Date   

Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Paul Lyons
 

Ed, How about sharing Jack Spencer technique for thinning out BT roofwailks so they are see through.
Paul Lyons
Oceanside, CA

In a message dated 7/8/2004 5:34:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> writes:


On Thursday, July 8, 2004, at 10:06 �AM, Andy Harman wrote:

I saw some early samples which would have been see-through, but too
many
problems filling the mold. �Kadee's method must be a trade secret. �BL
compromised by tooling a see-thru overhang on the ends and making the
rest
solid. �But I still prefer to use the Kadee walks when I take the time
to
change them.
Andy and Brian,
Regarding the HO scale running boards, both Kadee's and Branchline
Trains' running boards best represent the Apex Tri-Lok, which was the
most common type used during the 1940s and '50s. Having done some
research for an upcoming article on the subject of running boards for
RP CYC, I have learned some interesting stuff about them. The Apex
running boards had 13 longitudinal members that were 1" high with a
1/8" serrated top edge for footing. The 1/8" serrations are lost when
reduced to HO scale.

While I agree wholeheartedly that the Kadee R/B looks terrific (I also
use them extensively), it is actually not prototypically correct as it
has only 11 longitudinal members. The BT R/B has the correct amount of
13. Kadee must have chosen to compromise the prototype design in order
that the mold would fill. Kadee's crosswise members measure just over
4" apart and the BT crosswise members measure 6" apart.

Apex R/B built from 1938 to approximately 1953 had crosswise members
spaced 3-1/2" apart. Apex changed by 1953 and increased the spacing to
5-7/8". Blaw-Knox, who had running boards that were similar in
appearance (from a distance) to the Apex also increased their crosswise
member spacing by circa 1949/51 (per the CBC) from 4" to 6". There were
more changes but these were the most significant from an appearance
standpoint.

Kadee uses acetal plastic that flows better and fills easier than
styrene. I understand that BT uses a form of styrene. Kadee's detail
parts made of acetal plastic are virtually indestructible. The downside
to acetal plastic is that it doesn't hold paint and that is why Kadee
molds the parts with color rather than painting them. The BT running
boards and other detail parts are paintable. The BT running board mold
must be getting worn because I've noticed more flash on the running
board detail compared to a few years ago when the 40'-6" box cars were
first introduced.

Jack Spencer showed me a method that he uses to remove material from
the bottom of the BT running board such that the remaining portion is
scale thickness and open-grid. The process is labor intensive, but it
yields an excellent running board when the job is completed. Even after
all this work, the BT running board is accurate for cars built 1953 and
later with the 6" crosswise spacing. While in HO scale I don't get
overly concerned about all this, I believe the visual differences in O
scale (and even S scale) would be quite noticeable.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins





Yahoo! Groups Links






Re: Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)

jaley <jaley@...>
 

On Jul 8, 6:00pm, Brian J Carlson wrote:
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)
What's Bruce's trains this is a new one to me?
Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

Brian,

Bruce's Train Shop is a hobby shop in Sacramento, California.
They do some custom stuff, mostly for SP fans.

Their web site is http://www.brucestrainshop.com/ .


Regards,

-Jeff

--
Jeff Aley jaley@...
DPG Chipsets Product Engineering
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Brian Carlson asked:
What's Bruce's Trains this is a new one to me?

Bruce's Trains is a hobby shop out in Sacramento:

Bruce's Trains
2828 Marconi Ave
Sacramento, CA 95821
(916) 485-5288

They have a small "house brand" of resin kits, mostly concentrating
on prototypes of local interest such as SP and WP. I'll leave it to
Dr. Anspach to fill in the details...


Ben Hom


Re: Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)

Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

What's Bruce's trains this is a new one to me?
Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

----- Original Message -----
From: Garth Groff
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 3:26 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)


Tim,

Note that some of the hopper cars Bruce's Trains offers are also correct
for other roads. Their HG-21 hopper was also used by the WP, and I think
the C&NW.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Tim O'Connor wrote:

>
>Bowser made styrene see-through walks for their ACF hoppers that
>are pretty good. And the ready-to-run resin SP freight cars from
>Bruce's Train Shop include a hopper car with see-through resin
>end platforms . . . .
>
>





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@...

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: buying direct

Eric
 

Don wrote:

"I think you misunderstand something, Eric. With a normal 50% plus 10%
distributor discount structure the manufacturer gets 45% of the suggested
retail price."

I was under the impression that when an item MSRPs for $10.00 then the retailer has gotten it from
the wholesaler for about $5.00. The Wholesaler has gotten it from the manifacturer for about $2.50
or about 25% of the MSRP.

Is the hobby industry that different?


"You can refer to Walthers as the Milwaukee Mafia if you like, and there
have been days when their occasional high-handed manner would prompt me to
agree with you,"

I was being faceteous. That and that I just got a visit from Phil 'knuckles' Walthers informing me
there is no such thing as the mafia. ;-)

"but in the overall they do a better job with and for smaller
manufacturers such as N.E.R.S. than any other distributor out there. Most
distributors only want the Athearn, Atlas, M.D.C. and Life-Like sized
manufacturers and won't even talk to smaller firms."

I agree with that.

Eric

[PASS}


Don Valentine




________________________________________________
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more
http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag


Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Ed Hawkins
 

On Thursday, July 8, 2004, at 10:06 AM, Andy Harman wrote:

I saw some early samples which would have been see-through, but too many
problems filling the mold. Kadee's method must be a trade secret. BL
compromised by tooling a see-thru overhang on the ends and making the rest
solid. But I still prefer to use the Kadee walks when I take the time to
change them.
Andy and Brian,
Regarding the HO scale running boards, both Kadee's and Branchline Trains' running boards best represent the Apex Tri-Lok, which was the most common type used during the 1940s and '50s. Having done some research for an upcoming article on the subject of running boards for RP CYC, I have learned some interesting stuff about them. The Apex running boards had 13 longitudinal members that were 1" high with a 1/8" serrated top edge for footing. The 1/8" serrations are lost when reduced to HO scale.

While I agree wholeheartedly that the Kadee R/B looks terrific (I also use them extensively), it is actually not prototypically correct as it has only 11 longitudinal members. The BT R/B has the correct amount of 13. Kadee must have chosen to compromise the prototype design in order that the mold would fill. Kadee's crosswise members measure just over 4" apart and the BT crosswise members measure 6" apart.

Apex R/B built from 1938 to approximately 1953 had crosswise members spaced 3-1/2" apart. Apex changed by 1953 and increased the spacing to 5-7/8". Blaw-Knox, who had running boards that were similar in appearance (from a distance) to the Apex also increased their crosswise member spacing by circa 1949/51 (per the CBC) from 4" to 6". There were more changes but these were the most significant from an appearance standpoint.

Kadee uses acetal plastic that flows better and fills easier than styrene. I understand that BT uses a form of styrene. Kadee's detail parts made of acetal plastic are virtually indestructible. The downside to acetal plastic is that it doesn't hold paint and that is why Kadee molds the parts with color rather than painting them. The BT running boards and other detail parts are paintable. The BT running board mold must be getting worn because I've noticed more flash on the running board detail compared to a few years ago when the 40'-6" box cars were first introduced.

Jack Spencer showed me a method that he uses to remove material from the bottom of the BT running board such that the remaining portion is scale thickness and open-grid. The process is labor intensive, but it yields an excellent running board when the job is completed. Even after all this work, the BT running board is accurate for cars built 1953 and later with the 6" crosswise spacing. While in HO scale I don't get overly concerned about all this, I believe the visual differences in O scale (and even S scale) would be quite noticeable.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Re: broken plastic parts

Tim O'Connor
 

Branchline seems to make everything from styrene - the only successful
see-thru plastic walks I've seen have been delrin. Styrene at least can be
painted.

Andy
Bowser made styrene see-through walks for their ACF hoppers that
are pretty good. And the ready-to-run resin SP freight cars from
Bruce's Train Shop include a hopper car with see-through resin
end platforms.

Kadee's technology is definitely a secret. I know people who would
really love to know how they do it!


Steamfreightcars.com

prsearls <prsearls@...>
 

I am having trouble accessing www.steamfreightcars.com. I can only see the top 1/2 inch
of their pages when I try to view their files. What am I doing wrong?

Thanks

Paul Searls


Re: Need help identifying boxcar

Tim O'Connor
 

Sure looks like another Missouri Pacific car to me. I
think this is one of the cars available from Westerfield.

Hello everyone,

There is a Wellsville, Addison & Galeton boxcar I need help to
identify. It's a single sheathed wooden boxcar, WAG series 7000-7020
(or higher). There is a photo of 7019 at:

http://www.s363.com/images/wag/wagobbox.jpg

This series likely arrived in 1958, but possibly as early as 1956. Any
modeling suggestions would be welcome. Also, if anyone wants to take
a stab at that gondola behind it, I'm all ears!

Any help is always appreciated.

Thanks,
Mark Heiden


Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Tim O'Connor
 

There was once a discussion "Kadee vs. Plano" in which it was
reasoned that Plano is too thin.

Manfred, the Plano parts are .010" or .87" HO scale. A prototype
APEX running board is 1.00" thick. If you can see a 1/8" HO scale
difference then you've got much better eyesight than me! I think
the Kadee, like all plastic running boards, are too thick.

Open grid tank cars runways, on the other hand, are 2" thick. It
would be nice to have etched metal parts for those.


street elbow

ed_mines
 

--- In STMFC@..., Garth Groff <ggg9y@v...> wrote:
Friends, Bruce and Richard's excellent comments on dome platforms
brings to mind a tank car need we've had for a long time: castings
for "L" and "Y" shaped safety valves that were used on new equipment
up until the 1920s or so.

Those "L" shaped fittings with male treads on one leg (going into
the dome) and female threads on the other leg are called "street
elbows".


Ed


Re: Need help identifying boxcar

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Mark Heiden wrote:
I think the WAG's gondola fleet was a collection of one of a kinds
(or a few of a kinds).

We can say that about their entire freight car fleet, or for that
matter, the freight car fleets of all of the Salzburg roads.


Ben Hom


Re: Need help identifying boxcar

Mark Heiden
 

Thanks for the identity of the boxcar, Richard. The part in my
original message about the gondola was a desparate hope that someone
might recognize the end of it. I think the WAG's gondola fleet was a
collection of one of a kinds (or a few of a kinds).

Mark Heiden

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@o...>
wrote:

I can't help with the gondola, as not enough of it is visible.
However the
box car is unmistakably ex-Northern Pacific 14500-14999 (NP Brainerd
Shops
1931-'32) or 20000-20499 (NP Laurel Shops 1931-'32). Sunshine has
recently
issued resin kits for these cars.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Re: Need help identifying boxcar

Richard Hendrickson
 

Mark Heiden writes:

There is a Wellsville, Addison & Galeton boxcar I need help to
identify. It's a single sheathed wooden boxcar, WAG series 7000-7020
(or higher). There is a photo of 7019 at:

http://www.s363.com/images/wag/wagobbox.jpg

This series likely arrived in 1958, but possibly as early as 1956. Any
modeling suggestions would be welcome. Also, if anyone wants to take
a stab at that gondola behind it, I'm all ears!
I can't help with the gondola, as not enough of it is visible. However the
box car is unmistakably ex-Northern Pacific 14500-14999 (NP Brainerd Shops
1931-'32) or 20000-20499 (NP Laurel Shops 1931-'32). Sunshine has recently
issued resin kits for these cars.

Richard H. Hendrickson
Ashland, Oregon 97520


Bruce's Trains hoppers (was: broken plastic parts)

Garth Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Tim,

Note that some of the hopper cars Bruce's Trains offers are also correct
for other roads. Their HG-21 hopper was also used by the WP, and I think
the C&NW.

Kind regards,


Garth G. Groff

Tim O'Connor wrote:


Bowser made styrene see-through walks for their ACF hoppers that
are pretty good. And the ready-to-run resin SP freight cars from
Bruce's Train Shop include a hopper car with see-through resin
end platforms . . . .


Re: broken plastic parts - reasonable thickness?

Brian Chapman <cornbeltroute@...>
 

There was once a discussion "Kadee vs. Plano" in which it was
reasoned that Plano is too thin. <

K&S offers brass sheet in .016 inch thickness (1.392 inches in real
world, if modeling HO). Just after opinions here: Would .016 give a
better appearance than .010 thickness metal perhaps and yet be
acceptable with a thickness 40 percent greater than the prototype?

Thanks,

Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa


---


Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Andy Harman <andy10@...>
 

At 01:13 PM 7/8/2004 -0400, you wrote:
It may be the material that Branchline uses .It doesn't seem to be
the same as Red Caboose or Interrmountain or Kadee.Armand premo
Branchline seems to make everything from styrene - the only successful see-thru plastic walks I've seen have been delrin. Styrene at least can be painted.

Andy


Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Tim O'Connor
 

Manfred wrote

Last year I got my sample of the quality when I bought the NP
convention car. I had to dig through 5 boxes before I found one with
acceptable roofwalks whose grids were not partly filled and then I
later discovered that I only exchanged that for broken, bent and
short-shot ladders and brake lines and a not too good a decal
(printing) job.
Although I have never had any paint or printing problems with
Branchline cars, I guess I have low expectations when it comes
to plastic detail parts -- I am never surprised to find broken
ladders, flash-filled running boards, etc. But it doesn't bother
me because for years I replaced so much stuff that I have a good
supply of spare parts -- in most cases, better than what comes
in the kits. And since I always use etched parts to represent
metal running boards, I have a huge supply of plastic boards. I
am surprised they shipped replacement parts in a soft envelope.
Sounds like somebody screwed up.


Need help identifying boxcar

Mark Heiden
 

Hello everyone,

There is a Wellsville, Addison & Galeton boxcar I need help to
identify. It's a single sheathed wooden boxcar, WAG series 7000-7020
(or higher). There is a photo of 7019 at:

http://www.s363.com/images/wag/wagobbox.jpg

This series likely arrived in 1958, but possibly as early as 1956. Any
modeling suggestions would be welcome. Also, if anyone wants to take
a stab at that gondola behind it, I'm all ears!

Any help is always appreciated.

Thanks,
Mark Heiden


Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

Brian Paul Ehni <behni@...>
 

Mine came in a padded envelope, too, but the parts were taped to some heavy
cardstock.

Sounds like a Branchline error to me. I would have requested another pair,
telling them to pack better.
--
Brian Ehni



From: Manfred Lorenz <germanfred55@...>
Reply-To: <STMFC@...>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 17:12:07 -0000
To: <STMFC@...>
Subject: [STMFC] Re: broken plastic parts (was charter revision)

--- In STMFC@..., "Brian J Carlson" <brian@b...> wrote:
I've begun replacing all my Branchline roofwalks with Kadee, Plano
or DA parts.

The see-through effect is much better.  Based on the thickness of
the Branchline roofwalks
-----------------

There was once a discussion "Kadee vs. Plano" in which it was
reasoned that Plano is too thin.

----------------
I do not believe Branchline intended for their roofwalks to be see-
through.

When I have missing or broken Branckline parts the replacemnts were
sent in a paddeed envelope.
----------------

Padding is useless if the envelope gets bent. The nice and thin brake
rods don't take this.

Manfred


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

161341 - 161360 of 193499