From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment and found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car here a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+.
> From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment and > found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car here > a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+.
=>"Ian G. Mathers" <imath...@internorth.com> wrote in message =>news:40627029@news.tera-byte.com... =>> From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment =>and =>> found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car =>here =>> a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+. =>> =>> =>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3183428820&categor... =>&sspagename=rvi:1:2 => =>what's wrong with it? => =>
The CN logo is too thin and the wrong size. Lettering in lettering block is wrong font (too thin). Been this way ever since Athearn first offered this paint scheme back in the 60s or 70s - can't imagine why they persisted with this stupid mistake. Has made me suspicious of _all_ Athearn paint schemes, and I check them all against reality now.
Wolf Kirchmeir ................................. If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on this train? (Garrison Keillor) <just one w and plain ca for correct address>
> =>"Ian G. Mathers" <imath...@internorth.com> wrote in message > =>news:40627029@news.tera-byte.com... > =>> From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment > =>and > =>> found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car > =>here > =>> a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+. > =>> > =>>
> =>&sspagename=rvi:1:2 > => > =>what's wrong with it?
> The CN logo is too thin and the wrong size. Lettering in lettering block is > wrong font (too thin). Been this way ever since Athearn first offered this > paint scheme back in the 60s or 70s - can't imagine why they persisted with > this stupid mistake. Has made me suspicious of _all_ Athearn paint schemes, > and I check them all against reality now.
ah ok. I did notice the thin logo. I didn't click on the "supersize' photos, so I didn't notice the font was wrong too...it didn't look noticable on the smaller ones. I guess I was thinking maybe there was a typo or something, that's why I asked :)
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 22:37:35 GMT, Steve Hoskins wrote:
=>On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:36:11 -0700, "Ian G. Mathers" =><imath...@internorth.com> wrote : => =>>From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment and =>>found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car here =>>a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+. =>> =>>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3183428820&categor... => =>Sure it's worth $10.00 or a little more. => =>The car probably cost $7.00 or maybe a little more new. Add the Kadee =>couplers, and the weathering.
Nah, it's worthless. Wrong lettering, needs new paintjob. I might give you a couple bucks at a swap table if I was hard up for 40' boxcar bodies, and there weren't any Roco-built AHM PS-1s around.
Wolf Kirchmeir ................................. If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on this train? (Garrison Keillor) <just one w and plain ca for correct address>
> Been this way ever since Athearn first offered this > paint scheme back in the 60s or 70s - can't imagine why they persisted with > this stupid mistake.
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:36:11 -0700, "Ian G. Mathers" > <imath...@internorth.com> wrote :
> >From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National equipment and > >found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular car here > >a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+.
Briefly in IIRC the 1960s. They were the same as their blue boxes except yellow. I have one out of a total of several hundred Athearn boxes.
At roughly the same period Athearn experimented with a totally different box. Slightly more square in shape, pale blue with entirely different printing and with a window. A complete failure as the windows were of rather thin material which almost invariably gave way. The cardboard was not of marvelous quality either and that style of box was also abandonned after only a few months.
I still have a couple of those yellow boxes from the 60's. And I remeber the pale blue boxes with the 'window' - I think the'steam era' box car paint schemes were in those boxes...
> Briefly in IIRC the 1960s. They were the same as their blue boxes except > yellow. > I have one out of a total of several hundred Athearn boxes.
> At roughly the same period Athearn experimented with a totally different box. > Slightly more square in shape, pale blue with entirely different printing and > with a window. A complete failure as the windows were of rather thin material > which almost invariably gave way. The cardboard was not of marvelous quality > either and that style of box was also abandonned after only a few months.
> > =>"Ian G. Mathers" <imath...@internorth.com> wrote in message > > =>news:40627029@news.tera-byte.com... > > =>> From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National > equipment > > =>and > > =>> found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular > car > > =>here > > =>> a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+. > > =>> > > =>>
> > The CN logo is too thin and the wrong size. Lettering in lettering block > is > > wrong font (too thin). Been this way ever since Athearn first offered this > > paint scheme back in the 60s or 70s - can't imagine why they persisted > with > > this stupid mistake. Has made me suspicious of _all_ Athearn paint > schemes, > > and I check them all against reality now.
> ah ok. I did notice the thin logo. I didn't click on the "supersize' photos, > so I > didn't notice the font was wrong too...it didn't look noticable on the > smaller > ones. I guess I was thinking maybe there was a typo or something, that's why > I asked :)
Actually, the "error" is the CN Wet noodle on the LEFT, and reporting marks on the RIGHT.
I don't know how rare it is, as I've had a couple of them in the past, as well as the "correct ones", Athearn made both.
> In article <dtQ8c.1334$z%1.1...@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>, "Mark Mathu" > <m...@mathu.com> writes:
> >When did Athearn use yellow boxes?
> Briefly in IIRC the 1960s. They were the same as their blue boxes except > yellow. > I have one out of a total of several hundred Athearn boxes.
> At roughly the same period Athearn experimented with a totally different box. > Slightly more square in shape, pale blue with entirely different printing and > with a window. A complete failure as the windows were of rather thin material > which almost invariably gave way. The cardboard was not of marvelous quality > either and that style of box was also abandonned after only a few months.
> Alex. W. Stirrat
The "yellow box" was the standard Athearn box up until the late 1960's. one in several hundred? I have 4 or 5 of about 50.
The "window" box was used for several years from the late 1950's through early 60's for Athearn's RTR cars. I don't know that it was ever used for kits.
In article <QC99c.1164$YC5....@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>, "Mark Mathu"
<m...@mathu.com> writes: >> The "yellow box" was the standard Athearn box up until the late 1960's.
I started buying Athearn in the early 60s and my first ones came in blue boxes. My only yellow boxed one was certainly not the first I bought though it did look as if it had sat on a shop shelf for some time so could well have been the tail end of early stock. It contained one of their more obscure kits which I would not think had a very high turnover rate. I still have it but its not readily to hand at the moment to check what the exact item was.
> The "window" box was used for several years from the late 1950's through > early 60's for Athearn's RTR cars.
Mine definitely contained kits as I have never bought Athearn RTR until recently when that is the only way to buy certain of their cars. I was not even aware that Athearn did RTR back then.
> In article <QC99c.1164$YC5....@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>, "Mark Mathu" > <m...@mathu.com> writes:
> >> The "yellow box" was the standard Athearn box up until the late 1960's.
> I started buying Athearn in the early 60s and my first ones came in blue boxes. > My only yellow boxed one was certainly not the first I bought though it did > look as if it had sat on a shop shelf for some time so could well have been the > tail end of early stock. It contained one of their more obscure kits which I > would not think had a very high turnover rate. I still have it but its not > readily to hand at the moment to check what the exact item was.
> > The "window" box was used for several years from the late 1950's through > > early 60's for Athearn's RTR cars.
> Mine definitely contained kits as I have never bought Athearn RTR until > recently when that is the only way to buy certain of their cars. I was not even > aware that Athearn did RTR back then.
> Alex. W. Stirrat
Athearn had quite a bit of ready to run. In fact around that era they were one of the best selling "train set" lines around. I got into HO in 1959 with an Athearn "set". Lionel RTR production ca. 1960 or so was also actually made by Athearn. Other lines also included Athearn rtr cars, most notably Herkimer (of aluminum streamliner fame).
In later years, Athearn also made models for "Cox".
> > > =>"Ian G. Mathers" <imath...@internorth.com> wrote in message > > > =>news:40627029@news.tera-byte.com... > > > =>> From time to time I do a search on eBay for Canadian National > > equipment > > > =>and > > > =>> found this Athearn error. I remember reading about this particular > > car > > > =>here > > > =>> a while back and wondered if it is worth $10+. > > > =>> > > > =>>
> > > The CN logo is too thin and the wrong size. Lettering in lettering block > > is > > > wrong font (too thin). Been this way ever since Athearn first offered > this > > > paint scheme back in the 60s or 70s - can't imagine why they persisted > > with > > > this stupid mistake. Has made me suspicious of _all_ Athearn paint > > schemes, > > > and I check them all against reality now.
> > ah ok. I did notice the thin logo. I didn't click on the "supersize' > photos, > > so I > > didn't notice the font was wrong too...it didn't look noticable on the > > smaller > > ones. I guess I was thinking maybe there was a typo or something, that's > why > > I asked :)
> Actually, the "error" is the CN Wet noodle on the LEFT, and reporting marks > on the RIGHT.
> I don't know how rare it is, as I've had a couple of them in the past, as > well as the "correct ones", Athearn made both.
