Atlas' GP40-2w pics are up...


to me if you look at the nose itself, you cant see a difference, but as soon as you look at the cab, theres quite a difference.
 
is 8''-10'' really a big deal in ho or N scale???
i could understand if they made a dd40 with 3 axles instead of 4
or a sd40-2 with two axle trucks.
There seem to be a LOT of NIT PICKING going on lately.
At least we have train that WORK
the way there ment to and look like what there modeled after
 
bigford said:
is 8''-10'' really a big deal in ho or N scale???
i could understand if they made a dd40 with 3 axles instead of 4
or a sd40-2 with two axle trucks.
There seem to be a LOT of NIT PICKING going on lately.
At least we have train that WORK
the way there ment to and look like what there modeled after
Click to expand...

very well said
 
For an engine that costs that much there should not be errors period.

I think as consumers we should always demand the best. It is a nice looking model and something sorely needed by CN fans, but to put that much work into tooling and not make it correct? Why?

I'm sure the model will sell well, and I hope it does, so maybe they will look at doing other Canadian prototypes in the future.

Remember when Athearn engines where all too wide in the body? I'm glad they listened to the nit pickers and fixed that...
 
Heck, Even if the nose is a hair too long, I'd buy 3 of these if i had the $$$. Nice looking engines!! And I always wanted 2 or 3 of these!!
 
Canadian Prototype Replicas made a one piece styrene HO scale cab and the overall dimensions of their cab were 100% correct in 1983, years before a narrow body GP or SD was even available...Atlas has no excuse.

bigford said:
is 8''-10'' really a big deal in ho or N scale??? <<SNIP>> the way there ment to and look like what there modeled after
Click to expand...

Absolutely 8-10" is a HUGE deal. Why do the aircraft, armor, auto and ship modellers strive for accuracy and we wallow in complacency and mediocrity? And it doesn't look like what they're modeled after.

Railflyer of late also has a 100% correct cab. (C.P.Rep cab on the right, railflyer on the left)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The thing that caught my eye is the much longer grab on the incorrectly long hood. I can guarantee you that an MR reviewer (well, maybe not MR, but an unbiased reviewer) would pick up that difference right away. I tend to agree that, at the price we're paying for top quality locomotives, at least the basic dimensions should be right. Our hobby has a long history of accepting foobies without complaint. How long did Athearn market the SW-7 as an SW-1500, long after the real SW-1500 was out? Come to think of it, was it ever not marketed as an SW-7 before Athearn stopped production on BB kits?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm going to agree, if I'm paying upwards of $150 for one engine, it BETTER be correct.

I'm still HIGHLY disappointed in the Trainman GP39-2. Especially considering Santa Fa had the most, and you can't even model one correctly with that step well they included...
 
I'm all for dealing with errors it adds interest, in fact I like the GSB SD40-2 shells to start with because I know the problems with them and remove them or work around them, but I can find complete GSBs for $20. Same goes for the SW7s, cab goes in the garbage in comes Cannon, you can get those models for $26 pwrd. I look forward to Bachmann's GP7s for a superdetail starter, $35. But I really have a problem with shelling out $100+ for REMOVING superdetails to change major structural/dimensional problems on a model, seems counterproductive to me.

Rest assured, I have a undec GO version reserved at my LHS for 3 reasons:

1. to support my LHS
2. Atlas has done the step/handrail/longhood work for me
3. I have a few old Prototype Replica cabs on hand to swap out the Atlas one.

So keep an eye out on Ebay for an undec Atlas widecab in a few months....99 cent starting bid!
 
i was just looking at my railroad ruler and both 12'' marks
on the HO and N side. That little diffrence would not bother me.

Half the complaning done about trains,I would not even know
was wrong. Like the bachman dd40 body being to wide to be
able to fit the trucks it LOOKS like a dd40 to me.

But i will give you the for the price we pay for the trains in
these scales HO/N they should look like the prototype
 
I think it's funny that people are saying "Aren't you all nitpicking.... what's the big deal?" To me, all I can look at is that horribly long and inaccurate nose. By the same account, who here thought the old OLD Athearn BB SD45's, GP35's GP9's were "acceptable." They had the same amount of extra width in the hood as these new Atlas' have in the nose. Gross! Anyone ever build a Jay's Train's GP40-2W? This was a resin kit, produced in a basement office, and they were *PERFECT*

While we're at it, what's with the numberboards and dual horizontal lights on the long hood end? I know there were a few with this, but 99.9% didn't have them... I think it was only the ex-GO units that had those?

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1090596
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is disappointing to see these errors for the price they are charging for these units.
 
Back in the days, the fat Athearn long hoods were just a fact of life unless you had the money for brass. Given the motor technology available then, Athearn didn't even have a choice if they wanted sell an affordable model. Now, with CAD, smaller motors and drivetrains, and prescision casting, there's no excuse for not getting all the major dimensions correct. This is especially true if you're producing a model for a major railroad with a lot of modelers that follow the prototypes. As far as nitpicking, it's sets my teeth on edge every time I see a Nickle Plate caboose with a white top band instead of the correct almost white, light grey band. Now, that's nitpicking. :) OTOH, NKP modelers will notice this right away, especially those of us who were around to see the real thing. It's even worse when you can go to the tracks today and see the engine and know your model doesn't look right.
 
See, I'd be fine with the errors that they have on this model, if they weren't charging an arm and a leg for it. But if they're going to charge us an arm and a leg for the thing, then it should be as good as they can get it, or at least pretty frickin' close. If there was a good reason for this hood being too long, then it'd be less annoying. I'd live with it. But Atlas has no excuses for us.

10".
You'd notice that in RL. So why is it not a big deal on a model?
 
well I would like to see a dead on side shot of the cab on the decorated loco and compare it to a prototype side shot. I have worked on these locos and the decorated unit looks OK but the pics of the preproduction samples looked odd. If the cab is the only problem on the model which is what it looks like then it can be changed with the much better Railflyer cab if needed. I do agree that for the retail that Atlas charges you should be able to pour diesel into the locos and run them but its just the price we pay to have oddball locos made. I will still keep my 5 units that I ordered but will def inspect them for inaccuracies against all the detail pics I have. And speaking of price the street price should be much lower then the retail on these. I am paying a tad over $100 for my which isnt bad even if I have to change the cab. Still cheaper then paying $600+ for 1 brass loco. Now all I need is 3 GP40-2L's and I will be happy as it will almost complete my NECR roster.

DSC03074.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think it's an illusion. Looks at the size of the front porch on the 9659 compared to the 9401.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top