Date   
Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars

Bill Welch
 

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 04:13 AM, Ben de Vries wrote:
Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde
and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!
Ben de Vries, the Netherlands

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
A link would be helpful Ben. . .

Bill Welch

Re: Erie coal gon

Alice Devenny
 

Steve:

Sorry, I don't recall which RMC issue had the Erie coal gon article. My quick attempt at trying to find an index on-line was not successful. 

IIRC, the article wasn't much help regarding the car height problem anyway. Car height is the major issue to overcome - the rest of the work was just some simple detailing. 

Tom Devenny
East Norriton, PA 

Re: Erie coal gon

Richard Brennan
 

...but it was done in brass in TT-scale!!!  A 'Joma' import from Japan.

Drawings from the '31 CBCyc were reprinted in Train Shed Cyclopedia 46...
and an article by Jim Cassidy on  upgrading the Mantua HO car was in MRG May-June 1985.
Another article was written by Richard Reichenbach in the ELHS Diamond... the copy I have is undated.

Original: Circa-1923
[]

Modernized: Post 1937
[]

Richard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Brennan - TT-west
www.tt-west.com  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

At 07:36 AM 10/9/2019, Tim O'Connor wrote:
Surprising it was never done in resin... over 500 cars in service, and 44.0 feet inside length!


On 10/8/2019 8:10 PM, Hugh Guillaume via Groups.Io wrote:

Erie coal gon made from Mantua on my model railroad.
Sent from my Verizon ASUS Tablet


Attachments:

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars

Benjamin Hom
 

Ben de Vries asked:
"Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!"

Bill Welch replied:
"A link would be helpful Ben. . ."


We've discussed these models before in the thread "Bowser Box Cars" starting with message #143056 dated 6/15/16.  Long story short, this model has been lurking around the Bowser catalog for the last 15-20 years or so in the guise of base model "canvas" for custom-decorated cars in their English Model Railroad Supply line.  Bowser used their Class X31A single door boxcar tooling as the basis for a "generic" 40 ft boxcar, creating a model with a Murphy rectangular panel roof with 4/5 Dreadnaught ends but with the side rivet patterns of the Class X31A single door car, all the way down to the unique 5 panels to the left of the door/4 panels to the right of the door.

I've got one of these models, but haven't discovered any prototype for it yet as this combination of features is unusual, so all of the decorated models are suspect.  Frankly, $28.95 is a bit much to shell out for a stand-in model.


Ben Hom  

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Bob Chaparro
 

As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

BRIAN PAUL EHNI
 

Some did.

 

 

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

 

 

From: <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of "Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io" <chiefbobbb@...>
Reply-To: <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Date: Thursday, October 10, 2019 at 9:47 AM
To: <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

 

As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA

Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

.....but they did. See attached.

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 10:47 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Bruce Smith
 

OK, I’m a little confused by this conversation.

FIRST - afaik, ALL cars in interchange service were required to show CAPY, LD LMT, and LT WT data and the LT WT data was to be accompanied by either the stencil NEW and a date, or the code for the scale where the car was weighed (or reweighed) and the date, including tank cars.

SECOND - tank cars were not required to be ROUTINELY reweighed (but were reweighed from time to time, particularly when repairs that might significantly affect the LT WT were made).

So, while the first part of Bob’s statement is fine, the second is completely false and does not derive from the first.  ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith            

Auburn, AL

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




On Oct 10, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Gatwood, Elden J SAD <Elden.J.Gatwood@...> wrote:

.....but they did.  See attached.

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 10:47 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

As tank cars, I assume there would not have been a reweigh requirement for these cars and the model should not have reweigh stenciling, right?
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA




<Linde SERX 974 1974 Hawkins.jpg>

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Dave Parker
 

At least through the 1920a and 30s, the MCB/ARA lettering standards did not require a LD LMT stencil on tank cars, only the LT WT and CAPY stencils.  I have seen a LD LMT on a few tank cars, but it was not part of the Standard Practice.

As to whether "most" tank cars would be sporting a reweigh stencil (as opposed to the original light weight), I think this has to be era-dependent.  For 1934, almost all my tank cars have the original, factory-applied light weight, as most of them are <20 years old, and some are <10.

--
Dave Parker
Swall Meadows, CA

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars

Staffan Ehnbom
 

The GN car: Foobie! Nothing seems right but wheels and couplers. Accurail came closer 30 years ago except a fish belly side sill needing straightening and an overhanging diagonal panel roof to be exchanged. See attachment. 

Staffan Ehnbom


On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:13 AM Ben de Vries <bernjuldevries@...> wrote:
Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde
and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!
Ben de Vries, the Netherlands

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad


Swift Reefers

Steve and Barb Hile
 

Has anyone published any sort of detailed roster of Swift reefers?  I seem to think so, but can't locate such.  I do have Martin Lofton's RMJ 2-93 article.
 
Maybe a good clinic session?
 
Thanks in advance,
Steve Hile

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Jack Mullen
 

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:11 AM, Bruce Smith wrote:
So, while the first part of Bob’s statement is fine, the second is completely false and does not derive from the first.  ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  
As I read Bob's conjecture, he's not saying that tank cars wouldn't have weight data, just that they "shouldn't" have REweigh dates and revised weights. Not completely false, but an overstatement.
I think the premise may actually be what's incorrect - these cars are classed as XT which is a box car class, not  a T_ tank car.  I'd expect the normal boxcar reweighing requirement would apply.

Jack Mullen

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Tony Thompson
 



ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 


Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#167298) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [tony@...]

_._,_._,_

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars

Ben de Vries
 

Ben,
thank you, I know now that I should avoid these models!
Ben
 

From: Benjamin Hom
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:03 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
 
Ben de Vries asked:
"Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!"
 
Bill Welch replied:
"A link would be helpful Ben. . ."
 
 
We've discussed these models before in the thread "Bowser Box Cars" starting with message #143056 dated 6/15/16.  Long story short, this model has been lurking around the Bowser catalog for the last 15-20 years or so in the guise of base model "canvas" for custom-decorated cars in their English Model Railroad Supply line.  Bowser used their Class X31A single door boxcar tooling as the basis for a "generic" 40 ft boxcar, creating a model with a Murphy rectangular panel roof with 4/5 Dreadnaught ends but with the side rivet patterns of the Class X31A single door car, all the way down to the unique 5 panels to the left of the door/4 panels to the right of the door.
 
I've got one of these models, but haven't discovered any prototype for it yet as this combination of features is unusual, so all of the decorated models are suspect.  Frankly, $28.95 is a bit much to shell out for a stand-in model.
 
 
Ben Hom 

Re: Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars

Ben de Vries
 

Thank you Staffan, that saves me money!
Ben
 

From: Staffan Ehnbom
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 8:52 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars
 
The GN car: Foobie! Nothing seems right but wheels and couplers. Accurail came closer 30 years ago except a fish belly side sill needing straightening and an overhanging diagonal panel roof to be exchanged. See attachment. 
 
Staffan Ehnbom
 
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:13 AM Ben de Vries <bernjuldevries@...> wrote:
Can anyone of you review the prototype fidelity of subj. cars, especially the Linde
and GN car? I would like to avoid buying foobies!
Ben de Vries, the Netherlands

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad


Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Bruce Smith
 

Tony,

While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.

Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date
- the photos range across many years and types of tank cars
-a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt.
-The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW.

My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might indeed be correct.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
 


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
 


ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 


Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#167298) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [tony@...]

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Tony Thompson
 

No argument in general, but one point to keep in mind is that even when there is a reweigh date, it may be MANY years prior to the photo date, implying it was a repair date, not periodic reweigh. There are lots of those in Richard’s collection.
Tony Thompson 


On Oct 11, 2019, at 12:12 AM, Bruce Smith <smithbf@...> wrote:


Tony,

While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.

Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date
- the photos range across many years and types of tank cars
-a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt.
-The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW.

My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might indeed be correct.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
 


ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 


Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#167298) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [tony@...]

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Eric Hansmann
 

Could a tank car reweigh date reflect some sort of upgrade to the car, like a new tank?


Eric Hansmann
Murfreesboro, TN


On October 11, 2019 at 3:14 AM Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:

No argument in general, but one point to keep in mind is that even when there is a reweigh date, it may be MANY years prior to the photo date, implying it was a repair date, not periodic reweigh. There are lots of those in Richard’s collection.
Tony Thompson 



On Oct 11, 2019, at 12:12 AM, Bruce Smith <smithbf@...> wrote:


Tony,

While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.

Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date
- the photos range across many years and types of tank cars
-a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt.
-The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW.

My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might indeed be correct.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)


ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Bruce Smith
 

Eric,

Yes, and repairs as well. Repainting could potentially be included in that list as well, but I have also seen many photos of tank cars that were obviously repainted, but had earlier reweigh (or NEW) dates.

Regards,
Bruce Smith
temporarily located in Birmingham, Al


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Eric Hansmann <eric@...>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 5:47 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
 

Could a tank car reweigh date reflect some sort of upgrade to the car, like a new tank?


Eric Hansmann
Murfreesboro, TN


On October 11, 2019 at 3:14 AM Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:

No argument in general, but one point to keep in mind is that even when there is a reweigh date, it may be MANY years prior to the photo date, implying it was a repair date, not periodic reweigh. There are lots of those in Richard’s collection.
Tony Thompson 



On Oct 11, 2019, at 12:12 AM, Bruce Smith <smithbf@...> wrote:


Tony,

While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.

Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date
- the photos range across many years and types of tank cars
-a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt.
-The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW.

My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might indeed be correct.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)


ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 

Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)

Bruce Smith
 

Agreed! And our models should absolutely reflect this. 

Bruce Smith
temporarily in Birmingham, Al


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 4:14 AM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
 
No argument in general, but one point to keep in mind is that even when there is a reweigh date, it may be MANY years prior to the photo date, implying it was a repair date, not periodic reweigh. There are lots of those in Richard’s collection.
Tony Thompson 


On Oct 11, 2019, at 12:12 AM, Bruce Smith <smithbf@...> wrote:


Tony,

While I don't have Richard's collection at hand, I have looked through the photos I have and counted "new" versus "reweigh" stencils. The ones that are obviously reweighs outnumber the "new" by 61 to 36. I probably looked at around 250 photos.

Some caveats:
-I did not count builder's photos, only photos that were clearly "in service."
-reweigh cars were cars where the Lt Wt did not match either the build date or the tank test date
- new cars were cars where the Lt Wt did match either the build date or tank test date
- the photos range across many years and types of tank cars
-a reasonable number of cars did not seem to show any date with the Lt Wt.
-The majority (~2/3) of the "new" cars were not stenciled "NEW" but rather had no stencil or stencils such as MILT (and you know where that is 😉) Interestingly, AC&F builder's photos show either MILT or NEW.

My take-home is that my statement could be revised to "a majority have reweigh data", but I am tempted to note that since a number of the "new" photos were of clearly new cars in service, that would bias the count so that over their lifetimes, "most" might indeed be correct.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Tony Thompson <tony@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:10 PM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io <main@realstmfc.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Fidelity Bowser 40’ boxcars (Linde Tank Car)
 


ALL tank cars, including Linde Tank Cars, would have weight data and most would have reweigh data.  

Nope. Plenty of tank cars had their NEW weight decades after being built. I don’t agree that even “most “ had reweigh. There are thousands of tank car images in the Hendrickson collection, so I am not making this up.
And BTW class XT car were still billed by gallonage, so no real reason to reweigh.
Tony Thompson 


Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#167298) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [tony@...]