Date   

Naperville 2013 RPM Photos

dh30973
 

I have posted my 2013 Naperville RPM photos at:

 

http://www.pbase.com/dh30973/naperville13&page=all

 

Dave Hussey


Fw: [Proto-Layouts] Naperville 2014

Clark Propst
 

This is from another list. Thought you guys might like to know.
 
Clark Propst
Mason City Iowa
 
 

Here are the dates directly from Joe D'Elia of ProtoPower West for the RPM  meet at Naperville/Lisle, Ill.

Date we have with the hotel is Oct 9–11, 2014.

Plan ahead!
Tony Koester


Re: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Robert kirkham
 

Ya, I get that. I keep track of such places so if my family vacation takes me close, I can think about adding a day here and there. Usually it is preserved rolling stock - there is a bunch of it I'd like to photo and measure in Ontario and Quebec. Slowly but surely, I've either had a chance to visit or had a friend do it for me.

If you find something in their catalogue that might be interesting and want to have it checked out in person before ordering a copy, let me know. I'd be able to drop in to the library and look. Even to let them know they have mislabeled a photo of Nash cars as Chev's!

Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: BRIAN PAUL EHNI
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 4:44 AM
To: STMFC List
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Great! I'm VERY likely to travel a couple thousand miles to Vancouver just
to look at the collection.

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni


Re: Most needed car?

dahminator68
 

Hi Eric:  Thanks for the reply. 
Andrew Dahm

From: "eric@..."
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 3:17 PM
Subject: RE: Re: Re: [STMFC] Re: Most needed car?

 
Andrew, 

The list grew out of discussions for fleet building. I do enjoy building Westerfield and other resin kits, but the prospect of building a dozen of one kit to satisfy fleet needs looms as a mountain. Multiply that across ten or twelve different kits and the mountain grows larger. 

The question asked here was in regard to "Most Needed Signature Freight Car". The new Tangent tank car seemed to spur interest in what could be done next. Most everyone wants a common post-WW2 car design, but the remaining prototypes that were built in decent numbers are dwindling. It also seemed the audience wanted to consider this a mass produced, plastic product. What is left but several long-lived car designs from the era before 1930? Some of the prototypes on my list had more numbers built than all of the AAR 1932 steel sheathed box cars, and all of the B&O M-53 wagontop box cars, and all of the Milwaukee rib side box cars. We have models of each of those interesting prototypes available as plastic, injection-mold, mass market models. 

The list I posted was intended to open a few eyes to possible prototypes that were built in large numbers, had long service lives, but have not been produced as plastic, injection-mold, mass market models. I'd rather not see another USRA twin hopper or an AAR 1937 steel sheathed box car offered. There are quite a few charismatic prototype freight car designs that could really fill large holes in many model railroad fleets.

Eric Hansmann
El Paso, TX  


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

Hi Eric:  Nice list but I wondered if you are listing these cars because they need to be modeled or just as an example of cars that had large quantities built by Railroads?
 
Andrew Dahm

From: "eric@..."
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 3:59 PM
Subject: RE: Re: [STMFC] Re: Most needed car?

 
Back in 2012, a group of pre-Depression modelers compiled a list of freight car models for mass production consideration. 
In many cases here, 10,000-20,000 of the prototypes were produced. The in-service numbers through WWII were strong on a number of these individual freight car designs. Between 1946 and 1953, the in-service numbers rapidly dwindled as a 1953 mandatory K brake upgrade pushed railroads to scrap many older freight cars or move them to maintenance service.
 
New York Central Lines - 36-foot, double-sheathed box cars with Murphy inverted corrugated ends
New York Central Lines - 40 foot, double-sheathed, door-and-a-half automobile (XA) box cars
Pennsylvania Railroad - 40-foot GRa, fishbelly side sill, composite gondolas
New York Central Lines - 46 foot,  fishbelly side sill, composite mill gons - many rebuilt with steel replacing original wood sides
1905 common standard hoppers - several railroads rostered these in the thousands
Union Tank Lines (UTLX) X-3 tank cars - came in a few different gallon versions and an insulated version
Southern Railway -  36-foot, steel underframe, double-sheathed, truss rod, box cars
Baltimore & Ohio - M-15 class 40 foot, double-sheathed, box cars
Merchants Despatch Transit (MDT) reefers - 40 foot, double-sheathed, refrigerator cars
Harriman box cars - Southern Pacific, Union Pacific, Illinois Central - 40 foot, double-sheathed, fishbelly side sill, box cars
USRA 70-ton triple bay coal hopper - over 20,000 in service for Chesapeake & Ohio, and New York Central Lines
 
Here are some additional prototypes to consider. These were not produced in the quantity of those listed above but they are distinctive designs:
1924 ARA proposed standard XM-1 single-sheathed, Howe truss box car design - L&N, B&M, more
Seaboard Air Line B-3 or B-4 box car - similarities to the XM-1 above
Atlantic Coast Line ventilated box car (an updated version better than the old Con-Cor model)
wood vinegar tank car 

I'm looking forward to the Dominion/Fowler model from True Line Trains someday. I'd be even happier if a 6-foot door version was produced to cover several US roads.

I model 1926, YMMV.

Eric Hansmann
El Paso, TX



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

Doug Harding wrote:
"What else is there?"
 
Signature cars for major roads that have not been sufficiently explored or analyzed, and the biggest elephant in the room is the New York Central.  What modelers think is covered and what we really need as steam era freight car modelers are two different things, and we really don't know what we don't know, even with the efforts of Jeff English in the late 1990s.
 
For example, the recent release of the Broadway Limited 8 ft 7 in IH USRA-design steel boxcar would lead you to believe that we have the most common boxcar covered.  However, the NYCS raised the IH of these cars during the production run, building large numbers of 9 ft 3 in and 10 ft IH cars.
 
Another example: what is the most common NYCS hopper car?  The USRA/USRA-design twin?  Bob Karig's early common standard?  Oddball IL offset twins?  It sure as heck isn't the AAR offset twin, which was a rare care on the NYCS - only 1000 cars!
 
How many?  Nobody really knows because nobody cares enough to go through the Byzantine lot system of the NYCS to really figure this out.
 
The B&O is another one - the M-53 and M-15 subclass wagontop boxcar were certainly signature cars of the railroad, but they were far outnumbered by the 1923 ARA alternate standard steel boxcars.
 
Additionally, there's another slamdunk that hasn't been done yet - the 10 ft IH postwar steel boxcar.  (The Intermountain car is a prototype unique to the GN.)  You can sell NYC Pacemaker boxcars and SP Overnight boxcars until the sun turns into a red giant, and that doesn't include the other prototypes!
 
 
Ben Hom 





Re: C& BT back in business

Tim O'Connor
 

Tom

I guess I don't understand the question.

The kit boxes I have all have "VERSION x BODY" printed right on the label.

The decorated cars have the "Rr-x" on them. For undec kits, you can
choose the class based on the body version.

C&BT by the way produced some good decals for the reefers, sold separately.

Tim O'Connor



Yes, The label won't tell you if it's A, B, C, etc. but it will tell you Rr 23, or Rr34, etc. Which is what you want to know.

 

Tom Hayden

>I have 2 of those kits in my "stash". How can one best distinguish the A, B, C versions you mentioned.
>>
>>Version A covers Classes Rr-19/23/24/25/26/28/32
>>Version B covers Classes Rr-33/34
>>Version C covers Classes Rr-35/36/39/40
>>Version D covers Class Rr-43
>>Version E covers Classes Rr-45/46
>>Version E1 covers Class Rr-48


Re: C& BT back in business

hayden_tom@...
 

 


Re: C& BT back in business

hayden_tom@...
 

Yes, The label won't tell you if it's A, B, C, etc. but it will tell you Rr 23, or Rr34, etc. Which is what you want to know.

 

Tom Hayden 

>I have 2 of those kits in my "stash". How can one best distinguish the A, B, C versions you mentioned.
>>
>>Version A covers Classes Rr-19/23/24/25/26/28/32
>>Version B covers Classes Rr-33/34
>>Version C covers Classes Rr-35/36/39/40
>>Version D covers Class Rr-43
>>Version E covers Classes Rr-45/46
>>Version E1 covers Class Rr-48


Re: C& BT back in business

Tim O'Connor
 

Robert

The best way to tell is to read the label on the kit box.

Tim O'Connor

I have 2 of those kits in my "stash". How can one best distinguish the A, B, C versions you mentioned.

Version A covers Classes Rr-19/23/24/25/26/28/32
Version B covers Classes Rr-33/34
Version C covers Classes Rr-35/36/39/40
Version D covers Class Rr-43
Version E covers Classes Rr-45/46
Version E1 covers Class Rr-48


Re: C& BT back in business

Robert J Miller CFA
 

Keith.

I have 2 of those kits in my "stash". How can one best distinguish the A, B, C versions you mentioned.


On Oct 23, 2013, at 8:33 PM, <thecitrusbelt@...> wrote:

 

I believe the Keith Jordan post below appeared on this group sometime back.  The Neo system makes finding these things a pain but I did happen to save the post.

 

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA

+++ 

Shawn Beckert, while opening a can of worms, asked about the CB&T SFRD
reefers. Here goes.

The various versions, which CB&T lists as A/B/C, etc. were a
shorthand I developed for Dick Schweigert so his designer/toolmaker
could tell the difference, rather than rely on class designations.
The bodies are the only difference, all of the detail parts were the
same for each version/class. Here is the cross-reference, I'll throw
my two cents in about the cars after:

Version A covers Classes Rr-19/23/24/25/26/28/32
Version B covers Classes Rr-33/34
Version C covers Classes Rr-35/36/39/40
Version D covers Class Rr-43
Version E covers Classes Rr-45/46
Version E1 covers Class Rr-48

Versions A1-D1 are those classes modernized in the 1950s with
additional insulation, hatch cover and running board changes and
sliding plug doors. The classes represent the USRA-style reefers,
rebuilt by the Santa Fe into all steel cars, from 1936 through 1949.
The complete history of these cars is covered in the Santa Fe Rolling
Stock Reference Series Volume 2, Ice Bunker Refrigerator Cars, by
Jordan, Hendrickson, Moore and Hale.

Dick Schweigert's concept to tool an entire group of cars was quite
revolutionary in the plastic field. Unfortunately, some tooling
mistakes and questionable execution caused the project to falter. I
supplied Dick with all of the drawings and information for the cars
and I was supposed to proof/sign-off on the final drawings. I did so
for the first carbody; after marking up the drawings so much with red
ink it looked as though a gruesome murder had occurred. His
designer/toolmaker did not like the interference, so I never saw
another drawing. In fact, I didn't see the cars until after the
tooling had been completed.

The main problem with the cars is the roof; it's three inches too
high, but more egregious, it's nine inches too wide. To fix, you have
to remove the excess width, and then lower the roof. Otherwise, the
car is too top heavy. The walls of the carbody are pretty thick and
if there's some bowing, it can cause some problems. The recessed
Dreadnaught ends of the early classes aren't executed as well as the
Intermountain cars (When I was contacted by IMRC about doing SFRD
reefers, I saw an opportunity to right a wrong. Second chances are
Godsends.), I suggest using the Intermountain cars instead.

The underframe is passable, but lacks the better tooling of the
Intermountain cars. I had Martin Lofton cast a bunch of detail parts
for these cars, but never sold them to others, as the Intermountain
cars came out, obviating the need for most of the replacement parts.
The CB&T detail parts are pretty bad, which in itself is too bad
because they includes such things as Preco fan housings and the
different style of hinges ("tongue-less") used on the similar GATC-
built SFRD reefers. CB&T later included Grandt Line ladders and Tichy
AB brake sets.

The later body styles' tooling is pretty good, rivets are the correct
size and very sharp, the doors are good, and the later Dreadnaught
and Improved Dreadnaught ends are nice.

The kits also included a brief history, plus a "spotting features"
chart, as well as a chart noting painting and lettering variations.

CB&T later had custom decal sets done by Microscale, called
Reefercals, which covered all of the painting/lettering variations
for the cars. I don't know what happened to these ( I got a couple of
sets.)

In short, all the kits are accurate and can be brought up to current
standards, especially the later classes, but not without a lot of
work. It's too bad, because Dick had a terrific opportunity. I never
see the cars in shops or advertised, but until his recent illness,
Dick was at the fall trade show with the entire line. I don't even
know if you can still get them. Hope this helps.

Keith Jordan



---In STMFC@..., <stmfc@...> wrote:

I recall reading I think on the atsfrr.net website that the C&BT kits for SFRD reefers were 9 scale inches too wide. Does anyone know if that was corrected on the current models?  I realize that's not a lot, but next to a Intermountain car it would be noticeable. 

I'm always looking for a more cost effect way to build up the fleet.

Mark P Stamm

Sent from my mobile device

On Oct 22, 2013, at 5:55 PM, SUVCWORR@... wrote:

 

Keep in mind that all of the C&BT dies were hand cut.  They are not computer laser cut as today's dies are.  The dies for the bodies, ends and roofs were cut by a talented die cutter.  Unfortunately he died before completing the detail parts.  His son attempted to finish the detail sprue molds but simply did not have the same level of ability as his father.  In addition to the complaints, Dick received some bad advise from a number of highly regarded modelers recommending he trash the separate parts as this was not the wave of the future.  He followed this advice and had the details cut into the body, end and roof dies to the extent possible.

Dick was also the first as far as I know to add colorant to the plastic pellets so that the color of the plastic matched the color of the car.  Scrap the paint from a C&BT car and the plastic will be the same color as the paint.

Rich Orr

"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."

Joseph V Paterno


-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Thompson <tony@...>
To: STMFC <STMFC@...>
Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 1:14 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C& BT back in business



       Not sure why all the criticism of these cars. The bodies are largely quite well done. I have said for years, "just throw away all the detail sprues and replace with quality parts," and would still say so. I don't have any of the cast-on parts cars, so am talking about the original, add-the-details cars. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I knew Dick Schweiger, and I can attest to his fine model-building skills. He completely understands what is involved, but simply could not find a mold maker who could do what was needed. He did indeed get tired of the complaints about the quality of details, which is why he went the cast-on route. I see lots of abuse here on that score. Can you say "Accurail?"

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: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

 

Great! I'm VERY likely to travel a couple thousand miles to Vancouver just
to look at the collection.

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

From: Robert <rdkirkham@live.ca>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, October 24, 2013 12:32 AM
To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?






They are very good about putting photos or negatives on a light table in
front of you if you can go visit. I've been able to do so for 30 years - a
very nice collection, and tolerable duplication charges.

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: BRIAN PAUL EHNI
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:13 AM
To: STMFC List
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

I'd sure be inlined to peruse their images more if they weren't so tiny.

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

From: Claus Schlund HGM <claus@hellgatemodels.com>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:06 AM
To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Hi List Members,

Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spePhotos/LeonardFrankCollection/02DisplayJP
Gs/469/41541.jpg

More info can be found at the crazy long link below (I have no idea if it
will work, being it is so long!)

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll?AC=GET_RECORD&;XC=/
dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll&BU=http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca%2Fspe%2Fh
istphotos%2Fphotos-search.htm&TN=PHOTOS&SN=AUTO20119&SE=8512&RN=652&MR=5&TR=
10000&TX=1000&ES=0&CS=0&XP=&RF=briefweb&EF=&DF=Full+Photo&RL=0&EL=0&DL=0&NP=
2&ID=&MF=&MQ=&TI=0&DT=&ST=0&IR=21712&NR=0&NB=130&SV=0&SS=0&BG=&FG=&QS=&OEX=I
SO-8859-1&OEH=ISO-8859-1

- Claus Schlund



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

Yahoo! Groups Links









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


Re: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Tim O'Connor
 

Not especially relevant to this list, but some of these lasted into the 1980's
in company service (not stationary; used to move company materials).

Tim O'Connor

Claus Schlund asked:
"Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?
http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spePhotos/LeonardFrankCollection/02DisplayJPGs/469/41541.jpg

Yes. The giveaways are the radial roof, Dreadnaught ends, single rows of rivets joining the side sheets, and the long "tabs" at the bolsters.
http://www.steamerafreightcars.com/gallery/boxauto/cp246134main.html

Ben Hom


Re: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Robert kirkham
 

They are very good about putting photos or negatives on a light table in front of you if you can go visit. I've been able to do so for 30 years - a very nice collection, and tolerable duplication charges.

Rob Kirkham

-----Original Message-----
From: BRIAN PAUL EHNI
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:13 AM
To: STMFC List
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

I'd sure be inlined to peruse their images more if they weren't so tiny.

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

From: Claus Schlund HGM <claus@hellgatemodels.com>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:06 AM
To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?






Hi List Members,

Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spePhotos/LeonardFrankCollection/02DisplayJP
Gs/469/41541.jpg

More info can be found at the crazy long link below (I have no idea if it
will work, being it is so long!)

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll?AC=GET_RECORD&;XC=/
dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll&BU=http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca%2Fspe%2Fh
istphotos%2Fphotos-search.htm&TN=PHOTOS&SN=AUTO20119&SE=8512&RN=652&MR=5&TR=
10000&TX=1000&ES=0&CS=0&XP=&RF=briefweb&EF=&DF=Full+Photo&RL=0&EL=0&DL=0&NP=
2&ID=&MF=&MQ=&TI=0&DT=&ST=0&IR=21712&NR=0&NB=130&SV=0&SS=0&BG=&FG=&QS=&OEX=I
SO-8859-1&OEH=ISO-8859-1

- Claus Schlund













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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: C& BT back in business

thecitrusbelt@...
 

I believe the Keith Jordan post below appeared on this group sometime back.  The Neo system makes finding these things a pain but I did happen to save the post.

 

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA

+++ 

Shawn Beckert, while opening a can of worms, asked about the CB&T SFRD
reefers. Here goes.

The various versions, which CB&T lists as A/B/C, etc. were a
shorthand I developed for Dick Schweigert so his designer/toolmaker
could tell the difference, rather than rely on class designations.
The bodies are the only difference, all of the detail parts were the
same for each version/class. Here is the cross-reference, I'll throw
my two cents in about the cars after:

Version A covers Classes Rr-19/23/24/25/26/28/32
Version B covers Classes Rr-33/34
Version C covers Classes Rr-35/36/39/40
Version D covers Class Rr-43
Version E covers Classes Rr-45/46
Version E1 covers Class Rr-48

Versions A1-D1 are those classes modernized in the 1950s with
additional insulation, hatch cover and running board changes and
sliding plug doors. The classes represent the USRA-style reefers,
rebuilt by the Santa Fe into all steel cars, from 1936 through 1949.
The complete history of these cars is covered in the Santa Fe Rolling
Stock Reference Series Volume 2, Ice Bunker Refrigerator Cars, by
Jordan, Hendrickson, Moore and Hale.

Dick Schweigert's concept to tool an entire group of cars was quite
revolutionary in the plastic field. Unfortunately, some tooling
mistakes and questionable execution caused the project to falter. I
supplied Dick with all of the drawings and information for the cars
and I was supposed to proof/sign-off on the final drawings. I did so
for the first carbody; after marking up the drawings so much with red
ink it looked as though a gruesome murder had occurred. His
designer/toolmaker did not like the interference, so I never saw
another drawing. In fact, I didn't see the cars until after the
tooling had been completed.

The main problem with the cars is the roof; it's three inches too
high, but more egregious, it's nine inches too wide. To fix, you have
to remove the excess width, and then lower the roof. Otherwise, the
car is too top heavy. The walls of the carbody are pretty thick and
if there's some bowing, it can cause some problems. The recessed
Dreadnaught ends of the early classes aren't executed as well as the
Intermountain cars (When I was contacted by IMRC about doing SFRD
reefers, I saw an opportunity to right a wrong. Second chances are
Godsends.), I suggest using the Intermountain cars instead.

The underframe is passable, but lacks the better tooling of the
Intermountain cars. I had Martin Lofton cast a bunch of detail parts
for these cars, but never sold them to others, as the Intermountain
cars came out, obviating the need for most of the replacement parts.
The CB&T detail parts are pretty bad, which in itself is too bad
because they includes such things as Preco fan housings and the
different style of hinges ("tongue-less") used on the similar GATC-
built SFRD reefers. CB&T later included Grandt Line ladders and Tichy
AB brake sets.

The later body styles' tooling is pretty good, rivets are the correct
size and very sharp, the doors are good, and the later Dreadnaught
and Improved Dreadnaught ends are nice.

The kits also included a brief history, plus a "spotting features"
chart, as well as a chart noting painting and lettering variations.

CB&T later had custom decal sets done by Microscale, called
Reefercals, which covered all of the painting/lettering variations
for the cars. I don't know what happened to these ( I got a couple of
sets.)

In short, all the kits are accurate and can be brought up to current
standards, especially the later classes, but not without a lot of
work. It's too bad, because Dick had a terrific opportunity. I never
see the cars in shops or advertised, but until his recent illness,
Dick was at the fall trade show with the entire line. I don't even
know if you can still get them. Hope this helps.

Keith Jordan

On Oct 22, 2013, at 5:55 PM, SUVCWORR@... wrote:

 

Keep in mind that all of the C&BT dies were hand cut.  They are not computer laser cut as today's dies are.  The dies for the bodies, ends and roofs were cut by a talented die cutter.  Unfortunately he died before completing the detail parts.  His son attempted to finish the detail sprue molds but simply did not have the same level of ability as his father.  In addition to the complaints, Dick received some bad advise from a number of highly regarded modelers recommending he trash the separate parts as this was not the wave of the future.  He followed this advice and had the details cut into the body, end and roof dies to the extent possible.

Dick was also the first as far as I know to add colorant to the plastic pellets so that the color of the plastic matched the color of the car.  Scrap the paint from a C&BT car and the plastic will be the same color as the paint.

Rich Orr

"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."

Joseph V Paterno


-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Thompson <tony@...>
To: STMFC <STMFC@...>
Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 1:14 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C& BT back in business



       Not sure why all the criticism of these cars. The bodies are largely quite well done. I have said for years, "just throw away all the detail sprues and replace with quality parts," and would still say so. I don't have any of the cast-on parts cars, so am talking about the original, add-the-details cars. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I knew Dick Schweiger, and I can attest to his fine model-building skills. He completely understands what is involved, but simply could not find a mold maker who could do what was needed. He did indeed get tired of the complaints about the quality of details, which is why he went the cast-on route. I see lots of abuse here on that score. Can you say "Accurail?"

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: C& BT back in business

Mark Stamm
 

I recall reading I think on the atsfrr.net website that the C&BT kits for SFRD reefers were 9 scale inches too wide. Does anyone know if that was corrected on the current models?  I realize that's not a lot, but next to a Intermountain car it would be noticeable. 

I'm always looking for a more cost effect way to build up the fleet.

Mark P Stamm

Sent from my mobile device

On Oct 22, 2013, at 5:55 PM, SUVCWORR@... wrote:

 

Keep in mind that all of the C&BT dies were hand cut.  They are not computer laser cut as today's dies are.  The dies for the bodies, ends and roofs were cut by a talented die cutter.  Unfortunately he died before completing the detail parts.  His son attempted to finish the detail sprue molds but simply did not have the same level of ability as his father.  In addition to the complaints, Dick received some bad advise from a number of highly regarded modelers recommending he trash the separate parts as this was not the wave of the future.  He followed this advice and had the details cut into the body, end and roof dies to the extent possible.

Dick was also the first as far as I know to add colorant to the plastic pellets so that the color of the plastic matched the color of the car.  Scrap the paint from a C&BT car and the plastic will be the same color as the paint.

Rich Orr

"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."

Joseph V Paterno


-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Thompson <tony@...>
To: STMFC <STMFC@...>
Sent: Tue, Oct 22, 2013 1:14 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: C& BT back in business



       Not sure why all the criticism of these cars. The bodies are largely quite well done. I have said for years, "just throw away all the detail sprues and replace with quality parts," and would still say so. I don't have any of the cast-on parts cars, so am talking about the original, add-the-details cars. When I lived in Pittsburgh, I knew Dick Schweiger, and I can attest to his fine model-building skills. He completely understands what is involved, but simply could not find a mold maker who could do what was needed. He did indeed get tired of the complaints about the quality of details, which is why he went the cast-on route. I see lots of abuse here on that score. Can you say "Accurail?"

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: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

Benjamin Hom
 

Claus Schlund asked:
"Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?
http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spePhotos/LeonardFrankCollection/02DisplayJPGs/469/41541.jpg

Yes.  The giveaways are the radial roof, Dreadnaught ends, single rows of rivets joining the side sheets, and the long "tabs" at the bolsters.
http://www.steamerafreightcars.com/gallery/boxauto/cp246134main.html
 
 
Ben Hom


Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

So guys, when do we talk auto PARTS?

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of William Keene
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 5:30 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S



Thank you Al. Charles, Paul, Richard, Tony, and all of the others that responded to my request for information regarding the shipment of automobiles in the post-WWII era into the early 1950s. I now have a much clearer understanding of this traffic. An education that I really needed.

Now I need to review my personal automobile box car fleet and make some prototypically necessary adjustments.

Cheers & Happy Modeling,
Bill Keene
Irvine, CA



On Oct 22, 2013, at 1:23 PM, "Aley, Jeff A" <Jeff.A.Aley@intel.com> wrote:





Charles,



Very nice analysis. I was surprised that the state-to-state data for Kansas was omitted. But then I realized the the BOP (Buick-Olds-Pontiac) plant in Kansas City (Fairfax), KS was probably the ONLY major auto factory in the state. The ICC 1% waybill analysis omits data from a single source, as it can easily be identified as a single factory, and therefore can provide production data to competitors. IIRC, there's also no data about the tires shipped from the Goodyear plant in Topeka, for that same reason.



Could you (or anyone else) please tell us more about automobiles shipped in crates in gons? I am not familiar with that practice. How does one "break down" an automobile to fit in a crate, and why?



Regards,



-Jeff





From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Hostetler
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 7:52 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S





Hi Bill (and other interested in automobile traffic):

I gathered some statistics from the 1% carload waybill study on passenger and freight automobile shipments into a post that you may find useful as you think about your auto car fleet. For those interested, the post can be found here:

http://cnwmodeling.blogspot.com/2013/10/commodity-flows-of-automobiles-and.html

Regards,

Charles Hostetler







Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Nice pull, Rob!

BTW, photo 3 is not (only?) of Chevrolets. NASH is clearly stenciled on one crate...

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 8:55 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S



if you go to the Vancouver Public Library web search page <http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spe/histphotos/photos-search.htm> and search with the term “crated” you will find three photos of crated autos. Not the greatest resolution, but gives the idea – both flat cars and gons.

Rob Kirkham

From: cnw1045@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 4:58 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: RE: [STMFC] Re: AUTOMOBILE SHIPMENTS IN BOX CARS IN THE 1950S




Jeff Aley wrote:



"I was surprised that the state-to-state data for Kansas was omitted. But then I realized the the BOP (Buick-Olds-Pontiac) plant in Kansas City (Fairfax), KS was probably the ONLY major auto factory in the state. The ICC 1% waybill analysis omits data from a single source, as it can easily be identified as a single factory, and therefore can provide production data to competitors. IIRC, there’s also no data about the tires shipped from the Goodyear plant in Topeka, for that same reason.




Could you (or anyone else) please tell us more about automobiles shipped in crates in gons? I am not familiar with that practice. How does one “break down” an automobile to fit in a crate, and why?"







Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


Re: model tank car placards

Tony Thompson
 

Andy Miller wrote:
While we are on the subject of tank cars,  does anyone know the meaning of the small diamond that appears on the sides of the dome of most tank cars?

   Andy Sperandeo correctly described the meaning of the diamond, but it is important to realize that its placemen was optional with the car owner, not mandatory. Thus many cars which had the safety manway did NOT display the diamond. This is one more of those cases where you need to model from photos.

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: model tank car placards

Andy Sperandeo
 

Hi Andy,

The diamond means the dome has a safety manway cover, with hold-down bolts to keep it from flipping open under pressure when first released.

So long,

Andy


On Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:37 AM, Tim O'Connor wrote:
 
Andy

I quote:

"... means that the dome is equipped with a safety dome cover which can
be loosened but not removed until any pressure that has built up in the
tank has been vented."

Tim O'

While we are on the subject of tank cars, does anyone know the meaning of the
small diamond that appears on the sides of the dome of most tank cars?
Andy Miller




Re: Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

 

I'd sure be inlined to peruse their images more if they weren't so tiny.

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

From: Claus Schlund HGM <claus@hellgatemodels.com>
Reply-To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:06 AM
To: STMFC List <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?






Hi List Members,

Is the car in the image below a CP 'minibox'?

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/spePhotos/LeonardFrankCollection/02DisplayJP
Gs/469/41541.jpg

More info can be found at the crazy long link below (I have no idea if it
will work, being it is so long!)

http://www3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll?AC=GET_RECORD&;XC=/
dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll&BU=http%3A%2F%2Fwww3.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca%2Fspe%2Fh
istphotos%2Fphotos-search.htm&TN=PHOTOS&SN=AUTO20119&SE=8512&RN=652&MR=5&TR=
10000&TX=1000&ES=0&CS=0&XP=&RF=briefweb&EF=&DF=Full+Photo&RL=0&EL=0&DL=0&NP=
2&ID=&MF=&MQ=&TI=0&DT=&ST=0&IR=21712&NR=0&NB=130&SV=0&SS=0&BG=&FG=&QS=&OEX=I
SO-8859-1&OEH=ISO-8859-1

- Claus Schlund

63081 - 63100 of 182166