Prototype Modeling: How Close is "Close Enough"

Moose2013 Apr 15, 2022

  1. fordy744

    fordy744 TrainBoard Member

    309
    304
    21
    As mentioned by others it's what you are happy with. You model for you, not for anyone else so you only have to answer to yourself.

    What is acceptable also changes with knowledge... if you don't know any better it can't be wrong!

    When I started I bought what I liked the look of, regardless of era/prototype/accuracy, with time and knowledge I've learnt about eras and prototypes and consequently once I know something is wrong it irks me. Running 40ft roof walk boxcars with modern SD70s grates me.

    I have subsequently narrowed my modelling era and prototype, anything that doesn't fit that has been sold. My focus is on "home" road motive power and stock, seeking the best commercially available model, generic mass produced plastic models have been replaced by brass models where available. Rolling stock is detailed to a greater degree on "home" road again, cut lever bars, train line hoses etc etc. None "home" road just get enough to not look toy like. I've spent a long time modelling 6 cabooses to be accurate to a specific road number, not necessary but I wanted too (half way through I questioned my sanity)

    When it comes to non home road cars my knowledge is limited, no one can know everything about every road in every era. I've had people more knowledgeable on other roads offer insights to accuracy and suitability, I've taken this on board and acted best for me. Some instances when a better model has been available i've replaced it, other times I've kept the original.

    When it comes to valve gear, I wouldn't even attempt to replace, regardless of scale but certainly not in N. Some would and do have the skills and ability to do so. If no accurate model exists in plastic or brass then the closest stand is all you can do, or just omit that class from your modelled RR.

    I don't know if the Z4 is available in brass or not in N, if it is I suggest going that route as personally fettling and brass loco and getting it running right with a new motor and DCC/sound is quicker and easier than modifying and plastic model. By the time you factor in the labour in doing all the work it probably cheaper in the end to go the brass route. I know we are modellers but there is no shortage of other things that need "modelling". Pick you battles and you get to running trains sooner!

    Do what works for you.
     
  2. Kisatchie

    Kisatchie TrainBoard Member

    1,031
    1,322
    44
    Hmm... close only counts
    in horseshoes and hand
    grenades... and Kiz's
    modeling...
    [​IMG]
     
    gmorider, BNSF FAN and Kurt Moose like this.
  3. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    3,259
    6,172
    70
    and thermonuclear devices, black holes ...
     
  4. in2tech

    in2tech TrainBoard Member

    2,703
    7,639
    78
    Very nice and even the Signature in GREEN except the scale :) A few of those pictures look real, very cool!
     
    Tad, BNSF FAN and Mike VE2TRV like this.
  5. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    3,343
    5,868
    75
    More less a GP-9 with a sealed carbody and a 35-Line angular cab. Replaced by the GP-38, which used the new 645 diesel.
     
    HemiAdda2d and Mike VE2TRV like this.
  6. Hardcoaler

    Hardcoaler TrainBoard Member

    10,673
    44,836
    142
    As I've crossed into my mid-60s, facing decreased vision, I'm a lot less fussy about details. Went with Kato Unitrack with my new layout because of its ease, not wanting to hand ballast like I've done for the past 50 years. I enjoy railfanning and historical research as much as modeling, so will continue to run my trains with respect to the prototype, yet I won't deny myself a BNSF boxcar as a vacation souvenir because I model the mid-1980s or shelve my midwestern road locomotives because they didn't run in eastern PA. Meh, life is short and I'm not inclined to create rules to govern my retirement years.
     
  7. gmorider

    gmorider TrainBoard Member

    2,093
    6,282
    65
    In my scale, 1/384 (Omega), compromise is often the rule. Sometimes, quite broadly. We do what we can. We strive for effect.
     
  8. Moose2013

    Moose2013 TrainBoard Member

    747
    3,490
    47
    :eek: ... Ya'know, the definition of insanity might be modeling in Omega scale...
    ;)
     
  9. gmorider

    gmorider TrainBoard Member

    2,093
    6,282
    65
    I am sure I am "borderline". :confused:
     
    Mike VE2TRV, Kurt Moose and BNSF FAN like this.
  10. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    3,259
    6,172
    70
    THIS!!!

    While I have a preference for ATSF (and if Texas & Pacific were available in N scale locomotives [I have a couple of T&P cabeese], they'd run too), my era is all over the place. And no matter what the road or era, if I like it, it runs on my road. Yes, a wooden vinegar car can run with multi-unit double stack container cars! The rail police were run off my private road a long time ago.

    I'm doing this for my own enjoyment, not anyone else's approval. I retired from all that stuff. I like the ability to bounce ideas off others with far more experience than me, without blame or condemnation here. I enjoy learning about prototypical practices, but I'll decide which ones I follow.

    All that said, I still have immense respect for modelers that envision, plan and create historically accurate layouts (and trains running on them), as much as anything else. This hobby needs all comers to thrive.

    Okay, I yield the soap box...
     
  11. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    3,259
    6,172
    70
    BTW, ATSF stands for "Andy's Trains So Far" on my RR.
     
  12. HemiAdda2d

    HemiAdda2d Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    22,014
    27,407
    253
    If this is the case, T-scalers would be certifiably bonkers at 1:480 scale...:whistle::cool::D
     
  13. Shortround

    Shortround TrainBoard Member

    4,333
    5,037
    93
    For me it would be affordable engines from the 50s/60s with only 4 drive axles and max. 50' cars. Everything would need to be completely finished and ready to go on a Kato layout.
     
    Mike VE2TRV, Hardcoaler and BNSF FAN like this.
  14. Carl Sowell

    Carl Sowell TrainBoard Supporter

    3,031
    8,073
    82
    Very nice thread. In my case "close enough" is just that today at the age of 82. My hands and fingers seem to be about triple the sizes that they were as recent as two years ago. I have, in the last year, had to accept the fact that I just can not met my own expectations when it comes to quality work. So close enough for sure is just that.

    One of my latest vehicles, and yes they are true to prototypes, are special to me. First the Chevron truck/trailer unit is an exact copy of a rig that I drove for Chevron out of the Albuquerque Terminal way back in 1968 -'70. So good enough, yes, as I have captured quite a memory from my late 20's. If you have never lived in the West, this paint scheme may not be familiar.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    This is a 3D printed item that I painted, made all decals and applied. A lot of fun and that's what MRR'ing is supposed to be about, right ? ?

    Be safe!!!
     
    Tad, Pfunk, fordy744 and 10 others like this.
  15. Mike VE2TRV

    Mike VE2TRV TrainBoard Member

    4,867
    12,442
    92
    Most surely it is! Nothing like doing something with your own hands. Getting into the minutiae and details, getting the colors right, the lettering right... one is in a closed bubble and nothing else in the world matters.

    Great work!
     
    BNSF FAN, Shortround and Carl Sowell like this.
  16. Moose2013

    Moose2013 TrainBoard Member

    747
    3,490
    47
    @Carl Sowell

    Very nice modeling, good sir! (y)

    And thank for the reply and perspective. :)
     
  17. Pfunk

    Pfunk TrainBoard Member

    548
    1,868
    40
    I'll echo those that say it comes down to your own eye.

    One of the city buildings I am trying to figure out how to recreate is pushing 600ft irl but no way in akjshdfgkasdh am I going to build a faithful 1/160 scale 4ft model. But in the same breath a 1/160 automobile sitting right next to a 1/150 one makes me itchy because it's so obvious. I have a 1/200 airliner and a 1/144 helicopter that look great and not at all out of place on their own as long as they're nowhere near each other or any figures. Speaking of figures, Preiser's n-scale ones look unnaturally smaller to me than say Koch or Kato's and I don't want to use the sets I've bought online at all now.

    All of these things that I am OCD over probably look perfectly acceptable to someone else.

    And, if they were the ones spending stoopid amounts of time and money putting all this together then I'd probably not care about it either :ROFLMAO: but if I don't like it, then that's all I'm always going to see.
     
    Moose2013 likes this.
  18. Moose2013

    Moose2013 TrainBoard Member

    747
    3,490
    47
    @Pfunk

    Thank you for your reply, Mr. Funk.

    Moose recently "converted" a 2-8-8-4 B&O EM-1 to a MT&P Class TBD because the EM-1 was nooo where close enough to the NP Z class that Moose wanted. There are sooo many differences that to Moose's brain, it was never going to be "close enough." There's still four or five other locomotives to consider...
    :cautious:
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2022
    Pfunk likes this.

Share This Page