This was beaten into the ground on this forum a month or so back. If there was a potential market out there, there are enough maufacturers looking for an unserved market and someone would start to capitalize on it. If it was well supported other product offerings and manufacturers would soon jump on board.
Set aside the fact that there is no one alive today that has any real relation to this period and thus any attachement or motivation to dedicate modeling it (TV westerns alone are not sufficient motivation to almost anyone) the period is so far different thatn the world we live in today. The time period frm even teh thirties till today reflect a style of life not as different as what teh late 1800’s are vs today. From the thirties onward one can relate to developed cities, modern roads, automobiles rural areas that were more developed, industry etc. Before 1900 you are talking horse and buggy, primitive rural towns, ancient city design…an entirely different world. I also agre with many here that the puny and somewhat shabby cars of the period light weight locomotives with single cylinders balloon stacks and the like are not as interesting as the stuff in the 20’s and newer.
It’s what you like and perheps the old build it and they will come would hold true. Some manufacturers could release loads of stuff for that era but unfortunately I think it would end up showing as a bad investment. I think it would be about as successful volume wise as introducing model t ford slot cars and assuming the market will grow to absorb the required production numbers/investment.
You’re even more right than you know! There’s no question of “hard enough”, I actually haven’t tried at all - I have no interest in modeling that era. I was surmising this based on the old-timer locos I’ve seen and the smallest decoders I’ve work with for DCC conversions with major space limitations. I’m sure you’re right that it can be done.
A major deterrent to modeling the late 19th century is a lack of any quality locomotives and a very limited supply of decent rolling stock. The other problem is this absurd “law” being promoted here that one is only supposed to model a time period which was experienced in-person.
We may be ahead of the curve here, as there really has not been a good running American operating on layouts. That may change soon, and Moguls and Consolidations will follow as well. As the availability of smaller foot print locomotives improves modellers will find this “Era” more attractive to pursue. The one thing working against this trend is the desire for that big engine, be it a Mountain or 2-10-2 or a Big Boy or a Cab Forward all of which pulls the potential modeller to a later era. As the market provides 1900’s locomotives at reasonable prices and good operating characteristics we will have to see how much lure there is to return to the “days of yester year”. “Build it and they will come” may well be the next frontier in the hobby.
Will
We could get into a chicken-and-egg debate here, but it seems that one of the major limitations on early-era modeling is fitting motors into the smaller bodies of older locomotives. British OO came about largely because motors of the era wouldn’t fit into proper HO scale models of Brit steam, which was generally smaller than American steam. Similarly, aside from a few specialty items, mass-produced early steam never made an appearance because the motors were too big.
As a result, the “available base” of modeling supplies–structures, rolling stock and locomotives–is lacking when it comes to 19th Century models because the engines were too hard to power. Because there aren’t decades’ worth of old secondhand or back-stock models to choose from, modelers and model companies had no great impetus to pursue 19th Century railroading even after small can motors made the locos possible to model. And unless the 19th Century comes back into vogue in a big way, this status is unlikely to change.
There are other factors to consider, too: despite the delightful Pacific Coast Air Line’s working link & pin system, most people don’t want to model link-and-pin couplers.
I would agree with the statement that there is not only very little of this equipment available, but much of what is made is pretty poor quality.
I disagree with there being some “law” being promoted here or anywhere. If you don’t agree that’s fine and dandy, but what I seem to read is either pretty neutral observations, reflections on surveys that have been done over time and some personal opinion on individual modelers preferences on what era they mnay or may not choose with some backup on why.
I didn’t see anyone imposing unwritten rles or peer pressure that one does not or should not model that era or they are an idiot if they do type ideas. I did see allot of thought out explanations and observations. If you don’t like what others have discussed on what they observe and want to spin it as “rules” to fit your agenda than I think you have the problem not others.
There are some niche interests that seem to get support but the numbers of enthusiasts and thus market power justifies production. Colorado narrow GAuge is one that has always drawn enough folks who spend to get product support, Traction modelers to sme degree also have enough numbers to have some better availability of product than pre 1900 stuff.
To think there is so little of this product because there is some unwritten law or peer pressure in the hobby is misguided. To think almost no manufacturers venture significantly into this untapped market due to some bias against it is ut of touch with the economic fundementals that make this country tick. If someone though the market was there, someone would be addressing it, there’s a decent buck to be made and no one else is filling the need, someone would try it and if successful others would follow.
This isn’t my law agaisnt the era, I have nothing against it, even though I personally have no interest in it at all. If there were enough folks out there to justify it, I’d wi***hem all the decent product in the world, and why not, just b
I have to disagree about fitting a decent mechanism into them. If Dapol can motorise an N scale 0-4-2 tank loco (this thing is about 2 and a half inches long) and make it run well (it’s unfazed by pretty much anything due to having all wheel pickup), there’s no reason the same motor couldn’t work in a HO 4-4-0. Trains of that era didn’t tend to be long, so the mechanism wouldn’t be under a lot of strain. They could also design it so the wheels will spin long before the motor overheats - the 0-4-2 mentioned will only handle three 4-axle passenger cars (a prototypical load) before slipping.
Perhaps I am repeating what others have already, so please bear with me a moment.
In the late '70s and early '80s my goal had been to build a 1920s era free-lance Oregon short line. So I have some equipment for that era. But earlier eras keep (kept) drawing me. My next goal was to build a layout that moved chronologically as the years went by, similar to the Utah Belt. Only, mine was to be from my free-lance prototype’s inception, say about 1870. So my model railroad would advance 1 year every year, remaining 120 years behind - this was around 1990.
I never actually started the layout, and I learned that there is a huge difference between 1870 and 1900 in rolling stock, and that there is almost nothing available for the 1870 era. The Mantua General is about the only close-to-scale non-brass 1870 locomotive. Almost any new older era locomotives in HO are detailed and manufactured to appear as they did in later years - '20s or '30s usually - because it’s a larger market. The Roundhouse and Labelle (and others) early era car kits usually scale out to or actually match turn-of-century equipment much better than 1870.
Given that I am now in my '50s, and my modeling years will probably not stretch another 50 or 60 years, I have decided to focus on turn-of -the century (no later than 1901), just prior to the standard-gauging of my free-lance narrow gauge. By keeping the scope of the layout quite small, I will be able to kitbash and obtain what I need the same way other minority groups do (S, Sn3, On3, HOn3). Unfortunately, early HOn3 is not catered to either. But there is decidedly more for turn of the century than 1870 in both HO standard and narrow gauge.
Assuming the polls are correct, there is little reason for anything to change. Unfortunately, the Roundhouse Old Timer kit line will probably never return except as RTR. It’s just going to be part and parcel of modeling anything prior to WW1.
Havent heard that law, or maybe I just wasnt listening.[;)]
I model 1947-57 narrow gauge industrial trams, all freelanced. All from before I was even born. Model what ever era interests YOU and dont listen to anyone else, any one telling you thats a law need to be whipped with a piece of flex-track[(-D]
Ever since I saw Walt Disney’s “Great Locomotive Chase” in 1956 I wanted to model the 1870’s. Most of the old time equipment is really OO scale running on HO track. The internet opens the United Kingdom’s world of OO scale to one’s mailbox.
Now I am able to model the 1870’s “standard gauge” in OO/HO. The locos become the right size and everything works. I am willing to compromise the gauge because it really isn’t noticeable when operating.
An IHC 4-4-0 with an OO scale figure (Click image to enlarge )
I have a web article explaining the advantages of OO/HO at:
Well, there was heavy industry and large cities in the 1890s US. In the east and midwest you had huge industrial complexes with many buildings (yes, mostly brick with large windows for light and ventilation) in addition to the many varied smaller mills and business which were also rail served. It was an industrial age, and there was large scale industrial activity, dense cities with large buildings closed packed together (perhaps not so much in the American southwest, but they were there).
That said, I do agree that sometime post WWI there seemed to be changes in outlooks, probably a culmation of the various outside events and progressions (one quote in relationship to the auto said the average driver in 1920 would ill-at-ease in 1960s traffic, while the driver of 1930 would be familiar with traffic jams, congested roads, high speed driving, etc.).
Eh, perhaps Gilded Age/Victorian railroad modeling will become popular (again?), just because it is a fun and cool era (trains were finally reliable and formed the backbone of freight and passenger handling in the US, while still somewhat small and human sized compared to their descendants 2 or 3 decades hence)
I saw (and can’t re-locate) the thread about a remotored 4-4-0 using N scale equipment. I like the idea. There have been consistent sales of the General (Civil War) and Jupiter (Transcontinental Golden Spike) locomotives since I saw my first MR about 30 years ago. Ergo there IS interest out there. Good equipment will draw sales that are invisible now.
Selling a “tourist special” train set for modern-era and any anniversary tie-in would draw attention (and I hope sales).
Another way to promote this would be to observe that not everybody HAS a 72" wide space to turn a big locomotive around but can fit a 36" space on a small table - say, a 4x8?
A rather clever bunk bed set (top bunk perpindicular to lower bunk) could be easily converted to hold up a layout about 6x6 on the upper deck; this is plenty of room for HO scale old-timers (and it’s the flexible kids who sleep underneath it, not the stiff adults).
And, yes, I do model 1900 (more or less) on a 2x6 plank.
Love those early 1900’s .SP and steam logging in the Pacific NW. Who cares who makes what as long as there are reasonably inexpesive mechanisms that run well to kit bash. ( Like Bachmann.) I modify MDC cars. The old ones and the ready to run new ones . If they disappear I will just have to scatch. You do what you like and just have fun.
