MTL MRAP's

[jimmo]

Pretty crappy looking models in the pics. I'm really surprised that MT would sell something that crude.

[Denver Road Doug]

Completely off-topic, but I came across this photo when researching some intermodal stuff and thought it was cool and at least somewhat related...
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1741193

Pretty crappy looking models in the pics. I'm really surprised that MT would sell something that crude.

Wow.   The photo is HO (or O) Scale and an unpainted model.   That's a pretty strong "review" all things considered.   

[jimmo]

Wow.   The photo is HO (or O) Scale and an unpainted model.   That's a pretty strong "review" all things considered.   

If you guys are ok with that level of scale fidelity then I'm trying way too hard.

As a manufacturer, I believe that any picture of product better look just as good at O-scale as it does in N. With all the tools and techniques available to model makers (especially MT) something like these examples are way below par.

[Denver Road Doug]

As a manufacturer, I believe that any picture of product better look just as good at O-scale as it does in N. With all the tools and techniques available to model makers (especially MT) something like these examples are way below par.

As a manufacturer, I would expect you to be a little more professional than that.

You, of all people, could put your money where your mouth is...make an MRAP that's better.   I'm sure you can since the rest of your stuff looks pretty good.   No reason for jumping in the mud with the rest of the forumites. 

There are plenty of military loads that you could make that would sell good I think.   Especially if anyone ever brings more military flats to the table.

[Philip H]

I actually agree with Jimmo.  Look at the quality of their LVTP7 Amphibious Tractor :



I'm not a manufacturer, but these appear to be tough to tool - compound angles, weird hatches.  But a decent model.  Maybe the MRAPs are too new for drawings to be available, but why bring out a product that looks . . . well I just don't think it meets their standard as set by prior products.

And yes, I'd love to see Jimmo branch out - but not until he does a few other things first.

[jimmo]

Since when is having an opinion about quality (or lack thereof) not professional? As a consumer, I expect a lot more from one of my favorite manufacturers.

Judging by the number of Humvees I sold, military models are not big sellers. Common civilian models are.

There are a few MRAPs available on Shapeways however. This vendor "Eagle" has both the 4x4 Ridgeback and 6x6 Mastiff "armored up" versions of the Cougar.
https://www.shapeways.com/shops/problue?section=1%2F148+-+1%2F160+%28N+Scale%29&s=12#more-products

I don't know who does MT's load models but (pretty much) they are background only, IMHO.

[wazzou]

It looks to me like they were laser cut from Gator Board and cast from that.

[delamaize]

It looks to me like they were laser cut from Gator Board and cast from that.

what he said.

[jimmo]

I would say it was cast in a light desert tan tinted resin. Because it was too light to see any details they "enhanced" it by the addition of some kind of weathering to help bring out the detail (spray and wipe). Then a picture was taken of it (probably a cell phone) so they had to Photoshop it the best they could and what you see is the final result.

One of the reasons we cast our vehicles in a primer gray is because it photographs well. There is no fancy setup here, just a desk lamp, a curved piece of card stock and a 10 year old Digital Elf camera on macro setting. We use Photoshop to adjust the pics for maximum clarity.

Another thing to note is the relative size of the vehicles in the photo (at least on my screen) is not blown up to HO-scale. MRAPs are not small vehicles, so (unless you have a giant monitor) what you're seeing is probably pretty close to actual size.

[wcfn100]

what you're seeing is probably pretty close to actual size.

Only if they're 31' long and 16' high. 

It's just another flat car car load from MTL.  It's 'on par' with the 20 other loads they've done.  If you feel like this load should be a higher quality than the other ones for some reason, that's fine, but lets not make it like this is some sort of surprise.

Jason

[Denver Road Doug]

On my screen it's 2 1/2" long, so unless they're ~36ft long then they're not n-scale.

Maybe we'll find they do suck in real life...I'm not saying that's impossible, but it seems odd to blast them from what is a consensus bad photo.   I'll be glad to eat crow if they don't cut it.

And, I will agree that MTL's load have never been SUPER great so yes there is something called "relatively speaking" that we need to consider.  The other related piece of the equation is cost.  These will street for $6-7ea and if you're building a unit train that's not insignificant versus a $12-15 Willmodels or $30-35 Shapeways model.   And you have to expect to see a flat car loaded with three of them at some point at probably an even cheaper per unit cost.

[FEC Railway]

I don't think they're bad models...just wish they would have chosen a more common platform.  And one that is actually being retained in the inventory in large numbers and brought home.  The model is a Force protection Cougar, same family as the cougar H, JERRV, and the Badger ILAV. 

Contrary to popular belief,  these vehicles have dangerously high centers of gravity.  Across the board.  The Cougar family has one of the lowest, but has almost zero
Room to "grow" with the threat.  They're also cramped inside.

There are numerous versions of them. 
The BAE Caiman family is built on a army 5 ton truck (FMTV "M1083") chassis.  The bottom of the shalow U-shaped hill is about 3-6 inches thick.  There's some steel, but alot of aluminum and tensylon armor.  Caiman Category 2 added More protection behind a veritable shoe box of extra armor plate. 

The Navistar MaxxPro family is based on a dump truck chassis I believe.  It certainly rides like one.  The MAxxPro plus has additional armor plate.  I measured the belly armor of one and got something like 11 inches.
 again,  use of composite armor is commonplace. 

The RG31 and RG33 family are directly descended from South African vehicles.  Early RG31s still have the OMC of olifant motor corp on the from plate.  RG31 was on the way out in Iraq as they were earlier designs and couldn't get much additional armor plate.  RG33 has more glass than a palace in the back.  We used them by the HAGA variant - heavy armored ground ambulance. 

There are a few rare-er variants and sub variants.  One is the M-ATV. 

Other than that-  I think it's cool someone is making military loads.  These would rate 89 foot flatcars,  not too
Heavy. 

[jimmo]

...it seems odd to blast them from what is a consensus bad photo.

My deal was that I am disappointed at MT for using such a lousy image to show off a new product. Whether it was a good picture of a bad model or a bad picture of a good model, you don't put out crap. If the pictures don't turn out good, you go back and shoot more until you get it right--it's not that difficult.

Price is not the main consideration here. We pour all kinds of money and effort into making our trains look as real as possible then are content with dropping a blob of resin on a flatcar that resembles a military truck?

[Denver Road Doug]

So I picked up a package of the MRAP's at the OKC show.  I took some photos last night including some that were about 1:24 scale when I got done.  Here's one of those reduced to somewhere in the neighborhood of N, still probably on the large side:
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
(EDIT: After several attempts, I think this one is EDIT AGAIN: REALLY REALLY SMALLish COMPARED to the 1:24 ONE.   How's that?)

I think the body looks pretty good.  Perfect, no, but I think definitely as good or better than 90% of resin models I have experience with. (admittedly Willmodels being an overwhelming exception)  I will concede that I don't have an exact match to know with great certainty that it looks like it is supposed to, but generally it seems to be give the right idea.

Where the earlier anger SHOULD have been place was the tires/wheels.  They are grossly unacceptable, and I feel like MTL either wasn't paying attention or got stuck with them and didn't have the stones to fix them.   They're terrible.  I mean, unless you're planning to take your MRAP to the drag strip and need racing slicks.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Good news is, I think they'll make good roof vents.

[peteski]

(EDIT: After several attempts, I think this one is actually fairly close to n-scale)

Um, is that on a tablet's 9" screen 5" smart phone display, or a 24" computer monitor".  Or on your screen (whatever size it is)? You do realize that there is a huge variety of computer screen sizes people use?