Is it daft to buy rolling stock nearly 20 years old?

[dannyboy]

@PLD posted his reply as I was composing mine and he makes a good point about the track radii. Maybe you could use that as an excuse to treat yourself to another locomotive and run a 5 and a 6 car train?   

[keiron99]

I have quite a few 'Kato' California Zephyr coaches. 

Having not personally seen the (models) in real life, can you vouch for their quality? Are they as good in the flesh as they look on screen?

Just one observation if I may - can the depth of the layout be increased a bit, say another 4 to 6 inches? As long as your nickname is not 'short arms', the extra few inches would give you a lot more to play with. 

Oee-err missus. I've just measured up again. I guess I could go to about 80cm deep, although it wouldn't eave an awful lot of "gangway" space in the small office/box room in which I intend to build it.

Despite the relatively small size (it'd be 320cm long x 80cm deep, with a possible 90 degree extension on the right end , 90cm long x 70cm deep), I'm now feeling rather intimidated by the amount of board space I'd need to fill (and the cost!). Wondering whether I should pare back on  my ambitions! OTOH, the space isn't needed for anything else and I'll (hopefully) be a long time retired, soooo....

[Browning 9mm]

for what it is worth,
while disposing of much of my inventory, I have retained a number of early purchases to run on v. xxxxx of Inverknockie.
locos run well, and haul loads due to heavy chassis.
ok, no lights, but that stops my rage at tail lights reflecting off the front of the first wagon / carriage.
[to me, coaches are driven down the motorway by stagecoach, not pulled by locos.]
unless you want the latest upgrades, then I see no problems with 20 year old stock.
change plastic wheels for metal if you want, it's your choice.
but I'd far rather try to strip / respray / re decal a 20 year old model that cost pounds, than a new one that cost 10's of pounds.
but then, I'm a luddite.

[dannyboy]

can you vouch for their quality? Are they as good in the flesh as they look on screen?

In a word - 'yes'. I do not think I have ever had a piece of 'Kato' that has not worked as it should and, just as important, looked good! I think I have some photographs from my 'Averingcliffe' thread that might show the 'Zephyr' rolling stock - I will have a look later.

I'm now feeling rather intimidated by the amount of board space I'd need to fill (and the cost!).

Kieron, do not feel that you have to fill every available space - sometimes, especially in model railways, 'less is more'. Have a look at some of the layout threads and you will see what I mean. You can always add more later, as and when time - and money - allow. 

[Hiawatha]

If you feel that an 11-coach train is too long (and you would also need three or four locomotives for the California Zephyr), maybe Kato's Silver Streak Zephyr would be the better choice? This is a complete train with five coaches and a single E5 locomotive.

https://katousa.com/n-silverstreak/

The train is a similar Budd corrugated stainless steel streamliner but has no dome cars in the consist. So, if you like the CZ especially because of its dome cars then the shorter train is no alternative.

And I can reassure you that the coaches from the 20 year old set don't have faded colours. They came in plain silver straight from the Kato factory.

[Bingley Hall]

I have quite a few 'Kato' California Zephyr coaches. 

Having not personally seen the (models) in real life, can you vouch for their quality? Are they as good in the flesh as they look on screen?

I have over 50 coaches from this period including the California Zephyr set. Only the most [pedantic would find fault with them. Great models.

[dannyboy]

@keiron99
Keiron, I can not find any photographs at the moment of the coaches, but this one shows my four E5 'Silver' locomotives -



I should add that they  are on the partially done 'Dilymic Fields', not 'Averingcliffe'. (Put it down as an 'age' thing).

[keiron99]

That's very cool ?