Scale Trains 5188 Hoppers In at MBK

[basementcalling]

Gorgeous looking cars. Curious to hear feedback from those who may already have them on hand about how they look and operate. Not expecting the road names I might want to stay in stock all that long, unfortunately. Even at $31 a pop they'l likely sell out quickly.

[GaryHinshaw]

Here's a link.  My pre-order shipment just showed up at my US post box.  I'll report back as soon as I get a chance to pick them up and inspect.   I will be replacing the wheels with FVM (smaller flanges) and couplers (Z scale) but they otherwise look great in the photos.

Glad I pre-ordered mine @ $27.99 ea.
-gfh

[basementcalling]

Here's a link.  My pre-order shipment just showed up at my US post box.  I'll report back as soon as I get a chance to pick them up and inspect.   I will be replacing the wheels with FVM (smaller flanges) and couplers (Z scale) but they otherwise look great in the photos.

Glad I pre-ordered mine @ $27.99 ea.
-gfh

Who offered them at that price?

[mu26aeh]

Who offered them at that price?

Probably ST when they were announced

[migalyto]

Who offered them at that price?

Order them direct from their website, offer is still good, but to get them at that price you have to order 12+

[jpwisc]

I’ve got my first batch already. Beautiful. The printing is fantastic, the details are well done. I just need to swap the couplers out for 1015s. The ST couplers are harder to couple than MT TrueScale.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[C855B]

... The ST couplers are harder to couple than MT TrueScale.

I had a lengthy conversation with Shane about this at our recent RPM. He said they recognized the issues and were working on it, readying the release of their third tooling. If this is the v3.0 then... well... no change. "The coupler box is compatible with the 1015..." seems to be the company line, and the three in-person conversations I have had with Shane or Michael indicate they have no interest in accommodating TSC conversion by at least tooling for a separate box rather than integrating the box into the frame casting. Frustrating.

The takeaway from the recent chat is they're done with this issue. For as much as ScaleTrains.com does that is first-rate, this ongoing operability problem going unresolved flummoxes me.

[Spades]

I’ve got my first batch already. Beautiful. The printing is fantastic, the details are well done. I just need to swap the couplers out for 1015s. The ST couplers are harder to couple than MT TrueScale.
(Attachment Link)

Beautiful car, what impresses me is that they have placed the stirrup in the right position. IMR Trinity 5161 and the IMR/Red Caboose Autorack steps have an exaggerated offset. 

[GaryHinshaw]

Order them direct from their website, offer is still good, but to get them at that price you have to order 12+

Ah yes, I forgot that the discount was for 12+ cars. 

I was able to pick mine up last night and give them a test drive and I'm very impressed.  I had no issues with tracking or performance on my layout.  They are easily as good as the IM 5161 hopper, which was already an excellent car.  Here are a few photos, with comments.  First an overall shot:



As others note, the paint & finish work is excellent, and the details are well done.  The air line along the bottom of the body is very fine, as are the stirrups.  Another nice touch is that the roof walk supports are painted the same colour as the body.  The roof detail is good (Scale Trains 5188 on the right, IM 5161 on the left):



The roof walks themselves have a bit of texture and the hatches are very well done.  The ride height is correct, as can be seen here next to a stock IM hopper, which rides high due to the truck-mount couplers:



(The IM hopper has the same ride height as the ST if equipped with BLMA 100T trucks.)  Here is a comparison of the end detail of a Trinity (IM) hopper on the left and Gunderson (ST) on the right:





The only complaints I have are minor:

* The wheels have a wider tread than the FVM 3601s, so I will be swapping them out.  This won't bother most people though.
* The brake wheel housing on ~half of my models were tilted outward and looked wonky (see photo below).  I don't know if this will be easy to fix without breaking something, but it's a minor thing.
* The couplers are cr@p...  They're enormous and they require a fair bit of force to mate.

Here is a shot of two stock models with stock couplers:



The car spacing is nearly 2 scale feet longer than the IM hoppers with MT couplers.  I plan to outfit mine with Lee English Z scale couplers, but it sounds like MT 1015s are a good option for folks as well.

All in all, an excellent addition to the fleet which adds some nice variety to the "earth worm". 

[peteski]

I don't get this Scale Traiins coupler thing either.  The models are super-detailed with all sorts of fancy free-standing detail, yet they use a giant McHenry wannabe coupler.  So much for "rivet counting". . . 

Thankfully (at least for me) the coupler boxes are designed to retrofit the MTL couplers.

[GaryHinshaw]

A bit more on the couplers.  I have not modified a 5188 hopper yet, but I have outfitted an ST carbon black car with Lee English couplers and it turned out to be quite simple.  I just trimmed off the sides of the coupler box and the screw post, leaving a flush surface as shown:



This surface was just the right height to mount the new coupler box on:



I'm pretty sure the same procedure will work with the 5188 hoppers.  Perhaps a similar procedure would work with the Tru Scale couplers?

[Ogden Rails]

Where is the best place to buy Lee English Couplers?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I don't get this Scale Traiins coupler thing either.  The models are super-detailed with all sorts of fancy free-standing detail, yet they use a giant McHenry wannabe coupler.  So much for "rivet counting". . . 

Thankfully (at least for me) the coupler boxes are designed to retrofit the MTL couplers.

My guess is that they're trying to do something new and are still working through revisions of it. As long as they "work" right now, I'm willing to give them some space to get them worked out since, otherwise, the ST stuff is really nice.

[C855B]

I get that, but you'd think they'd be closer than this by the third cut. And "work" is relative - 40-50 SMPH to couple is not my thing.

My take is NIH syndrome, something I've noted in our corner of the world as peculiar to HO-biased companies. They've spent so much on re-tools they could've spent much less to buy MTL shanks in bulk and simply get it over with.

[peteski]

My guess is that they're trying to do something new and are still working through revisions of it. As long as they "work" right now, I'm willing to give them some space to get them worked out since, otherwise, the ST stuff is really nice.

Even if they tweak it to couple easier, the size is totally wrong for something they would consider "rivet counter" model.  After all, they are  striving for realism and fine details. They should really  be heading in the other direction. Make is smaller.  Arnold/Hornby coupler is a good example of how make a knuckle coupler look more like the real AAR couplers, and still have it work well.  That coupler still needs some fine running, but at least it does not look like a boxing glove.   

So we have a new model RR company striving for high quality models with fine details. They spend the R&D funds to design their own N scale coupler, but instead of making it as close to scale as possible, they make what looks like McHenry clone. Makes not sense to me at all.  It is not like they are using someone else's design - it is a brand new coupler!    Dump it, and come up with a really better (working and looking) coupler.