Saw a clinic at the Prototype Rails/Cocoa Beach 05 meeting on
building Blueprint kits. I am not at this level of kit building
yet, but I was certainly impressed with the finished products, so
was pleased to see in April that Branchline would offer some of
the Pullmans RTR at a very reasonable $25 above the kit price.
I purchased a Pool 12-1 a few weeks ago and had only a minor
problem in that one of the trucks fell apart between China and
here. I think it is a beauty.
Because the availability of these RTR is limited in types and
roads, and introduction is going slowly, I decided to order a
Walthers HW for comparison. Didn’t expect it to match the
Blueprint at 2/3 the price, and it didn’t; here’s what I noticed:
Con on Walthers: truck sideframes lack detail; not nearly as free-
rolling; underbody detail not as complete; no rods, etc; no outside
handles on windows. Diaphragms don’t have bellows, don’t look real.
Pro on Walthers: semi-scale couplers; close-coupling gives very small
gap between diaphragms; diaphragms float and flex around curves;
leaf springs complete inside sideframes.
Con on Blueprint: large gap between cars; standard couplers;
diaphragms could not be close-coupled anyway because they do not
flex, so full clearance necessary for whatever turn radius; leaf
springs on outside of sideframes only.
Pro on Blueprint: superior detail in general; realistic but non-
working diaphragms; very free-rolling trucks.
From three feet away, my admittedly weak eyes see little difference
except for the lack of completeness in the underbody detail of the
Walthers and the diaphragm/coupler stuff.
I realize that the Walthers HW’s are less prototypical, more cookie-
cutter, with probably no differences between roads and time periods,
but don’t know enough to comment. I did not examine the interiors
yet.
I have looked at the Blueprint models, and as you say there are of a slightly higher detail level than the Walthers models, but for me it made a minimal impact. Where the walthers models lacked the detail below the sole bar, this would be easily modified with some scrap brass rodding and perhapse a little plasticard! The close coupling was a big bonus for me, so after reading your comments I am glad I did not go for the Blueprint models!
The other issue I have is that if I buy a kit - it does not get built for ages! So I would rather purchase an item (although a generic model), but at least I can run it straight away! I unfortunatley do not have enought time to build kits or do adequate research to find out whether a certain coach was used on a certain road, so I happily accept what the manufactures offer (within reason of course!).
I suppose it all depends on how much of a perfectionist you are - with my UK models, like you, I will make sure everything is 100% accurate, but when modelling US I relax a bit, mainly beacuse I can’t afford Brass models, and at the end of the day I am happy with a good ‘representation’ of a certain american train.
So in a nutshell I’d go for the Walthers models every time!
I’ve seen photos of the Branchline models, and I like the detailing on them. My major complaint would have to be with the diaphragms - Walthers have been offering very effective sprung diaphragms on all their HO stock for a while now, they almost touch when you change the couplers (Kadee #5s seem a little shorter than the E Z Mates they ship with, they also look nicer and work more reliably) and they resemble the prototype pretty closely. The Branchline diaphragms are fixed and therefore need to have the coupler heads protruding further to stop them locking together, the end result of which is a more noticable gap between cars. If they were to offer a sprung diaphragm kit (if you take a look at the Walthers ones it’s a very simple change - they just use a piece of springy steel to hold the moulding in place and allow it to move) I would be more impressed - to my mind this one minor point is letting down an otherwise superb model.
I built a Branchline Blueprint 12-1 pullman, and it’s really not that difficult. It takes a lot of time, but everything goes just exactly where it’s supposed to. The only thing I found difficult about it was the placement of the underbody detail, as the instructions are not really too clear about where goes what and why. But other than that, it’s a good kit and makes a fine car. I’ve integrated it with my Walther’s heavyweights, and frankly, it’s hard to tell the difference between them.
One thing I do NOT like about the Walther’s heavyweights is that most of the RR-specific cars are painted in ‘transitional’ color schemes instead of the usual Pullman Green. So if you want a ‘pool car’ bought from Pullman and operated by, say, the Denver and Rio Grande Western, you’re either stuck with the “Bumblebee” Rio Grande colors (which were only used on the post-1947 “Royal Gorge”), or get an undecorated pullman green car and decal it yourself. Which means, of course, taking apart a RTR car and literally turning it into a ‘kit’. Also, the Walthers cars are pretty unforgiving about curves due to the truck rubbing against the underframe truss (and I’m talking about a 34" radius, here, folks). But again, the Walther’s close coupling and their flexible diaphraghms make for a really impressive looking passenger train, and clipping the underframe truss enough to let the trucks clear doesn’t make for an unsightly gap, unless you’re really looking.
For myself, I’m really glad that Walthers has put out their Pullman Standard heavyweights, and from what I understand, next year is going to see even more variation in the types of cars available (an enclosed Solarium car, for one). Now if Walthers or Branchline can start putting out some head-end cars for our limiteds, I’ll be a very happy camper.
But again, don’t be afraid of the Branchline kits–they don’t demand the expertise of a master model builder, but they DO take time and patience.
Tom [:D]
[img]http://pic15.picturetrail.com/VOL573/
I’ve seen both, own a few Branchlines (kits) and will buy both, because the models the two manufacturers have decided to produce will do different things for me. I only need a small fleet of passenger cars (all heavies), so I’ll lean more on the Branchline cars due to their better detailing (when you’ve for a fleet of 400 40-foot boxcars, the detailing can be relatively lax; when you’ve only got 10 passenger cars, they SHOULD be gems!). But Walthers is making a few cars that BL isn’t, mostly the full baggage, diner and tail car, so I’ll pick those up from Walthers.
Guys,Both cars are excellent models…As for me I will go with the car that has more usability over heavily detailed…In a nutshell I want a car I can use without the fear of knocking off minute detail that one can’t see under normal operation conditions.The same rule applies for locomotives after all I buy locomotives and cars to use and not to gawk at.[:0].[;)]
Thanks for your comments, all. I will see what
diaphragm and coupler mods could be applied to
the Blueprints for close coupling, since there
seems limited value to having a great looking
set of cars with toy train-like gaps between
them. But as orsonroy says, if I want a baggage
or diner car, I may have to purchase Walthers.
One solution for reducing the gap between the diaphragms on Branchline cars is to use the shims that American Model Builders makes for this purpose. See the HO detail parts category on their web site, at http://www.laserkit.com.
They offer some pretty nice-looking parts to make Branchline’s very nice cars even better.