Tomytec - New Releases

[disturbman]

I wouldn't mind a KT4 in BVG livery. I'm beating myself up for missing on the first Berlin tram.

[kami_illy]

3 hours ago, disturbman said:

... I'm beating myself up for missing on the first Berlin tram.

Oh, how i feel you.

Same thing happened to me. Waited too long. Thought I'll eventually snatch an affordable one when prices went up... now they are almost impossible to find. 

 

I'd be happy if they made the T4D in DVB Dresden livery (old and / or new, modernized)

Edited July 14, 2022 by kami_illy

[bill937ca]

I've done that too with the initial Kyoto trams. I learned my lesson. If I want it I order it right away.

 

[bill937ca]

After a  bit of investigation I have determined that  tram 7250 number shown in the Tomytec illustrations was Gifted to Kyiv Ukraine in 2016 and apparently is still operating in Kyiv Ukraine. Expect a Kyiv T3 in the future.

Edited July 14, 2022 by bill937ca

[200系]

I never thought I'd ever be greeted by the sight of Japan's largest toy/model manufacturer announcing a Czech tram built for use in Comecon countries as well as the USSR itself, kinda had to do a double take this morning.

 

One thing to keep in mind though, for those interested in the German version, the Tomytec model seems to be based on the T3SUCS (and yes that is indeed the real, but somewhat unfortunate, acronym😅) variant of the T3, basically a slightly modified version of the (post 1976) T3SU export model built for tramways in the USSR (hence, Soviet Union) adapted for use used in Czechoslovakia (hence, CS). They were intended to replace ageing T1 and T2's still in service at that time, in lieu of the T5 model which had originally been intended as a replacement but for various reasons never entered production.

 

The T4 on the other hand was primarily intended for Comecon tramways systems which couldn't accommodate the wider carbody of the T3 model (2,500mm) and as such a new model with a narrower carbody based on the T3 was put into production, which is what became the T4 model. Besides the changed width (2,200mm for the T4), they were also somewhat longer compared to the T3 models (15,200mm for the T4 vs 14,000mm for the T3). The majority of T4's would be build for tramway systems in the DDR/GDR, Magdeburg, Leipzig, Halle and Dresden, and would be classified as the T4D (Deutschland), though T4's were also built for other Comecon countries as well as (narrow gauge) systems in the USSR. Interestingly a number of T3D's were also built for use in Schwerin and Karl Marx Stadt (Chemnitz).

 

So, short story short (at least, as far as my contributions go🤐) as Tomytec will be using the same mold for both models, the Leipzig model isn't actually a T4 but a T3, which may be good to know in advance for those who are of the rivet counting persuasion, and more than likely irrelevant to those who aren't.😉

 

 

9 hours ago, bill937ca said:

There are still about 300 T3s running in Prague.

 

As well as a large numbers of almost identical T3SU's still running in the former USSR and CIS.

 

As an example tramway systems in places like Kyiv, Odessa, Kharkov etc are still relying heavily on those cars (with some obvious difficulties, especially for the later, of course), as well as a number of cities where I'm sure the operational status of these cars (and the network itself) is rather questionable taking into account recent events. They still make up a large part of the streetcar fleets in Russia as well, with T3SU's still playing a role in the regular ("special") streetcar operation of a number of cities including Moscow, Yekaterinburg, Volgograd etc.

 

That said, I personally would love to see a Tomytec T3SU in the future (I'm allowed to dream now, aren't I?😅), especially in the earlier USSR version (the livery at least would be exactly the same as the version used in Prague), but a Kyiv or Kharkov version would be great as well. The versions being operated in Mordor are a bit iffy at the moment but, perhaps in a few years?

 

 

Speaking of (former) Soviet equipment...

 

Tomytec can please of gib glorious Type E, Esh, 81-71, Sr/Sr3, ER1 and ER2 (both the original pre 1974 globe style cab and the post 1974 angular cab would be glorious) sometime in the future? Pretty please?

 

9 hours ago, bill937ca said:

The T3 is a PCC car.

 

Well... yes and no?

 

I mean I get what you're saying as they are usually included in the PCC totals and they were most certainly build on licensed PCC technology, however, I would personally classify them as PCC derivatives rather than actual PCC cars but that's just me.

I mean you're probably more than aware of this than I am, but the criteria of what is and isn't considered a PCC car has always been based on a rather broad set of guidelines, mainly focusing on the specifications laid out by the actual Electric Railways' Presidents' Conference Committee in 1931, but the actual PCC cars themselves could differ significantly from one another, and even the equipment used could vary quite significantly between different orders. To make matters worse, the actual concept for the PCC car as originally specified was quite vague namely a: streamlined, quiet, comfortable, quick acceleration and braking capabilities as well as being foot operated. The actual cars themselves, whether they were built by the St Louis Car co. or Pullman Standard could also be built to varying different configurations. 1936 or 1945 carbodies, air-electric vs all-electric, Westinghouse vs General Electric propulsion, B1/B2 or B3 trucks, single ended vs double ended designs etc, you get the drill.

Generally speaking though, my biggest sticking point with the American PCC's versus the license built PCC's is based on the conception of the PCC car in the US, versus the role it would play in Europe, and to a much lesser extend in Japan. The PCC car was drafted to combat increased private car ownership, as well as the emergence of motor buses in the late 1920's and early 1930's by building a streetcar which could compete in terms of performance and exceed in terms of comfort your average automobile or motorbus. The PCC in a way served as a hail Mary for the American electric railroads, which unfortunately turned out to be not enough to stem the tide. The European PCC on the other hand, whether we're talking about the BN built American style PCC cars (NVMB/SNCV, the Hague and Belgrado), the BN "Euro PCC" (Brussels, Antwerp Ghent etc), Düwag articulated cars or the Tatra T1~T4 cars, they were al introduced as new technology type cars in order to modernize and replace the already existing fleets of (mainly) pre-war streetcars, rather than compete with the threat of private car ownership, which wouldn't really become an issue until the 1960's and especially the 1970's in western Europe, and arguably wasn't even a factor until the fall of the Berlin wall and/or the collapse of the USSR for the Tatra cars.

 

The same is more or less true for the Tōkyō Bureau of Transportation (Tōden) 5500 type cars, which represents the Japanese version of the PCC (though technically 5501 was the only actual PCC car of the series, 5502~5507 would ditch the foot operated controls for a more conventional setup), though I'd like to get into a bit more detail on these cars on a separate occasion. Interestingly enough, the right-angle cardan drive as used by all PCC cars was considered to be the defining factor of the PCC car, and as a result up to the mid 1950's pretty much all cardan drive cars, regardless of whether they used a right-angle drive a WN-drive or a hollow-shaft parallel cardan drive,  being introduced in this period were referred to as PCC cars by both the press and the public, before the high/new performance moniker came about in the mid to late 1950's.

 

Anyway, going of topic again (my favorite!), not even about Japanese trains this time, I am ashamed of myself...

 

Cheers!

Edited July 14, 2022 by 200系

[brill27mcb]

They are considered PCCs because they use the licensed PCC technology, like the drum controller mechanism underfloor. It's the licensed technology, not the appearance of the car or the market situation surrounding them. Cardan drives were in designs in the U.S. in the 1930s, prior to the PCC specification.

 

Rich K.

[200系]

2 minutes ago, brill27mcb said:

They are considered PCCs because they use the licensed PCC technology

 

Sure, that's why I said:

 

I mean I get what you're saying as they are usually included in the PCC totals and they were most certainly build on licensed PCC technology

 

3 minutes ago, brill27mcb said:

like the drum controller mechanism underfloor

 

Not all PCC cars were equipped with the accelerator as their main controller, it depended entirely on whether the car in question was equipped with WH or GE equipment.

 

The Westinghouse XD323 (prewar type) and XD473 (postwar type) controllers, i.e. the drum controllers you're referring to, were, as the name suggests, only used on Westinghouse equipped cars. The accelerator itself is more or less based on the drum type sequencer WH used on their unit switch based automatic acceleration type controllers, as introduced in the early 1920's on their ABF type controllers.

 

General Electric equipped cars on the other hand used GE KM type controllers (KM12N1, 17KM12N1 etc.) which was a floating type controller (driven by an electric pilot motor) using a commutator as contacts (the "floater" is equipped with brushes at the end).

 

WH XD type:

 

GE KM type:

 

Interestingly enough, all non American PCC licensees would actually specify the Westinghouse controller, which is why all BN and Tatra PCC based cars have the accelerator rather than the GE controller, but for American built PCC's the type of controller was entirely dependent on the operators preference.

 

To complicate matters even further, later Euro PCC's would be fitted with thyristor control, foregoing the accelerator in it's entirety

 

 

14 minutes ago, brill27mcb said:

Cardan drives were in designs in the U.S. in the 1930s, prior to the PCC specification.

 

Umm, yes I'm aware, and I never said the PCC was the first now did I?

 

The right angle cardan drive was more or less an automotive invention which found its' way into the railroad industry, and had been around for more than a decade before the first PCC cars arrived, I know.

Same goes for the  WN drive, which the Nathal division of Westinghouse had introduced circa 1925, and which had found at least some acceptance on streetcars prior to/around the early 1930's (though you may have a better grasp of the streetcar part than I do), with the 1934 BMT Green Hornet being the first rapid transit (el in this case) unit to use said drive as far as I'm aware, so yes I'm aware.

 

However, my reference to said drive systems was not based on the introduction of said systems in the United States, like I said I'm aware the PCC wasn't the first, but more on the perception of the PCC car in a European and Japanese context. Yes the PCC didn't introduce the right angle cardan drive in the United States, but it did in Belgium and Czechoslovakia (and here again I am aware that flexible drive systems were a thing prior to the first PCC's arriving in Belgium, I'm more than aware, the Buchli drive had been around for a while and the quill drive had also been introduced in the 1930's, though both weren't all that suitable for EMUs' (though that wouldn't stop the French from building a whole slew of suburban EMU classes with the Jacquemin (quill based) system from the mid 1950's until the late 1970's, which actually ended up working in their own way) and of course BBC would pioneer their disc drive in 1941 for the Zurich tramways, but my point still stands)  and while it didn't in Japan, the concept of a cardan drive car was introduced into Japan through knowledge of the existence of the PCC car both immediately prior and immediately after the war.

In fact I added the section about the Tōden 5500 type cars precisely to illustrate that the same term could come to mean something entirely different depending on the language, culture and time period (as well as trying to at least include something related to Japan in my post 😉).

 

2 hours ago, brill27mcb said:

It's the licensed technology, not the appearance of the car or the market situation surrounding them

 

I agree with the first part, that's why I classified them as PCC derivatives in the first place.

 

I also agree with the second part, I merely included the different exterior designs etc. to add to my point that the PCC, though highly standardized, was never just built to one specific set of technical specifications, and as such the elements which constitute a PCC car are not as strictly defined as sometimes stated (take the main controller mentioned above for example), nothing more nothing less.

 

As for the third part, I disagree. Perhaps I should've been clearer in my earlier post, but for me it was more about the language used vs a widely differing point view. There is a linguistic difference in my opinion between the T3 is a PCC car vs the T3 uses licensed PCC technology the first suggests something different to the uninitiated observer than the second one.

 

Moreover, what I was getting at is that the specifications laid out for the PCC car as originally devised had everything to do with the reality American electric railroads had to face at that period in time. The 1931 conference wasn't convened because the companies present just wanted to design the most modern streetcar for no reason, no they wanted to find a way to weather the situation they found themselves into, and the specifications for what would become the PCC car were entirely based around that desire, how the manufacturers achieved the performance specifications as decided by the committee, which technology they used to get there didn't matter one bit to the committee, as long as those specifications were met, and as long as said solutions were economical it didn't matter how they were achieved. Yes eventually more detailed specifications were laid out, but those still left more than enough wiggle room for the licensed (American) manufacturers to design and produce their own (approved) solutions as long as they met the specifications.

 

But let's not make this into something bigger than it actually is, we agree on principle, it's just that in my personal opinion simply calling the Tatra's PCC's isn't doing them justice, while at the same time glossing over the nuances which can be found in the American PCC's and their conception does the same for their American cousins, and I personally think there is a bit of nuance which can get lost here. But I'd say, let us agree to disagree.

 

Cheers!

[maihama eki]

Need kitty ears and tail for some of your n-scale cars? A campaign roof top rack? Various advertising wraps, and what-not for your cars? Tomytec heard your request.

 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10902187/30/4

 

 

 

 

 

[brill27mcb]

The Hobby Search listing for these Tatra models states that they are Tomytec's "4th overseas tram series." My question is what were the first 3 series? I don't recall seeing this series designation before.

 

Rich K.

[bill937ca]

Berlin / Munich single end (original mold) GT6

Jena / Braunschweig /Mainz  double end (new mold) GT6

Nuremberg single end (new mold) GT6

Prague T3 and Leipzig T4 single end (same new mold)

 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/list/1712/6/1?Make=Tomytec

 

Edited July 21, 2022 by bill937ca

[brill27mcb]

Thanks as always, Bill!

 

Rich K.

[KateM]

August announcements have come early 🙂 

 

 

 

[disturbman]

And the bus system is BACK!
 

 

[bill937ca]

All those buses!!! Sammy will be cleaned out!  😁

 

 I'm looking at the Hobby Search listing and their are some caveats on the new bus system.

 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10916292

*The [automatic stop/departure function] and [variable speed] that were attached to the previous product are not compatible with this product.
 

* Do not bring magnets or other magnetic objects close to the running bus. Malfunction may occur.
*Specifications, functions, and images are under development. Please note that it may differ from the product.

Edited September 8, 2022 by bill937ca

[cteno4]

Hmm looks like they simplified it back to the old faller on/off control. But the chassis looks to be a great redesign to fit different wheelbases and the quick and easy battery replace. Rechargeable Lithium battery was nice and eco, but if left uncharged for a long time would kill it. Too bad there is not a small lipo battery pack that could easily be replaceable.

 

jeff

 

 

[Guest]

The N700S-8000(Kamome) is the one I’m most looking forward too. I was hoping that it would be on the horizon, and happy Tomix announced it yesterday for a March 2023 release. I’ve ridden every Shinkansen and have every Tomix Shinkansen, so this an exciting addition. 

 

https://www.tomytec.co.jp/tomix/products/n/98817.html

[bill937ca]

By the way some  Moving Bus track pieces are back in stock at Hobby Search and perhaps other dealers.

 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/list/1219/6/1

[disturbman]

11 minutes ago, Bob Martin said:

The N700S-8000(Kamome) is the one I’m most looking forward too. I was hoping that it would be on the horizon, and happy Tomix announced it yesterday for a March 2023 release. I’ve ridden every Shinkansen and have every Tomix Shinkansen, so this an exciting addition. 

 

https://www.tomytec.co.jp/tomix/products/n/98817.html

We have separate threads for Tomix and Tomytec, the announcement for the N700-8000 was posted there 🙂

[Guest]

1 hour ago, disturbman said:

We have separate threads for Tomix and Tomytec, the announcement for the N700-8000 was posted there 🙂

I guess I didn’t relaize that, since it all falls under www.tomytec.co.jp and it was all announced on the same presentation video. feel free to move/delete the post. 😜

Edited September 8, 2022 by Bob Martin

[disturbman]

Really no worries. Just thought it was a good occasion to let you know about the other subjects.

Tomix is a subsidiary of Tomytec; we separated the subject as per the branding. The common video presentation is a relatively recent phenomenon.

[cteno4]

It’s is confusing as at first Tomytec was presented as the brand for the building, vehicle, train and scenery collections, sort of a cheap side biz to the old standard Tomix brand of trains, buildings and tracks. Then later Tomytec was put forward as the overall brand under tomy for their model trains and Tomix put under Tomytec as a sub brand. This might have been their intent all along it was more in how it was rolled out over a decade or so. They are still their own sort of brands and still clear line of distinction on the products and packaging presentation/logos. Marketing makes my head hurt.

 

cheers,

 

jeff

[JR 500系]

On 9/8/2022 at 3:40 PM, disturbman said:

And the bus system is BACK!

 

I literally jumped when i saw this!!! All those buses, and a fuel cell bus!!! 🙂

 

On 9/8/2022 at 7:12 PM, bill937ca said:

All those buses!!! Sammy will be cleaned out!  😁

 

 I'm looking at the Hobby Search listing and their are some caveats on the new bus system.

 

https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10916292

*The [automatic stop/departure function] and [variable speed] that were attached to the previous product are not compatible with this product.
 

* Do not bring magnets or other magnetic objects close to the running bus. Malfunction may occur.
*Specifications, functions, and images are under development. Please note that it may differ from the product.

 

Hahaha you are SSSOOOO correct Bill! Now to see where to order from, and how many.  😛

 

The new motor is pretty interesting... wont the battery be in the way of the wheels, hanging out like this below? 

It's great that it is expandable, which means it can actually fit into the longer base coaches. The only thing is that is doesnt work with the previous bus stops...  X_X ... We need to work around it by having this bus perform a 快速 service to skip some bus stops. ~  Would be great as well if they had included directional lights but oh well that's just me...  😛

 

Would Tomytec be releasing the new chassis motor individually? 

 

Edited September 10, 2022 by JR 500系

[arkh]

Still trying to decide if I want to buy the bus system set. I was thinking if I ever wanted to use Tomytec's moving buses on a layout, I'd probably just make my own track anyway since it doesn't seem too hard. But the appeal of pre-made ones is still great for me, haha. 

[cteno4]

You can do some more realistic turns with your own wire. Don’t have to have big round corners you can just swing wide into oncoming lane some and sharper curve and then swing back into the lane after the turn. It’s fun as you can experiment just taping the wire under some 020 styrene or thin chipboard. You can do printed streets easily that give more details and look as nice as Tomytec streets.

 

jeff

[bill937ca]

Wish Tomytec made moving bus compatible tram track. Just yesterday I was looking at the Porta Nuova train station in Turin Italy. Tram 4 stops outside the station and shares the tram platforms with buses.  I have also seen this in other places where tram right of ways are wide enough to accommodate buses.