Date   

Red Caboose Ho WFEX Reefer Kits For Sale

parkvarieties <parkvarieties@...>
 

In an unexplained "senior moment" I find I have somehow wound up with
two duplicate Red Caboose HO WFEX/GN reefer kits from their latest
production run. Kit numbers are RC-4448-27 and -32. The
corresponding car numbers are 67055 and 67141. I am making these
available for sale at $15.00 each plus actual shipping cost to your
ZIP Code. Feel free to buy one or both cars. If interested, please
respond directly to me at: parkvarieties@provide.net
Thanks.
Frank Brua


Re: interesting techique

jerryglow2
 

Some roads (I know MP did) converted old boxcars into pulpwood flats
so the 2 sided detail on the ends would be critical for the right
look. Doors would be another thing if modeling them open.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Eric <newyorkcentralfan@...> wrote:

I was reading an issue of Fine Scale Modeler and there was an
article in which a modeler made
castings out of bismith and then had them plated. Afterwards, he
melted out the bismith and used the
resulting plated metal shapes.

I thought this might be a useful techique for freight car
modeling. How about using it to make
replacement pressed steel car ends? Anyone have any other ideas?

Eric Petersson


Re: Truck Chronology

leedennegar
 

Anthony and everybody:

Thanks for the info on trucks and their chronology.
I've been looking for this info myself, am glad to
learn anything I can. I've been trying to learn to
recognize different types of trucks by collecting pics
and data off the net, but am still very far from an
expert.

About Barber trucks: I have got a drawing of Erie
wooden trussrod boxcars in the 100000-101999 series
from the 1913 diagram book which notes the cars had
Barber trucks, but there is no illustration of them.
I'm sure they are not the same as Barber _stabilized_
trucks which Anthony mentioned (of which I have a
model photo; they are very distinctive, not to say
futuristic (jet-age) in appearance).

I am far from sure whether the ones in use in 1913 are
the Barber S2 design, which looks like a more-or-less
"generic" cast steel truck. Doesn't "S2" suggest it
wasn't the earliest design? Does the "S" stand for
"stabilized", which would put it circa 1930? If so,
what does the early Barber look like? Does anybody
have any light to throw on this question?

BTW, other similar cars from the 1913 book have
Archbar or Fox trucks, but none seem to have had
Andrews trucks (although not every drawing has the
type of truck noted). Weren't Andrews trucks in use in
1913?
I need to learn a lot more about trucks, or stop
obsessing so much :^) Maybe I'm also obsessing too
much about draft gear (what's the difference between
Miner Friction and Sessions Friction with Farlow
Attachments?)

I would like, though, to have better knowlege of the
different roof types on boxcars. Does anybody know of
a good reference on this subject?

Thanks in advance, and for everything else I've
learned on this list.

Thanks

Lee Dennegar
Piscataway NJ (Between the CNJ and the LV, not far
from the Port Reading branch)



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


Re: Fact, Fiction, Truth or Myth

Richard White
 

Dear Jim,
I don't model in P87 or Scale4 (the 1:76 equivalent) but I know several
people who do and I've seen and been allowed to operate their layouts.
HO scale freight car trucks are sufficiently short wheelbase that they do
not need to be sprung (or compensated, which is the alternative. Passenger
car trucks probably should be sprung or compensated and steam locomotives
MUST be sprung or compensated, otherwise they will certainly fall off the
track. On cars the trucks must be able to rock sufficiently to enable the
car to adjust to changes in grade and slight imperfections in the track etc.
They should rock fore and aft at one end and from side to side at the other.
I hope this helps
Richard White



--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 27/01/06


interesting techique

Eric
 

I was reading an issue of Fine Scale Modeler and there was an article in which a modeler made
castings out of bismith and then had them plated. Afterwards, he melted out the bismith and used the
resulting plated metal shapes.

I thought this might be a useful techique for freight car modeling. How about using it to make
replacement pressed steel car ends? Anyone have any other ideas?

Eric Petersson

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


Fw: [bbfcl] Rocky Mountain Prototype Modelers Meet

Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...>
 

Forwarded from bbfcl:

----- Original Message -----
From: <StuThayer@aol.com>
To: <bbfcl@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 9:23 AM
Subject: [bbfcl] Rocky Mountain Prototype Modelers Meet


Up until now there has been a huge hole in the RPM meet landscape, but this
summer that will change...

Please join us for the first Rocky Mountain Prototype Modelers meet to be
held in Littleton, Colorado. This meet is currently scheduled as a one day
event to be held on Saturday, June 10th.

This event will follow the familiar format used by many other RPM meets
across the country. We have invited the Colorado Free-Mo group to
participate with us and are now setting up clinics and possibly some layout
tours. To get the latest information, visit the Rocky Mountain RPM Meet web
site:

<http://home.comcast.net/~nh370/RM_RPM/rmrpm.htm>

This page will be updated as we fill in more of the blanks. Be certain to
bookmark the page and check back from time to time.

We look forward to seeing you and your models there!

Gene Fusco
Stuart Thayer


Re: Duryea Underframes

Bill Kelly
 

The 1970 Field Manual of the AAR Interchange Rules tells us under rule
90, 3b that cars equipped with Duryea underframes are prohibited in
interchange effective July 1, 1972.

The 1978 Field Manual tells us under rule 90, 3b that cars built prior to
April 1, 1950 equipped with Duryea underframes are prohibited in
interchange.

Something changed in those eight years. I've exhausted my post 1970
sources but it appears that Duryea underframes could be seen after 1978.
Someone with a more comprehensive library could tell us

Later,
Bill Kelly


Re: Duryea Underframes

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 18, 2006, at 4:51 PM, Doug Brown wrote:

According to 49 CFR (see my other post) company service cars with
Duryea
underframes could not be used in freight trains. I think they can be
used in
ME and MW trains.
Doug, the information re: 49 CFR is very useful, but it isn't clear at
what date the prohibition of Duryea underframes built before 1950 took
effect. The version of 49 CFR you posted was dated 1979, but I wonder
if it banned Duryea U/Fs for the first time or restated a prohibition
which was already in effect. Can you, or any other list subscriber,
clarify this?

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Freight Car Trucks - when?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 18, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Jim Betz wrote:

  I thought I had a handle on this and then I started asking myself
some questions and realized I didn't really know enough.
  I know stuff like when certain truck styles were banned in
interchange (thanks to people like Guy W.).  But I was trying to
answer stuff like the following and not only don't know but don't
know how to find out ...

  When were the various truck types introduced?  Arch Bar,
Andrews, Bettendorf, Bettendorf T-section, Barber S-2, etc.
  And the other side of the coin ... when did they go out of
favor (stop being common)?
  How long after the all-cast trucks were introduced were they
essentially used on all new cars being built?
  Why was there a Bettendorf and also a T-section Bettendorf?
The basic arch bar design was introduced in the mid-19th century and
had become almost universal by the 1870s (see John H. White, Jr. The
American Railroad Freight Car). Pressed steel trucks such as the Fox
and Wright designs began to appear in the 1890s and had brief
popularity around the turn of the century but soon became out of favor
owing to problems with their pedestal journal boxes binding in the side
frames. Cast steel designs with separate, bolted-in journal boxes such
as the Andrews and Vulcan trucks dated from around the turn of the
century and were used in increasing numbers before WW I, though arch
bar trucks were still common.

The first trucks with the journal boxes cast integral with the side
frames were T-section Bettendorfs, which also first appeared around the
turn of the century and were so named because they were developed by
the Bettendorf Co. of Bettendorf, IA. T section trucks, whether
Bettendorfs with integral journal boxes or Andrews and Vulcan, were
prone to side frame cracking, especially when loaded heavily, so
U-section side frames began to replace them before WW I (e.g., the USRA
Andrews trucks applied to USRA freight cars in 1818-1920). After the
war, the Pennsylvania RR introduced a U-section truck with integral
journal boxes which, with minor variations, was adopted as a standard
design by the American Railway Association (designated the Type Y).
The basic principles of this design were then incorporated in a large
number of somewhat different trucks by different manufacturers, all of
which conformed to ARA specifications and had U-section side frames and
spring planks and can be considered under the generic label of ARA
trucks. These were sometimes loosely called "Bettendorf" trucks by
railroad workers (though not by railroad mechanical engineers) because
they incorporated the Bettendorf principle of journal boxes cast
integral with the side frames, a bad habit that was picked up in late
years by modelers and model manufacturers; hence the confusion about
the Bettendorf name. The Bettendorf company itself manufactured trucks
of numerous designs (including the T-section truck, which was still
being made in the 1920s, and a swing-motion caboose truck which was
widely used from the mid-1920s onward). However, Bettendorf became an
increasingly minor player in the freight car truck market and ceased to
manufacture trucks ca. 1942.

Arch bar trucks, though still manufactured until the late 1920s, were
largely replaced after World War I by U-section Andrews and Vulcan and,
increasingly in the 1920s, by ARA trucks with one piece side frames.
Among the various ARA 1920s designs were Dalman trucks, which had more
and softer springs for improved riding qualities. Many trucks were
also equipped with lateral motion devices to improve riding qualities,
the most popular of which was the Barber design of the Standard Car
Truck Co. All of the major truck manufacturers applied these features
to their trucks under license agreements.

Experiments in the 1920s showed that snubbers (actually primitive
friction shock absorbers) also improved riding qualities, and starting
ca. 1930 freight car trucks were introduced which incorporated built-in
snubbers. The first of these to be widely used was the National B-1,
which also eliminated the spring plank in favor of a precision-machined
sliding joint between the side frames and bolster. The latter
principle was also developed for ARA trucks (which became AAR trucks in
1934 when the ARA was reconstituted as the Association of American
Railroads) by a consortium of truck manufacturers, resulting in AAR
self-aligning spring-plankless trucks. Another improvement made in the
ARA/AAR design at about the same time was the "double truss" side frame
which had box-section instead of U-section lower chords. In the mid
1930s the Standard Car Truck Co. introduced its Barber Stabilized S-1
AAR truck with built-in friction snubbers, and this soon evolved into
the Barber S-2, which was applied to growing numbers of freight cars in
the early 1940s. A similar design was developed by American Steel
Foundries which, though its introduction was delayed by World War II,
began to appear ca. 1944; this was the "Ride Control" A-3 truck. After
World War II, all the truck manufacturers developed proprietary designs
with built-in snubbers (e.g., the National C-1), but the Barber S-2 and
ASF A-3 were by far the most popular and are still being built in large
numbers today as roller bearing trucks.

  So has any one written this up some where?  Is it online or
in some book I need to study? 
Most of it is covered in my copiously illustrated monograph on freight
car trucks in Railway Prototype Cyclopedia, Vol. 4.

Richard Hendrickson


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


Re: Freight Car Trucks - when?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Jim Betz wrote:
When were the various truck types introduced? Arch Bar,
Andrews, Bettendorf, Bettendorf T-section, Barber S-2, etc.
And the other side of the coin ... when did they go out of
favor (stop being common)?
How long after the all-cast trucks were introduced were they
essentially used on all new cars being built?
Why was there a Bettendorf and also a T-section Bettendorf?

So has any one written this up some where? Is it online or
in some book I need to study?
RPCyc no. 4 is your best bet, Jim. Unfortunately, it's OOP as I recall. There is also Richard's earlier version of that article, in the 1990 Pittsburgh NMRA National clinic book.
Arch bar trucks were in use at the time of the Civil War, and were finally banned from interchange in 1940. Cast steel truck sideframes really were first introduced in the first few years of the 20th century. If you have access to a series of Car Builders' Cycs, you can see the various models. Among the earliest of these were the Bettendorf L- and T-section designs, though the T-section most modelers recognize is a later revision. These were found to crack excessively and were removed from service in the 1950s (I forget the date off hand). The U-section truck, including the Bettendorf design (all other truck makers also made very similar U-section trucks, conforming to ARA and then AAR standards), appeared by WW I and was widely adopted in the 1920s. Certainly by 1930 they were universal for new cars.
The different snubber and stabilizer designs, starting with the various iterations of the Barber design, began in the 1930s. After WW II, these became widespread if not standard, particularly the ASF A-3 truck version, along with the National C-1 and others.
This is extremely brief and without much specific on dates, Jim, and you really do need to read something detailed and authoritative. Richard Hendrickson's articles are your best bet.

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, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Duryea Underframes

Doug Brown <g.brown1@...>
 

According to 49 CFR (see my other post) company service cars with Duryea
underframes could not be used in freight trains. I think they can be used in
ME and MW trains.

Doug Brown

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
O'Connor
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 1:16 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Duryea Underframes


Mass retirement of D&RGW Duryea equipped gons began in 1972, and a
couple of old emails from Eric and Jim Eager approximate the time of
expiration of Duryea equipped freight cars as 1972 to 1974. They were
of course only prohibited for interchange and many cars continued in
company service for much longer.

Tim O'Connor


Jerry Glow wrote:
"This came up the other day on the BBFCL and a response cited 1970
as the date they were outlawed. Can't confirm or deny but it's a
start."

Cross referencing 1970 vs Jeff English's AAR Interchange Dates
compilation in the STMFC files section turned up "No underframes over
50 years (blt before Jan 2 1970?)", attributed to Eric Neubauer.

Ben Hom



Yahoo! Groups Links








--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.10/263 - Release Date: 2/16/2006


Re: Freight Car Trucks - when?

Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

Jim:
A very good primer on trucks can be found in Railroad Prototype Cyclopedia
vol 4.

Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim" <jimbetz@jimbetz.com>
To: <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 5:24 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Freight Car Trucks - when?


Hi All,
I thought I had a handle on this and then I started asking myself
some questions and realized I didn't really know enough.
I know stuff like when certain truck styles were banned in
interchange (thanks to people like Guy W.). But I was trying to
answer stuff like the following and not only don't know but don't
know how to find out ...

When were the various truck types introduced? Arch Bar,
Andrews, Bettendorf, Bettendorf T-section, Barber S-2, etc.
And the other side of the coin ... when did they go out of
favor (stop being common)?
How long after the all-cast trucks were introduced were they
essentially used on all new cars being built?
Why was there a Bettendorf and also a T-section Bettendorf?

So has any one written this up some where? Is it online or
in some book I need to study? All pointers to the info will
be appreciated. Or if you know the answers and consider it
to be a 'short list' and want to just post it or put it in
the files ... that's fine also.
- Jim Betz in San Jose







Yahoo! Groups Links






Re: Terminology: was CB&Q single sheathed box cars

pullmanboss <tgmadden@...>
 

Pieter Roos asked:

Err, how about "lower" and "higher"?
We're talkin' semantic nuances now... but I suppose that's what this
is all about. "Lower" and "higher" need a further reference than
just "car A vs. car B". A Fowler boxcar sits higher on its trucks than
an AAR steel boxcar, but it's certainly a "lower" car. In this
case, "height" is the missing reference. On the other hand, "taller
than" and "not as tall as" are unambiguous.

Why am _I_ doing this? Where's Richard when we really need him?

Tom Madden


Re: Duryea Underframes

Bill Kelly
 

The 1970 Field Manual of the AAR Interchange Rules tells us under rule
90, 3b that cars equipped with Duryea underframes are prohibited in
interchange effective July 1, 1972.

The 1978 Field Manual tells us under rule 90, 3b that cars built prior to
April 1, 1950 equipped with Duryea underframes are prohibited in
interchange.

Something changed in those eight years. I've exhausted my post 1970
sources but it appears that Duryea underframes could be seen after 1978.
Someone with a more comprehensive library could tell us

Later,
Bill Kelly


Re: CB&Q single sheathed box car roofs

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Ed Mines asked:
"Is this the same type of Hutchins roof on the Accurail car?"

Almost. The Accurail car's roof matches the number of panels of the
CB&Q car, but it has a different eave.


Ben Hom


Re: Terminology: was CB&Q single sheathed box cars

Pieter Roos
 

Err, how about "lower" and "higher"?

Pieter Roos

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Tom Madden said:
In the case of the Q boxcars, "not as tall" rolls off the tongue
more gracefully than "were of less height" or "were less tall".
I'd agree. This problem with "short" has come up in other
contexts; I remember a discussion of how steam-ear box cars varied
several inches in height from each other, thus giving a very
visible
variety in a string of cars, but the term used was "shorter than
others," and someone responded that a few scale inches in car
length in
HO was hardly noticeable so what was all the fuss?
"Not as tall" seems fine, as does "shorter in height."

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, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Freight Car Trucks - when?

Jim Betz
 

Hi All,
I thought I had a handle on this and then I started asking myself
some questions and realized I didn't really know enough.
I know stuff like when certain truck styles were banned in
interchange (thanks to people like Guy W.). But I was trying to
answer stuff like the following and not only don't know but don't
know how to find out ...

When were the various truck types introduced? Arch Bar,
Andrews, Bettendorf, Bettendorf T-section, Barber S-2, etc.
And the other side of the coin ... when did they go out of
favor (stop being common)?
How long after the all-cast trucks were introduced were they
essentially used on all new cars being built?
Why was there a Bettendorf and also a T-section Bettendorf?

So has any one written this up some where? Is it online or
in some book I need to study? All pointers to the info will
be appreciated. Or if you know the answers and consider it
to be a 'short list' and want to just post it or put it in
the files ... that's fine also.
- Jim Betz in San Jose


Re: Terminology: was CB&Q single sheathed box cars

Tim O'Connor
 

Yes, but nothing beats ACTUAL heights! Relative comparisons don't
really do it for me in most contexts. Why not just write 10'0" or
8'6" or whatever it actually is?

At 02:36 PM 2/18/2006, you wrote:
Tom Madden said:
In the case of the Q boxcars, "not as tall" rolls off the tongue
more gracefully than "were of less height" or "were less tall".
"Not as tall" seems fine, as does "shorter in height."

Tony Thompson


Re: Duryea Underframes

Scott Pitzer
 

We'll have to quit this soon, considering it certainly happened after 1960, but...
I remember from past discussions about underframe AGES, the 50 years was "cut by one year, every year" until it was a 40-year limit for interchange (although I think up to 50 years was OK for home-road use.)
Scott Pitzer

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Brown <g.brown1@worldnet.att.net>
Sent: Feb 18, 2006 11:57 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Duryea Underframes

From:

Code of <http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/index.html>
Federal Regulations
Title <http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/title49/index.html>
49 Transportation

_____


PART 215-RAILROAD FREIGHT CAR SAFETY STANDARDS


215.203 Restricted cars.

(a) This section restricts the operation of any railroad freight car that
is-



(1) More than 50 years old, measured from the date of original construction;



(2) Equipped with any design or type component listed in appendix A to this
part; or



(3) Equipped with a Duryea underframe constructed before April 1, 1950,
except for a caboose which is operated as the last car in a train.



Doug Brown



-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
benjaminfrank_hom
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 8:09 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Duryea Underframes



Jerry Glow wrote:

"This came up the other day on the BBFCL and a response cited 1970

as the date they were outlawed. Can't confirm or deny but it's a

start."



Cross referencing 1970 vs Jeff English's AAR Interchange Dates

compilation in the STMFC files section turned up "No underframes over

50 years (blt before Jan 2 1970?)", attributed to Eric Neubauer.





Ben Hom













Yahoo! Groups Links



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/



STMFC-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/











--

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.10/263 - Release Date: 2/16/2006










Yahoo! Groups Links






Dullcoat blushing

dphobbyman <dopear9@...>
 

Hi all-my problem is tiny white spots from Dollcoat. Is this
bluishing? I use a air brush for the final coat. Thanks, Doug Pearce.

134741 - 134760 of 186212