Guys, many thanks for the prompt and authoritative assistance. Pacific Limited sounds a great loss. Regards Jonathan Marcus Apologies about not puting my full name.

Greg Martin wrote: Surely any sensible review would compare to the prototype, whether of one or two models. Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA 2906 Forest Ave.,

Dean, I wrote... rather both to an accurate set of plans. This is the only true comparison. Then you wrote... "Greg, I think you missed Bruce's point. What is desired is a comparison of the

Arthur Marr wrote: I have one of the PL cars, but it is packed in an inaccessible way right now, so I couldn't check it directly. Obviously with the Dalmans the car should be in the second

Hello folks, I have not yet brought my slide scanner online since my move last year, though I thought with the recent interest in the Gerstley slide collection this would be a good time to show one

Tony, The Pacific Limited G-50-12s' do have the rivets so are correct for that class. They also have the Dalman trucks. is also Pat is noted for doing very good research and producing prototype

Jon (not signing his full name) wrote: That depends on which class you want to duplicate, Jon. The G-50-9, -10 and -11 classes all had T-section trucks from either ASF or Bettendorf, but the

Ray,I,for one, would like that information.Armand Premo

Can anyone tell me which trucks - Dalman or Bettendorf T-section - would be most appropriate for the late 1940's, early 1950's time-frame? The prototype is the slope-sided drop bottom gon as

why should we care? Is it a different prototype than the Walthers model? They look almost identical. The Broadway version costs a couple dollars more.<< unbiased side by side review of these

<schuyler.larrabee@v...> wrote: absorbed by the individual help deal with it. Ships should do the same and have seem to have no problems. That is, if they are not named Fitz. As long as the

Stephen, I've got lots of data on the W&LE 78000-series cars. They went as a group to the NKP in 1949. I've got 17 in-service NKP photos, a copy of the original 1948 W&LE diagram sheet, a copy of

Schuyler Larrabee wrote: Schuyler is right, and the idea doesn't require separated panels; the segments and their ribs can all contribute to local expansion, even if the roof is welded. OTOH,

Well, I have been called Clark a few times, so what does that make me? Chet French Dixon, Illinoise December

<schuyler.larrabee@v...> wrote: is absorbed by the individual help deal with it. ======================= Aren't 86' boxcars welded though? I would think that the reason was stamping a small piece of

Manfred Lorenz: Expansion and contraction, a significant dimension over a 40' car, is absorbed by the individual panels. Yes, the entire car expands and contracts, but the joints help deal with

I drove 180 miles (round trip) to Cabela's to buy my wife a new Walleye rod only to find they don't carry that model in the store anymore. Kind of like a 37 car with round versa square ends. I

IF the pattern maker is a model railroader , is also the resin caster and was the freight car design mananger for a car builder , I'm sure you will get something outstanding. Marcelo Lordeiro

Speaking of "size of presses available for stamping," there is an NdeM 40' box #76079 in Volume 7 of Classic Freight Cars. The caption says it was built a few months after this list's era ends (March

Guy, Oct 95 MLM magazine has a nice article on how to build one of these cars. The auther states the cars were rebuilt at St Cloud MN in 60-61. So your photo is correct :) Chet, you read this? Guy