I wonder if... as the technology improves... 3D printing of odd-ball locomotives and rolling stock might not be the way that these products become available again from current manufacturer/importers (Atlas, FVM etc...) within our borders... not in another country. Currently... most items are from the far east; however, I received a couple of very nicely done Baldwin DT-66-2000 from James Norris which was 3D printed in the US and was designed in England. I have several other 3D printed locomotive shell from US designers and 3D printed in the US as well. The decorating and assembly, as well as the mechanism will be a potential reason that they might not completely come back to the US though.
Here's another of my C-636's, this one is the proposed but not built C-636P. I think it would have preceded standard production units by its 1967 date. I've included the plan I drew from Alco diagrams. I've used similar plans for a lot of my kitbashes, as it's a handy way of putting all my thoughts in one place. Cheers Steve NZ
Magnificent models. Even though i model in HO i appreciate the fine modeling you guys perform in "n" scale. A much harder task i suspect due to the smaller size but really impressive. Thanks. Pete Australia
Steve, That 636P is a work of art. Well done! I bet it would look great in the SP&S scheme. I do think someday we will eventually see a N version of a 636. As to who is the first to produce one or how remains to be seen. Hopefully sooner than later. Rick
Thanks guys. Personally I think the 636P would look good in any scheme. How about Amtrak Ph I. I did think about doing it in Morristown & Erie red, but that would have been a bit over the top. I'm not sure that we will see a mass produced C-636 in N-Scale. Unless you count the "Down Under" units, there were only 34 built. Maybe a 3D printed shell will be made, but I've yet to see anything printed that matches Mark Gasson's prints for quality, and sadly Mark didn't get to making much for us Alcophiles. His high nose short hood and cab did correct an error in the window location of the Atlas C-630, but that's another story. Here's my next version of the C-636 that's coming together, SIXX 77, former Alco demo unit. If I ever clear the backlog from my workbench, I may have a crack at a C-636F. But I may be very old before that happens. Oh! I'm getting old already!!!! Cheers Steve NZ
Its not just Walthers. It is all manufactures that are doing this. And honestly WE are to blame for that. As modelers we want this feature or that feature on this specific model and the manufactures are answering our demands,........kind of. Atlas is a prime example of this with the N scale EMD SD 24/26 offerings. This is the first mass produced model I can think of in N scale that has had RR specific bodies for that specific RR. The UP body is different from that of the ATSF body and the CB&Q/BN body is different as well. In order for said mfg to be able to produce this model they must pass the buck off to us modelers in the form of higher MSRP. Is this right or wrong? It depends on who you ask. Personally, I think mfgs should start producing basic generic good running locos that us TRUE modelers can customize with little effort to the specific RR model we want. Bachmann is a great starting point for this. You can get a Bachmann GP 9 with DCC for about $50. Then you add the details you want to make that specific model you desire and you are all in for far less than you can get an Atlas for out of the box. BUT the main reason I think mfgs should go back to the drawing board and start producing basic locomotives again is to make models more affordable for the younger kids to get into the hobby. We all know that the younger generations are not buying trains like kids were in years past. If said mfg could produce a good running loco for under $50 then you would have a home run with people getting into the hobby. I am sure I will get some flack and even pi$$ a couple people off for this but this is just my $0.02. Ryan
Logtrain, the problem with that scheme is that the majority of existing and future N-Scale railroaders want ready-to-run. Only a fraction of the market are actual "modelers". If work is going to be imposed on potential newcomers to the hobby then you lose more than you gain. Most who are interested in railroading don't have layouts, room for layouts, or even a place to establish a workshop for detailing, painting, & repairing. I've had layouts but no room for one currently. The only chance I get to run is a local club that lets me run occasionally at off hours and only because they are required to have trains running for the public even when no club members can be there. I'm not retired but work full-time and have other responsibilities outside of the home. I don't have time for detailing & painting. If all the manufacturers produced were generic undecorated models that required further work then I'd be out or model railroading.
I would be interested in an SP&S version and maybe an Illinois Central. I agree that 'only ' offering undecorated generic versions would find too few actual modelers; however, there are talented modelers who would be able to offer customized models (for an extra fee) for model railroads unable or untalented to do it themselves. Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk
