There are four B-B Engine drawings by Will Anderson uploaded to the Z scale Images. SEARAILS proposes to create Limited Edition shells to fit on Micro-Trains Line's present engine chassis. Please help SEARAILS to determine which shell to build first. Which of the following would you buy first? 1. ALCO RS-2 2. BLW-RF-16A 3. EMD GP30 4. GE U-18-B Please rank all of them in order of preference. How many of that model would you purchase? What price would you expect to pay for an unpainted shell of that model? Add any comments you wish. Please respond to SHOP@SEARAILS.com with the subject "ENGSHELLS" There is also a brief POLL, and results will be published. Thanks for continuing to support Z scale. Jim Shiff
I want a GE. Any GE. Jim, I like your new line of models. Its something we been discussing in chat, and I hope they are release soon
Hello Jim That't some great News! I would like to see a totaly different Shell like the RS-2 and U-18 B but I think the GP30 was more common and you can sell a lot more of them. I've voted for the RS-2 and I would buy 2-3 Shells. I would also buy 3-4 Shells from the GP30, 2 Shells from U-18 B or 2 Shells from the BLW Sharknoose.
If you are going to go to all the work, I vote for the RS1-RS3 and I will 4. No reason to do the GP30 as it's not enough different a representation of the GP35 to give the feel of a different model. My ultimate goal is 1950's NP modeling, and of your list, only the RS1-3 will work. If you make an FT, F3, F7, or F9 shell to fit the GP35 mechanism, I would buy those too! Don't be swayed by the "Most Common" talk, but go for a loco shell that looks different from what is currently available, as we can turn an RS2 into an RS1 or RS3 as needed, a GP35 into a GP30 as needed. I would like: RS can use several GE maybe 1 for fun and wont buy: GP Baldwin
I voted GP30. It is quite unique compared to the later GP-35,38,40 series. It is also more appropriate for the current mechanism. The rest would need new truck sideframes. With the RS-2 there's the issue of the fuel tanks. Where's Robbman when we need a lecture on truck centerlines?
If you think about it... and you were MTL, you would have plans to make a different shell for your hard engineered mechanisms, so we will more than likely see a GP30 shell from MTL soon enough. Before we actually see an RS2 in Z, I fear we will have 2 companies making F7's, GP30's, and GP7's
I have to agree with Robert. MTL will want to get the most bang for the buck out of their development, so, I would expect to see a GP 30 at some point. But, Alcos are not represented at all (I also voted RS-2). Truck sideframes can be scratch built, or some of our laser or etched brass friends could make some parts to help with the conversion. Alco, GE and Baldwin would all make good additions, even if they aren't perfect. They will at least provide variety. Besides, didn't the N&W or someone put Alco trucks on their EMDs? Dan S.
I didn't vote because none of the selection interest me. I doubt you will get a RS-1,2,or 3 body to fit the chassis since they are all "low" hoods. The RS-11 listed is a "high" hood. Isn't a U-18-B shorter than all other GE U-boats?, but most I've seen had EMD trucks under them.
Jim: Whatever you select, be sure to look ahead to the Digitrax "drop in" DCC that apparantly is lurking in the shadows. I would think you would want to make allowance for that or some other DCC chip. ...don
You're right on the money there. Not only that but look how screwy the early Atlas N scale GP/RS mechanism looked with improper truck spacing. Isn't Z scale past compromises like that? Or are they still acceptable when there's nothing better out there?
I would be honored to have an out of scale RS1 or 3, just as long as it catches the flavor of the loco. We have no other choices. Yes perfect scale would be good, but if someone gives us a shell that fits a current mechanism, then that is a choice we may never ever have had. Look at the SW1 shell that Lajos offers, it is made to fit a German 0-6-0 steam switcher mechanism, with enough modification to capture the flavor of the prototype. Marklin has been cranking out what they call F7's that are as long as a scale FP7 for years, and people are still snapping them up. Why, when they could choose the MTL F7? Well, they at least look recognizable as an F-something? Given the choice of a psuedo RS1 or no RS1 at all, I will gladly take the psuedo RS1, and do what I can to make it look better. Have any of you ever modified or improved a boxcar, flatcar, locomotive, or building to look like something else? That's what you did if you modeled N Scale 20 years ago, and that's what you do in Z now.
Flavor! Robert, I couldn't have said it better! ".....catches the Flavor of the Loco!" You are so right! Z scale might still be in its infancy, but we already have alot of prototypical rivot counters. "Oh my Gawd, the GP35 chassis needs to be stretched 6 scale inches for it to be perfect for a such-n-such shell to fit it." "MTL's GP35 shell is 3 scale inches toooooooooooo wide!" For crying out loud! We are dealing with a scale that is 220 times smaller than the real deal! It is not possible to re-create everything to exact size and measurements for Z scale. We have to Compromise with some items! Robert mentioned ZTHEK's SW-1 switcher loco. A Marklin 0-6-0 loco chassis is modified so a brass shell can fit over it. If you look at a drawing of an actual SW-1 switcher, you will immediately notice the ZTHEK SW-1 operator cab is way too long. Compromise! SW-1 or NO SW-1, that is the choice! MTL GP35 or NO MTL GP35, that is the choice! AZL Brass Diesel Locos, or NO AZL Brass Diesel Locos! The list goes on, and on! On a personal note; When I make a scratch built master from styrene so that I can make a mold and then produce that item in Z scale so lots of fellow Z scalers can have one, I TRY to make as much prototypical as possible. If I can't make it prototypical, I compromise enough to make the item and keep it's appearance without gawding it up! Only complaints I am getting about the Mi-Jack is I need more of them! And that I need to make more versions! If I could enlarge my cast resin Mi-Jack 220 times, and place it next to the real thing, I am here to say that there would be a very big difference! If Searails wants to make one or two Acrylic PR shells to fit over the GP35 and/or F7, then I say more power to him! People will buy the shells! Remember don't count the rivots, but do savor the Flavor of the TrainZ! Hobo Tim
It is shorter... and most other U-boats are longer than any GP-series. The U18B is within 1 foot of a GP7/9. Why the RS-2? It's less common than either the RS-1 or RS-3.
Tim- Funny, you didn't make the same argument in the Micron Art bridge thread... Proportions are different to me than rivet counting. Rivets are not easy to count in Z because they are so small. But proportions are easy to spot in any scale. The SW1 you mention is a perfect example. It just looks wrong. I like looking at some of the photos posted here and NOT seeing something that screams Z scale. Your Mi-Jack is a good example. It may not have every bolt, but the proportions are spot on. It looks good and doesn't scream Z scale. You ask SW1 or no SW1? I'll pick no SW1 for my layout until something better comes along. I make that choice all the time even in larger scales. If I'm modeling a locomotive that needs snow shields, but the only available part is too bulky, I'd rather leave it off than have it stick out like a sore thumb. More people will spot a shady part than the lack of any part at all. I don't want anything to call attention to itself, I want the whole package to meld. Anyway, that's my philosophy... for what little it's worth. ;-)
realization! I realized the mass bulk of Micron Arts products are for an era many decades before even my birth! I model within the last 10 years so Reynards ancient products are not of interest. I let it rest! Looks wrong, but really needed for re-arranging alot of Z scalers yards. The only person to make a difference in that arena. I hate to admit it, but I agree. It's the "Z Scale" look that so many modelers try to avoid when building their modules and/or layouts. Unfortunately, not everyone has the ability to avoid the Z Scale look! Positively speaking, Modeling railroads 220 times smaller than real life is a constant learning experience. Everyone is improving! Everyone has their perogatives! I have mine. Most everyone who posts messages in the Trainboard, on the Z Central Station, and in Yahoo's Z_Scale group knows my Strong dis-approval of Marklin's terribly unprototypicalness of nearly all of their North American Z scale. Their are very few exceptions, and very few Marklin items that I will own. My perogative! Why do I dislike Marklin so much, well they have had 30+ years to get it right! Maybe the new owners will get it right? Time will tell! ---------------- The only thing I was trying to say in my original posting is that a desire exists that is great for everything that is made in "N" scale, to be made in "Z" scale, and they want it now! That ain't going to happen, at least not that quick. Alot of people are going to have to settle with items that are not quite prototypical, or actually look correct, but just so long as the item has the Flavor, then alot of people will be satisfied, at least till a better version is produced. Hobo Tim
