Realism in 3-rail rolling stock: How good is good enough?

Here's a Milwaukee Road round-roof boxcar, by Lionel for the Milwaukee Lionel RRC. The prototype for the Lionel car is a Pennsylvania RR car, but Lionel has issued it decorated for other railroads that had round-roof boxcars, including the Seaboard and the Milwaukee. The prototype Milwaukee Road car was all-welded (as you can see in the photo, the Lionel/Pennsy car is riveted) and the Seaboard prototype also was not identical to the PRR one. Should Milwaukee and Seaboard fans be happy that Lionel has offered something resembling the prototype, or annoyed that it isn't fully prototypical?

Here's my answer...

Would PRR fans be happy if their round-roof boxcars were really the Seaboard variety, I think not.

From what I read on here, most folks don't care if it's right/wrong prototypically.  The few of us that do have few options these days.  One of  my options is to not buy it if the basics are not correct (window patterns, rib placement, roof/door/end type), but that requires research if you're that interested.  If you want to call that being a "rivet counter" that's fine.  I like to say there's degrees of rivet counting, maybe we can establish a list of what is acceptable and what is not!

I'd value hearing SIRT's view on this topic.

Since its 3 rail O we are keying in on, I would say keep that in mind as to the final answer.

I find most offerings I select to buy are somewhat close to a real item. It’s rather easy for me since I model a 25 – 30 year span. Basically I grew up seeing or riding what I model. With a ton of old photos in books and on the net, most can find the item of interest as a reference.

The things I find odd are the stock grey colored wheels and silver axles which I paint anyway. Also every MTH brake wheel is black, not matching the car. Other graphic minor details are generally missing. I still don't understand why older style cars still have roof walks and ladders. Seems like some money could be saved by MFG's in this area.

Probably the worst thing about 3 rail cars is the height from rail to body. Rolling stock looks too high.

So, I’ve learned to live with 3 rails, large couplers and high water cars. If the overall look is close enough, it will have to be acceptable.

It is very costly for companies to produce small numbers of custom cars specific to the road, in that case sometimes you can make your own.

If 3R is not good enough for the real seeker, then I would say switch to H.O. where everything is 99% accurate.

S.

I think the best overall detailing and realism for the money would be Atlas Trainman rolling stock. They are equal to or better than MTH Premier.

My level of detail and prototypical tolerance is best expressed by Weaver. Their level of detail and paint schemes work for me. I just started buying some Altas O cars....first car within one minute I broke some fragile details. Weaver paint schemes applied to cars that may or may not have been painted that way, if the look right is fine. The fact the Weaver car may have the wrong box car ends vs the prototype is not an issue.

Not a big fan of fantasy schemes.....but it depends on the car case by case. I hate the Weaver NASCAR box cars they did back 1990's or so.....but I buy them cheap and repaint.  I am less of a detail person than I was in HO days......now I want cars and locos that look good rolling by at speed. 

If one accepts the center rail and chooses to embrace 3 rail scale. Then select a t rail track like scaletrax or atlas. Then one can begin to buy true 2 rail scale cars adopting kadee couplers and pull them with your 3 rail scale locomotive. The effect is great. Atlas steam series cars are very well detailed and affordable if your in the steam era.

That said, Norm Charbenneau,, still runs lobster claws on a lot of his stuff in his videos. His overall scenes put most two rail scale layouts to shame.

If one is running on tinplate track then your options are somewhat limited, but SIRT has demonstrated what is possible with his techniques.

I can't help but notice the major manufacturers are slowly progressing to really better scale offerings, but at higher price points.

I want accuracy!

That said, insisting on complete accuracy will lead to me having pretty much nothing!

I, perhaps rashly, invested in 3 rail. There is no going back. But I find myself almost religiously committed to replacing the couplers on every 3 rail car I buy, despite promising myself I would not do so. I am also buying 2 rail cars now, which may cause me trouble with switches.

I have made the mistake of "researching" real car numbers in the photo archives  and comparing them with the models. Inevitably, the car makers use a shell and roll out as many road names and car numbers as they can sell. Understandable. I see no other choice, either for the manufacturers, or for me as a customer.

While NOTHING seems totally prototypical, I do gravitate towards cars with separately applied grab irons, in spite of whatever other sins the car may have. It's become a fetish. The moulded in grab irons have become a real issue with me. They are unacceptable! I am very reluctant to buy a car that has them.

The cars that I am most consistently happy with have been Atlas O Masters. I'll buy just about any Atlas O Master car that carries Canadian Road markings, including those with strong Canadian connections, like Soo, D&H and GT.

Of course, these are "just toys." Tell an avid golfer that all he's doing is whacking a little ball around with a stick!

I really liked the premium K-Line rolling stock,especially the scale smoking caboose. Most of my rolling stock purchased in the last few years have been Atlas Trainman,Lionel and MTH Premier. I used to have a lot of the Atlas Master rolling stock but as excellent as they were,they were just too delicate for me and something was always breaking or falling off.

So in my eyes,the MTH Premier and Trainman offerings are "good enough". I have some Weaver items,mostly boxcars and they're just fine. 

Here is your opportunity to get something different 

http://lbrenterprisesllc.homes...html?_=1410703029914

Dave, LBR

My approach to model railroading echo's that of legendary modeler of the 30's 40's and 50's Mr. Frank Ellison. His contention was that a model railroad was viewed within the context of the whole. To this end we try to keep things reasonably within scale proportions and add sufficient detail for realism. Its like looking at a stage production where it is viewed as a large picture presentation. No one looks at the minute detail just the same as visitors would not show up to see your layout with a magnifying glass to count the rivets or measure the size of everything. If the view has good color, depth,  and enough detail to create realism then I  believe that it accomplishes its purpose.

The only way to get a truly accurate model in all scales is to scratch build it or modify an out of the box model.  The model railroad press is full of articles of people spending a lot of time modifying HO and other scale models to make them more prototypical.  The NMRA Magazine publishes articles about this nearly every month.

I generally want a representative paint scheme on my models.  I will run a non-protypical paint scheme if it is attractive.  All model railroading is a compromise.

Joe

Good words. I think the "total prototypical scale accuracy" should be left to the limited run shops and the scratchbuilders. Note I didn't use the word "authentic" which I think is bandied around too much by toy train manufacturers and others.

The compromises made by manufacturers are all backed by production design and processes that are limited by money. There is quite a leap of faith, IMHO, in beginning the tool and die work for any model. 

Perhaps we will all get exactly what we want when we download all those old scale drawings into our personal 3D printers (one for metal, one for plastic) and push "start". 

Maybe another Santa Fe F-unit or PRR GG-1 for starters?

I am happy with the current details on the Rail King line. I find the supper details too easy to damage. From 3 feet away, they are not that noticeable. I am  runner, not a collector. Besides, when you look down and see 3 rails, how realistic do you want to be. Same with engines,  the Premier models are too big and easy to damage, I don't need them on my carpet covered layout.