The only change I will likely make are FVM wheels and some weathering. The paint needs a good fade for sure, but man they are nice.
Wasn't there going to be a WP version? Those I'd love to see, but I do have to admit, the SP cab is REALLY nice!
Overall, I like the Athearn cabooses. The MTL SP bay windows that I have have better lettering than these Athearn ones, however. Both of mind have small blotches on the lettering... kind of unprofessional.
That's two extra colors, MTL would have added an extra two or three dollars to the price for that extravagance.:tb-biggrin:
The only thing I wished Athearn would have done was the whit grab on the end of the body next to the door.
additional parts Something I forgot. I found them while putting the car back in the case tonight. The car comes with photoetch window screens burried in the packaging.
Well here are some side by side shots of the Athearn and M-Ts SP cabooses. Sorry camera is not that great. A photo of the 3 athearn Cabooses And the 1st and 2nd run M-T cabooses Which would you prefer??????
Both companies did a nice job on this model. It looks to me that the Athearn Bay Window caboose is more detailed. I would prefer that the coupler would be closer, but that can easily be modified. Athearn is using the "new" McHenry coupler on that caboose.
I still can't get over the difference in size of two cars that are supposed to be the same.:tb-confused: Did MTL reuse an existing caboose underframe for their version?
Prototype Comparison John, The pictures you shared look mighty fine. Three more sets left. Hummm... To all tuned in: Here are some pictures of the prototype. You can use these to compare notes. What's interesting is, SP operated a number of different types of bay window cabooses. I'm impressed with the work MTL and Athearn put into their crummies. Looking good to these tired eyes. The pictures are not mine and are being used here for illustration and documentation. Credits are posted on the photos. Thanks for taking a look. Have fun!
At least for the SP version, the coupler distance is right. The SP cabooses had cussion couplers on them that extended out farther than a standard coupler. http://espee.railfan.net/nonindex/caboose_photos/4712_sp-c-50-9-james_bradley.jpg http://espee.railfan.net/picindex/c-50-09_photos/4730_sp-c-50-9-ken_perry.jpg http://espee.railfan.net/picindex/c-50-09_photos/4735_sp-c-50-9-tom_fassett.jpg
I decided to go with the Athearn based on the etched metal details in the pre-production photos. Don't have mine in my hands yet, but I think I'm going to be happy with my choice.
Trucking By Train Here's one I'd like to see Athearn produce. Oh, I know it's not SP. But what the heck.smile:
The prototype has a cushioned underframe, so the extended coupler pocket on the Athearn model is prototypically correct.
paul mopac had a similar version which the athearn bay window would be "close enuff" http://www.trainweb.org/screamingeagle/other/berglund/mp13669.jpg http://www.trainweb.org/screamingeagle/mp_cab/mp13689_c.jpg http://www.trainweb.org/screamingeagle/other/cab_behni/mp13690_behni.jpg credits to the screaming eagle website
Not sets, but three individual cabeese with different road numbers. That was last weekend and I doubt there are any left, but there only one way to find out. Maybe I'll pick up the last three and hold for the collectors. Huh!! Thanks for the great photos Rick. I will use them when I weather my units.
That first part there is fightin' words, Randy. LOL! If my Athearn didn't have such gloppy lettering I would like it even more, but I think both companies did a nice job on this one. :thumbs_up::thumbs_up:
