I promise to try and not grumble too much on this forum. There’s only one big gripe that I have in the world of model railroads and I need to say this to get it off my chest:
Producing locomotives or rolling stock with paint schemes or railroad companies that never had them. I guess you also could include such things as totally incorrect tenders and other parts. However, I don’t wi***o count rivets. Just big, noticeable details that are incorrect.
I understand that some folks don’t mind this practice. Fine.
My BIG gripe is when the companies don’t clearly label them as “fakes” or “fantasy” schemes.
OK, the counter-argument goes, caveat emptor or buyer beware. That is fine for some of you train veterans but for people starting out, they expect to get the real deal.
The practice seems to be more widespread in some gauges than in others.
Con-cor did this recently in N or HO. However, if memory serves, they did provide the warning label. Some 3-rail companies are esp. guilty of this practice, producing such things as Santa Fe FAs and steam engines in full-warbonnet paint scheme. I don’t mean to pick on certain companies and I don’t think I have. Mainly, I just wi***o point this out.
Although I would like to take the high road with you on this issue, I can’t. First, I’'ve bought non-prototypical engines painted for BC Rail that didn’t exist - when I didn’t know what I was doing. But you know what, at the time I was really happy with the engine - kept me interested in the hobby. I couldn’t figure out why people were so upset it wasn’t a real prototypical engine.
Of course, over time I stopped purchasing these non-existent engines. But that isn’t the reason I am defending the practise. If I were to start out a MRR company producing cars, I just might put out some “fake” ones, just so I can survive to put out future cars. It might just be that the income the fake cars bring in would be enough to keep me alive and actually pay some bills.
Con Cor has never been the Bastian of excellence - though I do like some of their releases - but they aren’t excellent.
I guess in my mind, if I am a company survival is first, then I will head in the direction I want as reality permits.
Where would you have them draw the line? To me O-27 and 3 rails looks worse than ANY fake paint scheme possibly could. That’s a really big detail to me. So let’s have them stop making O27? Please don’t take offence, but there can be toy trains and model trains and if your into model trains someone shouldn’t have to tell you the difference. If you are into toy trains you don’t care that your train is painted wrong and running on three rails with ties every 20 feet. You buy it cause you like it. Even the great John Allen had toy trains too. FRED
There’s only one big gripe that I have in the world of model railroads and I need to say this to get it off my chest:
Producing locomotives or rolling stock with paint schemes or railroad companies that never had them. I guess you also could include such things as totally incorrect tenders and other parts.
. . .
Con-cor did this recently in N or HO.
…
They also did this a few years back with their CB&Q blackbird scheme MP 15 switcher which didn’t come out on the prototype until sometime in the 1970’s, IIRC. CB&Q ceased to exist on March 1, 1970. Shame, shame!
I suppose you’re right; companies could add a disclaimer and add something like XYZ Ry didn’t have a box car exactly like this one and 54 other railroads had box cars similar to this one. The point is that when I first got into the hobby I was happy to get anything that had my favorite prototypes paint scheme. As the years (decades) have flown by I’m more selective in what I buy only because I have more knowledge of what my favorite RR actually did own. That quest for knowledge is just one of literally dozens of facets that make modelrailroading so much fun. That being said, I have never repainted any of the “incorrect” items because they still “look” good and until it gets to the point where I just can’t stand it anymore I probably never will repaint them. I have painted “incorrect” rolling stock in my prototypes colors because although not exact replicas they are “close” enough for me. Just enjoy the hobby and if you don’t like what’s not prototypical for your railroad then repaint what you have to a correct scheme or swap it for something else because eventually you will acquire enough of what is “right”. Finally, there is just so much more out there today than there was 30 years ago that sometimes I almost have to do a doubletake when I see something advertised for my prototype that never in my life did i ever think I would see it but now here it is. What a great hobby!
You just never know! Really though, most companies that have to do this are just trying to recover the up front cost which can run as high as $250,000 or more just for the molds. I spoke to LIFELIKE about this once and was amazed at how much it takes to bring a new loco to the market, even in todays computerized enviorment.[:)][:)]
Agree and understand why they try to recoup cost. However, the disclaimer should be made regardless. I seriously doubt if model airplane or car enthusiasts would appreciate branding an Edsel as a Chevy or an F/A-18 Hornet with Air Force insignia.
But those examples are common knowledge things that everyone knows, including my grandma. Some of the railroad triva is pretty obscure, like warbonnet paint on a loco that never had it. Model car and plane companies make plenty of errors too, they are just posted in a forum for model cars and planes buffs and we never hear of them. A real good example of this was the early F-117 stealth fighter which is way off, it doen’t even resemble a F-117 from across the room. Also, a Romulan Warbird model is bigger than the Enterprise C, but in real life is way smaller. FRED
I saw an article a few years ago that over half of the model RR items that are decorated for Santa Fe, that railroad never did own. Manufacturers decorate practically everything for the Santa Fe because it is the best selling road name, especially in the War Bonnet scheme. Personally, I’m not the rivet counter type and don’t care whether or not the Illinois Central, or any other road, really had a particular locomotive or rolling stock item that I own – I’m just glad that someone is making it available. To me, model railroading is supposed to be fun, not a continual challenge to be as accurate as possible by super-detailing everything, down to the last rivet. During open houses at the Cochise & Western Model Railroad Club, if someone makes a comment to me that something I’m running isn’t “authentic,” I tell them we’re running a free-lanced railroad, and if they don’t like that, we don’t need people like them in the club, anyway. I hate nit-pickers who seem determined to take the fun out of model railroading with their constant criticism. We removed one club member who got out of hand with his criticism of how the layout was being built.
Actually I have pictures of prototype steam tenders lettered for the Penn Central by the Penn Central for use on the Penn Central.
To a certain extent I think its a matter that if you buy a Reading PS-1 boxcar and don’t know that RDG didn’t have any PS-1’s, it probably wouldn’t matter to you that its a fake scheme. If you know enough to know its a fake scheme, then you probably would care that its a fake scheme and not buy the car.
Anyone with any modicum of sense who models the Santa Fe should know that they never did own any GG-1s, because the Santa Fe did not have any electrified track.
I understand your point, but what about all the people who don’t have the time to sit & custom paint locomotives or rolling stock?
I don’t!
If I see something that I like, I’ll buy it no matter if it’s prototypical or not. Because that’s what I want. True, some manufacturers go a bit over board with somethings but these are usually the low end manufacturers arn’t they? But then again, I’m not buying from Model Power or Bachman.
A modern BNSF paint scheme on a poorly executed 40’ composite boxcar is pretty flagrant, while putting a steam era NYC/RDG/CNJ scheme on a well done PRR X-29 boxcar falls into the “close enough” realm. While those roads didn’t use the X-29 they did have USRA boxcars that were similar in outward appearance. Now the rivet counters will be screaming that they didn’t look anything alike, rivet patterns, underframe design, yadda, yadda. But from across the room they are certainly close enough to stand in for a USRA car.
Then you get into the variations of execution. Which is worse, a well done paint scheme on an inaccurate car (for example a PRR X-29 car with a paint scheme and lettering that is accurate for a USRA style car) or a poorly executed paint scheme on the correct car (for example a NYC USRA car with the wrong lettering style, the herald too big and the paint a couple shades too dark). For my money the quality paint scheme on a close car beats the poor paint scheme on an accurate car.
In this age of near porn, violence for the sake of violence on our tv , movies and computer games and the shrinking of our industries , families and moral fiber there is nothing in the world as harmless as a little model train. So what if it is incorrect. Serious prototype modelers should hit the books and research every aspect of their railroad world. To me that is part of the fun, overcoming the passage of time and mistakes made by model companies. To others just seeing their favorite roadname on a coffee cup or a box car made 20 years after their line mergerd into another makes them happy. There is nothing wrong with that. You say they never made that , wrong your holding it in your hands. Do’nt forget model trains are trains too.
I’d be inclined to agree that “fake” liveries can be a nuisance to those just starting out in the hobby, but some of them are very convincing - look at some of the Athearn “John Deere” range - I’ve had a look at a couple of boxcars and a flatcar with a pair of tractors loaded, and I thought they were very believeable.
I’m one of those who isn’t overly concerned about fakes. I can live with them. Perhaps that’s because I’m also a toy train guy. My advice to those who are opposed to them is simple: if you don’t like them, don’t buy them. Not all trains have to be perfect scale models, some are just for fun. We all have our own tastes. I would question the Santa fe GG1, but when I think about it, I guess one would kind of look sharp. I’d muvh sooner buy a Pennsy one, though!
Some other examples that I can add to this list are foreign trains in North American paint schemes. Model Power makes a 2-6-0 that is actually a German class 24 steamer that’s had it’s elephant ears (smoke deflectors) and buffers removed. It’s paired with a North American style tender that’s available in several roadnames. In the past, Model Power has made Japanese Shinkansen train sets in Amtrak and Santa Fe paint schemes.