"Crumbly plastic" may be an indication that someone lubed the motor with an oil that was not plastic-compatible.  Better check other places (like the opposite end of the motor) for signs of deterioration.

Les

jbrock,

I haven't lived in "HO Land" since 1978, and I've never owned a Con-Cor HO locomotive.  My experience with Con-Cor HO has been two sets of passenger cars, and observation of "OPM" (other people's models).  They seemed to me to be pretty good for the time, but not up to current standards.  But that was 45 years ago.

In the 1980's N-scale, Con-Cor products were as good as you could get.  They were assembled in the US (Bensenville, IL) using domestically-produced body shells and Kato drives.  N-scale Con-Cor locos I own are UP Veranda Turbines (2); UP U-50; UP PA-1 (2); MP PA-1; Milw DL-109 (2) and UP E-7A.  In 35 years of use, I have worn out both UP PA's, then replaced their drive chassis with new replacement Con-Cor chassis.  I have not seen any improvement in their locomotives over the years, but they still hold their own well against competing brands.  On the other hand, Con-Cor passenger cars in N have improved over the years, and make up the backbone of my passenger fleet.  They offered N-scale passenger cars with interiors at a time when many HO passenger cars (including their own!) lacked interiors.

If I may add, passenger car interiors are a big deal to me.  I like to paint and detail interiors, and add tables to dining cars, and interior walls to sleepers, painting chairs and carpets a variety of prototypical colors and adding antimacassars ("tidies" in railroad terms) to seat headrests in coaches.  Cars without interiors get scratchbuilt ones.

Les

As long as a model is selling in quantities sufficient to sustain the desired margin of profit, it is difficult to say it is overproduced.  Obviously, a demand for it is there, and the public is willing to pay what it takes to keep it on the market.

When a situation develops of several companies building essentially the same product, it becomes a matter of cost/benefit to the buyer.  If a product is perceived as a poor value, it will fall from the marketplace.

In the case of Athearn, it was able to dominate the HO market for decades because of its cost/benefit.  Even in the days of rubber-band drive, its locomotives were better than any of its competitors in its same price range and time.  Even in the 1960's and late 1950's, Athearn locomotives were built with large, high-quality motors (Pittman, that were also found in brass imports and slot-racing cars); cast metal frames and trucks; all-wheel drive on 4-axle locomotives; wireless chassis; and separately-applied handrails on hood units.  This at a time when their competitors typically used injection-molded plastic frames and trucks, and small motors that drove only two out of four axles, and depended on crude lumps of cast lead and traction tires for adhesion.  Although clearly upper mid-range in price, they were so superior to their competitors' product that they still were able to capture the market.

That company's choice of making Santa Fe its primary prototype was also a great idea.  No matter where the modeler was located, Santa Fe was a familiar name, largely because of its promotion by Lionel.  And ATSF was a major transcon itself, exposing itself to lots of modelers.  It had possibly the best paint scheme ever used by a railroad, and had a wide variety of equipment types.  It ATSF offset cupola caboose was very similar to cars used by many American railroads.  If PRR was the "Standard Railroad of the World" in full-size trains, then ATSF took that title in model trains. 

It should be no surprise that so many manufacturers tried to copy Athearn's success.  Some eventually succeeded by putting quality first and charging accordingly, others kept building to a low price point and hoping to garner business based on price alone.  Model railroading, for good or bad, has become mainly an adult hobby.  And adults are looking for quality goods that will last for years or maybe for the balance of their lifetimes.  They are not interested in saving $30 on a locomotive that will be in the junk box in two years.

I think most of the readers of this blog would agree that Bachmann has risen to the high quality market.  As have Life-Life (Walthers).  Con-Cor and Atlas were always there.  Same with Kato and Intermountain.
The others, not so much.  As the customers have aged, quality trumps price.  All these good manufacturers pretty much sell models of the same prototypes, so there is really not a case of overproduction.

Les

jonathan,

Your weathering work really looks nice!

And I'm glad to see two CGW boxcars.  This was one of my favorite local roads in Minnesota.  Too bad it was taken over and pretty much dismantled by a competitor I will not mention.

Les

jbrock, jward, Hunt: 

The issue with having multiple feeder lines, aside from creating isolated track sections, is voltage drop.  Rail of any material is a poor conductor compared with copper wire.  And that wire must be heavy enough to carry the current required without heating up or creating voltage drop. I suggest 18 gauge wire as a minimum size for power connections to track.

I would suggest if anyone was planning to go to DCC at a later date, build and wire the layout for DC.  As has been described already, it would be easy to convert a DC-wired railroad to DCC.  Once a layout reaches a certain size, additional feeder wires will be needed for both systems.

It all comes down to what you want your trains to be able to do.  If for some reason, it is important to you to be able to independently control more than one locomotive in the same track block, then DCC would be the system to use.  For me, that would be a capability of dubious value.  Onboard, DCC-controlled sound likewise.  Locomotive-mounted speakers are just too small to sound realistic, at least to me.  I have found the Kato Soundbox system to be more effective.  It uses a fixed speaker system, with the larger speaker better suited for the low-frequency sounds.  It can also power a large speaker.

I don't think it is fair to compare DC vs. DCC as horses vs. automobiles.  Each system has its own strengths and weaknesses.  For me, who built a new layout while owning dozens of DC locomotives, it was a cost/benefit decision.  But if I had no existing locomotives, I still would have not built a DCC layout, for the reasons stated in my earlier post.
I am more interested in running trains than in having locomotives that do tricks.  I have been a model railroader for 47 years, and am a retired locomotive engineer with thousands of hours of running trains, so I have a good idea of what I trying to recreate.

Les

Hunt,

There are several good reasons to wire a model railroad for DC instead of DCC.  If the wiring cost for DCC is lower than for DC (and I'm not sure that is true), that would be its only savings.  DCC requires at least as many track feeder connections as DC in order to maintain reliable operation.  The early claim that "you can run your whole railroad with two wires" is no more true with DCC as with DC.  You could wire a DC railroad with two wires also, but operation would be poor and limited.
 
Good reasons to use DC:  All model locomotives can operate on straight DC without modification.  Straight DC or "DCC ready" locomotives are priced lower than DCC-equipped locomotives.

DC requires no expensive throttles, power boosters, or locomotive-mounted receivers.

DC locomotives require no programming.

DC block wiring requires only DPDT block selection switches for each block.  Electric block isolation is desirable for DCC as well.

DCC requires power to be on all tracks at all times, unless track blocks can be isolated and turned off.  This presents a potential safety hazard.  I once had an HO 2-8-8-2 ruined by a scheme like that when it malfunctioned and melted the centers out of all drivers when stalled on a section of track that was supposed to be dead.

DC wiring requires no components that cannot be isolated, wired around, or circuits traced by eyeball.  No electronic components that can fail unseen, except for those in the power pack itself.

DC wiring is not subject to interference by outside radiation or emf forces.

Money saved by using DC can be spent on other desirable model railroad purchases: additional locomotives, cars, trackwork, scenery.

I built a fairly large N-scale model railroad several years ago from scratch with DC wiring.  I had about 60 locomotives that were DC only.  With DCC, each one would have had to be converted to DCC or retired.  As it was, the only modification I made to them was to install diode-controlled directional lighting on those that were not so equipped.

I don't think you should give the impression that only "serious" or "real" model railroaders build DC railroads.  I have been a model railroader since 1968, an N-scaler since 1978.  DC model railroads have been around for 100 years.  It is a proven technology.  I could have built my present railroad for DCC operation, could have afforded to, but did not for the reasons listed above.  I think there are still more DC model railroads than DCC, and more are continuing to be built.  It is not obsolete technology, it is simple and foolproof.  I am glad that the manufacturers recognize the continuing demand for DC components, and continue to offer them.

Les

Trainman,

My railroad is N-scale.  It is U-shaped and covers 52 sq. feet.  All main lines and other major tracks are EZ Track.  I find it works quite well.  The molded ballast can either be covered with bonded ballast, or painted whatever color you choose.  By using different ballast colors, it is easy to differentiate between track owned by different railroads.

Mine is an urban setting, but uses lots of trees and smaller buildings as well as large ones.  It represents Denver in the early-mid 1960's.

Operation is centered on passenger operations.  20 train pairs of seven major railroads call at Denver Union Station in the order the actual trains operated there.  Although a double-ended terminal, there are no through train movements through the terminal.  All trains originate or terminate there, except the California Zephyr, which changes power between CB&Q and D&RGW.  The Colorado Springs section of the CB&Q Denver Zephyr is switched out and sent south on the D&RGW Royal Gorge.  The reverse happens when this train arrives.

Not all trains are grand streamliners.  The D&RGW ran a heavyweight local to Grand Junction (discontinued in 1959, but I kept it going).  The C&S ran a mixed streamlined/heavyweight local to Billings, MT.  The CB&Q ran a heavyweight mail train to Omaha.  The AT&SF ran a short train to LaJunta to connect with mainline trains.  The C&S ran a mixed streamlined/heavyweight Texas Zephyr and a heavyweight mail train to Dallas.

The outer main line handles Joint Line freights.  These are C&S and D&RGW freights that circulate around as sort of moving scenery.

Possibly the biggest challenge is finding period-correct motor vehicles.

Les

I like to go to train shows, but I don't expect to find much I can use or want to buy.  Sometimes, though, one can come up with real good buys.

Once, I found a PA-1 ABBA set in actually "like new" condition for a very good price.  Only one A unit was powered, but it alone was worth the price.

Another time, I found a switcher I was looking for in "new old stock" condition.  At the original price!

Dealers sometimes sell new stock that are slow sellers.  This is a good source for hard to find items at a reduced price.

I don't go in expecting to find any real bargains.  But it happens often enough to be worth going.  It is usually worth the price of admission to see the layouts and talk with fellow modelers.

Les

Trainman,

I feel the same way about railroads that are gone, or are "mere shadows of their former selves".  Most of the railroads I have worked for are shortlines, operating remnants of Class Ones.  I have made it a point to try to learn something about each of the predecessor roads.

The saddest part was a former New Haven line.  Miles and miles of dense but abandoned track in what once was an industrial colossus.  It is easy to get the attitude that "nothing is as good as it used to be".

One of the lines I worked on (and helped manage) was a former Gulf, Mobile and Northern line that was the route of the first streamliner in the South.  It was an 80 mile long, 10 and 20 mph shortline.  Now it is mostly abandoned under new ownership.  Our southern terminal (Houston, MS) at one time had a cotton compress.  I have never seen one of these modeled.  It would have been a large warehouse with a steam-powered compactor.  The compactor used two big, vertical cylinders to pack loose cotton into a cube.  By the time I saw it, all that was left was a concrete foundation, the steam press, and the boiler.  The building might have contained a cotton gin (a plant for separating the seeds from the fibers).

The compress would be easy to model.  A large, rectangular wood frame building with a full-length loading dock, a tall smokestack and several smaller steam exhaust stacks, and maybe a water tank.  It would need its own siding.

The real beauty of modeling a period and place is we can revisit these "good old days" on our own terms.
My "good old days" railroad is somewhat like yours in some ways.  It is flat, located in a river valley.  Several bridges cross a major stream.  But it is an urban setting in the early 1960's at a major regional passenger hub.  The passenger trains of seven Class One railroads call at the terminal there.  It is "American Graffiti" days forever there.

Les

Trainman,

You have to remember all these models are new to someone starting out in the hobby.  They all have eye appeal.  If they weren't good sellers, they wouldn't stay in production.

If they didn't sell very well, there would be no reason to produce them.

My first HO locomotive was a Santa Fe F-7 AB in red and silver warbonnet.  I loved it, because it was an iconic design, looked like what a model railroad locomotive was "supposed" to look like, and ran very well.
This was back in 1968.  Santa Fe equipment, both passenger and freight, has always been readily available.
So it was easy to get cars to go with it.

When a lot of manufacturers are selling models of the same prototype, there is a need for someone to bring out something fresh, but they should not abandon proven good sellers.

Les

Trainman,

I really like your railroad, especially the location and concept.  It is refreshing to see a location not often modeled.

A flat railroad in a flat setting!  Lots of trees!  A railroad in that area would likely be hauling timber and sawmill products, maybe a paper mill, rice farming, cotton, and corn.  Great possibility of mixed train operation.

Your MP connection reminded me of a "pike-sized" passenger train, the Delta Eagle.  This train, although operated on the east edge of Arkansas, would fit in well.  This MP train could be easily kitbashed.  Start with an E-6, add a baggage door on each side where the rear engine would be located (look up EA-6).
It would pull two coaches (one each for Blacks and Whites).   A short train for a short route.

If you cut carefully, you may not even have to repaint the shell.

Les

I have worked for two railroads that switched carbon black plants, one in Texas and one in Kansas.  Everything associated with its production is extremely messy.  It is the soot from the incomplete combustion of oil.  Various chemicals are added to the oil to produce carbon black of differing properties.

The stuff is moved within the plant in tubes, by compressed air.  The interior of the plant and the floor withing it is coated with a uniform layer of flat black powder.  It contains enough oil that it sticks to all horizontal and vertical surfaces.  Almost all is carried in covered hoppers.   Some is also transported in large bags in box cars.  All covered hopper cars I have seen in this service soon become flat black, regardless of the color they are painted.

These days, carbon black is usually carried in shipper-owned cars (with an "X" suffix on the reporting marks.  The most common paint scheme is black with white lettering.

The workers in these plants naturally become coated with the stuff daily.  It has to be real hard on their eyes and lungs.  I complained to a friend of mine who was a chemical engineer about how filthy the stuff was.  His reply was "It's not filthy, it's just carbon, the same stuff we are made of!"

Of course, this will also coat the locomotives.  I tried to keep some cars between my locomotive and the plant itself, but that was not always possible.  Once it gets on a locomotive, one can get dirty just walking past it.

Carbon black plants are often located in or near oil fields, handy to a local supply of raw material.  It is used in making ink, pigments, and a lot of other things.  It is what makes tires black.

I disagree.  If you hooked the rails to the AC side, the loco would just sit and hum and burn out.

Les

Unless you want to return the whole set, you will need to isolate the problem.  It sounds to me like the problem is in your speed controller, not the locomotive.  See if you can borrow another N-scale locomotive and see how it performs.  If it runs too fast also, the problem is in your speed controller.

Another way would be to hook a voltmeter to the rails to see what amount of voltage your pack is putting out at different throttle settings.  I'd say you probably have a defective throttle.

Les

Kewatin:

Those brain farts happen to me, too.  Don't feel bad.

Those GG-1's might appeal to more than just Pennsy fans.  They were used by Penn Central (anybody model them?) and AMTRAK, and may be by a commuter authority.

But the best use I saw for a GG-1 was in a magazine article I read in the 1970's.  Someone used the GG-1 chassis (I think it was a Rapido) to model a Milwaukee Road Bi-polar electric.  The center (cab) portion was modeled using a caboose with the cupola removed.  The curved hoods at each end were modeled by draping a sheet of plastic over a metal tube with a heating element inside.  The pantographs were re-used from the GG-1.  It really looked good!

Les