I'm pretty sure the market size for N scale locos is smaller than for HO, hence less room for profit when making different types, and less locos on the market as a result. All I can say is I'll be very happy if someone comes out with an updated F40PH . . . maybe an N scale version of the HO unit that Kato just announced?
Perhaps not. Since N scale allows for prototypical length trains to be operated without needing an airplane hanger for a big enough layout, more locos per train can be used in less space.
I used to buy the blanks of certain diesels because I wanted six or so of them. As an example, the GP-7s were everywhere on the NYCS, they even ran on the P&LE, together with the P&LE's own GP-7s (the GP-7 was the mainstay of the P&LE's road fleet). Thus, I bought numerous blank Atlas NYC GP-7s. One thing that I like about the IM is that they offer four road numbers, where appropriate (they are not C-C, so if the road in question had only one or two, that is all that they do). If more manufacturers would offer four numbers, I would buy certain items in all the numbers. Changing numbers is not that big a deal to me. There are times when I must avoid running a factory-numbered unit with one that I decalled (or re-decalled). The reason for this is that one of the things on which model manufacturers and decal manufacturers will never agree is the size of numbers and letters. This often works ou for me as I usually run my diesels in pairs. I do not often run them singly, except for switchers. I VERY rarely run them in motive power consists of three, four or five units.
The question here is why offer just two numbers in non-DCC and two different in DCC? Why not four of each? This would reduce the already low chance of damage whilst doing shell swaps to zero at the retailer level (those of a like mind to do so, that is). Also, for people like myself who have a couple of 'odd' roads to join in with friends that model those different roads, it increases the option of having a different number to theirs without anyone having to go to the trouble of patching, repainting, renumbering, etc. As already pointed out, the differences between lettering on models of different manufacturers can be quite noticable and also between the model and decal manufacturers, let alone proto versus the model. BN is a good example with the road numbers being so big than any discrepancy becomes noticable amongst factory numbered and decalled unnumbered units if the decal sheet is different to the factory lettering. Soo units are another but primarily in regards to the SOO on the long hood and the cab numbering. There is a specific font for this and it is available from the SLH&TS site but it appears several variations of the font exists between model and decal manufacturers. As for unnumbered units, I think a great solution would be to provide a separate small decal sheet for numbering the unit and number boards in the same font/style used on the factory decorated units. At least they would be the same next to each other regardless if they are correct or not. The biggest issue I see with the numberboards is getting a number small enough to fit into them, particularly the undersized Kato ones. Being able to see light through them is a nice touch but not important to me so painting and numbering the boards is not a problem, the size of number is. George, I don't think you are the only N Scaler that thinks that way, but you may be the only retailer that does. I'm certain there would be a majority that would buy more than two models if given the option of more numbers and had the budget to do so. Personally, it would be a toss up based on where I would use them. If in a club situation there would be the possibility of two or more of the same number on the layout at one time, then I would lean towards a different number to those manufactured - just to be different. Otherwise, for home use the factory jobs would be fine. The downside? Probably too many locos in the end! So, are we being 'gypped'? Not really. Atlas has made great strides to come closer to the options available to the HO market. Unnumbered units, second and third runs that come at a reasonable time after the previous, and the willingness to try something different (ALCo, Baldwin, F-M, etc) sets them apart. As I see it, the next step for them is to mirror the number availability that Intermountain has begun. Having four numbers to choose from may give them 10-20% more sales but gives us modellers 100% more choice! Now, if Kato comes aboard as well....
Well, I am among the "include the decals" camp, and I've pleaded my case many times on the Atlas board. Unfortunately, Atlas' answer is that they don't want to be in the decal business. Microscale, which has to be one of the most unaware companies in the history of business, also doesn't play the game for whatever reason. I propose a company that would have to be privvy to the manufacturers plans through a Non-disclosure agreement that would produce a "mini-cal" set to go with each release of locomotive and car. (as a separate sell item) And this is not a generic set mind you, but specifically tailored to that model. For example, the lighted numberboards would look right-on when applied and all the fonts would (thoeretically) match since they came from the same source. Each minical (1/4 of a decal sheet) could probably do around 10 locomotives or 20 cars. (or more in certain cases like unit coal trains or containers) Interestingly, Atlas refuses to do unnumbered freight cars. Had they done an unnumbered UFIX coalveyor, they would have saved me and George a lot of hassle. Of course there's no decal available...big surprise. BTW, just thought I would give mention to one company who has addressed this issue somewhat. N-Scale of Nevada has announced "overlay" decals to renumber the recent Micro-Trains enclosed Autorack. Of course, they didn't announce this until after the Autoracks were announced and orders filled, which means the only people who may buy their product are those who purchased a bunch of the autoracks. Oh, and the overlay won't be out for a month or so. Interesting timing, but I applaud the idea and the effort. That's the spirit!
As for offering more roadnumbers--how well does IM's tunnel motors sell, with their SIX road numbers apiece? Perhaps Paul, Cory, et-al are listening? If a DCC-friendly unit, say a GP30 in say, Rio Grande was offered in 6 numbers, I'd be hard-pressed to come up with the cash to get all 6, but I would likely do so!
I definitely would buy more locos if they were numbered but I really think that it would be a great idea to offer a decal sheet with un-numbered models - the best of both worlds. Brian
Exactly! In the case of the Atlas BN GP-38, your choices are 2161 and 2175 - I would suggest the same loco (paint scheme and road name and all the other smaller decals/reporting marks/etc) with the one exception that the road number either be totally removed (probably best idea) or only have the "21" portion already on. The included decal sheet would either have sets of four numbers (2100 series, or whatever the GP38 numbering series are) or sets of two (where you add your favorite last two digits - probem here is alignment & spacing). Yes there is the problem of matching the number font/size/color exactly, but it's not rocket science. In my case, when I put DCC decoders inside these LL GP's, I took the time to renumber two of them for addressing ease
When asked, I was told it is an inventory thing that keeps the number down. I think it's just laziness. I asked MicroScale to put out a number sheet for each new locomotive, with the entire engine number instead of individual. At least we would only have to put on one decal, instead of four or so, and also get the alignment right! Of course, now I just laser some typewriter decal sheets for stencils and then air brush the numbers. Takes me about 5 minutes to do a lokie! Tony Burzio San Diego, CA
I'm still trying to grock the concept of an "$800" train. Yes, If I _was_ running a train that cost that much I would want my numbers to be unique. My own plans are to create "number boards" and fasten them to the engines. The SVRR is not concerned about image, to quote the company president, "You will buy our product because it is the best, not because it it is pretty" yep, he really said that.
The problem is that many manufacturers don't understand the N Scale Market. While "HO" in total has larger sales than N Scale, HO takes in a great deal of territory.... all the cheap starter trainsets and other low end equipment that is almost totally absent from N Scale. The N Scale Market in total resembles the HO "quality" market segment... the Athearn Genesis, Bachmann Spectrum, Atlas, LifeLike Proto2000, Intermountain and Kato end of things. One difference is that N Scalers tend to buy in fleets.... IMHO you can't sell locos in any combination less than a normal lashup...which means a MINIMUM of 3 units...and 6 would be better, especially if it were a follow-up release a few months later to allow the credit cards to cool down. We N Scalers like to RUN our power!!!! Charlie Vlk
Here! Here! I tend to think in "normal" sizes. I have two SD40-2s on my roster, I want about 4 to run together, maybe 6 total. I buy my coal haulers in the sense of 3 per train. I just wish I could get a 4th run of Kato C44-9Ws. I missed the last release as I wasn't back into the hobby yet.
Charlie: Your comments are right on. However it shocks me that Atlas is missing this opportunity so extensively. They offer 4 road numbers in HO but only 2 in N. I think it really should be the other way around. I never saw only 2 ATSF SD-24s or SD-26's pulling the York Canyon coal train. Four on the point and two to three at mid train (with a RCC) were the norm. I'd also like to have the cars to make up that train if Athearn would re-release them from the MDC line in some substantial additional road numbers.
I agree with Charlie completely--well said! But if I were a model railroad supplier, and I saw that 80 percent (or so) of revenues came from HO, then I'd invest 80 percent (or so) of my resources in that scale. If I could be convinced that investing a greater percentage in N scale would have a great (and almost certain) return on investment, then I'd invest more in N scale. I used to make these kinds of decisions for computer companies, which operated on a much grander scale (and typically lost on any "bets"). Small lot manufacturers have to be conservative. I doubt there's a "disruptive technology" out there in the small hobby market that would turn things upside down.
I have mixed feelings - one the one hand I agree with all that's been said, and Charlie's perceptive response is on the money. On the other hand, however, my wallet's glad I can only buy 2 units at a time. Why make Atlas and Kato rich, after all?
On a items other than locomotives. I was looking through a sale listing the other day. An HO Jordan spreader, a basic piece of MOW equipment. On sale for less than $20.00. The only Jordan spreader ever available in N has been in brass. Currently available at under $280.00. Feel cheated? Frank
Perhaps not. Since N scale allows for prototypical length trains to be operated without needing an airplane hanger for a big enough layout, more locos per train can be used in less space. </font>[/QUOTE]I have to agree with Kisatchie. I operate trains with 2 to 4 loco's. If I had a HO layout on the same amount of space a train with that many loco's wouldn't look right. N scale allows me to purchase more locos than HO would for my available layout space. I do agree that the HO market is much larger, but are that many purchasing 4 road numbers of the same unit for the majority of the units sold compared to N-scale? I have a terrible time cutting the little numbers off the decal sheet, why there isn't more space between rows I dont' understand. Most of the time I get a piece of the number from below or above on the loco. As for number boards, LOL, for me that hasn't happened with success yet. I just cover the boards with the black decal. Mike
One thing to consider here about MU purchases. How many N scalers do it? Yes many / most of the people who post to this board do. Is it possible the key part is, _people who post to this board_? Does the average guy have the budget or even the desire to buy MU of 4 at a time or even in a year? George, can you give us an idea of what the "average" order is like?
