Most new model rr equipment now comes with free standing details. While these look nice I have a question about durability in every day use. I have found that items such as grabs and ladders have tendency to break easily. Molded details are getting better, in fact in some cases they look better than add on details. My question, do you use rolling stock (not locomotives) with molded or freestanding details and why.
Charles Sanchez
PRR=Perfect RailRoad
As an aging male who is modeling in HO, I don’t have much need to see this level of detail even if I could actually make it out from 3-6’ away. I have two cabooses from Walthers that are nicely detailed IMO, and I do appreciate that level with the added metal bars and grabs. I have to admit, too, that I like the detail on my BLI coal hopper sets. I also have lesser stuff that still looks pretty good to me, particularly when it is in motion. It seems to be that the best details are rendered during photography. When I am playing with trains, the details don’t have to be so fine.
I am always very careful with my Walthers heavyweights that have the bars added, and I am most careful with my locomotives. Still, sometimes I pinch something and I hope that I have not permanently damaged it. When I look, it is almost always to find that I have done no permanent damage.
Man, gotta love your user name and signature block!
I’m in N scale, so most times my grab irons are molded on. In some instances I’ve applied etched brass grabs and ladders which tend to hold up quite well. Because I’m in such a small scale, the loss of detail fidelity by using molded-on details doesn’t offend me.
However, as I’m beginning to focus on actual PRR-prototype equipment and not just foobies painted Pennsy (until recently this was a near impossibility in N), I’m looking at detail like seperately applied brake rigging, free-standing ladders, etc. The grab irons, though… Just not sure shaving the grab irons off my fleet of H21a and GLa hoppers and adding free-standing brass ones will actually be worth the time, effort, money, and repainting in N.
A fine model with separately applied super details is a joy to behold. Kitbashing or scratch building superdetailed models is an enjoyable part of the hobby. I’ve done my share of it and will do more. But to be real about it, the superdetailing is rarely noticable on the the layout. A good paint and weathering job is more important to the looks of the train than nearly invisible detail. A well painted Athearn blue box car looks as nice as the finest Red Caboose model.
So, you can have it both ways. Buy or build superdetailed cars to enjoy the fine model work. Buy or build models with plainer molded on detail and they will look just fine at “layout distance” in a train.
When I was in HO I used the molded-on details that were on Athern, MDC, and most rolling stock at the time. When I saw cars with free-standing detail I wasn’t happy with the molded-on ones and tried to add grab irons and other details to my rolling stock but found out they were fragile and very frustrating to add. To me they do make a difference even in HO.
The main reason I switched to O scale and then Large Scale is because of the excellent, visible details, not only on rolling stock but on structures and scenery as well. The details on the larger scales are very durable, easy to add, and look great.
Interesting discussion. I’d like to see it continue. But it got buried under two pages of troll threads.
BUMP.
My preference is for free standing detail, but the “molded-on lobby” certainly has valid points.
In a perfect world… shake-the-box kits would come set up for both ways: no molded on grabs, but slight dimples cast in so the modeller can drill holes for the enclosed package of wire grabs; or just glue on the cast plastic ladders over the dimples.
I would think the overall cost of such a model would be about the same, and it would appeal to a broader range of consumer - from beginner to the pre-resin kit buyer.
The only problem with that is the plastic grabs are still going to be TINY. I have a few kits that are all plastic, and even though many of the detail parts are comparitively large, they are still very fine.
EG, the ladders are all one piece, but the rungs/vertical parts are still only .010" in diameter… same as the stirrup rungs, and the single grabirons…
I definately like the freestanding details better. As far as durability, occassionally something will fall off or break, especially stuff I built myself[swg]. However, I’ve gotten better at handling stuff too. I do wish that kits and RTR would use more metal details versus plastic. Metal end brake details on boxcars, ladders, grabs, steps, etc I think would be more durable. I know it would add cost and attaching these items would be more difficult but I think well worth it.
Rick
I prefer free-standing/add-on details to moulded-on. My layout is at my eye-level, so my view of the trains is much closer than the 3 to 6 feet usually given as the typical viewing distance. At eye-level, freestanding detail is quite visible - cars without it look naked. As a minimum standard, my freight cars have freestanding ladders, grab irons, and basic brake rigging. In the past I’ve modified shake-the-box kits to achieve this minimum standard, but these days that isn’t necessary. As for questions of durability, I don’t see the problem. I tend to leave my models on the layout, and only handle them when absolutely necessary.
Another consideration for me is that modern kits with freestanding detail tend to be more finely moulded and more accurate than the older coarse and inaccurate shake-the-box kits. IMO, no matter how well painted or weathered a Blue Box kit is, it will never look as good as a well painted and weathered kit from Tichy, F&C or P2K. My preference is for a small fleet of accurate, detailed freight cars, rather than having hundreds of generic cars indistinguishable from anyone else’s.
Thanks for everyones input. As for my fleet I have a mix of both going back forty some years. A lot of my concern is the damage that comes from transporting them since I belong to a modular club. I do use padding in the boxes but still have damage. I guess I’ll just take the cars with molded details to the club.
Thanks for the compliment Dave. I’v been a PRR nut since I was a young child (I’m retired now). I was raised on the DC end of the system and rode many times with my family on the clockers to NYC to visit relatives.
Charles Sanchez
PRR=Perfect RailRoad
This is a conceptual preference with no right or wrong opinions. I prefer free standing details; they look superior when done properly, scale not withstanding as crappy craftsmanship is bad in ANY scale. I would prefer to have 5 finely crafted, high quality pieces of rolling stock than 50 injection molded box cars with shallow detail. For me, quality is more important than quantity.
Durability is not an issue as I never put my hands on a piece of rolling stock unless it derails. If you do have to handle a model, then you must use the utmost care as they are inherently fragile.
The molded on detail does not weather well compared to the free standing detail. I have noticed that an airbrush will not weather inside the molded on ladders without a lot of fussing with that detail. Even brushing on chalk is harder to cover inside the ladders on molded on detail. I still have them, but prefer the newer cars since they are available at reasonable prices overall.
My preference is for the free standing ladders and handrails. Sure, they can be broken, but we must be aware of detail and handle it carefully.
I prefere freestanding details if the material it is made of is not brittle but flexible.
I love the details we are getting with every new release but,I like molded on detail as well.
I hate the fragile details as far as transporting to the club…Thats where I like the modeled on details the best in transportation…
The determining factor should be, how is that specific piece of rolling stock going to be used?
If it will spend its life in under bright lights in a display case, the level of detailing will require separate grabs (and hand brake connector chain with the proper number of links…) OTOH, if it will simply be another pawn in the car distribution game…
For my personal modeling, I apply the 100 meter rule. If the freight car looks ok at 100 scale meters (about four feet in HOj,) that’s good enough. Locomotives and passenger equipment attract more attention, so they have to pass the 50 meter test. My only display case models are a small collection of US prototype locos - unmodified out of the box. I am much more concerned about whether the interchange cut will be ready for pickup by through freight 509re at 2145 (24 hour clock) than I am about whether each car has the proper number of rivets on every journal pedestal.
Just my [2c]. Feel free to disagree.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I feel there’s nothing like a highly detailed loco. Long before any manufacturer added them, short of brass, I used to super detail all my engines. After awhile I even knew the Detail Associates and Detail West part no. from memory. If ones weren’t available, I would fabricate the part to match the prototype from pics. Most of the ones I did were Athearn BB. Smokey Valley stanchions and fitting w/ brass or bronze railingswas probably the most outstanding and most durable addition to any shell. Pilot detail/ plows especially are always important to me. Even all my Altas, Stewart and P2k units get the proper plows and pilot details. Chessie on a lot of the EMD units use the very different Chessie rock pilot. Installing these properly took some trial and error. I do like the detail on all the newer stuff, but much of it is very fragile. I love to use cab shades but what a PITA they can be. If I’m lucky, they turn up somewhere on the layout instead of adding new ones and matching the paint.
I prefer the cars with molded on detail. Less to break off. Most of the time, I play at the club, and derailments happen. There usually isn’t any debris left on the layout after derailing. If 1:1 scale cleaned up so easy… My boys also handle the equipment.
The P2K covered hopper I built didn’t last long. Ripped out both end sills in a derailment. Maybe a little too prototypical…
Well, as one who has a lot of cars with both, and whose eyesight isn’t what it used to be, a lot of the moded on detail these days (especially from Accurail and the Branchline Yardmaster series) is quite finely detailed enough for me. Where I usually run into trouble with ‘free-standing’ details on cars from Red Caboose or Intermountain, are the stirrup steps. For some reason, all I have to do is look at them and they just fall off (or commit suicide, LOL!). But I do love the extra detail of them (and I’ve got a couple of parts boxes with extra stirrups). But these days, with the improvements in models, I can mix and match and hardly tell the difference.
Tom [:)]