Date   

Re: Naperville

mrprksr <mrprksr@...>
 

Saying 3D parts are useless for freight cars ...you need to take a look at Seaboard Shops on the Shapeways site.....Several ACL and SAL pulp wood flats and chip cars.....I just got the AC L H1 chip hopper to build and while not cheap I'll put it up against a resin kit any day.....Larry Menn ie



On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 12:43 PM, "Ray Breyer rtbsvrr69@... [STMFC]" wrote:


 
Yes......"3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies"

Just like these useless bodies here:
https://nycshs.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/nycentralmodeler4th2015final1.pdf
(see pages 65 and 67)

But to be fair, Tom (and Tim) do have a very valid point: even after you overcome the technology's limitations and the problems with printing through Shapeways and come up with a good, usable print, it's still FAR cheaper to use the resulting car as a master for resin duplication (generally, by a factor of ten or so).

Now we just need to find more people who can do high quality casting in bulk.

Ray Breyer
Elgin, IL

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 10/27/15, 'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@... [STMFC] wrote:

Tim,

Perhaps you need to read Jack’s latest article in the current Model Railroad Hobbiest ;)
(Which also features Clark Propst’s LDE layout) While 3D printing is not for every car, it is my
experience that in fact it is hard enough, sandable, cutable and drillable.  No, it isn’t resin or styrene, and
it is a new medium that requires some adjustment of technique, but in fact cars can and are being made this way
that are very nice.  It may not be appropriate for every car (for example a smooth sided steel carbody might show
very fine build lines) but it a workable direct solution.

Regards
Bruce F. Smith  
         

On Oct 27, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Tim O'Connor
timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:

Jack

3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies -- the material lacks hardness and strength. It has to be sandable,
drillable, and cut-able. Tom has the right idea -- make MASTERS in 3-D, modify them as needed (e.g. adding rivet details), and then
make rubber molds from those. The final models are cast in urethane resin.




Re: Naperville

Tony Thompson
 

Ray Breyer wrote:

 

But to be fair, Tom (and Tim) do have a very valid point: even after you overcome the technology's limitations and the problems with printing through Shapeways and come up with a good, usable print, it's still FAR cheaper to use the resulting car as a master for resin duplication (generally, by a factor of ten or so).


      Some of you may not realize that the era of the home 3-D printer is not so far away. Sure, Shapeways may have $100,000 machines, but Robert Bowdidge has a home machine costing less than 5 percent of that number, and he is producing pretty darn nice car bodies for sale. Most of us may still not be ready to spend even 5 percent of a Shapeways machine, but costs are still falling. Keep your eyes open.
       Please note, if you didn't before:


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: USRA

Ray Breyer
 

Which begs the question; How many double sheathed cars were still around in the 50s?
Armand Premo

Hi Armand,

"The Fifties" is a ten year long span of time with a VERY significant marker stuck in about one third of the way through. Are you talking before or after the K-brake ban? Because the numbers will look VERY different.

(Roughly, and ONLY going off of memory here, there were around 40,000 double sheathed cars in 1950, and less than 4,000, mostly all ventilated boxcars or shortline cars, in 1959).

Ray Breyer
Elgin, IL


Re: Naperville

Ray Breyer
 

Yes......"3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies"

Just like these useless bodies here:
https://nycshs.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/nycentralmodeler4th2015final1.pdf
(see pages 65 and 67)

But to be fair, Tom (and Tim) do have a very valid point: even after you overcome the technology's limitations and the problems with printing through Shapeways and come up with a good, usable print, it's still FAR cheaper to use the resulting car as a master for resin duplication (generally, by a factor of ten or so).

Now we just need to find more people who can do high quality casting in bulk.

Ray Breyer
Elgin, IL


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

On Tue, 10/27/15, 'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@auburn.edu [STMFC] <STMFC@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Tim,

Perhaps you need to read Jack’s latest article in the current Model Railroad Hobbiest ;)
(Which also features Clark Propst’s LDE layout) While 3D printing is not for every car, it is my
experience that in fact it is hard enough, sandable, cutable and drillable.  No, it isn’t resin or styrene, and
it is a new medium that requires some adjustment of technique, but in fact cars can and are being made this way
that are very nice.  It may not be appropriate for every car (for example a smooth sided steel carbody might show
very fine build lines) but it a workable direct solution.

Regards
Bruce F. Smith  
         


On Oct 27, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Tim O'Connor
timboconnor@comcast.net [STMFC] <STMFC@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Jack

3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies -- the material lacks hardness and strength. It has to be sandable,
drillable, and cut-able. Tom has the right idea -- make MASTERS in 3-D, modify them as needed (e.g. adding rivet details), and then
make rubber molds from those. The final models are cast in urethane resin.


Re: Naperville

Tony Thompson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

 

3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies -- the
material lacks hardness and strength. It has to be sandable, drillable, and
cut-able. Tom has the right idea -- make MASTERS in 3-D, modify them as needed
(e.g. adding rivet details), and then make rubber molds from those. The final
models are cast in urethane resin.


     Tim, nowadays there is no such thing as saying "the material." You can choose from a wide variety, from the soft and brittle stuff you seem to have seen, to material which is much like urethane resin, and even metals. The Hart convertible gondolas we talked about, a week ago, are a really nice material -- there is one in front of me as I speak, and I have been drilling and sanding, no problem.

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: USRA

Tony Thompson
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:

 

The SP (Pacific Lines) owned no USRA double sheathed box cars, but the
Northwestern Pacific (SP subsidiary) did own some, and operated them as
late as 1960. Ted Schnepf even had an NWP Accurail kit in his vendor display.

Westerfield produced a model (#3858) for the late-era NWP car.


     TIm is quite right, but the NWP cars only numbered 100, and judging by the numbers you see in on-line NWP photos, most of them stayed near home. I model the SP Coast Line, so feel okay having one or two (but NOT the NWP Overnight cars, which did NOT go offline). Most of the U.S. would rarely if ever see an NWP box car.
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: Naperville

Bruce Smith
 

Tim,

Perhaps you need to read Jack’s latest article in the current Model Railroad Hobbiest ;) (Which also features Clark Propst’s LDE layout)  While 3D printing is not for every car, it is my experience that in fact it is hard enough, sandable, cutable and drillable.  No, it isn’t resin or styrene, and it is a new medium that requires some adjustment of technique, but in fact cars can and are being made this way that are very nice.  It may not be appropriate for every car (for example a smooth sided steel carbody might show very fine build lines) but it a workable direct solution.

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."



On Oct 27, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Jack

3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies -- the
material lacks hardness and strength. It has to be sandable, drillable, and
cut-able. Tom has the right idea -- make MASTERS in 3-D, modify them as needed
(e.g. adding rivet details), and then make rubber molds from those. The final
models are cast in urethane resin.

Tom had photos of a forthcoming technology that promises to do away with the
hated "scan lines" -- creating completely smooth parts.

The machines at Shapeways and elsewhere cost $100,000 and up. Also, Shapeways
contracts most of their work out -- to over 13,000 different shops.

Most importantly, Shapeways and other shops DO NOT allow you to specify how your
model will be oriented inside the machines. Your parts are batched with many other
parts. This means you have little control over the direction of scan lines, for
example. You can sprue things together to save money for small parts, but to make
an entire freight car (set of masters) sprues will not help you compared to
printing the entire car in 3-D for example. But in Tom's case he was making a
tank car with complex requirements, so he printed parts masters individually.

Tim O'



Why create a rubber mold when you can draw that part in 3D and make a sprue
of as many copies as you want?

Jack Burgess



------------------------------------
Posted by: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>
------------------------------------


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

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   STMFC-digest@...
   STMFC-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   STMFC-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
   https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/



Re: [EXTERNAL] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)

Bruce Smith
 

Bill,

The PRR modified its X26 fleet rather heavily during the 1930s with new doors and roofs.  The best models for the X26 class for WWII and beyond are the Westerfield resin kits.  The Tichy kit has the original roof and therefore models the car prior to that time period (although some X26 retained the original Murphy XLA roofs through the 1940s).  The Tichy kit is missing rivets on the sides of the ends, but Archer can solve that problem.  F&C has a modernized X26 in HO as well.  Beware of the F&C kit that has side and end ladders which are a rare variant.

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."



On Oct 27, 2015, at 10:58 AM, fgexbill@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:



Hmm, I thought the PRR X26 was a USRA car and much this discussion has been about clarifying the fact that the Accurail 8-panel car given its underframe, roof, ends, and types of steel bracing is clearly not a USRA design. Especially given its Z-braces, ends, and roof, how can it be bashed into a X26? Or why would one do so given the Tichy USRA SS styrene kit?

Bill Welch




Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)

Eric Hansmann
 

Elden,

I think the Tichy kit is fine out of the box for an X26 in the 1926 era I
model.

Can we all please remember there are people here who don't model the
post-WW2 years? I've been seeing quite a few recent posts that seem to
ignore the bulk of the 1900-1960 time span this list covers.

Eric Hansmann
El Paso, TX

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 10:08 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car
(UNCLASSIFIED)

CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

Bill;

I did bash an Accurail SS car into a PRR X26 back when. It was a lot of
work, but looked pretty nice when finished. One can obviously also use the
Tichy or Westerfield versions, which are far less work and more accurate
from the get-go, but that are also bashes (not correct for X26 out of the
box).

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 11:58 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car
(UNCLASSIFIED)



Hmm, I thought the PRR X26 was a USRA car and much this discussion has been
about clarifying the fact that the Accurail 8-panel car given its
underframe, roof, ends, and types of steel bracing is clearly not a USRA
design. Especially given its Z-braces, ends, and roof, how can it be bashed
into a X26? Or why would one do so given the Tichy USRA SS styrene kit?

Bill Welch


CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED


------------------------------------
Posted by: "Gatwood, Elden SAW" <Elden.J.Gatwood@usace.army.mil>
------------------------------------


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

Yahoo Groups Links


Re: USRA

Tim O'Connor
 

The SP (Pacific Lines) owned no USRA double sheathed box cars, but the
Northwestern Pacific (SP subsidiary) did own some, and operated them as
late as 1960. Ted Schnepf even had an NWP Accurail kit in his vendor display.

Westerfield produced a model (#3858) for the late-era NWP car.

Tim O'

Dave Ellzy wrote:
"Yes I got some good suggestions from both of them. Tony T. said the SP didn't have anything similar to the accurail car. Eric H. said the accurail car is based on a Canadian car mostly. He sent some very handy information a site called trainlife.com. There is an article on the accurail boxcar. No one contacted me offline. I get the impression that the accurail car is not highly regarded among prototype modelers:-)
Dave"

I don't think anyone ever said anything of the sort. Your original question was about using the Accurail car to model USRA prototype cars, specifically the SP.
There are a few things some folks don't like about the Accurail car (the excessive wood grain as Bill mentioned and the molded on grabs/ladders another) but there's nothing wrong with the basic bones of the model. I have at least 6 or 8 of them on the layout - but I model a CN subsidiary in a slightly earlier era than you.
I'd surmise the feedback you received as "There are better options for modeling the USRA cars (and clones)." And that includes feedback from Dennis, who's rumored to know a thing or two about Accurail freight cars) who mentioned the CB&Q/C&S/FW&D cars as a possibility. But those aren't USRA cars, or even "clones."
Marty McGuirk


Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

Bill;

I did bash an Accurail SS car into a PRR X26 back when. It was a lot of work, but looked pretty nice when finished. One can obviously also use the Tichy or Westerfield versions, which are far less work and more accurate from the get-go, but that are also bashes (not correct for X26 out of the box).

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 11:58 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)



Hmm, I thought the PRR X26 was a USRA car and much this discussion has been about clarifying the fact that the Accurail 8-panel car given its underframe, roof, ends, and types of steel bracing is clearly not a USRA design. Especially given its Z-braces, ends, and roof, how can it be bashed into a X26? Or why would one do so given the Tichy USRA SS styrene kit?

Bill Welch


CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED


Re: USRA

Jim Betz
 

Armand and All,

The GN built 900 40' box cars out of plywood in '45 (500) and '47 (400). Most/all
of those would still be around in the late 50's under discussion ... and probably
showing up in Texas/Louisiana hauling forest products from time to time. And
another 1000 of them in '54 and '55. And 100 more in '47. Go to the

http://www.greatnorthernempire.net

site for details on number series. (There are others - I just listed the ones built
later on.) These are not USRA design - but they are relevant to the O.P.s desire
(need?) to have 'correct' cars on his layout.
So that puts at least 2000 cars in interchange service in the late 50's. *G* (*GN*)

I've heard it claimed (but never 100% verified) that one of the reasons GN used
plywood was to "buy product from their customers" in order to solidify the
relationship with them. Whether that is true or speculation is unknown (to me).

****

I believe that there were many sources for "USRA design" cars that were not
"built by the USRA". The designs were published and used (and modified - some
times only slightly and some times heavily) by many car builders.
GN was not alone in terms of having a car construction shop in addition to their
car repair shops.
And, as has been mentioned already, "rebuilding freight cars" was done by
almost all of the RRs from time to time ... so a car that starts out with some
major spotting/identifying features is often considerably different later in its
life - some times that included being renumbered/some times not.
- Jim B.


Resin kits built overseas

Eric Hansmann
 

Paul Doggett lives in the UK and enjoys building HO scale resin kits of US prototypes. Several of his models are featured along with his build notes on the Resin Car Works blog, just in time for your lunch break.

 

http://blog.resincarworks.com/building-resin-kits-on-this-side-of-the-pond/

 

 

Eric Hansmann

El Paso, TX


Re: Naperville

Tim O'Connor
 

Jack

3-D parts are useless for freight car models -- at least for bodies -- the
material lacks hardness and strength. It has to be sandable, drillable, and
cut-able. Tom has the right idea -- make MASTERS in 3-D, modify them as needed
(e.g. adding rivet details), and then make rubber molds from those. The final
models are cast in urethane resin.

Tom had photos of a forthcoming technology that promises to do away with the
hated "scan lines" -- creating completely smooth parts.

The machines at Shapeways and elsewhere cost $100,000 and up. Also, Shapeways
contracts most of their work out -- to over 13,000 different shops.

Most importantly, Shapeways and other shops DO NOT allow you to specify how your
model will be oriented inside the machines. Your parts are batched with many other
parts. This means you have little control over the direction of scan lines, for
example. You can sprue things together to save money for small parts, but to make
an entire freight car (set of masters) sprues will not help you compared to
printing the entire car in 3-D for example. But in Tom's case he was making a
tank car with complex requirements, so he printed parts masters individually.

Tim O'

Why create a rubber mold when you can draw that part in 3D and make a sprue
of as many copies as you want?

Jack Burgess


Re: 3-D printers

Pierre Oliver
 

I had planned to stay out of this, but to reinforce what Bruce is saying;
I had a test print made of an HO scale ACF proprietary roof at Shapeways. It cost me $25.00 to print. The resolution was not remotely good enough to cast from for production runs. Rough texture, etc.
The same CAD drawing was sent to another high end printer and I paid $200.00 for the part and it's as smooth as any resin part you've ever seen. That I can use for creating masters.
It might be useful to stop calling it 3D printing and refer to it as it really is, "Rapid Prototyping".
Pierre Oliver
www.elgincarshops.com
www.yarmouthmodelworks.com
On 10/27/15 11:42 AM, 'Bruce F. Smith' smithbf@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

Jon,


These are monofilament extrusion printers,  For model work, they’re crap.  I don’t know how many times we have to say it, but the resolution of “bargain” 3D printers is insufficient to produce satisfactory parts for models.  PERIOD.  Someone will likely chime in with a pie in the sky view of what MIGHT be coming and yes, it might be coming.  But right now, it ain’t here and as Tom Madden and others who actually use this technology repeatedly point out, to get the resolution that modelers need, you need the really really expensive machines...

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."



On Oct 27, 2015, at 10:28 AM, Jon Miller atsfus@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:



    Monoprice has a couple of 3-D printers, one at $399 and one at $599.  Not sure if these are the normal price range or good prices.
-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS





Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)

Bill Welch
 

Hmm, I thought the PRR X26 was a USRA car and much this discussion has been about clarifying the fact that the Accurail 8-panel car given its underframe, roof, ends, and types of steel bracing is clearly not a USRA design. Especially given its Z-braces, ends, and roof, how can it be bashed into a X26? Or why would one do so given the Tichy USRA SS styrene kit?

Bill Welch


Re: 3-D printers

Bruce Smith
 

Jon,

These are monofilament extrusion printers,  For model work, they’re crap.  I don’t know how many times we have to say it, but the resolution of “bargain” 3D printers is insufficient to produce satisfactory parts for models.  PERIOD.  Someone will likely chime in with a pie in the sky view of what MIGHT be coming and yes, it might be coming.  But right now, it ain’t here and as Tom Madden and others who actually use this technology repeatedly point out, to get the resolution that modelers need, you need the really really expensive machines...

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."



On Oct 27, 2015, at 10:28 AM, Jon Miller atsfus@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:



    Monoprice has a couple of 3-D printers, one at $399 and one at $599.  Not sure if these are the normal price range or good prices.
-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS




3-D printers

Jon Miller <atsfus@...>
 

    Monoprice has a couple of 3-D printers, one at $399 and one at $599.  Not sure if these are the normal price range or good prices.
-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: Naperville

mwbauers
 

Jack and guys,

People are talking about a problem with Shapeways and multiple parts on a sprue. Something about a set-up fee for each part rather than a single set-up fee for the sprue of parts.

For now, if you sprue in 3d, you better have your own 3d printer.

Best to ya,
Mike Bauers
Milwaukee, Wi

On Oct 27, 2015, at 10:09 AM, 'Jack Burgess' wrote:

Why create a rubber mold when you can draw that part in 3D and make a sprue
of as many copies as you want?


Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: USRA & Accurail 8-panel car (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

It also bashes nicely into a PRR X26.

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 10:31 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [STMFC] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car



That's just the response that I was trying to elicit from my statement. The Accurail single sheathed boxcar is a beautiful model. I was hoping that it was closely based on several prototypes that could be kitbashed into excellent models.
Dave

________________________________

From: "fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com [STMFC]" <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] USRA & Accurail 8-panel car



Regarding your statement "I get the impression that the accurail car is not highly regarded among prototype modelers:-)" I think that is an overly brood statement. I have used it to build four different models that I consider good models. To me the issue it is that not good for every 8-panel SS car with Z-bar bracing as some would seem to like it to be. I have also ripped its excellent Hutchins roof off the body and used it on several resin kits as it is the best around in any media.

I do wish the sheathing was not so distressed but that has not kept me from using it however.


Bill Welch




CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

54341 - 54360 of 192633