Eric what builder is PC&M ? I don't recall seeing those initials before.

Tim O'



  M-26               265000-266999        2000 cars       built 1925               PC&M
    Eric Hansmann

Yes, but the B&O M-26 ARA cars had 5 foot spacing - according to Chris Barkan,
who is (or was) something of an expert on the B&O. What do you say, Bob Witt?

To quote from Chris's email (Feb 2, 1998 to the old freightcars list)

   Classes M-26D and M-26E had the Duryea.  The RC car is going to be lettered as
   an M-26A which had the early ARA UF with 5' kingpin to striker spacing and the
   crossbearers located between the door and the body bolsters.  The M-26 and
   M-26B also had the early ARA UF.  The M-26C had the "intermediate" ARA UF with
   5'6" kingpin to striker spacing and the crossbearers located as above.

Tim O'Connor

Tim O'Connor wrote:
"The M-26 had the early ARA underframe with 5 foot from bolster kingpin to striker distance (most freight cars use 5 foot 6 inch) which places the wheels closer to the end of the car."

Actually, it's the other way around.  Class X29 had the 5 ft spacing, while most of the ARA cars had the 5 ft 6 in spacing.
http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=x29_x29a.gif&sel=box&sz=sm&fr=

If length over strikers in 42 ft 3 in, distance between kingpins is 32 ft 3 in, kingpin to striker distance is (42 ft 3 in - 32 ft 3 in)/2 = 5 ft

 

Jared Harper asked:

"I did go to the archives and saw the P&LE reference.  But I guess I am wondering if these could be used to model the ATSF USRA rebuilds?  I have been trying to get hold of the RPC #24 that is supposed to cover rebuilds but cannot find one."

No.  Do not fall into Atlas' trap that all rebuilt boxcars are alike (which is how we got their crappy model). Compared to the prototype ATSF USRA DS rebuilds, the Tichy model is too short in height, has the wrong sides (model has 8 panel vs 10 panel of the prototype), ends (1/5/5/5 vs 2/5/5/5), and underframe (SS vs the fishbelly DS underframe).

With the Sunshine Models kits out of production, your best bet is to go all the way back to Martin Lofton's original approach in his RMC articles - start with a prewar AAR boxcar kit, and graft on new ends, underframe, and sidesills.  More recently, a Cocoa Beach Shake 'n Take project followed this approach.

Ben Hom   

Tim O'Connor wrote:
"The M-26 had the early ARA underframe with 5 foot from bolster kingpin to striker distance (most freight cars use 5 foot 6 inch) which places the wheels closer to the end of the car."

Actually, it's the other way around.  Class X29 had the 5 ft spacing, while most of the ARA cars had the 5 ft 6 in spacing.
http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=x29_x29a.gif&sel=box&sz=sm&fr=

If length over strikers in 42 ft 3 in, distance between kingpins is 32 ft 3 in, kingpin to striker distance is (42 ft 3 in - 32 ft 3 in)/2 = 5 ft

 

I respectfully yield to Dennis’ superior explanation. However, to Mr. Townsend’s suggestion: Perhaps with some fairly substantial overspray? I would suggest that it was probably brush applied, and none too neatly, for that matter.

Schuyler

---In STMFC@..., wrote :

Interesting, Bob. I’d speculate that the dark area around the ribs is condensation. The ribs are exposed to the cold inside the reefer, and are comparatively cool on the exterior...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/railphotoart/25558915051/sizes/k/
======================

Interesting speculation, Schuyler, but one problem... Since the SRECo panel roofs don't use carlines, there is nothing under the "rib" that penetrates any deeper into the insulation than the rest of the roof, therefore no reason for the ribs to be colder. The carline structure is replaced in these roofs by the combination of the upstanding flange on each edge of the roof panel, riveted to the U shaped pressed steel seam cap. Because of the rivet penetrations on the sides of the seam caps, some roads specified car cement on the seam caps to try to head off any leaks. To me the photo appears to show an additional application of fresh car cement on an older roof.

Perhaps Tony can comment on PFE's roof maintenance practices.

Dennis Storzek

 

Thanks Dan.

I've never really understood the terminology - "built up"?

I know some cars had Bettendorf underframes (single beam), while
others had twin-beam center sills with two different styles of
cross bearers, yes?

But what is meant by "built up"?

Tim

Tim O'Connor wrote:
My only question is - is the reefer an R-30-21, or an R-40-21 ?

 All that is certain from the photo is that this car has a built up under frame. The car can be
 either a 30 or 40 ton frame. Without being able to see the side info clearly, tonnage can't
 be determined but that is largely irrelevant. Only that the car has a built up under frame is
 important.

 I have copies of all the relevant car cards from CSRM. Few from the -18/19/21 class cars
 exist. Haven't dug them out to see if this car is there but I highly doubt it.

 Dan Smith

https://www.flickr.com/photos/railphotoart/24148138943/sizes/k/

Caption: Eastbound Toledo, Peoria and Western Railway local no. 24 crosses frozen creek near Fairbury, Illinois, in February 1960. Photograph by J. Parker Lamb 2015, Center for Railroad Photography and Art. Lamb-01-065-03

Is this an early X-29 clone?

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA