Sound features in a locomotive aside, what is the difference mechanically and electrically in an inexpensive and a more expensive locomotive? Take the regular Bachmann line and Atlas’ better models for example, what is it about the motor, drive train, electrical pickups/wiring etc. that makes the Atlas the better runner and more expensive, generally speaking?
Jarrell
Well, better quality electronics, better gearing, more R & D testing to eliminate potential issues (longevity is built in and problems with potential bindings or failings of driveline issues addressed), better design overall (including wiring set up to make easy DCC decoder for control and sound conversions), finer attention to details, the list goes on.
I would say better engineering from the start. This would include things like how the torque from the motor is transmitted through the various gears to the wheels. What is the right ratio at each transfer point needed to achieve the desired effect. Do the gears mesh exactly or were generic of-the-shelf gears used so that they have lots of slop in them. I am guessing the toy manufactures don’t even consider this sort of thing.
Greater precision in the manufacturing leading to finer tolerances. Are the gears & worms molded, cut, or milled. Is the fly wheel & other rotating drive train components perfectly in balance. Are the wheels 100% round with 0.0001" maximum variation. The best design in the world can be ruined with lousy engineering.
Better quality control. Even the Bachmann Spectrums suffer from this. One part out-of-spec can ruin an entire drive train.
I would also venture a as to say higher quality materials making up higher quality parts. All synthetic materials (plastics, nylons, etc.) are not created equal. The vendors have to ask themselves why use expensive self lubricating neoprene bearings when cheap pot plastic ones will do - or for that mater why use bearings at all? It is just a toy.
I would feel happier knowing that this was the case, as stated in the two posts above mine, but I am not so sanguine about it. Can anyone show us definitively that a can motor in Bachmann’s regular line is measurably poorer in the appropriate aspects compared to one found in their Spectrum line,…and that the gear towers are substantially different? Is BLI doing this to their Blue Line…I don’t think so.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying there is no difference, but how would I know of it one way or another? I can appreciate the difference in details, and perhaps the shell molds have more relief and detail on them on the higher end stuff, but I am unsure that there is much to separate them. Then, so many folks get on here and implore the neophytes to forego the trainsets because they are clearly inferior…I can believe that.
I think it is a good question. We hear that many folks can’t run their new XCM 4-8-2 in brass because it needs “tweaking”, or even outright remotoring and gearing…what’s up with that?!
The terms are somewhat related to our disposable income of course.
But to generalize, I would put HO engines costing below $60 (average discount price) in the inexpensive category and over $60 in the “more expensive” category. Anyone new to the hobby would probably agree.
Examples of those “inexpensive” loco’s might include Bachman or Bachman Plus, Proto 1000, MRC, Tyco and so on. Essentially loco’s in the toy train category, not Proto 2000 loco’s that somone “bottom fed” for dirt cheap.
Example of the more expensive loco’s include Athearn RTR, Genesis, KATO, Proto 2000 and Stewart. BLI at the upper end of that.
Those who have gotten aclimated to the costs of model trains, and have the income, might put the “more expensive” loco’s into the above $100-150 price range (for diesels anyway - steam is another beast altogether).
Between similar priced engines we can argue things like chassis and detail etc. Joe Fugate commented that P2K loco’s (certainly MRSP at the “more expensive range”) has commented that the chassis are overall high maintenence over time vs other loco’s in the approximate similar price category. Stewart F units cetainly have very high quality drives but the shell is outdated and still selling for similar prices as other more highly detailed engines with inferior drives like Athearn RTR or Proto 2000 etc.
Good post, i am still trying to figure out why all my bachmann diesels sound like small lawn mowers, even the spectrums, when the same companies steam locos are fairly quiet, and also how Bev/bel Lifelike diesels which are as cheap if not cheaper then the bachmann stuff is so much quieter, i was running a bachmann u36b last night and finally had to swap it for a bevbel F7 because the noise was giving me a headach, i just don’t get it.
I wouldnt group Proto 1000 with “MRC, Tyco and so on”. Mechanically they are no different from their 2000 brothers and the difference ONLY being in the application of grab irons. So, according to your logic, locomotives without grabirons are toy train catagory locomotives. IF that is your logic, then you need to put Stewart products with the toy train locomotives.
David B
Selector-I’ve got A Bach Spectrum Dash and a few of their cheap standard line. Same motors.
None of them sound like little lawn mowers. They all actually run real quit and smooth. Better than any of my Athearns. (DOWN Brakie![:D]) Keep in mind I’m NOT comparing these to Atlas,Kato or Proto since I don’t own any.
Loathar, that is the thing, isn’t it? Bachmann has to replace/repair their cheapos every bit as intently as they must their more expensive Spectrum line, so would it not make sense to get the best deal on a solid drive by volume purchase and simply adopt that as a single reliable standard in all their lines? We’re not talking a 282 vs. a 350 here, nor a F-150 over an F-350 Heavy Duty and all the engineering differences that the customer wants and pays for in the macro scale and world.
Now, having said all this, I do know, and fully accept, how in the world of amateur-level telescopes you really do get what you pay for. Usually, the optics are good enough across the various lines and prices to qualify as “diffraction limited” (giving decent image quality and contrast), but it is in the engineered mounts and the drive mechanisms to let the optical tube track the movement of the stars and planets across the sky relative to the observer’s positon on the globe where the bucks pay off. Cheap ones are jerky, hard to get fine control, and the image suffers accordingly as one tries to watch through the moving eyepiece. Blaachh!!
An important point here is the level of quality control. Bachmann, even Spectrum suffer from uneven QC. If you get 10, there will be 1 or 2 good ones, 2 or 3 bad ones and the rest inbetween. With any none train set stuff, the QC is pretty level accross the board. Sure you can find a dog occasionally (often caused by handling during shipping knocking parts out of alignment) but that is the exception. The best quote I ever heard was a modeler bragging about Bachmann customer service because he only had to send 7 of his 10 Spectrums back for service. It is often said Bachmann has the best customer service - why do you suppose that is?
Along this line, I offer this. I have purchased the Bachmann Thomas stuff, supposedly for the boys. When I got Thomas and converted it to DCC, I called Bachmann and got to talking to the engineer in charge, who just returned from China.
During our converation he told me the motors in the Thomas line are spectrum motors because it didn’t make sense to set up a seeperate line for lower quality motors.
I’m guessing this is often the case. Certain parts can be higher quality and still be used in lower end products. This means everything else, details, shell construction, wheels etc, can and will be the difference in “quality” and run-abliity of a loco.
In this case James, the 2-6-0 is the worst runner and it has to do, not with the motor or drive train, but rather with electrical pick-up.
Tilden
This is true about a lot of things. From breakfast serials to trains. Often, changing things at the factory is more expensive then using the same all out. Lets face it, the cost for each motor in a spectrum or any other mass produced engine must be a very small cost for a large manufacturer. Perhaps even lower due to the fact that they are ordering 100000 instead of 10000. Also, repairing ten different ones are harder then repairing one kind and the same goes for spare parts.
That said, there obviously are different motors in different engines but Tildens point is very good.
Magnus
Names omitted to protect the guilty.
Back when I was buying motive power and rolling stock I noticed that a certain ‘name’ manufacturer charged 15% or so more for products of identical (or even poorer) quality, compared to other manufacturers of similar items. It didn’t take long to figure out that the difference was a surcharge for, “The Name!”
Very few of that manufacturer’s products ended up on my roster.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
You get what you pay for. Period.
What’s the difference between a BMW and a Chevy?
You get what you pay for!
Don’t buy any locomotive that has a single powered truck with a ‘pancake’ motor. This type of locomotive is for racing, not running on a model railroad layout.
David B,
My logic has nothing to do with grab irons - I think you are putting words in my mouth. Please re-read the title of the topic - that is where I’m coming from. Things fall into price categories and the Proto 1000 F3’s are rather inexpensive in comparison to the “more expensive” HO diesels. I wasn’t making any value judgements by putting them in that cost category. That is just how they are priced. However, Athearn “blue box” loco’s still on the shelves would probably classify as “less expenisive” loco’s too and they gasp don’t have grab irons either. My point above is to draw a line between lesser and more expensive based on todays market, budgets and buying power etc.
Obviously the Proto 1000 F3’s are the best of the “inexpensive” loco group. The danger of painting any topic with too broad a brush is that you have to lump things together and you can’t satisfy everyone when you do that. I also put the Bachman Plus F units in the inexpensive category and from the review I read, they ran pretty smooth and quietly too.
Don’t get too misty eye’d over big brother Proto 2000 mechanisms - Here is what Joe Fugate had to say in another forum about Proto 2000 mechanisms:
I wasnt putting words in your mouth…you used the word “toy” and “Proto 1000” in the same thought.
I consider 4 catagories when it comes to plastic models:
Junk (Tyco, Bachmann standard line, Model Power). Locos that wont run well no matter how much tweeking you do to them.
Inexpensive bashing material and their clones (Athearn BB, Proto 1000/2000) If you know what you are doing, BB Athearns make great models.
Great Drives, Spartan Details (Stewart Hobbies). Amazing drives, but shells require the modeler to drill holes for grab irons and such.
Shake-and-Bake material (Atlas, Kato, Athearn Genesis). These models cost more because of the drive and details.
In my mind, this is what I see. I dont see expensive/inexpensive as there are different subcatagories to each.
David B
When I was saying you were putting words in my mouth, it was because you said I was taking loco’s with or without grab irons and putting them in to such N such a cost group etc. So yes, you were adding the idea of grab irons etc to my discussion when I didn’t mentione it.
As for putting Toy Train engines in the same broad price range category with Proto 1000 - “less expensive” - maybe they don’t seem to go together but… the original topic was two price categories. “inexpensive and more expensive”. I drew the line around 60 dollars discount. Athearn RTR, Genesis, Proto 2000, Atlas, BLI, KATO are all pretty firmly above 60 dollars at discount new sale prices. (yes, I know some people bottom feed a few of these of these at less but we are talking new prices at dealers/online etc). Proto 1000, Bachman Plus, MRC, Life Like Tyco and some I can’t think of are below. Thats my own man made dividing line. Just because a “toy” falls into that category shouldn’t put anyone off. If anything it speaks highly of the “good deal” you get with a Proto 1000 F3! =)
Part of the problem with subcategorizing things is you get away from the idea of cost - the original premise of this thread. Because, as I mentioned above, you have some loco’s which are cheaper with very good drives, and some which are more expensive and have medicre details. KATO loco’s for example have (save the SD40-2’s) excellent smooth quiet drives, but have fallen way behind in the detail department. So it gets mixed up pretty fast and difficult to put cost division lines out and then make generalizations wi
Not worth my time…
David B
It was worth your time to take issue with my orginal post. Be a good sport please.
Cheers.