# matte vs. glossy locomotive surface



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

Shouldn't locomotives be more glossy than they are? I have photos of the prototypes of some of my locomotives, and in real life they're shiny metal. Dirty, but still with some gloss.The models, on the other hand, are quite a dull, almost matte, surface. 

Is this done so that it's easier to add details, decals, paint? They don't really look right to me. I guess I miss my all-metal Lionel from childhood, but plastic could be glossy too.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

I too raised this point at my German Modelleisenbahn forum and several are of the opinion that gloss paint doesn't scale well. German and Austrian locomotives are generally kept fairly clean and in good finish repair, but the paint fades and the gloss disappears too.

Viewing a locomotive at 200 or more scale feet and it might look too glossy. I know it's not quite the same because there would be reflections from the actual locomotive that you could see at 200 or more real feet.

The Rhätische Bahn is very careful about maintaining their locomotives to the point of waxing them when needed. In addition to scheduled passenger service, many tourist use that railroad and they have to keep their equipment looking its best.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Well, most of the (real) train equipment I see here in North America, is quite flat in finish…..rain, snow, dirt and weather takes the shine off them real fast….that’s why all my train equipment gets a shot of dullcote….

The only glossy ones I have seen are straight out of the factory or paint shop.…

There’s nothing glossy about these….


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

On the other end we have shiny RhB locomotives...even in the snow:


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Weathering is natural on any surface, and if IC engines are involved, or fire and steam, there will be soot, ash, grime, and grease. There will also be bird droppings, atmospheric dust, pollen, mineral deposits on the tender walls, and mineral deposits on the the downhill sides of any inlet valves where water was untreated.

In the steam era, only newly shopped engines looked like the shinier models, except that 'the varnish' consists, higher end passenger trains and their power, were kept clean for the sake of the passengers and the road's image. Freight engines didn't need to look pretty, they just needed to work well enough that the company made money. 

BLI, at least in the case of the Norfolk & Western Class J 4-8-4, took pains to faithfully paint the freight versions with a dull paint. Their notable passenger engines were glossed up, just like the prototype.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

Numerous factors involved there.
Firstly age or how recently repainted.
Location is a factor in a couple ways; ATSF will fade much faster than Boston & Maine. Also locos assigned closer to service hubs get better care (my observational opinion)
Freight locomotives get washed far less often than passenger locos do.
Service assignment is also a factor. A road switcher assigned to a branch that has a grain mill, wood distributor etc will be less grungy than a loco of the same company assigned to a heavy industrial corridor with factories and power plants etc. 
Service assignment priority. Years ago, passenger trains were not created equal. I don't mean priority in traffic, like Mail priority, but priority based on prestige. When the Empire State Express debuted, it dethroned something else… which dropped to lesser priority train. More prestigious equipment gets better care in general.
Weather; a fresh rain that hasn’t dried looks glossy.
And budget (operating cost) of course. Some companies hold appearances in higher regard than others.
Fleet size. Washing doesn’t come free. See: Budget.
Paint quality. Dupont has made many colors/formulas over the years that were susceptible to failure. Early Conrail units you’ll see 2, 3, maybe even 4 different blues used before one was officially adopted. The black that Conrail used to cover “Penn Central” was notorious for failure. Most of these failures started in the early 1970s (also applies to automobiles) when they moved away from lead-based paint, which was much more durable. Compare a 1950s boxcar to a 1970s boxcar, ignoring grime & grease, and look strictly at paint fade & failure.


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

Apologies for being late returning to this interesting thread. Great photographs and discussion by you all, and more on that below. I guess I wasn't clear in my initial query. I should say: Why aren't the new models, brand new from the manufacturer, shiny? In this picture of my brand new Mallard from Hornby, maybe you can see what I mean. The different colors aside, clearly the model is a dull matte finish compared to the real locomotive. Sure, the real thing has been cleaned up for its museum or Coronation train or whatever. I understand about model weathering, I totally get why you do it. In a layout that is supposed to be as realistic as possible, shiny trains really aren't realistic for very long, with the passenger exceptions noted by others. 

But this is a new locomotive I just received. If we mean to be realistic, wouldn't we want our new model trains to be shiny new, and then age appropriately as we run them? They won't age naturally, hence the weathering. But a weathered gloss surface will look different from a weathered matte surface.

In the context of the verisimilitude demanded by (most) modelers, this is also an existential and time-twisting question actually, and I'd love to hear more of your thoughts about it. 

For twenty years I photographed American Main Streets, which of course are closely tied to railroads. For many reasons, I'm attracted to old dilapidated buildings and old dilapidated trains. But the (real) Main Streets built in the 19th century also have refurbished, repainted facades, FedEx boxes, handicapped parking signs, modern shopfronts, all kinds of things that date them to the 21st century. One question I wrestle with is, how do we depict the time period of our meant-to-be-permanent model layouts? Say it's supposed to be the 1950s and all the tiny female people are wearing skirts. Are any of the 1950s trains supposed to be new, or would they all be weathered? Things, places, and people we value because they show their history were new, and new-looking, in their time.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Where’s the picture of your Mallard?


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

Old_Hobo said:


> Where’s the picture of your Mallard?


Oh it didn't show up? Weird. Trying again:


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Nice! Looks like the version I bought recently….and I like the flat finish…..the glossy pics in that book were all staged, with the locomotive being shined and polished for the photo-shoot….factory fresh….

You’d be surprised how quickly a locomotive looses the “factory fresh” appearance when it starts working for a living…. 😁

I think a lot of it comes down to what many things in this hobby come down to….personal preference….


----------



## DonW (Mar 25, 2012)

I like the finish Hornby put on my Orient Express, really smooth finish with just a little sheen but not enough to give a reflection. Yours looks really flat! Maybe wax it for a little improvement?


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

That blue in the photos of the locomotive is a lot bluer than the model. That looks a little on the green side.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

DonW said:


> I like the finish Hornby put on my Orient Express, really smooth finish with just a little sheen but not enough to give a reflection. Yours looks really flat! Maybe wax it for a little improvement?


I like the flat, I don’t think any shine would improve it….but again, personal preference….


----------



## vette-kid (May 2, 2020)

Blue North said:


> Oh it didn't show up? Weird. Trying again:
> View attachment 577113


Man I would love to have one of those!

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

MichaelE said:


> That blue in the photos of the locomotive is a lot bluer than the model. That looks a little on the green side.


Yes, it's more of dark teal. Very nice color, just not like any Mallard picture I've seen.


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

vette-kid said:


> Man I would love to have one of those!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk


Very affordable! It arrived in a week from the UK for just under $200 including about $50 for the shipping. It is only DCC Ready, not DCC Fitted, which is what I wanted. I'm running it on basic DC and it is by far the fastest loco in my little fleet of six. I can't even turn up the control knob all the way, it's already going too fast. As it should be.


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

DonW said:


> I like the finish Hornby put on my Orient Express, really smooth finish with just a little sheen but not enough to give a reflection. Yours looks really flat! Maybe wax it for a little improvement?


That's a thought! (Is it a good thought?)


----------



## DonW (Mar 25, 2012)

As to waxing I should have warned proceed with caution, I used some cleaner wax on a set of passenger cars that had stains and scratches, they look way better but they also took on a lot of gloss clearly shinier when placed next to my other set that are untouched with original like new factory satin finish.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Blue North said:


> Apologies for being late returning to this interesting thread. Great photographs and discussion by you all, and more on that below. I guess I wasn't clear in my initial query. I should say: Why aren't the new models, brand new from the manufacturer, shiny? In this picture of my brand new Mallard from Hornby, maybe you can see what I mean. The different colors aside, clearly the model is a dull matte finish compared to the real locomotive. Sure, the real thing has been cleaned up for its museum or Coronation train or whatever. I understand about model weathering, I totally get why you do it. In a layout that is supposed to be as realistic as possible, shiny trains really aren't realistic for very long, with the passenger exceptions noted by others.
> 
> But this is a new locomotive I just received. If we mean to be realistic, wouldn't we want our new model trains to be shiny new, and then age appropriately as we run them? They won't age naturally, hence the weathering. But a weathered gloss surface will look different from a weathered matte surface.
> 
> ...


It appears that the eye candy caught more attention in the recent posts than did your question.

You depict the scene by the setting. The look in the 1910's was markedly different from the look in mid-1950, as photos will readily show. However, the place is important because the local culture was important. Economy is/was important. Even the looks of steam locomotives designed and built in the 20's was vastly different from what came just 15 years later when the war had started. War measures even meant reductions in the grades of available materials. The US government, for example, in both wars, heavily regulated what could be purchased new by the rails, even going so far as to prohibit new designs. When steam was just coming onto its own in the 1945 era, diesels were offered with incentives and promised simpler maintenance, less infrastructure roadside, even the opportunity to lighten the employee roll. 

Despite what might be guessed as the boom happened near the end of the War, the roads were on tough times and had begun to let maintenance slide, especially on their steamers. Some roads were still committed and the last main line steamer stood up was Norfolk & Western's Y6b, a heavy Mallet type 2-8-8-2 #2200. That was 1952. By then, a majority of other roads were dropping their fires like mad and integrating second generation diesels into their stables. Those beast would indeed, as you have guessed, looked rather fine just out of the shops. Didn't take more than a month to turn them grimy.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

Adding a finishing gloss would require machines, material, human operators, and time. 
I’m guessing that’s the reason, but just a guess.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

OilValleyRy said:


> Adding a finishing gloss would require machines, material, human operators, and time.
> I’m guessing that’s the reason, but just a guess.


And all those things you mention equate to money, and railroads just love to save money, so….


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

OilValleyRy said:


> Adding a finishing gloss would require machines, material, human operators, and time.
> I’m guessing that’s the reason, but just a guess.


On model trains, I was reading that we need to do that anyway if applying decals, gloss the whole piece so the decals will look integrated. True?


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

If you’re decalling yourself, then yes……factory decorated/painted locos, different story….


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

Blue North said:


> On model trains, I was reading that we need to do that anyway if applying decals, gloss the whole piece so the decals will look integrated. True?


Correct, factory decorated or not. Like adding ACI labels etc. I do 2 gloss coats total, the first to hide film discoloration. The 2nd after a setting solution, mainly to obscure the edges of where decals were trimmed.
But not everyone adds such things.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

Old_Hobo said:


> And all those things you mention equate to money, and railroads just love to save money, so….


I was referring to model manufacturers. As to real RRs I couldn’t say definitively but I assume that “clear coat” is part of the paint process like at GM et al.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Actually, I think a lot of the real railroads use vinyl decals to apply their name/design on their locomotives nowadays, so I doubt very much if they spray a clear protective coat over them when they are done….

I do know that CP’s giant gold beaver shield is a vinyl decal….









Some refer to this method as “wrapping”….

Vinyl Locomotive Wrapping


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

The paint gets clear coated either way, or is a high gloss paint. I think theres youtube vids of the Juniata paint shop showing how it’s all done at that facility. Alaska RR was having brand new units painted there a while back. 
I wouldn’t doubt some #s etc are vinyl now.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Here are some pics of the decals being applied on C.P.’s military tribute locomotives…..

The pics are from the shop where the decals were applied for the Navy tribute locomotive….


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

@Old_Hobo Hob ... what are these?



Old_Hobo said:


> View attachment 576900
> 
> View attachment 576898


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Blue North said:


> One question I wrestle with is, how do we depict the time period of our meant-to-be-permanent model layouts? Say it's supposed to be the 1950s and all the tiny female people are wearing skirts. Are any of the 1950s trains supposed to be new, or would they all be weathered? Things, places, and people we value because they show their history were new, and new-looking, in their time.


A problem I've seen mentioned in many videos. When people model the 1950's (for example) they tend to make everything look 70 years old. 

It carries over to other hobbies too. In reenacting and Cowboy Action Shooting people tend to want their guns to look like they're 150 years old, with most of the bluing gone, heavy patina and worn wood. In 1885 a cowboy wouldn't have plopped down a month's wages for a gun that looked like that.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Stumpy said:


> @Old_Hobo Hob ... what are these?


Those are locomotives that I used to depict how un-glossy railway equipment can become….


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

What make/model?


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

The first one is a high hood EMD GP30….

The second one is an Alco high hood C630…..


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Thanks.

The Alco has a slug or calf behind it.


----------



## Ron045 (Feb 11, 2016)

Blue North said:


> On model trains, I was reading that we need to do that anyway if applying decals, gloss the whole piece so the decals will look integrated. True?


You should apply a gloss coat prior to applying decals. But once the decals are applied you can do the final coat it any finish you like. Flat, matte or gloss again.
The 44 tonner is Matte and the 2-8-0 is gloss.


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

Very nice decals! Thanks, great to see examples.


----------



## Blue North (12 mo ago)

Stumpy said:


> A problem I've seen mentioned in many videos. When people model the 1950's (for example) they tend to make everything look 70 years old.
> 
> It carries over to other hobbies too. In reenacting and Cowboy Action Shooting people tend to want their guns to look like they're 150 years old, with most of the bluing gone, heavy patina and worn wood. In 1885 a cowboy wouldn't have plopped down a month's wages for a gun that looked like that.


We've been watching "Deadwood" (1876) all the way through for the second time, one of the greatest series ever. Fascinating to see how some buildings look old (even though supposedly new), some look new, some look partially finished, and the thoroughfare is always muddy.

Yesterday I bought the Woodland Scenics "rustic water tower" with graffiti on it, sale price from my hobby store, as they are discontinuing it. "Chuck is a cheater" it says. If I decide I prefer it looking spiffy, can always paint it. Also got a 1960s pickup truck that has an iridescent finish! Now that really looks too new.


----------

