I was looking at my Bachmann Spectrum 44 tonner last night and I keep getting the feeling that the dimensions are the cab tall windows seem small and the hoods appear tall.
Better go back to your “Doc” and tell him the “Meds” are too strong…
Mark
WGAS
Model Railroader did a review of the 44 ton engine June 2009.
The review is on this web site under product reviews. Model Railroader indicated the engine matched the dimension drawings found in the Model Railroader Cyclopedia Vol. 2: Diesel Locomotives
Perhaps it is time to visit the optometrist?[;)]
Look closer gentlemen. Look at the windows on the front of the cab. right next to the exhaust. Also look ath the doors for the cab.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/Locopicture.aspx?id=9447
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/Locopicture.aspx?id=9447
Indeed, various features and components of the Bachmann 44-tonner’s shell are not exactly in the correct proportions, although the model’s overall dimensions may scale out correctly. The widow openings in the cab of the model are most definitely narrower and the posts separating them thicker, than on the prototype, partly because of how the window frames are represented. This was undoubtedly done to give the cab shell more strength. As the preceding poster indicates, the hoods on the prototype don’t extend quite as far up on the cab as they do on the model, either.
However, keep in mind that the first Bachmann 44-tonners were offered a long time ago, in an era when a model’s exact dimensions relative to the prototype were somewhat less of a concern.
CNJ831
You should count the rivets, just don’t count all of them.
Don’t forget, we are boys playing with toys.
Rich
And if it were made to the exact proportions the first thing that would happen is the cab roof would cave in due to the weak supports. The second thing that would happen is there would be a thread here complaining about the fragile piece of crap shell. Be happy with what you can get. It’s a well done model but it had to have some strength to it as well. The alternative would be to put some ribs on the inside of the shell but that would take away from the meager space already provided for electronic equipment.
The windows on the doors seem to go down to the level of the tops of the hood doors, as they do on the prototype pifctures. The only ‘issue’ is the window frames are thicker than the real thing, for reasons noted. It’s quite close.
And also there were variations in the prototype - different headlights among them. And on another forum I just saw a prototype shot of a loco that is supposedly a 44-tonner with MUCH lower hoods than any of the ones seen here. So low the headlights are on TOP of the hoods, not in the top front. Probably not really a 44 tonner, just a mislabeled photo, but it looks significantly different.
–Randy
Switch to post-war O gauge before you drive yourself crazy.
No, you are not wrong. The Bachmann model doesn’t look at all like the real thing:
I apologize if I sound like I’m nitpicking. It’s just that I bought one red and one yellow 44 tonner and they looked visibly odd when I took them out of the package. I couldn’t put my finger on the problem until last week. I only came on to the forum to see if there was a problem and see if there was a solution.
I have earlier editions of the model from 15 years ago (the original 2 motor 44 tonners) and they didn’t appear disproportionate to me at the time. Then someone did a magazine article on how to lower the body on them because the body sat too high. Still, I didn’t notice anything.
But when I took them out of the package, they just seemed odd. I haven’t been able to take my older models out of storage yet ( I must have about 10 44 tonners). The wierd thing is that I also bought a pair of 44 tonners in the Boston & Maine black with red stripes scheme and they didn’t appear glaringly ot of whack.
Is it because bright colors bring out the details as well as the flaws?
Mike,
I think it is a fact of our hobby that as items get smaller, or better stated - as we try to model smaller items, it gets harder to have them in exact proportion, for a number of reasons as explained by others here.
Just look at any HO model of a 4-4-0 after taking a trip to a museum and looking at a few - then put an N scale 4-4-0 next to an N scale 4-8-4 - Oh No!
BUT, considering its price, overall detail, correct (or nearly so) overall and major dimensions, the Bachmann HO 44 tonner is a great model.
Prototype photos can distort the appearance of things just as much as scale model making can require some parts to be slighly oversized. I would suggest that the only fair comparison would be to compare it to a good scale drawing.
We accept lots of details that are oversized on many of our models. I will repeat my view that since we most often view our HO models from 2-3 feet, we should consider their appearance based on being 175’ to 260’ away from the real thing.
I restore old houses for a living, and I’ve never seen a nail hole in a piece of wood siding that I could see from 175’, but we see it all the time on model structures that get critical acclaim. I’ve never seen a piece of wood that I could “see” the texture of the grain, no mater how weathered, from that distance, but to many people that “looks relistic” on a model, whether it is realistic or not.
So, for my money the Bachmann HO 44 tonner is more than close enough.
Sheldon
I agree that no models are perfect, I think It’s a great model. It’s just that once you see one glaring detail, you see more right after that. I started another thread on this so that I can tone down the mistakes and maybe add other details to enhance the model. All of you are right. For the buck, there’s a lot of bang. Bachmann makes a fine value in their Spectrum line. I have their 70 tonner as well as the 45 tonner.
There’s even more buck for the bang with their 45 tonner. The locomotive looks like it’s running the Indianapolis 500 at slow switching speeds. A very animated and busy looking locomotive.
I’m not looking for Bachmann to retool their models. I was trying to figure why it didn’t look right and I couldn’t put a finger on it.
Mike,
I took a few minutes and compared one of my 44 tonners to the drawings published by MR in September 1978 - long before the Bachmann model was offered.
I agree the front and rear cab windows on the model are smaller than the prototype. I could not however find any other problems with the dimensions of the model.
The height of the hoods, cab and total height off the rail are an exact match to that drawing. And the side windows are so close only such a direct comparison could reveil any difference.
44 tonners did go though several “phases” so direct comparison of hood details may require knowing which version Bachmann used as their prototype.
One important item I changed to improve the “working” appearance of the model was to install short shank Kadee couplers bringing the couplers in closer to the loco - still not as close as the prototype, but MUCH better.
Sheldon
What number coupler did you use?
I used the #33 and installed the complee Kadee draft gear, but you may be able to use the #143 whisker coupler just as well.
Sheldon
Thanks Sheldon. I’ll try that.