Date   

Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Richard Hendrickson
 

On May 22, 2014, at 5:11 AM, Don Valentine riverman_vt@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Jeepers folks,
  I undertook the Cudahy project to obtain a few of these unique Atlas cars painted as I wished to have them painted and found a few friends were interested in them as well.  It was not my intent to commence a ruckus on the STMFC. Since questions have arisen, however, perhaps someone can answer a few for me. Tony and Richard have mentioned that others, apparently subsequent to the 1925 Cudahy cars, constructed cars having only four hinges per side. I gather this was largely found with cars constructed by North American Car.

No, Don, read my e-mail again.  In the 1920s reefers, both 36’ and 40’ with four large door hinges per side, were virtually a trademark of the Pressed Steel Car Corp., which built many cars for North American but also built many others for other owners.  North American did not build their own cars.

BUT, did any other shipper have cars that actually duplicate the #5500 series of Cudahy cars? These are the cars I was specifically refering to when commenting that in my earlier years of meat reefer research I was never able to find duplicates of. By "duplicate" I mean have VERY similar dimensions, capacity, appeareance and such.

It depends on what you mean by “duplicate.”  Exact copies?  Not that I know of.   However, the Atlas model certainly isn’t an EXACT copy of the Cudahy 5501-5600 series either.  Dimensional comparisons are hard to make because North American omitted external dimensions from its ORER listings, but in comparing photos the chief differences in appearance were that the PSC cars had ladders rather than separate grab irons and slightly different side sill details.  

I believe I have seen one North American constructed car that had only four hinges oer side but, IIRC, it did not look at all like the Cudahy cars and had what I reefer to as the North American trademark of the wood sheathing extending so far below the doors that they looked to be much higher than they actually were. The car side of many North American meat reefers really presents an optical illusion in that respect.

Don, you’re confused here.  Beginning in the mid-1930s, North American did have a group of refrigerator cars with the side sheathing feature you describe but they had six hinges per side and were rebuilt from former live poultry cars.  These are not the ‘20s PSC cars to which Tony and I are referring and which are shown in many photos in the Billboard Refrigerator Car book.    You really need to depend less on your memory and more on factual research.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Richard Hendrickson
 

On May 22, 2014, at 7:17 AM, destorzek@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

I was just involved in this discussion on another forum a couple months ago, and what I wrote there is equally applicable here:

I think you are missing the point. As the regulations stood as of 1934, the railroad was obligated to supply a car for the shipper's load. If the shipper supplied the car (either via direct ownership or through long term lease) the railroad was obligated to pay the shipper a mileage rate for it's use. So, the railroads were paying for the privilege of hauling the shipper's ads around.

But as I understand it, this wasn't the underlying issue. The railroads didn't like the private lease fleets, because they were obligated to maintain a fleet of cars which were only used during peak traffic flows, meanwhile they were obligated to pay mileage to use the shipper's cars while their own fleet sat. So, they were trying all and any tactic to discourage the use of private cars; the advertising issue was just one of many.

Further, the ICC didn't prohibit the shipper from painting whatever they wanted on their cars, they were, after all, the shipper's property. The ICC simply ruled that the railroads did not have to accept a load in a car that carried advertising, which, of course, had exactly the same effect. It had an even more drastic effect, in that what shipper was going to risk painting their logo on the car (which was still allowable) and have a railroad refuse the car? Sure, the shipper could then complain to the ICC, but that would take months, while the shipper's load rotted in his car, possibly on an interchange track hundreds of miles from the shipper's plant. The end result was that over the course of four years, the reefer fleet became very plain looking indeed.

While as far as I know the same regulation was still in effect until the whole regulatory structure was revised by the Staggers Act of 1980, after WWII ended it appears that some common sense tempered the railroad's attitude, and colorful business logos became common once again, but never again did a business paint a whole list of their products on their freight cars.

Thanks for this admirably accurate and succinct statement of the facts, Dennis, though i suppose there are still STMFC subscribers who will dismiss it as nothing more than “roundhouse rumor."

Richard Hendrickson



Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Chuck Cover
 

List,

I thought that attacks on individuals were not allowed. I am new to this group and so far I am not impressed at the tone of the discussions.

Chuck Cover
Santa Fe, NM


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Richard Hendrickson
 

On May 22, 2014, at 2:30 AM, 'caboose9792@...' caboose9792@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Tony, i sujest you actualy read the ruling rather than repeating roundhouse rumor. Mel is corect the prohibatation only appled to some situations and was not a blanket ban. Cars such as meat reefers returned empty to the leasor so there was no conflict. 

However, starting in 1929 the national economic downturn made extravagant expendatures a luxery. Ironicly there is a billboard tankcar accross the street from my office, someone call the railfan police!

Roundhouse rumor?  Aside from having a malfunctioning spell checker and a sizable chip on his shoulder, Mark Rickert simply doesn’t know wheat he’s talking about here.  Tony has not only read the entire ICC report but included the Railway Age summary of that report, which quotes the resultant rules verbatim, as Appendix 2 in the book on Billboard Refrigerator Cars written by myself and Ed Kaminski and published by Signature Press, the publishing house in which Tony is a partner.  The practical effect of that ruling was exactly as described by Dennis Storzek.  With regard to the disappearance of billboard advertising on refrigerator cars, the economic effects of the Great Depression were entirely irrelevant.  This has all been extensively documented and the facts are readily available to anyone with even the most modest research skills, which Mark apparently either lacks or chooses not to employ. 

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

destorzek@...
 

I was just involved in this discussion on another forum a couple months ago, and what I wrote there is equally applicable here:

I think you are missing the point. As the regulations stood as of 1934, the railroad was obligated to supply a car for the shipper's load. If the shipper supplied the car (either via direct ownership or through long term lease) the railroad was obligated to pay the shipper a mileage rate for it's use. So, the railroads were paying for the privilege of hauling the shipper's ads around.

But as I understand it, this wasn't the underlying issue. The railroads didn't like the private lease fleets, because they were obligated to maintain a fleet of cars which were only used during peak traffic flows, meanwhile they were obligated to pay mileage to use the shipper's cars while their own fleet sat. So, they were trying all and any tactic to discourage the use of private cars; the advertising issue was just one of many.

Further, the ICC didn't prohibit the shipper from painting whatever they wanted on their cars, they were, after all, the shipper's property. The ICC simply ruled that the railroads did not have to accept a load in a car that carried advertising, which, of course, had exactly the same effect. It had an even more drastic effect, in that what shipper was going to risk painting their logo on the car (which was still allowable) and have a railroad refuse the car? Sure, the shipper could then complain to the ICC, but that would take months, while the shipper's load rotted in his car, possibly on an interchange track hundreds of miles from the shipper's plant. The end result was that over the course of four years, the reefer fleet became very plain looking indeed.

While as far as I know the same regulation was still in effect until the whole regulatory structure was revised by the Staggers Act of 1980, after WWII ended it appears that some common sense tempered the railroad's attitude, and colorful business logos became common once again, but never again did a business paint a whole list of their products on their freightcars.

Dennis Storzek


Re: General American tank car parts from Tangent Scale Models

al_brown03
 

Pending the moderators’ approval, I’ve posted three in-progress photos in Doug Harding’s album entitled “Tangent Tank Car”. To repeat, I’m building the kit, and what a pleasure. The following details were added:


(1)    The two little pipes that connect the brake reservoir and the AB valve. One pipe was run directly between the points it connects, on a slight diagonal; the other was run vertically, to clear the retainer line, with a sideways jog at the bottom. Photo 3606 is a view from underneath.


(2)    Speaking of retainers, a Tichy valve was mounted on a styrene bracket on the inside of the end running board, behind the handbrake. The location is shown in the GATC ad mentioned, which is re-printed in TS CYC 71, pp 300-301. Photo 3596 is a topside view.


(3)    The kit’s handrails and stanchions are a single molded part, beautiful and delicate. The second time I broke it :-( , I replaced it with Precision Scale stanchions and handrails of .015” PB wire, joined with plastic tubing .016” ID (smallparts.com).


(4)    The bleed rod was modeled somewhat impressionistically. (I decided to add it after the AB valve and tank were already in place, which isn’t the easiest order.) Small brackets of styrene angle were drilled #79 to accept the rod, and one bracket was mounted under the running board on each side. The rod consists of segments of .010” wire, one from each side to the AB valve. (The wire should be .006”: see Gene Green’s article on freight-car underbody details, in the files section. I chose .010” as a compromise between appearance and durability.) The bleed rod is visible in photo 3606 running top to bottom; its left end and bracket appear in photo 3596, in front of the brake reservoir; and the right end and bracket appear in photo 3601, under the placard board. I didn’t try to model the actual attachment to the AB valve: I just jammed the rod segments under the valve <sirens wail>.


Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.


Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Don Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
 

Jeepers folks,
 
      I undertook the Cudahy project to obtain a few of these unique Atlas cars painted as I wished to have them painted and found a few friends were interested in them as well.  It was not my intent to commence a ruckus on the STMFC. Since questions have arisen, however, perhaps someone can answer a few for me. Tony and Richard have mentioned that others, apparently subsequent to the 1925 Cudahy cars, constructed cars having only four hinges per side. I gather this was largely found with cars constructed by North American Car. BUT, did any other shipper have cars that actually duplicate the #5500 series of Cudahy cars? These are the cars I was specifically refering to when commenting that in my earlier years of meat reefer research I was never able to find duplicates of. By "duplicate" I mean have VERY similar dimensions, capacity, appeareance and such. I believe I have seen one North American constructed car that had only four hinges oer side but, IIRC, it did not look at all like the Cudahy cars and had what I reefer to as the North American trademark of the wood sheathing extending so far below the doors that they looked to be much higher than they actually were. The car side of many North American meat reefers really presents an optical illusion in that respect.
Again IIRC, Hormel had a number of such cars. Do, again, my principal question is did anyone have any cars that actually duplicated the #5500 series Cudahy cars?
 
Thank you, Don Valentine


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

caboose9792@aol.com <caboose9792@...>
 

Tony, i sujest you actualy read the ruling rather than repeating roundhouse rumor. Mel is corect the prohibatation only appled to some situations and was not a blanket ban. Cars such as meat reefers returned empty to the leasor so there was no conflict.

However, starting in 1929 the national economic downturn made extravagant expendatures a luxery. Ironicly there is a billboard tankcar accross the street from my office, someone call the railfan police!

mark rickert (who says look on tracks 42 & 43 at irm for some post ruling examples)
Sent with Verizon Mobile Email

---Original Message---
From: STMFC@...
Sent: 5/22/2014 2:22 am
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

mark rickert wrote:> As long as the car was owned and used by cudahy why would the "ban" effect them? Sure the issue with the simple paint had more to do with the eccononic situation in the 1930's?> Mark, I can see you are entirely unaware of the history. In fact, the ICC undertook to regulate the use of privately owned reefers, one VERY minor part of which was the advertising provided gratis to lessees, which was banned on new or repainted cars after 1934 and on all cars in service after 1938. It had nothing whatever to do with the Depression itself.Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, tony@... of books on railroad history


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

clipper841@att.net <clipper841@...>
 

sorry to ease drop:
but there was an exception to the rule, it being, that as long  as the owner was the actual shipper,
then the billboard, of course,was allowed, however the car could not be used by anyone else,
 the the shipper became responsible for the return of the freight car charges,
which meant, in essence, that the shipper had to pay the rr's for the return freight , charges, which
quickly became cost prohibited, that's why very few cars after 1934, had billboard, simply because
the shipper's couldn't afford to pay the railroads the return charges, check out billboard
by kaminski, or mm, had an explanation also, in the late 80's/early 90's
mel perry

On May 21, 2014, at 11:55 PM, 'caboose9792@...' caboose9792@... [STMFC] wrote:

 

As long as the car was owned and used by cudahy why would the "ban" effect them? Sure the issue with the simple paint had more to do with the eccononic situation in the 1930's?

mark rickert
Sent with Verizon Mobile Email

---Original Message---
From: STMFC@...
Sent: 5/21/2014 8:43 pm
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Everyone, the photo Don is using to verify the P/L scheme for the Cudahyreefer was taken by the Fairmont Railway Motors Company, probably todemonstrate their Tri-Sorb rubber spring block. They offered the Tri-Sorbbeginning in 1935 to 1938, when Goodyear took over the spring block. As acompany photo I figure it was taken in 1935. So the scheme is a pre WWII P/Lscheme, but after the 1934 ICC ban on billboard lettering on freight cars.No doubt this is the standard P/L scheme Cudahy used to comply with the newlaw, replacing the Dutch Cleanser and other Cudahy paint schemes, whichlasted well past the date of this list. Doug Hardingwww.iowacentralrr.org



Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Tony Thompson
 

mark rickert wrote:

As long as the car was owned and used by cudahy why would the "ban" effect them? Sure the issue with the simple paint had more to do with the eccononic situation in the 1930's?

     Mark, I can see you are entirely unaware of the history. In fact, the ICC undertook to regulate the use of privately owned reefers, one VERY minor part of which was the advertising provided gratis to lessees, which was banned on new or repainted cars after 1934 and on all cars in service after 1938. It had nothing whatever to do with the Depression itself.

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, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

caboose9792@aol.com <caboose9792@...>
 

As long as the car was owned and used by cudahy why would the "ban" effect them? Sure the issue with the simple paint had more to do with the eccononic situation in the 1930's?

mark rickert
Sent with Verizon Mobile Email

---Original Message---
From: STMFC@...
Sent: 5/21/2014 8:43 pm
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Everyone, the photo Don is using to verify the P/L scheme for the Cudahyreefer was taken by the Fairmont Railway Motors Company, probably todemonstrate their Tri-Sorb rubber spring block. They offered the Tri-Sorbbeginning in 1935 to 1938, when Goodyear took over the spring block. As acompany photo I figure it was taken in 1935. So the scheme is a pre WWII P/Lscheme, but after the 1934 ICC ban on billboard lettering on freight cars.No doubt this is the standard P/L scheme Cudahy used to comply with the newlaw, replacing the Dutch Cleanser and other Cudahy paint schemes, whichlasted well past the date of this list. Doug Hardingwww.iowacentralrr.org


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Douglas Harding
 

Everyone, the photo Don is using to verify the P/L scheme for the Cudahy reefer was taken by the Fairmont Railway Motors Company, probably to demonstrate their Tri-Sorb rubber spring block. They offered the Tri-Sorb beginning in 1935 to 1938, when Goodyear took over the spring block. As a company photo I figure it was taken in 1935. So the scheme is a pre WWII P/L scheme, but after the 1934 ICC ban on billboard lettering on freight cars. No doubt this is the standard P/L scheme Cudahy used to comply with the new law, replacing the Dutch Cleanser and other Cudahy paint schemes, which lasted well past the date of this list.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Richard Hendrickson
 

On May 21, 2014, at 1:08 PM, Don Valentine riverman_vt@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...> wrote:

Hi folks,
  Some have asked about colors and such of the special run of Cudahy meat reefers New England Rail is having done by Atlas so I'll respond to everyone here. The car sides are reefer yellow with a brown roof and ends. Lettering on the sides is black while that on the ends is white.  A pkhoto of teh prototype can be found in Doug Harding's photo section. When first introduced in 2003 Atlas offered the car in two different Cudahy billboard paint designs but have never gone any further with Cudahy paint. Thus this will be the first time the car has been offered in the standard Cudahy post WW II paint design, which was simply the colors stated and simple lettering in black on the car sides much like most other packers in the postwar years. The car, as least when first constructed in 1925, was built specifically for Cudahy and is a standout with its 36 ft. length and the odd use of only four door hinges per side rather than the usual six. In twenty years of researching meat reefers I have never found any other packer that used these cars. Thus I wonder if any of the other paint and lettering designs Atlas has used on this model are really accurate. I'd be interested in learning of other possible users of this same basic car with the four hinges per side.

Don, obviously your research didn’t extend to the Billboard Refrigerator Car book by myself and Ed Kaminski, published by (and still available from) Signature Press.  In that book there are three photos of Cudahy four hinge-per-side 36’ reefers and MANY photos - far too many to list - of similar cars, both 36’ and 40’, owned by other car lines.  In the book, it is pointed out that these cars ,with four large hinges per side instead of the more usual six, were built by the hundreds to standard designs of the Pressed Steel Car Co.

Richard Hendrickson



Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Tony Thompson
 

Don Valentine wrote:

 The car, as least when first constructed in 1925, was built specifically for Cudahy and is a standout with its 36 ft. length and the odd use of only four door hinges per side rather than the usual six. In twenty years of researching meat reefers I have never found any other packer that used these cars. 

      Then you should look into Richard Hendrickson and Ed Kaminski's book on _Billboard Refrigerator Cars_ and you will find pages and pages of four-hinge cars in the chapter devoted to North American (NADX) cars.

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, tony@...
Publishers of books on railroad history





Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Nelson Moyer <ku0a@...>
 

Don,

 

I have Gene Green’s book, Refrigerator Car Color Guide published by Morning Sun, and it contains color photos of five Cudahy meet reefers taken between 1957-1961. These are all post-war cars with road numbers 5802, 6057, 6067, 6270, and 6766. All of these cars have six door hinges per side. I’ve never seen a color photo of a prototype Cudahy reefer with four door hinges per side. Could you share some with the group?

 

Nelson Moyer

 

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 3:09 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

 

 

Hi folks,

 

     Some have asked about colors and such of the special run of Cudahy meat reefers New England Rail is having done by Atlas so I'll respond to everyone here. The car sides are reefer yellow with a brown roof and ends. Lettering on the sides is black while that on the ends is white.  A pkhoto of teh prototype can be found in Doug Harding's photo section. When first introduced in 2003 Atlas offered the car in two different Cudahy billboard paint designs but have never gone any further with Cudahy paint. Thus this will be the first time the car has been offered in the standard Cudahy post WW II paint design, which was simply the colors stated and simple lettering in black on the car sides much like most other packers in the postwar years. The car, as least when first constructed in 1925, was built specifically for Cudahy and is a standout with its 36 ft. length and the odd use of only four door hinges per side rather than the usual six. In twenty years of researching meat reefers I have never found any other packer that used these cars. Thus I wonder if any of the other paint and lettering designs Atlas has used on this model are really accurate. I'd be interested in learning of other possible users of this same basic car with the four hinges per side. 

 

      In any case, thank you to those of you who have taken advantage of our pre-production pricing, The deposit has been sent to Atlas, a sample car is expected about 1 August and the completed cars are expected in November. For those who still wish to take advantage of our pre-production pricing the cost is $34 per car plus $5 shipping for one car of $8 for two for all orders postmarked not later than 31 May. Thereafter the cars will be $45 each. Two car numbers are being produced, with one car number ending with a "3" and the other a "6" so that they might be easily changed to an "8" or a "0" for those who want more than two car numbers.  

 

    Again, my thanks to those who have already ordered their Cudahy meat reefer(s).

 

Cordially, Don Valentine

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3950/7537 - Release Date: 05/21/14


Re: Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

MDelvec952
 




-----Original Message-----
From: Don Valentine riverman_vt@... [STMFC]
To: STMFC
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 8:33 pm
Subject: [STMFC] Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

 
Hi folks,
 
     Some have asked about colors and such of the special run of Cudahy meat reefers New England Rail is having done by Atlas so I'll respond to everyone here. The car sides are reefer yellow with a brown roof and ends. Lettering on the sides is black while that on the ends is white.  A pkhoto of teh prototype can be found in Doug Harding's photo section. When first introduced in 2003 Atlas offered the car in two different Cudahy billboard paint designs but have never gone any further with Cudahy paint. Thus this will be the first time the car has been offered in the standard Cudahy post WW II paint design, which was simply the colors stated and simple lettering in black on the car sides much like most other packers in the postwar years. The car, as least when first constructed in 1925, was built specifically for Cudahy and is a standout with its 36 ft. length and the odd use of only four door hinges per side rather than the usual six. In twenty years of researching meat reefers I have never found any other packer that used these cars. Thus I wonder if any of the other paint and lettering designs Atlas has used on this model are really accurate. I'd be interested in learning of other possible users of this same basic car with the four hinges per side. 
 
      In any case, thank you to those of you who have taken advantage of our pre-production pricing, The deposit has been sent to Atlas, a sample car is expected about 1 August and the completed cars are expected in November. For those who still wish to take advantage of our pre-production pricing the cost is $34 per car plus $5 shipping for one car of $8 for two for all orders postmarked not later than 31 May. Thereafter the cars will be $45 each. Two car numbers are being produced, with one car number ending with a "3" and the other a "6" so that they might be easily changed to an "8" or a "0" for those who want more than two car numbers.  
 
    Again, my thanks to those who have already ordered their Cudahy meat reefer(s).
 
Cordially, Don Valentine


Re: New file uploaded to STMFC

thecitrusbelt@...
 

I copied the link and pasted it into my browser...and it worked.


I have found the same problem you experienced with links that will not work on other Yahoo groups since the change to Neo.


On the other hand, the files of some groups are not accessible unless you are a member of those groups and are signed in.


Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Re: thanks for posting

Charlie Duckworth
 

Logged into ebay expecting a notice or message on their site to change my password but there's nothing.  Pretty strange way of doing business.  Thanks for the information.

Charlie Duckworth


Re: Wheelset and coupler choices.

davesnyder59
 

Not sure if everyone doesn't already know, but there is a relatively new Yahoo Group for Sergent couplers. I have been using them for probably ten years or so, but I have learned a new trick or two from the site and new things keep coming. Here is the link.

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SergentEng/conversations/messages

 




Dave Snyder
Louisville, Ky.


Impending Cudahy meat reefers.

Don Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
 

Hi folks,
 
     Some have asked about colors and such of the special run of Cudahy meat reefers New England Rail is having done by Atlas so I'll respond to everyone here. The car sides are reefer yellow with a brown roof and ends. Lettering on the sides is black while that on the ends is white.  A pkhoto of teh prototype can be found in Doug Harding's photo section. When first introduced in 2003 Atlas offered the car in two different Cudahy billboard paint designs but have never gone any further with Cudahy paint. Thus this will be the first time the car has been offered in the standard Cudahy post WW II paint design, which was simply the colors stated and simple lettering in black on the car sides much like most other packers in the postwar years. The car, as least when first constructed in 1925, was built specifically for Cudahy and is a standout with its 36 ft. length and the odd use of only four door hinges per side rather than the usual six. In twenty years of researching meat reefers I have never found any other packer that used these cars. Thus I wonder if any of the other paint and lettering designs Atlas has used on this model are really accurate. I'd be interested in learning of other possible users of this same basic car with the four hinges per side. 
 
      In any case, thank you to those of you who have taken advantage of our pre-production pricing, The deposit has been sent to Atlas, a sample car is expected about 1 August and the completed cars are expected in November. For those who still wish to take advantage of our pre-production pricing the cost is $34 per car plus $5 shipping for one car of $8 for two for all orders postmarked not later than 31 May. Thereafter the cars will be $45 each. Two car numbers are being produced, with one car number ending with a "3" and the other a "6" so that they might be easily changed to an "8" or a "0" for those who want more than two car numbers.  
 
    Again, my thanks to those who have already ordered their Cudahy meat reefer(s).
 
Cordially, Don Valentine

69981 - 70000 of 194600