Florian
I agree with what you just said, there should always be a
basic line of dependable products such as the Athearn standard designs with
the options to go more advanced with the high tech line, I think Athearn is
on the right track as to be a leader again in the hobby, they may have some
bugs to work out in their Genesis line but I am sure they will, I have seen
them make mistakes in the past before and correct them to make them better,
I think that it is important that they continue on with their current path
of making reliable standard design and their genesis line for more advanced
modelers if they want, I have a Spectrum Consolidation and it is a superb
runner, I love this little engine, but I also have a set of detailed
standard Athearn F7 A-B-A set regeared with Ernst gearing and they give me
the same performance of slow and prototypical speed as the Spectrum, the
gearing set is all it took, they are more noisier but I kind of like the
grinding sound, you are correct we need balance in the hobby for everyone.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: Florian Griessenboeck <florian@v...>
To: <BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Re: FW: Genesis CB&Q 2-8-2
> Tom,
>
> I don't say you are wrong. No, I like the way you're doing things because
> you have a lot of fun and at last that's what counts. I think there will
be
> always a basic line, at least to introduce newcomers to a companies other
> products. When we take Bachmann, they could not have just the Spectrum
line
> alone. But where would they be without a Spectrum 2-8-0 ? Way behind. They
> continued with their USRA Mountain, Rivarossi released it's superb
2-6-6-6,
> Lifelike came up with a 2-8-8-2 that was called "the best plastic steam
> locomotive so far" and Trix did the Big Boy. Other firms will have to
> answer. And you are right - Mantua is out of the match, par example. I
think
> the marked will change, if it already hasn't. If we Burlington guys ever
get
> our stuff done? The recent super sellers where always good for many
> different prototype roads. A Burlington design would maybe problematic in
> that way. Time (and N-scale) will tell .....
> Have a good time downstairs!
>
> Florian Griessenboeck
>
>
>
>
> > I agree there is nothing wrong with raising the standard, I could
> > easily afford 3 or 4 engines of High Tech quality if I wanted to by
buying
> > from discount houses, but the thing what concerns me is that if the push
> is
> > so strong in this direction than the companies are going to start
dropping
> > their basic line and only cater to the protitypical modeler, and fine
> tuning
> > everything to be prototypically correct on all engines which would
> > completely call for entire retooling of mold and dies then the cost will
> go
> > even higher, that is why we call it modeling, to start with something
> basic
> > and try to make it better, all modelers are serious in one respect or
the
> > other, such as the airplanes I do, my cousin does the same and don't
care
> > about wing seams showing he is more concerned with the thinning of the
> paint
> > not to hide the details, I'm the opposite, I fill and sand wing seams, I
> > think everyone has their nitches, so hopefully one can find common
ground
> > and build from there, but I just don't want the hobby to get to the
point
> of
> > everything being so fine tuned that the average guy can't keep up with
it
> > anymore. I agree with the point that modeling is more affordable than
> allot
> > of other hobbies because we still have options, I just hope we can keep
it
> > that way. Tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
|