D500 posted:"Less detail. Well, this could just be me, but the description says a "high level of detail." While I'm not in the same galaxy as rivet counters, to my untrained, uneducated eye, the details (hoses, pipes, doo dads) on the boiler seem sort of spartan?"
I don't mean to sound like a grumpy old man (too late), but does anyone ever look at photos of the real locomotives?
Indeed, why would one even buy the model unless one has seen the real thing, or its image?
The Niagara, the definition of the modern steam locomotive, had very few "doo dads" ("is that an Elesco or Worthington doo dad "?) visible on it. The thing was virtually streamstyled, if not streamlined, enhanced by the smoke lifters. But it was not either. It was modern engineering, done with some esthetic sense*, and, had steam survived, more and more locomotives would have looked like it.
It was industrial sleek and slick, and kept most of its "doo dads" in its pants.
(*The original 1920's J1 Hudson specs from management instructed the designer - Kiefer, same as the Niagara's - to give the new locomotive "pleasing proportions", roughly quoted.)
That's a good point, and I had little knowledge on the facts you raised, so thanks for this. In terms of the only thing you've focused on from my entire post - did I look at the real thing - I did. Here's one of the images I found before ordering. To my untrained eye, it looks like it has a a good amount more external doo dads than the the "high level of detail" Vision version. Again, not a deal breaker for me by any stretch, as I don't buy these things for rivets but rather for play value, and this one is a winner in that regard ...
