Date   

Re: Coupler droop

Tim O'Connor
 

Kadee coupler shanks can be filed thinner quite easily. I have
done this many times, and they still work perfectly. They can also
be shortened at the rear end for incredibly tight applications,
such as the rear of F units, or steam loco pilots.

Tim O'Connor

The shank on ALL of the ones I've tried are simply too thick,
> and end up getting 'pinched' by the lid of the gear box when it
> is secured as it should be.


Re: Model kit hierarchy and heritage

Dave Lawler
 

For top of the line, prototype specific accuracy, try resin kits from Westerfield and F&C. Both have web sites.
Dave Lawler


Re: Coupler droop

Scaler164@...
 

This is what I sort-of expected to be the case... but it's not a good thing in all cases.  One such case is the rear coupler box on Athearn Genesis F-Units.  After all this time, I have yet to find ANY aftermarket coupler that will work WELL, as it should , in these... yes, including the Kadee whisker couplers.  The shank on ALL of the ones I've tried are simply too thick, and end up getting 'pinched' by the lid of the gear box when it is secured as it should be.  I have tried nearly ALL possible applications and methods ... including trying to file the shank of the whisker couplers thinner, but every single one I've tried that on ends up defective... missing one or boyj  whisker(s).  And I am no rookie modeler by any means.

As they have done for other models, Kadee should develop a coupler (or couplers) specifically for these locos that have a thin enough shank to fit and operate freely in the extremely tight, rear gear box on the Genesis F-3s.

However, since you say Kadee said something about a "later run" of the whisker couplers... am I safe in assuming the earlier ones had thinner shanks?  If so, then if anyone has any of these early whisker couplers, I'd like to buy a few from you for testing in my F-3s...


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

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Sykes" <John.Sykes@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 8:20:26 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Coupler droop

I asked  if the whisker couplers were thinner or the same as #5s and Kadee responded that  the later runs were actually 0.005" thicker to compensate for the square spring that no longer needed.

-- John

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Blue "Tank Car Connected" Sign

John
 

True. In some cases they just used an actual blue flag or blue lantern at night (aha! that's why some lanterns have blue lenses!).

In other cases, a piece of sheet metal was painted blue, hand lettered and bolted onto some sort of stand that would clip onto a rail by the shop. The specific wording on the signs is a rather recent development.

Now they have specific signs for specific applications and some signs are red not blue and they have blue flashing strobes, etc., etc., etc.

Violating a blue flag was, and still is, a firing offense.

-- John

--- In STMFC@..., Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:

John Sykes wrote:
That is one type of "Blue Flag" protection. Take a look here:
http://www.aldonco.com
-or-
http://www.aldonco.com/products.aspx?sec=2&cat=114&subid=20
Lots of fun toys for the 12" to the foot railroad enthusiast.
Might be worth pointing out that these images are of OSHA-standard signs, long postdating this list. Before 1960, signs were different -- and not standard.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Replacing Athearn trucks and/or wheels

John
 

Irv had a tendency to do things his own way. Some kits are dead-on (mostly for SP and UPRR, which ran outside his back door) and others were amalgams or mixes of two or more similar bodies.

For example, his reefers (with the exceptions of the molded-on ladders and roof hatch details) were pretty much dead-on for specific classes of PFE reefers. The mechanical reefers were taken directly from PFE designs. His stock car is a UPRR class (almost perfect for one and close for another).

To me, they always seemed to be good starting points for detailing projects. Then the question was, how much effort do you want to put into a car that will be buried in the middle of a 25 or 30 car freight train? Ladders, grabs? It's up to the modeler (his brake gear sprues were always backwards).

Trucks are definitely one item I switch around a lot. In fact when I buy a kit, if the trucks that come with it are not correct (e.g., solid bearing trucks with a modern 100 ton covered hopper) they go into the truck drawer and when I build the model, a pair of appropriate trucks come out of the drawer and go on the model. That drawer has hundreds of different trucks in it (actually two drawers - one for freight cars and one for passenger cars). I am replacing most of my plastic truck wheelsets with Intermountain 33" or 36" wheelsets as appropriate. I use Kadee or P2k wheelsets on metal trucks, so I always have a plastic to metal bearing surface. I do not see much change in the coupler height as the height change is only 1-1/2 scale inches. So 36" wheelsets go on 100 ton trucks and 33" wheelsets go on 50 or 70 ton trucks. I have some 38" wheelsets too, but have only used them on intermodal well car end trucks so far.

Of course the cars all get Kadee couplers.

-- John

--- In STMFC@..., "hvyweight41" <hvyweight41@...> wrote:

Background: I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. Most seem to have 70 ton trucks, whether the prototype had them or not. The only exception I have found, so far, is an express reefer which appears to have express trucks.
Is it worthwhile to replace the wheels and/or trucks with the correct trucks?
For example, I have 54' covered hoppers with 200000 lb capacities that come with 70 ton trucks and 33" wheels.
Is it worthwhile to replace them with the correct 36" wheels? With the body mounted couplers, will I need to go with an underset shaft to compensate for the bigger wheel or should I lower the body?
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL
PS I have discovered that many older Athearn kits don't have prototypes. I just want to do a little bit to make them better. I have a bunch of undecorated kits that I will be modifying to be more prototypical.


Re: Coupler droop

John
 

Keith:

Just the other day I wrote to Kadee telling them that I had found a solution to just such a problem. What I did was insert Kadee fiber washers under the coupler. I used 0.010" washers for most, but if the couplers were not free to move laterally (side to side) after modifying, I switched to a 0.005" Kadee steel washer. I guess you could use the 0.015" fiber washers if the couplers are really sloppy. My experience is that after this mod they fit perfectly and I didn't have to glue them.

I asked if the whisker couplers were thinner or the same as #5s and Kadee responded that they the later runs were actually 0.005" thicker to compensate for the square spring that no longer needed.

-- John

--- In STMFC@..., "hvyweight41" <hvyweight41@...> wrote:

Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL


Re: Coupler droop

hvyweight41
 

Tony-
Maybe I should clarify. The Kadee couplers have thinner shafts than the hook and horn they replace. As a result, they sit canted down from the pivot point. I checked them with the gauge and they are at the right height. However, I noted some vertical play when uncoupling. The coupler moves up with a slight bit of pressure and returns to the original height when the pressure is released. I call this droop.
As I understand it, the prototype coupler connection is essentially rigid. The couplers move up and down relative to each other as the cars move over irregular track and the only pivot is at the coupler to coupler interface. Our model couplers pivot to accommodate small radius curves. I'm thinking I should assemble some couplers in Kadee draft boxes and see how big the opening is.
In a related matter, Kadee states that scale couplers are drop ins for the standard couplers. Does anyone have experience with the scale couplers and were any changes required to insure reliable operation?
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL

--- In STMFC@..., Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:

Keith Kempster wrote:
Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Keith, there is really no permissible droop. The Kadee height gage shows you the required position of the knuckles and the trip pin. Do not accept droop beyond that. Kadees are legendary for reliability and consistency, but that only happens if you install them to the Kadee standard height.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Coupler droop (etc)

Scaler164@...
 

I h a v e found over the years that the Athearn cars were much more 'tolerant' of Kadee couplers than were... say, for example, MDC/Roundhouse cars, which seemed to have a  'tighter' (internally smaller) gear box, which would pinch the Kadee couplers when the gearbox lid was installed i f t h e c o u p l e r s w e r e i n s t a l l e d with the #634 spring.  In most cases, I had to file the Kadee shanks thinner to get them to operate correctly.  Another, not-necessarily-related problem with the MDC gear boxes is that the lid screws would literally expand , or even sometimes literally split the 'boss' (screw post) when the lid was installed, causing the couplers to bind even more.  I actually quit buying those models because of these issues.   Kadee's new 'whisker' couplers might have been the perfect solution to at least one of those issues with the MDC cars... but that is ASSUMING that thei r shanks are no thicker than the earlier generation Kadee couplers' shanks... which takes us back to your issue.  I no longer use Kadee couplers (opting rather for the Sergent Engineering couplers)... but I may still have a few stragglers lying around somewhere that I can gauge with my calipers to determine if there is any difference.  I w ill get back with you on this if   I find some and get this done.  I'm betting that there won't be much, if any difference... and probably not enough to make a difference with your drooping issue.



I'd like to see an example (or possibly a  clinic or blog ) of the technique  that Tim described to be sure I'm getting the big picture, as I find it interest ing .  But the above can be a fallback if all else fails... and it needed to be documanted for those who may still have some unb uilt  MDC and other brand models that will have  similar issues with their gear boxes in regard to installing  Kadee couplers... and / o r coupler drooping in general.



On second thought... if you're adventurous, and not against extremely  radical approaches ... the simplest solution to your drooping issue might be to just drop in a #634 centering spring and use it in conjunction with the whisker springed coupler.  You could go so far as to snip off the business - sides of the #634 so as to eliminate any unwanted, extra centering tension.   The thickness of the #634 out near the front opening of the gear box might be just what is needed to  elevate the shank/coupler head to the right level.





John Degnan
Scaler164@...

Scaler187@...

----- Original Message -----
From: "hvyweight41" <hvyweight41@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 11:30:34 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Coupler droop

John-
Question 1: I am planning to use the appropriate whisker coupler, most use the #148. I have some #158 scale couplers but I'm not sure I want to use these on these basic kit.
Question 2: yes, so far all are the metall clip.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL
PS This may all be mote if I use Tim O'Connor's more "radical" approach, above.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


HO Barber 70 Ton S2 Trucks

 

As to the recent discussion on the CB&Q and off in the future Hi-Tech Details trucks.

After a wait of several years, I am offering the Red Caboose 70 Ton truck to the
group at $3.90/pair without wheel sets. Postage will be added and for Paypal,
their extra fees will be added.

These trucks were originally done for the RC SP F-70-7 flatcar and other SP cars
used these trucks also, although spring packs varied on some. As Richard
Hendrickson noted:"the Barber S-2 was one of the two truck designs that were
widely used from the end of WW II through the '50s (the other being the ASF
A-3), so the 70 ton Barber S-2 was applied to many cars built for many different
railroads, chiefly (but not exclusively) flat cars, mill gondolas, large
hoppers, and covered hoppers. Later in the '50s, they were also applied to a
growing number of 70 ton box, auto, insulated box, and mechanical refrigerator
cars. As Ron Merrick observes, spring package arrangements varied".

Andy Carlson offered these trucks awhile ago but he is sold out and I have a
limited # of these to sell. If you are interested or have questions, contact me
OFF LIST at <espeefan@...>. Thanks.

Dan Smith


Re: SP B-50-25 12 panel 40' boxcar with corrected details

Andy Carlson
 

The 1946 built cars came with the 5/5/5 Interim Improved Youngstown 6' door. the 1947 cars came with both 4/6/6 and 5/6/5 IYD. I just discovered a list which indicated all of these cars came with ASF A3 ride control trucks, not the Barber Lateral Motion.
-Andy





________________________________
From: Robert Kirkham <rdkirkham@...>
To: Steam Era <stmfc@...>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] SP B-50-25 12 panel 40' boxcar with corrected details



 
trying to take this in a non-commercial but related direction: what would
the built dates be for SP cars with this body type and ends, and in
particular, for each door variation?

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Carlson
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 12:15 PM
To: Steam Era
Subject: [STMFC] SP B-50-25 12 panel 40' boxcar with corrected details

Hello,

I have a package deal which I am offering to anyone reading this post.

Intermountain tooled their 12 panel box car for a Great Northern prototype.
After running decorated kits and RTRs in many GN schemes, they offered some
SP and T&NO versions. Intermountain did tool up a 3/4 IDE of the
configuration the Espee utilized, but overlooked offering a correct pair of
doors and also simply reused the GN 12 panel ladders, which are 8 rungs for
the sides, are only 7 rungs for the ends (GN bottom step was a drop grab--SP
used full 8 rung ladders for their ends).

Both GN and SP 12 panels included Superior doors, which were OK for a few GN
numbers, but the larger majority of both RR's 12 panels had Youngstown
doors, which Intermountain did not offer.

I have the following supplemented HO Intermountain SP B-50-25 undec box car
kits:

#1) Undec new12 panel kit with the following extras--Red Caboose
Rectangular panel 40' AAR roof. One extra sprue of 8-rung ladders to address
the short ladders on the ends issue. One pair of the SP/T&NO version of the
3/4 IDE. One Pair of SouthWest Scale Productions 5/5/5 Interim Improved
Youngstown doors (The so-called "Overnight" doors). One pair of Barber
Lateral Motion Tahoe Model works # 009 50-ton cast steel truck, less
wheelsets.

#2) Same as above, but with 5/6/5 SouthWest IYDs.

#3) Same as #1, but with 4/6/6 SouthWest IYD

No decals or couplers are included.

Priced at $27.50, 1st class air mail shipping included. I accept checks and
money orders. For a small fee I can also accept PayPal. Contact me off-list
(Please) for more info. <midcentury@...>
Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

Price is $24.50 each supplemented kit--including 1st class shipping.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Model kit hierarchy and heritage

Robert kirkham
 

I'm no expert, but would start with 3 broad categories: "Good as is or a good source to start with", "OK source to start with", "poor or unknown". I leave it for those in the know to take it further. But I'd break the group into those categories, as follows:

Kadee
Lifelike Proto 2000
Branchline Blueprint series
Intermountain
Accurail

Bowser

everything else

There are some brands I'm not familiar with that may belong higher on the list. Wasn't sure what to do with Bowser - it may belong in the first group. The product lines in the first group have their strengths and weaknesses.

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: hvyweight41
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 8:19 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Model kit hierarchy and heritage

I like to build models. I enjoy researching prototypes and seeing how close to the prototype a kit is. I plan on progressing to the point I can replace ladders, steps, roof walks, trucks and wheels with prototypical details. Also, I want to add details like brake rigging and pipes, air hoses, cut levers, etc. I have amassed a large number of HO kits. They include:
Athearn
Kato
Front Range
E&B Valley
Stewart
Accurail
Bowser
Intermountain
Walthers (white box and red? Box)
Life Like Proto 2000
Branchline Blueprint series
Roundhouse (blue box and yellow box)
Train Miniature Industries? TMI
E&C shops
C&BT Shops
Ambroid
Central Valley
Kadee Lines
The Cliff Line
Prototype Modeler
I can see significant differences in detail and overall quality between brands. However, I also see similarities in things like detail sprues and offerings.
First, is there a general consensus on the quality of these brands? I can see wide differences in skill required and quality of things like painting and lettering.
Are any of these brands descendants of other brands, listed or not? I found one thread discussing one brands genealogy and just today there was a post that mentioned company A using company B's molds to produce new copies of a detail part under company A's brand.
Has time produced better quality products? I.E. are the newer brands better than the brands they succeeded.
For now the craftsman brands:
Ambroid, Central Valley, Kadee Lines, The Cliff Line and Prototype Modeler
have been set aside until I've developed better modeling skills assembling the plastic kits. This is a lot to ask in one post. If there are posts that already answer any of my questions, please feel free to direct me there.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL





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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: SP B-50-25 12 panel 40' boxcar with corrected details

Robert kirkham
 

trying to take this in a non-commercial but related direction: what would the built dates be for SP cars with this body type and ends, and in particular, for each door variation?

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Carlson
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 12:15 PM
To: Steam Era
Subject: [STMFC] SP B-50-25 12 panel 40' boxcar with corrected details

Hello,

I have a package deal which I am offering to anyone reading this post.

Intermountain tooled their 12 panel box car for a Great Northern prototype. After running decorated kits and RTRs in many GN schemes, they offered some SP and T&NO versions. Intermountain did tool up a 3/4 IDE of the configuration the Espee utilized, but overlooked offering a correct pair of doors and also simply reused the GN 12 panel ladders, which are 8 rungs for the sides, are only 7 rungs for the ends (GN bottom step was a drop grab--SP used full 8 rung ladders for their ends).

Both GN and SP 12 panels included Superior doors, which were OK for a few GN numbers, but the larger majority of both RR's 12 panels had Youngstown doors, which Intermountain did not offer.

I have the following supplemented HO Intermountain SP B-50-25 undec box car kits:

#1) Undec new12 panel kit with the following extras--Red Caboose Rectangular panel 40' AAR roof. One extra sprue of 8-rung ladders to address the short ladders on the ends issue. One pair of the SP/T&NO version of the 3/4 IDE. One Pair of SouthWest Scale Productions 5/5/5 Interim Improved Youngstown doors (The so-called "Overnight" doors). One pair of Barber Lateral Motion Tahoe Model works # 009 50-ton cast steel truck, less wheelsets.

#2) Same as above, but with 5/6/5 SouthWest IYDs.

#3) Same as #1, but with 4/6/6 SouthWest IYD

No decals or couplers are included.

Priced at $27.50, 1st class air mail shipping included. I accept checks and money orders. For a small fee I can also accept PayPal. Contact me off-list (Please) for more info. <midcentury@...>
Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA

Price is $24.50 each supplemented kit--including 1st class shipping.





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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Coupler droop

Tony Thompson
 

Keith Kempster wrote:
Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Keith, there is really no permissible droop. The Kadee height gage shows you the required position of the knuckles and the trip pin. Do not accept droop beyond that. Kadees are legendary for reliability and consistency, but that only happens if you install them to the Kadee standard height.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Coupler droop

hvyweight41
 

Tim-
This method really appeals to the modeler in me.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Keith

I have been building blue box kits lately -- (Maybe I should create
a blog?)

Step 1 -- Paint the floor boards a wood color and lightly weather. Also
paint the kit underframe an appropriate color (some railroads painted
them black, others painted them brown). Weather to suit. (I do about
20 floors and underframes in a batch.)

Step 2 -- Turn one Athearn underframe into a jig for drilling 2-56 holes
for Kadee coupler pockets. Attach to the floor (boards under the frame)
and drill and tap the holes. Remove the jig. Make sure you carefully
choose where to drill the holes -- they do NOT go exactly where the
old Athearn post is located, but a little further towards the ends.

Step 3 -- Trim off the pocket on your kit Athearn underframe.

Step 4 -- Assemble the floor and underframe with the truck screws and
make sure the floor boards are under the frame (i.e. this is the
REVERSE of Athearn instructions!!!)

Step 5 -- Attach Kadee's new coupler pockets (#242 or #262 if you want
to use Whisker couplers) so they extend the correct distance from the
end of the floor. Attach them with Kadee PLASTIC 2-56 screws.

Step 6 -- Trim off the Kadee screws on the other side, flush with the
plastic deck. You could use metal 2-56 screws, but trimming them flush
will be much harder. :-)

Step 7 -- Add the weight. This will be INSIDE the car!

Step 8 -- Sand the "wings" off the side of the floor. The entire floor
assembly will now drop snugly, and perfectly, into the body. Glue it
in place. (I trim the claws off the doors first, and glue the doors
in place, before I add the floor.)

Step 9 -- Detail, paint, weather, etc -- The floor should be at exactly
the correct height, and the couplers should also be exactly correct.
(I assume you are using Athearn's blue box trucks which have a certain
bolster height. Other brands may have a different bolster height.)
No shims etc. are needed.

The couplers will not droop, and they will not come out, ever, unless
you unscrew the 2-56 screws holding the pockets in place.

Caution, Athearn blue box cars assembled this way might look so much
better to you that you'll want to toss all your older Athearn cars.

Note many older Athearn cars are NOT glued together -- so you can rebuild
them properly and easily!

Tim O'Connor




Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL


Re: Coupler droop

hvyweight41
 

John-
Question 1: I am planning to use the appropriate whisker coupler, most use the #148. I have some #158 scale couplers but I'm not sure I want to use these on these basic kit.
Question 2: yes, so far all are the metall clip.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL
PS This may all be mote if I use Tim O'Connor's more "radical" approach, above.

--- In STMFC@..., Scaler164@... wrote:



Question 1 : Which Kadee couplers are you installing?  If you're using some of the modern "whisker" type Kadee couplers, t he 'droop' could be caused by the lack of the older style centering spring which helped to eliminate vertical clearance inside the gear boxes... assuming, of course, that the shank on the whisker couplers is the same thickness as the older couplers.  I haven't  thought to check this before, so I can't say for sure if there is a difference or not.



Question 2 : Do the problem cars have the old, metal clip-on lid for the gear box?  If so, one POSSIBLE solution might be to ever-so-slightly bend the end of this metal lid upward to help raise the coupler head to the correct height, being very careful not to bend it too much as to  pinch the shank .





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

----- Original Message -----
From: "hvyweight41" <hvyweight41@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 10:30:49 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Coupler droop

Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL



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

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Coupler droop

Scaler164@...
 

Question 1 : Which Kadee couplers are you installing?  If you're using some of the modern "whisker" type Kadee couplers, t he 'droop' could be caused by the lack of the older style centering spring which helped to eliminate vertical clearance inside the gear boxes... assuming, of course, that the shank on the whisker couplers is the same thickness as the older couplers.  I haven't  thought to check this before, so I can't say for sure if there is a difference or not.



Question 2 : Do the problem cars have the old, metal clip-on lid for the gear box?  If so, one POSSIBLE solution might be to ever-so-slightly bend the end of this metal lid upward to help raise the coupler head to the correct height, being very careful not to bend it too much as to  pinch the shank .





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

----- Original Message -----
From: "hvyweight41" <hvyweight41@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 10:30:49 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Coupler droop

Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL



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

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Model kit hierarchy and heritage

hvyweight41
 

I like to build models. I enjoy researching prototypes and seeing how close to the prototype a kit is. I plan on progressing to the point I can replace ladders, steps, roof walks, trucks and wheels with prototypical details. Also, I want to add details like brake rigging and pipes, air hoses, cut levers, etc. I have amassed a large number of HO kits. They include:
Athearn
Kato
Front Range
E&B Valley
Stewart
Accurail
Bowser
Intermountain
Walthers (white box and red? Box)
Life Like Proto 2000
Branchline Blueprint series
Roundhouse (blue box and yellow box)
Train Miniature Industries? TMI
E&C shops
C&BT Shops
Ambroid
Central Valley
Kadee Lines
The Cliff Line
Prototype Modeler
I can see significant differences in detail and overall quality between brands. However, I also see similarities in things like detail sprues and offerings.
First, is there a general consensus on the quality of these brands? I can see wide differences in skill required and quality of things like painting and lettering.
Are any of these brands descendants of other brands, listed or not? I found one thread discussing one brands genealogy and just today there was a post that mentioned company A using company B's molds to produce new copies of a detail part under company A's brand.
Has time produced better quality products? I.E. are the newer brands better than the brands they succeeded.
For now the craftsman brands:
Ambroid, Central Valley, Kadee Lines, The Cliff Line and Prototype Modeler
have been set aside until I've developed better modeling skills assembling the plastic kits. This is a lot to ask in one post. If there are posts that already answer any of my questions, please feel free to direct me there.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL


Re: Coupler droop

Tim O'Connor
 

Keith

I have been building blue box kits lately -- (Maybe I should create
a blog?)

Step 1 -- Paint the floor boards a wood color and lightly weather. Also
paint the kit underframe an appropriate color (some railroads painted
them black, others painted them brown). Weather to suit. (I do about
20 floors and underframes in a batch.)

Step 2 -- Turn one Athearn underframe into a jig for drilling 2-56 holes
for Kadee coupler pockets. Attach to the floor (boards under the frame)
and drill and tap the holes. Remove the jig. Make sure you carefully
choose where to drill the holes -- they do NOT go exactly where the
old Athearn post is located, but a little further towards the ends.

Step 3 -- Trim off the pocket on your kit Athearn underframe.

Step 4 -- Assemble the floor and underframe with the truck screws and
make sure the floor boards are under the frame (i.e. this is the
REVERSE of Athearn instructions!!!)

Step 5 -- Attach Kadee's new coupler pockets (#242 or #262 if you want
to use Whisker couplers) so they extend the correct distance from the
end of the floor. Attach them with Kadee PLASTIC 2-56 screws.

Step 6 -- Trim off the Kadee screws on the other side, flush with the
plastic deck. You could use metal 2-56 screws, but trimming them flush
will be much harder. :-)

Step 7 -- Add the weight. This will be INSIDE the car!

Step 8 -- Sand the "wings" off the side of the floor. The entire floor
assembly will now drop snugly, and perfectly, into the body. Glue it
in place. (I trim the claws off the doors first, and glue the doors
in place, before I add the floor.)

Step 9 -- Detail, paint, weather, etc -- The floor should be at exactly
the correct height, and the couplers should also be exactly correct.
(I assume you are using Athearn's blue box trucks which have a certain
bolster height. Other brands may have a different bolster height.)
No shims etc. are needed.

The couplers will not droop, and they will not come out, ever, unless
you unscrew the 2-56 screws holding the pockets in place.

Caution, Athearn blue box cars assembled this way might look so much
better to you that you'll want to toss all your older Athearn cars.

Note many older Athearn cars are NOT glued together -- so you can rebuild
them properly and easily!

Tim O'Connor

Background:I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. They all have hook and horn couplers. I want to replace them with Kadee couplers. I tried a set and there seems to be bit of vertical play, aka droop, in the draft box. What is the standard for droop, if any? What are the best methods for correcting out of tolerance couplers? I do have the Kadee coupler gauge and an NMRA gauge.
I've done some research and the options seems to range from replacing the draft boxes to shimming the opening with strip styrene.
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL


Replacing Athearn trucks and/or wheels

hvyweight41
 

Background: I received a large lot of Athearn blue box rolling stock from my father. He's had these for years and decided he'd never build or run them. Most seem to have 70 ton trucks, whether the prototype had them or not. The only exception I have found, so far, is an express reefer which appears to have express trucks.
Is it worthwhile to replace the wheels and/or trucks with the correct trucks?
For example, I have 54' covered hoppers with 200000 lb capacities that come with 70 ton trucks and 33" wheels.
Is it worthwhile to replace them with the correct 36" wheels? With the body mounted couplers, will I need to go with an underset shaft to compensate for the bigger wheel or should I lower the body?
Thanks,
Keith Kempster
Jacksonville, FL
PS I have discovered that many older Athearn kits don't have prototypes. I just want to do a little bit to make them better. I have a bunch of undecorated kits that I will be modifying to be more prototypical.


Re: ACL yellow ventilated box car

Ray Breyer
 

Anyone know where I can get info on the painting of this car? Such as roof,
ends and underbody, were they black or yellow or ? I have only seen one photo
of the yellow cars and can not locate same at this time.
Thanks
Ron Morse
Hi Ron,


I've got about a dozen different photos of these cars in yellow paint; I'll send them to you off list in a couple of minutes.

Essentially, the cars have all yellow bodies, boxcar brown roofs, and "grunge" underframes and trucks. Keep in mind that at least according to the ACF builder's photo collection, the road switched to brown bodies in 1911 (same lettering standards though; looks like they didn't significantly change the lettering until 1927).

Regards,

Ray Breyer
Elgin, IL

79821 - 79840 of 196818