what model are these locomotives?


J

jabber1990

New Member
I hate to ask stupid questions but I an just wondering, I did some research but I didn't know for sure if they were correct

IMG_20130907_145716.jpg

it looks like

from top to bottom

F7
SD45-2
AC45CCTE
SD70M

the last 2 I found pictures of online but they didn't look like they matched

if you need me to take a better picture(s) let me know and i'll do that

Thanks for all your help
 
All are models of EMD products.
Athearn F7a
Mehano/IHC SD40
Athearn GP40-2
Athearn SD40T-2
 
Terry,

Isn't that second unit a SD40-2? I can't remember seeing those big porches on a 40, but they're a spotting feature on the Dash-2's.

I may not have known the model, but I knew the maker by the handrails. Athearn handrails from that era were very distinctive, they were steel wire and the stanchions were very plain, and didn't match anything from EMD. You had to form the top of the stanchion around the handrail, and it was hard to get the bend correct.
 
I looked at the truck on the SD40, most SD40-2s had HTC trucks, and the sideframe on the models is completely different. An HTC would have the dash 2 shock absorber on the center axle. All the ones I have ever seen say "SD40" on the box, though I agree those porches are pretty big for a straight 40. Also, the SD40 doesn't have the rectangular engine are vent at the rear of the dynamic brake hatch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You may be right about the trucks, but it is an old Mehano, first imported by AHM. They were known in those years for not very accurate models due to shortcuts, omissions and "imaginerring".
 
Cjcrescent said:
You may be right about the trucks, but it is an old Mehano, first imported by AHM. They were known in those years for not very accurate models due to shortcuts, omissions and "imaginerring".
Click to expand...

And being #ed 5707 makes it a real fig newton of Mehano's imagination! But changing the 1st 7 to a "0" would make it more believable.
 
I don't know about ATSF numbering, but from the years this model was made, up until relatively recently, all manufacturers manufactured foobies, be they cars or locomotives. The push more more realistic numbers has occurred in the past 10 years or so. While I believe that car foobies will be with us from now on, if just to keep costs down, a locomotive foobie is becoming rarer, and rarer.
 
?Foobie? I can guess the meaning from the context. But I've never heard that word before. (Mind you, my ignorance in general is pretty much infinite.) What's it literally stand for or derived from? :confused:
 
Fake, false, untrue. It's not in the dictionary that I know of, but within the hobby its a car, or locomotive that has an incorrect number on it or is lettered for a railroad that never had them. To keep costs down the manufacturers used to letter all manner of cars and locomotives for railroads that wouldn't have ever owned them, the thinking was if they could sell 5000 locomotives lettered for all sorts of different roads instead of 500 for the railroads that actually had the locomotive, costs would be spread over those 5000, instead of the 500. Until the push for accuracy gained a lot of backing, this was a normal practice.

Athearn was "famous" for doing this with their yellow box, then BB kits, both cars and locomotives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any more, a model train company is vilified if it tries to make fantasy paint jobs on their locomotive models...
 
But a dime will get you a dozen, no car designer, for the majority of makers, is sitting there with an ORER making sure his freight cars are accurate for every railroad they're cars are lettered for.
 
I did read somewhere that manufacturers are actually finding that a market exists for "foobies" (good word, so I'll use it). I guess if you're a fan of a particular fallen flag RR, it would be nice to make believe it survived into modern times. While looking for locos and rolling stock for my new interest in MRL, I came across an Intermountain announcement that an ES44AC is due for release early next year. When I inquired on the Yahoo group, was told that there weren't any GE's at all on their roster, but, more or less, if I was keen on GE, why not.
 
MRL? Why is everyone going for MRL these days?

My solution to running stuff the RR doesn't have is to set the modelling period 6 months in the future. That way I can argue that the RR will be buying it soon.

As to the Intermountain 'what if's', I guess people don't complain about them because the manufacturer has never tried to claim that the liveries where prototypical. They are just for fun. Rivet counters can't argue with that.
 
Motley said:
Not sure about that? I don't think Intermountain was vilified for these here:

P1010010.JPG
Click to expand...
Obviously, you don't belong to the same forums I do. On some of those, manufacturers are flamed for having a stripe a scale 1/4" too thick, and refusing to purchase locomotives painted in that "fantasy paint scheme".
Personally, I think those kind of people need to either relax and enjoy their hobby, or find another one they can relax and enjoy. I'm not sure if alcoholism can be defined as a hobby, though...
 
tootnkumin said:
I did read somewhere that manufacturers are actually finding that a market exists for "foobies"
Click to expand...
Tower 55 started that trend. I wish I would have gotten a set of their ES44AC?s in the NP canoe scheme.

there weren't any GE's at all on their roster
Click to expand...
Which railroad was that? A Protolance D&RGW brought forward into modern day would be the same. Other than a few Alcos that were more or less forced on them due to the effects of WWII, it was an all EMD road. They thought was that keeping the manufacturer the same reduced maintenance costs. One didn't need workers for both types of locos, didn't need to keep parts for different manufacturers, same maintenance schedule, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PaulB said:
MRL? Why is everyone going for MRL these days?
Click to expand...

It's an interesting operation. A lot of 2nd hand, older locos, lots of variety of rolling stock and what they carry and service. BNSF has trackage rights (at the moment I think it's actually leased from BNSF)and uses it a lot. CSX has been known to use it as well also. Bummer for me is that UP doesn't and most of my stuff is UP.

Iron Horseman said:
Which railroad was that?
Click to expand...
MRL = Montana Rail Link. The loco roster provided by one of the members on the MRL yahoo group lists no GE's of any type.
 
Iron Horseman said:
Tower 55 started that trend. I wish I would have gotten a set of their ES44AC?s in the NP canoe scheme.
Click to expand...
Not really. Athearn, Atlas, Model Power, Life Like, just about every maker, made foobies almost exclusively from when they started making what ever locomotives. There wasn't the demand for accuracy as it is today. No one really worried about locomotive numbers and details as it is today. Loco models were generally offered with one number, and occasionally two and most of the time, the numbers were foobies as well. The numbers wouldn't even be correct for the roads the loco was painted into. Most didn't even care what the loco was painted, as long as it was painted into the schemes of their favorite roads. Anyone who wanted their locos to be correct would strip, repaint and decal it. They would sometimes even go as far as detailing the loco as best they could, mostly just removing the cast on grabs, and replacing them with wire ones. There wasn't many detail parts available for diesels. There was only 2 manufacturers at that time making parts for diesel projects, and they were Cal-scale and Kemtron.



Iron Horseman said:
Which railroad was that? A Protolance D&RGW brought forward into modern day would be the same. Other than a few Alcos that were more or less forced on them due to the effects of WWII, it was an all EMD road. The thought was that keeping the manufacturer the same reduced maintenance costs. One didn't need workers for both types of locos, didn't need to keep parts for different manufacturers, same maintenance schedule, etc.
Click to expand...

I believe you. Many RR were "brand" specific when it came to their loco's, but there weren't many modelers that were like that. Its only been recently, within the past 15 years or so, that modelers have demanded the models be painted in specific road names, with the correct details and such. Frankly I would not have minded if the manufacturers offered their locos not just painted for the correct roads with correct details but also offer them as undecorated models with details in a parts bag. The details would be road specific, like an NS pack, Conrail, CSX etc., and also a "generic" bag of details that would have a mixture of parts not as extensive as the road specific one. I also wouldn't have minded if they offered their stuff painted and lettered as a foobie, with the generic bag of details included.
 
tootnkumin said:
It's an interesting operation. A lot of 2nd hand, older locos, lots of variety of rolling stock and what they carry and service. BNSF has trackage rights (at the moment I think it's actually leased from BNSF)and uses it a lot. CSX has been known to use it as well also. Bummer for me is that UP doesn't and most of my stuff is UP.
Click to expand...


Hmm...

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/locoPicture.aspx?id=124117


Someone on rrpic archive claims MRL has a shay.

In fact, it is probably this loco:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:-1_MRL_Co_Shay_at_Bellows_Falls_VT.jpg


MRL as in Meadow River Lumber co. But no reason not to use the opportunity to add something that isn't an EMD to your MRL roster. After all it's still the MRL RR, right?:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top