Fw: Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar


The tackboards, being black, stick out drawing attention to their inaccuracy. They have a pin in the back of them that hold them to the car. However, a quick paint job to make them the same color as the car and the discrepancy goes away for the average modeler. I did not try to replace them at this point, just paint them (too many other projects on my work table). I also replaced the 2-piece Atlas coupler with Kadee whisker 58s.

----- Original Message -----
From: mcindoefalls
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:39 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar

--- In STMFC@..., "culturalinfidel9" <djmiller@...> wrote:
> I've seen only limited discussion on the new Atlas 1932 boxcars. How
> is the level of detailing? Any blatant inaccuracies?

Recently there was a brief discussion here, which mostly questioned
the two-board tackboards. But while we're on the subject, I have to
question Atlas's choice of road names. The only ones I'm even
remotely, and I mean remotely, interested in are CofG and MEC. If they
had offered WM, C&O or Seaboard in the first run, they would have sold
a car or three to me already. But, Warrior River Terminal???

Walt Lankenau

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.