View Poll Results: Is Car underside detail important to you?

Voters
70. This poll is closed
  • Yes

    21 30.00%
  • No

    49 70.00%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43

Thread: Is Car underside detail important to you?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    913
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    376
    Thanked 624 Times in 260 Posts
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Is Car underside detail important to you?

    One of the areas I always feel that I am not with the masses about is the underside detail of freight cars. My question is why it seems manufacturers are always raving about the detail of the underside, brake rigging etc. For me my cars spend 90% of their lives right side up riding the rails, where I never see the underside. I would rather less detail go into this area and possible savings go into the car to be passed onto us the consumer. Thoughts opinions?


    Please vote if you feel this detail is important to you....
    Be positive, Be polite, have fun with the hobby!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Zombie Hill, Vermont
    Posts
    5,887
    Blog Entries
    42
    Thanks
    9,705
    Thanked 9,697 Times in 2,775 Posts
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All I care about is what's visible.
    ~ Charles

    :shay:

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Antelope, Calif USA
    Posts
    4,722
    Blog Entries
    6
    Thanks
    1,841
    Thanked 2,464 Times in 1,257 Posts
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put NO, but I have to say, there are some cars that I have that seem to have spectacular undersides. I am thinking of one of my MT UP boxcars... When I pulled it out of the box it was amazing looking to me. Now, as a general rule, I don't care because I consider all my cars "runners" and I do not see the undersides. I do care about the look of the wheels and trucks. I frequently paint my wheels and weather my trucks, so those are important.
    Sean McC

    "No man is a failure ...

    who has friends." -- Clarence

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Everywhere yet Nowhere
    Posts
    2,052
    Thanks
    2,251
    Thanked 1,989 Times in 756 Posts
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put YES.
    Depending on the freight car (and layout height) a lot of underside detail is visible and once weathered stands out even more and brings that freight car to life (so to speak).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    744
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 215 Times in 159 Posts
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put NO.
    Like Bob, my cars spend 99.9 percent of their time right side up!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    333
    Thanks
    27
    Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Maybe" would have been my answer because it all depends on the way the car looks rolling down the tracks. Some cars sit higher than others or have more exposed while rolling. Those cars I would want the details to be there the others that sit lower it really doesn't matter. All in as I saw stated above what's visible.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Omaha, Ne USA
    Posts
    1,255
    Thanks
    1,800
    Thanked 1,147 Times in 594 Posts
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put NO. If I see the underside, the car is not doing what it should, rolling on the rails.
    Cheers, Paul
    President & CEO of the BHRR

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pascagoula, Ms
    Posts
    1,536
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    619
    Thanked 1,367 Times in 534 Posts
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put no. About the only cars I can think to have detaied under sides would be tank cars.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to russtrnmn For This Useful Post:


  10. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    Posts
    7,404
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    6,154
    Thanked 13,166 Times in 3,135 Posts
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If the detail is clearly visible from the side then it's great, but if you can't see it I don't care. Just like with buildings, you don't need to paint, detail, or even include walls you won't see just like a movie set. BUT for many people it's not just how they look on the layout that matters, it's how they look when you hold them in your hand and examine them. I think if you are attracted to the hobby for making realistic railroad scenes you don't really care about undersides, but if you get into the hobby more to collect fine models, then you probably would. I'd be pissed if I bought one of those nice 1:24 scale metal model cars and it didn't have an amazingly detailed engine under the hood, or a perfectly detailed underbody.

    But for me I'm not collecting models, I'm building scenes so anything not visible in my scenes can be easily omitted.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,439
    Thanks
    1,424
    Thanked 7,815 Times in 4,489 Posts
    Mentioned
    261 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe that as runners, we N Scalers don't put the premium on details, that those guys in the bigger scales do.

    Think about it, where as, they are stuck running peddler freights, we run cross country express trains. When you only have the space to run a ten car train, you spend a lot of time, looking at those ten cars. The problem gets worse the smaller the fraction gets. When you get to G you only have the room for a trolley in the space of an N scale layout. Go bigger than G and you have to make the things actually operate like the real ones do.

    Of course, then there are those people, that have too much money and the ears of the manufacturers. They want exact replicas of the equipment, no matter, the cost. Since they are screaming into the ears of the marketing department, those of us, that actually run trains, not collect them, we get overpriced museum pieces, instead of equipment that can be handled and transported. Because of them we get a boxcar with a hundred parts instead ten different cars made of ten parts with a multitude of paint schemes.

    I have some of the high end two bay covered hoppers. When I put them in with a dozen ones from Atlas, they don't shine. They are just another hopper car in a string of twenty. Those brass etched roofwalks and detailed hopper door mechanisms just can't be seen as they roll past my eyes as I sit and watch trains.

    You really can't see the details on the real thing as they pass by you at the crossing either. Yeah, you can see all the 13mm bolt heads when the car is sitting on a siding for a week, as you take pictures, underneath it, lying on the track, but try finding one as you drive by it at 35mph.
    Use what you know about the world to model…
    Learn from modeling what you don't know about the real world.



  12. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to ChicagoNW For This Useful Post:


  13. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pascagoula, Ms
    Posts
    1,536
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    619
    Thanked 1,367 Times in 534 Posts
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I look at nscale trains as seeing a 1:1 at a distance lets say about 1/4 of a mile. I can't see lift rings and bolt heads from that distance. So it is not that important for my models. I bought some Athearn and Walthers rolling stock lately. They have good detail but not overboard. They also have reasonable prices. I also like the FVM rolling stock for about the same reason. MT halso has some good lookin stuff.
    I don't mind paying a bit more for hoppers and tank cars because they tend to have more exterior details. A plastic roof walk can be improved by washes or dark chalk between the raised areas.
    I don't like the plain Jane stuff from the 70's and early 80's but the newer stuff does look better moving or not.

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Sunriver, Oregon USA
    Posts
    261
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 235 Times in 59 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also a No........I agree that the upper stuff is what I look at. And as someone said, viewed from a few feet what can you really see besides either a box, tank, hopper, etc. The paint color is most important to me. Some of the cars are just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too shiney.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to JKeenan0407 For This Useful Post:


  16. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    976
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked 1,382 Times in 466 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put 'no'. I have buildings on my layout that have a slab of black plywood as a back wall - no point worrying about what can't be seen.

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    zombietown
    Posts
    1,471
    Blog Entries
    13
    Thanks
    4,356
    Thanked 985 Times in 527 Posts
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Of course, then there are those people, that have too much money and the ears of the manufacturers. They want exact replicas of the equipment, no matter, the cost. Since they are screaming into the ears of the marketing department, those of us, that actually run trains, not collect them, we get overpriced museum pieces, instead of equipment that can be handled and transported. Because of them we get a boxcar with a hundred parts instead ten different cars made of ten parts with a multitude of paint schemes. "....chicago nw

    it was this that lead to the bankruptcy of many european manufacturers imo....

    models became too complicated and to expensive and to delicate for the "common" man and those that wanted and could afford such models , could not buy enough to make it worthwhile.

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Belding, Michigan, Ionia
    Posts
    873
    Thanks
    1,609
    Thanked 235 Times in 139 Posts
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put yes. I run trains and I collect trains. I'll buy a piece, play with it a while and sometimes resell it. Buy high sell low! My current layout is 45" high. I have a little work area and DC test track under a portion of the layout. The rails are 1 ft in front of me at eye level so I can see the bottom detail from that perspective.

    PICT0001.jpgPICT0004.jpgI do agree some detail is a bit overboard. I have some Bluford Shops hoppers and they have hose detail sticking out on both ends? Now, I kinda thought the magnetic trip pin on MTs and such represented that? About all the hose detail is good for is breaking off in your hand.

    Now for the kicker.....I pulled an Athearn caboose off a shelf to take pics and some of the fancy bottom detail broke off in my hand I may want to change my vote.
    Sean Barry

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Sean Barry For This Useful Post:


  20. #16
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    3,027
    Thanks
    1,327
    Thanked 4,404 Times in 1,397 Posts
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I put "Yes". I don't have a large fleet, but I do like the details. I photograph my equipment from a short distance and there are some things that I want to see. I like to see the air reservoirs and brake piping.

    I look at the cars that I got twenty years ago and my newers cars blow them away. In a unit train, details tend to not be so important as the viewer is looking at the train, not individual cars. But when I have a single car spotted at an industry I want it to look real, I want crossover platforms, cut levers and so on. I want my empty center beam bulkheads to have tie down cables. The details to me are what keep our equipment from looking like toys, but I also know I am in the minority on this one. Most people prefer quantity over quality.

    I woud rather have 150 detailed cars than 1500 plain Jane cars.
    Karl

    CEO of the Skally Line, an Eastern MN Shortline

  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jpwisc For This Useful Post:


  22. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    976
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked 1,382 Times in 466 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jpwisc View Post
    I put "Yes". I don't have a large fleet, but I do like the details. I photograph my equipment from a short distance and there are some things that I want to see. I like to see the air reservoirs and brake piping.
    I can't disagree with you -- I like to take close-up photos too, and details make a difference. But when I started taking photos in N-scale the first thing that struck me was the oversized code 80 rail, not missing brake details. Given that the majority of N-scalers are still using code 80 the extra cost of super-detailed rolling stock doesn't seem worthwhile. (Of course I'm speaking in terms of the hobby as a whole - I'm not suggesting it wouldn't be worthwhile on your layout).

  23. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pascagoula, Ms
    Posts
    1,536
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    619
    Thanked 1,367 Times in 534 Posts
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On this flatcar you don't really see the equipment underneath.
    100_0023.jpg

    But on this boxcar if you zoom in a little you can see some stuff underneath
    100_0020.jpg

    This is in need of details on top and underneath. That is the stuff I like to add not buy it already done.
    100_2631.jpg 100_2630.jpg


    Cars that have the fishbelly sides tend not to reveal the underside as much as the straight sides.
    I like the topside with a fair amount of detail. The bottom not so much. Just enough to give an impression
    something is there. I also like to weather my rollingstock. That is the fun of it.

  24. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    General area of central Alabama, Birmingham
    Posts
    2,715
    Blog Entries
    63
    Thanks
    3,961
    Thanked 1,249 Times in 472 Posts
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I voted "No." I'm in agreement with most of the other posters. If you can't see it why create so much underside detail. Decrease cost by less underside detail.
    See ya
    Ron
    "Men go and come,
    but earth abides." Ecclesiastes 1:4

  25. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    273
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 270 Times in 127 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I voted no. If I am looking at the underside of a wagon on my layout then something has gone horribly wrong and I am rolling out the rescue equipment.

    Who looks at the underside of a motor vehicle before they buy??

Similar Threads

  1. Important news about the CH&FR...
    By TwinDad in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 1st Apr 2011, 12:32 PM
  2. An Important Post - For Me Anyway!!!
    By BryanC (RIP) in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 4th Mar 2011, 07:11 PM
  3. How Important are Roadnames?
    By thirdrail in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 24th Jun 2008, 01:48 AM
  4. Important: We are starting a glossary
    By BryanC (RIP) in forum General Rail Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21st Aug 2007, 06:21 PM
  5. Just how important are easements?
    By Bryan in forum Trackage
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2nd Jul 2007, 06:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •