1. main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
Re: Shapeways

Robert kirkham
 

Trouble is, while the Frosted Ultra Detail is a nice material and can produce good parts, if it is not laid down into a part properly it can be very bad (as can their courser materials). I printed a bunch of 7/8 Murphy ends using that material and received some that were fine and usable and others that were very grainy - not from the normal process of laying in the material, but from something different I attribute to the machines Shapeways uses. On a lathe, you'd bet that surface distortion like I received was caused by chatter. No idea what is doing it with the Shapeways process. Because I received a mixture of acceptable and unacceptable parts on multiple occasions, I started to go elsewhere. The price is three times as high, but so far the quality is obviously better.

From that point of view, I have little trouble accepting criticism of Shapeways as a vendor that produces uneven quality. But a lot depends on what sort of part you need. And how many you want to discard to get it. I'm waiting for the day I can do HO people - but they are hard to draw. My suspicion is a wrinkle here and a wrinkle there won't be a deal breaker like it is on a boxcar end.

Rob Kirkham


--------------------------------------------------
From: "John Degnan" <Scaler164@...>
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2012 6:20 AM
To: <STMFC@...>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Shapeways

The conclusion to all of this (and a recent, similar discussion being held on one of the S scale groups) seems to be just as I suspected from the start - that the resulting quality of the part(s) being received from Shapeways depends on (1) the material chosen to have the part(s) printed in and (2) the quality of the design based on the designer's experience.

I can't say for sure, but I would almost be willing to wager a bet that the part reviewed by Bill Lane (who started this post) was not printed with the Frosted Ultra Detail material, and therefore is not a fair or just review of what Shapeways can do... only what they did in this one situation. But even if it was printed in the FUD material, I still cannot justify writing off a company based on a single person's single experience, expecially when there are so very many others who seem to have gotten great results from them.


John Degnan
Scaler164@...
Scaler187@...


----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2012 01:38 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Shapeways


Kent Hurley wrote:
>
> I send shapeways something to print every month, and although I have
had issues, most are disign issues. The FUD material is about all I use. You can see ia few is the scenic detail parts and and HOn30 engine shell and some one truck cars in my photo folder, nvrr49.

I've submitted a part to Shapeways to be run in the Frosted Ultra Detail (FUD) material Kent mentions. It looks to be 3D Systems' multi jet process, which is similar to the PolyJet process I have access to. The part is a heavyweight Pullman bolster assembly, the design is visible here:

http://www.shapeways.com/model/694311/bolster2.html?key=a29def8060cf357026fd64e7f1847f40

The part is very complex but doesn't have a lot of surface detail. The price is very competitive - I ordered two at $14.04 each plus $6.50 for shipping etc. We'll see how it goes.

Tom Madden




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: Shapeways

John Degnan <Scaler164@...>
 

The conclusion to all of this (and a recent, similar discussion being held on one of the S scale groups) seems to be just as I suspected from the start - that the resulting quality of the part(s) being received from Shapeways depends on (1) the material chosen to have the part(s) printed in and (2) the quality of the design based on the designer's experience.

I can't say for sure, but I would almost be willing to wager a bet that the part reviewed by Bill Lane (who started this post) was not printed with the Frosted Ultra Detail material, and therefore is not a fair or just review of what Shapeways can do... only what they did in this one situation. But even if it was printed in the FUD material, I still cannot justify writing off a company based on a single person's single experience, expecially when there are so very many others who seem to have gotten great results from them.


John Degnan
Scaler164@...
Scaler187@...

----- Original Message -----
From: pullmanboss
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2012 01:38 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Shapeways


Kent Hurley wrote:
>
> I send shapeways something to print every month, and although I have had issues, most are disign issues. The FUD material is about all I use. You can see ia few is the scenic detail parts and and HOn30 engine shell and some one truck cars in my photo folder, nvrr49.

I've submitted a part to Shapeways to be run in the Frosted Ultra Detail (FUD) material Kent mentions. It looks to be 3D Systems' multi jet process, which is similar to the PolyJet process I have access to. The part is a heavyweight Pullman bolster assembly, the design is visible here:

http://www.shapeways.com/model/694311/bolster2.html?key=a29def8060cf357026fd64e7f1847f40

The part is very complex but doesn't have a lot of surface detail. The price is very competitive - I ordered two at $14.04 each plus $6.50 for shipping etc. We'll see how it goes.

Tom Madden
Re: Shapeways

Tom Madden
 

Kent Hurley wrote:

I send shapeways something to print every month, and although I have had issues, most are disign issues. The FUD material is about all I use. You can see ia few is the scenic detail parts and and HOn30 engine shell and some one truck cars in my photo folder, nvrr49.
I've submitted a part to Shapeways to be run in the Frosted Ultra Detail (FUD) material Kent mentions. It looks to be 3D Systems' multi jet process, which is similar to the PolyJet process I have access to. The part is a heavyweight Pullman bolster assembly, the design is visible here:

http://www.shapeways.com/model/694311/bolster2.html?key=a29def8060cf357026fd64e7f1847f40

The part is very complex but doesn't have a lot of surface detail. The price is very competitive - I ordered two at $14.04 each plus $6.50 for shipping etc. We'll see how it goes.

Tom Madden
NEW BRASS BOXCAR

WILLIAM PARDIE
 

I have a friend who follows various brass lists on a daly basis. On a recent visit he had a new brass insulated
boxcar from a Crown Custom Imports. The car is reasonably priced (less than $200.00) for brass. The car
is a New Haven, State Of Maine, red, white and blue car. The car was so well done that I wound up ordering
one for myself. On receipt I weas very pleased with the model.

Although I am a Southern Pacific modeler and the build date on the car is 1953 (top end of my range) i do have
a photo of this car in San Francisco in the late 50's. Normally I make quite a few "improvements" on a brass
car. This car requires only air hose brackets as an addition. There was an excellent article on these cars in
the January 1995 Mainline Modeler magazine. The underframe even features a Royal Brake Regulator.

This is not meant to be a commercial for this product. If I had not stumbled across it I would have missed out
on an excellent model. Someone else might be interested.

Bill Pardie
Re: Shapeways

nvrr49 <nvrr49@...>
 

I send shapeways something to print every month, and although I have had issues, most are disign issues. The FUD material is about all I use. You can see ia few is the scenic detail parts and and HOn30 engine shell and some one truck cars in my photo folder, nvrr49.

Kent Hurley
KC, MO

--- In STMFC@..., "Frank Valoczy" <destron@...> wrote:


For my part, I will say that pretty much everyone I know - myself included
- has been satisfied with their purchases from Shapeways, ranging from
trucks to complete cars. I've had a TT scale covered hopper and a pulpwood
rack from them, and my only complaint was the surface finish - a bit
grainy; that was, however, before they introduced the Frosted Ultra Detail
material which is smoother and stronger than their previous materials. The
covered hopper is fairly solid, but the rack is quite spiderweb-like and
one would expect quite fragile, but it's proven to be surprisingly strong.

The new Frosted material is considerably better in finish, and the
strength is satisfactory too. If one is careful with one's models (and
little more so than with any other model), I don't see there being any
issue that could arise.

Just thought I'd put a different opinion on the subject out there for
others to consider.

Frank Valoczy
New Westminster, BC
Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's

Rich C
 

I would like to see decals produced for both versions. If we can get better photos or lettering diagrams and of course enough interest, maybe Jerry Glow would be interested in producing them.
 
Rich Christie


________________________________
From: erict1361 <erict1361@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 9:42 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's



 

Jerry,

Thanks, I never knew that the Large DIAMOND scheme existed?

Eric Thur

--- In mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com, "switchengines" <jrs060@...> wrote:

Well Eric, you missed a paint scheme in the middle between the 1920s "Diamond
Products" and the, I think, late 1930s large "D-X Gasoline" scheme. It featured a large
"Diamond" lettering and you can have a look at it in this SL-SF 1285 accident photo
taken on October 10, 1935 at Monett, Missouri, from the Frisco Library.

http://thelibrary.org/lochist/frisco/friscoline/images/photos/p01608.jpg

To try and answer your question about the date when they started repainting the
fleet into the "D-X Gasoline" scheme, from what I've looked at in the Library Of
Congress photos collection taken during the early years of WWII, it appears that the
large "Diamond" scheme was still around on some cars during the early 1940s. So
my best guess is sometime in the late 1930s as the start of the "D-X Gasoline"
scheme? The "Diamond Products" scheme, with the red diamond back round that
Walthers has done on the 8k AC&F, former proto tank car, probable was gone by the
mid-1930s. And judging from the number of cars repainted in that photo, I think I'm
about right?

Trying to help you, Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois





--- In mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com, "erict1361" <erict1361@> wrote:

According to information I have gathered from various websites, Mid-Continent Petroleum (C.O.S.X) had GATC Type 17, ACF Type 11 and Type 21 Tankcars. The Type 11 being the largest numbers. The cars were painted in the "Diamond Products" Red Diamond's with White lettering scheme in the 1920's and later re-painted with only white lettering with a large "D-X" logo. "D-X Gasoline was introduced in 1933 and " Diamond Gas stations began changing there signs to D-X" beginning in 1946.

My question is what year did Cosden begin re-painting the Red and white "Diamond" paint scheme to the all white lettered "D-X" scheme? Did any cars still have the original lettering past 1947 or were all Tank cars re painted by then?

Thanks,

Eric Thur
Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's

switchengines <jrs060@...>
 

Ken, according to the records with the photo it was taken in October of 1942
by John Vachon from the U.S. Farm Security Administration Office. So that would
explain the large "D-X Gasoline" scheme also being present on other cars. It's my
best guess that the large "D-X Gasoline" paint scheme did first appear in the late
1930s......too many cars have it by the early 1940s for it not to be?
Here is another very interesting photo from the LOC of an AC&F type 11 car,
that has had insulation applied to it after it was built, also in the large "Diamond"
paint scheme at the West Tulsa refinery of Mid-Continent in October 1942.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d09394/

All kinds of goodies at the LOC if you go looking for them,

Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois

--- In STMFC@..., va661midlo@... wrote:

Jerry,

Is the car behind the one on which you focused painted in the D-X scheme - in the 1930's?

Ken Montero

----- Original Message -----
From: "switchengines" <jrs060@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 5:03:12 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's






Eric,

You might be interested in also seeing this photo from the Library of
Congress which shows one of the GATC type 17 insulated cars at Tulsa,
Oklahoma in the 1930s era large DIAMOND scheme. It appears to be
painted in a lighter color with the lettering in black?

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d09232/

Looks as if the car is in asphalt or cut-back service from the stains
running down the tank sides, note the extra "board" insert between the
end running board and the bolster along the side running board. Sure
would make an interesting model!

Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois
Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's

Kenneth Montero
 

Jerry,

Is the car behind the one on which you focused painted in the D-X scheme - in the 1930's?

Ken Montero

----- Original Message -----
From: "switchengines" <jrs060@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 5:03:12 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's






Eric,

You might be interested in also seeing this photo from the Library of
Congress which shows one of the GATC type 17 insulated cars at Tulsa,
Oklahoma in the 1930s era large DIAMOND scheme. It appears to be
painted in a lighter color with the lettering in black?

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d09232/

Looks as if the car is in asphalt or cut-back service from the stains
running down the tank sides, note the extra "board" insert between the
end running board and the bolster along the side running board. Sure
would make an interesting model!

Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois

--- In STMFC@... , "erict1361" <erict1361@...> wrote:

Jerry,

Thanks, I never knew that the Large DIAMOND scheme existed?


Eric Thur



--- In STMFC@... , "switchengines" <jrs060@> wrote:

Well Eric, you missed a paint scheme in the middle between the 1920s "Diamond
Products" and the, I think, late 1930s large "D-X Gasoline" scheme. It featured a large
"Diamond" lettering and you can have a look at it in this SL-SF 1285 accident photo
taken on October 10, 1935 at Monett, Missouri, from the Frisco Library.

http://thelibrary.org/lochist/frisco/friscoline/images/photos/p01608.jpg

To try and answer your question about the date when they started repainting the
fleet into the "D-X Gasoline" scheme, from what I've looked at in the Library Of
Congress photos collection taken during the early years of WWII, it appears that the
large "Diamond" scheme was still around on some cars during the early 1940s. So
my best guess is sometime in the late 1930s as the start of the "D-X Gasoline"
scheme? The "Diamond Products" scheme, with the red diamond back round that
Walthers has done on the 8k AC&F, former proto tank car, probable was gone by the
mid-1930s. And judging from the number of cars repainted in that photo, I think I'm
about right?

Trying to help you, Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois
Re: Pennsy K7, R7, X23/24 Underframe

Benjamin Hom
 

Bill Welch asked:
"Did the Pennsy have an official or de facto designation for the common
underframe they used with their K7, R7, and X23/24 group of cars?"

None that I know of.  Maybe the Lewistown crew can check correspondence to see
if there's an answer there.


Ben Hom
Pennsy K7, R7, X23/24 Underframe

Bill Welch
 

Did the Pennsy have an official or de facto designation for the common underframe they used with their K7, R7, and X23/24 group of cars?

Bill Welch
SP F-70-2 paint scheme

rdietrichson
 

Hey all,
After following Allen Wood's article in the Westewrn Prototype Modeler I've run into another stumbling block. The article calls for the model to be painted boxcar red, but the Champ lettering Guide says the car should be painted black. For a car running in 1950, what is the correct color?
Thanks for any help.
Rick Dietrichson
Wilmington, NC
Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's

switchengines <jrs060@...>
 

Eric,

You might be interested in also seeing this photo from the Library of
Congress which shows one of the GATC type 17 insulated cars at Tulsa,
Oklahoma in the 1930s era large DIAMOND scheme. It appears to be
painted in a lighter color with the lettering in black?

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/fsa.8d09232/

Looks as if the car is in asphalt or cut-back service from the stains
running down the tank sides, note the extra "board" insert between the
end running board and the bolster along the side running board. Sure
would make an interesting model!

Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois

--- In STMFC@..., "erict1361" <erict1361@...> wrote:

Jerry,

Thanks, I never knew that the Large DIAMOND scheme existed?


Eric Thur



--- In STMFC@..., "switchengines" <jrs060@> wrote:

Well Eric, you missed a paint scheme in the middle between the 1920s "Diamond
Products" and the, I think, late 1930s large "D-X Gasoline" scheme. It featured a large
"Diamond" lettering and you can have a look at it in this SL-SF 1285 accident photo
taken on October 10, 1935 at Monett, Missouri, from the Frisco Library.

http://thelibrary.org/lochist/frisco/friscoline/images/photos/p01608.jpg

To try and answer your question about the date when they started repainting the
fleet into the "D-X Gasoline" scheme, from what I've looked at in the Library Of
Congress photos collection taken during the early years of WWII, it appears that the
large "Diamond" scheme was still around on some cars during the early 1940s. So
my best guess is sometime in the late 1930s as the start of the "D-X Gasoline"
scheme? The "Diamond Products" scheme, with the red diamond back round that
Walthers has done on the 8k AC&F, former proto tank car, probable was gone by the
mid-1930s. And judging from the number of cars repainted in that photo, I think I'm
about right?

Trying to help you, Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois
Re: Railworks X32 on Ebay

ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:
Wow. $52 for an excellent brass model of a PRR X32? Keep yer
eyes open, it's a buyers market on Ebay...
The best deals are when the buyer isn't sure of what they have or the item being sold isn't in the expected catagory. Old brass fits in this catagory.

A lot of bidders hide in the weeds until just before the auction ends and then make a bid.

There are 2 kinds of offerings - those who want to get rid of the items and those who think they have collectable treasures. Some of the later relist items after the auction expires with no bidders. There are some freight car models (Like Tichy & F&C) where virtually the entire line is listed.

Many of the RR "craft" freight car kits are the chaff - like the Ambroid ACF covered hopper and and the combination reefer/poultry car.

Ed Mines
Re: Shapeways

Richard Brennan <brennan8@...>
 

Bill

Unfortunately... you seem to have based your assessment on one sample of an unidentified Shapeways build. Each of the many available materials has different characteristics, and may be more or less suitable for a given part.

Questions:
- Which Shapeways material was used?
- What type of surfaces are on the part?
- How large/small was the object?
- Quote: "material is too thin to mold it"... This sounds like a design issue?

I'm agreeing with you that Shapeways is no panacea for development of production model parts, but with modest cost and quick turn-around it is often suitable for one-offs and pilot models. YMMV

--------------------
Richard Brennan - San Leandro CA
--------------------

At 10:26 AM 9/6/2012, you wrote:
Much has been said at times on Yahoo groups suggesting Shapeways as a viable
source of low production or 1 off model railroad items for a reasonable
price. Since starting my own part designing with Solidworks about 5 years
ago I have long been skeptical of what you would get for your purchase. I
have mostly thought (without seeing first hand) they are not there yet. The
best I had ever heard was from N Scalers saying their purchased items were
"acceptable".

That changed about an hour ago. A fellow S Scaler sent me an S Scale roof he
purchased. The material is rather fragile. It arrived to him broken - which
is why he graciously sent it to me just to see. In some ways it is a little
better than I expected but mostly it is **much worse** than I expected. The
material is a bit waxy but the layering is just awful! These is no chance
anyone would find it to be acceptable right out of the box. It was built
across the width so the roof was made vertically. It probably would have
been a worse finish if the roof was built as if you would see it on that
car. This just more than confirms my thoughts about Shapeways - you get what
you pay for and they are by far NOT there yet!

The material is too thin to mold it and try and use the casting as a master
which you would have to sand the cast part extensively. That is too much
like work! To get this roof made where I get my stuff printed would cost a
TON of money and possibly not that much better in finish but the material is
stronger so there are more possibilities - but nothing is easy for sure.


Thank You,
Bill Lane
Re: Mid-Continent Petroleum (COSDEN) Paint scheme's

erict1361 <erict1361@...>
 

Jerry,

Thanks, I never knew that the Large DIAMOND scheme existed?


Eric Thur

--- In STMFC@..., "switchengines" <jrs060@...> wrote:

Well Eric, you missed a paint scheme in the middle between the 1920s "Diamond
Products" and the, I think, late 1930s large "D-X Gasoline" scheme. It featured a large
"Diamond" lettering and you can have a look at it in this SL-SF 1285 accident photo
taken on October 10, 1935 at Monett, Missouri, from the Frisco Library.

http://thelibrary.org/lochist/frisco/friscoline/images/photos/p01608.jpg

To try and answer your question about the date when they started repainting the
fleet into the "D-X Gasoline" scheme, from what I've looked at in the Library Of
Congress photos collection taken during the early years of WWII, it appears that the
large "Diamond" scheme was still around on some cars during the early 1940s. So
my best guess is sometime in the late 1930s as the start of the "D-X Gasoline"
scheme? The "Diamond Products" scheme, with the red diamond back round that
Walthers has done on the 8k AC&F, former proto tank car, probable was gone by the
mid-1930s. And judging from the number of cars repainted in that photo, I think I'm
about right?

Trying to help you, Jerry Stewart

Woodstock, Illinois





--- In STMFC@..., "erict1361" <erict1361@> wrote:

According to information I have gathered from various websites, Mid-Continent Petroleum (C.O.S.X) had GATC Type 17, ACF Type 11 and Type 21 Tankcars. The Type 11 being the largest numbers. The cars were painted in the "Diamond Products" Red Diamond's with White lettering scheme in the 1920's and later re-painted with only white lettering with a large "D-X" logo. "D-X Gasoline was introduced in 1933 and " Diamond Gas stations began changing there signs to D-X" beginning in 1946.

My question is what year did Cosden begin re-painting the Red and white "Diamond" paint scheme to the all white lettered "D-X" scheme? Did any cars still have the original lettering past 1947 or were all Tank cars re painted by then?

Thanks,

Eric Thur
Re: sugar beets

Clark Propst
 

Probably were beet dumps for loading cars. Around here during the beet rush, any open car with holes smaller than the beets would do. Anything from hoppers to mill gons.

Clark Propst

--- In STMFC@..., "bbbogart56" <bbbogart56@...> wrote:

I am attempting to model the NKP in the 50's. Some of the trackage shows sidings labelled Sugar Beet. Were these elevators or a pprocessing plant? Anyone have a lead on pictures of frieght cars in Nothern Ohio/Indiana? Thanks!
Bruce Bogart
Re: Shapeways

Frank Valoczy <destron@...>
 

For my part, I will say that pretty much everyone I know - myself included
- has been satisfied with their purchases from Shapeways, ranging from
trucks to complete cars. I've had a TT scale covered hopper and a pulpwood
rack from them, and my only complaint was the surface finish - a bit
grainy; that was, however, before they introduced the Frosted Ultra Detail
material which is smoother and stronger than their previous materials. The
covered hopper is fairly solid, but the rack is quite spiderweb-like and
one would expect quite fragile, but it's proven to be surprisingly strong.

The new Frosted material is considerably better in finish, and the
strength is satisfactory too. If one is careful with one's models (and
little more so than with any other model), I don't see there being any
issue that could arise.

Just thought I'd put a different opinion on the subject out there for
others to consider.

Frank Valoczy
New Westminster, BC
Re: Shapeways

rckwallaby
 

Interesting comments Bill.
And I guess... scary.

I've just ordered a complete HO scale flat car from Shapeways so I guess I'll know within a couple of weeks whether you're mostly right all the time, or just with respect to the item you've seen.

The model I've ordered is of a HO standard gauge flat car used by Railways of Victoria to tranship the 2'6" gauge steam locos of 'Puffing Billy' heritage for workshop overhaul. A note and link is listed below.

I chose to have these printed in a higher quality substrate called 'Frosted Ultra Detail'. This is the first item I have ever ordered from Shapeways. It cost me about $30 for the item and $20 for postage.

Several variations of this model have been offered; HO and O scale, a complete model and one that should be supplemented with brass, etc detail parts. - That's the one I'm getting.

Anyway we'll see what it all means. I'll let youze know.

Here's the notes and links below.

Cheers

Phil Morrow
Melbourne - the one in AUS.

VR 129 Q Transfer Wagon in HO and O Scales

On Jeev's Shop on Shapeways.

HO (1/87) version one detailed with buffers, brake wheels and brake line /
piping.

<http://www.shapeways.com/model/677262/pbr-q129-ho-1-87-scale.html>

Version two, less couplers (add brass ones), hand brake wheels (use etched
brass),
and brake lines (use brass wire)

<http://www.shapeways.com/model/678588/pbr-q129-v2-ho-1-87-scale.html>

And in O scale, similar versions:

V1 with details.

<http://www.shapeways.com/shops/shapeways.com/shops/Jeevi?s=36>

V2, modeller to add details.

http://www.shapeways.com/model/678674/pbr-q129-o-1-48-scale.html


The HO version has a piping detail plan to assist the modeller and a
downloadable URL for decals.

--- In STMFC@..., "Bill Lane" <bill@...> wrote:

Much has been said at times on Yahoo groups suggesting Shapeways as a viable
source of low production or 1 off model railroad items for a reasonable
price. Since starting my own part designing with Solidworks about 5 years
ago I have long been skeptical of what you would get for your purchase. I
have mostly thought (without seeing first hand) they are not there yet. The
best I had ever heard was from N Scalers saying their purchased items were
"acceptable".



That changed about an hour ago. A fellow S Scaler sent me an S Scale roof he
purchased. The material is rather fragile. It arrived to him broken - which
is why he graciously sent it to me just to see. In some ways it is a little
better than I expected but mostly it is **much worse** than I expected. The
material is a bit waxy but the layering is just awful! These is no chance
anyone would find it to be acceptable right out of the box. It was built
across the width so the roof was made vertically. It probably would have
been a worse finish if the roof was built as if you would see it on that
car. This just more than confirms my thoughts about Shapeways - you get what
you pay for and they are by far NOT there yet!



The material is too thin to mold it and try and use the casting as a master
which you would have to sand the cast part extensively. That is too much
like work! To get this roof made where I get my stuff printed would cost a
TON of money and possibly not that much better in finish but the material is
stronger so there are more possibilities - but nothing is easy for sure.



Thank You,
Bill Lane

Modeling the Mighty Pennsy & PRSL in 1957 in S Scale since 1988

See my finished models at:
<http://www.lanestrains.com/> http://www.lanestrains.com
Look at what has been made in PRR in S Scale!



See my layout progess at:

<http://www.lanestrains.com/My_Layout.htm>
http://www.lanestrains.com/My_Layout.htm

Custom Train Parts Design
<http://www.lanestrains.com/SolidWorks_Modeling.htm>
http://www.lanestrains.com/SolidWorks_Modeling.htm

PRR Builders Photos Bought, Sold & Traded
(Trading is MUCH preferred)
<http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRphotos.xls>
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRphotos.xls

***Join the PRR T&HS***
The other members are not ALL like me!
<http://www.prrths.com/> http://www.prrths.com
<http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRTHS_Application.pdf>
http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRTHS_Application.pdf

Join the Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines Historical Society
It's FREE to join! <http://www.prslhs.com/> http://www.prslhs.com
Preserving The Memory Of The PRSL
Re: CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons

Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;)
 

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the compliment.

Will send you something off-line.

- Claus Schlund

----- Original Message -----
From: <Rdietrichson@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Cc: "Claus Schlund (HGM)" <claus@...>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons


Claus,
Your model is great. Can you provide me eith info on how you built the car?
Rick Dietrichson
Wilmington, NC

---- "Claus Schlund (HGM)" <claus@...> wrote:
Hi,

(Sorry if some folks on both groups get this more than once!)

Back in late 2009 I asked on both the CBQ list and the STMFC list for help
creating a model of a CB&Q composite mill gon.

I've got some pictures of the completed model now, and thought others might
be interested. Note this is N scale.

I had a lot of fun doing this car.

Sorry about the super-long link!

https://zjw8hq.sn2.livefilestore.com/y1p8aDKkjZB-SYbQNI1ynaecHdNLqXTe_BrcpCPVFHjfihjnh3dZTWLdW3Rj7F_pg78gaNVUOcfNDRScwnmaTFzevmkPL-uT6iQ/CBQ_composite_mill_gon_MT_model_10.jpg?psid=1

or if that is too long to work, try the short link below...

http://tinyurl.com/8aftr3t

Thanks again to everyone for the tremendously helpful responses.

- Claus Schlund


----- Original Message -----
From: "Claus Schlund (HGM)" <claus@...>
To: "STMFC" <STMFC@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 5:21 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons


Hi,

Thanks everyone for your more than helpful responses - I would never have
guessed that so much imformation would be coming my way!
Several folks sent me images off-list, thank you for those as they were
very helpful.


Here is my admittedly meager comtribution to the topic...

A builders photo from the 1931 CBC (TSC #46) pg 215...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4198770352_3af882d03d_b.jpg

An set of images of the N-scale Micro-Trains gon in CB&Q paint...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2660/4198016869_ca287111ea_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2557/4198770700_ced97c70ab_b.jpg

Lastly, am image of the undecorated Micro-Trains shell...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2786/4198017167_0dca0ebd6f_b.jpg

The car looks pretty good rite out of the box, and the factory lettering
appears to be correct. A few things need to be fixed.

* The car comes with a straight center sill, and the prototype has a
fishbelly center sill. This needs to be corrected

* The car rides too high and needs to be lowered

* The car comes with a side-mounted brake wheel. While the photos I've
received are not entirely conclusive, it appears these cars
had (I'm not sure I've for the terminology right) lever brakes, much like
those on the as-delivered USRA composite gons. This will
need to be changed as well

* The car comes with dreadnaught drop ends, and they should be 5-rib
inverse Murphy. Not sure how to correct this...

* The two end panels in the Micro-Trains model are slightly longer then
the rest of the panels, and the prototype was just the
opposite. I'm not going to make any effort to correct this. Oh well!

Thanks again everyone, I've got some fun work to do.

- Claus Schlund


----- Original Message -----
From: "Claus Schlund (HGM)" <claus@...>
To: "STMFC" <STMFC@...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 3:38 PM
Subject: [STMFC] CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons


Hi,

I'm trying to gather up some info on CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons,
but information and in-service images of these particular
gons are proving elusive. I'm hoping someone here can help.

The cars I'm asking about are pictured in the 1931 CBC (TSC #46) page
215, which shows a builders photo of CB&Q 195499, described
as follows: Composite Gondola Car, Solid Bottom, Drop Ends, ARA Class GM,
Length Inside 48'6"; Builder, Pressed Steel Car Company.

Apparently, this car was part of the series CB&Q 195000 to 196499. For a
class that had 1500 cars in it, you would think I'd be
able to turn up SOMETHING! I have the CB&Q Historical Societies Data Sheet
on composite gons, but it covers only 40 foot gons and
makes no mention of the above cars.

According to Dec 1930 ORER, statistics for this car class are:

MCB class GM (gon, drop ends)
195000 to 196499
IL 48' 6"
IW 9' 3/4"
IH 3' 10"
OL 49' 9 3/4"
OW 10' 3"
Extreme Ht 7' 6 3/4"
Cap 1770 cu ft or 100000 lb
1498 cars

An image of an N scale model of this car by MicroTrains can be seen at:

http://i.ebayimg.com/05/!BP8hDBgCGk~$(KGrHgoOKj4EjlLmY+TiBJ2Qr6EpC!~~_12.JPG

(hopefully the line will not wrap!)

The MicroTrains model appears to be a excellent match structurally. But
I'm curious about the paint and lettering. The builders
photo in the above 1931 CBC shows a two-color paint scheme, with all the
wood parts painted white and the metal parts painted a
darker color. I assume this paint scheme was for the photo only, and not
for service. Can someone on this list confirm? Also, can
anyone point me to a in-service photo of these gons? I'm interested in the
as-built lettering. Lastly, anyone know if these gons
were used for any specific service, routing or customer on the CB&Q?

Thanks in advance for any info.

- Claus





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons

Claus Schlund &#92;(HGM&#92;)
 

Hi Charlie,

Yes, you are correct. I had begun to notice this back in Dec 2009 when I wrote:

* The two end panels in the Micro-Trains model are slightly longer then
the rest of the panels, and the prototype was just the
opposite. I'm not going to make any effort to correct this. Oh well!
But I had not realized the asymmetry you are pointing out.

I guess my response is still "Oh well!"

Yes, it is certainly weird!

- Claus Schlund



----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Vlk" <cvlk@...>
To: <STMFC@...>; <CBQ@...>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 11:35 AM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] CB&Q 48 foot composite mill gons




Klaus-

I didn’t notice this before but the end panels on the prototype is not symmetrical….it appears that one end of the car is shorter (in relation to the body bolster) than the other. The strap diagonal on the long end is at the same angle as the pressed steel truss members, but on one end the panel is shorter and the strap diagonal is consequently at a sharper angle.

This shows up on the builders photo and in-service cars but not the Kalmbach MR Cyclopedia drawing. I wonder if this was done for clearance on the brake gear and platform?
Weird.

Charlie Vlk







------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links
82481 - 82500 of 193476