I’m going to be purchasing one Milwaukee Road engine to run on a small layout I am building, and am trying to pick between the Atlas U30B and the Athearn GP38-2 (I have limited funds, so it needs to be one or the other and not both).
I’ve had superb experiences with Atlas in the past, and very little overall experience with Athearn locomotives. From just a superficial perspective, the Athearn appears to be a far more detailed product (and the short fuel tanks are really nifty to top things off). However, over the long term I’m most concerned with reliability, performance, and endurance. The Atlas is, as of now, slightly more expensive, but setting that factor aside, which locomotive do you believe I should buy?
I assume we are talking about HO scale. I have a couple of the Atlas U-30s in the BN livery and also a few Athearn GP 38-2s in SP and BN. The Athearn in my opinion has better detail and runs fine, I am no expert but I really like the tsunami sound of the GP 38-2s. On the other hand the U30s have the QSI titan decoder and again in my opinion have better sound that reacts well to speed changes. The U30s are a little heavier and are not prone to stalls on some switches that can be a problem for the Athearn GP 38-2. That being said, I think you would be happy with either one. One last thought is that the Atlas QSI uses indexed cv’s which can be a little confusing if you are new to programming. I would reccomend using JMRI which makes it a lot easier to access all the options.
I’m probably not really helping you out since I really like them both,
Marty C
I would take the U30 if we are talking sound equipped. The Milwaukee’s 38’s looked more interesting, but the U30 SOUNDED more interesting. Set in a high momentum or manual notching and bazinga!
Yes, we are talking HO, and yes we are talking sound-equipped. Sorry. I should have stated both. [:)]
Shrike Arghast,
Some video’s to watch and listen. There are Athearn’s also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XugtTXOZpdk
Maybe they will help, in Your decision.
Enjoy!
Frank
Atlas is far superior to anything ever put out by Athearn or anyone else.
The Atlas U30B is a Phase II unit. The Milwaukee never had any U30Bs, but did have U28Bs. Phase II U28Bs look the same as Phase I U30Bs. So, this wouldn’t fit, if you are a rivet counter. For protoypical accuracy, I would go with the GP38-2.
From the outside do U30B and the U28B look different?
Trainworld has the Athearn GP38-2 with sound on sale for $170. They’ve got the Proto U28B for $250, and the same engine without sound for $89.
I’ve dealt with Trainworld a lot. They are a good dealer.
I have a Proto U28B that I got a few months ago. It looks and sounds good, and runs well, too, but there were broken detail parts when I got it, the headlight flickers and the front coupler is too short.
Kind of like a Chevy vs. Ford question…
As having Fords since a 1957 ragtop with the 312 T bird mill, I would choose the Proto over the Athearn…
In this case, yes, but it is complicated.
There are two main phases of U28B production. Phase I is almost identical to late U25Bs. Phase II is identical to Phase I U30Bs. Phase II U30Bs don’t look like the the others.
The Milwaukee had Phase I and Phase II U28Bs. The Phase II units look like this…
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=492747
…except for the paint. The Atlas units are Phase II units, which look like this:
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=2570430
There are some radiator detail changes at the rear of the locomotives that are different, primarily the way the grilles are arranged, and the size. You can decide if the difference between the Phase II U30B and the Phase I U30B/Phase II U28B is enough to annoy you.
I’m still confused, heh. Wikipedia lists Milwaukee as owning both U28Bs and U30Bs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Milwaukee_Road_locomotives I also have photos in an issue of TRP focused on Milw that list some of the engines pictured as U30Bs. Is what you’re saying is that the U30Bs on Milwaukee looked like U28Bs, but the Atlas model is of the later version of the U30B? How perplexing! [:|]
Sincere appologies-I was reading a roster book that had listed them under the full Chicago, Milwaukee, Saint Paul and Pacific name, as opposed to the Milwaukee abreviation. It does seem that the Milwaukee did have Phase II U30Bs, like the Atlas model. Appologies for any confusion this may have caused, diesregard my earlier posts.
Hey, Northwest, no need to appologize. [:)] You were just trying to be helpful and I genuinely appreciate that. While I’ve got you, let me ask you something else: what do you think about the realism of using a U30B as an engine for running a local freight that involved a lot of switching? I was told by someone on another forum that the U30B was rarely utilized for this role because it lacked power switching technology and put out full amperage even at low speeds. Would you agree with this… or do you think that an impovershed railroad like Milwaukee would be inclined to use anything that ran to get the job done?
Also, as a complete aside, here’s another nice couple of videos of the Atlas unit at work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-9Ia3pMpsc&index=34&list=PLy0mozSjKBTwjYLqQnWP4_5PNs1TV_omY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZXi0mlWqJE&index=33&list=PLy0mozSjKBTwjYLqQnWP4_5PNs1TV_omY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xaalX4vOk8&index=35&list=PLy0mozSjKBTwjYLqQnWP4_5PNs1TV_omY
GEs of this era were noted for slow loading, and slow acceleration, so I think it would be avoided if possible. But, yes, they were difficult to switch with. The Milwaukee and Rock Island did use whatever was available and still running in later years, so it is possible. U28Bs and U25Bs were somewhat common on the Sumas branch in the late '70s, however. (Plus the odd U33C, on 1897 40lb rail!)
Here is my Walthers-Proto U28B:
Since you mentioned Milwaukee, I thought you’d like a picture.