Omaha orange stymies Kato F unit noses once again.

[eja]

Here is a visual indication of where the mold parting line is.

(Attachment Link)

Thank you !

[Ron McF]

Well they seem to have screwed up the yellow on the ATSF Cigar Band Freight F7s as well. The pics on the Kato site look ok, but in person its a whole different ball game. I only mention this cuz I was wanting to get one of the cigar band Santa Fe F7s (sentimental reasons), but now am on the fence about it due to the yellow.

Can any ATSF fans comment on this? (you have to see them in person).

The colours on my cigar-band units seem to be a good match to those used on my MTL FTs and various Atlas and Kato blue/yellow bookend (pinstripe locos), so I'm very happy with them.  I never got to see the real things in their day, and I'd be wary of comparing the models to the colours on the various restored units as they might not be exactly the same as the original paints.

In any case, by 1960, the year that I model, many if not all of the cigar-band locos would have been repainted at least once. Add in the effects of sun and weather, and some variation between units should be expected.

As for the mold parting lines on my cab unit, the vertical line on the side is just visible, but the lines on the nose are hard to see.  In fact, mine looks just like the image on the Kato web site (http://www.katousa.com/Zcart/images/176-2129.jpg).

Regards,
Ron

[davefoxx]

Mold wear might be the problem - they have probably used the same nose molds since the first F3 was produced in the 1990s.

Here is a visual indication of where the mold parting line is.

(Attachment Link)

I'm wondering if it's either a worn-out mold (as pointed out upthread) or the mold pieces not being completely engaged.  For example, look at that anticlimber.  While the parting lines wouldn't be that big of a deal to fix on the undecorated shell, fixing that anticlimber wouldn't be fun.  In fact, now that I've seen it, I can't unsee it, and that would bother me.

Also, clearly the unit is pad printed, and not only is the mis-match of orange a significant problem, but look at the stripes where the nose meets the side.  Poor registration.

Not Kato's best moment.

DFF

[arbomambo]

Mold wear might be the problem - they have probably used the same nose molds since the first F3 was produced in the 1990s.

Here is a visual indication of where the mold parting line is.

(Attachment Link)

Mold wear is not the problem...
this seam has been evident on every Kato F unit...the molds have held up very well. this seam is no more prominent now, than on Kato F units from the 90's...that seam, carried down through the anticlimber, onto the 'plow', has always been there. Paint has hidden it, to an extent; but the undec version REALLY exposes it.




original Freight release from the 90's...


Bruce

[wcfn100]

Here's an undec from I think around 2003 or when ever they offered undec F3s with the DCC frame.



Jason

[jmlaboda]

As for the mold parting lines on my cab unit, the vertical line on the side is just visible, but the lines on the nose are hard to see.  In fact, mine looks just like the image on the Kato web site (http://www.katousa.com/Zcart/images/176-2129.jpg).

I am really surprised to see this... I have never noticed it before but with I did.  I love covered wagons and not only EMDs but have little use for them in my current operating interests (possibly an ALCO RS2 demo'ing on one of my lines' passenger trains and a 65T GE center cab on a shortline connection is about the extent of what diseasels would be on my future lines) but I am surprised that this has not been discussed before.  On extreme shots it even looks like the anticlimber is affected as well, not being completely in-line, which would really trouble me now considering how highly regarded these models have been.

[peteski]

I would have to dig up some of my original F3s from the 1st run to check, but I do seem to recall (and the photos already posted confirm it already) that not only there were parting lines than, the anticlimber mismatch was there. I just thought it might have gotten more pronounced.

Couple of things:

1. Certain paint schemes will greatly amplify how visible the parting lines are.
2. Over the years our expectation got a lot higher. What was acceptable 20 years ago is now considered a flaw.

There is no good solution to this - injection molded complex-shaped  plastic items will have parting lines. The mold can be designed to minimize the appearance of them (place them on natural panel lines). But in some cases (such as the complex curvature of the F nose) there is no way to hide those parting lines.  If they made the number boards a separately-applied item, those parting lines could have probably been moved to a less visible location. But that would add to the parts count and complexity of assembly.  Trust me, whoever designed those molds did the best they could under the circumstances.

Check some of the other manufacturer's F or E unit noses and you will see the parting lines somewhere on the curved nose (unless they had them sanded off during assembly, before painting).

[arbomambo]

I would have to dig up some of my original F3s from the 1st run to check, but I do seem to recall (and the photos already posted confirm it already) that not only there were parting lines than, the anticlimber mismatch was there. I just thought it might have gotten more pronounced.

Couple of things:

1. Certain paint schemes will greatly amplify how visible the parting lines are.
2. Over the years our expectation got a lot higher. What was acceptable 20 years ago is now considered a flaw.

There is no good solution to this - injection molded complex-shaped  plastic items will have parting lines. The mold can be designed to minimize the appearance of them (place them on natural panel lines). But in some cases (such as the complex curvature of the F nose) there is no way to hide those parting lines.  If they made the number boards a separately-applied item, those parting lines could have probably been moved to a less visible location. But that would add to the parts count and complexity of assembly.  Trust me, whoever designed those molds did the best they could under the circumstances.

Check some of the other manufacturer's F or E unit noses and you will see the parting lines somewhere on the curved nose (unless they had them sanded off during assembly, before painting).

I completely agree...unless you're using  'slide mold' technology, parting lines will exist...
one either lives with it or does something about it i.e. sanding and repainting...
 In my case, I choose to 'live with it'...for the units I model and detail, the Kato paint is good, to the point I'd rather not strip and paint it myself...the only time I really see the parting line is when I'm super detailing under the magnifier, and in the consequent close up or macro photos...in normal viewing and operating distance, I don't see it...
IMO, the Kato E and F units REALLY capture the complex curvature of the EMD bulldog nose...better than the IM units...and because of that, I'll always choose the Kato unit, then take the extra steps to detail to my satisfaction...
Bruce

[peteski]

I completely agree...unless you're using  'slide mold' technology, parting lines will exist

Even with slide molds, there will still be parting lines (I have built many 1:25 scale model automobiles with bodies molded using slide molds) to see that on some complex surfaces parting lines are still unavoidable.

Like Bruce said, we just have to live with them or buy undecorated models and paint them ourselves.