I have a brass Overland model. To the best of my knowledge this is the only model car available that had the correct "curvy" NYC, T section caboose trucks. It's interesting that later brass NYC

Tim O'Connor said: This is certainly true, and I do have photos showing what Tim describes, large diameter pipe in GS gons. A photo of a whole train so loaded on Tehachapi is in my volume on

--- "Garth G. Groff" <ggg9y@...> wrote: I believe that there is a conversion based on the Bowser X31 to model these cars. There is interest by one resin manufacturer in the NYC designs that

Richard, Resin is great if you need only one or two stock cars. But someone who wants a whole fleet of these rather complicated cars is going to have to spend a lot of money and time to assemble

I built many QualityCraft (and Gloor) HO cabooses including the NYC truss rod caboose. The kit definitely had Bob Weaver assembly techniques but the window castings were much coarser than any of

Funny they would use GS gons instead of G-50-13 or G-50-14 gons. Must have been short pipe. Did they must have a shortage of mill gons and were pressing in to service what they could get? Gas

Earl, though I have no detailed documentation on these cars, it's always been my understanding that they did not have AAR standard underframes, and that the underframes more closely resembed the older

Mike...please delete this. Sheesh, I uploaded the file to go to the OTrains bunch here instead...duh. Is it the weekend yet? Buck Dean Lexington,KY Sorry , group, I have other relevant stuff for

Garth Groff wrote: I think Garth has missed the point here. Resin kits are the way to go in modeling stock cars precisely because there were no widely used standard designs and so many stock cars,

Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC group. File : /DCP_0420.JPG Uploaded by : ABDean

I ended up using the C&BT door. It's not too horrible, although I did thin its profile significantly. I have attached a photo. As for the ends, I don't know yet. There is a photo in the Nov. 99

--- Mike Brock <brockm@...> wrote: Your comments are right on the money. The discrepancy is about 1.6%. There are resin with higher margins of error for shrinkage than that. I think many of

Bill Schneider writes: The ad that was run in Model Railroader a few months back showing UP and CNW cars were in fact decaled samples of the "old stock" kit - none of the complete new cars were

Not all steel is the same, clearly. The SP* had at least two steel gas pipe producers on line and unit trains of gas pipe were seen on the SP in the 40's and 50's ... In most of the pictures I

Kevin Slark writes: I sympathize. I suppose each of us that model a particular RR have similar problems...some worse than others. The UP, of course, was another large user of stock cars and they are

I would like to second Garth's comments and add two of my own: That a manufacturer would acknowledge and correct at their own expense the problem that occurred is a remarkable act that speaks volumes

Charlie Tapper writes: I sincerely doubt if much of the product from east While I have not yet compiled meaningful data from the Big Boy tape, various books or the Fraley frt conductor book, I have

Garth's Words- also less than 40', and the I wholeheartdly agree with Garth. I model the D&RGW/D&SL and my best bet for correct stock cars comes with plans from old Hawk Kits for D&SL stock cars. As

Re: Geneva, Pittsburg, Torrance, Pueblo et al. We know western roads did acquire cars to serve these mills, D&RGW's 65' mill gons come to mind as do WP's shorty coil-service cars. I sincerely doubt if

I would point out to the members that critical comments...or praise...about a railroad or group of railroads is NOT prohibited on this group. Thus, if I choose to comment about the obvious fact that