Weathered Big Boy

That's a beauty! Thanks for sharing.

Harry does some absolutely exquisite work. He did a fine job on your locomotive. Love the wood grain and rear view mirror details.

Weathering is something I might be into for certain pieces in my collection.

yes I like weathering very much!

here a gallery of my weathered models.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...ms/72157644720802562

Paul

I'm waiting for my first one to be finished.

Milepost48 posted:

yes I like weathering very much!

here a gallery of my weathered models.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/...ms/72157644720802562

Paul

Darn nice work Paul

Very nice.

Am I into weathering? Everything except

locomotives. I don't have the guts to do it to them, though I admire when I see it done well.

FrankM

In the picture of the engine and tender on the bridge, it looks to me like the bridge is sagging noticeably under the weight of the engine. What do you think?

L.I.TRAIN posted:

As for weathering, I avoid it, but it's a personal preference. I think that it is often overdone and looks artificial. But Moonson's work on buildings is terrific.

MELGAR

WOW, I just noticed that. Judging by the million pound's it's supporting, I'd be sagging too.

PARTSGUY posted:

WOW, I just noticed that. Judging by the million pound's it's supporting, I'd be sagging too.

The UP 4000 class locomotives were one million, two hundred fifty thousand pounds, in "working order". The "smaller" 3900 class Challengers were one million, seventy thousand pounds in working order.

MELGAR posted:

In the picture of the engine and tender on the bridge, it looks to me like the bridge is sagging noticeably under the weight of the engine. What do you think?

L.I.TRAIN posted:

As for weathering, I avoid it, but it's a personal preference. I think that it is often overdone and looks artificial. But Moonson's work on buildings is terrific.

MELGAR

THAT BRIDGE IS A DIORAMA HARRY USES TO PHOTOGRAPH HIS WORK. i GUESS THE 20 OR SO LBS OF THAT ENGINE IS PUTTING A HURT ON THE STRUCTURE

Moonson posted:

Am I into weathering? Everything except

locomotives. I don't have the guts to do it to them, though I admire when I see it done well.

FrankM

I will weather anything with exception of any postwar pieces, but I also like to see locos and cars that are well done.

Weathering, even if well done as on this engine, is a highly subjective and personal preference.

Tinplate Art posted:

Weathering, even if well done as on this engine, is a highly subjective and personal preference.

Well, yes and no. If one is really modeling a specific time period, say late 1940s through mid 1950s, then pretty much EVERYTHING should be weathered. The key, however is the term "modeling".

TRUE, but I am not a modeler! I am a new and shiny toy train guy, and make no apologies! LOL!

When I first looked at that bridge I thought the same thing also, then I asked myself is it really sagging? I then said no it can't be, it must be the way the picture is taken. Thanks to all for helping me see things I really am seeing! LOL!

Moonson- Excellent job on everything, down to the last detail!

gandydancer1950 posted:

Moonson posted:

Am I into weathering? Everything except

locomotives. I don't have the guts to do it to them, though I admire when I see it done well.

FrankM

I will weather anything with exception of any postwar pieces, but I also like to see locos and cars that are well done.

Some incredible talent going on here. I wonder if it's practice or it's just something your born with or both but either way this is very very good!

I don't believe weathering locomotives is for me. I was tempted by Harry's weathered H10 in the catalog, but ultimately went with the #1773 set. Although I do appreciate a well done job! I may venture into those waters some day. It's a true art to try and recreate this look.

PARTSGUY posted:

WOW, I just noticed that. Judging by the million pound's it's supporting, I'd be sagging too.

I'm guessing there are probably 20 pounds of dirt and grime on the loco & tender on the proto.  

ConrailFan posted:

When I first looked at that bridge I thought the same thing also, then I asked myself is it really sagging? I then said no it can't be, it must be the way the picture is taken. Thanks to all for helping me see things I really am seeing! LOL!

Moonson- Excellent job on everything, down to the last detail!

Thank you, ConrailFan, for your kind comment, and Thank you for the "Like," too.

My Thanks, also, to the following voices who sent me "Likes," for my reply to the weathering question:

PRRronbh; gandydancer1950 (and Thanks for your comment, too); L.I. TRAIN; MELGAR: CNJ#1601; Jushavnfun; Tyler P; albertstrains.

FrankM

That bridge sure does look like it's sagging. I sighted across my monitor and there is a definite bow in the structure. It's low point is right at the empty barrel platform next to the rear drivers. If I recall correctly Lionel even included a note with its first Big Boys cautioning new owners to check their bridges before running the BB over them for the first time.

The diorama bridge does look a tad spindly to be carrying a loco that size.

---PCJ, who once built a 3' HO truss bridge out of craft sticks that successfully supported three MTH 6-axle diesels without any visible deflection.

As best I can determine from the photo, the sag is about 0.2-inches at the rear driver of the front engine.

MELGAR