On 27 Jul 2020, at 12:09, Paul Doggett via groups.io <paul.doggett2472@...> wrote:

Bill 

I used the C&EI I have also used bits of them to make up other sets they are good.

<image0.jpeg>

Paul Doggett.   England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 

On 27 Jul 2020, at 01:31, Bruce Griffin <bdg1210@...> wrote:

Friends,

I am curious how or if anyone has used the Speedwitch Relaunch Decal Set. Ted recently re-released this huge decal set to support the Hindsight 2020 series and I was fast enough to get one before they sold out.  I am curious if anyone is willing to share their efforts to use these decals.  As primarily a B&O modeler I have access to photos of the W-2 and W-2A hoppers so I will start there and share my research and progress. I don’t have a collection of photos of the many of the other cars, so I would be very interested to see what others have done.  Looking forward to seeing other’s models. 

Best Regards,
Bruce D. Griffin
Ashland, MD
https://bomodeling.com/blog/

 

On 27 Jul 2020, at 01:31, Bruce Griffin <bdg1210@...> wrote:

Friends,

I am curious how or if anyone has used the Speedwitch Relaunch Decal Set. Ted recently re-released this huge decal set to support the Hindsight 2020 series and I was fast enough to get one before they sold out.  I am curious if anyone is willing to share their efforts to use these decals.  As primarily a B&O modeler I have access to photos of the W-2 and W-2A hoppers so I will start there and share my research and progress. I don’t have a collection of photos of the many of the other cars, so I would be very interested to see what others have done.  Looking forward to seeing other’s models. 

Best Regards,
Bruce D. Griffin
Ashland, MD
https://bomodeling.com/blog/

 

I looked up #8327 in various on-line OREG/ORER's and found:

This series was not there in 1891
In series 8267-~8999 listed as "Palace" with no indication that they were double-deck in 1893-1894-1895
In sub-series 8267-8681 listed as double-deck as part of series 8267-8965 listed as "Stable" in 1897-1905.
1909-1911 are similar designated class R
class SB in 1913, but after 1905 it doesn't really differentiate between single & double deck cars.
Then I got tired of looking!

My take-away here is that these double-deck cars with roof hatches were built as single-deck Palace cars with roof hatched for feeding etc in about 1892.
Some time around 1896 they became "stable" cars, feeding was discontinued, some were rebuilt as double-deck cars, but the roof hatches were not removed.
They then lasted into the teens.

What do any of you think? - Tom E.

I don’t KNOW that this is the answer. This is a very early photo, probably 1900. Note the cars have no corner posts and the trusses are stuck in pockets like those on a flat car. Some of the early cars had an upper deck that could be removed or manually lowed by human beings by removing cross bracing. IF that was the case with these, they could be used for backhaul of coal or coke. Santa Fe cars with roof hatches were regularly used for coal, coke, and sugar beets, however none of those were double deck.

J. Stephen Sandifer

Livestock Car With Roof Hatches

The first photo on the link is (to me) very interesting as it raises several questions:

https://alchetron.com/cdn/union-stock-yards-fbd57413-559b-4587-9245-93f1c9ffec5-resize-750.jpeg

My take on the hatches is that for these particular cars the hatches were for feeding and watering the stock. But there seem to be a problem.

These are double deck cars so unless there was a way to retract the upper level the hatches would not allow feeding and watering for the lower level, or the loading of bulk commodities for non-livestock transport.

Does anyone know more about these particular cars?

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA

As I continue to strive to make room for the layout I hope to build I still need to sell a lot of kit and some RTR that I have accumulated over the years.  Most, if not all, are out of production.

On Jul 26, 2020, at 1:23 PM, mopacfirst <ron.merrick@...> wrote:

Here's a followup on the coupler and coupler box replacement.  

For the two cars that I completely removed the stock Intermountain coupler box, I anchored the Kadee 262 box in a manner that seems adequate.  I had some .046 brass wire (DA 2511).  Cut a length of around 3/16", just shy of 1/4".  Then I used ACC to loosely fix it in the hole remaining from the Intermountain coupler box mount into the body, not necessarily needing to be perfectly vertical.  After that cured, then I used Shoe Goo to attach the Kadee coupler box in its proper position -- the Kadee box ends up with the right location along the car centerline.  So this mount seems to be a success.

I'll note that the recent Intermountain cars seem to be painted after assembly of the body, roof and side/end details, while the underframe, brake equipment and coupler boxes seem to be unpainted black plastic on the several cars I've bought recently.  So any cars that have just had the couplers replaced with the #158, without a change of the box to the Kadee 262, will get a wash of body color paint (usually boxcar red) on the ends and sides of the original coupler box when I get around to installing the uncoupling lever.  I need to go back and look at the last batches of IM cars delivered before the Chinese factory collapse, for instance the 10"-0" height cars with 3-4 ends (the "postwar" car as IM calls it) to see what condition they're in.  My move is imminent so a lot of the cars are not available for inspection right now.

Now for a question.  I saw the posts about IM so longer selling parts.  But one thing I do like about IM 40' steam era boxcars is the one-piece metal roofwalk of an Apex pattern.  Has anyone ever been able to get these separately?  I had a couple that I pried off of some Burlington cars because the prototypes actually had a wood roofwalk, but I immediately used those on something else.

Ron Merrick

On 07/26/2020 1:23 PM mopacfirst <ron.merrick@...> wrote:

Here's a followup on the coupler and coupler box replacement.  

For the two cars that I completely removed the stock Intermountain coupler box, I anchored the Kadee 262 box in a manner that seems adequate.  I had some .046 brass wire (DA 2511).  Cut a length of around 3/16", just shy of 1/4".  Then I used ACC to loosely fix it in the hole remaining from the Intermountain coupler box mount into the body, not necessarily needing to be perfectly vertical.  After that cured, then I used Shoe Goo to attach the Kadee coupler box in its proper position -- the Kadee box ends up with the right location along the car centerline.  So this mount seems to be a success.

I'll note that the recent Intermountain cars seem to be painted after assembly of the body, roof and side/end details, while the underframe, brake equipment and coupler boxes seem to be unpainted black plastic on the several cars I've bought recently.  So any cars that have just had the couplers replaced with the #158, without a change of the box to the Kadee 262, will get a wash of body color paint (usually boxcar red) on the ends and sides of the original coupler box when I get around to installing the uncoupling lever.  I need to go back and look at the last batches of IM cars delivered before the Chinese factory collapse, for instance the 10"-0" height cars with 3-4 ends (the "postwar" car as IM calls it) to see what condition they're in.  My move is imminent so a lot of the cars are not available for inspection right now.

Now for a question.  I saw the posts about IM so longer selling parts.  But one thing I do like about IM 40' steam era boxcars is the one-piece metal roofwalk of an Apex pattern.  Has anyone ever been able to get these separately?  I had a couple that I pried off of some Burlington cars because the prototypes actually had a wood roofwalk, but I immediately used those on something else.

Ron Merrick

Livestock Car With Roof Hatches

The first photo on the link is (to me) very interesting as it raises several questions:

https://alchetron.com/cdn/union-stock-yards-fbd57413-559b-4587-9245-93f1c9ffec5-resize-750.jpeg

My take on the hatches is that for these particular cars the hatches were for feeding and watering the stock. But there seem to be a problem.

These are double deck cars so unless there was a way to retract the upper level the hatches would not allow feeding and watering for the lower level, or the loading of bulk commodities for non-livestock transport.

Does anyone know more about these particular cars?

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA

Livestock Car With Roof Hatches

The first photo on the link is (to me) very interesting as it raises several questions:

https://alchetron.com/cdn/union-stock-yards-fbd57413-559b-4587-9245-93f1c9ffec5-resize-750.jpeg

My take on the hatches is that for these particular cars the hatches were for feeding and watering the stock. But there seem to be a problem.

These are double deck cars so unless there was a way to retract the upper level the hatches would not allow feeding and watering for the lower level, or the loading of bulk commodities for non-livestock transport.

Does anyone know more about these particular cars?

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA