Title says it all. I am purging some of my collection and most of the less than super detailed stuff is gone. Just seeing who is doing what and why.
well, I don’t have any of the wood/craftsman kits I think you’re asking about … but I have no qualms with running “less than super ultra mega detailed with 1/1000 inch accuracy” (a.k.a. [Tyco|Bachmann|etc] trainset stuff, with KD couplers) stuff alongside my “highly detailed” (Red Caboose, Branchline, etc.) stuff.
TBH, I’m a little more fond of the cars that are “bad” in the looks department, since they have less trouble with “now where’d that stirrup step go!?”.
Eventually, yeah, I’d like to get some of those “ultra-mega detailed” cars, but it’d probably be like … 3 or 4 … just enough to go along with a locomotive on a 100% true-to-scale (proto:87, I think it was called?) diorama. But that’ll be forever and a day from now 
Here’s a twist… Since I have a large collection of Athearn and Roundhouse IPD boxcars and boxcars in general I see no reason to sell them because they’re a foot to wide and have cast on grabs.I now have 49 cars in my “super fleet” car roster.
What to do because the old wide bodies looks out of place with the scale width bodies? [*-)]
Ahh,says I,I’ve got! [I]
I’ll run my wide body cars together and my scale width cars together… [tup]
I believe that he is talking about old wood kits, not less detailed cars ala Bachmann/Tyco nor foot too wide Athearn.
I run Labelle, brass and Blackstone cars together. If you’re sorta OCD, you might have an issue, but they look fine to me.
At 3 feet, things start blending together pretty well unless you have Superman vision.
This is a LaBelle RPO-Express with a Blackstone Coach. I think having the cars in different classes (all my LaBelle cars are head-end cars, not coaches) also helps fool the eye here.
Up close, yeah, the difference is obvious, but under most layout conditions a well built and finished wood car holds up pretty well versus the slick new stuff.
This is a pure scratch build from basswood. I built it a long time ago.
And this another pure scratch build, also very old. The “steel” sides are actually glossy photographic paper over sheet basswood.
And this is a Ambroid “one-in-five-thousand” kit, all basswood with a few pot metal castings. It’s also pretty old.
I have ballasted the track since I took these pix. The track is ordinary code 100 flex track with the rails brush painted with Floquil rust.
Not only am I running today’s highly detailed plastic with wood kits from Silver Streak and others, but I am also running old Athearn and similar quality plastic with old old Athearn, Varney and Model Die Casting metal cars. To make matters worse I am even still running a few old old old paper sided reefers, which came with Baker couplers. Some of those may predate WWII or are post War but pre 1950.
Dave Nelson
For me, there isn’t much from the olden days that is good enough to run with current rolling stock. That includes wood and/or metal kits. The only thing that comes to mind that might would be the old Athearn metal boxcars. With the latest in grabs, ladders and roofwalks, they’d probably look great. I’ve got some of their round-roof cars tucked away, and I have great hopes for them.
Ed
Well, since I’m usually about 3 to 6 feet away from my HO scale trains, it doesn’t bother me one iota to run trains full of Silver Streak, Ambroid or Athearn or Varney metal freight cars along with my newer super-detailed plastic ones. I don’t know about the rest of you, but my viewing point for my model railroad is usually that of a ‘helicopter’. I’m not photorgraphing or filming my model railroad most of the time, I’m RUNNING it, and that calls for a rather larger scope of sight than a camera lens.
Tom
I guess it’s about what’s important to you. Personally, I am much more proud of the kits I’ve built (including some wood car kits) than I could ever be of a RTR superdetailed car that the only thing I did to become the owner of was lay out way to much hard earned cash and I detail to my own standards, not the standards of those who think it is their job to judge what others do in their spare time!
duplicate post
Wood looks like real wood, what better for a wooden boxcar?
I have a couple I picked up from a show (already built) they just needed some love in the form of trucks, metal wheels and Kadees. No problemo!
Almost anything else, including plastic and metal. That’s because what you see when you look at a real wooden boxcar is paint. And possibly weathered paint. By the time a wooden boxcar shows a lot of wood, it should have been scrapped. And even then, real wood’s grain is way too coarse to model most model wood. Flat car and gondola decks come to mind as an exception.
If you’re building one of the excellent LaBelle passenger car kits, it’ll look pretty awful unless you spend a lot of time applying sanding sealer. So that it’s as smooth as, yes, plastic.
Ed
Some models ONLY look good from three feet away. But others look good BOTH at 6 inches and three feet. I prefer to see the latter as “dual usage”.
Ed
You would be wrong if:
You thought I haven’t built LaBelle, Ambroid, Silver Streak, Ulrich, Model Die Casting, Model Engineering Works…
And I still have them.
For nostalgia.
I would never (well, hardly ever) run them with current rolling stock.
The only one that comes to mind that I am expecting to introduce to current operation on the logging branch is my Model Engineering Works side dump car. It still holds up well, though I think it needs work on the grabs and steps. And no one has made a replacement.
Oh, yeah. Throw in some Kadee disconnect log trucks too. They’re still quite nice. But with Sergent couplers. They REALLY benefit from them.
Ed
One of my problems is every car is subject to the 6" rule, accually 3" if I get up real close. Yes I was talking about wood craftsman kits, all were bought built but many needed major repairs (that is what I like to do and have gone so far as to make cutom z molding for a car (luckily I only needed a small peice). Most of my layout cars are Tichy from one company or another (think I will start another thread about name all the companys that used or had molds made by Tichy).
I run pretty much everything together.
Personally, I like building wood cars from wood - have one under construction now.
Sure, if you’re doing closeup photography, many cars won’t show well. But then, I don’t run photographs.
Enjoy
Paul
To each his own. Having every piece of rolling stock being detailed to the hilt by present day standards is unlikely to be noticed by most visitors, who tend to consider the layout as a whole. It’s a little like have fully detailed interiors in every building, even ones where there’s no chance anyone will look inside.
And there’s something to be said for nostalagia, So long as cars are in good running condition, they’re OK with me to run. They may be old, lack certain details, etc, but they serve a purpose as stand-ins or just a reminder of how far things have come.
To my mind this is another case of personal choice, I guess I’m not fussy as I go for the “Looks about Right” look.
I’ve obtained an unbuilt Silver Streak boxcar kit that I tend to build as per the instructions, the purpose being that if anyone notices it I can then explain how the hobby has progressed.
Actually it will be interesting on how many observant folks there will be. Having run at a couple of shows my half dozen kitbashed freight cars together, I’ve only been asked twice who made those cars.
Have Fun,
Cheers, the Bear.
I think your opinion on all this is just fine, for you. I disagree with your opinions, simply because what is important to you, is not as important to me. By all means do what you do and have fun at it. However, there is an undercurrent in what I see you say, leading me to believe that you are judgemental about other peoples work that doesn’t measure up to your higher standards.