Apart from the USRA types and a few like Challengers and ex N&W mallets that went to different roads during WW2 most steam locomotives are road specific. ATSF 3751 is both road specific and a wheel arrangement that's been done often. If they want to make a wheel arrangement not yet done a Santa Fe 4-4-2 would get my attention.
Agreed but you have to admit, a santa fe northern or up fef would grab a big income for a company and it would definatly fill a nitch.
I admit I'd buy one of each road number Santa Fe they did and I probably wouldn't pass up an fef either.
I look at it this way, you can do NUMEROUS runs of 4-8-4s in Numerous configurations/numbers for one railroad and make enough money to fund other steam projects and not lose a dime. It would be a better investment in my eyes. A) Build a northern for ATSF or UP and see HUGE profit margins in a recession plus keep making them and keep making big money on the same tooling with minor changes B) Build a Mikado(even railroad specific) and get mediocure profits especially in a recession and possibly lose interest in steam al together in N-Scale What would your choice be?
I think there would be more than minor tooling changes between an ATSF Northern and an fef if you were to do them correctly, about the only things the same would be the number of wheels on the loco and maybe the diameter of the drivers, and even the same diameter drivers doesn't necessarily mean you can use the same mechanism. Someone with drawings of both might know but I suspect even the driving wheelbase and also spacing of the lead and trailing trucks would be different requiring different frames for each loco, get the wheelbase wrong and the whole loco looks out of proportion. Look at Atlas's attempt at using the RS3 mechanism to make a GP7. If you transfer too much tooling across whichever engine gets done first is going to be correct and the second will just be 'near enough'.
My bad westfalen. I didn't clarify that I meant minor tooling changes between locomotives of the same class and railroad, not between 2 completely diff locos like the fef and ATSF northern. Wheelbase wise, you can use the mechanism over again as they are very close and honestly close enough for n-scale. Now the box-pok drivers are a little different but they could still use the same mechanism and just design new side rods, valve gear, drivers and what not and still come out ahead and make a huge return to re-invest into more steam products and it would trump what a railroad specific mikado would make money wise.I too would live some S-2 switchers! San bernardino needs them when I build my layout!
There doesn't seem to be too much problem with making something railroad-specific. I don't think Kato is having too much problem selling the GS-4 and Intermountain seems to be doing well with the cab forwards. It's a good time for SP modelers. And for the UP folks too - look at the Big Boys and Challengers (too bad they didn't do a D&H version). Personally, I think any company that jumped on it could make an absolute fortune by making steam engines specific to the Santa Fe or Pennsylvania and they wouldn't have to make anything else and could smile all the way to the bank. I know I would buy them and I don't model either. I think Bachmann kind of went out on a limb a little bit by offering a lot of different USRA types knowing that a lot of railroads had copies or very similar types and I think these offer the possibility to be a good stand-in for something rostered by any number of railroads. Let's face it, there may be more steam choices available in HO, but not appreciably so. So if you want to model steam in any scale, you either adapt a current model and detail and kitbash it to represent your prototype, or you buy brass. The same can be done in N. The light 2-10-2 provides yet another starting point for a kitbash. After all, in the real world there were about 2200 2-10-2's built.
I like your thinking. All but the highlighted part above. They can make a hugh profit and make a ton more DIESELS !