Actually within this hobby it seems most people accumulate equipment and never actually operate it beyond a test run.

I've waited upon many of "the accumulators"--whether plastic or brass, or both.

John

The best indicator of plastic/hybrid model train sales and pricing is currently www.modeltrainstuff.com

Their inventory is real time--if I buy it, the quantity available immediately decreases by one.

For anyone who thinks steam isn't popular--I respectfully suggest they check the website inventory.  A whole bunch of the best steamers are completely sold out at this time (including many Bachmanns), while diesels, particularly F units, and the latest/greatest thing, are in reasonably good supply.  When they had the Bachmann 2-6-0's and 2-8-8-4's (lettered versions), they both actually went quickly and in fairly significant numbers.

John

P.S.  A few years back, I was the 23-year old with a brass steam collection--then in my early 30's I sold them and put the money into our house.  Now at 43, I'd like to get back into the brass, but with kids, mortgage, cars...it will have to wait.  I enjoy the plastic stuff I do have at the present time, and am contemplating some brass East Wind passenger cars.

Also--brass diesels in particular have gone through a consistent price cycle.

The price is high when Overland releases them and everyone has to have one because it's the only way to get the latest/greatest version.

Then a year or two later, either when the real railroad buys a new model or a plastic manufacturer comes out with the same thing, the price on the Overland diesel plummets, and dealers can't get rid of the remaining inventory without some kind of discount.

The price then remains rather low from year 2 through perhaps year 5 after release.

By then they are all gone from the marketplace--and then, because nobody can find one if they want one, the price recovers and starts to head back up again, surpassing the new MSRP.

This curve has been going on this way for a good 20 years in the brass market.  It has happened time and time again with countless models--partly because the diesel fans are obsessed with having the absolute latest/greatest model.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Steam forever!

John born 1968

The PFM DRGW F-81 is a Crown model; as such its price was grossly inflated in the past.  It is a poor example to use for brass model prices or values, and comparing it to a Precision Scale F-81 is even worse, as in general the Precision Scale brass models tend to look pretty good but run poorly.  If a particular model's price falls it is usually because there is a problem with the model's accuracy (PFM exaggerated the boiler diameter by 10% on a number of engines to make them appear more impressive--this definitely included the M-75 4-8-2) or there is a known problem with running/quality control.  In general, brass models do not go down in value, but up.

Crowns in general no longer enjoy the mystique they once had, and have been somewhat surpassed in quality by newer runs; their value has remained relatively flat.  Years ago Crowns were highly prized as being the "cream of the crop" but those collectors are indeed the ones passing from the scene today--and the younger generation behind them prefers newer models, made in Korea, that are more highly detailed/individual engine specific--and in some cases do run better.

However, the Key/Samhongsa DRGW M-64 used to go for about $350 in mint condition; now that might be more nearly $450 or even more--but prices on those and similar models have not plummeted--they have remained fairly steady for many years.

I have actually bought and sold a lot of brass--at least more than 100 pieces.  I do in fact know a little bit about the values of the models at this point.  Though I personally lost some money on brass by excessive trading and/or buying the occasional defective locomotive (missing critical hidden pieces and thus unable to run correctly), I know for a fact that most people who bought brass have made a profit on their models.

I have been directly involved in the liquidation of brass collections that belonged to others--and the models held their value quite nicely--even after having been played with, even being "used".

I also mean no disrespect to the plastic or hybrid owners out there; right now I do not own any brass at all--so I'm in your crowd.

The asking price on some hybrids is now double what it was when they were new.  (MTH UP 4-12-2 currently on Ebay).  That alone will maintain brass values.

Respectfully submitted--

John

Interesting, very creative with the 2-10-4.  How nice to have that space on which to run the big mamma jamma's too!

I really really like the 3350 and 1553 up above.  The finished versions look fantastic.

My problem is I can't bring myself to take an articulated I love from road A and reletter it for road B.  Sometimes knowing the history makes it less fun.  

Then again, with the EM-1, at the present point in time, I don't even know what roadname, other than B&O, I would want to put on it.  A big harvest yellow "MEC" for Maine Central would be somewhat twisted of me to apply...

John

Yes, yes--I don't like Elesco feedwater heaters.

Give me Rio Grande, speed lettering, blue-green boiler (few alive know the real color for sure--at least the green on SP engines), with Worthington fwh.

A nicely painted M-78 was on the cover of RMC years ago.  It's a stunning model, and the image of that cover is burned into my brain--but I've never seen one, and have heard horror stories that they need work.

Still--the massive size of the Rio Grande mountains would make for a very impressive plastic version--and I've often dreamed it would come to pass.

However, the legions of B&O fans are also craving a proper 2-10-2, 2-8-2, or just about anything at all actually correct for B&O.

Santa Fe--most of the popular big steam has already been done in plastic, and I doubt a super 2900 model is yet to come because they're just so darn big--not everyone can run one.

The Alco 2-6-0 has opened my eyes toward the possibilities of smaller steam engines.  The mainline appears to have a much longer run when I put on a little 2-6-0 with a few cars and a caboose--and my son loves them--especially with the economically priced sound package.

I could appreciate a USRA 4-6-2, as well.

John

P.S.  Don't sweat the brass prices falling.  You run the stuff, enjoy it, and the nicely done, nicely upgraded stuff like you have will always be worth more.  The prices fall on PFM Crowns when new models of the same thing come out that blow the old version away, and the segment of the hobby that buys it simply because it is a Crown or because it says Tenshodo on the box is dying off.  My plastic EM-1 will not appreciate because there are plenty of them--even though it's a terrific engine--but the brass models generally make money for their owners if you buy smart in the first place.  Just don't overpay for them.  One loses money in brass by excessive trading, or by being impatient and wanting to sell it fast--as I have done.  If you are patient, hold the models for a few years (especially after any initial dip shortly after some are released) the price almost always goes up.  Even the marginal ones go for slightly more than the price 15 years ago.

I for one would love to see the Rio Grande 4-8-2 (any class of them) available in HO plastic or hybrid.  Living in the East I have hunted for the brass ones in the past, but have never seen some classes of them, and the comments I've read online about the work required to make them run right (other than the PFM Crown, which is just a bit noisy with the open frame motor) have scared me away from ever trying to buy one.

Also perhaps I'd love the B&O Q-4d mikado, or the B&O 2-10-2.  Or a nice 4-8-2 or 4-6-2 from one of the New England railroads, but without the smoke deflectors.

In my opinion, there are two other articulateds in the running, along with the B&O EM-1, for the title of "most beautiful" articulated ever built. They are the Western Pacific 4-6-6-4, which toiled in the Nevada desert, was rarely photographed, and is not as well remembered, and the other is the Seaboard Air Line/B&O 2-6-6-4.  Both were neat, and I'd kill to see either of them in plastic (especially since some brass versions of the WP Challenger are notorious for not being accurate--some were pretty generic D&H/WP/WM models with many common features that make none of them correct).

Finally, I would like to see another road number (besides 7627) of the 1945 order of B&O EM-1's.  The 1945 order, with the smaller cover over the front sand lines, is to me the best looking one.

Diesels--all the ones I care about have been done in plastic already, and at age 43, I'm actually purging diesels from the layout in favor of steam.  Only two diesels remain, an Atlas S-2 and a Bowser Alco Demo C-628.

John

ryeguyisme--

Lets get some facts correct:

First:  DRGW received the L-105 Challengers prior to the L-97 Union Pacific Challengers; the L-105's did not come along "after" the L-97 as seems to be implied by your post.  Some have claimed the Rio Grande modified the smokestacks on them but other than that they shipped them off to Clinchfield in more or less "stock" UP configuration.

Second: It was the middle of a war, and the War Production Board tacked the L-97 Challenger onto a Union Pacific order that was in the midst of production--thus saving critical setup time on the factory floor that would have been wasted in setting up to do a small production run of additional L-105's.

Third: There was nothing at all wrong with the UP Challengers, except they weren't the Rio Grande's own design, and they had somewhat less starting tractive effort--but the reason they didn't like them was because they were UP engines, pure and simple.

Also--it is well documented via a telegram sent from the Rio Grande to the DM&IR that the DM&IR Yellowstones, which Rio Grande leased during some winters, were the finest steam locomotives that ever ran on the Rio Grande, in the railroad's opinion.

Donelson and ryeguyisme and others who think brass is going to get cheaper--

You are absolutely dreaming if you think brass prices are going to collapse further than they already have.  I would love to smoke what you are smoking--because it's insanely good stuff.  Try finding the high quality late models (like for example the Rutland or New Haven engines pictured in the latest brass book) used--it's darn near impossible in some roadnames--they're just not out there to be had--or not at a reasonable price.

Not that many years ago I bought a mint Custom Brass 2-6-6-2 (Z-1a/L-76) for only $600 that ran great--but you will never be able to do that again as most articulateds, indeed most brass models of good quality, have appreciated quite nicely to significantly higher levels.

Given the few rare exceptions when someone is selling something they clearly do not know or appreciate, the only brass engines available cheap are those with known quality control issues that affect a portion of the model run, known mechanism problems, or older runs done in large quantities that need some work to get them up to today's running standards, etc.  On some of these prices have been flat for 15 years--but they aren't going any lower.

There are lots of well-detailed basket cases to be had and re-built, but I personally wouldn't touch them as I don't possess the modeling/kitbashing skills displayed above, and am unable to pay the fees charged by real craftsmen to fix 'em up to acceptable standards.

Regarding the BLI and MTH buyers trying Bachmann--we already did and are already here.  I love my one EM-1 and the Alco 2-6-0's.

John

I liked the Model RR News review of the EM-1.  They did say that some of the details that should be on the model, below the running boards, and above the trailing truck, were left off for the sake of trailing truck clearance.  Compromises have to be made, and I understand that.  It's still a nicely done engine.

Sheldon--

I didn't come right out and say it and should have for the sake of clarity, but my recollection has been that even in plastic/diecast, in many cases the rear engines of articulateds have still been fixed.  I've owned the Mantua 2-6-6-2, and it was a nice engine for the money, indeed with a fixed rear engine.

I never owned a Proto 2000 2-6-6-2 or 2-8-8-2 to know anything about them.  The one P2K Heavy 2-10-2 I tried was not good at all, so I sorta avoid P2K steam power, in general, though I might get an 0-6-0 if the right one comes along.

I no longer own the MTH (formerly Lionel HO) Challenger, but I thought the rear engine was fixed on it.  Perhaps my recollection is wrong.

Also, one need not spend a fortune on a nice articulated--the Oriental Limited/Powerhouse ones show up at train shows for as little as $250 depending on the roadname, in new/mint/hardly used condition--even in recent years.  The only thing is they are not loaded with detail as much as some would like--and the front engine's handrails are soldered up from brass and subject to breakage if mishandled, as seems so often to be the case with stuff dragged from show to show.  For that reason I haven't owned any lately--but nice ones can be found out there.

However, I have had the Powerhouse/Samhongsa ones apart, and the mechanism is the exact same mechanism as what Samhongsa was putting into the big dollar 1980's brass articulateds.  The only difference is the crank is soldered into position on the Powerhouse series and may be screwed onto the high dollar ones.  Also, by the late 1980's, Samhongsa offered (at least for and through W&R) delayed motion articulated gearboxes that allowed the one engine to start and slip before the other one just like a prototype mallet--those gearboxes were of course not available in the Powerhouse Series engines...but I digress from the topic at hand.

I did read the link, and it does clearly say that after lots of discussions no arrangement could be made.  I have to agree with Len.

Since the EBT Preservation Association was evidently leasing the railroad with an option to buy, it seems pretty crystal clear to me that whatever offer(s) might have been made to either A. buy the railroad outright or B. continue leasing/operating the line for this year was not acceptable to the owners.

Quote from: Atlantic Central on May 21, 2012, 12:58:21 PM
blwfish,

I don't mean to be argumentitive here, but for what it is worth, a great many modelers I know have 36" radius and larger curves on their layouts. And based on my conversations with them not one would prefer their articulated locos to be prototypically rigid in the rear, hinged only in the front.
Sheldon

Sheldon--

Most of the brass articulateds out there actually are prototypically correct in that the rear engine is fixed.  Also the outstanding hybrid Oriental Limited Powerhouse Series 2-8-8-2's, built by Samhongsa during the mid 1980's, all had fixed rear engines--and those models are and have been pretty common on the layouts of those of us who run articulated steam power.  Howard Zane has stated to me that he preferred the Oriental Limited/Samhongsa Powerhouse articulateds for day to day operation on his layout.

The Powerhouse Series 2-8-8-2's are easily capable of negotiating 28" radius mainline curves, and I think they can do smaller than that (I haven't had one for awhile).  However most other brass articulateds really do require large radius curves--much larger than 28".

At some point the limiting factor is not necessarily the mechanism, but details that get in the way of the pivoting rear engine.  The more details are added, the more having a fixed rear engine becomes necessary.

OP--The old Rivarossi engines had a number of compromises to allow 18" radius operation--including very deep flanges (too allow operation over uneven trackwork), sloppy valve gear, and likely slightly smaller driver diameter.  If one runs those old Rivarossi engines on 18" radius or even 22" radius, the plastic wheel centers fail in time (mine did) such that they start rotating on the axle, quickly getting out of quarter and binding up the entire mechanism.  The store I worked for had drawers full of brand new drive axles for those Rivarossi steamers--because we sold lots of replacements.  Most modelers today want a little bit more detail and better durability than those older models provided...

This is only hearsay, however, from what I have heard through the years, living in Central PA, it always seemed to me the owners had a somewhat inflated value in mind of what the railroad and related facilities were worth in cold hard cash.  I have heard the federal government did once make a reasonable offer to buy the railroad and turn it into a national park--they were allegedly turned down--and PA got Steamtown instead, built essentially from the ground up, as not much was left in Scranton from that era.  Building Steamtown from the ground up has always seemed somewhat ludicrous to many of us living in PA...though we do enjoy it...at least some of us.

As I read the announcement, my takeaway is that no purchase offer acceptable to the owners was made.

Perhaps another team will succeed in purchasing and preserving the line?

I must agree with everything Sheldon said here, though I haven't always agreed with him on other forums...



John

Opinions of others will differ, but once I put an EM-1 on the track nobody in my basement will be paying attention to any other trains that I might have on the mainline at the same time.  So for me the question would become (in plain DC) why on earth would I possibly want any other engine to share the mainline with an EM-1, unless it's another EM-1?

And this is coming from a long time Santa Fe/WP/UP/SP fan--not an "eastern road" guy at all.  My (former brass collector) friends (who expect outstanding locomotive performance) said the Bachmann EM-1 was a heck of a good engine at a heck of a good price.  I initially laughed that off, even as I was buying Athearn Genesis SP 4-8-2's, but I'm not laughing now--it's a great engine!  Bang for the buck!  More impressive than those little tiny girly-man 4-8-2's.

Respectfully submitted--

John

P.S. I also do own two Bachmann Alco 2-6-0's--also wonderful engines for the money.

Disclaimer:  the last line above "Respectfully submitted" was meant to be entirely facetious, perhaps mildly sarcastic, and only a reference to brute physical strength and nothing more.  In no way whatsoever was I making fun of any locomotive's (or human's) particular orientation.