MTL Made In America...

[sirenwerks]

I would give anything for rolling stock to go back to kits and paint and decals. Detailing and alteration would be easier, I could only blame myself for color mismatches rather than the manufacturer I just paid 40 to 80 bucks to, building something would provide more fulfillment, and, presumably, it would lower the cost. I started with blue boxes and would like to go back to it. It's one reason IMRC holds a soft spot in my heart.

[ridinshotgun]

What did they mess up on those? They just came out.

I spent a bit of time this weekend looking over ways to upgrade the new 3281s and this is what I settled on so far (stock on the left, new on the right):



The changes include:
* Swapping out the weird 0.4mm soft plastic bolster washer for a 0.25 mm metal one.  This gives a slightly lower ride height and a bit better ride stability (though it wasn't too bad to start with).
* Switch to narrow-tread FVM wheels.
* Switch to N-Possible couplers with a scale box.  The coupler height is similar what Andrew posted above with his 5161 hopper.  Perfectly fine.
* Straighten out the sloppy end cage assembly and replace the stirrups with 3d printed ones (happily the same parts I used on my 5161s work here).
* Paint the roofwalk side supports to match the body colour.

Here are a few more shots:



^^ Note how the end cage on the stock model is angled out towards the bottom.  Most of my samples are like that.  The stock stirrups are awfully thick too.



Finally a comparison to the other two cement hoppers that will round out my fleet: an Atlas 3230:



and an IM 2-bay ACF:



Overall I'd give these models a B+.  It's been 9 years since these were announced: I'm very happy to finally have them in my hands.

[thomasjmdavis]

I would give anything for rolling stock to go back to kits and paint and decals. Detailing and alteration would be easier, I could only blame myself for color mismatches rather than the manufacturer I just paid 40 to 80 bucks to, building something would provide more fulfillment, and, presumably, it would lower the cost. I started with blue boxes and would like to go back to it. It's one reason IMRC holds a soft spot in my heart.

I was also a big fan of IMRC kits. And, let's not forget the pre-decorated MTL kits that were readily available in the 80s and 90s- which really were the N scale equivalent of the HO Blue Box kits.  Took 10-15 minutes to assemble. In the modern day, the MTL undecs (when you can find them) are similar- that is, a box of parts, rather than an assembled car.  I've bought quite a few passenger cars that way.

[basementcalling]

I would give anything for rolling stock to go back to kits and paint and decals. Detailing and alteration would be easier, I could only blame myself for color mismatches rather than the manufacturer I just paid 40 to 80 bucks to, building something would provide more fulfillment, and, presumably, it would lower the cost. I started with blue boxes and would like to go back to it. It's one reason IMRC holds a soft spot in my heart.

Sadly the hobby went the opposite direction. Too many in too big a hurry to apply parts and a little paint and maybe a decal set.

Kits lengthen the amount of hobby time I get per dollar spent, as I enjoy assembling them. Not everyone does.

I guess Micro Trains is the American version of Kato, a family run business that early on established a reputation for high quality with ownership dedicated to maintaining that level of quality. They didn't go chasing cheaper labor and lower quality products from overseas markets, though neither did they chase a higher level of detail and sophistication compared to a few new companies that matured in China production to a level that equals 80s brass in appearance and detail. They maintained their supply chain and skill set of workers though. Re establishing those domestically is far more expensive than just dollars and cents costs, and few today in our throw away, disposable society are willing to invest the time to build from the ground up.

[pmpexpress]

What did they mess up on those? They just came out.

Gary - thanks for sharing your improvements.

So weird about how the stirrups don't line up with the ladder - I wonder what Intermountain's rationale was for that. 

Mark

How did you fix the end cages Gary? Looks to be a bit of a pain! I have a solitary example I picked up at the LHS this weekend. All of the stock I looked at had poor end cage assembly too. More specifically, it seems to be very much an “A end” problem. Flash on the bottom of the ladder cage being the root case as best as I can tell.

Your steps look fantastic. I’m going to get some printed up for my cars too. The steps on the 3281’s are noticeably worse (thicker, poorer molding quality never less wonky placement) than the 5161 steps!

You might want to consider re-drilling and pushing the scalebox coupler out ~1-1.5 mm to get them proto spaced. If you use the stock hole as it looks like you’ve done, you’re actually a bit too close coupling. The beauty of my couplers is that yes, you really can get even these subtle details spot on.

Even with the thick height adding washers, the stock coupler height is still super low (exactly same as the truck mount 5161 I posted earlier in this thread).

I originally figured the roofwalk end treatment is a cost cutting measure; But it’s actually somewhat prototypical. I’m finding these etched roof walks with gigantic holes really poor relative to other’s we’ve seen though; They’re not up to the BLMA/Atlas standard at all.  Doing them right is possible!

Proto photo reference of the roofwalk end and coupler placement:

I hate to say it, but these are really rough out of the box. Wow.

They look like a major step backwards compared to some of the other cars you're showing next to them too.

The fact that you have to replace huge assemblies to make them right is nuts.

I hate to say it, but it's such typical Intermountain.

They try to swing for the fences with stuff but keep falling so short.

They have a few winners, and often have really good "bones" but execution ends up so damn sloppy to make all of their stuff "projects".

Such a bummer.

Hard agree.

Intermountain fell out of favor with me some time ago, their 5277cf and rebuilt AAR 40' boxcars are about all I'll spring for anymore. A run of their 4650cf covered hoppers was the last straw (think these were the first 4650's with factory body mounted couplers and metal wheels), finding the fit and finish to be quite poor and the Sclair cars of this particular run were a noticeably incorrect pumpkin pie filling orange (remarkable since several earlier runs were correct).

The SD40-2W was also quite a letdown, the incorrectly proportioned cab not the least of the issues with these... shells glued together, no tread on walkways, bent ends and misaligned couplers, some shells were humpbacked, wheels not great, and the mechanism is terrible imo.

It's a shame because they have so much potential, but seem adept at grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory.

Based on the images, this is lower-tier quality for N scale.  Too bad, very useful and common prototype, I would have wanted to a sand train if they were good. When other companies are churning out top-quality product at a comparable cost, it is hard to turn a blind eye to this.

I think I'll try my hand at a 3D printed version.  Beyond getting the sidewall curve correct, it looks pretty straightforward.

Rationale??   

In all honesty, I was expecting worse.  The Atlas 3230 hopper pictured above was a bigger mess than the 3281, in terms of the time it took to bring one up to snuff.  (Lots of flash and wonky assembly.)   But I agree that these are rough too.  That said, after going through one example, I think I can fix these guys up in less than an hour per car (which is pretty fast for me).  In the end I have a car that is at least as good as the IM ACF car, and a prototype that is hugely important for my layout.  I'm fine with that for now.

I agree.  I attribute a lot of this to lazy design that places a premium on the talent of the factory to get it right.  For example, the end cages could easily be designed to have alignment tabs that forced the parts to fit properly.  The flash-laden injection molding is another story though: those stirrups are really atrocious. 

I basically popped the glue joints at the base of the cage and did a bit of pruning.  As far as I can tell, the parts were not designed to fit properly.     I'll post a photo when I can to illustrate what I trimmed.

Agreed!  However, my short term goal is to get as many cars converted to N-Ps as I can before I re-start operations.    This was basically a drop-in-place conversion that I can improve on later.  I will probably swap in medium length shanks in the short run to get a better car spacing.

One concern I have about moving the box forward (apart from the extra work) is that a properly placed hole would likely span the joint between the end cage and the centre sill, so I'd be inclined to reinforce the area with a layer of styrene above the joint.  I need to study it though.

These roof walks are definitely not as nice as the 5161s, or the Atlas 5660 PD hoppers.  But they are straighter than the Atlas 3230 hoppers...

Here is an illustration of the end cage issue.  The first shot shows where the stirrups are interfering with the end cage, preventing it from mating with the bottom sill:



The solution is to remove/replace the offending stirrups and cement the end cage to the bottom sill as shown in the top car below (with one replacement stirrup in place):



Oddly the B side bottom sill projects beyond the stirrups a bit more than the A side, so this is less of an issue on that side.

Note that there is relatively little room to add another coupler pocket hole further forward of the stock one.  For now I will use the stock hole and the medium length shank to get a good car spacing.

I'm going to bump my grade down to a B- after a bit more experience with these.  But I'm still really happy to have them, after 9 years of waiting.

[bbussey]

I have always believed what makes Micro-Trains 'work' (apart from a small team of dedicated people who willing wear all hats within the company.. ).. Is the simplicity of parts and assembly on the products they sell.

If Atlas-Trainman or Scale Trains-Operator were to subcontract Kadee/MTL to tool and produce the next lower detail level cars then sure it could work..

No it wouldn’t. It still would be cost-prohibitive. And it’s not that MTL would be gouging, it’s that it’s too costly to contract this type of work in the States. ESM and MTL have explored the possibility in the past multiple times and it just isn’t feasible. The EL bi-level auto-rack with anti-vandal panels was intended to be the first of a twelve car series, but the first car was too costly in the long run even though it sold out quickly. The ESM X72 holiday car was printed 4C by MTL and the MSRP was double what the previous cars had been. Again, not Micro-Trains fault. It’s just the nature of what it costs to do this type of work here, even in regions where it is more favorable and cost-friendly.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

It's funny, I feel like one of those things driving that cost is the cost of healthcare and providing it to company employees. If only there were a solution for that that most of the rest of the industrialized world had figured out...

[Point353]

The EL bi-level auto-rack with anti-vandal panels was intended to be the first of a twelve car series, but the first car was too costly in the long run even though it sold out quickly.

That those cars sold out seems to suggest that there was demand for a greater production quantity.
If so, would the retail price per car have been lower?

Likewise, since the cars sold out (quickly), it would seem that there were sufficient customers willing to pay the price you set.
Many of the NSC/NSE special run MTL cars are not exactly inexpensive, yet they appear to sell out.
Same for the cars made by MTL for Lowell Smith.

[Sokramiketes]

Bryan-  Was that related to the cost and processing/packaging add on of the etched panels?  Or something else driving the cost higher on the EL Autorack?

[bbussey]

I think more manual labor than usual. The etchings didn’t add a significant amount. The decks were masked/painted pre-4C tech. One of the stanchions had to be modified to substitute for the stanchions with ladders, which have shorter mounting pins. There might have been some other alterations to the normal assembly process. The MSRP already was higher than MTL was comfortable with, even though I pushed for a higher ceiling because I thought the consumer base would accept it.

Also, regarding NSE runs, those quantities are much lower than normal MTL runs.

[Missaberoad]

I would be willing to part with a not small sum of money for a ESM/MTL autorack series! The EL and SP cars were probably among the hottest things I've seen a manufacturer come up with in N scale.

[bbussey]

Yes, it was disappointing that we didn’t get to continue. Only the SP tri-level got mocked up out of the remaining cars.  All of the schemes had different configurations.

[Point353]

Yes, it was disappointing that we didn’t get to continue. Only the SP tri-level got mocked up out of the remaining cars.  All of the schemes had different configurations.

Perhaps post a poll of roadnames to the ESMC website to gauge the relative interest in the remaining cars in the series.
Then choose the most popular roadname and open that car to preorders, indicating the expected retail price.
If you receive sufficient preorders, then move forward with the project.
If necessary, require a deposit - refundable if there are insufficient preorders.
Alternatively, could you partner with a particular dealer by guaranteeing them exclusive access to the car in return for meeting the minimum order quantity you would need?

[bbussey]

It takes two to tango.  MTL felt they couldn't continue due to cost, and that was well before the Talent fires when they had a larger labor force.  I'll post the list on RW at some point for the ooh's and ah's.

[JoeD]

It's funny, I feel like one of those things driving that cost is the cost of healthcare and providing it to company employees. If only there were a solution for that that most of the rest of the industrialized world had figured out...

  Medicare for all ;P