Bicentennial GG-1 is out...

[rswinnerton]

I quoted 'soon after' because I'm not sure of the repaint date. It wasn't too long though.

[davefoxx]

CR 4800 in bicentennial garb can be seen in the Port Road DVD that I own, so that paint scheme must have lasted for at least a little while before repainting.   

DFF

[dougnelson]

Unfortunately, the Bicentennial GG1 was 4800 known as "Old Rivets".  It was built as the first prototype GG1 for testing against the rigid frame R1.  4800 is the only riveted body GG1.  Raymond Lowey took the original design and stream-styled it into the smooth welded body that all other GG1s were built with.  In this case you don't actually have to count the rivets to know there is a problem of accuracy here.

[rogergperkins]

  I have been fascinated by the models of the GG-1 for nearly as long as I have been an n-scale modeller.  I may have seen the real thing once during a trip from Washington, DC to Baltimore.   This topic pushed me over the edge to MBK where I placed an order for a DCC version. 

[SkipGear]

The ladders on the stock model can be corrected easily enough.

Tony, whose decals did you use?  Microscale?  Any out-of-register markings can be corrected that way.  Disappointing, but at least there is a solution.

I printed the decals myself.

[Bob Bufkin]

Anyone ever see the Conrail Savings Bond Car?  It has stars that look like they came from the same stencils as used on the GG1.  Russ, anyone, know if this was so?

[Dave V]

Unfortunately, the Bicentennial GG1 was 4800 known as "Old Rivets".  It was built as the first prototype GG1 for testing against the rigid frame R1.  4800 is the only riveted body GG1.  Raymond Lowey took the original design and stream-styled it into the smooth welded body that all other GG1s were built with.  In this case you don't actually have to count the rivets to know there is a problem of accuracy here.

Doug, I agree.  However, short of brass or a Shapeways-style shell replacement, I doubt we will ever see a riveted model of the 4800.  4800 was also the only Conrail G to receive a blue body and can opener.  If this scheme is released I may set aside my rivet-counting alter-ego and run a welded-body 4800.

It's worth noting as well that those of us considering a foobie Kato 4800 will also have to overcome the fact that 4800 had a slightly different shape and contour than all the standard Gs such as the Kato model is based on.

A Shapeways Old Rivets shell might be just the thing.  The Kato mech is amazing.

[ai5629]

I thought I remember Kato being very honest and admitting that the welded body was incorrect for the 4800, but they wanted to make this unique scheme available to N scalers.  It is a neat looking locomotive that I may have to get even though I have no use for it beyond displaying it.  Thanks.

Jeff

[rswinnerton]

Bob,
I don't think so. With 4800 being an 'unofficial' job, it's likely that the star stencils were small (ie one star). The random pattern on 4800 supports this. The savings bonds boxcar (and savings bonds locomotive) had lots of stars of varying sizes, which would be time consuming with only a couple small stencils.

So not 100% sure, but I'd say likely not. 

[Nato]

                 Guys,Buy some "Archer Rivets" and make your own low cost PRR/Pen Central/Con Rail 4800. Nate Goodman (Nato).

[Dave V]

                Guys,Buy some "Archer Rivets" and make your own low cost PRR/Pen Central/Con Rail 4800. Nate Goodman (Nato).

This would not solve the differences in body contours between 4800 and all the other GG1s...

It is often incorrectly stated that Raymond Lowey designed the streamlined GG1 body.  He didn't.  What he did do was take the PRR's design for 4800 and suggest shot-welding versus rivets, but also "adjusted" the streamlined body a little bit...just enough that if you were to see the 4800 and another GG1 side-by-side, particularly the noses would look different.  He also created the 5-stripe scheme for the G that was later used on all passenger diesels prior to 1954.

It's a minor point, but as an SPF, one I am obliged by the SPF union to point out...   

[Bsklarski]

Nothing some putty and a Dremel cant fix

[bbussey]

It does actually seem that (other than the rivets) the roof line over the noses and the intake grills are the only obvious major differences.  The rain drips are different, and the front windows and end doors are not rounded.  The marker lights are round instead of squared.  The Archer rivets could be used, plate separations can be scored in the plastic, and rivet belt rails can come from Bare Metal Foil or automotive tape. It may not be that difficult to create a good facsimile of PRR 4800 from the Kato model after all.

[Bsklarski]

See to me the car body nose looks more round on the 4800 and the roof also on the ends. The  end doorway is different. Forward facing windshield is also different. If it was not for the carbody, I could like with all the other stuff.

[Dave V]

I haven't decided if the rivets and contours are a hill to die on, especially if Kato does the blue.  I have some much more foobified equipment than a smooth-sided 4800.  It is useful, though, to understand what makes a foob a foob.