Re: making the case for self-tapping screws

Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>

Hi Denny,

Gather you are back in your "normal" habitat as I see "Sacramento"
at the end of your post rather than "Iowa". But with regard to truck
screws, and without wishing to open a new thread for endless
discussion, it does seem to me that this is another standard that the
NMRA could/should have addressed long, long ago. It seems that each
individual manufacturer of rolling stock has just chosen a method of
truck attachment that seemed convenient at the time the process was
set up. For my own purposes If I don't like what is presented I
usually fill any exisitng holes with five minute epoxy and then do
things "my way", which in the end only adds to the disparities
already out there. A single standard would better serve everyone.

Happy Holidays, Don Valentine

--- In STMFC@..., Denny Anspach <danspach@...> wrote:

Creating bushings to compensate for disarity in size between 2-56
screws and the gaping truck bolster holes is one path to solution-
it can be a remarkably frustrating one. The depth of bushings
from truck make/type to another seem to vary considerably, so that
bushing that you have fabricated may be too short for truck A, or
long for truck B, so that in the end although one has indeed
the infernal truck side-slip, instead he/she is left to deal with
either a car body rocking like a drunken soldier, or a loose truck
screw already working its way out.

Of course, if the overly long bushings can be made easily shorter,
if the security of 2-56 screws in the body bolsters can be
then the use of bushings is certainly one pathway to A solution.

Truck makers make bushings peculiar to their truck bolsters?


Denny S. Anspach, MD

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.