Total accuracy is a very nasty trend to deal with for the manufacturers. Simply because almost all prototype locomotives go through significant changes in their appearance during their lifetimes.
First are the modifications that are ordered at time of manufacture by the purchasing railroad. How well documented are these? Are the pictures in the model manufacturer’s hands dated, and do they show the locomotive as delivered. Same goes for other pictures. Do they show all the local changes made, and are they dated, so one can know when the changes were made? Does the model manufacturer have access to all the known photos of the prototype - because there’s always someone who turns up after the model is produced saying it’s garbage because it doesn’t match the photo in their possession.
Even if the manufacturer has a complete photo and modification history - what year should be picked to be manufactured? Look at the dumping on the recent K4 models as an example - MTH chose to produce an earlier version than BLI. And were dumped on for doing so, and were dumped on again for producing “another K4” anyway.
Producing many versions of the same locomotive - common in HOn3 - still doesn’t make it exactly the model you want. Many still get modified by their owners to match a particular set of photos. And yes, producing the extra detail parts for all the versions does add to the cost.
If painting a model in a fictious or inaccurate scheme in addition to the accurate schemes adds to sales, I’m all for it. That means that much more $$ for new models to be developed.
This is what I do not get. If anyone care about a 100% accuracy then what is the problem with an incorrect offered instead of nothing at all. If anyone cars that much they will have the knowledge needed to know that they do not want it. For us others who believe int “close enough” theory this ads to our choices. No one is robbed, everyone is a winner or at least haven’t lost anything.
If people will demand a 100% accurate model for the dates between the 5th of may 1952 and the 1 of September that year when that particular engine ran in an excursion service or what ever the manufacturers will collapse. Fortunately, I think most of us are able to mix and match some what with an overall aim to be some what accurate, but not at the expense of enjoyment of our hobby.
One of the instances if total accuracy being a problem is when one of the brass importers brought out a model of the C&O Kanawha they sent a left and right side picture to the importer. Unfortunately one side was a Lima engine and the other an Alco. The builder followed the photographs even to having the Lima builders plate on one side and the Alco builders plate on the other.
My main objection is not so much total accuracy, but total innaccuracy and not even trying to correct the problem. For example Athearn recently released the ex MDC lowside ore cars. They may be fine for some railroads but they tried to pass them off as PRR/PC/CR G38 ore cars, and they are not even close. It seems the manufacturers find a neet looking paint scheme and try to put it on a car that is not even close to the prototype.
I usually have to buy undecorated diesel locomotives as the ones decorated for the railroads I model are usually incorrect as regards fuel tanks and bell placement among other things not to mention the PRR Trainphone antennas.
Rick your catching exactly what I’ve said , and I aggree with you completely.I’m all for new models comming out , heck who isn’t. Instead of doing teh 70’s thing andpainting everything with teh same bruch as I believe is what has happened here, offer the undec option.Paint the prototypes that they know are correct and let everyone else do their own thing. Lots of detail parts and paint and decals still available , so complete prototype accuracy is not required for each and every road name made, it is a hobby folks we should have to do some of the work.[;)]
Back in '04, I said one day someone would make a model of ,oh, say, D&RGW SD40-2T 5413, as it appeared at 6:52AM on September 21, 1985, detailed down to the last nut and bolt. And someone would immediately point out that the snack cake the conductor left on the control stand was a Twinkie, not a Zinger!
I absolutely agree with the “offer it in undec” idea, but I still like to feel there is enough imagination in the hobby to accept that some people will buy a NYC ES44AC just because they like it. And if they don’t, let their wallets do the voting.
On the one hand I cringe when I see a bay-window caboose or a gas-turbine loco painted for Pennsy.
On the other hand I actually run cars from other roads that probably aren’t prototypically correct either.
I think a good compromise is for a manufcturer to offer a car or loco in a road name if it’s very close to something the real railroad had. For example, the Atlas N scale 40’ USRA rebuilt is similar (though not exact due to grabs versus end ladders and number of rivet lines) to a PRR X26c. I run them anyway, unmodified. That’s a good compromise in my mind.
The Tyco Penn Central steamer, on the other hand…[xx(]
Here’s a thought. Company ABC is making a train project. There fixed costs is the dies and presses required. There variable costs are labour, materials, marketing. End result net income. Another concept which is never talked about return on capital. The more you make, the higher return on capital.
A wise man told me once, if you knit pick about everything, you will never get anything done. If I was to knit pick, I would never be able to finish my monster layout. Yes, I do add details, yes I like weathering, yes I research products. However I also understand what the market can make and do. Here is a concept if a company tries to be everything to everyone they fail. It’s called market mypotheia.
Hey caso I do aggree with the substance of what you are saying , however it’s still a two edged sword for them. Great if they are helping pay down the costs of their die’s etc , but if the grossley(sp) incorrect stuff sits on shelves and doesn’t sell they still don’t make their money back. That and also in the modern train manufacturering ventures the painting and everything are done over at the factories , it’s also done in batches so by doing these fictitious CN loco’s that production could have gone into more of the roadnames that did have this type ie more Sante Fe’s etc , roads that will sell as they have a broader modler pool wanting them.
I also agree with what Dave said , I’m happy with the really close items and can live with the compromises box car ends etc , but It’s I think a bigger gamble for the manufacter wehn your talking higher dollar locomtives as opposed to the odd boxcar, locomotives are more noticable .( I’ll say to most people as I know people that have to have everything dead nuts correct ) Like Dave said I cringe when I see gas turbines or U50’s painted for Amtrak or CSX as well.