Date   

Re: Steam freight car modeling tools - a decent pair of tweezers

Armand Premo
 


Join the club Marty.It's all in the game----- Original Message -----
To: STMFC
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 2:30 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Steam freight car modeling tools - a decent pair of tweezers

 


I've had it with the collection of "Tool Man" and "Tool Lady" tweezers - I spent a frustrating half hour looking for a part that I managed to flick halfway to the next dimension last night...only to find it on the floor under the modeling desk, pick it up, and flick it off into space again.

 

Anyone have a recommendation on a pair of modeling tweezers that they absolutlely love? I'm afraid most of mine are going to end up stuck in the wall after being tossed in frustration.

 

TIA,

Marty McGuirk

 


Re: Steam freight car modeling tools - a decent pair of tweezers

Tony Thompson
 

 Marty McGuirk wrote:

 
I've had it with the collection of "Tool Man" and "Tool Lady" tweezers - I spent a frustrating half hour looking for a part that I managed to flick halfway to the next dimension last night...only to find it on the floor under the modeling desk, pick it up, and flick it off into space again. 

Anyone have a recommendation on a pair of modeling tweezers that they absolutlely love? I'm afraid most of mine are going to end up stuck in the wall after being tossed in frustration.

     I have used Dumont (Swiss) #3 and #5 tweezers for many years (often specified for electron microscopy, something I did in a previous life) and they are great. Not cheap, though.
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: Steam freight car modeling tools - a decent pair of tweezers

Tom Vanwormer
 

I was given a pair of Surgical Tweezers by my wife's surgeon after he removed her stitches long ago.  It seems most of the instruments are now "throw aways."  I now "swear by" rather than "swear at" them.
Tom VanWormer
Monument CO

Marty McGuirk wrote:

 


I've had it with the collection of "Tool Man" and "Tool Lady" tweezers - I spent a frustrating half hour looking for a part that I managed to flick halfway to the next dimension last night...only to find it on the floor under the modeling desk, pick it up, and flick it off into space again.

 

Anyone have a recommendation on a pair of modeling tweezers that they absolutlely love? I'm afraid most of mine are going to end up stuck in the wall after being tossed in frustration.

 

TIA,

Marty McGuirk



Steam freight car modeling tools - a decent pair of tweezers

Marty McGuirk
 


I've had it with the collection of "Tool Man" and "Tool Lady" tweezers - I spent a frustrating half hour looking for a part that I managed to flick halfway to the next dimension last night...only to find it on the floor under the modeling desk, pick it up, and flick it off into space again.

 

Anyone have a recommendation on a pair of modeling tweezers that they absolutlely love? I'm afraid most of mine are going to end up stuck in the wall after being tossed in frustration.

 

TIA,

Marty McGuirk

 


Re: Code 88 Wheels and 58 couplers

Andy Sperandeo
 

I too like the look of code 88 wheels and scale-size Kadee couplers (these days I use a lot more 153s than 58s). The wheels work perfectly on my track, or I wouldn't use them. I don't see why everyone else shouldn't have as much fun as I do.

So long,

Andy 


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Andy Sperandeo
 

Hi Chris,

There are several sources, including InterMountain, NorthWest Short Line, ReBoxx, and Tangent Scale Models. Also, Tahoe Model Works has caboose trucks with all-metal code 88 wheelsets.

Good luck with your caboose,

Andy


Re: Code 88 Wheels and 58 couplers

Tony Thompson
 

Jim Betz wrote:

Similarly - and in my opinion even more noticeable - the 58s are much more difficult to couple and uncouple - and they do not interface well with #5s. In addition, simply due to the decrease in the dimensions of the vertical faces and the 'gather' - they are more likely to 'spontaneously uncouple' when going over/thru track with vertical kinks/height mismatches between two adjacent pieces of rail ... or our turnouts.

           This can appear true, but remember that the Kadee #5 has an exaggerated vertical dimension, which is why it is forgiving over excessive vertical curves. And the amount of coupler swing as well as the gathering width of the coupler body are, again, exaggerated in the #5. In reality, the #58 is much more like a prototype coupler, and if you watch a prototype switchman, yep, he has to align drawbars, just as we do with 58s, and he can't couple up on a sharp curve. Sure, the #5 has been convenient for years, but in reality its unrealistic dimensions are maybe something we OUGHT to be getting away from, in favor of coupling more like the prototype..
            I have not had trouble at all mating #5s with 58s, but it is vital that both couplers operate very freely. This aspect seems more important that with all 5s, but I have not found it hard to accomplish.

I use coupling picks 'all' of the time. No matter what size/style of pick I'm using the 58s are harder to uncouple and couple. When uncoupling they just don't separate as easily - and when coupling they just don't couple up easily ... both comparisons are to my experience with #5s. And both comparisons apply to 58s with 5s or 58s with 58s.

     True about coupling (see above), but I would say not true about uncoupling, in my experience. You do need to make sure your uncoupling pick has a smaller tip than what works with #5s.
      Personally, I am slowly replacing #5s on older models with 58s, but feel no urgency to do so, other than improving appearance, as my experience has been that the two sizes DO play well together.

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





Code 88 Wheels and 58 couplers

Jim Betz
 

Hi,

The following are my opinions, experiences, advise
and observations ...

**********************************************
* I -love- the look of the more prototypically sized
* wheels ("code 88) and couplers (#58s). Having
* said that ...
**********************************************

If you have truly "perfect" track then you can run code 88s
and not have too many more derailments. If you run some
88s and also some regular wheelsets at the same time
(different cars) then you will observe that the 88s are
"more likely to derail" than the regular wheelsets. I have
never seen any numbers on "how much more likely".
I have not noticed any increase in derailments when 88s are
coupled to cars with regular wheelsets so there does not
seem to be any kind of problem similar to couplers (see
below).
That term "perfect track" is relative - it changes from layout
to layout. Some layouts, that run fine with regular wheels,
are much more prone to derailments with 88s than others.
Many (most?) layout owners are highly reluctant to rework
their track to correct problems. For instance they will go to
great lengths to avoid pulling up and relaying a turnout. If
we were all better at laying track the first time - or more
willing to change track that is down and in service ... then
code 88s would be easier to use ...

Similarly - and in my opinion even more noticeable - the 58s
are much more difficult to couple and uncouple - and they
do not interface well with #5s. In addition, simply due to the
decrease in the dimensions of the vertical faces and the
'gather' - they are more likely to 'spontaneously uncouple'
when going over/thru track with vertical kinks/height
mismatches between two adjacent pieces of rail ... or our
turnouts.
I use coupling picks 'all' of the time. No matter what
size/style of pick I'm using the 58s are harder to uncouple
and couple. When uncoupling they just don't separate
as easily - and when coupling they just don't couple up
easily ... both comparisons are to my experience with #5s.
And both comparisons apply to 58s with 5s or 58s with 58s.

****

Whether you choose to use semi-scale couplers and wheels
is -your- choice.
If you are "into Ops" then you have a much different set of
values/decisions than if you aren't - and the choice is not easy.
We all, including myself, want our equipment to look as
prototypical as possible (especially those of us on this list) ...
but we still have to deal with 'the realities of whether/where/how
our equipment is operated'.
Locally (SF Bay Area) many layouts have chosen to go all
58s. Far fewer have chosen to go all 88s.

****

Car standards and maintenance levels affect all of the
above. The more likely that all of your cars have all of
their couplers at exactly the same height and all of their
wheelsets perfectly in gauge the more reliable your
operation will be.
This is true for both semi-scale and regular wheels and
couplers.

The cost of converting an entire fleet of cars and locos
can be a serious consideration depending upon the size
of the fleet! I use "about $10 a car" as a rule of thumb
for doing both the wheelsets and couplers. That can
quickly add up to "serious money" when contemplating
doing all the equipment on a layout. Especially if your
fleet already has 'regular' couples and wheels.

****

I do not know of any layouts/guys who use prototypically
accurate wheels (63s) or couplers (Sergent) on Ops oriented
layouts. I'm not saying they don't exist ... I just have never
operated on one.
- Jim Betz

P.S. On the average I operate on at least 4 to 5 different
layouts a month. Most of them are HO. And most
of them are "ops sessions" of 3 to 6 hours long and a
crew of 3-4 to 18-or-more operators. Most of them
have been 'experimenting' with semi-scale since the
wheelsets and couplers became available ...


Re: Freight Car Documents

Steve SANDIFER
 

I would love to have them.

________________________________________________________________
Steve Sandifer
12027 Mulholland Drive, Meadows Place, TX 77477
713-376-0684
www.ssandifer.com

From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
William B Kelly
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:18 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Freight Car Documents



Hi Guys,

I had some time to clean out files today and have about 80, maybe 100 pages
of drawings, photocopies, lists, and other misc. documents relating to
STMFC. There are a number of Sunshine documents in there too, and a few
handouts from Naperville and Cocoa meets. If you'd like it let me know
offline at Golden1014@yahoo.com and I'll send it all to you.

Thanks,
John

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL




____________________________________________________________
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/53319e5438ecc1e541d1cst02vuc> Old
School Yearbook Pics
View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School Year. Look Now!
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/53319e5438ecc1e541d1cst02vuc>
classmates.com


Re: Freight Car Documents

Bill Kelly
 

Hi Guys,

I had some time to clean out files today and have about 80, maybe 100 pages of drawings, photocopies, lists, and other misc. documents relating to STMFC. There are a number of Sunshine documents in there too, and a few handouts from Naperville and Cocoa meets. If you'd like it let me know offline at Golden1014@... and I'll send it all to you.

Thanks,
John

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL

 



Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Paul Hillman
 

Thanks Tim,  Looks like the NMRA RP25 flange is the main factor. I have standard "normal" HO track & switches built to NMRA standards. Sounds like Code 88 with RP25 flanges is the best way to go???
 
Paul Hillman
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] HO Code 88 Wheels

 


Paul, you've got that right -- scale width is .063 and is almost guaranteed to
misbehave on switch frogs. NWSL sells what they call Proto:HO which has .063 treads
but "RP25" flanges and back-to-back distance. They also have Proto:87 wheels with
.063 treads but true-scale flanges, and those will definitely not run through
normal HO switches. NWSL used to make wheels with .072 treads and "RP25" flanges.
I had those on a car that ran on a club layout for years, and it never derailed
even once!

Tim O'Connor

>Thanks Richard & others, Checked out NWSL and they seem to have the entire answer, and a small "book" on this wheel subject. Looks like the first thing to do, to replace your existing .110 wheels to something with a more narrow tread, is to measure the axle length and axle end-type.
>
>I have read before that tread-width (like true prototype width) less than .088, won't run well on "standard type" HO track flange-spacings at frogs, etc.
>
>Paul Hilman


Railroad town film

rob.mclear3@...
 

Some nice shots of freight cars here and an excellent look at the journal box on a "hot box" description worth watching the thing to the end.


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Ned Carey
 

I prefer Reboxx  because they come in various axel lengths.
 
Ned Carey


Re: Box car Interior colors

Dan Sweeney Jr
 

Very helpful, Nelson, thanks for posting!
Dan Sweeney, Jr.
Alexandria, VA


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Tim O'Connor
 

Paul, you've got that right -- scale width is .063 and is almost guaranteed to
misbehave on switch frogs. NWSL sells what they call Proto:HO which has .063 treads
but "RP25" flanges and back-to-back distance. They also have Proto:87 wheels with
.063 treads but true-scale flanges, and those will definitely not run through
normal HO switches. NWSL used to make wheels with .072 treads and "RP25" flanges.
I had those on a car that ran on a club layout for years, and it never derailed
even once!

Tim O'Connor

Thanks Richard & others, Checked out NWSL and they seem to have the entire answer, and a small "book" on this wheel subject. Looks like the first thing to do, to replace your existing .110 wheels to something with a more narrow tread, is to measure the axle length and axle end-type.

I have read before that tread-width (like true prototype width) less than .088, won't run well on "standard type" HO track flange-spacings at frogs, etc.

Paul Hilman


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

jon miller <atsfus@...>
 

On 3/24/2014 5:55 PM, Paul Hillman wrote:
they call theirs "semi-scale". Does that equal Code 88 width?

    Yes.  I have a set of actual scale wheelsets and I'm amazed that the real scale folks can run them.

-- 

Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax--Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Paul Hillman
 

Thanks Richard & others, Checked out NWSL and they seem to have the entire answer, and a small "book" on this wheel subject. Looks like the first thing to do, to replace your existing .110 wheels to something with a more narrow tread, is to measure the axle length and axle end-type.
 
I have read before that tread-width (like true prototype width) less than .088, won't run well on "standard type" HO track flange-spacings at frogs, etc.
 
Paul Hilman
 
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] HO Code 88 Wheels

 


On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:24 PM, jon miller <atsfus@...> wrote:


On 3/24/2014 5:16 PM, chris_hillman@... wrote:

Who makes Code 88, HO, 33" dia. wheels, with metal axles & wheels?

Needed for electrical lighting pickup for cabooses.

The Kadees I have, have plastic axles.

Thanks, Paul Hillman

    Intermountain and Rebox, and probably others.  One of the gentleman on this list has them occasionally.

I’ll add Northwest Short Line, whose wheel sets come in a variety of sizes.  


Richard Hendrickson



Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Tim O'Connor
 


Exactrail is another maker of .088 wheels, including these
https://www.exactrail.com/announcements/07-27-2012


   >> Intermountain and Rebox, and probably others.


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Paul Hillman
 


Thanks Jon, Checked out Intermountain and they call theirs "semi-scale". Does that equal Code 88 width?
 
Paul Hillman
 
 

----- Original Message -----
From: jon miller
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] HO Code 88 Wheels

 

On 3/24/2014 5:16 PM, chris_hillman@... wrote:

Who makes Code 88, HO, 33" dia. wheels, with metal axles & wheels?

Needed for electrical lighting pickup for cabooses.

The Kadees I have, have plastic axles.

Thanks, Paul Hillman

    Intermountain and Rebox, and probably others.  One of the gentleman on this list has them occasionally.

--

Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax--Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: HO Code 88 Wheels

Richard Hendrickson
 


On Mar 24, 2014, at 5:24 PM, jon miller <atsfus@...> wrote:


On 3/24/2014 5:16 PM, chris_hillman@... wrote:

Who makes Code 88, HO, 33" dia. wheels, with metal axles & wheels?

Needed for electrical lighting pickup for cabooses.

The Kadees I have, have plastic axles.

Thanks, Paul Hillman

    Intermountain and Rebox, and probably others.  One of the gentleman on this list has them occasionally.

I’ll add Northwest Short Line, whose wheel sets come in a variety of sizes.  


Richard Hendrickson


69401 - 69420 of 192670