Will we ever see a SD70ACe or ES44AC produced in plastic that is similar in quality to the Overland Models brass engines?

Did anyone else notice the - what looks like a ground light(one of those little lights aimed downward, that helps personnel on the ground, visually judge a locomotives speed) it's located just below the second step(from the bottom), in the picture showing GM70(seen on page 4, of this thread)?

Rick

I believe that lighting is part of the lighting and detail package on the 10 UP SD70 Aces that Bill Davis ordered [2750 per unit]

Hi hibar,

You can see the other ground light, to the right of the bell, a little higher up...  a few feet below the M, in the GM70 marking.

I've never noticed two of those lights so close together, on the same side of a locomotive; I'm curious about their purpose? Possibly, it helps the crews see the steps(or the bottom step) better... especially, when visibility/lighting is poor.

It's hard to tell - if the light is mounted directly over the bottom step, or is set further back...

Rick

It's not a ground which are governed by rule 17, it's stairwell lighting, although a small amount of light will spill onto the ground.  All modern locomotives have them in the stairwells.  Pics from my Conrail SD80mac:

See that white bar in the bottom of the center of the nose...that's a light also that lights the anti-climber platform.

...my new overland ns sd70ace model has these details...

NS...,

Thanks for the pics and the info.

Is the MAC HO?

Rick

The lights below the engineer and conductors side windows are so they can see wheel motion and slippage in the dark.

The pic above looks to be Overland's O Scale SD80MAC.

 Richard, I just saw that shell. Is it still available? I'm trying to guess if I could make it work.

PM sent.

I didn't realize there was other pictures of the MAC, until I clicked on the posted picture; says O on the box.

For some reason, I was under the impression the ground lights we used to help gauge the speed of a locomotive, in poor light conditions.

Thanks for the info rd...

Rick

All,

After reading through all the posts and thinking about it during some sleepless early hours this am, here's my take:

Yes, a mid-range current model diesel in O scale is wanted, would sell, and can be done in plastic with a horizontal drive, excellent added on detail, and scale accuracy up and down. As I write this, I'm looking at one of my Atlas O GP60s. An excellent O scale model...in plastic....my only gripe being the China drive that necessitates those out of scale trucks and performance that is not really a match for my OMI GP60's.

Now there's been a lot of talk about price points and start up costs, etc. but if we are to look at the demographics of the average modeler in HO, it  would probably be apparent that he/she does not have huge amounts of disposal income....but there are many superb models that are available within that budget. I know that

this is where O scale misses the proverbial boat, and, in part, why we're having such a poor time attracting more modelers to our scale. Now could I drop nearly

$10k on 3 new SD70Ace's to pull my coal train or my manifest freight, probably, but despite my love of Ajin models, I didn't because it didn't make economic sense (or cents) to me, times being what they are for most of us. Would I spend $700-900 per locomotive on a superbly built plastic-brass-diecast scale model that wasn't built for the 3 rail crowd (here, we'll put some oversized wheel sets on it and call it 2 rail so we can squeeze out a few more bucks).....you bet! and there's money left over to grow the fleet on sucessive runs, just as the 1:1 guys do.

I wouldn't look to MTH or Lionel, Atlas or 3rd Rail to start this revolution, it will most needs be somebody else. These companies are too beholden to the 3 rail market.

Now in regard to what we have now: Long before Athearn upgraded to their current lines of superb models, there was Details West, Cannon, and a host of small parts makers that would allow one to upgrade locomotives and cars to a higher level of fidelity to scale and accuracy than what was available off the shelf at the LHS. O Scale is ripe for this. Scale trucks, horizontal drives, diecast scale and accurate underframes, individual parts, all drop in with minimal if any finagling (is that really a word?) could turn these so-so MTH and Lionel models (yes, and some Atlas models, too Virginia!) into scale beauties that would suit the need without mortgaging the wife and kids. I would say this is especially true of some of the newer Atlas cars. What exists of an underframe was just an after thought. Now for those that think this can't be done, let me just move you straight over to the 1:50 diecast construction equipment hobby, of which I'm a part. Take a look, and be amazed.

Now some you have mentioned that you have a "so many feet and it doesn't matter rule." Well to each, his own, I say, but for me, since 1979, it matters, and I believe it matters for a majority of us who have been desperate enough to be in O Scale, but have had to make due with the bones the manufacturers throw us.

So Swafford, I say YES! YES! to scale fidelity! Yes! to scale accuracy! YES! to Scale operation! YES! it can be done! Will it be done? Start writing those letters again and make it known that we're looking for new manufacturing blood, not memories of 1953!

My opinion!

Mike Caddell

I believe Sunset is as close to what we would like to see in scale 2rail, they already have the drive and their latest plastic Diesels show an ever increasing level of detail.As long as they can minimize the compromises for the 3rail market[which they must have to make these projects feasible] we should see nicer models in the future,obiviously this comes at a higher price point than the big MFGs but still at 20-25% of the high end collectors/modelers market[remember we like to talk multiple units]JMHO

The exact reason no true 2 rail plastic diesel can be done is to make the cost feasible the model has to attract the 3 railers also. If it is made just for two rail as mentioned above the cost will be just too high IMO. I could be wrong but I just don't see the plastic version without a major mfg. doing them being done. 

If it could be done I would expect to pay 1200 or less. But I also think that too many two railers are married to brass and would never accept a plastic model no matter how well done. 

http://thecrhs.org/image/view/2011/_original

http://thecrhs.org/image/view/13422/_original

One of my favorite locomotives models, the 80's.

I'm glad I read Mike P.'s thread, re: his new Overland ACe, and this thread; it helps me - come to terms with my models and their limitations.

The reason I asked if the picture of the Conrail SD80MAC, is HO, was, because it doesn't appear to be a super detailed O scale model. At least, not what I expected a super-detailed o scale model, to look like. I'm not trying to insult it's owner; but, it definitely looks toy-like/ model-ish, to me. The front door almost looks 2-dimensional...molded in... not realistic.

I think the main point, when it comes to - manufacturing highly detailed, realistic looking, O scale models, of the prototypes, is realism.

I'm actually surprised, especially considering their cost, by what I've seen, here.

You don't have to be a rivet counter, to see their obvious limitations...

After seeing what you get, for a significant amount of money; maybe, some of my cheaper models - aren't so bad, after-all.

There's only one version of real - everything else fall short. I'd rather pay less for... short; because, I'm still not going to be totally satisfied with the current version of high end, O scale models.

I appreciate the efforts of those individuals, that gave me a chance, to see for myself...

Thank you!

Rick

Mike Caddell,

Sounds great sign me up!  If given the opportunity to purchase a $700-900 model with the scale fidelity of OMI, and not a hi-rail bastage, I would go for it as well.  And if possible modern scale cars like 53' articulated well cars etc.  

Gunderson Maxi Stack IV's would be fantastic!

Regards,

Swafford

Good tread Frank.  Matt, Mike and the others have hit a homer with Their comments, I recently got my PRR SD70 PRR ACe and admired it for an hour before I even turned the juice on, I at first thought it had a fixed pilot it wa so perfect looking, I guess they could make them better but I am not sure where to start. I like to see them use the new tecnology more like the auto crossing gate trip track and engine horn sequence Lionel is promoting on the big boy.

Having said that good stuff above on a more serouise note I need to swing back to Rich's tread about moving ahead together as in working side by side  to make the hobby more attractive to those youngins, were not getting younger and our ranks are saddly and quickly decreasing, we lost a lot of fellow club members this year and we will be losing more in the future.

I am asking a big favor from the big guys to work together not only on the computer and remote goodies Ipads and other gadjets  they are talking about but the hobby in genral make it exciting again so those younger folks want to get  involved, we in the field do what we can with open houses , shows and other things to get the kids involved but we need help from the manufactures, more scale, more variety, more electronic cool stuff as the kids say, show us what you can do, we know you can do it. More scale features are fine, the more the better however the hobby in ALL needs to be sharpend to a magnificent state of the art pastime, just my two cents.

Okay - why not approach Midwest Models, and see if they can do it?  Probably a trivial amount of money to make the plastic dies.  I am guessing that fifty grand would be enough, then copies would pop out of the mold for ten cents each.  If you can sell 300 of them maybe it would be profitable?

Not opinion, just guessing.  

Scott,

I agree, there has to be an end game to attract younger modelers. While some might be aiming at that pre-empty nestor group. I know that I got my first Lionel train when I was 2 y.o. That was a seminal event that made me a model railroader for life. Now where the disconnect came was when my neighborhood pals discovered HO and I sadly realized that my trains were not scale or even current prototype. Even more surprising was when I was finally allowed to venture on my own and took a trip on my bike to the local NYC railyard. What?! No stem engines?! No F-3s. What are these GP-35 thingys...and what's in these big long, tall cars? Well, my point is that that clubs can open up new vistas and fire the imagination, as you say.

In my mind, the old clubs are being swept away because they relied too much on the good will of others, or wouldn't bend with the times, and times do change. That unwanted space that was lent to a club by one friendly and sympathetic building owner becomes an incalculable commodity when the next landlord takes control, no matter how much they smile and fawn over your art. Then there's the reality that modeling methods change and improve. What was state of the art for one generation represents a compatibility barrier for the next. Change is hard, and in this case, expensive. There's reluctance to rebuild, sometimes not even the money.

But one thing is clear, to enamour more people into our scale, running trains is it, not only for the public, but for club members as well. As I have been slowly developing the FRRX project, I've looked to HO a great deal as they are very flexible, innovative, and roll with technology changes. Modular and sectional design work well as opposed to the monolithic "Fortress Europa" style of O Scale layouts of the past.

Really, this could be another thread entirely, so rather than hi-jack Frank's, let's leave it here and carry on with new locomotives, but you made some good points about our future and where we need to go as a hobby.

FRRX: Route of the High Plains Drifter 

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this most interesting thread.  There have been so many great comments to consider.  After 5 pages I keep going back to a comment made early on by 30th Street.

will we ever see a Ford or Chevy that is similar in quality to a Ferrari or Lamborghini

 

Ferruccio Lamborghini was a successful farm tractor builder who owned a Ferrari.  When the clutch failed he was surprised to find that it was the same commercially available clutch that he used on farm tractors.  He went to Enzo Ferrari and asked for something better and was told he was just a tractor maker and didn't know anything about sports car.  And thus Mr. Lamborghini went into the sports cars business to prove a point and build a more comfortable grand touring car than Ferrari with a better quality clutch!

Ford or Chevy could never afford to build a car with quality as poor as a Ferrari.

Most Ford or Chevy owners are not on a first name basis with their mechanic, many Ferrari owners are.  If Ford or Chevy tried to build a commuter sedan or a work pickup with Ferrari quality mechanical reliability or service intervals they would see sales plummet and be swamped by warranty claims. 

I am sure some will say that reliability is not the sole component in the definition of quality, performance must also be a consideration.

Consider this. 

When Henry Ford II got out of bed one morning and decided that Ford should build a GT car to out perform Ferrari the effort resulted in the GT-40, a 1,2,3 sweep by Ford at Le Mans in 1966 and a winning streak at Le Mans by Ford that lasted the rest of the 1960s.

So what is the relevance of sports car history to the O scale model locomotive market?  I think it shows that when an organization with major capital and engineering resources decides to take on a small custom builder they can often achieve impressive results in a short amount of time.  It is also worth noting that a major builder like Ford has not sustained an effort to serve the ultra high priced, ultra high performance market over the long haul because there just isn't much profit in attempting to serve that market.  They can earn more by devoting their financial and engineering resources to larger markets.  Enlarging the high end market by reducing unit cost can even alienate established customers who enjoy the sense of distinction that comes from owning a highly priced marque.  And, a major builder does make a sustained effort in the high performance market, like Chevrolet with the Corvette, the product not only needs the power and handling of a GT car, it has to have the mechanical reliability of a pickup truck.

In describing buying habits Bob2 commented that his were...

Not rational, but as far as I am concerned, the hobby is less than rational as well.

So how do you ask someone to commit the financial and engineering resources needed to design and build a reliable, smooth running, strong pulling superbly detailed diesel locomotive at a mass market price?

That is going to be hard to do for a market that at least some if not most of us perceive as small, shrinking and not always rational!

Swafford has picked out the two models that present a manufacturer with the best opportunity to make a good return on their investment, the ES44 and SD70ACe.  They are currently in production and are likely to be on the rails for decades to come.  Perhaps the most important boost to their sales has come from the proliferation of heritage paint schemes.  There are many guys who have bought one of each and many more who have at least a few.

Both Lionel and MTH have produced some very nice modern diesels in recent years.  Sunset has shown that they can produce an E unit this is competitive in detail and performance with the Lionel and MTH E units.  The MTH Trainmaster seems to have won universal respect as a very well detailed model and it is priced in line with other plastic 3 rail and 2 rail models. 

What improvements would the existing Lionel or MTH ES44s or SD70ACes need to be regarded as highly as the MTH Trainmaster?

What would a Sunset plastic modern diesel model need to exceed detail of the existing models from Lionel and MTH?

The larger market will not accept being on a first name basis with a guy who can rebuild your locomotive to make it run.  Will the 2 rail market accept a well detailed modern diesel model with a drive train that a high volume builder can warranty?   

And they were about $750 for the drive (I think he said the drive was about $1k of the price for the complete models he is working on).  If you are willing to pay that I'm sure Erik would be happy to make you one or two.  That is where he has been in business for years.  The expansion into complete models is new[er].

Several of these recent posts on this thread (past 24 hours) have reminded me about the need for 53 ft equipment.

Should we really be asking for more highly-detailed SD70Aces and ES44s when o-gauge is really lacking in relevant rolling stock for them to pull?  We need more stuff like 53ft well cars, AND 53 ft highway trailers on spine cars.  

I say:   Let the rolling stock catch up before taking the locos to the next level.

Ted,

I agree, MTH has a really nice Premier Train Master. I recently traded away, a Premier 3.0 CP train Master. Their(MTH's) Premier Train Master, is probably their best O scale offering. MTH's Dash8-40CW, runs a close 2'nd.

Their GE Evolution series falls short, in my eyes; same opinion, re: their EMD Enhanced 70's models. I've posted enough pictures of the real units, here, to show the obvious discrepancies...

Even the highly touted brass models drop the ball; some manufactures don't commit to a complete rendition; amongst other things, they fail to deliver exacting details...

I can't believe the quality of the sheet metal details, on the Conrail SD80MAC, shown in this thread. I've got RailKing models that have better looking molded-in, longhood panel/door latches etc. A great example of high quality molded in detail, can be seen on MTH's latest version of their U30C; especially, on the longhood - under the radiator. I couldn't believe the door handles, on their new Premier Train Master; excellent! Their Narrow Nose Dash 8, sports deep molded-in details.

I was running my Premier P5a today, it's die-cast, and has some excellent details...

but,

There's only one way to get true realism; every single detail has to be replicated... in scale proportions, exactly like the prototype. Exactly!

So far, I haven't seen this done.

BTW, when GE or EMD gets customer orders, they are able to "duplicate" and build unit after unit, as advertized, from base materials. If they can do that in the real world, surly it's possible to do the same, with a scale model.

$2,000 plus models, should match that benchmark. I don't see it being worth the significant effort, for $500.00 models. Somebody, should post a picture of some high end HO models, I doubt they match the prototypes, too?

Rick

Just to add one has to look no further than MTH's HO catalog to see what can be done.   At NYSME we are fortunate to have both O and HO.  I'm always amazed by what they have in the smaller scale versus what we have in the larger scale except what we have are crude renditions of the prototype unless you are willing to pay big bucks.  

Also worth a mention the one body for all/its close enough attitude.  Look at the new 2014 HO catalog and see "GE Dash 9-44CW"  the bold headline says it all "New Tooling! Flexible mold Desing allows for 10 different road-specific body configurations."

Rick,

I have 3 of dash-8 narrow nose, 2 CSX dark future and 1 CSX oddball primer gray and several in wide cab from the recent runs, they are incremental upgrades but hardly anything earth shattering.  On some of my diesels the etched brass floors detach or bend and buckle because the material has a different expansion contraction rate as the plastic it is glued to.   I do applaud MTH they are making changes for scale fidelity.  Recent example UP challenger with scale sized smoke box doors vs the old monster hinge. While it is a small detail change it adds a lot to the look and the new Facebook photos prove it.  

 CN CW40-8 PS3.0

CSX CW40-8 Bright Future PS3.0

And excuse the foreground but in the back is one of two CSX CW40-8 Dark Future PS3.0 and an older UP Gray AC44CW PS2.0.

In my opinion none of the "high volume builders " [ Lionel, MTH, WBB ]  have the desire, need or -- above all -- engineering / management resources to devote to producing a quality 2 rail locomotive either from a detail or a power train standpoint, let alone both.

I see two possibilities, neither likely but yet plausible, for a plastic [ well, plastic + metal ] quality diesel other than Sunset:

1)  An arms-length-joint venture between Lionel [ by process of elimination ] and a second party such as Midwest, where Lionel produces painted but unfinished body shells and the other builder details and powers them.

2) That one morning Bernd Lenz -- who singlehandedly resurrected 0 scale in Germany -- gets out of bed and decides to do an SD40-2 in 1:48.

   Less likely, but still possible, would be Günter Braun of Brawa reaching the same decision though somewhat more rationally-- now THAT could not only match OMI, but better it....

    And before you think (2) unlikely, remember that Lamborghini is now a Volkswagen AG subsidiary, and run like one:  German engineering / QC in an Italian bodyshell.

Best, SZ

PS  Roco just announced an SD40 -- in HO.....

Mike,

I'm not saying anything more than they've done admirable work, re: some of their molded in details.

You and I aren't that different - do or do not, there is no try

Either match the prototype or you don't, there is no try!

Rick

Martin H

Yes, I agree with you...not just locomotives, but freight as well: Trinity T Boxes, Trinity 34000g LPG Tankers, 65 foot mill gondolas (Trinity, Greenbrier, etc....take your pick), 30000g Ethanol cars (correct design and scale Lionel!), 73' Partition Flats(com-on Atlas! I've been asking since 2006), ACFinc and Gunderson Grain Hoppers, Plate C Boxcars....my list goes on. Is anybody there? Is anybody listening to our call? Can you hear us at all?

FRRX:  Goin' West on the Cowboy Trail!

I am 27 years old, so i guess i can shed some light on why i think alot of the folks my age and younger are not actively getting into O scale. I have a few friends around my age who are model railroaders as well but they are into HO scale.

I'll give one example. a few years ago before i started O scale and had been out of the railroading hobby since i was a kid, I went out and bought a Train set with a BNSF GP38 engine and 4 or so cars, extra track and an additional Dash 9 engine. it cost me around $200 dollars or less for it all. I had track and a power supply and was set up having fun within a short amount of time.

For $200 dollars in O scale, i can get maybe a few cars. no engine, no track, no power supply or anything. Cost is the major factor keeping the younger folks out of O scale 2 rail. hence why i only own 1 engine, 1 car and have to rely on running it on someone else's layout. the only thing keeping me into O scale is my obsession with super detailing and it being easier on a bigger scale.

I have asked all my HO buddys why they wouldn't consider O scale and they all gave the same reason, they don't want to take out a loan from the bank to have a hobby haha.

My only hope right now to get some more out of the hobby is to make my own cars and locos. which may not be to far off since I work a machinist as my full time job, and I'm  learning some CAD stuff here and there.  in the future sometime i am planing to try and machine my own frames and then use CAD to make stuff to 3d print when it gets cheaper on shapeways or the like.

Does anyone have the url for Midwest Models? 

Thanks,

Ed

Ted,

If a guy wants a square, give him a square; not a triangle, hexagon, circle, or sort-of a square, just a square.

Years ago, I heard talk about companies building tiny robots, that would be injected into a humans blood stream...

Small is only small, when compared to something that is bigger. You can go up or down in scale, and I would imagine - you'd have to have the appropriate tools, that would fit the scale you're working with.

Obviously, this costs a significant amount of money. That is probably "the" reason for not meeting the benchmark...

BTW, last I heard, in the real world, it was around $2,500,000.00, for a new, stock AC traction model.

Rick

kcmike2011

Glad to hear you are a machinist and have aspirations to build models of your own.  O scale is definitely the place to be if you want super detail!  I'm working on a Chicago & Alton Heavy Pacific, which no importer is ever going to do.  I'm not a machinist by trade, but am acquiring the necessary skills.  Primary interest is Illinois Central, which the importers aren't going to do, either.  Since I have access to prints I have made the trailing truck which has 202 parts.  Try doing that in HO.  As far as costs, I know many HO'ers who have spent a lot of money on trains because they buy many because they "cost less"  Best wishes on your machinist adventure!

Harmon

It was seeing the HO and European MTH products that swore me off their O stuff.  It is proof positive just what they can do.

When you want to have "somebody" contact whomever look in the mirror, that is who should contact them.  All the O Scale/Gauge marketeers I have spoken too have been open, candid and easy to talk to.

I asked Mike Wolf about O Scale and he was candid about it.  They will continue to improve their tooling.  But improving the accuracy of scale is in the middle of the GaS list. Why?  Because the toy train market does not support it and they are the largest segment of their O offerings.  Spending money on scale tooling when it only ends up with customers buying WBB on price makes him think twice.  The European and HO markets demand accurate scale.  PS3 with DCC happened only because of those two markets.  The O market is perfectly happy with their proprietary control system and sorta scale models.

There is no such thing as a perfect replica model of anything!  Regardless of size or price.

Lionel had been asked many times about 2-rail and they have made it very clear they do not support anything having to do with the 2-rail market.

End of the story looks like a simple business plan, follow the money.  And Ted I agree HO and european markets are ripe but they're also demanding.  

Ed, http://midwesternmodelworks.com