Date   

Re: Intermountain shake-up?

branchline@...
 

I suspect that the so called "Golden Age for model railroaders "is over
and is now being replaced by the "Golden age for the distributor's".Our gold
in their pockets.Distributors do not produce or develop products.Armand
Premo
Beggin' to differ here Armand, but there are at least a few exceptions -
Walthers, Bowser and Branchline come to mind....

As far as where the gold goes, where do you think all the LHS's have been
buying most of their stuff all these years?

Bill Schneider


Re: Intermountain's "Milk" Car - GPEX to CMWX....When?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Beckert, Shawn wrote:
Another wierd thing - One would assume that CMWX belonged to the
Chateau Martin Winery, since photos show the cars with these marks
painted in the Chateau purple scheme with billboard lettering. It
didn't, though - it belonged to the Commodities Car Company. Quite
a coincidence, and a bit misleading.
Why you think this is "weird" is unclear. It is certainly no coincidence that "CMW" are the initials of the winery, and quite possibly the small CMWX fleet was entirely dedicated to the winery's use. The car company being separate is a device used by many entities; it may well have been owned by the parent company of Chateau Martin, or may simply have been a lessor set up in order to get CMW's business.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers

charles slater
 

Sorry that was ment for Andy only and not the list.

From: "charles slater" <atsfcondr42@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 10:29:46 -0700

Andy, I received the 6 undec Intermountain reefers I ordered from you today.
There is a problem with two of them, they have the wrong car body in the
kits. The body's have a double row of rivets on the side seams, they have a
fan molded on the left end of each side and they only have a 4 foot door
with PFE style door hinges. I think they must be the bodies for their
R-40-10 model.
Maybe you better check the rest of the Santa Fe kits before you send them
out. Tell me what you want me to do with these two kits, I guess just ship
them back to you.
Let me know.
Charlie Slater



From: Andy Carlson <midcentury@sbcglobal.net>
Reply-To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
To: Steam Era <stmfc@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:27:39 -0800 (PST)

I have recently received a shipment of INTERMOUNTAIN
RAILWAY CO's often hard to find HO ATSF Santa Fe
Undecorated Reefer Kits (Rr 32 and others). For the
"roll your own" enthusiasts among us I am offering
these for sale.

I also have remaining Pacific Fruit Express R-30-16
undecorated Reefer Kits, the Terry Wegmann/Red Caboose
collaboration.

The price for these are:

IM RR CO ATSF Undec ...........$10.00 ea
Wegmann/RC R-30-16 ...........$22.00 ea.

Shipping is $3.85 for up to 2 kits, add another $1.00
each additional kit (beyond 2). If interested, please
contact me off-list at < midcentury@sbcglobal.net >


Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA


Re: Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers

Andy Carlson
 

SEND THEM BACK. I hope that this is limited to just
these 2. I will ship the 2 replacements tomorrow.
Please send me your mailing address, for I did not
save it.
-Andy Carlson
111 S Encinal Ave
Ojai CA 93023
805 646 3334

--- charles slater <atsfcondr42@hotmail.com> wrote:


Andy, I received the 6 undec Intermountain reefers I
ordered from you today.
There is a problem with two of them, they have the
wrong car body in the
kits. The body's have a double row of rivets on the
side seams, they have a
fan molded on the left end of each side and they
only have a 4 foot door
with PFE style door hinges. I think they must be the
bodies for their
R-40-10 model.
Maybe you better check the rest of the Santa Fe kits
before you send them
out. Tell me what you want me to do with these two
kits, I guess just ship
them back to you.
Let me know.
Charlie Slater



From: Andy Carlson <midcentury@sbcglobal.net>
Reply-To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
To: Steam Era <stmfc@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated
Reefers
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:27:39 -0800 (PST)

I have recently received a shipment of
INTERMOUNTAIN
RAILWAY CO's often hard to find HO ATSF Santa Fe
Undecorated Reefer Kits (Rr 32 and others). For the
"roll your own" enthusiasts among us I am offering
these for sale.

I also have remaining Pacific Fruit Express R-30-16
undecorated Reefer Kits, the Terry Wegmann/Red
Caboose
collaboration.

The price for these are:

IM RR CO ATSF Undec ...........$10.00 ea
Wegmann/RC R-30-16 ...........$22.00 ea.

Shipping is $3.85 for up to 2 kits, add another
$1.00
each additional kit (beyond 2). If interested,
please
contact me off-list at < midcentury@sbcglobal.net



Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
--------------------~-->
Help save the life of a child. Support St. Jude
Children's Research Hospital's
'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6iY7fA/5WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/9MtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->



Yahoo! Groups Links


STMFC-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com






Re: Intermountain shake-up?

Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

armand premo wrote:
I suspect that the so called "Golden Age for model railroaders
"is over and is now being replaced by the "Golden age for the
distributor's".Our gold in their pockets.Distributors do not produce
or develop products.
Armand Premo
I think it's rather obvious that the market is mature and will not support
as many manufacturers as it has in the past, hence the consolidation.
Whether it's because there is a fixed number of consumers and too many
products or the right number of products and fewer consumers, well, I dunno.
But there isn't enough $$ in the market anymore to keep all boats afloat.
Now whatever profit that used to be split 2 ways now is kept entirely by
just one. We'll just have to see if that means more products or meerly
survival, at least for a while. My hunch is on the later.

What I'm most curious about tho is whether the move to RTR at premium prices
was cause or effect.

Dave Nelson


Re: Intermountain shake-up?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Apr 7, 2005, at 9:33 AM, pullmanboss wrote:

Matt [Gaudynski] used to work with/for Ron Sebastian and seems like a good man
from the few contacts I've had with him. I doubt he has Marty's
energy, drive or contacts, but then few humans do.

Tom Madden
Tom, I'm relieved to learn that IM's new R&D guy has some background in the hobby. IM has a number of freight car projects that are in process or are/were in the planning stages which are of great interest to many subscribers on this list, and it would be unfortunate if they failed to materialize.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers

charles slater
 

Andy, I received the 6 undec Intermountain reefers I ordered from you today. There is a problem with two of them, they have the wrong car body in the kits. The body's have a double row of rivets on the side seams, they have a fan molded on the left end of each side and they only have a 4 foot door with PFE style door hinges. I think they must be the bodies for their R-40-10 model.
Maybe you better check the rest of the Santa Fe kits before you send them out. Tell me what you want me to do with these two kits, I guess just ship them back to you.
Let me know.
Charlie Slater

From: Andy Carlson <midcentury@sbcglobal.net>
Reply-To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
To: Steam Era <stmfc@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [STMFC] Santa Fe and PFE HO Undecorated Reefers
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:27:39 -0800 (PST)

I have recently received a shipment of INTERMOUNTAIN
RAILWAY CO's often hard to find HO ATSF Santa Fe
Undecorated Reefer Kits (Rr 32 and others). For the
"roll your own" enthusiasts among us I am offering
these for sale.

I also have remaining Pacific Fruit Express R-30-16
undecorated Reefer Kits, the Terry Wegmann/Red Caboose
collaboration.

The price for these are:

IM RR CO ATSF Undec ...........$10.00 ea
Wegmann/RC R-30-16 ...........$22.00 ea.

Shipping is $3.85 for up to 2 kits, add another $1.00
each additional kit (beyond 2). If interested, please
contact me off-list at < midcentury@sbcglobal.net >


Thanks,
-Andy Carlson
Ojai CA


Re: Sergent Couplers

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

John Degnan wrote:
I wasn't referring to the horn hook couplers as being the hill-climber that became a standard, I was referring to the Kadee couplers becoming a standard over the horn-hook.
Exactly my point, John. Horn-hooks were never standard.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Intermountain's "Milk" Car - GPEX to CMWX....When?

Shawn Beckert
 

List,

Thanks to Brian Ehni's generosity in sharing photos, I was made
aware of just how long the prototype for Intermountain's latest
kit lasted in service - far longer than I would have expected
for a car of this vintage. A casual look through the April, 1959
ORER last night showed that the GPEX series was still very much
in existence. I couldn't find mention of the CMWX reporting marks,
which is confusing (or maybe I just missed it) because according
to the "Reporting Marks" web page, "CMWX" was in existence from
January 1941 to January 1975.

Another wierd thing - One would assume that CMWX belonged to the
Chateau Martin Winery, since photos show the cars with these marks
painted in the Chateau purple scheme with billboard lettering. It
didn't, though - it belonged to the Commodities Car Company. Quite
a coincidence, and a bit misleading.

Now, GPEX belonged to General American-Pfaudler from July 1930 to
October 1966, so there's some overlap between this and the use of
the CMWX mark. So I can't really pin down when the GPEX "milk" cars
became the CMWX "wine" cars. Worse yet, browsing the internet this
morning revealed no information on the Chateau Martin Winery, so I
can't even hazard a guess as to when this company came into being,
much less when they acquired a fleet of wine cars.

Does anyone have better information on when General American sold/
leased/gave these cars to the Chateau Martin Winery, assuming it's
not way beyond the time limit of our list?

Thanks,

Shawn Beckert


Re: Code 88 wheels, and steam era freight cars.

Jared Harper <harper-brown@...>
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Denny Anspach <danspach@m...> wrote:
I always pay close attention to Mike Brock's wise comments. . .
Ha! You're probably the only one. Just kidding! I agree with your
acessment.

Jared Harper
Athens, GA


Re: Intermountain shake-up?

branchline@...
 

I suspect that the so called "Golden Age for model railroaders "is over
and is now being replaced by the "Golden age for the distributor's".Our gold
in their pockets.Distributors do not produce or develop products.Armand
Premo
Beggin' to differ here Armand, but there are at least a few exceptions - Walthers, Bowser and Branchline come to mind....

As far as where the gold goes, where do you think all the LHS's have been buying most of their stuff all these years?

Bill Schneider


Re: Code 88 wheels...again

Paul LaCiura <paul.jeseng@...>
 

I was going to post the question to the P:87 group but Mike has clearly
brought the key issue up. I am debating going from Code 88 to Code 64
freight and passenger car wheels with P:87 modifications to existing
turnouts, that is new frogs, guardrails, etc. But if I can't run my Code
110 wheeled brass steam locomotives on the P:87 without shorting out, forget
it. I'll stay with Code 88 wheels on stock Shinohara Code 70 turnouts with
cosmetic "scale" upgrades until the Code 64 drivers are available. For that
matter, I need to wait until the locomotive lead and trailing truck and
tender truck wheelsets are available in Code 64. Changing just the drivers
would not be the complete solution. NWSL has some nickel silver wheelset
products to develop. If the Code 64 locomotive drivers and wheels were
available I would make the changes to my locomotives gradually. The Code 64
wheels look great, and I would not have to worry about any future
possibility of feeling obliged to go to narrower flanges.

I face a similar situation with the Sargent couplers. The gross draft gear
on all but the Accumate proto looks like comparing Code 110 wheels in an
otherwise scale car versus Code 64. Put two cars side by side and compare
ends, toylike versus prototype, "Athearn RTR" versus Sunshine/Westerfield.
Yes, the Sargent's are much better detailed and desirable than the Accumate
proto couplers for many reasons. If the Sargent's were available now with
the prototype draft gear like the Accumate I would do the changeover now,
lock, stock and barrel. Nothing more to consider. But a perfect coupler
sitting in an imperfect draft gear begs for retrofit. I'll take my hits
with the Accumate proto coupler/draft gear for the time being, maybe
Sargent's future scale draft gear couplers will eventually drop into the
Accumate proto draft gear. Otherwise I will do a complete Sargent changeout
when the time comes.

BTW, it appears that making P:87 mods to existing Code 70 commercially
available turnouts is a relatively simple matter. Again, side by side
visual comparison is hard to ignore, especially if you are driven to model
the right-of-way as faithfully as rolling stock.

Paul

Paul LaCiura
San Francisco, CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Brock [mailto:brockm@brevard.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 8:30 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Code 88 wheels...again


Tom Olsen writes:

This could be remedied by replacing the frogs with the new Scale frogs
from Details West. They are making code 83 scale maganese insert frogs
in sizes 8 and 9, with #'s 6 and 7 coming.

The frog isn't the issue. Now that sounds confusing after I wrote that the
frog is the ONLY issue. The flangeway as defined in NMRA S-3.2 is the driver

for wheel design. S-3.2 requires NMRA S-4.2 Wheel Standard and RP-25 Code
110 wheel design because of the flangeway. RP-25 includes the wheel tread
size and the flange size. Many people aren't aware that RP-25 includes specs

for Proto 87 wheel design...Code 64. Anyhow, the point is that the S-3.2
flangeway size drove manufacturers to produce wheels of RP-25 Code 110 size.

We are now finding that the tire width can be changed to Code 88 size for
better appearance as long as we operate through turnouts with frogs much
smaller than prototype. I suppose one takes their choice...too small frogs
or too large tread size. However, the real problem isn't so much to do with
frt car wheels...we can replace them. The real problem is replacing the
wheels on the things that pull frt cars...steam locomotives for our era. I
build my own turnouts including frogs [ how else to get number 12's? ] so I
could build to Proto 87 specs as easily as S-3.2. The trouble is, I can't
find anyone who will provide me the 600 or so drivers in Code 64 that I
would need to replace those on my Code 110 drivered steam engines. It's
somewhat like the dilemma faced by standard gauge O scale. NMRA S-3.2 for O
scale is still 5' between the rails. Too many wheels have rolled by I guess
to change now. Brass engines were built to a 5' gauge.

Mike Brock






Yahoo! Groups Links







--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.3 - Release Date: 4/5/2005


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.4 - Release Date: 4/6/2005


Re: Intermountain shake-up?

armprem
 

I suspect that the so called "Golden Age for model railroaders "is over
and is now being replaced by the "Golden age for the distributor's".Our gold
in their pockets.Distributors do not produce or develop products.Armand
Premo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Hendrickson" <rhendrickson@opendoor.com>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Intermountain shake-up?



On Apr 7, 2005, at 4:54 AM, Garth Groff wrote:

Friends,

I was sad to see Marty leave Intermountain, and hope that wherever he
goes, he rejoins our group. Does anyone know if he is moving out of
Colorado, and what he will be doing?

I picked up tidbits here the other day that Marty was not the only one
to leave Intermountain. Does anyone know what is happening there, and
how it is likely to affect us?
For Marty personally, this may be good news if it means that he'll
finally have time for his own modeling.

For the rest of us, it's almost certain to be bad news. Intermountain
recently issued a press release announcing that Matt Gaudynski has been
appointed vice-president of engineering and research. They describe
him as being knowledgeable and highly qualified in prototype research,
but I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has ever heard of him, and
that's not a good sign.

Richard Hendrickson





Yahoo! Groups Links







see through metal roof walks

ed_mines
 

Has anyone got any new ideas on attaching see through metal roof
walks to plastic cars?

About 20 years ago I saw an adhesive film between 2 carrier papers
which could be cut into shapes. One side of the paper was removed and
the adhesive was burninshed on one surface to be glued. The other
paper was then peeled off and the second item to be glued pressed into
place. Anyone know a source of this now?

Ed


Re: Intermountain shake-up?

pullmanboss <tgmadden@...>
 

For Marty personally, this may be good news if it means that he'll
finally have time for his own modeling.

For the rest of us, it's almost certain to be bad news.
Intermountain
recently issued a press release announcing that Matt Gaudynski has
been
appointed vice-president of engineering and research. They describe
him as being knowledgeable and highly qualified in prototype
research,
but I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has ever heard of him,
and
that's not a good sign.

Richard Hendrickson
Matt used to work with/for Ron Sebastian and seems like a good man
from the few contacts I've had with him. I doubt he has Marty's
energy, drive or contacts, but then few humans do.

Tom Madden


Re: Code 88 wheels, and steam era freight cars.

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

I always pay close attention to Mike Brock's wise comments and have indeed observed long strings of pretty fine trains traverse his smooth trackwork both forward and reverse. All of my principal mainline turnouts are also either #10 or #12 (Shinohara and custom), and the overwhelming majority of my cars on the rails at the moment have .088" wheels.

Although I am fully aware that it could theoretically happen, I am honestly unaware of any wheel drop in the large frogs of these turnouts. That my impression is that they do not do so is either do to the fact that I simply am not observant; or, that even with the most soft sprung trucks, HO trucks are so inherently stiff that they simply cannot equalize enough to allow the wheel to drop in, i.e. the wheel crossing the frog will be briefly suspended in free air. I subscribe to the latter :-). I have casually tested this theory by finger-pushing trucks through these frogs, and this characteristic seems to be quite reproducible.

I strongly subscribe to Mike's point of view that with good trackwork, .088" wheels are simply not an operational issue. This coincides with the experiences reported now over the past several years by both wheel makers NWSL and Reboxx.

That these narrow wheels and the new "scale" couplers (minus any "glad hand" especially) make your Steam Era Freight Cars look so good are pluses too hard to ignore. I keep bins of both on hand, and when cars arrive on the bench rip track, wheel and coupler/coupler box replacement are automatic (if not already performed), in addition to other needed repairs.

Denny
--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento


caboose window dimensions

ed_mines
 

Has anyone ever tabulated the dimensions of the Qualitycraft caboose
window castings?

Ed


Re: Code 88 wheels...again

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Tom Olsen writes:

This could be remedied by replacing the frogs with the new Scale frogs
from Details West. They are making code 83 scale maganese insert frogs
in sizes 8 and 9, with #'s 6 and 7 coming.

The frog isn't the issue. Now that sounds confusing after I wrote that the frog is the ONLY issue. The flangeway as defined in NMRA S-3.2 is the driver for wheel design. S-3.2 requires NMRA S-4.2 Wheel Standard and RP-25 Code 110 wheel design because of the flangeway. RP-25 includes the wheel tread size and the flange size. Many people aren't aware that RP-25 includes specs for Proto 87 wheel design...Code 64. Anyhow, the point is that the S-3.2 flangeway size drove manufacturers to produce wheels of RP-25 Code 110 size. We are now finding that the tire width can be changed to Code 88 size for better appearance as long as we operate through turnouts with frogs much smaller than prototype. I suppose one takes their choice...too small frogs or too large tread size. However, the real problem isn't so much to do with frt car wheels...we can replace them. The real problem is replacing the wheels on the things that pull frt cars...steam locomotives for our era. I build my own turnouts including frogs [ how else to get number 12's? ] so I could build to Proto 87 specs as easily as S-3.2. The trouble is, I can't find anyone who will provide me the 600 or so drivers in Code 64 that I would need to replace those on my Code 110 drivered steam engines. It's somewhat like the dilemma faced by standard gauge O scale. NMRA S-3.2 for O scale is still 5' between the rails. Too many wheels have rolled by I guess to change now. Brass engines were built to a 5' gauge.

Mike Brock


Re: Intermountain shake-up?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Apr 7, 2005, at 4:54 AM, Garth Groff wrote:

Friends,

I was sad to see Marty leave Intermountain, and hope that wherever he
goes, he rejoins our group. Does anyone know if he is moving out of
Colorado, and what he will be doing?

I picked up tidbits here the other day that Marty was not the only one
to leave Intermountain. Does anyone know what is happening there, and
how it is likely to affect us?
For Marty personally, this may be good news if it means that he'll finally have time for his own modeling.

For the rest of us, it's almost certain to be bad news. Intermountain recently issued a press release announcing that Matt Gaudynski has been appointed vice-president of engineering and research. They describe him as being knowledgeable and highly qualified in prototype research, but I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has ever heard of him, and that's not a good sign.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: B&O Class M-41 boxcar modeling

Eric Hansmann <ehansmann@...>
 

--- Tom Madden wrote:

The BCW replacement MDC underframes are cast urethane, not plastic.
They can be bonded with CA or epoxy.
======================================



Thank you Tom! That saves a few $$ on a bottle of Tenax.

Eric Hansmann
Morgantown, W. Va.

149481 - 149500 of 189708