4-8-0 "survey" results

[NW Modeling List]

I'd really love to see this project come to life but I think doing at least some other tenders would be the best way to sell them. The unfortunate thing is the 433 and 475 both have the USRA tenders and that's what will probably be used as a reference. I think doing the 12A (396) and 9A (as built) tenders would be a much better idea and more welcome to most modelers. The 9A by NWSL is very common on the feebay market in brass but the 12A (Sunset & PSC) is pretty scarce. Maybe do the 12A and the USRA tenders?
Just my 2¢,

Roger HuberDeer Creek Locomotive Works

      From: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
 To: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> 
 Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:39 AM
 Subject: Re: 4-8-0 "survey" results
   
The tender on 475 was not used on very many M’s.  They used larger tenders.  This would allow for many more numbers/runs.  The extra axles will provide better electrical pick-up too. -- Mark LindseyStuck in the 1930’s

From: NW-Modeling-List <nw-modeling-list-bounces at nwhs.org> on behalf of NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Reply-To: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 12:06 PM
To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>, NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Subject: 4-8-0 "survey" results

I thought I should share the results.  We got a significant number of suggestions (mostly tactful, some not)that we clarify which M we were talking to the manufacturer/importer about.  Our discussions hadn't reached that level, as we were simply exploring the possibility of a "low price" N&W 4-8-0.  The results of the survey made it clear that our best bet is the M, specifically the way it looks (tender, fittings, etc.)at Strasburg today.  It is clear to most of our members that some mass-market appeal will, we think, substantially increase the viability of this project. I got some comments about getting my M, M-1, and M-2 straighter in my mind.  I don't have it where I want it, but I'm a lot closer than I was two weeks ago (thank you, again, and as always, Col. Jeffries and Harold Davenport). We got a good number of "You should do the M in a version with variations, especially tenders"; we're going to pass that on, but the cost-effectiveness of that will be determiend by the manufacturer/importer.  We got a good number of "Instead of an M you guys should do []".  We're listening to all of that, but some are probably less likely than others.  I'd like an LC-2, but I'm not holding my breath. And, we got a surprising number of "at that price I'd be interested in one or two".  I'm quite pleased we did this.  We forwarded the results and constructive suggestions to the manufacturer/importer.  We've been asked to keep "his" name quiet for the time being.  It's not Broadway, but we're looking at that type of model with that level of quality and in that price ballpark.  We will keep you posted as to what happens next. For those of you who replied with expressions interest and constructive suggestions/comments/cirticism, thank you. Frank Bongiovanni, NWHS Modeling Committee  
________________________________________
NW-Modeling-List at nwhs.org
To change your subscription go to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-modeling-list
Browse the NW-Modeling-List archives at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/

  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/attachments/20150729/298392de/attachment-0001.html>