Spectrum Passenger Cars

[Kevin Strong]

...Not much of a hobby for those like me who like to build rather than just operate...

What's keeping you from building? There's no lack of detail parts, wheels, trucks, etc. I'd argue the RTR stuff we're seeing has been a boon to the scratchbuilder/kitbasher, since it provides an ever-broadening array of "starting points." The 2nd-hand market is ripe for the picking for those looking for bits and pieces at discount prices. The more you build, the deeper your spare parts bin gets, which saves you even more money. (To say nothing of being able to trade with other modelers whose scrap bins overfloweth.)

Later,

K

[Skarloey Railway]

I'm with you about Bachmann supplying components to make different cars, but I'm afraid it's not going to happen. They tried it before with their kits and their last boxes are still gathering dust at stockists shelves. I enjoyed bashing them, but most modelers now have nor the time nor the inclination to build things. That's why I think that, to keep costs down, Bachmann could produce new cars with a maximum of existing parts (trucks, etc), finished on the outside but with simple inside detail, which is difficult to see anyway - who can see the Spectrum caboose interior? If someone wants inside detail it can build it, or order it separately.

I think that's not wholly true. I agree that large scale modellers seem not to want to do too much modelling and prefer running their favourite trains in the garden rather than following a particular prototype or even creating something that looks like a real railroad. However, in the smaller scales, it's a different case and people do seem willing to spend time over their creations.

Perhaps it makes sense. After all, why go to great effort to kit/scratch build a perfect Carter Bros passenger car if it's going to stand next to a 1 to 1 scale garden pond.

[Larry Green]

To S Ry, I disagree with you. Hardly a car or engine on my Belden Falls Ry is straight out of the box. In fact, many are hard to identify as to origin, and all are custom lettered. Even my live steam locos costing many $$s get the treatment. Many large scalers I know who may not go to my degree of kitbashing or scratch building do follow a theme, buying and running equipment that follows a logical plan.

I agree that any new 1:20.3 passenger cars should be different that what is out there now, and with most of the other points already mentioned.

The razor saw and styrene are ready to go---

Larry

[Chris9017]

Overall, honestly, I think we should get 1:20.3 scale Spectrum coaches for narrow gauge but something different from Jackson Sharp.

[WillBeck]

Carter Bro's coaches would be my vote as well. Nice to see something different than what is available, yet compatible.

I think they would sell extremely well, i know i would pick up a coach and combine immediately.

Also, offer undecorated, and west coast NG lines. Pacific Coast, and others come to mind.

[Marilyn]

I do not care what brand (J&S), Carter or prototype they follow, though I would agree to something a little different as long as the cars are truely 1:20.3 in proportion. 

[WillBeck]

I wonder if Bachmann has any input?

[glennk28]

I would say at least the same range as the long cabpoose--

I would first want to go with an RPO-Baggage, and a coach with optional bay window--tobe able to run a train similar to the Chili Line abd other short/mixed trains.   Or to "test the waters, a combine with  an optional cupola--I have seen the Accucraft cars and think they are too long for me. 
Glenn Joesten

[glennk28]

Another possible extension from a Combine could be a "What-If"-A "Colorado Rail Annual" recently, covering the narrow gauge passenger cars--showed a proposal  for a motorcar from a combine similar to the one that was converted from a standard gauge car.   

[Chuck N]

Glenn:  the Accucraft passenger cars are scale correct.  If Bachmann did similar cars in the Spectrum series they would be the same length.  Chuck

[glennk28]

I didn't say they weren't--just that they are BIG! and msny modelers might find them bigger than they think--and pass them by.  gj

[steamrusty]

Hey,
in an other thread I votet for the short Sierra overtons just like the Delton/Aristo Classic, but in 20,3. These cars would be fit to all layouts.
steamrusty

[JerryB]

The Sierra RR cars are standard gauge. They would be inappropriate orphans if done in 1:20 scale, 45mm gauge.

I think most folks working in 1:20 scale are also interested in prototypes or at least 'could have beens,' not something that is so far afield.

BTW, the Sierra cars are among my favorites. I frequently visit Railtown 1897 where the Sierra cars are stored and (very slowly) undergoing restoration. Having them available in 1:20 scale, 70.6mm gauge would be fantastic, but will never happen. I do have enough information to scratch build them should I live long enough!

Happy (Scale Model) RRing,

Jerry

[Skarloey Railway]

How do the Uintah passenger cars compare in length to most other cars. I see from one source the had a 30' combine and other cars at 42'6". Given the constraints of that line I doubt they'd have anything long.

[Marilyn]

The Unitah #50 is a bit shorter as I remember.  Car number 50 was pretty unique being metal sheathed and a combination of baggage/rpo and observation. 

The C&S had a few 'shorties' as well, one combination car still survives.

Personally some of the most beautiful equipment was the early Colorado Central Billmeyer and Small duckbill cars.