ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 12, 2018, 02:08:18 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Please read the Forum Code of Conduct   >>Click Here <<
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  HO
| | |-+  Any suggestions for Bachmann's future models?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11 Print
Author Topic: Any suggestions for Bachmann's future models?  (Read 44732 times)
electrical whiz kid

View Profile
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2015, 07:52:13 PM »

Jim; we'd ALL like to see another Linda Hamilton.

All; I am not sure when, but Grandt models came out with a little box-cab that would be suitable for a switching layout.  When I was modeling HOn3, I had bought two; and the drives that went with them.  While I wouldn't recommend them for an eight year-old, they aren't out of the ability range of the average modeler.  I will possibly use them on a part of my new layout (if I ever get up off of my duff).  To those of you who knew of Malcolm Furlow, when he built the "San Jaun Central" he used two of them in tandem.

RIch C 
Logged
Trainman203

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2015, 09:41:25 PM »

Fix the mechanical problems with the Russian decapod, put a powerful motor in it , and reissue it.

Reissue the 63" driver 4-6-0.

Reissue the USRA mountains.

All of those are beautiful engines and presumably the tooling is still there.  Wouldn't take much.  

THEN ...... do some Harriman engines.  The Vanderbilt medium oil or coal  tender tooling already exists.
Logged

Modeling the New Iberia and Northern 1945
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: September 05, 2015, 08:35:04 AM »

You see then on eBay once in a while but the prices they ask is absolutely insane!
Marc

OMG Marc!  No doubt.  I recently saw one go as high as $30!

I wonder if Bachmann is reading this?  Huh?

Marc

No doubt; where my name appears, I can guarantee you the Yardmaster is. Roll Eyes

Jim; we'd ALL like to see another Linda Hamilton.
RIch C

I know right?!  Like who doesn't love Sarah Connor?!?!
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
alco9000fan


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 05, 2015, 03:31:21 PM »

jbrock27, not a fair deal at all. As I have seen them even around the $40-$60+ range depending if it was a new car with all the stirrups and what have you not. But mostly $30 is a good range to pay. Even harder to get nowadays is the Ambroid kit that was released in the 1960's. Most have either been built very maticulously and the people who did do then want an arm and a few legs at that. Unbuilt a are usually messed with more of them being partially assembled. I have been waiting for years for a reissue of that car, but I don't think we will see them soon. The USRA 4-8-2 didn't di me any good justice after I saw the Broadway Limited version of the UP MT-73. Which that's a whole new story to get on. Let's just say she may be going back for her 4th time in a row. But regardless the Broadway versions sold very quickly and we won't see the MT-73 for a while either.

One more model I can ask for is the Harriman 4-4-2 that MDC offered many moons ago. But they are scarce. Very very scarce. Bachmann made a good saddle tank in the Spectrum line so I have yet to get one and superdetail it with sound.

Good day all,
Marc.
Logged
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: September 05, 2015, 04:20:16 PM »

But mostly $30 is a good range to pay.
Marc.

LOL!  I don't even pay $30 for a brand new in the box currently produced car.  Sometimes not even that much for a diesel, powered loco, LOL! Smiley
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
rogertra


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: September 05, 2015, 06:37:23 PM »

Just maintain the Spectrum standards.

AFAIC, the dropping of the Spectrum standards is a backwards step.

The Spectrum 2-8-0 raised the RTR bar to a new high standard that all manufacturers had to step up to.

This seeming abandonment of the Spectrum range is a backwards step towards the toy train market.

Cheers

Roger T.
Logged

electrical whiz kid

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: September 05, 2015, 10:27:32 PM »

Roger;
I would be underselling Bachmann's efforts if I were going to say a "step backwards" is bad.  Not necessarily so.  Personally, I would like to see a stripped-down engine, especially the 2-8-2 they are coming out with; at least as a pilot for this concept.  I tell you why:  Again, personally, I do a good amount of super-detailing (at least that's what I call it.)  And a lot of the detail that goes on at Kader factory is ultimately in the way.  It can also be pretty sub-standard, but that's grain for another feed bag.  A modeler could then pick and choose their prototype and the parts they will need from where they choose.  I know this isn't a "one size fits all" deal,. but it is simply my thoughts.

Rich C.
Logged
J3a-614

View Profile
« Reply #22 on: September 06, 2015, 01:19:26 AM »

I still want a C&O Greenbriar, which has thus far only been made in brass, however I know that Bachmann currently produces 3 or 4 4-8-4's so I'l concede that it is unlikely.

As a strong C&O fan, I would second the Greenbriar!  Alas, it's also an engine on 74-inch drivers, a different size from the 70-inch (N&W J, USRA 4-8-2s) and 80 inch (ATSF, NYC, and SP 4-8-4s, PRR 4-6-2) that Bachmann makes, so you are looking at a locomotive that is all new and expensive.

In the line of smaller power, a stock Baldwin 2-8-0, either a 50-inch drivered late 19th century version (M&PA light 2-8-0) or a newer version (used on Sierra Railway and other roads) would be a good choice.  These engines, with at least one Alco counterpart, were essentially "stock" locomotives used by a number of railroads, as would be a smaller 4-6-0 along the lines of Sierra No. 3.  Some of these machines even wound up on Class I roads, either as locomotives purchased in the 19th century or as engines inherited when some regional and short line roads were merged into a larger system.  

M&PA No. 26, one of four such locomotives on the M&PA:

http://www.algonet.se/~cheklof/bilder/mapa-s26.jpg

http://www.maparailroadhist.org/locos/loco26.htm

No. 23, rebuilt with Southern valve gear:

http://www.maparailroadhist.org/locos/loco23.htm

New Hope & Ivyland 40 (modern 50-inch drivered Baldwin 2-8-0)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hope_%26_Ivyland_40

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8407/8702786783_3938c28495_z.jpg

http://www.toytrains1.com/images/trains/nhrr-02.jpg

And near twin Sierra 28 (48 inch drivers):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/P8060020.jpg/600px-P8060020.jpg

http://www.sierrarailroad55.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/sierra28jamestown1940.jpg

Huntington & Broad Top 38 has a straight boiler (little or no taper) and 51 inch drivers, but is otherwise similar to the previous two examples:

http://www.everettrailroad.com/railfans/38.aspx

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/consolidation/hbtm38-mainey.jpg

Examples of both designs ran on the Baltimore & Ohio, in the form of engines inherited from the Coal & Coke Railroad.  Western Maryland had some of the light version, too.  No doubt there were others.

Who can fill in on some of those  other roads?

« Last Edit: September 06, 2015, 02:27:47 AM by J3a-614 » Logged
J3a-614

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: September 06, 2015, 02:51:43 AM »

Going the other way, I do wonder how Bachmann decided to produce the B&O EM-1.  Although the smallest of the 2-8-8-4s used in the US, it's still a huge locomotive--and it's been selling like hotcakes from some of the comments elsewhere on the site.  

I would say this big, classic Baldwin needs company in the form of the 60 or so EL class 2-8-8-0s B&O rostered in classes EL-1 through EL-6.  I would stay with the true B&O engines in EL-1, 2, 3, and 5 classes and appropriate subclasses (the others were second hand jobs and/or rebuilds).  Like a USRA 2-8-8-2 or 2-6-6-2, these machines, while large, are not nearly as enormous as a Big Boy or an Allegheny.  They often worked secondary routes that never saw an EM-1 or even a Big Six (2-10-2).  

Photo examples are all of engines which were rebuilt to simple operation, which is how most of them ended up.

http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15330coll22/id/48372

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/bo7117sa.jpg

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/bo7154sa.jpg

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/bo7147sa.jpg
« Last Edit: September 06, 2015, 02:54:58 AM by J3a-614 » Logged
Skarloey Railway

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: September 06, 2015, 08:49:01 AM »

If the new 4-4-0 proves a success I'd like to see a stock Baldwin mogul to go with it.

On another line, I'd like a General Electric box cab with remote control pantographs. No specific prototype.
Logged
Len

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 06, 2015, 09:10:47 AM »

How about a New Haven EP-3 'Flatbottom'?

The mechanism would essentially be the same as the GG-1, with a box body. The end trucks would need to be pulled in a scale 4" to be completely accurate, but I doubt most people would notice if they weren't.

And before you say it wouldn't sell, keep in mind the New Haven scheme of someone else's DL-109 outsold all the other schemes put together. The NH has a world wide following, this is a pic of a hobby shop proprietor in Helsinki taken by a pilot friend of mine, who's also a model railroader:



Even he carries a lot of New Haven locos and rolling stock in his shop.

Len
Logged

If at first you don't succeed, throw it in the spare parts box.
Trainman203

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 06, 2015, 10:13:33 AM »

Specific engines for specific roads are a bad marketing idea, no matter how much one may love the road or the engine.  I'm neither a PRR or a NYC fan, but the K4 and the Hudson appear to be the only specific engines over many long years of model railroad history that have consistently sold well in large numbers .... Engines from big roads in a densely populated market area.  One might put the gg1 and the daylight   4-8-4 in that bag too.

I myself have no use for any of those engines but I understand marketing and money.  I know that I'll never see an MP 2-8-0 or ten wheeler offered by anyone.  Even though the MP too has followers across The Pond.  And I know that from now till eternity we will always see a k4 or NYC Hudson on the shelves.  Or a gg1, a Daylight, or even a Big Boy ...... How many of those appropriate-for-only-the-biggest-layout engines have been put out for sale?

The reason  I suggested that Bachmann reissue some of their earlier steam engines is that they sold well and the tooling is there. They are generic enough to suit many roads, as would be Harriman engines if offered.

« Last Edit: September 06, 2015, 10:15:46 AM by Trainman203 » Logged

Modeling the New Iberia and Northern 1945
Trainman203

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 06, 2015, 10:29:45 AM »

To all of you modelers that want to see electric locomotives offered ........ do you have catenary on your layout?  What percentage of layouts have catenary?  Or is everyone happy running overhead powered electrics on the model railroad version of the air guitar, an "Invisible Friend"? 
Logged

Modeling the New Iberia and Northern 1945
Skarloey Railway

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 06, 2015, 11:33:24 AM »

Pass. No layout to run anything on. Or should I say I have an 'air' layout and 'air' locos running on it. Cheesy

But if I did run electric locos it would be because I was modelling a RR with catenary.

Logged
Trainman203

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 06, 2015, 11:44:50 AM »

That's good.  I had an air layout for years.  But actually, at least putting up the poles, , with no catenary,,is better than nothing.  We've done telephone poles like that for years.  Why not catenary?

We had an " interurban" in my hometown from 1912 to 1917 before it flopped.  I've sometimes thought of modeling it.
Logged

Modeling the New Iberia and Northern 1945
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!