My response was not aimed specifically at you since you’ve responded to my comment and I agree with you about them making something other than run of the mill locomotives. So, I hope you do not take my comment personally.
I was more making a ‘broad brush’ comment aimed more at newer visitors and those considering this model.
I’m not convinced that we’ll see DC or DCC only versions on everything just yet - perhaps on the more popular diesels. Number to be produced will be a factor in determining that option.
In spite of complaints from the relatively few wanting DCC only or nothing, the models seem to be selling very well to a majority of buyers who do want the Protosound 3.0 equipped versions, which have proven to work flawlessly with DCC users.
I think offering both is a very good idea - from a marketing standpoint.
No. I did not take it personally at all, I simply wanted to take this opportunity to make it clear that any bias I have against MTH is based on facts and on my own needs and buying habits, not just some “emotional” reaction.
I don’t buy BLI/PCM locos with DCC and sound (unless they are on sale at non sound prices), and when I buy Athearn Genesis, Intermoutain, Proto, etc, it is the DC version for me, usually undecorated except for some B&O, C&O and WM locos for my interchanges.
While the hobby has changed over the years, and many people like/want/use sound and/or DCC, there are still many of us DC operators out there. AND, many DCC people I know prefer to install the decoder of their choice.
So, if MTH wants into my pockets, they need to consider seriously the “other”, older half of the market. Not necessarily that we are “older” in age, but refering to those of us who still see this as a craftsman hobby, not as the plu
Message to ALL the manufacturers - I don’t own one - Big Boy, Challenger, PRR K4, SP Cab Forward, NYC Hudson, PRR GG1, SP 2-10-4, UP FEF, or vitually any of this stuff you have been basing your brains out duplicating the efforts of your competition - BUT I own 120+ locos, 2-8-0’s, 4-8-2’s, 2-8-2’s, 4-6-2’s, EMD F & GP units, Alco PA & FA units, etc, etc. - and I am not alone based on some of what I read on here and on others I know personally - make SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
Sheldon,
Huhhhh…I think that is what they are doing. lol.
We are all very fortunate to be living at a time in this hobby , when we’re being brought so many differnet and impoved variations of locomotives, cars and structures.
Companies like Fox Valley and MTH, Intermountain and Exactrail - are leading the industry with new and never-before-offered products.
On a side bar: I’m interested in your era and roads you model - you must live in the northeast or are from there - I was brought up on the B&O in the Pittsburgh, Pa area and have a great affection for the WM (I’m from that neck of the woods) Hagerstown had a WM historical society but I’ve lost touch with those guys many moons ago.
Clearly, we have some folks on this forum for whom the Milwaukee is not an area of prototypical interest.[swg]
The Milwaukee EP-2 Bi-Polar prototypes WERE ARTICULATED! The MTH models don’t and shouldn’t lock. The only compromise for tighter curves in this design is the same one made on the prototype. The EP-2’s had the cabs split into three sections just like the MTH model.
The Coast and Rocky Mountain Divisions of the Milwaukee’s Pacific extension had a lot of 10 and 12 degree curves that required very flexible locomotives. The Bi-Polars were designed and built by GE specifically to accommodate these tight curves at high speeds. The original Milwaukee GE Box Cab EP-1 passenger motorss were built in 1915 along with the EF-1 freight motors. The primary difference between the EP-1’s and EF-1’s was the gearing. The EP-1’s had half the gear reduction of the EF-1’s so they could reach 70 mph instead of only 35 mph. In service this proved to be a major problem. The EP-1’s didn’t pull very well and were rather slippery when pulling out of the station. Milwaukee ordered the EP-2 Bi-Polar’s in 1919 to replace the EP-1’s in passenger service. Once the Bi-Polar’s arrived the EP-1’s were re-geared and re-numbered as EF-1’s The EP-2 Bi-Polars proved far more successful and pulled the Olympian and Olympian Hiawatha for over 35 years.
So, it does not matter how good they are until they make sometihng my railroad needs. And yes, the likes of Bachmann Spectrum, sometimes tuned up and improved by me, do meet my needs quite well since they make "everyday’ type stuff like 2-8-0’s, 4-6-0’s and 4-8-2’s that did the “work a day” tasks on America’s railroads - Rather than just offering a few “big stars” that belonged to only one road, like K4’s and Big Boy’s.
Well, that’s the problem if you’re a free-lancer. Only the SP had these:workaday engine with and without the skyline casing: http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2487.JPG
And while this http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2454A.JPG is a Harriman Heavy 4-6-2 (UP, SP and Chicago & Alton), each of the 3 roads’ versions had a considerably different look…
I’m not so sure I’d call a K4 one of the “big stars” for any reason other than the fact that Pennsy rostered about 425 examples (17 times the number of Big Boys). Otherwise, at least for the Pennsy, they were about as workaday as you can get (as were the 598 I1s 2-10-0’s). Pennsy also rostered something like 1500+ 2-8-0’s of classes H8, H9 and H10 (more than most ralroads’ entire steam rosters). Just adding up the K4’s, I1’s, and H8/9/10 gives you over 2500 engines. That’s a sizeable number of engines that only appeared on one railroad and we haven’t yet included the L1s 2-8-2’s (574 of those) or the 301 examples of M1 variant 4-8-2’s
I’m not trying to rag on you. It’s just that while USRA engines make great fodder for the free-lancer, all the USRA engines have been done (if you’re willing to count the Rivarossi Heavy Pacific as a USRA Heavy Pacific). From wh
Sheldon’s comments are about right on with my feelings. See, DC and DCC users CAN agree about something [(-D] I like the DC only versions because I can put in my choice of decoder and know it’s all 100% caompatible. And it’s great that we’re finally getting something other than Yet Another Big Boy - if things keep up there will soon be more manufactureres of model Big Boys then there ever were actual Big Boys.
But of all the locos produced by Broadway, PCM, and MTH, I have exactly 2 (of the same model) becuase they are the only ones made so far that fit my chosen road. For those that aren;t strict about a specific road, it would be nice if they offered undec versions - PCM did with the Reading T-1’s, they offered them painted but unlettered. But that seems to be rare
I wasn;t bashing MTH, from all accounts their locos are good looking and run well. I just don’t like the proprietary nature of DCS and the limited compatibility. They clearly ARE listening though, previously they seemed to have a rather cavalier attitude about the superiority of DCS, not they are giving the buyer an option to get what is otherwise the same loco but without the DCS electronics. Now, if they fo the FA’s in Reading and they look as good as the P2K ones withotu being so fragile (the P2K ones are nearly impossible to pick up - anywhere you touch there are fragile detail parts like scale size grabs that tend to break) and it comes in a version without DCS - I would probably buy it. I certainly wouldn’t reject it out of hand because it’s made by MTH.
Yes, they were articulated but NOT between the hoods and the end of the center section that was attached to the hood. The real ones articulated in 2 places, it looks from the picture that MTH added 2 more articulation points, total of 4, as a compromise for small radius. That EXTRA articulation is the one I’m talking about. If you look at pictures, the cab is firmly fixed to the hood. Each hood and cab is hinged
I did commend MTH for FINALLY doing something new and different, but why are there so many brands of Big Boys, K4’s, Challengers, etc, etc, when those locos represent such a small piece of railroading in North America?
I don’t buy the “ours is better” thing, that is a straw man. That does not grow the market or help the hobby in the long run. Anyone who has been around the hobby a long times knows that in the old days manufacturers avoided too much direct competition trying to sell the same item because they knew how small the market was.
All the resources that have been used by MTH and BLI to make a long list of the same products also offered by several other manufacturers could have been at least partly used to offer products NEVER offered before or only offered in brass many years ago.
And again, OK, MTH might be moving in a good direction with these new offerings, but only after a long list of stuff already recently done in very high quality by others.
I live in Forest Hill Maryland and am a life long resident of the Mid Atlantic region. My modeling interests are very focused and I do not “collect” model trains. I can just about count on two hands the items I own that do not fit the theme of my layout.
I like the freelance or protolance thing and the process of creating a fictional but believable layout with connections to real railroads that did exist. So I model mainly my fictional ATLANTIC CENTRAL and its connections to the B&O, C&O, and WM. Since the ATLANTIC CENTRAL is fictional, I’m not opposed to a little bit of “what if” in my modeling of those prototype roads - again, without stretching things too far.
I am into operation and my current layout which is under reconstruction is designed to provide operation for 8-10 operators or to allow display ru
You’re seeing things that aren’t there. The MTH models do NOT have 4 articulations, only two. What you’re seeing in this photo…
… is a bit of “fish eye” effect from my wide angle camera lens. The black area between the cab and hood is the cab door porch. It is correctly painted black in this paint scheme. It’s not a rubber articulation point. Here’s an over lightened photo that shows the porch area in better detail. The ribs you see next to the cab door are not corregated rubber. They are conduit detail which is also correct per the prototype.
True, but that’s the case all over. Many of us gearheads would like to buy a new car with a carb rather than EFI, but that’s not happening.
And I completely agree with you on your point about the multitude of unique, one-off locomotives being produced rather than the actual workhorses the railroads truly relied on. And, as you say, in TRIPLICATE sometimes!
That said, I used to commute on the Milwaukee Road Lake Forest - Glenview Illinois, and I have always been completely fascinated by their west coast extension, especially the electrified operations.
I don’t know about that, all the manufacturers except MTH and BLI seem to be very committed to offering both DC and DCC versions - and MTH seems to be seeing the light. BLI on the other hand can’t seem to decide. One model is offered stealth, the next one not, then a few more, then none?
Contrary to all the expressed excitement shown in the above posts, let’s look at the potential of this model more realistically. It’s a huge electric which will sell for perhaps $500, God knows, maybe more. The number of actual model railroaders with electrified overhead on their layouts is vanishingly small today, so the model can probably only be operated realistically on a very small fraction of one percent of existing layouts. It was also a locomotive essentially unique to the Milwaukee Road…certainly not the most modeled prototype out there. My guess would be that this model is truly appropriate, from a realistic operational, era, road, standpoint, for no more than a few dozen model railroaders, at most!
So, what are we honest left with? All I see is yet another model of a very expensive, monster locomotive of very limited application, appealing almost exclusively to the dabbler/collector element in the hobby, just as nearly all the MTH entries in the recent past have been.
Sadly, new, work-a-day steam locomotives in HO are increasingly a rarity, in spite of the fact that the transition era remains the most popular to model among hobbyists. What are currently out there meeting this need (i.e. USRA and smaller road-specific examples, like Atlantics, Pacifics and Mikes) are largely older models not up to today’s operating standards and specs. Sorry guys, but rather than being overjoyed, all I am is disappointed in MTH’s latest entry.
AFTER Craig at BLMA produces everything I want (and it’s a long and growing list), it’d be nice if he came up with a presentable catenary system. Sort-of-affordable would be nice, too. And, yes, I’m hinting that MTH’s version would probably be unacceptably crude. To me. Maybe not to you.
I’ve dabbled in electrics for awhile (Acela, rectifier, GG1 (old AHM)); but, without overhead, they look just plain stupid running.
And I’ll also say, as I said on the Atlas forum, that this model is a bit crude for my taste. Maybe not yours. If I were a Milwaukee modeler, I’d certainly be very ambivalent about this model. Also, if I were a Milwaukee modeler, I would NOT be ambivalent about the Fox Valley Hiawatha. WOW, way nice.
Well considering how crude the Milw catenary was looking in the 60’s and 70’s it might just work.
A general reply to others: As a modeler who does model a portion of the Milw, in the east, I am still very tempted to pick one up, if for no other reasons than for shows. Anything that can hook onlookers to ask questions, take an interest or do a double take is worth it. As my club has 3 different variations of the Hiawatha’s running on it, occasionally putting one of these or a my Little Joe on the point of a Hiawatha would break up the diseal monotony and add a little variation to things. CNJ has a point, we have no catenary, it’s a pain to move, and as I am the only one interested in the juice jockeys, I am NOT going to ask my club to add catenary to a 16x75’ layout. But I would and do run my steeple cabs, little joe, and this beast (if it’s DC and can add my own decoder) without it. If anyone asks: Third rail.
Although I also mourn the absence of those bread & butter steam locos we all need for our layouts, I find it remarkable, that MTH is going to produce the MWR Bi-Polar. It is, just as the UP Big Boy or Challenger (and others) a landmark loco and certainly a spectacular one!
