7 type" number boxes. Without my Burlington Bulliten handy, I am currently unable to give you the specific road number breaks between early E7A units and later E7A units concerning the different number boxes.
One other thing to remember about the Burlington, there where NEVER ANY E7B, E8B, nor E9B units. Even though the Burlington ordered their E type units in A-A pairs, with the "rear" A unit of that pair numbered as a "B", they ONLY had actual B units for their E5 group.
Lastly, during the late 1950s, the Burlington began rebuilding the E7A units and many received stainless steel carbody side panels (just like the newly delivered E8As and E9As). However, not all the E7A units received the "stainless steel" treatment, so the specific E7A units that retained the "silver painted carbodys" are the specific road numbers (both "small" and "large" number boxes) that Golden Gate Depot is modeling.
That's a GREAT start, thanks Hot Water! I really appreciate the info.
Marker,
Glad to help. If you need any additional specifics, don't hesitate to ask. I should be getting my Burlington Bulletin back soon (lent it to Scott Mann and Jonathan P inorder to make the CB&Q E7A units as correct as possible), and will thus be able to answer more specific questions.
Glad to help. If you need any additional specifics, don't hesitate to ask. I should be getting my Burlington Bulletin back soon (lent it to Scott Mann and Jonathan P inorder to make the CB&Q E7A units as correct as possible), and will thus be able to answer more specific questions.
quote:Originally posted by rdunniii:
I want a Train of Tomorrow version and later CB&Q version with the angled number boards and stainless side panels, anyone else.
Richard
I second this. I ordered 4 2-rail CB&Q E7A units. I will order 4 more if they get released again with large number boards and/or stainless steel sides.
Are the 3 hand rails on the side of the CB&Q E7A Cab not spaced out far enough apart??? Please confirm this. They look to close to each other when I compare it to photos in my books.
And I agree the painted grilles on the front look bad. They need to be cleaned up.
Besides that I want them now.
And I agree the painted grilles on the front look bad. They need to be cleaned up.
Besides that I want them now.
Look at the 3 Hand-Rails on the side of the cab and compare to the production sample of the CB&Q E7A.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...14207/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...07577/in/photostream
To me it looks like a person could not climp up those handrails.
I hope they fix this on the second release.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...14207/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...07577/in/photostream
To me it looks like a person could not climp up those handrails.
I hope they fix this on the second release.
quote:Originally posted by Trainboy_4:
Look at the 3 Hand-Rails on the side of the cab and compare to the production sample of the CB&Q E7A.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...14207/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...07577/in/photostream
To me it looks like a person could not climp up those handrails.
I hope they fix this on the second release.
Trainboy,
The photos your looking at are modified Red Nose units dating from the 1960's. The GGD model I am pretty sure are as delivered no retrofit stainless or anything dating from around 49, and NO the Q did not add grabs until at least another 2-3 years when the larger number boards were added.
quote:Originally posted by Trainboy_4:
Are the 3 hand rails on the side of the CB&Q E7A Cab not spaced out far enough apart??? Please confirm this. They look to close to each other when I compare it to photos in my books.
And I agree the painted grilles on the front look bad. They need to be cleaned up.
Besides that I want them now.
I am planning on a full review of this model. I am somewhat of a fanatic of the Q E units early or late. I think the models are going to be wonderful. Considering the nature of the release with the non-China Drive and the RTR plastic I am very supportive of the effort.
I will refrain from any further comments until I can see the beauty in the studio!
Thanks Scott for making them.
Scott has only posted pics of the CB&Q, B&O and UP units. He also took pics of the SP&S and GN units done for Petersen Supply while I was there and I thought the finish on those was spectacular. It does appear they are pad printed and the printing of the CB&Q unit is a bit fuzzy in a few places places mostly noted by the vent graphics around the headlight. More on that below.
After Scott took the pictures of the CB&Q unit Scott offered to let me have it as delivery of one of the pair I had reserved. Since bringing it home I have disassembled the unit to see how it was put together and well done it was. So here are my opinions based upon that.
First a few notes on the building of the unit in general. It is built in China by the Korean builder that builds most of Sunset's brass steamers. As such these were built the same as if they were brass with the exception that the shell is a plastic molding. Interestingly, model trains is a side business for the builder in between high tech work for companies like Samsung to keep his workers busy and employed. The owner used to work for Samhongsa. Apparently the shell mold is a bit rough as much sanding and smoothing of the shell is required before finishing. I see no molding lines at all. You can also tell the builder is used to working in brass because the entire cab is fabricated from sheet brass and castings - except for the figures. There are a couple of internal assembly bloopers on this unit but I assume this is one of the first ones built and those were straightened out during production - kinda like version one of circuit boards if you have ever seen those.
1. Dimensionally the unit appears correct to me. All the curves in the nose are too close for me to find fault. As good as anything from Atlas or new tooling Lionel. Everything seems to be where it is supposed to be. I'm not an E-unit person and don't have lots of reference resources but the few I do have match up.
2. The drive is about the smoothest I have ever seen right out of the box. It is virtually silent. However, I do not have the ability to run it very fast so I don't know if it will whine at higher speeds. I am very impressed with the QSI Titan. It seems to be very well matched to the canon motor. Low speed startup and acceleration are very smooth. The sounds are awesome. The 2-rail units have a 2x3.5 inch speaker and the matchup reproduces the range of the diesel sounds equal to the Tsunami in my opinion.
3. Rivet counting part. If you don't like reading rivet count critique don't read this paragraph. I could only find minor 3 things to take issue with (other than the CB&Q nose graphics).
3a. Both the early smaller number boards and the later angled boards as on the UP are brass castings. I have issues with both types. The plastic shell is drilled out in the appropriate location to attach them; they are not molded on. I see this as good thing because it means the shell molding doesn't need any changes to improve this. The smaller number boards should be completely rounded at the front instead of square with rounded corners and the angled number boards need to be more rounded at the corners. If you look at Jonathan's drawing above you notice he drew the nose window graphics on round cornered boards leading to the incorrect shape of the upper band. I had to look at a prototype pic closely before I noticed the difference.
I don't have an angled number board unit to say anymore about those except I hope that is improved upon as those number boards would be the ones used in the future FL9s and FP7s.
3b. The lower headlight is the larger ATSF unique type versus the stock smaller EMD version. However, the lighting itself is awesome using what appear to be brass reflectors around the bulbs. I am very impressed with the mars light effect. The light in the cab goes off after a few seconds of motion.
3c. The pilot is a brass casting attached to the frame with [very] small screws. The unit comes with an open version with a Kadee coupler as shown in the above pics and there is a closed door version. To change them you just unscrew one from the frame and screw on the other. They look very good but are not attached flush with the anticlimber. Most people probably won't even notice it and it is almost impossible to see in the pics above. Also the holes for the foot boards could be squared up a bit with a file.
End of rivet counting.
Oh, the windshield wipers are brass too so you can bend them up next to the windshield without them breaking off or bouncing back. That really annoys me on some models.
On Brasstrains.com there are pics of an earlier run of 1/48th Key E7s by Samhongsa and I think these are aesthetically superior to those.
So, in summary, I'm really happy with mine and think they are an awesome value.
OBTW, If you have reserved SP 2-rail units and haven't paid for them better do so soon cause I'm on the list to take them if you don't.
Trivia question. Which paint scheme had the most reservations, by far, almost 2-1 to the next closest?
Richard
After Scott took the pictures of the CB&Q unit Scott offered to let me have it as delivery of one of the pair I had reserved. Since bringing it home I have disassembled the unit to see how it was put together and well done it was. So here are my opinions based upon that.
First a few notes on the building of the unit in general. It is built in China by the Korean builder that builds most of Sunset's brass steamers. As such these were built the same as if they were brass with the exception that the shell is a plastic molding. Interestingly, model trains is a side business for the builder in between high tech work for companies like Samsung to keep his workers busy and employed. The owner used to work for Samhongsa. Apparently the shell mold is a bit rough as much sanding and smoothing of the shell is required before finishing. I see no molding lines at all. You can also tell the builder is used to working in brass because the entire cab is fabricated from sheet brass and castings - except for the figures. There are a couple of internal assembly bloopers on this unit but I assume this is one of the first ones built and those were straightened out during production - kinda like version one of circuit boards if you have ever seen those.
1. Dimensionally the unit appears correct to me. All the curves in the nose are too close for me to find fault. As good as anything from Atlas or new tooling Lionel. Everything seems to be where it is supposed to be. I'm not an E-unit person and don't have lots of reference resources but the few I do have match up.
2. The drive is about the smoothest I have ever seen right out of the box. It is virtually silent. However, I do not have the ability to run it very fast so I don't know if it will whine at higher speeds. I am very impressed with the QSI Titan. It seems to be very well matched to the canon motor. Low speed startup and acceleration are very smooth. The sounds are awesome. The 2-rail units have a 2x3.5 inch speaker and the matchup reproduces the range of the diesel sounds equal to the Tsunami in my opinion.
3. Rivet counting part. If you don't like reading rivet count critique don't read this paragraph. I could only find minor 3 things to take issue with (other than the CB&Q nose graphics).
3a. Both the early smaller number boards and the later angled boards as on the UP are brass castings. I have issues with both types. The plastic shell is drilled out in the appropriate location to attach them; they are not molded on. I see this as good thing because it means the shell molding doesn't need any changes to improve this. The smaller number boards should be completely rounded at the front instead of square with rounded corners and the angled number boards need to be more rounded at the corners. If you look at Jonathan's drawing above you notice he drew the nose window graphics on round cornered boards leading to the incorrect shape of the upper band. I had to look at a prototype pic closely before I noticed the difference.
I don't have an angled number board unit to say anymore about those except I hope that is improved upon as those number boards would be the ones used in the future FL9s and FP7s.
3b. The lower headlight is the larger ATSF unique type versus the stock smaller EMD version. However, the lighting itself is awesome using what appear to be brass reflectors around the bulbs. I am very impressed with the mars light effect. The light in the cab goes off after a few seconds of motion.
3c. The pilot is a brass casting attached to the frame with [very] small screws. The unit comes with an open version with a Kadee coupler as shown in the above pics and there is a closed door version. To change them you just unscrew one from the frame and screw on the other. They look very good but are not attached flush with the anticlimber. Most people probably won't even notice it and it is almost impossible to see in the pics above. Also the holes for the foot boards could be squared up a bit with a file.
End of rivet counting.
Oh, the windshield wipers are brass too so you can bend them up next to the windshield without them breaking off or bouncing back. That really annoys me on some models.
On Brasstrains.com there are pics of an earlier run of 1/48th Key E7s by Samhongsa and I think these are aesthetically superior to those.
So, in summary, I'm really happy with mine and think they are an awesome value.
OBTW, If you have reserved SP 2-rail units and haven't paid for them better do so soon cause I'm on the list to take them if you don't.
Trivia question. Which paint scheme had the most reservations, by far, almost 2-1 to the next closest?
Richard
Great review.
I'm glad 3rd Rail was able to accomplish this.
quote:The light in the cab goes off after a few seconds of motion.
I'm glad 3rd Rail was able to accomplish this.
Is the expected delivery date still May? I've already reserved a place for my Seaboard unit to rest when not on the layout
Very cool Richard, thanks for the comments on the model. I appreciate it.
Tampo is an excellent technique for decals used today. Sadly our hobby is still stuck in the late 1980's or is always some 10 years behind in technology when it comes to these sort of issues. One it is expensive to buy this equipment and or hire the right people to produce the art for the models. Scott is trying to keep the cost down and still make a profit so we can see more models in the future I would surmise.
I am somewhat biased on the Key's brass E units and have three sets of early E's coming very soon; buying any further models would result in my untimely death by my wife..
LOL
Tampo is an excellent technique for decals used today. Sadly our hobby is still stuck in the late 1980's or is always some 10 years behind in technology when it comes to these sort of issues. One it is expensive to buy this equipment and or hire the right people to produce the art for the models. Scott is trying to keep the cost down and still make a profit so we can see more models in the future I would surmise.
I am somewhat biased on the Key's brass E units and have three sets of early E's coming very soon; buying any further models would result in my untimely death by my wife..
LOL quote:Originally posted by rheil:quote:Trivia question. Which paint scheme had the most reservations, by far, almost 2-1 to the next closest?
NYC ?
[:
NYC ?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Any SPF knows it is PRR, but Santa Fe is more likely
SPF
quote:Trivia question. Which paint scheme had the most reservations, by far, almost 2-1 to the next closest?
NYC ?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Any SPF knows it is PRR, but Santa Fe is more likely
SPF
quote:Any SPF knows it is PRR, but Santa Fe is more likely
SPF
Don't think 3rd Rail even offered AT&SF since the AT&SF didn't have any E7 units, did they?
I'm voteing for NYC or PRR
quote:Originally posted by Hot Water:quote:Any SPF knows it is PRR, but Santa Fe is more likely
SPF
Don't think 3rd Rail even offered AT&SF since the AT&SF didn't have any E7 units, did they?
I'm voteing for NYC or PRR
Mostly observing popularity of different roads. You are probably correct about Santa Fe E units.
JTA Southern Pacific, Burlington, Union Pacific and Central RR of NJ.
The GGD 1938/1940 20th Century Limited 12 car set is quite heavy at 61 oz per car or 732 oz (45.75 pounds) for the entire consist, and the rolling friction is also quite high. To provide motive power on my layout through a long S curve with a continuous 2.2% grade will require strong motive power with good draw bar pull. My question: will two powered E-7s be up to the task. I suspect the motors are capable, but I'm concerned the traction may be inadequate due to light engine weight.
Here is the breakdown for draw bar requirement:
Using a digital scale, one calculates the lifting force needed for the 12 cars by multiplying the 2.2% ascending grade by the weight of cars.
The lift is 2.2% X 732 oz = 16oz (1 lbf)
Using a fish scale, I measured the drawbar force on both level grade as well as on a 2.2% ascent through an S curve.
The measurement on level grade = 27 oz and gives a pretty good estimation of rolling friction.
The measurement on the 2.2% grade thru the S-curve = 52 oz (3 1/4 lbf as seen in the picture) establishes minimum drawbar force required without providing for any acceleration.
12 cars to measure:
3.25 pound measurement:
Although several of these measurements are unnecessary to establish drawbar pull required , one does get a pretty good breakdown of where the various forces are originating.
It appears the side force through the curves is about half a pound: (52 total -16 lifting weight - 27 rolling friction) = 8 oz side forces through the curves.
So in summary, without providing any acceleration,the two engines need at least 3 1/4 lbs drawbar force to start the consist on a 2.2% grade. It seems 6 lbs total force would be a reasonable expectation for operation when acceleration and other losses are considered.
Can enough weight be added to give each of two E-7 a tractive pull of 3 lbs. Lifting them at York, they seemed light for the job without additional weighting.
Here is the breakdown for draw bar requirement:
Using a digital scale, one calculates the lifting force needed for the 12 cars by multiplying the 2.2% ascending grade by the weight of cars.
The lift is 2.2% X 732 oz = 16oz (1 lbf)
Using a fish scale, I measured the drawbar force on both level grade as well as on a 2.2% ascent through an S curve.
The measurement on level grade = 27 oz and gives a pretty good estimation of rolling friction.
The measurement on the 2.2% grade thru the S-curve = 52 oz (3 1/4 lbf as seen in the picture) establishes minimum drawbar force required without providing for any acceleration.
12 cars to measure:
3.25 pound measurement:
Although several of these measurements are unnecessary to establish drawbar pull required , one does get a pretty good breakdown of where the various forces are originating.
It appears the side force through the curves is about half a pound: (52 total -16 lifting weight - 27 rolling friction) = 8 oz side forces through the curves.
So in summary, without providing any acceleration,the two engines need at least 3 1/4 lbs drawbar force to start the consist on a 2.2% grade. It seems 6 lbs total force would be a reasonable expectation for operation when acceleration and other losses are considered.
Can enough weight be added to give each of two E-7 a tractive pull of 3 lbs. Lifting them at York, they seemed light for the job without additional weighting.
Woodshire Bill,
Good question and well thought out.
If Roger Lewis were here he could explain the benefit of ball bearings in the drive train and the advantages of a single motor. Furthermore the design of the drive and how the power is transmitted to the wheels. Weight is very important but also too much weight can destroy a drive. Simply adding weight to a model in the interim can solve your issues if you have them but also it will increase wear on components. Friction is the killer of any mechanical part; add bearings and say bye bye friction and increase pulling effort.
All these components cost money, a drive in Key Model Imports E units are nothing but the finest machined and refined gear available. Scott used what I think is the best available for the cost.
My Union Pacific San Francisco Challenger/Pony Express example may surprise you:
I currently operate the following in the consist:
(all models brass imports, all weights are approx.)
Key Imports E7 A 16 lbs ball bearings everywhere one motor (tank drive)
Key Imports E7 B 14 lbs ball bearings everywhere one motor (tank drive)
Beaver Creek Express 40' box car 1.8 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard 60' P-5 RPO 4.3 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard 60' full baggage 3.9 lbs standard trucks
Sunset Harriman 70' full baggage 2.5 lbs standard trucks
Sunset Harriman Common Standard full baggage 3.4 lbs standard trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' full baggage 5.5 lbs standard trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' Coach 5.9 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard Diner D-73 7.8 lbs ball bearing trucks
Russ Briggs Designs custom built Alpine Sleeper 4.3 lbs standard trucks
Lionel Smithsonian 4-4-2 Pullman sleeper 8.3 lbs ball bearing trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' Placid Sleeper 6.7 lbs standard trucks
PSC Pullman 6-3 Sleeper 5.4 lbs standard trucks
With the 12 car consist I regularly run this train up our 2.8% grades that include several compound curves.
The following video is a shortened consist of only 9 cars.
I also operate a ATSF 17 car brass mail train with three ALCO PA's that has an approx. draw bar pull of over 90 lbs. All of these cars are standard trucks from Pecos River Brass.
Weight is a BIG issue and gravity.
I am uncertain what Sunset's E units will pull. I would take an educated guess they will out-pull any teeny-tiny motored China-Drive simply based on physics alone. I tried, believe me I tried very hard to use Atlas's F units.. They are beautiful.. but that China-Drive will not get out of its own way..
Good question and well thought out.
If Roger Lewis were here he could explain the benefit of ball bearings in the drive train and the advantages of a single motor. Furthermore the design of the drive and how the power is transmitted to the wheels. Weight is very important but also too much weight can destroy a drive. Simply adding weight to a model in the interim can solve your issues if you have them but also it will increase wear on components. Friction is the killer of any mechanical part; add bearings and say bye bye friction and increase pulling effort.
All these components cost money, a drive in Key Model Imports E units are nothing but the finest machined and refined gear available. Scott used what I think is the best available for the cost.
My Union Pacific San Francisco Challenger/Pony Express example may surprise you:
I currently operate the following in the consist:
(all models brass imports, all weights are approx.)
Key Imports E7 A 16 lbs ball bearings everywhere one motor (tank drive)
Key Imports E7 B 14 lbs ball bearings everywhere one motor (tank drive)
Beaver Creek Express 40' box car 1.8 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard 60' P-5 RPO 4.3 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard 60' full baggage 3.9 lbs standard trucks
Sunset Harriman 70' full baggage 2.5 lbs standard trucks
Sunset Harriman Common Standard full baggage 3.4 lbs standard trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' full baggage 5.5 lbs standard trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' Coach 5.9 lbs standard trucks
PSC Harriman Common Standard Diner D-73 7.8 lbs ball bearing trucks
Russ Briggs Designs custom built Alpine Sleeper 4.3 lbs standard trucks
Lionel Smithsonian 4-4-2 Pullman sleeper 8.3 lbs ball bearing trucks
Wasatch Model Company 85' Placid Sleeper 6.7 lbs standard trucks
PSC Pullman 6-3 Sleeper 5.4 lbs standard trucks
With the 12 car consist I regularly run this train up our 2.8% grades that include several compound curves.
The following video is a shortened consist of only 9 cars.
I also operate a ATSF 17 car brass mail train with three ALCO PA's that has an approx. draw bar pull of over 90 lbs. All of these cars are standard trucks from Pecos River Brass.
Weight is a BIG issue and gravity.
I am uncertain what Sunset's E units will pull. I would take an educated guess they will out-pull any teeny-tiny motored China-Drive simply based on physics alone. I tried, believe me I tried very hard to use Atlas's F units.. They are beautiful.. but that China-Drive will not get out of its own way.. quote:Originally posted by rdunniii:On Brasstrains.com there are pics of an earlier run of 1/48th Key E7s by Samhongsa and I think these are aesthetically superior to those.
So, in summary, I'm really happy with mine and think they are an awesome value.
Richard
Richard-
After some thought on this statement I decided to point out a few holes in your intended opinion regarding that a $2500+ Key Imports E7 set was not as good as a $1000 plastic GGD E7 set...
1) The Key Imports model at Brasstrains.com is a 1987 run Samhongsa, that is a 24 year old piece. I was 12 years old, I am almost 40 now!
If you stop and think about it; that is two and half decades of improvement in the industry. To compare to a vintage model like this that was produced in an era of hand drawn G.O.D.'s and literal hand made technology is like comparing a Model T Ford to a Toyota Prius, maybe better a Comodore 64 computer to your computer you are using now. nearly 30 years apart. What I want you to do is compare it to the current offerings of Key "Model" Imports.
Key Imports 1987 run E7 Union Pacific
GGD E7 in review
Look at these two models. even at 30 years apart the Key does a fine job... I like the windshield on the GGD better, maybe... The Key is pretty fine... a difficult formula not yet perfected until the 1990's by P&D and Highliners. Key did a fine job prior to this defining formula back in the 1980's, it was a concerted effort. GGD simply used a formula that was discussed with huge extent for nearly 20 years at Highliners and P&D. Today almost everybody uses some form or another of this great sculpt of the EMC/EMD windshield on models in all scales, Kato, Athearn Genesis, BLI, Atlas, Atlas O, and so on.
The ancient 1987 Key Imports model from 1987 uses a photo etched stainless panel for the wings, a decal on the GGD or pad printed I have not seen one. Lighting on both models I am sure is comparable however, I DO NOT like white LED's on new RTR plastic in N, HO or O. In the 1950's we did not have HID lighting or white/blue 7000K light as seen on your neighbors Mercedes. Incandescent lights are orange/yellow in color temperature not blue/white.
2) On the GGD Seriously whats up with the engine room windows? They are solid filled? Painted? Why are they yellow? These are windows with prime mover detail behind them and a series of engine room lights above.
I could go on, but I am NOT going to compare a hand built model to a plastic RTR piece from 2 and half decades ago.. Not going to happen.
Look I am not trying to pick a fight in your review; just trying to point out that comparing a 2012 plastic RTR model with a 1987 brass import is if anything just plain unimportant. I agree in my opinion the GDD is a better value compared to the 1987 Samhongsa piece. But compared to what is being produced in Korea today that is another story.
I will do you a favor and add photos of my 10 year old 2001 run Key Imports E7's. My #988 pair are very different than the 1987 Samhongsa Models. And have exhibit large improvements over the model produced some 18 years before.
Detail of the CORRECT wing design on the nose of the E7's.
Key Model Imports 2010 run E8/9
Key Model Imports 2010 run Frisco E7 (YES-this is an E7, made to look like an E8)
Key Model Imports 2010 run E7
I personally would prefer the 1987 Samhongsa E7's for a number of reasons, but $1250 compared to $500 that is a big reason to buy a GGD E7. I would need to spend at least $200 improving the nose art and the window issues so its a crap shoot on that. As far as drive... Well the 1980's Samhongsa drive is spectacular. Weight and adhesion is also an issue. That is an issue of what are your plans? Pulling a 90 lbs plus draw bar 12 car passenger train or shelving them?
It all comes down to the buyer, what does he or she want? A model with some flaws in the sculpt of the windshield with all the correct researched details and a factory Samhongsa paintwork with etched details or a very well done windshield with a general approach to the details and epoxy paint at a third the cost?
It is all a matter of taste and personal preference.
I love the GGD E7's; and love what they stand for, they are a genesis of a new era in O scale. Finally a HO quality plastic RTR models in our scale. I am ecstatic and absolutely in love with them for this reason. An alternative to brass in O scale! I am advocate for O scale not brass or plastic. I want beautiful ACCURATE models that are affordable like everyone here.
Your comparison is just not a good dynamic to play on in my opinion. Plastic RTR in O scale has a LONG-LONG-LONG way to go to stand up with Exact-Rail or Athearn Genesis in detail and accuracy in HO. But it is on its way I hope. These GGD E7's are a big step forward but to compare them to a 1987 brass import makes the GGD look bad, compare it to a 2012 brass import.
Erik,
Those Key units pics were the best standard I could find to compare them against. I picked the best I could find. That was a compliment to both. Would you have preferred I compare them to Lionel or...? And I did compare them "in general".
For example, The Key units are 2-rail only and there were some compromises for the short radius curve folks in the 3rd Rail units - like the floating front stirrups and the position of the truck pivot for short radius curves with the tank drive. I have already asked Scott about making additional rear fixed stirrups available because the chassis I have is already drilled to move the pivot forward for fixed stirrups, but that restricts the turning radius because of the larger swing at the tank drive end. And while the trucks are not as detailed as Keys the fact that they are sprung is a great step forward. I wish I had other trucks (beyond the P&D Blombergs) to match.
Ahh, the windows. At least it's not just me. They were painted out to hide the very unprototypical internal electronics and wiring of the models. The windows are clear polycarbonate painted on the inside. It took me about 30 minutes with a qtip and Scalecoat remover to remove the paint from the CB&Q, but silver is about the easiest color to remove so I don't know how difficult it might be to remove other colors if someone is so inclined - like me.
Woodshire Bill,
The 3-rail units had some type of weights added to the fuel tanks. I do not know how much but was certainly noticable. Because the trucks are sprung - with very soft springs, 4 of the 6 wheels on each truck are in full contact with the rail so if they are not strong enough as is a little weight should go a long way. I'm actually considering removing the center gear box from mine to make them a true A-1-A. That would allow all axles to float. The amount of available traction should be the same. You will not get full 6 wheel traction unless you replaced the one piece drive shaft in each truck with universals - something high end brass doesn't even do - yet.
As for wear, I didn't disassemble any individual gear boxes [yet] to form an opinion if they will hold up. As they are built by the same builder as 3rd Rail steamers I would assume they would hold up similarly.
Trivia answer,
Yes, Bob is correct, but he may have had inside information, NYC had far and away the most reservations, although if you add the Pennsylvania green and red together that might have been more. Kinda tells you why Scott was so quick to offer the reverse TTG NYC.
Richard
Those Key units pics were the best standard I could find to compare them against. I picked the best I could find. That was a compliment to both. Would you have preferred I compare them to Lionel or...? And I did compare them "in general".
For example, The Key units are 2-rail only and there were some compromises for the short radius curve folks in the 3rd Rail units - like the floating front stirrups and the position of the truck pivot for short radius curves with the tank drive. I have already asked Scott about making additional rear fixed stirrups available because the chassis I have is already drilled to move the pivot forward for fixed stirrups, but that restricts the turning radius because of the larger swing at the tank drive end. And while the trucks are not as detailed as Keys the fact that they are sprung is a great step forward. I wish I had other trucks (beyond the P&D Blombergs) to match.
Ahh, the windows. At least it's not just me. They were painted out to hide the very unprototypical internal electronics and wiring of the models. The windows are clear polycarbonate painted on the inside. It took me about 30 minutes with a qtip and Scalecoat remover to remove the paint from the CB&Q, but silver is about the easiest color to remove so I don't know how difficult it might be to remove other colors if someone is so inclined - like me.
Woodshire Bill,
The 3-rail units had some type of weights added to the fuel tanks. I do not know how much but was certainly noticable. Because the trucks are sprung - with very soft springs, 4 of the 6 wheels on each truck are in full contact with the rail so if they are not strong enough as is a little weight should go a long way. I'm actually considering removing the center gear box from mine to make them a true A-1-A. That would allow all axles to float. The amount of available traction should be the same. You will not get full 6 wheel traction unless you replaced the one piece drive shaft in each truck with universals - something high end brass doesn't even do - yet.
As for wear, I didn't disassemble any individual gear boxes [yet] to form an opinion if they will hold up. As they are built by the same builder as 3rd Rail steamers I would assume they would hold up similarly.
Trivia answer,
Yes, Bob is correct, but he may have had inside information
, NYC had far and away the most reservations, although if you add the Pennsylvania green and red together that might have been more. Kinda tells you why Scott was so quick to offer the reverse TTG NYC.Richard
Erik and Richard,
The comments from both of you are very informative, and, unlike so many who seem to only want to discover errors in models, you have both given what I think is an extremely fair critique.
I am also dumbfounded by the painted side windows. I have no idea where that came from. I believe this was the builder's first diesel so he will learn form his mistakes (hopefully).
Many of us are glad to have reasonably accurate models at a less expensive price than the high end models. I will be getting 4 of the Sunset E units but have no intention to sell the 4 Key E-8's I currently have. There is a place for both Sunset and Key on my permanent "Christmas garden". It's great to have the selection we have today. Somewhat different from 1955 when I got my first O scale equipment.
The comments from both of you are very informative, and, unlike so many who seem to only want to discover errors in models, you have both given what I think is an extremely fair critique.
I am also dumbfounded by the painted side windows. I have no idea where that came from. I believe this was the builder's first diesel so he will learn form his mistakes (hopefully).
Many of us are glad to have reasonably accurate models at a less expensive price than the high end models. I will be getting 4 of the Sunset E units but have no intention to sell the 4 Key E-8's I currently have. There is a place for both Sunset and Key on my permanent "Christmas garden". It's great to have the selection we have today. Somewhat different from 1955 when I got my first O scale equipment.
I think A reviewer is entitled to compare anything he or she wants to. It is true that models are getting more realistic, but I routinely compare stone age cast brass with modern imports. As long as it is clear what is being compared, I think any comparison is valid.
Nice looking. I am glad they were not die cast, since I am literally out of room for more models.
Nice looking. I am glad they were not die cast, since I am literally out of room for more models.
Well put Bob!
It's good to compare. We all have our own little ways of taking writing. That's the trouble with email, text, and these sort of things. The reviewer was just saying... The GGD is pretty dang good!
I still prefer the Key from 198x....
It's good to compare. We all have our own little ways of taking writing. That's the trouble with email, text, and these sort of things. The reviewer was just saying... The GGD is pretty dang good!
I still prefer the Key from 198x....
I would suggest that scott invest into a very simple casting that has a basic shape of the prime mover and paint it a dark green similar in shade to the EMD interior green. Even if this part is only a fraction of a tiny teeny centimeter from the window glass it would look a little better than just painting them over.
Some E7's had vents in place of the windows and a combination of both.
I would have painted them a dark grey or a black perhaps than just body color them. I think what I will do is remove the plastic/glass and make a styrene cutout similar to the shape of the prime mover, Challenger Imports did this with the brass HO E units in the 1990's, pretty neat trick. And paint this styrene the EMD green and clear the windows out. I think it be will great. Despite this trouble spot they look marvelous still!
No worries Scott, its all good bud! Rivet counters huh! Blast those bloody rivet counters! 
Some E7's had vents in place of the windows and a combination of both.
I would have painted them a dark grey or a black perhaps than just body color them. I think what I will do is remove the plastic/glass and make a styrene cutout similar to the shape of the prime mover, Challenger Imports did this with the brass HO E units in the 1990's, pretty neat trick. And paint this styrene the EMD green and clear the windows out. I think it be will great. Despite this trouble spot they look marvelous still!
No worries Scott, its all good bud!
Rivet counters huh! Blast those bloody rivet counters!
Erik,
I think you will find most EMD engine room interiors were painted "suede gray". The optional interior color EMD offered for cabs was "jade green", which is what most railroads used for the cab interiors in the steam locomotives. I can't ever remember being the engine room of an EMD E or F unit that was "jade green". Cab interiors, yes, but not engine rooms. There are exceptions to every generalization, however.
I think you will find most EMD engine room interiors were painted "suede gray". The optional interior color EMD offered for cabs was "jade green", which is what most railroads used for the cab interiors in the steam locomotives. I can't ever remember being the engine room of an EMD E or F unit that was "jade green". Cab interiors, yes, but not engine rooms. There are exceptions to every generalization, however.
3 or 4 Seaboard E7s had aluminum side panels, here's both sides of 3041:
One had fiberglass side panels.
3025 has the filter in the rear, in place of the window:
The more I look into what Seaboard had the more differences I see
Horns, handgrabs, numberboards, skirting, even pilots were changed out, it all depends on the year of the photo.
One had fiberglass side panels.
3025 has the filter in the rear, in place of the window:
The more I look into what Seaboard had the more differences I see
Horns, handgrabs, numberboards, skirting, even pilots were changed out, it all depends on the year of the photo.
quote:Originally posted by Hot Water:
Erik,
I think you will find most EMD engine room interiors were painted "suede gray". The optional interior color EMD offered for cabs was "jade green", which is what most railroads used for the cab interiors in the steam locomotives. I can't ever remember being the engine room of an EMD E or F unit that was "jade green". Cab interiors, yes, but not engine rooms. There are exceptions to every generalization, however.
Cool Hot Water.... Good to know.
quote:Originally posted by Bob Delbridge:
The more I look into what Seaboard had the more differences I see
Horns, handgrabs, numberboards, skirting, even pilots were changed out, it all depends on the year of the photo.
Bob- The railroads made so many adjustments and changes to their power its almost insane to keep track of all the changes.
Railroads were in effect the ultimate form of MacGiver.. Always tinkering and adjusting, modifying, changing, and anything else all in an effort to make a locomotive more efficiently use fuel, spend less of the company money or whatever. It surprises me that EMD allowed so many modifications and still stood behind warranties. Can you imagine if you made these changes to your auto today! Like Ford would let you keep your factory warranty if you added extra intake vents on the roof, or added your own version of a radiator...
This dynamic the railroads used is so hard for model railroad manufacturers to get right. Research on one locomotive can be exhaustive and extremely time consuming. Brass importers can get these details right at far less cost than plastic. To cut tooling for plastic parts is far more expensive than brass lost wax. Athearn Genesis really stands out in the field with road specific details and modifications in HO to prototypes. For GGD to get everything done on every road of E7 would be prohibitively expensive. As a modeler it is your right to step in with a great blank canvas such as these fine GGD E7's and modify them to your specified road.
For the aluminum try Testors Model Master "Metalizer Paint". You can buff the aluminum to almost perfection, seal it with a high quality lacquer. ALCAD also offers an excellent plating alternative for stainless sides on those Burlington units. As far as details, look at P&D and Kiel Line for goodies, grab iron castings etc. P&D cast grab irons are spectacular for his old line of F units.
You guys have me considering an extra set or two---just keep it up now!
Norm
Norm
quote:This dynamic the railroads used is so hard for model railroad manufacturers to get right.
Erik,
I don't know how they do what they do as it is
They almost need an historian on the payroll.I haven't seen anything but the artist's rendering on the 3rd rail site of SAL #3025. If that IS the engine chosen, I hope they at least offer the 5-chime horn as those seem to be hard to come by on the parts market these days.
I'm not sure what needs to be done in order to change out the rear window for a filter screen. The elongated handgrabs on the nose can easily/hopefully be made without too much fuss.
Once I get it I may decide I don't want to make any changes, it sure seems to be a pretty model just as it is.
The E7 was a transition unit between the earlier E and the E8/9s. It's basically an E6 with an F cab. In looking at the pics above you can see so many variations that for a hundred models you would have to make a hundred variations if you modeled them later in their life.
For example the units are all coming with the E6 pilots the earlier units were originally delivered with. Notice the NYC unit has a F unit pilot in the above pic. Notice the Seaboard units have the later E8/9 or F-unit passenger pilot.
Scott is modeling early units with the grills behind the cab, the transition units with the louvers behind the cab and the later units with the different side windows. Single and double headlights and angled and straight numberboards. And then add on to that the individual road details.
It has been noted above that the nose grabs on CB&Q units are later add ones and they are incorrect. I don't even have any pics of them with those grabs to compare but I'd bet a buck they were not all the same on all units that had them added.
The basics seem good to me and that's what matter most to me. I can't easily change the shape of the nose or the roof or move the windows or make the unit narrower if that is off which is the case with the majority of other O Scale mass produced stuff. This selective compression carp just immediately takes stuff off of my list. The dimensions seem so close in general that I can see that the truck sideframes are too far out because of the Ow5.
Richard
For example the units are all coming with the E6 pilots the earlier units were originally delivered with. Notice the NYC unit has a F unit pilot in the above pic. Notice the Seaboard units have the later E8/9 or F-unit passenger pilot.
Scott is modeling early units with the grills behind the cab, the transition units with the louvers behind the cab and the later units with the different side windows. Single and double headlights and angled and straight numberboards. And then add on to that the individual road details.
It has been noted above that the nose grabs on CB&Q units are later add ones and they are incorrect. I don't even have any pics of them with those grabs to compare but I'd bet a buck they were not all the same on all units that had them added.
The basics seem good to me and that's what matter most to me. I can't easily change the shape of the nose or the roof or move the windows or make the unit narrower if that is off which is the case with the majority of other O Scale mass produced stuff. This selective compression carp just immediately takes stuff off of my list. The dimensions seem so close in general that I can see that the truck sideframes are too far out because of the Ow5.
Richard
Anyone have any observations on the Sunset E7's performance?
After a 15 year drought with China drives coming in the "mass produced" O gauge diesel market, I'll be very interested to learn if the Sunset E7 drive sets or equals the performance benchmark set years ago by the AtlasO SW series locomotives. As a 2 railer I'm hoping the 3R and 3RS market will respond favorably to what a refined drive train design can offer (unobstructed cabs, sprung & equalized trucks, scale speed characteristics, lower current draw, better low speed performance). If Scott has a market success with the E7's hopefully additional prototypes will be offered providing 2 railers new alternatives to the beautiful but premium priced brass Key models.
Ed Rappe
After a 15 year drought with China drives coming in the "mass produced" O gauge diesel market, I'll be very interested to learn if the Sunset E7 drive sets or equals the performance benchmark set years ago by the AtlasO SW series locomotives. As a 2 railer I'm hoping the 3R and 3RS market will respond favorably to what a refined drive train design can offer (unobstructed cabs, sprung & equalized trucks, scale speed characteristics, lower current draw, better low speed performance). If Scott has a market success with the E7's hopefully additional prototypes will be offered providing 2 railers new alternatives to the beautiful but premium priced brass Key models.
Ed Rappe
Ed- rdunniii made some comments on page 3.
quote:2. The drive is about the smoothest I have ever seen right out of the box. It is virtually silent. However, I do not have the ability to run it very fast so I don't know if it will whine at higher speeds. I am very impressed with the QSI Titan. It seems to be very well matched to the canon motor. Low speed startup and acceleration are very smooth. The sounds are awesome. The 2-rail units have a 2x3.5 inch speaker and the matchup reproduces the range of the diesel sounds equal to the Tsunami in my opinion.
quote:Originally posted by Keystoned Ed:
Anyone have any observations on the Sunset E7's performance?
After a 15 year drought with China drives coming in the "mass produced" O gauge diesel market, I'll be very interested to learn if the Sunset E7 drive sets or equals the performance benchmark set years ago by the AtlasO SW series locomotives. As a 2 railer I'm hoping the 3R and 3RS market will respond favorably to what a refined drive train design can offer (unobstructed cabs, sprung & equalized trucks, scale speed characteristics, lower current draw, better low speed performance). If Scott has a market success with the E7's hopefully additional prototypes will be offered providing 2 railers new alternatives to the beautiful but premium priced brass Key models.
Ed Rappe
Right on Ed!
Let's here it for a new era in O Scale! No more China Drives, we deserve affordable Athearn Genesis, and Kato Ready To Run quality in O also!
Originally Posted by Erik C Lindgren:
quote:Originally posted by rdunniiin Brasstrains.com there are pics of an earlier run of 1/48th Key E7s by Samhongsa and I think these are aesthetically superior to those.
So, in summary, I'm really happy with mine and think they are an awesome value.
Richard
Richard-
After some thought on this statement I decided to point out a few holes in your intended opinion regarding that a $2500+ Key Imports E7 set was not as good as a $1000 plastic GGD E7 set...
1) The Key Imports model at Brasstrains.com is a 1987 run Samhongsa, that is a 24 year old piece. I was 12 years old, I am almost 40 now!
If you stop and think about it; that is two and half decades of improvement in the industry. To compare to a vintage model like this that was produced in an era of hand drawn G.O.D.'s and literal hand made technology is like comparing a Model T Ford to a Toyota Prius, maybe better a Comodore 64 computer to your computer you are using now. nearly 30 years apart. What I want you to do is compare it to the current offerings of Key "Model" Imports.
Key Imports 1987 run E7 Union Pacific
GGD E7 in review
Look at these two models. even at 30 years apart the Key does a fine job... I like the windshield on the GGD better, maybe... The Key is pretty fine... a difficult formula not yet perfected until the 1990's by P&D and Highliners. Key did a fine job prior to this defining formula back in the 1980's, it was a concerted effort. GGD simply used a formula that was discussed with huge extent for nearly 20 years at Highliners and P&D. Today almost everybody uses some form or another of this great sculpt of the EMC/EMD windshield on models in all scales, Kato, Athearn Genesis, BLI, Atlas, Atlas O, and so on.
The ancient 1987 Key Imports model from 1987 uses a photo etched stainless panel for the wings, a decal on the GGD or pad printed I have not seen one. Lighting on both models I am sure is comparable however, I DO NOT like white LED's on new RTR plastic in N, HO or O. In the 1950's we did not have HID lighting or white/blue 7000K light as seen on your neighbors Mercedes. Incandescent lights are orange/yellow in color temperature not blue/white.
2) On the GGD Seriously whats up with the engine room windows? They are solid filled? Painted? Why are they yellow? These are windows with prime mover detail behind them and a series of engine room lights above.
I could go on, but I am NOT going to compare a hand built model to a plastic RTR piece from 2 and half decades ago.. Not going to happen.
Look I am not trying to pick a fight in your review; just trying to point out that comparing a 2012 plastic RTR model with a 1987 brass import is if anything just plain unimportant. I agree in my opinion the GDD is a better value compared to the 1987 Samhongsa piece. But compared to what is being produced in Korea today that is another story.
I will do you a favor and add photos of my 10 year old 2001 run Key Imports E7's. My #988 pair are very different than the 1987 Samhongsa Models. And have exhibit large improvements over the model produced some 18 years before.
Detail of the CORRECT wing design on the nose of the E7's.
Key Model Imports 2010 run E8/9
Key Model Imports 2010 run Frisco E7 (YES-this is an E7, made to look like an E8)
Key Model Imports 2010 run E7
I personally would prefer the 1987 Samhongsa E7's for a number of reasons, but $1250 compared to $500 that is a big reason to buy a GGD E7. I would need to spend at least $200 improving the nose art and the window issues so its a crap shoot on that. As far as drive... Well the 1980's Samhongsa drive is spectacular. Weight and adhesion is also an issue. That is an issue of what are your plans? Pulling a 90 lbs plus draw bar 12 car passenger train or shelving them?
It all comes down to the buyer, what does he or she want? A model with some flaws in the sculpt of the windshield with all the correct researched details and a factory Samhongsa paintwork with etched details or a very well done windshield with a general approach to the details and epoxy paint at a third the cost?
It is all a matter of taste and personal preference.
I love the GGD E7's; and love what they stand for, they are a genesis of a new era in O scale. Finally a HO quality plastic RTR models in our scale. I am ecstatic and absolutely in love with them for this reason. An alternative to brass in O scale! I am advocate for O scale not brass or plastic. I want beautiful ACCURATE models that are affordable like everyone here.
Your comparison is just not a good dynamic to play on in my opinion. Plastic RTR in O scale has a LONG-LONG-LONG way to go to stand up with Exact-Rail or Athearn Genesis in detail and accuracy in HO. But it is on its way I hope. These GGD E7's are a big step forward but to compare them to a 1987 brass import makes the GGD look bad, compare it to a 2012 brass import.
RE: THe MOPAC E7 with the signature MP Portholes,pictured above!
We absolutely,positively need a three rail version from 3rd rail. I will buy FOUR ABA consists!
Ricky
