Bachmann 1937 AAR Boxcar.

[hegstad1]

So does anybody have a review of these?  And are those Buckeye ends on those suckers?

[bbussey]

Yes.  Lots of prototypical errors.  Stick with the InterMountain model.

[Cumbo2000]

Are there photographs posted someplace? Iwould like to see how well they "tooled" the ends.


Bob Witt

[wcfn100]

Are there photographs posted someplace? Iwould like to see how well they "tooled" the ends.

It's tooled to the same quality everything else they do. The HO cars got the correct style ends, not whatever this is supposed to be, but they are still very poorly done so it's no real loss.



I guess the grab iron location wasn't a one time thing.     At least the roof peak is believable, unlike the 50' car that was 'made from drawings', LOL.

Jason

[peteski]

The brakewheel looks like something from a '70s Atlas or a Life-Like boxcar.  Um, I better watch what I say - I was just  called an "elite" TRW modeler in another thread. 

[Chris333]

Hey, but body mounted couplers!

[peteski]

Hey, but body mounted couplers boxing gloves!

[Chris333]

You are elite. 

[peteski]

You are elite. 

I've been called a lot worse! 

[nkalanaga]

I think those are supposed to be PS ends, but there were better cars made in the late 60s.  To bad they couldn't copy the ConCor/Kato 40 ft box.  It had some odd detail selections, such as grabs on the side and short ladders on the matching end corners, but overall it was a nicely done model.

[muktown128]

The brakewheel looks like something from a '70s Atlas or a Life-Like boxcar.  Um, I better watch what I say - I was just  called an "elite" TRW modeler in another thread. 

Funny, the brakewheel was the first thing I saw that didn't look right.  The ladders and stirrups actually look pretty good in this pic.

And I'm nowhere near an "elite".  Probably more like a novice or beginner.  I'm learning new stuff on here every day.   

Scott

[sirenwerks]

So Bachmann was attempting to put PS ends on a 1937 box car and they ended up looking like Buckeyes?  Better modeling through stupidity?

[peteski]

Is this a beginning of another Bachmann-bash thread?    We better shut up before the forum police steps in.   

Um, with few shortcomings I think this is a lovely model. And very affordable too. It will fill a very important void in the N scale boxcar range.  Yeah, that's it, that's the ticket! 

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Nope, the abuse may be leveled fairly, since we can actually observe the car in question (and its deficiencies).

[Dave V]

Is this a beginning of another Bachmann-bash thread?    We better shut up before the forum police steps in.   

Um, with few shortcomings I think this is a lovely model. And very affordable too. It will fill a very important void in the N scale boxcar range.  Yeah, that's it, that's the ticket! 

Like Ed said, I guess I'm not understanding why it's so difficult to understand the difference between criticizing a model that is out there and can be directly observed versus "pre-bashing," i.e., forecasting problems before they even exist or from pre-production artwork that may not represent the finished product.  It's not about Bachmann or any specific manufacturer.

As for bashing, I think we'd all like to see folks stick with facts and avoid impugning the manufacturer's motivation, intelligence, etc.  If the car is a foobie turd, that's fine...  But let's keep it to that.  I--for one--find it useful to have manufacturers contribute here, but the abusiveness of some of the membership has driven some of them away.