Date   

Re: Long shot...

Tim O'Connor
 

Clark

I think 23021 was painted BCR -- a black & white photo shows a lube stencil
patch, and it is much darker than the rest of the car body -- probably a black
patch on a BCR body. The patch is from the RDG CO. :-)

Tim O'

At 4/14/2011 04:52 PM Thursday, you wrote:
I just finish with a (to be) M&StL 50' flat car. Made by splicing two Red Caboose 42 fters and adding a new deck. Not perfect, but close.

Much to my dismay, I don't know which color to paint it, BCR or black? Cars are in the 230001-23199 odd numbers series. I know it's a long shot that anyone would know, but I had to ask.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I want to paint it tomorrow....
Clark Propst


Re: Kadee Trucks

Andy Harman
 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:27:01 -0400, Tim O'Connor wrote
is a paintable graphite. With metal-metal contact I sometimes
use moly-grease or a teflon-grease and this seems to mitigate
the squeaking that develops.
Whenever I have metal to metal, I use Labelle 102 which is called "gear oil". It's
considerably thicker than 107 or 108. Typically a car lubed with 108 starts squeaking
again in 15 minutes (particularly Walthers passenger cars). The ones I lubed with 102, I
haven't had to re-lube after several years of both running and sitting.

Andy


Re: Kadee Trucks

Tim O'Connor
 

Bob, they were plastic.

One thing you can do with plastic-plastic contact is put
graphite in the bearing. This is very easy with Neo-Lube which
is a paintable graphite. With metal-metal contact I sometimes
use moly-grease or a teflon-grease and this seems to mitigate
the squeaking that develops. In other cases I use Tichy nylon
bearings, especially for brass truck sideframes designed for
stubby (shouldered?) journals.

Tim O'

Tim O'Connor wrote: "At a train club I belonged to, MANY cars with
Kadee wheels (mostly in non-Kadee sideframes) wore down the ends of the
axles to a round nub! In a high-use context, metal axles last longer...
But yeah, on a private low-mileage layout, it's probably not an issue."

======================================

Tim,

Were non-Kadee truck frames metal or plastic? Some of the problem of
wear may relate to what JP Barger noted in his presentations on truck
frames and wheel-sets that one wants metal axles in plastic truck frames
or the opposite. Kadee's older trucks always had plastic axles in metal
truck frames. It will be interesting to see how the new
plastic-on-plastic combination will perform long-term.

Bob Witt


Re: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

Tim O'Connor
 

Isn't that "step" just where the tab is bent into an "L" shape,
i.e. aren't we looking at the bottom of the "L" edge-on? If so,
maybe the "stepless" tabs were trimmed differently, so when they
were folded (bent into an L) the taper appears to be continuous.

Tim O'Connor

At 4/14/2011 04:40 PM Thursday, you wrote:
Dave Sieber wrote:
Then again, I might mention that you (like most everyone) missed
a minor identifying characteristic of Pullman-Standard's boxcars of
the '40s, seen on both their AAR standard boxcars and the very
earliest PS-1s: stepped bolster tabs. . . on Pullman-Standard
boxcars built from the very late '30s through about 1949 or so (but
not cars built by ACF, Magor, or anyone else).
Not true, Dave. You can see it on Pressed Steel Car and
Bethlehem cars built before WW II.

Tony Thompson


Re: Kadee Trucks

Andy Harman
 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:49:33 -0000, rwitt_2000 wrote
Tim O'Connor wrote: "At a train club I belonged to, MANY cars with
Kadee wheels (mostly in non-Kadee sideframes) wore down the ends of the
axles to a round nub!
I put Kadee wheelsets into various one-piece delrin trucks over the years. Athearn,
MDC, Walthers, Train Miniature etc. I don't know what the wear profile was but the
rolling quality was definitely inferior.

Funny, that AHM 6-dome car we were talking about... I looked at it last night and it
appears to have Kadee wheelsets stuck into ancient Athearn sprung trucks, or the AHM
equivalent - but most AHM cars I remember did not have sprung trucks.

It is interesting how we've come full circle from sprung, to one-piece, to some bad
attempts at non-sprung equalization, to sprung, to one-piece, and now Kadee's
functional, equalized new design. There was a time when a freight car truck was a
freight car truck, and I just tried to find one that would perform and didn't care if it
was the correct truck. Now I go blind looking at all of the un-branded delrin trucks I
have in my junkbox and try to figure out what they are and if I can use them.

Anybody remember a time - late 60s or early 70s - when Athearn was putting their
then-new delrin roller bearing truck in *every* kit, from their most modern to 40' box
cars to ice reefers? I've often wondered if they just ran out of their "Bettendorf"
trucks and didn't feel like making a run, or if the mold was down for repair or what. I
do still pull out Athearn cars from back then... like an SP steam era box car, and there
are those roller bearing trucks.

Andy


Long shot...

Clark Propst
 

I just finish with a (to be) M&StL 50' flat car. Made by splicing two Red Caboose 42 fters and adding a new deck. Not perfect, but close.

Much to my dismay, I don't know which color to paint it, BCR or black? Cars are in the 230001-23199 odd numbers series. I know it's a long shot that anyone would know, but I had to ask.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I want to paint it tomorrow....
Clark Propst


Re: Kadee Trucks

rwitt_2000
 

Tim O'Connor wrote: "At a train club I belonged to, MANY cars with
Kadee wheels (mostly in non-Kadee sideframes) wore down the ends of the
axles to a round nub! In a high-use context, metal axles last longer...
But yeah, on a private low-mileage layout, it's probably not an issue."

======================================

Tim,

Were non-Kadee truck frames metal or plastic? Some of the problem of
wear may relate to what JP Barger noted in his presentations on truck
frames and wheel-sets that one wants metal axles in plastic truck frames
or the opposite. Kadee's older trucks always had plastic axles in metal
truck frames. It will be interesting to see how the new
plastic-on-plastic combination will perform long-term.

Bob Witt


Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)

Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


The alternate standard offset - is this the version NKP had?
Yes. One could oversimplify and call it the AMC version.
I could certainly get into that. Maybe not quite in the same quantity as
the H10 but, I could use quite a few.


Actually, anyone modeling a northeastern or eastern Midwest road should have
a bunch of them. Fron a variety of local roads. Also, those NP and L&N guys
have been moaning about this for decades. The C&O had oodles, but with a
wide variety of ends.

The NKP version is an obvious choice for a one-piece resin kit, since it can
be cast upside down with most of the structurals as part of that casting.
Like the F&C H25. That version would also be good for P&WV and maybe others.

The Erie and P&S cars are shorter overall, like 10'10" IH versus 10'4"?? or
so, so some modelers would not accept that kind of compromise, but there are
those that would not care. I would hack off the top chord and shorten it up,
if I was that hot for an Erie car.

Elden Gatwood

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


Re: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dave Sieber wrote:
Then again, I might mention that you (like most everyone) missed a minor identifying characteristic of Pullman-Standard's boxcars of the '40s, seen on both their AAR standard boxcars and the very earliest PS-1s: stepped bolster tabs. . . on Pullman-Standard boxcars built from the very late '30s through about 1949 or so (but not cars built by ACF, Magor, or anyone else).
Not true, Dave. You can see it on Pressed Steel Car and Bethlehem cars built before WW II.

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: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

rwitt_2000
 

Dave Sieber wrote: "Jim, Then again, I might mention that you (like
most everyone) missed a minor identifying characteristic of
Pullman-Standard's boxcars of the '40s, seen on both their AAR standard
boxcars and the very earliest PS-1s: stepped bolster tabs. Take a real
close look at the prototype photos and you'll see an
inch/inch-and-a-half squared-off section at both the bottom and the top
of each bolster tab. Ted Culotta noted this in his Essential Freight
Cars article on the early PS-1s; once you first see it, you start
noticing it on Pullman-Standard boxcars built from the very late '30s
through about 1949 or so (but not cars built by ACF, Magor, or anyone
else). It's one of those tiny oddities that make prototype modeling fun
or maddening, or both in various proportions at different times."

===================================

I am looking at photos, mostly from Bob's, of the B&O versions of these
P-S boxcars ca. 1941, classes M-55a/M-55B, built with Duryea
underframes and they don't have the "stepped bolster tabs". Possibly the
spotting feature only applies to boxcars with AAR center sills and
underframe design. One can always rely on the B&O to have something
different.

Regards,

Bob Witt


Re: Kadee Trucks

Tim O'Connor
 

At a train club I belonged to, MANY cars with Kadee wheels (mostly in
non-Kadee sideframes) wore down the ends of the axles to a round nub!
In a high-use context, metal axles last longer. Also sintered wheels
like Kadee etc seem to pick up crud more easily -- we sometimes had to
scrape a layer of stuff from the wheel treads with an X-Acto blade!
If we didn't do that, the wheels would redeposit the crud on the track.

But yeah, on a private low-mileage layout, it's probably not an issue.

I'm waiting for Kadee .088 equipped trucks before I buy any more. No
way I'm paying for wheels twice anymore.

Tim O'Connor

Jim, you must run your freight cars a lot more than I do; I've never
had a Kadee axle wear out. However, I just put a pair of Northwest
Short Line Code 88 wheelsets into one of new Kadee trucks and it
rolls every bit as well as it did with the original wheelsets.
Richard Hendrickson


Re: Kadee Trucks

Andy Harman
 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:09:20 -0700, Richard Hendrickson wrote
Jim, you must run your freight cars a lot more than I do; I've never
had a Kadee axle wear out.
I've never had one wear out either, and I have some which date back to the late 1970s
although those are on old bluebox cars and they probably haven't been run much in the
last 20 years. Wear yes, wear out no - I will have to find some high-milers and examine
the axle points to see if there is visible wear or not.

Andy


Re: Kadee Trucks

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Apr 13, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Jim Betz wrote:

Hi,

As long as we are talking about Kadee trucks ...

Has any one found a non-Kadee wheelset that works well
in a Kadee truck?

- Tired of changing out worn out nylon axles - the point
wears out and you have to change out the entire axle
including the wheels
Jim, you must run your freight cars a lot more than I do; I've never
had a Kadee axle wear out. However, I just put a pair of Northwest
Short Line Code 88 wheelsets into one of new Kadee trucks and it
rolls every bit as well as it did with the original wheelsets.

Richard Hendrickson


Kadee Wheelsets

Richard Hendrickson
 

Sam Clarke e-mailed me this morning to say that Kadee's Code 88
wheelsets, which I knew they were thinking seriously about, already
exist and are in the catalog. Stock numbers are: #530 33" smooth
back, #531 36" rib back, #532 36" smooth back, and #533 33" rib
back. Eventually the trucks will be available with the Code 88
wheelsets as an option, though packaging and cataloging will take
awhile. See, some model railroad manufacturers really do pay
attention to what we say we want.

Richard Hendrickson


Formed wire?

Brian <cornbeltroute@...>
 

Hope I might acquire insights from the experienced here.

I'm working on a couple of TT scale projects for which I wish to learn how some of the parts manufacturers form wire into railings, eye bolts, and so on.

Of course, I don't seek proprietary information; I'm hopeful that "micro" wire forming is available for hire out there (although, I have not yet found any sources; often, though, I've learned, I fail to look in the right places).

Might someone know if model-making companies, Detail Associates, for an example, welcome outside customers? I will contact it, of course, but advance intelligence is usually helpful.

Thanks much,

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa


Re: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

Andy Harman
 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:26:05 -0700, David Sieber wrote
My apologies to all - that last email was intended to go only to Jim King.
Maybe but the stepped bolster tab info is pretty interesting, and I will start looking
for it and hopefully use it to at least identify PS built cars from prototype photos :-)

Andy


Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)

Andy Harman
 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:03:14 -0500, cvlk wrote
3D CAD has changed the approach to design of a model. It used to be that
you'd start with overall drawings and work down to the details of the
components (roof, body, trucks, details, etc..). Now it is pretty much the
reverse..... you design details to assemble into a whole.
It would be fascinating to see the process of how a 3D CAD drawing of the prototype is
turned into the actual tooling specs for the model. I've been reviewing some 3D
drawings for a forthcoming product, and I'm really just seeing a forest view, nothing
about how the individual parts will be defined, how they will all fit together, etc. I
suppose in a lot of cases that part is entirely done by engineers in China. But I'm
having a lot of trouble communicating the changes just in what I'm seeing - and I'm
working through a 3rd (or 4th?) party so I'm not even sure where the lines are breaking
down, or how to word my suggestions and corrections so that the guy on the final
receiving end knows what I'm talking about, and I don't know if that person speaks
English, Japanese, German, or Chinese. I'm kind of reduced to sending back a clip of
the drawing and a prototype photo of the same view and saying sheesh, look a it, yer not
even in the ball park! I'm sure whatever mistakes end up in the finished product will
be blamed on me, but I'm so far removed from the process that I'm not sure I'm helping
much. The last round, about 3 of the 20 things had been corrected, none of them
adequately, the other 17 were ignored, and two new errors injected. All of this just to
get to a 3D representation of the whole, which then will have to be picked apart into
assemblies and parts and tooled from there. If the person doing this even took vague
interpolated measurements from the prototype photos I supplied, he would have nailed it
almost completely the first time around, but at this stage, I have to wonder just what
it is they're looking at.

Andy


Re: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

David Sieber
 

My apologies to all - that last email was intended to go only to Jim King. I'm a very satisfied customer of Smokey Mountain Model Works. Dave Sieber


Re: TC boxcar nomenclature correction

David Sieber
 

Jim,
Thank God - I was beginning to doubt my sanity or my memory (or both), since I thought the TC boxcar had been built with the Pullman riveted roof (smooth, with overlapping sections above internal carlines) instead of the even-less-common Murphy flat-panel roof (flat, no raised rectangular or diagonal panels, between external carlines, as on some late '30s Canadian boxcars). I hadn't thought the TC as-built roof had "ribs" - but that web photo sure seemed to have 'em. Not that I was worried about my model since the rebuilds had a replacement roof. I was going to email you to ask about that, but the web photo made me hesitate; I'm glad someone else mentioned to you, though; this posting greatly eased my mind.
Then again, I might mention that you (like most everyone) missed a minor identifying characteristic of Pullman-Standard's boxcars of the '40s, seen on both their AAR standard boxcars and the very earliest PS-1s: stepped bolster tabs. Take a real close look at the prototype photos and you'll see an inch/inch-and-a-half squared-off section at both the bottom and the top of each bolster tab. Ted Culotta noted this in his Essential Freight Cars article on the early PS-1s; once you first see it, you start noticing it on Pullman-Standard boxcars built from the very late '30s through about 1949 or so (but not cars built by ACF, Magor, or anyone else). It's one of those tiny oddities that make prototype modeling fun or maddening, or both in various proportions at different times.
Gotta' have a little fun with it,
Dave Sieber
Reno NV


To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
From: jimking3@charter.net
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:52:28 -0400
Subject: [STMFC] TC boxcar nomenclature correction






It was pointed out to me yesterday that terminology I used (as provided to
me during the design phase) on the 1941-built Tennessee Central boxcar was
incorrect. The design IS correct and, therefore, so is the model, so those
of you who purchased the kit have nothing to worry about.

The comments made to me indicated that the web image, a low rez image
required for fast loading for folks still using dial-up connections, seemed
to show roof ribs. Weathering with oils along the rivet rows, photo angle,
combined with the low resolution image, caused the visual problem. The
Pullman riveted roof does, indeed, have ONLY rows of rivets, no ribs. My
web page description has been corrected to reflect proper Pullman
terminology for the roof and ends.

Jim King

Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.

Ph. (828) 777-5619

<www.smokymountainmodelworks.com>

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





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


Re: Necessary Freight cars (UNCLASSIFIED)

Charlie Vlk
 

Rob Kirkham wrote:
"But it makes me wonder - would useful CAD drawings substantially reduce a
manufacturer's costs and make some projects more viable?"

Good question. I am not sure the jury is in on this point. Certainly, the discipline that building a good 3D model entails (one has to look at ALL dimensions and make them work as the model is being built in 3D) is much more usefull than a traditional 2D presentation drawing (similar to old MR or RMC drawings with sides, ends, top and bottom and maybe some cross section views).

However, the factories in China (or Japan) may still choose to redraw everything anyway, negating any cost savings. I've seen factory drawings that were obviously done by different engineers for items that should have shared common elements. (for example, A & B units of the same model diesel). I don't know if this results in totally separate tooling for what should be one part. People who have tooling done in house have enough problems much less those that have it done on the other side of the Pacific..... Some times it seems like the work is being done to maximize work so streamlining the process might not be factored in as cost savings by the factory.

3D CAD does make visualization and checking of the final product before committing to tooling easier. 3D CAD has to be completely dimensioned to enter the part..... so dimensional errors are limited to deviations from the prototype and not just mistakes in calculations. Looking at 3D models of the individual parts and assemblies it is much easier to detect things that look wrong than cross checking between many sheets of paper 2D drawings. Items can be viewed and compared to photos much easier. Mechanical interfaces (truck swings, coupler mounting heights, etc.) are much easier to check in 3D as well.

3D CAD has changed the approach to design of a model. It used to be that you'd start with overall drawings and work down to the details of the components (roof, body, trucks, details, etc..). Now it is pretty much the reverse..... you design details to assemble into a whole.

I almost brought the Kato factory manager to tears when I suggested that if the 2D drawings of a model were provided to us in advance of production we could work out the paint and lettering schemes.... which often uncover errors in placement of details (because a stripe or lettering doesn't line up right). The 2D drawings are generated from the very end of the 3D design process.... just before tooling is cut..... and it would have interupted the production process, even though it would have been a good final check.

Most of the importers are dealing with factories that use sophisticated 3D design. I know of a couple of companies that have 3D as part of their research packages before the factories get involved, but don't know what cost savings might be realized from such improved R&D packages other than any errors that are avoided.

Charlie Vlk

86161 - 86180 of 185219