I don't understand why your company chose not to include flywheels on your latest diesels, (except for the 44 tonner which is too small and I understand that) the GP 7, RS 3 and any steamers you make should all have flywheels.  They are a necessity in N scale due to the lightness of the locomotives.  It allows the locomotive to coast over slight/minor electrical interuptions, (which are bound to happen even with the best pickup available) we are not talking huge flywheels, and are not looking for coasting effects, we are looking at smoothing out the motor pulses when the motor doesn't get consistant electrical pickup.   Please tell you engineers that including them is a requirement.   I myself will not ever purchase locomotives that are not equipped with them.

For an information point of view and a prototype speed afictionado one of the best (if not the best) locomotives in N scale ever made was made by your company.

Thats right, and that model was ER's Sharknose, it had quite a good gear reduction, large flywheels, and was (is) the smoothest models I own bar none.  Puts all the other models to shame in regards to scale speeds, switching speeds, and smooth gradual acceleration.

You would be well rewarded with sales if you would just mimic the design of this particular locomotive.  I have 12 of them.   With a dcc decoder the speed range is so right, so correct, I don't even have to mess with the speed tables *Unless the decoder is out to lunch)

Some folks think they are noisy, they are on pulse, they quiet down on smooth dc or dcc.   What that tells me is you would need to tighten the tolerances down somewhat, because whats making the noise is slight rattling of the drive train because the tolerances are a bit too loose.

At the production numbers you guys put out, flywheels shouldn't be excluded, and if you want to keep selling me locomotives and guys like me whom enjoy the best operation with a minimum of fuss. 

  Flywheels:  please tell your engineers that they need to include them in all locomotives, not just the spectrum.   

Rob 40 years in model railroading most of which was in N scale.

Will the new RS 3 come with flywheels?, also
Did the GP7 have flywheels?

This is important for me!

Rob

    You guys are making finely detailed steam, and diesels.  Everything else in the bachmann line looks like toys in  comparison.   Is anyone looking at upgrading the rest? 

  The plasticville line looks like something we had back in the 70's.
  Freight cars? between model power and bachmann I dont know which is on the bottom of the barrel details wise.

Rob

 You guys keep this up in N scale and you'll be the leader in this scale.  ((you are already in the steam department)

  My only issue with the tenders is for the price you could of had magnetic couplers, instead.   I haven't had them out of the box yet, but there is a few model power steamers slated to get them. maybe one of the old riviarossis or concor units too if I can turn the wheels down.

Rob

Hello Bachmann,

  Please send this to the chain of command for a product suggestions: Thank you.

    Now that you have a very good heavy Mountain chassis may I suggest you utilize it to creat a New York Central Mohawk, which has never been done in N scale in plastic.   All you would need to do is manufacturer the boiler, cab, tender to get there, along with the appropiate details like the lead and trailing trucks.  In looking at this again, the Mohawk had 69 inch drivers, I believe your mountain has 63"  maybe this would be the best idea.  but then again who knows?  Maybe a survey would answer that.

  Suggestion number 2:
There is a good market for New York Central hudsons (all versions)  The concor units are long in tooth, poorly running (most of them anyway) and poor representations of the prototype.  You could do the Chassies,  Make all variations of wheel types,  Cast three different boilers/cabs, the oriiginal non streamlined version, the bullet nose hudson, and the Empire state express.   Additionally you could also make the pt4 tender which was used on many of the New York Central engines as well as some other railroads.

Note:  there is a serious demand for these, as one could observe on ebay,they don't last long and command premium prices.   

Another suggestion:  The Niagra, it hasn't been done in plastic either, and since it used the PT4 tender, you would already have the tooling done (as per the NYC hudson used it also.   be aware that the Central switched tenders on various units during their lifetimes.   This would maximize you use of the tooling, and since they are great sellers yield a bigger profit than
just producing a single prototype.

Another suggestion: and although I am not a Pennsy modeler, here is an opportuniity to jump on an opportunity.    Kato is coming out with Pennsy passenger cars, for the GG1 many of which were once pulled by the Pennsy
K4 Pacifics.    If you make the Pacifics, the passenger cars will already be available to the market place.    Its nice that the GG1 is going to be made, but my concern is how many Pennsy modelers are going to buy them, because they Require the overhead wiring to attain any semblance of realism.   The K4 will fix that, in that the catenary will not be required.  Given the choice of the two, if I was a Pennsy modeler, not having to build catenary and using the K4 instead would be a viable alternative.

Your use of metal boilers with added details are what was needed in N scale,  good show keep up the good work. and please, do send the above information to the teams responsable for the decision making processes.

Robert

 

Ques 1.  I understand that Bachmann was contracted to manufacture the ER models sharks is this correct?

Ques 2.  If the answer is yes, (and I hope it is) then bachmann please tell your product development team that these locomotives are the best running N scale models in the industry Period.  No one comes close, they start about 1 mph smoothly, and increase speed (like a turbine engine) all the way to their top speed of 80 mph.  (so they are what 5 mph faster than the prototype maybe?)   What makes them so great is the motor and gear reduction combination.  I wouldn't change a thing.  Anyone whom thinks they are too slow, needs to switch to slot car racing.  As for noise the choice of power pack makes all the difference.
  In effect these sharks running characteristics are how all N scale diesel models should run.

Ques 3.  If you are going to keep manufacturing the line, perhaps you can get digitrax to put out the original dcc decoder they made for it a few years ago.
 

Rob
40 year model railroader.

to making good running reasonably priced steam.   

The new 482 has received great reviews from those whom purchased them.   Support Bachmann and show them
we are serious about steam in N scale.

Rob

   Are finially getting the system of making N scale steam.

You've had limited success with the 280, moderate success with the light 482, and now according to the reviews
your 482 heavy had made great leaps in performance.  I also noticed you've revamped the NW 484 and they too are
having good reviews.   Congradulations on your successes.  Keep up the good work.   Now if you can get a motor for
the 210 0 and 460 you guys will be on a roll.

N scale needs a manufacterer that is serious about making quality steam. Prior to this Athearn was the only one
driving in the home run.   We can now add Bachmann to the team.  Modelers are serious about steam in N please
keep up the good work.

Rob de rebel