MTL cars

[davefoxx]

If you keep analyzing it to death, we're just going to keep making fun of you.

And even if you don't keep analyzing it to death, we're going to keep making fun of you.   ;D ;D ;D

Dave

[asciibaron]

i spent the better part of last night working on the layout.  i have sorted out all the alignments and what will go where.  the next step is to start cutting the plywood and homasote and installing the subroadbed.  the problem of cars is a serious one - my small layout requires a minimum of 96 cars.  24 of them are B&O hoppers and another 18 of them are 2 bay covered hoppers for the zinc mine.

my goal is to model a railroad, not to have model trains.

[Dave V]

Then quit worrying about the cars!  REAL railroads don't care about the number of rivet panels; they care about moving trains.  You need a right-of-way with track to do that.

[davefoxx]

i spent the better part of last night working on the layout.  i have sorted out all the alignments and what will go where.  the next step is to start cutting the plywood and homasote and installing the subroadbed.  the problem of cars is a serious one - my small layout requires a minimum of 96 cars.  24 of them are B&O hoppers and another 18 of them are 2 bay covered hoppers for the zinc mine.

my goal is to model a railroad, not to have model trains.

If you believe that you need to super-detail a minimum of 96 cars for your layout, then it will be a minimum of two years before you can get back to constructing the layout, assuming you can complete one car per week.

Besides, if you want to model a railroad, you will quickly learn that operating super-detailed cars is not all that it's cracked up to be.  First, the cars just become part of the switching puzzle and it doesn't matter if the cars have the correct doors or running boards or even if they ride at the correct height. But, most importantly, you'll be glad that you didn't go to town on super-detailing when the RailWire contingent shows up at your doorstep to operate your layout and won't keep their meats off your fleet when switching per the 0-5-0 method.

DFF

[wcfn100]

Take your take your time, some of us aren't as judgemental.  

But I will warn you that the road you are heading down leads to cars that there are no known pictures of and, more likely, paint schemes that were short lived and will probably never be made in even a decal. So not only do you have to build the car, you have to make the artwork for the decal and have the means to print it.

Let these others run their foobies, it's ok to have higher standards (but you might never build a layout  ).

Jason

[asciibaron]

this is not my first layout, i'm well aware of what i'm doing.  i've been in the hobby for over 25 years.  i'm not looking for super detailed - i had a P:87 layout before (and really liked it).  i'm looking to run trains with rolling stock which are reasonably accurate.

i could have plenty of cars if i were doing 1983 or 1956.  there is a gulf in the 1960's that really sucks.

i'm not stalling on the layout - i just don't see a point in building it if i can't get a reasonable fleet together to operate the damn thing.  i could push my era a tad forward, but that screws up the operations and makes it pointless to model the prototype.

*reasonably: a mostly correct car model in a paint scheme that would have existed in the era modeled.

[Hiroe]

but with the limited amount of rolling stock, is it worth it to stick with N scale?

Probably not, but HO is for pre-teens and the elderly so unless I get space for O scale, I'm sticking to N.

Jason

Jason,
That's why you should join an O-scale club (like Cherry Valley). No need to build the real estate at home!

the problem of cars is a serious one - my small layout requires a minimum of 96 cars.  24 of them are B&O hoppers and another 18 of them are 2 bay covered hoppers for the zinc mine.

my goal is to model a railroad, not to have model trains.

Wouldn't a real railroad simply purchase/use what's available, and be more concerned with hauling those carloads of freight (and not the cars holding them, beyond basic safety)?

[Philip H]

I htink you can reach that goal, but it can also side track you from construction.  I'm glad to hear you are making progress on track alingments - that's an important next step.

As to cars, I go back to my earlier thought - if the idea is to get you layout operational, then you may have to run some "close enough" cars to get to that stage.

Ove rthe years half the fun for me has been trying to find and replace my foobies with better stuff.  Still have along way to go, but it is entertaining.

[asciibaron]

Wouldn't a real railroad simply purchase/use what's available, and be more concerned with hauling those carloads of freight (and not the cars holding them, beyond basic safety)?

the cars the 1:1 uses are real things, they can't slap flanges on dreams and run them, can they?

[asciibaron]

As to cars, I go back to my earlier thought - if the idea is to get you layout operational, then you may have to run some "close enough" cars to get to that stage.

Ove rthe years half the fun for me has been trying to find and replace my foobies with better stuff.  Still have along way to go, but it is entertaining.

why am i going to invest in crap cars i can't do anything with.  think of the environment. 

[Philip H]

As to cars, I go back to my earlier thought - if the idea is to get you layout operational, then you may have to run some "close enough" cars to get to that stage.

Ove rthe years half the fun for me has been trying to find and replace my foobies with better stuff.  Still have along way to go, but it is entertaining.

why am i going to invest in crap cars i can't do anything with.  think of the environment. 

Think of the fun of smashing them with your R/C off-roader!

[Hiroe]

Wouldn't a real railroad simply purchase/use what's available, and be more concerned with hauling those carloads of freight (and not the cars holding them, beyond basic safety)?

the cars the 1:1 uses are real things, they can't slap flanges on dreams and run them, can they?

Are our models any less real?

As for cars you can't do anything with afterwards: if you're good at picking cars that hold their resale value, why not?

Do we need to start a "Send Steve a Foobie Car" rolling stock drive? I'm sure we've all got a few fabulous foobies we could drop on you; and if it bothers you having them after you've got sufficient replacements, just sign them and send them back all to me.

[sizemore]

i'm not stalling on the layout - i just don't see a point in building it if i can't get a reasonable fleet together to operate the damn thing.  i could push my era a tad forward, but that screws up the operations and makes it pointless to model the prototype.

*reasonably: a mostly correct car model in a paint scheme that would have existed in the era modeled.

Well your definition of reasonably should be changed to PROTOTYPICAL, because you started this with MTL ride height. I'm pretty confident that most of us feel that most cars from almost all the manufacturers are reasonable, with the exception of painting cars a completely wrong color.

Why is it so hard to say, just to adopt the following:
1. Enter rehab for Waffling.  ;D

2. Finish the trackwork stage of the layout.

3. Begin car lowering program.
     I. Remove trucks.
     II. Remove Brakegear.
     III. Milldown bolsters.
     IV. Replace wheelsets with FVM.
     V. Reassemble.
     VI. Repeat I - VI until all MTL cars are complete.

4. Move onto next project.

The S.

[Sokramiketes]

Someone was just complaining on the NscaleVarnish list that Centrailia Car Shops improved their sleepers and now the ones they bought 18 months ago arn't as nice as the new ones and they feel ripped off.

I don't know how fast you make layout progress, but in 3 years, there might be a whole lot more 1960's era equipment out there.  If you really like the locale and prototype, you can make it all come together.

If you really want to do 1860's Central Pacific in TT gauge, and are just going to sit here and complain about the lack of Kato offerings that would fit your layout, well, not too many people here are going to have much sympathy.  We all wish certain prototypes were offered, but that's no way to get a layout done.  And the N scale landscape was different 5 years ago, and will be much different in 5 more years.  If you really want that 1860's CP layout, then you're going to have to accept a certain level of scratchbuilding.  If you want to model modern day BNSF in N, then you can be an outcome based toy railroader and pull everything off the shelf.  You're going to have to pick a prototype that matches the balance between available products and your level of enthusiasm for custom modeling.  

The last option is to take a couple hundred thousand dollars over to China and have someone else make your specialty equipment.

Less kvetching, more modeling!  :-*

[Robbman]

REAL railroads don't care about the number of rivet panels; they care about moving trains.

Tell that to a MAC...