Micro-Trains/Atlas Update - 1/20/26

[Lemosteam]

[Cory Rothlisberger]

Just the beating of a 20-year old dead horse...

[peteski]

That's precious Cory! 

I also wonder who first coined the "pizza-cutter" moniker. Maybe I should ask AI.   

[Englewood]

While you guys were sitting around pontificating about rail and flanges and stuff, I actually got some layout work done. You guys should try it! 

[peteski]

While you guys were sitting around pontificating about rail and flanges and stuff, I actually got some layout work done. You guys should try it! 

Um, I don't have a layout, but my NTRAK modules do need some attention. However, letting the fingers do the walking while I sit on a chair is also an enjoyable activity.

[robert3985]

While you guys were sitting around pontificating about rail and flanges and stuff, I actually got some layout work done. You guys should try it! 

I spend the vast majority of my time recently (after I became well enough) getting my 3D print workshop and my plain ol' analog workshop/machine shop up and running since my recent move.  Sitting at my computer typing, and doing research, about the whens, wheres and hows concerning the evolution of N-scale wheels and the positives and negatives of track products particularly if they might clarify the character of a company's attitude about a related product line they have recently acquired, is both informative for me as well as enjoyable...and might also clarify opinions not necessarily based on facts or based on rumor...and I include myself in that characterization.

As for thread drift...the discussion between interested parties about Atlas' Code55 track debacle and ME's pizza cutter wheels is not completely off-topic drift since it is pertinent to the title of this thread "Re: Micro-Trains/Atlas Update"...and the comments & assumptions made by other participants.

I also got some layout work done, since "layout work" is pretty all-inclusive...and since nearly all of my time is available for model railroading nowadays, or whatever I decide to do, my keyboard time doesn't impinge on my enjoyment of the hobby, but is part of it.

Hey, if you don't like it, then don't read it.  I'll continue to research, inform, and discuss topics for those who do find track & flanges & a little history interesting.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[milw156]

this showed up in my feed a couple days ago and I noticed that no one else has mentioned it/commented on it so...
could have been made a lot shorter, but some good news (?) contained within???

[learmoia]

Yeah could have been shorter but I think they are going for a live stream feel without editing..

Would have been more entertaining if Liz was giving the boys crap about their lack of knowledge of the MTL line 6 months into the acquisition..

When they went on for 5 minutes about magnematic and what a 1015 is.. Liz could have slid in 'It's what the modelers use to replace your Accumate couplers."

[bbussey]

It's nice to see that they are still going to produce many of the cars and sets that had been announced prior to the acquisition.

[cfritschle]

I am very happy to see that the Washington State DOT Grain Train 4-pack will still be produced. However, the artwork still shows the "duplicate" road number from the previous release of the Grain Train 4-pack.  While technically one could argue that BLMR 1015 and CBRW 1015 are not duplicates, it looks like there was an attempt to offer new road numbers in this release as shown below.   

Shown below are the reporting marks for the previous 4-pack:

BLMR 1008
BLMR 1015
BLMR 1019
BLMR 1022

And here are the reporting marks and road numbers for the new 4-pack

CBRW 1009
CBRW 1015
CBRW 1018
CBRW 1023

It sure would be nice if they could find a different road number for CBRW 1015.  All of the BLMR covered hoppers from the mid-1990s received a CBRW "patch" by the early 2000s.  And,I hope to make some CBRW decal patches for the BLMR covered hoppers I already have.

If one searches Railcar Photos for CRBW 1006 to 1028 you will find a lot of photos for ACF 4650 cu-ft covered hoppers that would be appropriate for the Micro-Trains by Atlas model.  Note: You must be logged in to search.

[robert3985]

I lost interest during the show of ignorance about "Magnematic" and "1015".  What N-scale modeler that's been doing it for a little while is so ragingly ignorant about Micro Trains couplers???  Then, bragging about the "highly detailed" weathered cars, while displaying them on vomitous Atlas Code80 trackage when they-themselves manufacture the 2nd best-looking Code55 trackage in the world.  Shows the place is run mostly by non-hobbyists, and/or non-N-scalers.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[learmoia]

Then, bragging about the "highly detailed" weathered cars, while displaying them on vomitous Atlas Code80 trackage when they-themselves manufacture the 2nd best-looking Code55 trackage in the world. 

I didn't even notice the track... Probably because it's the same display track MTL has used for many years..
https://www.nscalesupply.com/mtl/mtl-weathered.html

So apparently they have been run by non-hobbyists for quite a while now. 

[robertjohndavis]

I mentally dropped out at the “early diesel era” boxcar without a roofwalk and stenciled 1974.

It’s shocking to see how little prototype knowledge Atlas shows. They may have it internally but it doesn’t shine through.

Overall, from the botched messaging about the purchase of MicroTrains to videos like this that confirm some of the worst fears folks have had, it’s clear there’s no PR or marketing voice at Atlas who has been enabled to make a proper impact at the scale needed.

I lost interest during the show of ignorance about "Magnematic" and "1015".  What N-scale modeler that's been doing it for a little while is so ragingly ignorant about Micro Trains couplers???  Then, bragging about the "highly detailed" weathered cars, while displaying them on vomitous Atlas Code80 trackage when they-themselves manufacture the 2nd best-looking Code55 trackage in the world.  Shows the place is run mostly by non-hobbyists, and/or non-N-scalers.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[nkalanaga]

For many railroads, 1974 IS "early diesel era".  That was 52 years ago, and most roads hadn't fully dieselized until the 1950s, so 20 to 30 years before 1974, depending on the road.

I model 1974.  It's definitely "period modeling" today.

[robertjohndavis]

For many railroads, 1974 IS "early diesel era".  That was 52 years ago, and most roads hadn't fully dieselized until the 1950s, so 20 to 30 years before 1974, depending on the road.

I model 1974.  It's definitely "period modeling" today.

I model the ‘70’s as well. It’s a great period to model but it’s not by any historical means “early diesel.” It’s 50 years into the diesel era.

As I am sure you know, there is an accepted generational progression rail historians go by. That is what I was reacting to, and something that should be baseline understanding for a manufacturer.

The First Generation of the diesel era lasted from the 1920’s until 1963.  “Early” usually refers to the beginning of that period. The Second Generation of diesels began with the Alco Centuries in 1963 (though some wags argue it began even earlier). That generation took a leap forward in 1972 with the “-2” tech, but the Third Generation was still a ways down the road.

The difference in assessment is that you are looking to set the era by total dieselization while historians look at technical development to mark the eras. Did the steam era begin with The Rocket in 1826? Or did it begin when the last horse pulling cars on rails retired (which was the 1970’s in the U.K.)?

Even if we are generous and start the clock with CNJ 1000, 1974 is 49 years deep into diesel locomotion and after the landmark -2.

Unless we have a realignment of historical perspectives (which happens, and maybe should in this case if your argument catches on) we have a standard.

And maybe it’s not a big deal, but taken with the totality of that video, it was just another point of concern for consumers about where Atlas is heading.