Date   

Re: 36-foot boxcars

Benjamin Hom
 

Richard Hendrickson wrote:
"Bill, I wouldn't put too much stock in those numbers. Aging 36' box cars lasted longer on smaller and less prosperous railroads (and on Class 1 RRs like the Southern, which was still acquiring them in the late '20s) than on major transcontinental lines, and 50' cars were more numerous on the railroads that had a lot of automobile and auto parts traffic (e.g., NYC, Pennsy, Santa Fe, UP). So the ratio might vary a lot depending on the RR and location you're modeling. As always, interchange records, conductors' train books, and photos of actual trains are more useful than abstract numbers. In the area and era I model, I need many 50' cars, as the Santa Fe hauled large amounts of auto parts into the Los Angeles area and many finished autos and trucks out of it, but very few 36' cars, as the Santa Fe's had mostly been retired and most other western RRs (UP. SP, WP, GN, NP, MILW) had shifted from 36' to 40' box cars early in the 20th century. As always,
YMMV, of course. No doubt 36' box cars were more numerous in the southeast than in the far west."
 
To back Richard's assertion regarding geography and specific railroad, here are some Canadian boxcar numbers from data pulled from Rutland shifting lists in Armand Premo's collection from trains on the O&LC (with a Canadian gateway on the east end of the line), 1948-1950:
 
CN
Total XM: 359 (of 3166 total XM)
Total 36 ft XM: 206
 
CP
Total XM: 124
Total 36 ft XM: 64
 
I still have to analyze the specific car numbers of the 36 ft cars, but I anticipate almost all of them to be Fowler/Dominion SS boxcars.  Other roads' 36 ft cars appear to be much fewer in proportion, but this is analysis that I still need to do.
 
 
Ben Hom

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


Re: 36-foot boxcars

Nelson Moyer <ku0a@...>
 

<I also have a few undec MDC 36-foot kits around in case they may be good
for something.>

Bill Welch

Bill,

MDC 36 ft. double-sheathed boxcars are good for bunk house conversions,
either as single cars, or as two cars placed end-to-end. I've found
dimensions matching these boxcar bunkhouse configurations in CB&Q alignment
charts, and I've found photographs of them as well. I don't think I'd
sacrifice a resin kit, but MDC kits or RTR cars are great kitbashing
material. The resin kits can be turned into credible bunk cars.



Nelson Moyer


Re: 36-foot boxcars

Monk Alan <Alan.Monk@...>
 

Bill/all

A few years back Ray Breyer (I think) emailed a bunch of us who'd expressed interest in shorty box cars, a whole bunch of info, listings, photos, etc., that he'd researched for his 1950-based layout.

8% of the total 1950 boxcar fleet were less than 40ft, but the majority of those were the large CP/CN fleet of 36ft Fowler cars. Exclude those and the proportion drops to around 2.3%, with the L&N DS, Southern SU, ACL/SAL (ventilated), D&H DS and the N,C&StL's steel rebuilds forming large parts (1000+ each) of that reduced number.

I've probably got too many shorties in my fleet (one each of Southern SU, D&H DS, N,C&StL and Mopac steel rebuilds, plus a couple of CP Fowlers, all resin), but they provide a nice visual oddity in a string of 40-footers. I was tempted by F&C's NH shorty, but there were only 30 still in service in 1950, so decided they were likely too rare.


Cheers,
Alan Monk
London, UK



***********************************************************************************
The contents of this e-mail and any attached files are confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately at postmaster@... and remove it from your system. If received in error, please do not use, disseminate, forward, print or copy this email or its content. Transport for London excludes any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached files.

Transport for London is a statutory corporation whose principal office is at Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0TL. Further information about Transport for London’s subsidiary companies can be found on the following link: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/4510.aspx

Although TfL have scanned this email (including attachments) for viruses, recipients are advised to carry out their own virus check before opening any attachments, as TfL accepts no liability for any loss, or damage which may be caused by viruses.
***********************************************************************************



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


Re: 36-foot boxcars

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 9, 2013, at 8:11 AM, lnbill <fgexbill@...> wrote:

I too appreciate F&C's efforts with 36-foot boxcars.

One of the stats I remember from John Nehrich's "Shop Talks" years ago was the number of boxcars of various lengths based on numbers from the ORER he consulted. I don't remember the exact year but I am pretty sure the reason it stuck with me is because it was a post-WWII year. About 84% of the national boxcar fleet were nominal 40-ft cars while the 36-ft and 50-ft boxcars were about the same, approximately 8% for each. I have tried to remember this ratio as I buy and build.
Bill, I wouldn't put too much stock in those numbers. Aging 36' box cars lasted longer on smaller and less prosperous railroads (and on Class 1 RRs like the Southern, which was still acquiring them in the late '20s) than on major transcontinental lines, and 50' cars were more numerous on the railroads that had a lot of automobile and auto parts traffic (e.g., NYC, Pennsy, Santa Fe, UP). So the ratio might vary a lot depending on the RR and location you're modeling. As always, interchange records, conductors' train books, and photos of actual trains are more useful than abstract numbers. In the area and era I model, I need many 50' cars, as the Santa Fe hauled large amounts of auto parts into the Los Angeles area and many finished autos and trucks out of it, but very few 36' cars, as the Santa Fe's had mostly been retired and most other western RRs (UP. SP, WP, GN, NP, MILW) had shifted from 36' to 40' box cars early in the 20th century. As always, YMMV, of course. No doubt 36' box cars were more numerous in the southeast than in the far west.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar - Again

Bill Welch
 

The undecorated kit version of the Erie car I have has the correct roof and ends and the correct shorter "tab" under the door with the extra tab on the sill to the right of this long tab.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., "Don" <riverman_vt@...> wrote:



--- In STMFC@..., Lancaster James <ljames1@> wrote:

Atlas says these are new paint schemes.
http://www.atlasrr.com/HOFreight/ho1932boxcar4.htm

Are any of the cars prototypically accurate?

Jim Lancaster

Well, let's take them one at a time.

Erie - Paint and lettering are right on but will the model have
"Buckeye" ends? I'd like to think so but expect that is asking
too much. IIRC it may have a "Viking" roof, however. See
Culotta pages 124 - 139.

MEC - Nice job and accurate for those repainted from 1947 until

Cordially, Don Valentine


Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

Benjamin Hom
 

Don Burn wrote:
"Actually, if you go back in the discussions you will see there are bigger
problems. While there was variance in the implementation, the variance was
no greater than the 1932 box cars Atlas did correctly. For the rebuilds
they created one car that had a number of significant features wrong, then
did not even issue it for the railroads that most closely matched that car.
Search the archives of the group it is an interesting discussion, pointing
out failure such as not enough overhang, wrong brackets etc."
The problems are even more fundamental than roof overhang or incorrect side sill brackets.  For example, consider this model:
http://www.atlasrr.com/Images/HOFreightCars/hosteelrebuilt/0212/6423-2_TQ.jpg
 
The Santa Fe rebuilt their Class Bx-2 USRA DS boxcars into functional equivalents of prewar AAR boxcars, using rectangular panel roofs and 10-panel riveted sides.  Additionally, they increased the height of the car, using a corrugated filler plate at the top of the end resulting in a 2/5/5/5 end.  YMMV, but the model has the wrong roof, wrong ends, and is too short in height.  That's a deal breaker even before you get to things like side sill brackets (which are wrong too).
 
This example is even more laughable:
http://www.atlasrr.com/Images/HOFreightCars/hosteelrebuilt/6402-1_TQ.jpg
 
The prototype is familiar to participants of the first Shake-and-Take project at Cocoa Beach.  KCS made the most extensive modifications to the original USRA DS cars, essentially dropping a postwar AAT car body on the original underframe.  Atlas would be better served by slapping the paint scheme on an ex-Branchline postwar AAR boxcar body - it would be a closer model than this POS.
 
We can go over each of Atlas' offerings in this manner, but you get my point.
 
 
Ben Hom

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


Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

Benjamin Hom
 

CORRECTED POST:
 
Bottom Line Up Front: NO variation of the Atlas "rebuilt" boxcar (in any scale) accurately models any prototype out of the box.  It's essentially the equivalent of the Athearn 50 ft gon - a mishmash of features that is a model of nothing, but the modeler is charged $34.95 vice $2.50.
 
The variation with 5/5/5 Murphy ends, Murphy XLA roof, and fishbelly underframe can be salvaged with some work modifying the side sills to match ACL/C&WC and SL-SF prototypes, but every other roadname offered has significant differences (roof, ends, doors) between the model and prototype.  See the group archives for extensive discussions about the Atlas model and the S Helper Service model that it was copied from.
 
 
Ben Hom


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar - Again

Benjamin Hom
 

Don Valentine asked:
"In closing it appears I need to take another look at the Atlas USRA rebuilds. Anyone know of a good book to suggest?"
 
No single source yet.  RP Cyc 24 for the double-sheathed rebuilds; Martin Lofton's overview articles in the September and October 1989 issues of Railroad Model Craftsman, many other articles by Martin in the early 1990s in Model Railroading and Railmodel Journal (author search at http://index.mrmag.com/ will turn these up). See also spreadsheets summarizing DS and SS boxcars in the group files section compiled by myself and Larry Kline.
 
 
Ben Hom


Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

Benjamin Hom
 

Don Valentine asked:
"In the discussion of the Atlas 1932 ARA box car over the last day or so someone wondered how Atlas did
such a great job on the 1932 ARA car but such an abysmal job on the USRA rebuild. While I hate to risk
opening a whole can of worms can someone inform me of just what is so terrible about the USRA rebuild?"
 
Bottom Line Up Front: None of the variations of the Atlas "rebuilt" boxcar (in any scale) does not accurately model any prototype out of the box.  It's essentially the equivalent of the Athearn 50 ft gon - a mishmash of features that is a model of nothing, but the modeler is charged $34.95 vice $2.50.
 
The variation with 5/5/5 Murphy ends, Murphy XLA roof, and fishbelly underframe can be salvaged with some work modifying the side sills to match ACL/C&WC and SL-SF prototypes, but every other roadname offered has significant differences (roof, ends, doors) between the model and prototype.  See the group archives for extensive discussions about the Atlas model and the S Helper Service model that it was copied from.
 
 
Ben Hom

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


Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

Don Burn
 

Actually, if you go back in the discussions you will see there are bigger
problems. While there was variance in the implementation, the variance was
no greater than the 1932 box cars Atlas did correctly. For the rebuilds
they created one car that had a number of significant features wrong, then
did not even issue it for the railroads that most closely matched that car.
Search the archives of the group it is an interesting discussion, pointing
out failure such as not enough overhang, wrong brackets etc.

Don Burn

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of Walt
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 11:07 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

I think that the short answer is that because it is a rebuilt, each
railroad's master mechanic had different ideas on just how to do it. Trying
to use one set of dies to reproduce all these variations is pretty hard.

Walt Stafa

--- In STMFC@..., "Don" <riverman_vt@...> wrote:


In the discussion of the Atlas 1932 ARA box car over the last day
or so someone wondered how Atlas did such a great job on the 1932 ARA car
but such an abysmal job on the USRA rebuild. While I hate to risk opening a
whole can of worms can someone inform me of just what is so terrible about
the USRA rebuild?

Thanks in advance, Don Valentine



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


36-foot boxcars

Bill Welch
 

I too appreciate F&C's efforts with 36-foot boxcars.

One of the stats I remember from John Nehrich's "Shop Talks" years ago was the number of boxcars of various lengths based on numbers from the ORER he consulted. I don't remember the exact year but I am pretty sure the reason it stuck with me is because it was a post-WWII year. About 84% of the national boxcar fleet were nominal 40-ft cars while the 36-ft and 50-ft boxcars were about the same, approximately 8% for each. I have tried to remember this ratio as I buy and build.

I also have a few undec MDC 36-foot kits around in case they may be good for something.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., "Don" <riverman_vt@...> wrote:

But Steve & Sharon have come a huge distance since Al Ford at Willis Hobbies got Steve started in this business so many years ago.
I have picked up a number of their up-dated kits of late both to build and to sell and have been especially pleased with their new New Haven GA-2 gondolas and the 36 ft. New Haven box car now in a one piece body form. These are both great kits! The NYC 36 ft. box will be available shortly in a one piece body form as well which I'm sure will be a hit. I am very pleased with Steve's efforts with 36 ft. box cars as they offer what looks to be a longer or larger train but with less length. All part of the "optical illusion" of model railroading!

Cheers, Don Valentine


Re: Atlas USRA rebuild.

prr6380
 

I think that the short answer is that because it is a rebuilt, each railroad's master mechanic had different ideas on just how to do it. Trying to use one set of dies to reproduce all these variations is pretty hard.

Walt Stafa

--- In STMFC@..., "Don" <riverman_vt@...> wrote:


In the discussion of the Atlas 1932 ARA box car over the last day or so someone wondered how Atlas did such a great job on the 1932 ARA car but such an abysmal job on the USRA rebuild. While I hate to risk
opening a whole can of worms can someone inform me of just what is so terrible about the USRA rebuild?

Thanks in advance, Don Valentine


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar NdeM

Bill Welch
 

Several years ago I built two of "Yankee Clipper" versions of the CGW 1932 car, one as NdeM, and was very happy with the two models. I don't remember the source for the NdeM decals. BTW, IIRC these cars road on Andrews trucks. I just looked on the F&C site to see if they have re-issued this car and they have not. It might be possible to coax some casting set out of Steve however.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

Ken Montero asked:
"In the third link in your email (a link to the October 2011 run), Atlas shows an NdeM boxcar. What are your thoughts about the degree of accuracy?
http://www.atlasrr.com/HOFreight/ho1932boxcar3.htm

It's a foobie.  All of the NdeM cars had 7/8 Murphy ends and Pullman carbuilder ("reverse CRECo") doors.
 
 
Ben Hom



Atlas USRA rebuild.

Don <riverman_vt@...>
 

In the discussion of the Atlas 1932 ARA box car over the last day or so someone wondered how Atlas did such a great job on the 1932 ARA car but such an abysmal job on the USRA rebuild. While I hate to risk
opening a whole can of worms can someone inform me of just what is so terrible about the USRA rebuild?

Thanks in advance, Don Valentine


Re: NdeM Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar - Again

Don <riverman_vt@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

Ken Montero asked:
"In the third link in your email (a link to the October 2011 run), Atlas shows an NdeM boxcar. What are your thoughts about the degree of accuracy?
http://www.atlasrr.com/HOFreight/ho1932boxcar3.htm

It's a foobie.  All of the NdeM cars had 7/8 Murphy ends and Pullman carbuilder ("reverse CRECo") doors.
 
 
Ben Hom
Culotta indicates that some of the NdeM cars were "tendered to a new owner" but fails to elaborate further. Does anyone have any idea who this might hae been? Perhaps a southern shortline given the
Mississippi location of the photo in which this change of ownership
is suggested in the caption?

Cordially, Don Valentine


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar - Again

Don <riverman_vt@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Lancaster James <ljames1@...> wrote:

Atlas says these are new paint schemes.
http://www.atlasrr.com/HOFreight/ho1932boxcar4.htm

Are any of the cars prototypically accurate?

Jim Lancaster

Well, let's take them one at a time.

CofG - Appears to be accurate for a short-term paint design used for
only a year or two in the very early 1950's. See Culotta p.28.

Erie - Paint and lettering are right on but will the model have
"Buckeye" ends? I'd like to think so but expect that is asking
too much. IIRC it may have a "Viking" roof, however. See
Culotta pages 124 - 139.

MEC - Nice job and accurate for those repainted from 1947 until
about 1954. The earlier MEC version from Atlas is also good.
See Cullota page 144.

NS - I have nothing to go on for this special merchandise service
paint job nor does it appear in Ted Culotta's book.

NC&StL - Right on for the "as built" paint and nice to have to go
with the earlier Atlas "cigar band" paint plan. One can
also add the "To and From Dixieland" slogan above the
reporting marks of this new version if decals can be found.
See Culotta page 170 & 174.

SAL - Appears to be right on for repaints from 1953 to about 1960.
See Culotta page 203.


With the exception of the MEC, which I was personally involved with from 1969 until about six months after the Guilford takeover, I have relied soley on Ted Culotta's wonderful book on the 1932 ARA cars.
To me this is the single best book ever written about a particular car type and one which no one interested in them should try to do without.
I just hope Ted can get things squared away so that he might offer more of what he has provided for us in the past. I know well what he has been through in the past two to three years, wish him well and recognize
his many wonderful contributions to our enjoyment of the hobby.

In closing it appears I need to take another look at the Atlas USRA rebuilds. Anyone know of a good book to suggest?

Cordially, Don Valentine


Re: Modeling milestone

Don <riverman_vt@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "John" <golden1014@...> wrote:

I was at STL RPM, of course, and spent a long time at F&C's table looking at their new offerings and the quality of their castings. Steve has perfected the one-piece hopper body and the detail is phenominal. They had new one-piece covered hopper cars and all the modeler has to do is add the centersill and the car is essentially complete except for all the wire details. I made a recommendation to re-do their old NYC covered hopper and Sharon said a new one-piece model is on the schedule for production next year. Their one-piece hopper castings are really cutting edge--if you haven't seen them you will be impressed.

I bought another 1923 car and a USRA DS box car (flat kit) from them. The DS car has a one piece roof and it'll be a snap to get the carbody squared up. After doing a few Westerfield Fowler cars recently I'm excited to be using a one-piece roof.

I remember my first F&C model I bought in Sacramento in 1988. The old yellow castings. It was a disaster. They have come a long way since then!

I have to agree with you in both instances, John. Al & Pat Westerfield are great folks but two piece roofs were/are a pain in the
seat. But Steve & Sharon have come a huge distance since Al Ford at Willis Hobbies got Steve started in this business so many years ago.
I have picked up a number of their up-dated kits of late both to build and to sell and have been especially pleased with their new New Haven GA-2 gondolas and the 36 ft. New Haven box car now in a one piece body form. These are both great kits! The NYC 36 ft. box will be available shortly in a one piece body form as well which I'm sure will be a hit. I am very pleased with Steve's efforts with 36 ft. box cars as they offer what looks to be a longer or larger train but with less length. All part of the "optical illusion" of model railroading!

Cheers, Don Valentine


Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar - Again

Benjamin Hom
 

Ken Montero asked:
"In the third link in your email (a link to the October 2011 run), Atlas shows an NdeM boxcar. What are your thoughts about the degree of accuracy?
http://www.atlasrr.com/HOFreight/ho1932boxcar3.htm

It's a foobie.  All of the NdeM cars had 7/8 Murphy ends and Pullman carbuilder ("reverse CRECo") doors.
 
 
Ben Hom

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


Re: [CofGmodeler] HO Reading/NE Caboose Model?

Scaler164@...
 

Good info, Charlie .  Thanks.

The models I need should  not have end windows, so the P2K model is good for that area, at least.  Not sure about the running boards and floor boards.. .

I have already secured two different sets of Taylor trucks  needed for modeling S&A cab # 256... one from Eastern Car Works and the other from "Kitbits" (which I just got in the mail yesterday from Bob Brannen of Riverdale Station) .  The ECW trucks appear nicer than the Kitbits trucks, so I'll probably use them.   However, S&A cab # 255 did not have Taylor trucks... and I've decided to use the trucks from Spring Mills Depot for it.

As an Interesting anomaly ... I have photos of 255 with matching trucks (both trucks having TWO leaf springs) and two later photos showing it with one truck having THREE leaf springs.  (see attached photo (unless the group  strips it from the message))


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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Tapper" <charlestapper@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2013 2:36:38 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: [CofGmodeler] HO Reading/NE Caboose Model?

The old Life-Like caboose (ex-Varney?) has a non-Duryea underframe, and Pullman-style steps, and is based on a Reading design IIRC that had that underframe. Plus wood running boards and no windows.  The Pullman steps are incorrect for Reading and are a later addition to the dies(?): I have an old American Flyer HO caboose probably produced by Varney with side steps and a cast metal underframe intended to take a bulb.
 
Some Reading cabooses had Duryea underframes and some did not, IIRC.
 
The P2K car has a Duryea underframe and no end windows, plus a tread running board. Floor boards are oriented parallel to sides, another difference with old LL.
 
Gloor produced etched brass, cast metal, and wood kits. I believe the end may have a single window, I'll have to look. And  a "simplified" underframe. 
 
Do not use the ex-Mantua car, it is oversized by quite a bit and its proportions are just wrong. The Athearn/former MDC car is not really accurate either.
 
My interest is in the WM and P&WV versions, so I haven't looked at Reading classes lately, and I can't remember what their ends are like (2 square windows like some Lehigh Valley NEs?).
 
I don't have time to check my resources, I'm on lunch break and need to get back to well logs, but there are data out there on the various Reading classes. A friend of mine made a splendid Reading caboose out of the old Life-Like caboose many years ago, so you have several options going forward but may need to add end windows and Taylor trucks.
 
Charlie Tapper

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


Re: [CofGmodeler] HO Reading/NE Caboose Model?

wm501jra
 

The Proto 2000 caboose came in two versions, with and without end windows, those with had square windows. WM cabs were built without end windows, they were added starting in 1950. The Proto cabs also had two different trucks, the first runs had 50 ton Birdsboro (Andrews style) trucks, later runs including those done by Walthers look more like a 50 ton double truss with leaf springs. The early runs also had interior lights which were not that successful a design and the wheels were poor. These are often seen at Train Shows and on line auction sites.

I also did not see the Quality Craft Brass NE caboose kit mentioned. The MDC/Athearn car is really not accurate for a "NE" style caboose.

Jeff Adams
WMRHS

--- In STMFC@..., Charles Tapper <charlestapper@...> wrote:

It looks like Reading cabooses have no end windows. And a combination of Taylor, Birdsboro, and Andrews trucks to start with. There is a list somewhere that breaks down underframes.  This was a quick find on basic class data.
 
http://www.readingrailroad.org/roster/roster_cabooses_ne.shtml
 
 
Charlie Tapper
Now, back to well logs...

________________________________
From: Charles Tapper <charlestapper@...>
To: "STMFC@..." <STMFC@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2013 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: [CofGmodeler] HO Reading/NE Caboose Model?

 
The old Life-Like caboose (ex-Varney?) has a non-Duryea underframe, and Pullman-style steps, and is based on a Reading design IIRC that had that underframe. Plus wood running boards and no windows.  The Pullman steps are incorrect for Reading and are a later addition to the dies(?): I have an old American Flyer HO caboose probably produced by Varney with side steps and a cast metal underframe intended to take a bulb.
 
Some Reading cabooses had Duryea underframes and some did not, IIRC.
 
The P2K car has a Duryea underframe and no end windows, plus a tread running board. Floor boards are oriented parallel to sides, another difference with old LL.
 
Gloor produced etched brass, cast metal, and wood kits. I believe the end may have a single window, I'll have to look. And  a "simplified" underframe. 
 
Do not use the ex-Mantua car, it is oversized by quite a bit and its proportions are just wrong. The Athearn/former MDC car is not really accurate either.
 
My interest is in the WM and P&WV versions, so I haven't looked at Reading classes lately, and I can't remember what their ends are like (2 square windows like some Lehigh Valley NEs?).
 
I don't have time to check my resources, I'm on lunch break and need to get back to well logs, but there are data out there on the various Reading classes. A friend of mine made a splendid Reading caboose out of the old Life-Like caboose many years ago, so you have several options going forward but may need to add end windows and Taylor trucks.
 
Charlie Tapper
Not really Reading-proficient.

________________________________
From: Benjamin Hom <mailto:b.hom%40att.net>
To: "mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2013 5:54 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: [CofGmodeler] HO Reading/NE Caboose Model?

 
John Degnan asked:
"Anyone know if anyone besides Bachmann make a HO model of the style of Reading/NE Steel Caboose seen below?
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/160-16806
   
Todd Horton replied:
"Life Like / Walthers Proto200 makes a nice model
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/920-54829
 
Several models have been produced in HO scale of the Northeastern steel caboose over the years.  Before the P2K model, Life-Like cranked out tens of thousands trainset-quality models:
http://www.ho-scaletrains.net/lifelikefreightcars/id33.html
 
Lindberg also offered a model, later marketed by Mantua in their "Heavies" line and still available from Model Power ("Mantua Classics"):
http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r132/tonycook1966/Lindberg/02_Lindberg.jpg
http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r132/tonycook1966/Lindberg/03_Lindberg.jpg
http://www.modelpower.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=76 
 
Eastern Car Works had a decent kit for this car, including different ends to model variations.  Some modelers had complaints about the roof curvature, so YMMV.
 
 
Ben Hom

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

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




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

75761 - 75780 of 193414