Some well detailed HO items.

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

I would like agree with some comments in another topic and hope this time it can remain friendly. In recent years I have commented myself to others about some plastic models that I have bought which have the prototypical details of many brass models of say the 1990’s or early 2000’s. I haven’t owned any brass diesels as they have always been out of my budget, but I did own a brass CZ passenger train and have a 6 brass cabooses. Here are a few items I own which to me, I could have mistaken for brass if you would have showed it to me in the mid 1990’s:

Athearn RTR SD40T-2 from the second run and onward. This model isn’t FULLY detailed but it has all the key prototypical details and has the over all complete look with correct snow plow, nose gyra light, roof antenae, MU hoses, coupler lift bars, see through fans and air intake grills, prototypically correct fuel tank.

Athearn RTR SD45T-2’s for SP - similar comments as above.

Athearn RTR SD45 and SD45R - similear comments as above.

Athearn SW1000 and SW1500

BLI Californa Zephyr passenger train.

2

The various Stewart Baldwin switch engines - S-12, DS4-4-1000, etc. Heck they were built by Ajin, and have all the little details, even seperately applied etched metal wipers. And the same Canon can motor found in expensive brass.

As far as a direct comparison, well, when I first got my PCM Reading T-1, my ex father in law had oen of the NJ Custom Brass versions from the early 80’s. Head to head, the PCM plastic model is more and more accurately detailed. But I have seen the late 90’s or slightly newer runs of Overland’s version, and it is still one step ahead if ignoring the 3 foot rule.

–Randy

3

Sure good point. Mainly my point wasn’t a head to head comparison, I think that was discussed in another topic where things went “Pete Tong”. I’m thinking in terms of, the only way that you could get prototypical details on the past was with 'that which should not be mentioned"? The cool thing is that many models produced in the past 5 years fit that description so keeping with the spirit of things, I feel that qualifies for me.

4

I have brass N scale and brass HO interurbans. I like them bothl The interurbans are impossible to find in plastic so I had little option then to buy the brass.

In N scale I have some brass locomotives but I also have a large collection of brass passenger cars, again you cannot buy the equipment in plastic so there are few options if you want a specific piece.

My N scale brass steam power is the yard stick I use to measure the plastic locomotives against , so far Bachmann Spectrum comes fairly close , I give them a score of 80% of a brass locomotive detail quality. I do not have any brass diesel locomotives.

The other Randy

5

Well, I can only speak about HO, but IMHO many of my steam locos have equal or better detail than any brass model that has ever been offered of those same prototypes.

Among my fleet that I consider top notch in detail:

PCM Reading T-1

Spectrum USRA Heavy Mountain

Spectrum USRA 2-6-6-2

Rivarossi C&O H8

BLI N&W Class A

Proto2000 2-8-8-2

Proto2000 0-8-0

As for diesels, I think the same about:

Proto2000 GP7, SD9, PA1, BL2, FA1, E8, F7, and S1 only the rerun of the FA2 is a little lacking in detail.

Intermountain F7, F3 and FP7 are also superior in detail, as are my Athearn Genesis F units.

The only brass I own are two older USRA Pacifics - nice but not as detailed as any of the steam listed above.

DISCLAIMER - I have multiple copies of most all the locos listed above, and dispite their original prototypes, many are lettered for my freelanced ATLANTIC CENTRAL, so most of the diesels were undecorated models who’s shells required assembly and painting. Factory detail options were applied to suit ATLANTIC CENTRAL standards and practices.

But some locos are factory lettered in C&O, B&O or WM as these are the other roads I model, and based on research I have done, most are VERY close or perfect in terms of proto specific detail - and I have improved a few in that regard myself.

Personally, I am one of those who does not care one bit what is under the paint - if it looks good and runs good, and fills a needed slot on the roster - that suits me, plastic, brass, die cast metal, China, USA, Japan - it matters not.

DISCLAIMER #2 - I only buy models that fit my theme and era, which is 1954. I don’t know much about prototype diesels after 1960, can’t tell one from the other past a GP35, and would not know if they were correctly detailed or not.

Sheldon

6

Well, because of the railroads I model, (Rio Grande and Espee) by necessity, most of my steam locomotives are brass and cover a span of some 50 odd years from fairly well detailed to extraordinarily well detailed… All have been extensively worked on and are fine runners.

However, three non-brass locos I have are as beautifully detailed IMO, as any of my newer brass, those being the Athearn MT-4 Southern Pacific 4-8-2, the first-run Rivarossi C&O H-8 2-6-6-6, and Proto’s Rio Grande USRA-clone 3500 series 2-8-8-2. Another that I think is very close to brass quality detail is my BLI AC-5 Espee 4-8-8-2 cab forward. Just as important to me (if not more so) is the running quality of the locos, and all four of my plastic steamers both run and haul beautifully. I’m very glad I have them on my roster.

Tom [:D]

7

Speaking strictly HO steam:

I find that the best modern brass is still generally better in detail than the best modern plastic. While the brass is better detailed, I think the modern high end plastic is very, very good and certainly worth owning. The cost of the brass for most modelers probably wont be worth it for the small increase in detail .

Comparing modern plastic to older brass, many of the older brass are not as detailed as some of the best modern plastic. The plastic may be a better bet. This is especially true when you consider that most older brass is unpainted, may have motor/gear and pick up problems and will need a decoder/headlights/front coupler installed. This tips the equation in favor of plastic unless…

You need a specific prototype that you can’t find in plastic. This is why I run some brass and am actively looking to buy more…I model SP, Sierra, YV, Hetch-Hetchy, WP and Westside)

Some plastic that I think has good to great detail:

Proto 2000 - 2-8-8-2, 0-8-0 (look great, run great)

Intermountain AC-12 (looks great, runs???)

Spectrum 4-6-0, 4-4-0, 2-8-0 etc…(look great, run great)

Aforementioned Genesis MT-4 (looks great runs great)

Blackstone K-27 and C-19 (look great, run great) These locos have turned narrow guage on its head. The first reliable, well detailed non-brass to come along.

I’m sure there are other models I am forgetting about.

I am not as enamored with the BLI AC 4/5 - They do run well but I have seen several brass versions that are better than the BLI loco in terms of detail and other aspects. Same with the Proto 2-8-8-2. On the other hand, the brass are very expensive compared to these locos which is why I own these in plastic and run and enjoy them, I do hide the 2-8-8-2 when the train guys come over - NW on the SP ???..[:-^])

<

8

Jim,There are several plastic locomotives that compliment their brass brethern among those models are the Genesis SD70ACE and the GP15-1.

9

As a relative newcomer to HO scale, having started my first layout in 2004, I have no experience with brass locomotives.

When brass locos dominated the HO scale side of the model railroading hobby, was it because plastic was not widely used at that time?

It seems from the comments that I occasionally read about locomotive detail that plastic provides more detail than brass. Is this true?

For those of you who own both brass and plastic, I am curious. Which do you prefer, and why?

Rich

10

Without making this explaination too long, brass was the material of choice back in the 1950’s because injection molding of plastic was a not yet able to provide the level of detail it does today.

And, back in the earlier days of plastic and die cast metal, dies were cut by hand and very expensive. So complex dies like those used for todays locos would have cost astronomical amounts of money.

Today, with CADD, and computerized CNC machining, combined with better plastics and decades of “practice”, it finally became practical to build the highly detailed diecast and plastic steam loco or the highly detailed plastic diesel shell of today. It became very cost effective with Chinnese production and the assumption that 5000 to 20,000 pieces could be producted and sold per “batch”.

This is a developement of the last 20-25 years - it begain with the first Atlas and Proto2000 diesels and the first Spectrum steam - others followed.

With brass, simple jigs are developed for skilled craftsman to rapidly assemble multiple copies of the same design. Detail parts are cast in brass via the “lost wax” process. Frames are machined from brass stock, everything is soldered together. It is well suited to “short run” mass production - typically 500 -1000 pieces, but even smaller runs can be cost effective with a suitable market.

So when brass ruled the day in t

11

Hi,

Just a few observations from someone who has loved model trains since the early '50s…

  • Many of today’s plastic locos are beautifully detailed and in appearance as good or better than anything I have ever seen. For the money, one can get a terrific replica that looks - and runs - great.

  • The brass locos - particularly steamers - of the 60s and 70s were (to me) works of art. Unpainted, they looked (to me) like the works of a master craftsman, and IMHO were bought often for display models because of this. For me, they were something to admire only, for I never could afford to buy them.

  • But there was a “glitch” that I observed and read about, in that some of the brass loco brands were just not the runners you would want. If you wanted a “runner”, then a good quality plastic loco was the way to go - assuming you didn’t have the wherewithal to “lube and tune” a troublesome brass loco.

Today, we are really blessed to have such a wide range of well detailed and great running locos for “reasonable” prices. Be it brass or plastic or hybrids, we “have it made”.

12

Maybe a bit OT but back in the 1960s, when the finest brass steamers really did look terrific, brass diesels as a rule did not. I recall brass F units where it was evident they had a heck of a time with the nose contour, and some SD7s or 9s where the side grills were crude almost beyond acceptability. The techniques and materials seemed best suited to steam. Maybe it is unrelated but it seemed that brass manufacturers started to do a great job with diesels about the time the work shifted to Korea.

Dave Nelson

13

One of the key considerations with details is durability. That is, will those details be there 4 years later after much use? For that reason I prefer brass and MTH(which uses metal details). After all when the details have broken off, they no longer count.

A good example would be a new Athearn genesis diesel which we recently got and one trip around the layout and the snow plow is no more, nor one set of airlines. So, it’s off to Details West or similar and adding the details back. This loco was taken out of the box, inspected, checked with NMRA gage, etc before running.

Richard

14

You’re all a bunch of brass-haters, aren’tcha???

Oops! Did I say that? Just kidding (really!) [:slight_smile:][:#]

In terms of locos, I own some old brass, some new brass, and more plastic than either old or new brass. Nearly all of them are steamers.

My most recent brass purchase is a Sunset Models HO Z6. The plastic is mostly Walthers P2k (most recent ones about 2 1/2 years old) and BLI, with a lone Spectrum.

The brass Z6 outshines all the plastic locos (as well it should - it costs twice what the most expensive plastic loco did!). The older brass, notably a PFM GN Pacific and a GN P2 Mountain (not sure of the manufacturer off the top of my head), also stand out against the plastic models.

15

I own both in steam. At one time I longed for brass but could not afford it. Now I can but things have changed, since I still bottom-feed, I can get great detailed steam for cheap, still costs a bit for brass and the brass do not come DCC ready as a rule. The real benefit of brass is the durability of some of the finner details, the better plastic comes with some details in metal for that reason. I still have my eye on a few more brass pieces because they are unique and I need another camelback and though available in plastic, the detail is not there yet as the plastic people would rather make another Big Boy.

16

Richard, Respectfully that is not a problem for me and for many modelers I know. I have plastic models with plastic details that have been running for decades, all details still in tact. And, having been around this stuff for some 40 plus years, I’ve seen more than few brass locos with loose parts, bent this, broken that - also generally the result of poor handling.

They are after all small scale finely detailed models, not childrens toys.

As for MTH, much of the detail I have observed on several of their models is clearly oversized to make it more “durable” - also making it toy like in my view.

I would rather not have some details than to have them grossly oversized to be durable.

If you need durable, maybe you need brass - I don’t. I don’t handle my trains unnecessarily, I don’t haul them around to different layouts, I handle them with care. I don’t break the details off.

Sheldon

17

What about the latest brass locos from BLI?

Detail wise, good, bad, neither?

Rich

18

For looks, I’ll put my plastic HO Atlas Monon C-420s up against brass any day.

They run and sound pretty good, too.

While silent, my HO Rio Grande P2K GP30s look pretty good, too.

19

Yep, that is a fair comment. Some of the most beautiful locomotives I’ve seen, in terms of details, is a friend’s small fleet of modern hand made brass steam locos from the early years of the Norwegian State Railroads. Wonderful detail, nice weight.

A bit too expensive for my wallet, at about $1600 a pop. But man - these gals are seriously beautiful.

Grin,
Stein

20

It really has probably only been in the past 5-10 years that off the shelf plastic is detailed and fine enough that it has the look of brass of yor. The P2K GP30’s do look awesome, the only down side to the D&RGW are the noses, the gyra light are in the wrong place so it will take some plastic surgery to make them look prototypical, which is what people used to buy brass for in the past.

Must of the newer plastic is getting pretty thin, of course the material isn’t as durable. I don’t hate brass, but neither can I afford it. That being said, plastic of today is the brass of yestereday. The up coming UP DD40X will look like brass of yesterday and quite frankly the price will be approaching the coast of brass of yesterday too. Athearn UP veranda’s, U50’s would have fit in that category too. For me, since I can’t afford brass as a rule, plastic is stepping up to the plate. What about t