Whats the deal with the new Rivarossi FEF-3s? I see the Grayhound one is fine, but the other 2 paint schemes are flawed. #844 is black with light graphite parts and #840 has the dark graphite. [V] This is reversed from what they were advertised as. It is supposed to be the other way around. Seems like a pretty large mistake. [:(] I was very dissapointed in this. I think this is incorrect for the prototypes too.
If you read MR’s January 2004 Product review there is mention that the two tone grey c/w yellow stripe scheme represents the period between 47’ to 49’, where as the silver bearing journals weren’t painted silver until the late 50’s. So as you can see either the Rivarossi research team screwed up or thet took poetic licence and came up with a composite colour scheme.
Who’s to know!
Aggro, are you referring to those that are advertised with passenger car sets[?]
Blood, I mean the smoke stack and firebox on #844 is light silver, and #840 has dark graphite, which is reversed from the advertised description.
Yup. The brand spanking new ones reviewed in the January issue of MR.
Whoops! [:I]
Maybe this is Rivarossi’s idea of getting away from paying Uncle Pete his copyright fee.
Though I highly doubt it. someone probably picked up a photo that was mismarked or improperly dated.
I remember asking questions about detailing a Canadian National “Mountain” and was asked which one. I assumed that a class would have standard equipment. Nope! details/attachments depended on which shop did the overhaul and when. Looking at photos this appears to be the case. I don’t know if this “rule of thumb” applies to UP.
I got the grey version of the FEF-3 for Christmas, and even if the paint isn’t 100% right, it is still a beautiful locomotive. I am looking forward to hooking some grey passenger cars behind it and letting it show off.
They are still a better loco than the original Rivs were. And rather affordable too.
I saw a Rivarossi FEF-3 run at a local hooby shop. I was expecting smooth state-of-the-art running, like most other good plastic steam. But she wobbled across the test track. Every thing else was fine and functioning, but the boiler not ridding steady on the mechanism threw me off. One of the sales people suggested it was the tire causing this horrible preformance. I don’t think the traction tire would distort the running characteristics that much.
Fergy, morpar you guys have one. Did yours wobble down the rails or was it just this one messed up? If you use the non-tired replacement driver that somes with it, is it okay? Please advise.
After reading this I went down to the layout and ran the FEF-3 and here are my obs.
The engine ran straight and true on the ballasted track. once off the ballasted section she did not run even. small dips and “wobbles” but nothing too noticable. This is with the traction tire on and running on Atlas code 100. This engine is a very heavy engine which, as you probably already know has slightly less drawbar pull than the Allegheny. Thats a lot of traction to have on eight tires as opposed to 12. So as I noted before ballasting made a difference in the way she ran.
Just another quick note: when I’m laying the track I use a 4’ straight edge as I hate wobbles and dips. The only thing else I can think of that might cause this wobble is the tire clearances. Mine were all good and to NMRA standard.
Thanks.
I think someone should write a letter to Rivarossi, or Walthers, their American distributer.