KATO and the EAST

[mcjaco]

You could buy a real GEVO with the money it would cost just in tooling design for that many variations.

Yes, but then you wouldn't have an axe to grind on every major model railroad forum proclaiming the inaccuracies of said model. 

It's easier to bitch.


Let's put the Model back into Model Railroading.

[sundowner]

If you have no issues playing $300+ for a diesel, along with a few thousand of your fellow modelers, you can have any road-specific tooling variation you want.  If you want those same variations with current pricing, it's not going to happen.

I call BS on this, FVM tools a new truck for a one road wonder run of 400 and they dont cost $300.00.

I get it, FVM is the Apple of the MR world. Just dont tell me that you are going to do a one road wonder and the do a bunch of incorrect scheme and then tell me how great they are.

[bbussey]

I call BS on this, FVM tools a new truck for a one road wonder run of 400 and they dont cost $300.00.

I get it, FVM is the Apple of the MR world. Just dont tell me that you are going to do a one road wonder and the do a bunch of incorrect scheme and then tell me how great they are.

Most likely the truck frame tooling was piggybacked with another project to save costs, or it will be used in future projects.  But I'm guessing you are dismissive of those possibilities as well, since it's clear you have no idea of how the process works.

Pony up the $100G to get your own model tooled if you think it's such a snap to do, and then pray to the gods that you sell enough to recoup your investment.  Then you can crow about actually knowing what is BS and what isn't.

[Puddington]

Economies of scale..

Amoritization of R&D costs

Paying off tooling

Close enough for jazz.............

Pick one and that explaination is good enough for the FVM Gevo's being run in multiple roadnames without being 100% road name specific....like Kato, that "paragon of perfection" doesn't do this (and I point to ten's of thousands of faux Empire Builder, BN, CPR.. et la, four car passenger sets that were sold, or how about those really prototypical Magor CP Rail cabooses that Atlas is hauking....Magor...CP Rail...umm.....).....or; 'if ya don't like em, don't buy em...."

Man, the things we expect.............

[Catt]

I guess I am in the minority here,as I would rather have a model that is not 100% correct,than not have it at all.

As far as KATO is concerned if you don't like their west coast bias don't buy their product.By the way since the do CSX they handle my west coast (of Michigan) bias rathger nicely.

By the way you guys are starting to sound like the folks on the ATLAS HO forum.

[lock4244]

I guess I am in the minority here,as I would rather have a model that is not 100% correct,than not have it at all.

I agree. Close enough is good enough sometimes. I'd rather have the much maligned IM SD40-2W RTR than do it myself. The seven I bought are just fine to me, the foobs on them I can live with.

[CBQ Fan]

Can I complain here about the recent new release announcements?  3 HO offering and only 1 N scale item.  I need to find my soap box and megaphone!

[inkaneer]

Again you're harping on the K4.  It's fairly obvious at this point that, in regard to new tooling, Kato has settled into a niche of offering complete passenger consists.  The motive power is secondary to the consist overall.  They won't even release the BM60M separately in spite of overwhelming demand.  So trying to persuade them to tool an individual steam engine that is specific to one road without a consist attached to it is fruitless at this point, as it doesn't fit within their current business model.  And due to the lack of sales on the Broadway, another Pennsy consist probably won't happen anytime soon.

If you want Kato to consider more Pennsylvania prototypes, then you have to show support for the ones they offer.  Prior to the Broadway being released, there weren't too many higher quality passenger car models that were prototypical to Pennsy.  The California Zephyr modelers got their various additional sets of motive power because Kato is on their sixth release of the consist.   And if the lesser-quality Lima and Model Power cars are acceptable to you, then why isn't the Trix K4?  They can still be found without a lot of effort, and made to perform to current standards for less than what a newly-tooled K4 would cost.

As I understand you, Kato is married to a business model that is not rooted in profit or else they would be making more of the BM60M's.   Seems to me there is a disconnect there between management and the market where market demand is being ignored by management.  Is Kato being held a prisoner by their own business model?   Maybe the Kato model is the wrong model?  As for showing support for the Kato offerings in the hopes Kato will see things our way, that I am afraid, is wishful thinking.   Management has a penchant for following the axiom of "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead"  and proceeding on their preset course. 

As for the Trix K4 that you mentioned, the supply of these ended in 1999.   It is still popular because it is the only thing there is.  According to Spookshow's website:

"These models ultimately vanished from the face of the Earth around 1999 when Marklin bought out Minitrix and discontinued their line of USA-prototype models. They remain in high demand to this day (apparantly being a reasonably accurate representation of a popular PRR prototype). However, sticklers should be aware that the proportions of the boiler are off as compared to the real thing (too small).

In addition the engines are of ancient design with poor electrical pickup and 3 pole open frame motor and quite literally, a dinosaur from the past.   That they are still in demand as Spookshow states, shouts, "Opportunity here!"  Or at least it should.    One more thing about Pennsy steam.  You start with a H series 2-8-0 mechanism.  That same mechanism can be used on an L1 2-8-2.  All you meed is the trailing truck.  The mechanism is the same.  Same drivers, same driver spacing, same valve gear. That trailing truck can be used on a K4 or an E6.  But back to the 2-8-0 mechanism.  Add a fifth axle and you now have an I 1.  All the drivers are 62 inch diameter.  [There is a difference of 1 inch in the center to center distance of drivers 3-4 on the2-8-0 and 2-8-2H and L  series and drivers 3-4 on the I1.]  I think most Pennsyphiles will agree that we can live with that.  The pony truck wheel is 33 " on all three.  These things do not have to be tooled over and over.  Apparently the Pennsy realized something about 100 years ago that hasn't yet made it to Tokyo.  There is money savings in standardization. 

But I would be less than honest if I didn't also say that if a K4 were to be made I would hope that it would not be made by Kato.  Kato would probably make it following its design of the Mikado.  While still regardied by some as the gold standard of steam loco design that design is long in the tooth and resulted in a locomotive that was anemic at best in pulling power.  It was only rescued by traction tires.   I would want a K4 that would make the Kato 2-8-2 a dinosaur and I don't see Kato doing that. 

[bbussey]

Not. Going. To. Happen.

[up1950s]

True - ESM has bias in favor of eastern prototypes, as clearly stated in the tag line.  But even that will get blurred in the months to come.

Seaboard to Seaboard Models ?

[Smike]

All Mike wants from Kato is the correct front and rear (CSX, NS) Dash 9 hand rails!!! I can float the rest of the changes. 

[eja]

Maybe KATO could please everyone with a GG-1 in Daylight colours 

[sundowner]

Most likely the truck frame tooling was piggybacked with another project to save costs, or it will be used in future projects.  But I'm guessing you are dismissive of those possibilities as well, since it's clear you have no idea of how the process works.

Pony up the $100G to get your own model tooled if you think it's such a snap to do, and then pray to the gods that you sell enough to recoup your investment.  Then you can crow about actually knowing what is BS and what isn't.

If you say so.
 
What Its clear to me now that some cannot talk about some manufacturer but its OK to talk about others.
I guess is cool with some people that fantasy scheme are accepteble for easter road but not the holy BNSF or UP.

[bbussey]

Nope, you don't understand yet.   What's not okay is for you to make definitive statements about things you know nothing about.  You're entitled to your opinions, but opinions aren't facts.

Now it should be clear to you.

[SkipGear]

If you say so.
 
What Its clear to me now that some cannot talk about some manufacturer but its OK to talk about others.
I guess is cool with some people that fantasy scheme are accepteble for easter road but not the holy BNSF or UP.

Get over yourself. It is a factor of the fewest versions to create the most road numbers. It happens that the most road numbers are in the west.

Don't you find it interesting that both FVM and Kato chose the exact same set of details for their runs of the GEVO? It wasn't because of any east/west bias, it was because the units they picked statisfied the most common variations of the loco's while making the fewest variations in tooling to keep the cost in check. Two different companies looked at the numbers and came up with the same conclusion on which units to make.  FVM never said that the correct tooling for the eastern versions would not be done. The BNSF C4's are just an example that the line is not finished. People complained about the orange on the BNSF units and the truck detail has always been a little flat on the FVM's so they responded as quickly and easily as they could. Tooling a new cab and light pipes is not something to be done on a spur of the moment like a paint change and tooling one piece of plastic for replacement truck frames.