Mike and all,

Being in the Transloading Business in today's world I have to say I will ship
anything that you want me to in your car as long as it doesn't go over gross
to the car. The rate will be the same THANK YOU. $7200.00 to Nichols siding
in Brooklyn, NY or $7400.00 to most spots in Florida and yes we do ship there
quite often. The point is that most freight moves on a per car rate. But
items like grain, coal, minerals, and bulk commodities move on a per hundred
weight. I think it was this way in the 50's as well, Farm Implements likely
moved just as autos and auto parts on a per car basis. So ship only four but
cover your freight as we would remind you...

Greg Martin

I looking at an article from 2-95 RMC p.92. It's by Robert Smaus, it's a how
to for making UP 53'6" flats. He has four John Deere's crosswise and shows a
sketch for crosswise loading from the 1947 AAR rules.
Clark

Mike Brock wrote:

Greg Martin writes:

I have been doing a little photo research on Farmalls and mix'd freights

and

I found a shot in (the Late) Don Ball Jr's book America's Colorful

Railroads.

Here is what I have found so far ... on page 178, at the bottom a 1956 UP
mix'd steam local and two cars back there are at least 3 Farmalls on an
unidentifiable flat. (great color photo though check out the stock cars)

Greg, good info. Let us know of other shots. I have completed putting 4
Athearn tractors on an F-50-11 52 ft flat car...cables and all. The issue of
how many tractors and their placement is an interesting one and it is best
to not jump to too many conclusions about rules I think. Some have written
something about no less than 6 tractors to a car. I doubt that there would
be any restrictions on how few tractors could be placed on a car. If a
customer wanted to ship less than 6...he would and I suspect that the RR
would be glad to provide a car. There is an interesting shot of tractors on
a flat in Big Boy Portraits, pg 93. There are two tractors in a position
somewhat parallel to the car and one at the far end one at a 90� to the
others [ July 1954 ]. I have not seen this arrangement in an AAR plan.

Mike Brock

I agree with Mike's point on this but it raises the question of the basis for
the charges. If the car was full was it considered a bulk shipment, and if
not were they considered LCL and subject to a different freight rate? Or was
there some threshold? Anybody know more about how this worked?

Chris

Ben, You have some good points, but if you've never been an S scaler, you
just wouldn't understand the logic we sometimes subscribe to. Like the one
Harley Davidson ad states: "if I have to explain, you just wouldn't
understand" I too am picky on my choices of rolling stock and try to correct
any inaccuracies as time and ability permits, I find the 98% majority of
people who would see the layout wouldn't know the difference but I build to
satisfy my own standards. Having been forced to kitbash Am Flyer, build
wooden craftsman kits, etc over the years, I've realized that I ain't gonna
live forever and the eysight and manual dexterity are already not what they
once were (which is why I went into S years ago) So I'll buy only a few of
these inaccurate cars to hopefully be replaced by the more accurate kitbashes
as time permits (if I do end end up living long enough to enjoy the fruits of
the labor) You HO guys are fortunate to have so many choices but I wouldn't
trade places with you for anything. Bud

Hey Yuze Guys,

I have been doing a little photo research on Farmalls and mix'd freights and
I found a shot in (the Late) Don Ball Jr's book America's Colorful Railroads.
Here is what I have found so far ... on page 178, at the bottom a 1956 UP
mix'd steam local and two cars back there are at least 3 Farmalls on an
unidentifiable flat. (great color photo though check out the stock cars). I
find some of his books very good for reference but the quality of some of the
prints he published sometimes leaves a little to be desired. This photo is
quite nice as the color held up on it over the years just right.

Greg Martin

George Courtney asked on the S-scale list:

I was just wondering if there were any SPF's or freight
car specialist who would comment on the possiblity of
converting one of those AM 4 bay hoppers by slicing off
the two center bays and reversing them. How close to one
of the Pennsy H21 versions, as a stand in model? (Hope
H21 is correct)

George, I purchased a undec AM quad to explore the
possibility of the same conversion you are contemplating,
or alternately, to a PRR H25. For resources, I use John
Teichmoeller's PRR Hopper Car book. I am not sure how
close you want the car to be, so for now I will just cover
some basic aspects.

The AM car and the H21 both feature <rather> equally
spaced, 12 panel sides. The AM car sides are 7' 5" from
the bottom of the sill to the top of the side, while the
H21 measured 7' 3" at the same spot. The AM car is 10' 5"
on the outside width; H21's were 10' 3". Outside length
for the model is 42' 3", while the prototype had a 40' 2"
inside length.

The end sills and end supports aren't remotely close.
Since work would be needed there (a H21 without a heavy end
sill just wouldn't be an H21,) you could probably fix the
length issue simultaneously. All the side stakes require
shaping to resemble the "standard" PRR tapered stake, and
as you already know, the two center hoppers much be
reworked to face the opposite direction.

Want more than that?

If fairly close would such a hopper show up in s.w.
Virginia in the late 1950's. Hauling limestone or gravel
or salt for highway depts?

I'll let someone else tackle that question.

Last does the AM 4 bay hopper represent any prototype?
Not a complaint, just curious. Of course I wouldn't
consider doing stand-in's for the NYC or the SP, or the
DT&I, etc. >G<.

It appears that the "ribbed" quad was tooled using the AM
offset quad as a starting point, and thus is not strictly
accurate for anything. However, there are other roads
besides the PRR who received 12 panel ~40' quads that these
cars could be used as a starting place to model (B&O W-1's
cmoe to mind.)

The offset quad, on the other hand, is a fair
representation of a 1928 ARA design quad hopper. See
Railway Prototype Cyclopedia Vol 5 for an excellent 16 page
article covering those prototypes.

Earl Tuson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

Bud Rindfleisch wrote:

"Hello, I am one of those S scalers on this list and feel I have to mention
that although S Helper service is guilty of making an improper "rebuilt"
boxcar, the majority of their models are better than very good."

Yeah, but when they screw up, it's a doozy - the "rebuild" and USRA DS
cars are examples of what happens when you recycle tooling too many times -
each compromise that you make adds up until you have a model that's a
mishmash of several prototypes that doesn't represent anything. Think of it
like trying to drive a mountain road in a car with the windows painted over
with a stopwatch and road map. You'll do okay at first, but pretty soon
your errors add up and you end up going over a cliff.


"It also has to be pointed out that the very limited market for S scale
(including Hi-rail and/or tinplate) is fortunate indeed to have these
injection molded plastic models."

That's true, but a badly done kit of a previously unavailable prototype has
the effect of drawing off sales of better models that come later, especially
in a limited market such as S scale. The Kadee PS-1 broke this trend, so
maybe there's hope. Then again, HO is a much bigger market.


"Without those SHS cars to help fill in the roster quickly, I'd be hard
pressed to get a lengthy train together."

That was true 15 years ago in HO too, but we didn't get to where we are
today by accepting bad models. An inaccurate kit is an inaccurate kit, no
matter what the scale. $35 is a lot to spend on a train filler. Why should
you reward a manufacturer for making willful mistakes?


Ben Hom

Hello, I am one of those S scalers on this list and feel I have to mention
that although S Helper service is guilty of making an improper "rebuilt"
boxcar, the majority of their models are better than very good. It also has
to be pointed out that the very limited market for S scale (including Hi-rail
and/or tinplate) is fortunate indeed to have these injection molded plastic
models. Hey, I don't even complain that the cars come equipped with Hi-rail
wheels and AF compatible couplers, the code .110 scale wheelsets are included
and easy to install. Buying and installing the Kadee S scale 802's is also of
no major concern for me. I don't plan to have a several hundred car fleet,
maybe 150 when all is said and done. I don't even mind buying the occasional
"incorrect" car to help the cause. I also still build craftsman kits and the
plastic Pacific Rail Products kits along with a few of this list's beloved
resin kits (NYC Despatch hopper and Erie Dunmore, both F&C kits) An
occasional scratchbuilt car when I find the time (DL&W 42' wood milk car in
progress). Oh yes also working on one of Earl's Std Rwy Castings kits.
Without those SHS cars to help fill in the roster quickly, I'd be hard
pressed to get a lengthy train together. Thanks for reading guys, buy
yourself at least one S scale car for your display shelf, I don't think
you'll be disappointed. Bud Rindfleisch

From: "Benjamin Frank Hom" <b.hom@...>

Normally I try to avoid posting info outside of my scale,
but I just posted a reply on the Pennsy list concerning
these cars and I thought I'd share of my thoughts here
with the list, especially Jeff English, Earl Tuson, and
the local S scale community.

Several of the S scalers on this list discuss S specific
prototype modeling, primarily freight cars, in a different
forum, after having had a "trainset bozo" sort of
experience on the so-called S scale yahoo group.

S Helper Service recently released a "40 ft Rebuilt
Boxcar" in S Scale

Actually, it has been around for many years now.

the model has a number of serious shortcomings.

Yep, we have covered the car on both this list and the
alternate S scale one.

it's pretty obvious that the tooling for this car was
modified from SHS's USRA SS boxcar.

You are quite correct in this regard. The SHS USRA SS,
"S-40-10" stockcar, rebuilt boxcars, and more recently,
their USRA DS car, all share some tooling. The models have
progressively strayed further from their intended prototype
on each successive reuse of the molds. The DS car still
uses the SS car's narrow ends, the side sill is flush with
the outside of the sheathing, and the Murphy XLA roof
overhangs the car sides. If you did not know they intended
it to be a USRA DS car, you would not guess. It is an
absolute caricature; I would rather run a AF "X-29" than
this abomination. F&C did a lousy kit of the USRA DS years
ago. I have two, and will rework them rather than... How
many ways can I express my disatisfaction?

Underframe: USRA SS car (?)

FWIW, the most recent paint scheme released using this body
has in fact included a fishbelly underframe fairly
approximating the USRA cars', having been borrowed from
their ACF Type 3 reefer.

This model is probably closest to the ACL and SL-SF USRA
DS rebuilds;

The latter is the new scheme I refer to. Curiously, SHS
has never offered the rebuild in ACL or CW&C reporting
marks, despite my having made them very aware of the
prototypes and directing them to (Jim Six's?) article.

This model is better left to the American Flyer crowd.

That does describe the bulk of SHS customers.

Serious S scalers deserve better.

Such as my SRCC kits!

Despite the paragraphs above, SHS can be commended for
several of their cars: the 53'6" GSC flat, PS-2 hopper, and
USRA SS are good reproductions of the intended prototype.
I have never researched the stock car, never laid hands on
a three bay PS-2, and don't care about the International
extended vision caboose, although I have heard good things
about it. The is somewhere between the first three and the
rebuild. SHS's next project is going to be a 14000 series
LV composite hopper, which will probably later morph into a
USRA twin and a 20's era NYC 30'6" offset twin (how do you
spell disaster?) They have announced that they will make a
steel roof for the reefer, mount it on the USRA SS UF with
AB brakes, and offer more roadnames for that one.

Earl Tuson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

Now I'm not saying that anybody is wrong here. I'm just looking to do
the job right the first time. Is there some average range of chalk marks I
should shoot for. Thanks in advance. Just like to say that the Shineshine
decals are very nice to work with.

Chalk washed off pretty quickly -- if it rained. If not, then
marks could persist for quite a while. Like you I've seen photos
of many cars with no marks; but I've seen photos of cars with
many marks. How many to apply to your models calls for application
of judgement -- there is no "right" answer.


Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
Sterling, Massachusetts

Greetings list Members,

The weekend is here and I'm putting some of Sunshines' chalk markings on
some cars. I've noted that on the Shineshine flyers that there are often
more than a half dozen chalk marks on the side of a car. Is this for real?
I've dug through my limited collection of photos and can find at most 3
chalk mark on the side of a car.

Now I'm not saying that anybody is wrong here. I'm just looking to do
the job right the first time. Is there some average range of chalk marks I
should shoot for. Thanks in advance. Just like to say that the Shineshine
decals are very nice to work with.

Pete Reinhold
Paint Plus Trains
375 fourth Street
Prairie Du Sac, WI. 53578
608-643-4325
paintplustrains@...

I have scribed my own siding material back in the olda
days (pre-Evergreen). I used a "Kohliner" mechanical
line spacer to properly space the lines. I believe the
false T-G siding is 5.25" wide with a false groove in
the center. This would make the apparent boardwidth
narrower than the normal 3.25" board width found on most
cars.

Gene

Buck sez again:

You are welcome; however, apparently you have found the line between
to the two points to be straighter than imagined previously. It
usually takes me a couple of cups of coffee.

I will point out that what Charlie M. sez about the styrene scriber
from Micro Mark should make all take note...these are VERY handy and
there's always that need for some sort of something like this once in
awhile.

Buck Dean
Lexington, KY

Hello:
I have a few questions relating to SEABOARD's B-7 and AF-1
boxcars.
1)Did they have drop end style grabirons? The photos I have don't
really show the grabs too well.
2)What kind of handbrakes did they have?
3)What kind of trucks?
4)I'm assuming by the late WW2 years or late 1940s these cars would
have had steel running boards. Correct?
Thank you for your assistance.

Richard Stallworth

Bruce Smith (smithbf@...) writes:

Yes Bruce there is a wood God and we still have trees here in Oregon, lots of them...

Now, I really know better than to open this can of worms, but having to
face a project on my desk, I just have to ask...

I'm working on building a PRR wire train rider/tool car, and wanted to use
a Westerfield PRR MOW XL commisary car as a starting point. From a photo
Al Buchan sent me, I can tell that the siding on these cars is V grooved,
with what appears to be a 3" board width, but is in reality a 6" board
width with a center V-grove as well as a V-groove edge (as was applied to
most PRR wood cabins).<

Your observations are correct the "patterned stock" for "car siding" is 1"x6" V&CV T&G S2S REV which translates into VEE and Center Vee, Tounge and groove, Surfaced two Sides, Reversible center matched. Ths gives the impression of 2 piece of 1"x3". The patterned stock was "normally" run up on stock that was Ayes & Btr Clear Verticle Grain material. This helped reduce cupping, but the grade allows for some slash grain which once painted doesn't hold paint quiet as well. Thus you will see certain boards loose paint long before others.

I wanted to match the siding used for the masters for the Westerfield XL, but I can't seem to do it. Evergreen V-groove(.03", .04") has either too wide or too narrow a spacing and Evergreen car siding (3.5" boards IIRC) is just off a little bit in the spacing (actually too narrow, indicating that the Westerfield model has boards that are a little too wide <G>).

Any suggestions on matching the siding on these?

Happy Rails
Bruce

Good Luck trying to match the siding to Al's it might be tough to do. BUt I would think that the narrower would be closer to correct.

Greg Martin

Chet French wrote:

"The Wabash cars with the flush side sills are a result of a second
rebuilding which started two years after the period of this group---
1962. Car bodies from 83, 84, and 85000 series rebuilt cars were
placed on the floor and underframes from 13500-14849 series 41'-6"
gondolas. Trucks from the gons, both AAR standard and Andrews, were
used. The rebuilt cars were numbered 85200-85899 and had both 10'-4"
and 10'-0" IH's." <<snip>>

Great information, Chet! I never would have guessed that the
original underframe was swapped out with those from gons - that
tricky Wabash Mechanical Department!


"Side sills appeared to riveted to the underframe and the car body
welded to the side sill."

Explains the lack of an inset along the side sill.


"Cars were noted for some having a combination of corrugated and
dreadnaught ends, sometimes on the same end. Car 85346 had a 3/7/4,
B end, with the top two sections corrugated and the bottom
dreadnaught."

I was wondering about that car ever since I saw the photo in Classic
Freight Cars Volume 1. Of course, I wasn't about to trust the
caption in the book - that would be kind of like buying Worldcom
stock right now.


"Sorry I snuck past 1960."

In this case, not at all a problem. I'm coming to the conclusion
that the rebuilt boxcar book in the "Freight Cars in Service" series
is going to be the hardest one to write because of all of the
variations. It might also prove to be the most interesting one to do
because of that reason!

Thanks again!


Ben Hom

Buck sez:

Time to fall back to the old dental tool method for making siding if
you can't find an Evergreen stock item to match. Rather than take
up everyone's reading time with this here on the board, if you'll
email me , I'll walk you through the steps.

Thanks for the offer - In looking at this project more last night I
realized that I can use the Evergreen freight car siding...it may even
simplify the "bash".

My problem with this MOW car is that the window arrangement is different
from any of the the MOW XLs that Westerfield sells. So my original plan
was to cut the sides of one of Westerfield's kits up, rearrange whole
pieces of side and add siding as needed to fill gaps. This would allow me
to preserve details like the corner braces. Instead, I think that I will
simply drop Al W's windows into a new side, after cutting them out of the
XL kit side. The other details are pretty easy to add (DA NBW castings,
styrene for the fascia and corner braces)...heck this might be easier! In
both cases I would use the XL kit ends, and the board spacing is "close
enough" that no one will notice the difference between the ends and the
sides. Of course I'll use the XL unterframe as well. As it is, I'll need
to use TWO XL kits to harvest the correct windows, but parts of the second
one will get put to use building an FXL "living and idler" flat car...

In the end, these bashes will fit right in with the other 8 PRR MOW XL camp
cars that will make up three (or four) seperate MOW trains on my layout.

Happy Rails
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith V.M.D., Ph.D.
Scott-Ritchey Research Center
334-844-5587, 334-844-5850 (fax)
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ____________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|____________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0

Right! 4th, 5th edition, USED, for cheap, is what you want.

If you have one of these, and realize what you're looking at in a
photo, you can approximate scale a lot better . . . SGL <

So, the formal title of the desired reference book is, "AISC Manual"?
Thanks,
Brian Chapman

Noticed in latest Micromark catalog a scriber #60728 specifically for making siding.
Charlie