What say ye?

[brakie]

Guys,I was looking over the new and older releases and I can not get over what is being offered in the highly detail engines and cars..
As many of you know I model the C&O in 1965/66 and the Chessie(c&o) and C&HV in 78/79. I will be adding some PRR units to my 65/66 C&O era..I try to stay focus on my 2 eras.

I find it very hard not to buy some of the newer units such as the SD70 with the Spartan cabs in NS or CR and other units along that line and of course the many modern freight cars being offered..

My questions:

1.Do you find it hard to stay focus on your era with the more modern road name cars,engines(like the SD70,SD80/90sMACS) and newer paint schemes being offered that does not fit your era?

2.How about the older units? Do you find yourself looking at those to even though they might not fit your era or road?

3.With the operating roller bearing trucks and the KD 78 scale couplers.Do you find yourself wanting to upgrade your freight car fleet to these trucks and couplers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To answer my own questions I find it very hard to stay focus on the era of C&O/Chessie(c&o) and of course my C&HV..I have given deep thoughts on using the operating roller bearing trucks and 78 couplers on the cars I will be using on my layout..

I know and realize this is a hobby where we are free to buy and run what we will but,still I wonder want you guys do about this dilemma.Or is it just me?

 

[Ray Marinaccio]

All the new stuff are out of my price range, so it's not a problem for me.

 

[Flangehead]

I am like most model railroaders, I suppose, because I like to model the 1950's for the steam and diesel variety of that period.
I don't really covet the later stuff. I like it, but I like the earlier stuff more. It's the same with roadnames. If it's not N&W,PRR,WM
B&O or RDG, I can do without it. I am not that much of a purist, though. I occasionally run a GG1 down the line without an overhead wire. I really like the GG1, but the wires would be too much trouble on my current pike. In my dream pike, which I may or may not ever build, I would like to have a mainline of catenary on at least a portion of the pike.
As to the trucks, friction bearings were most common my era, roller bearings were starting to appear. The older trucks in use on my pike roll almost too well anyway, so I will not be changing them.

Nice topic

 

[sumpter250]

Era.......................
The Cindys Harbor FT A, and B units are running on roller bearing trucks. The Western Pacific units are not. A CH BL20-2 brought the local in, that had the Gauge box car in it, along with some gauge containers. Most probably a CH consolidation will run the local back to the NY&A interchange. When the damaged containers are repaired and ready to leave the SHS&D shops, the new, outside frame 2-8-2, will most likely be the power chosen for the run.
Most of my trains, run on the modular layout I am part of. There's no "required" era, so, there will be slide valve steam,on one track, running with SD80MACs, on the other.
My only concession to era is to ensure that rolling stock falls within the time period of the locomotive, and, that if a caboose is required, it also matches the time period of the consist.
My Grandmother lived in a small town on Long Island, that was established in 1656. I remember being there for part of the tercenteniary celebration. many of the homes, and buildings were from the earlier years, so seeing modern equipment in a setting of old structures isn't strange to me. (I know, there are older things in Europe, and the rest of the world).
I would think twice before running a modern freight loco, and 200 ton hoppers, across a wood truss bridge, anachronisms are one thing, violating physics......that's another.

 

[Ralph]

All right then!

1. Aye, no....If it came later than 1975 I'll not be buyin' it laddie!

2. Sure but those steamers look moighty foine to me but na' lettered for the Penn Central!

3. Weeeelllllllllll, maybe now...when funds allow!

Good topic Brakie!
Ralph

 

[60103]

My era is quoted as "British railways, 1829-1959", but I do have a few things that are later than 1959. Funny, I don't seem to have much that is earlier. I also have enough non-British stuff to run a separate layout.

 

[Mastiffdog]

Brakie,

I model the 1900's to 1945 era, but I like all of the locos, both steam and diesel. I have a handful of locos well out of my era, but I still run them when no one is watching them except me. I use #5 kadees on most everything that rolls ...

Love the questions ... keep 'em coming!


Dog

 

[Russ Bellinis]

When I operate on the modular club layout, I run Santa Fe in the fifties. I like some modern freight equipment, but I don't like unit trains. I also like Alcos, so I'm thinking of doing some Arkansas & Missouri. At home I plan to build an "L" shaped switching layout that will feature L.A. Junction.

 

[sumpter250]

anachronisms are one thing, violating physics......that's another.

Shows you what era I'm in!
Today that would be: anachronisms; a dollar three eighty,
violating physics; priceless

 

[Gary Pfeil]

I model the early fifties, but have no luck restricting myself to it. My goal when the layout is complete is to be able to run trains correct in era, but I'll run anything I like in between operating sessions. This "business end" view of the helix, NYC main around it, and NYC eastend staging below show trains of three different eras. Only the geeps on the lower level staging are correct for my era. The 20th Century is from 1938, I believe all those streamlined locos had their shrouding removed by the mid forties. the 20th Century had E7's by 1948. The Susquehanna units are from the nineties. I bought them because they ran by a house I lived in then so I saw them all the time. Other than the Susie Q units, I only have a GP20 that is beyond the fifties. Oh yeah, several C-424s as well. Well, at least I've contained myself to roads in the New Jersey/New York area. I'd like to do a SD90 in NYC lightning stripes someday.

 

[mhdishere]

I personally have no problem avoiding the modern stuff, I model late 40's-early 50's and 100% steam. (In fact I'd probably back-date to pre-war if I could find reasonably priced vehicles for that era). I have some cars that don't really belong in my era, but they're still 40 foot box-cars, just with built-dates later than I'd like. I just got a shipment of MDC Harriman cars (which I understand were run on the west coast) but I think they're perfect for commuter service in my NJ-based layout, so after a paint job that's what they'll do. I also have some Bowser hopper cars with arch-bar trucks, someday they'll be changed, but I have bigger fish to fry right now (like building the layout!).

All that said, if I liked the modern stuff I'd have no problem running it, it's my layout, it exists (or will exist) to make me happy and provide me with fun. If it bothers anyone to see my anachronisms they're invited not to look.

 

[jon-monon]

I'm with Ray, the new stuff's out of my price range, but I sort of run into the same thing on a different level. I model transition era with an emphasis on early diessel and industiral loco's. I ran into a deal on an SW1500 which is 10 or 15 years too new, but I'll run it anyway. Still looks good, and basically similar to an older EMD SW. Someday I might make it into a boxcab or interurban or something, meanwhile it is what it is. I also reserve the right to run anything I want to from time to time to get my jollies. I have some Fleishmanns that are clearly out of place, but are certainly flavorful and fun.

 

[Russ Bellinis]

I might add that I wasn't interested in modern equipment until BNSF started rebuilding their old mechanical reefers with the new Carrier-Transicold Ultima 53 refrigeration units. Since I work on those units, I need to model some of them. Fortunately, the prototype cars that BNSF rebuilt are the Athearn 57" mechanical reefer, and A-Line has come out with a modern Carrier reefer that is actually a "Pheonix Advantage." I can make it look like an Ultima 53 with paint.