1. main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
FYI Atlas branchline Boxcar Kits

jeralbin42 <jeralbin@...>
 

TC cars not Cor-Ten steel

Bill Welch
 

My apologies to all. Apparently during my conversation with Ed, I
confused what Ed was telling me about the use of Cor-Ten steel. Only
the BS cars were Cor-Ten. The TC were definitely not. I am going to
now wash the "Egg Beaters" off my face.

Bill Welch
2225 Nursery Road; #20-104
Clearwater, FL 33764-7622
727.470.9930
fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com
Re: TC Boxcar & SOU Gonss from SMMW

Allen Cain <allencain@...>
 

I too received the Southern Gons from SMMW and they are superb!



Both the SOU Gons and the TC Boxcar come with instructions on a mini-CD with
full color instructions. I think one was 14 pages long!



This alone makes the kits special.



HIGHLY recommend these to anyone interested in this period.



Allen Cain
Re: Kadee Trucks

Tim O'Connor
 

Denny, a 1 oz load is about 1/2 the typical load of a freight
car. There are also rolling dynamics involved. And under load,
the shape of the bearing and journal, and the materials, makes
a big difference. Kato ASF A-3 trucks for example roll incredibly
well without a load, but as the load increases, the performance
is affected -- it's almost a straight-line correlation.

I roll test every car that I put together, or make ready for
operation. It takes a little time, maybe 20 minutes, to identify
the proper truck design for that model and then find a model truck
and wheelset combination that gives good results. It's makes no
difference to me how well a truck rolls "in theory".

For example, remember those old Lindbergh trucks? Those things
rolled like crazy, we thought they were miraculous in the 1960's.
Oh wait, until you put a car on them. Then your results may vary.

Tim O'Connor

Tim O'C inquires about the effect of weight on truck rolling test data.

I do not routinely test truck rollability with/without weights, although I do so on occasion. My reason for not doing so is that I use the test data to conveniently guide my choices of wheel sets going forward (not excluding leaving OEM alone!) without having to parse out with testing anew with each install the usual small inherent differences resulting from both variable weighting, but also rollability differences caused by the common variability between nominally-identical trucks. Sometimes the weight improves rollability, occasionally in dramatic fashion; while at other times, the same weight can all but stop a truck dead in its tracks. Most of the time, in real time, it makes no difference.

As to the new Kadee trucks, I did indeed test the Barber S3 with and without weight. The weight (a 1-oz. lead block balanced on the truck bolster) caused the rollability to improve, but ever so slightly- remaining still in the midst of the Acceptable/Good field. This was why it was not mentioned.

Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Tim O'Connor
 

Tony

Yes, I have found that too... except for the roller bearing monsters.
Those go into the "gondola scrap load parts" box...

Tim

At 4/15/2011 02:41 PM Friday, you wrote:
Tim O'Connor wrote:
Front Range came up with some of the worst trucks and wheelsets
ever. That is, until Red Caboose wheelsets -- maybe RC found a stash
of old FR wheelsets! They are just atrocious.
When I first realized how bad the recent RC wheelsets were, I
tended to blame the trucks, but with Reboxx wheelsets the sideframe/
bolster parts are fine, and they roll well.

Tony Thompson
Re: Kadee Trucks

dennyanspach <danspach@...>
 

Tim O'C inquires about the effect of weight on truck rolling test data.

I do not routinely test truck rollability with/without weights, although I do so on occasion. My reason for not doing so is that I use the test data to conveniently guide my choices of wheel sets going forward (not excluding leaving OEM alone!) without having to parse out with testing anew with each install the usual small inherent differences resulting from both variable weighting, but also rollability differences caused by the common variability between nominally-identical trucks. Sometimes the weight improves rollability, occasionally in dramatic fashion; while at other times, the same weight can all but stop a truck dead in its tracks. Most of the time, in real time, it makes no difference.

As to the new Kadee trucks, I did indeed test the Barber S3 with and without weight. The weight (a 1-oz. lead block balanced on the truck bolster) caused the rollability to improve, but ever so slightly- remaining still in the midst of the Acceptable/Good field. This was why it was not mentioned.

Denny

Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento
Re: Necessary Freight cars

Benjamin Hom
 

Charlie Vlk wrote:
"'Back in the day' of early Japanese brass supposedly a model was built with a
fold line from the reference blueprint faithfully rendered on the side of the
model."

We don't even need to go back that far - how about the first run of the HO scale
Atlas offset twin hopper cars with the doubled center side post resulting from a
bad drawing splice?

At least they still can be used as fodder for the Sunshine Alternate Standard
mini-kit!


Ben Hom
Re: Necessary Freight cars

Charlie Vlk
 

Andy-
No confusion as Equipment Diagram Book Pages did not come up in the discussion and are a different aspect beyond the construction drawings we were talking about.
It has been correctly pointed out that General Arrangement drawings can vary widely in their degree of detail and accuracy.
I've seen older General Arrangement drawings which could be published as-is for presentation drawings in the model magazines; they have correct full rendering of all details and no or minimal hidden lines, and no partial sections... and include full lettering. Others are very crude and serve more as a visual map for drawing number references.
Equipment Diagram Book Pages can vary as well, although because they were generally drawn at a small scale they are rather simplified. Their purpose is just to show dimensions and other data that may be needed by operations and shop people for handling the car or locomotive.
"Back in the day" of early Japanese brass supposedly a model was built with a fold line from the reference blueprint faithfully rendered on the side of the model.
Charlie Vlk

----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Harman
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:49 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Necessary Freight cars



At 02:35 AM 4/15/2011 +0000, you wrote:

>All the general arrangement drawings I have seen were drawn to scale.

There's a rather famous one that is to scale but contains a famous error
duplicated in many, many models. But it's off topic.

I've seen railroad GA drawings that were laughably out of
scale. Lionelish. But perhaps those were:
>Is it possible that someone has confused 'general arrangement' drawings
>with what is typically called 'equipment diagrams,' those small (usually
>about 5" x 11") drawings collected together in a book given basic
>information about all the currently used freight cars for a particular
>railroad?

The someone may have been a model manufacturer at one time or another :-)

Andy
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

wm501jra
 

Yes they did - I have them too (somewhere under some poor old Athearn PFE refrigerator car). Back then I thought it was neat as heck! It just made me laugh when Kato announced the "first time ever in HO".

I should check my Kato trucks, they have put a lot of miles on the WMRHS Modular group layout but I don't remember missing any caps. For us WM guys these Barber S2A trucks are a blessing though (wrong era for this list however). They are also a pain to paint.

Jeff Adams

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:


Jeff, Athearn briefly experimented with rotating bearing cap trucks
in the 1960's -- I had some as a teenager. I also have a beautiful pair
of sprung, all-metal trucks of unknown manufacture, made in the 1970's,
with rotating bearing caps.

I will say they all share one trait: poor performance. And both the
Kato and Athearn versions lose their caps easily!

Tim O'Connor



Even those that announced their roller bearings trucks with rotating caps
were the first ever in HO.
Jeff Adams
WM Modeler
Fredrick, MD.
Lisle meet websire

Clark Propst
 

The link I have does not work. Can someone please provide a working link to this Oct. Chicago area meet.
Thanks very much,
Clark Propst
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
Front Range came up with some of the worst trucks and wheelsets ever. That is, until Red Caboose wheelsets -- maybe RC found a stash of old FR wheelsets! They are just atrocious.
When I first realized how bad the recent RC wheelsets were, I tended to blame the trucks, but with Reboxx wheelsets the sideframe/ bolster parts are fine, and they roll well.

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
Southern low side gons, flats and composite gon kits

Jim King
 

I am polling this list to determine remaining market interest for the
Southern PS 1945 low side steel gon (Roman and Block fonts), the SR 41' flat
car (built 1925) and a potential SR composite gon made from the flat car
(circa 1925 to the late 50s). All are/would be HO models. The gons and
flat are currently produced by me exclusively for the SRHA but I may be
taking back ownership of the patterns (but still offer via the SRHA) and
offer these in my product line. The composite gon, once produced in O and
S, would be a new kit based on the flat.



Please reply off-list with questions, comments, etc.



Jim King

Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.

Ph. (828) 777-5619

<www.smokymountainmodelworks.com>
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Tim O'Connor
 

lol, Ian. Yes I have some of those, I'd forgotten about them. Front Range
came up with some of the worst trucks and wheelsets ever. That is, until
Red Caboose wheelsets -- maybe RC found a stash of old FR wheelsets! They
are just atrocious. And RC even tooling a new rotating bear cap truck for
the R-70-15 reefers -- a truly remarkable feat of engineering, combining
the worst performing wheelsets with an inherently bad journal design!

Tim O'Connor

Front Range also played with rotating bearing trucks back in the 1980s (as I recall). They were included with their centre-beam flatcars, and rolled like bricks. The caps were pretty solidly attached though!
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Ian Cranstone
 

On 2011-04-15, at 1:52 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:


Jeff, Athearn briefly experimented with rotating bearing cap trucks
in the 1960's -- I had some as a teenager. I also have a beautiful pair
of sprung, all-metal trucks of unknown manufacture, made in the 1970's,
with rotating bearing caps.

I will say they all share one trait: poor performance. And both the
Kato and Athearn versions lose their caps easily!
Front Range also played with rotating bearing trucks back in the 1980s (as I recall). They were included with their centre-beam flatcars, and rolled like bricks. The caps were pretty solidly attached though!
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Andy Harman
 

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:52:47 -0400, Tim O'Connor wrote

I will say they all share one trait: poor performance. And both the
Kato and Athearn versions lose their caps easily!
Which is one reason why this is a fundamentally bad idea even if you can put up with the
sluggish performance. I installed Kato 70 ton RB on two box cars recently, and I was
losing caps just getting them installed - fortunately you get a few extras. I've been
running the cars and they probably have a total of 12 hours run time now, but they
haven't been handled, boxed, or moved otherwise. So we'll see how long the caps last.
I'm sure I'll forget all about it and when I bring them to Marion some wiseacre will
spot a missing bearing cap. I'll say this, the Kato trucks do roll better than Athearn's.

Andy
Re: National Type B/B-1 (was Re: Kadee Trucks)

Tim O'Connor
 

Gimme a break Paul :-) Until Brian mentioned it two days ago,
I didn't even know there were two types! Thanks a lot, Brian!

Remember my comment about no one complaining about incorrect
retainer valves because there weren't any? Now we'll be worrying
about having the WRONG National Type-whatever truck. Thank God
no one has made all-metal vs composition brake shoe details yet!
And what about roll dampers (those little widgets on top of the
truck bolsters)? There were many different brands and styles,
usually customer-specified. Egad, there's no end in sight! =-O

Tim O'Connor

p.s. just kidding. i eat this stuff up.

At 4/15/2011 01:52 PM Friday, you wrote:

Tim,
Which are they--B, or B-1?
Paul Lyons
Re: Kadee Trucks and New Atlas Wheelsets

Tim O'Connor
 

Jeff, Athearn briefly experimented with rotating bearing cap trucks
in the 1960's -- I had some as a teenager. I also have a beautiful pair
of sprung, all-metal trucks of unknown manufacture, made in the 1970's,
with rotating bearing caps.

I will say they all share one trait: poor performance. And both the
Kato and Athearn versions lose their caps easily!

Tim O'Connor

Even those that announced their roller bearings trucks with rotating caps
were the first ever in HO.
Jeff Adams
WM Modeler
Fredrick, MD.
Re: National Type B/B-1 (was Re: Kadee Trucks)

Paul Lyons
 

Tim,
Which are they--B, or B-1?
Paul Lyons

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@comcast.net>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 15, 2011 10:43 am
Subject: [STMFC] Re: National Type B/B-1 (was Re: Kadee Trucks)




Add:

GN 15400, 40' double door box (postwar AAR)
FW&D 8346, 40' single door box (1940 AAR)
FW&D 8427, 40' single door box (1940 AAR)
MONON 9383, 40' single door box (1937 AAR)
GTW 591399, 50' double door box, end doors (1940 AAR)
CB&Q 21000-21299, 50' single door box (1940 AAR)
CB&Q 48500-48599, 50' double door box, end doors (1940 AAR)
ERIE 95000-95099, 40' double door box (1940 AAR)

Also: hoppers, gondolas, tank cars, covered hoppers, and reefers... :-)

Some National Type B-1's were made with roller bearings, but
we won't go there...

Tim O'Connor

------------------------------------------------

Brian Leppert wrote

OK Paul, for you and other truck-challenged modelers <grin>, here's some applications for National Malleable & Steel Castings Co's "B" trucks on 40' steel box cars.

1937 AAR 10' IH Box Cars:

CN 472500-472799 blt 1937-38 Type B
477350-477649 blt 1939 Type B
485515-485764 blt 1944 B-1

ERIE 78000-78249 blt 1936 Type B
78500-78999 blt 1940 Type B

T&P 40000-40499 blt 1937 Type B

1937 AAR Modified Box Cars:

ATSF Bx-34 some blt 1940 B-1
Bx-37 some blt 1941-42 B-1

CB&Q 33750-33827 blt 1942 B-1
34000-34171 blt 1942 B-1

ERIE 80000-80199 blt 1941 Type B

IC 17800-17999 blt 1939 Type B
18800-18999 blt 1939 Type B
19300-19499 blt 1940 Type B

NP 27350-27499 blt 1942 B-1
27500-27999 blt 1942 B-1


Post-War Box Cars:

DL&W 52500-52999 blt 12-48 B-1

ERIE 82000-82499 blt 10-45 B-1






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: National Type B/B-1 (was Re: Kadee Trucks)

Tim O'Connor
 

Add:

GN 15400, 40' double door box (postwar AAR)
FW&D 8346, 40' single door box (1940 AAR)
FW&D 8427, 40' single door box (1940 AAR)
MONON 9383, 40' single door box (1937 AAR)
GTW 591399, 50' double door box, end doors (1940 AAR)
CB&Q 21000-21299, 50' single door box (1940 AAR)
CB&Q 48500-48599, 50' double door box, end doors (1940 AAR)
ERIE 95000-95099, 40' double door box (1940 AAR)

Also: hoppers, gondolas, tank cars, covered hoppers, and reefers... :-)

Some National Type B-1's were made with roller bearings, but
we won't go there...

Tim O'Connor

------------------------------------------------

Brian Leppert wrote

OK Paul, for you and other truck-challenged modelers <grin>, here's some applications for National Malleable & Steel Castings Co's "B" trucks on 40' steel box cars.

1937 AAR 10' IH Box Cars:

CN 472500-472799 blt 1937-38 Type B
477350-477649 blt 1939 Type B
485515-485764 blt 1944 B-1

ERIE 78000-78249 blt 1936 Type B
78500-78999 blt 1940 Type B

T&P 40000-40499 blt 1937 Type B

1937 AAR Modified Box Cars:

ATSF Bx-34 some blt 1940 B-1
Bx-37 some blt 1941-42 B-1

CB&Q 33750-33827 blt 1942 B-1
34000-34171 blt 1942 B-1

ERIE 80000-80199 blt 1941 Type B

IC 17800-17999 blt 1939 Type B
18800-18999 blt 1939 Type B
19300-19499 blt 1940 Type B

NP 27350-27499 blt 1942 B-1
27500-27999 blt 1942 B-1


Post-War Box Cars:

DL&W 52500-52999 blt 12-48 B-1

ERIE 82000-82499 blt 10-45 B-1
Re: What is the number series for a 1933 PRR X-29 with dreadnaught ends?

Benjamin Hom
 

I wrote:
"Dreadnaught end Class X29 boxcars were in PRR 97949-103324; cars
were built 1932-1934."

Bruce Smith wrote:
"The number series as built, 1932-1934 was 100000-103324."

Bruce has the number series correct; car numbers preceding 100000 DID NOT have
Dreadnaught ends.  Same caveat regarding the 100688 and the radial roof cars
applies.

Also, NO DASHES in PRR Car Classes.


Ben Hom
93601 - 93620 of 192720