What old zombies should come back, and who should do them?

[cjm413]

I would like to see a fresh version of the 2 bay covered hopper (with the triangular side cut-outs) that has been produced by Deluxe Innovations ...for ever.  A few suppliers have beat around this bush (Kato, Athearn, Atlas) but no one has yet chosen to made a fresh run at this model (ACF or Pullman Standard versions please).  I'd like to see TrainWorx take a stab at it.

Intermountain makes one in HO, don't know why they never followed-up with one in N...

https://www.intermountain-railway.com/ho/html/48659.htm

[Missaberoad]

Intermountain makes one in HO, don't know why they never followed-up with one in N...

https://www.intermountain-railway.com/ho/html/48659.htm

The story is that Kato was going to make that version, but sales of the full side version failed to meet their expectations...

All the detail is there on the model tho so it would be relatively easy to add the openings...

[cjm413]

The story is that Kato was going to make that version, but sales of the full side version failed to meet their expectations...

All the detail is there on the model tho so it would be relatively easy to add the openings...

Sales of the full side version failed to meet Kato's expectations because Kato failed to meet the expectations of the market...

[Missaberoad]

Sales of the full side version failed to meet Kato's expectations because Kato failed to meet the expectations of the market...

Reasons aside it's a nicely tooled model, and I've acquired a number of them some of which are slated to be converted to open side cars.

[peteski]

Charlie -

Would you consider the Kato Mikado to be in the category of a simple, bulletproof design?  I know you mentioned the Micro-Ace steamers earlier, but I always consider the Kato Mikado to be about the best in design as far as simplicity and operability for North American steam.

More recent steamers to me have been far too complex, especially if you need to fix something.

Not sure if Charlie understood your comparison.

I would say that yes, Kato Mikado is exactly that: a simple and bulletproof design.  Especially the 2nd run with new drivers and traction tire.  It is elegantly simple and very smooth running.  And it is made with Kato's famous engineering precision, from quality materials. Traction tire can be replaced without needing to futz around with the siderods.  All the drivers pick up power, and the tender trucks pick up power on all wheels and are very low friction.  The drawbar is probably the only weak part of the design.

[ncbqguy]

I did understand....and no, I don’t consider the Kayo Mikado to be “bulletproof” or any way equal to the Hudson.   Better than following ever more complicated designs, yes, but much harder to assemble in the factory and to maintain at home.   More parts (more expense) and doesn’t pull as well and not as consistent unit to unit out of  the box. 
China-built Hudson’s, especially the first run, were not as good as Japan-built because of lesser quality materials.   China QC on wheel and pickup materials are main culprits.
Charlie Vlk

[peteski]

I did understand....and no, I don’t consider the Kayo Mikado to be “bulletproof” or any way equal to the Hudson.   Better than following ever more complicated designs, yes, but much harder to assemble in the factory and to maintain at home.   More parts (more expense) and doesn’t pull as well and not as consistent unit to unit out of  the box. 
China-built Hudson’s, especially the first run, were not as good as Japan-built because of lesser quality materials.   China QC on wheel and pickup materials are main culprits.
Charlie Vlk

I guess my answer was based on the fact that Mike wasn't directly comparing it to that even-simpler Hudson.  To me he was putting it in a more contemporary, yet simple-and-bulletproof design - it is still relatively low parts count (compared to today's over-designed models), and reliable.

Mike wrote:
Would you consider the Kato Mikado to be in the category of a simple, bulletproof design?  I know you mentioned the Micro-Ace steamers earlier, but I always consider the Kato Mikado to be about the best in design as far as simplicity and operability for North American steam.
More recent steamers to me have been far too complex, especially if you need to fix something.

I agree with Mike: Kato Mikado is fairly simple, yet elegant and reliable design.  But not in the same class as the Hudson.

[mike_lawyer]

I guess my answer was based on the fact that Mike wasn't directly comparing it to that even-simpler Hudson.  To me he was putting it in a more contemporary, yet simple-and-bulletproof design - it is still relatively low parts count (compared to today's over-designed models), and reliable.

I agree with Mike: Kato Mikado is fairly simple, yet elegant and reliable design.  But not in the same class as the Hudson.

I don't have a Hudson to compare it to, but of the steamers released in the past 20-25 years, to me the Kato Mikado is about as bullet proof as you can get.  With a traction tire and the revised drivers, you get great pickup and pulling power.  While the shell is a pain to take off, mechanically speaking, the mechanism is easy to fix and maintain.  Plus there are no quartering issues since only the 1st and 3rd drivers are connected to the siderods.  For me, it is also a great platform for kitbashing.  You can also add whatever DCC you want to it, and even in the used market, prices are very affordable.

Mike

[cjm413]

Reasons aside it's a nicely tooled model, and I've acquired a number of them some of which are slated to be converted to open side cars.

Kato failed to realize that "nicely tooled" doesn't help sell cars that are only offered in 2 packs...

[thomasjmdavis]

Kato failed to realize that "nicely tooled" doesn't help sell cars that are only offered in 2 packs...

Helped me buy them.   They offered at least 3 2-packs of ATSF hoppers (and it is a pretty fair rendition of a GA-67) which gives me 6 numbers.  I suppose there were folks who would only want one, but getting rid of the second one during the eBay era is not really a problem.

[OldEastRR]

I've got at least one Southern covered hopper if anybody's looking.

[mmagliaro]

I don't have a Hudson to compare it to, but of the steamers released in the past 20-25 years, to me the Kato Mikado is about as bullet proof as you can get.  With a traction tire and the revised drivers, you get great pickup and pulling power.  While the shell is a pain to take off, mechanically speaking, the mechanism is easy to fix and maintain.  Plus there are no quartering issues since only the 1st and 3rd drivers are connected to the siderods.  For me, it is also a great platform for kitbashing.  You can also add whatever DCC you want to it, and even in the used market, prices are very affordable.

Mike

Ths Hudson had no quartering issues, either, because it had keyed axle ends.  It's also trivial to take apart compared to the Mikado, and far outpulls it, even after you put TT on the Mikado.  You need to throw a GHQ shell on the Mikado to get it up to Hudson pulling territory.  Adding DCC would be a breeze because the tender is positively swimming with open space.  The only real short-comings of the Hudson are it's non-cone-point axle pickups (it has all-wheel, but they are interior sled-plate type), and it's now-dated level of shell detailing.  It's also geared really high, but so is the Mikado.  I think cone-point axle pickup and a retooled shell would make the Hudson positively *amazing*.

My other votes would be for the 0-6-0 switcher... AND... the old Rivarossi 0-4-0 switcher, if they hone the tender pickup to be PERFECT.   Remember, in a steam-era layout, the yards and industrial areas should be positively swimming in 0-6-0's and 0-4-0's, but N Scale doesn't have anything in the "A" class for that engine.

[nscalbitz]

Helped me buy them.   They offered at least 3 2-packs of ATSF hoppers (and it is a pretty fair rendition of a GA-67) which gives me 6 numbers.  I suppose there were folks who would only want one, but getting rid of the second one during the eBay era is not really a problem.

Me too, for the small number of Rio Grandes actually purchased (25 first order off the top of my head), but the darker grey body wasn't correct, should have used the same light grey on others- however we accept that, and in the cement business you need a constant shuttle of cars coming, going or standing.
d

[mike_lawyer]

Ths Hudson had no quartering issues, either, because it had keyed axle ends.  It's also trivial to take apart compared to the Mikado, and far outpulls it, even after you put TT on the Mikado.  You need to throw a GHQ shell on the Mikado to get it up to Hudson pulling territory.  Adding DCC would be a breeze because the tender is positively swimming with open space.  The only real short-comings of the Hudson are it's non-cone-point axle pickups (it has all-wheel, but they are interior sled-plate type), and it's now-dated level of shell detailing.  It's also geared really high, but so is the Mikado.  I think cone-point axle pickup and a retooled shell would make the Hudson positively *amazing*.

My other votes would be for the 0-6-0 switcher... AND... the old Rivarossi 0-4-0 switcher, if they hone the tender pickup to be PERFECT.   Remember, in a steam-era layout, the yards and industrial areas should be positively swimming in 0-6-0's and 0-4-0's, but N Scale doesn't have anything in the "A" class for that engine.

I agree Max, a good small switcher mechanism is really needed in N-scale.  Something with good slow speed starting and very low top speed that can move a good chunk of cars.  I would love to see an 0-6-0 mechanism built to modern standards.

[wm3798]

The new Bachmann 0-6-0 is a marked improvement over the earlier white-box iteration, but it's still a bit wonky, and mysteriously, while the draw bar peg on the locomotive will accept the new power pick up tender that comes with it, it doesn't work with the superior all wheel pick up tender that's available.  The new version has a lower drawbar elevation than will ride comfortably on the peg.. and it ends up lifting the front drivers off the rail.

A little tinkering would do the trick, and the pick up offered by the stock tender is a plus, but it's only the front truck that transfers the juice, and it's by a wonky circuit board drawbar, not the direct contact spring wires of the newer version.

As is, though, it can handle a cut of about 7-10 cars (low friction trucks and level track might get you a few more) without too much barking.

Shell detail, though, is still squarely in the 70s.
Meanwhile, the Trix 0-6-0 can deliver 10-12 cars, but it's going to do it at 100 mph, and not at all over a long plastic frog...
Lee