0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Geeee, the jewel box is too large. I'll make a note to the factory that the jewel boxes need retooling.
Better make those wheel flanges bigger also to cope with his (assumed) crappy track work.
The Railwire is not your personal army.
They must prefer the Walthers version of the car...
Sigh... This reviewer is what's wrong with N scale... @bbussey I enjoy all of my ESM models and hope to get more. Despite the clearly inferior jewel box design Don't you know that's what matters, not that true to prototype crap that most people don't know or care about...
There used to be this thing called 'modeling' where you could modify your model to suit your specific needs... change couplers, wheels, ect... ~Ian
Or Life-Like/Bev-Bel or...oh never mind.
I was referring to the prominence that Walthers placed on Jewel Cases as a model feature.I dont think Walthers released the X72 (if they did I think Walthers used the same Jewel case design as ESM)..But I'll be curious to see their review of Atlas's $35 release of the same model based on 30 year old tooling I can purchase at train shows for $3 each.. ~Ian
LOL, that is funny!I suppose the train of thought here is that large box better protects the model during its long trip from the Orient to America. Or maybe there is only one size box tooled up for all sizes of cars?But to be perfectly honest, I also prefer compact jewel boxes (but I doubt I would ever complain in a public forum about it). The more compact the box is, the less storage space the model will use (so I can buy more cars to fit in the same space). In some extreme examples, I have been known to repackage small cars in large Jewel boxes into small MTL boxes. I trim the original large nests to fit the small box. I know, it is crazy, but that's Peteski for you.
Heck even if you need a hammer to open them, what does that have to do with the product?His Atlas code 55 track review: The track was nice, but I found the lack of a center 3rd rail a bit off.