main@RealSTMFC.groups.io

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Expanded

Topics Messages Polls

Between

and

Re: T&P box car

Thomas Baker

#130448

Ron,

Thank you. In the drawing from the company equipment book, the panels appear to be welded as are some plug-door cars updated with diagonal paneled roofs and IDEs. This bit of news will make my project a bit more difficult, although still doable.

Tom Baker

Show quoted text

From: STMFC@... on behalf of ron.merrick@... [STMFC]
Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 11:32 AM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: T&P box car

The 40' boxcars that these were rebuilt from had 5 panel riveted sides.

Ron Merrick

Re: Prototype Rails a Week from today!

BRIAN PAUL EHNI

#130447

Wish I were able to come. Retirement in 4 years. Can¹t wait!

Thanks!
--

Brian Ehni

From:  STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Reply-To:  STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Date:  Thursday, January 1, 2015 at 11:29 AM
To:  STMFC List <STMFC@...>
Subject:  [STMFC] Prototype Rails a Week from today!

After making a couple of photos for what I thought was my finished
presentation I am cutting up raw veggies for my lunch salad and realized PR
at the Beach starts a week from today. Glad I am prepared because things can
creep up quickly, Wow!

Bill Welch

Re: Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

Bill Welch

#130446

Yes I am aware there variations. When possible I like the most common or ubiquitous.

Bill Welch

Prototype Rails a Week from today!

Bill Welch

#130445

After making a couple of photos for what I thought was my finished presentation I am cutting up raw veggies for my lunch salad and realized PR at the Beach starts a week from today. Glad I am prepared because things can creep up quickly, Wow!

Bill Welch

Re: T&P box car

mopacfirst

#130444

The 40' boxcars that these were rebuilt from had 5 panel riveted sides.

Ron Merrick

Re: Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

James F. Brewer <jfbrewer@...>

#130457

All,

A discussion near and dear to my heart. When I was operating as Pocahontas Models, I was able to produce the B-4 in both versions as described elsewhere in this thread by David Thompson.

I obtained the general arrangement drawings and detail drawings for the NWHS for the B-5, with the intent to produce both; unfortunately I was never able to produce the B-5; I did, however, hand off the complete package of drawings to another purveyor of resin.

I might add that I enjoy the recent discussion of N&W freight equipment on this list. IIRC, except for the 800 USRA single sheathed boxcars, N&W Class BK, most, if not all. of their freight equipment was designed in house; it is not until the mid-1950's with the purchase of PS-1 boxcars and some small 2-bay covered hoppers that N&W purchased "standard design" freight equipment.

The NWHS archives contains thousands of drawings of freight equipment. In reviewing some of these materials at the archives I noted that some, such as roof drawings and truck drawings, were tracings of the original manufacturers drawing; the archives can be searched on-line at www.nwhs.org.

Happy hunting and happy new year to all.

Jim Brewer

Glenwood MD

Show quoted text

From: "fgexbill@... [STMFC]"
To: "STMFC"
Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 8:47:31 AM
Subject: [STMFC] Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

I found the recent discussions of the two N&W boxcars interesting, even though they do not come close IMO to the most interesting 40-ft Boxcar owned be the coal-hauling N&W, namely their B5. If the 1937 AAR boxcar is a thing of Beauty, the B-5 is an ugly homely Beast, albeit charming too. Here is a link to a photo from the NMRA online Archive: Photographs


			Photographs
			View on archive.nmra.org	Preview by Yahoo

Heavily riveted drop side sill; four riveted steel panels on each side of the door; 10-rung side-ladders; unique N&W roof (I think) also seen on their longer similar 50-ft B-4 the B-5 is impossible to confuse with any other car of the era. A great candidate for resin.

Bill Welch

Re: Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

David

#130443

Ah, but which version would you like? First group was 49500-49999; flat roof, 5-4 Dreadnaught ends, and the last 50 had Superior doors. 48000-48999 had Murphy rp roofs, 5-5 Dreadnaught ends, and Youngstown doors.

49999:
https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19398
https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19397
https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19401

48000:
https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19393
https://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19395

The 50-ft double-door B-4s were also built both ways.

52350 (note the different ladders):
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/F1/NS3242.JPG

52400:
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/F1/NS3244.JPG
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19399
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19389

52645:
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19386
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=19385

Pocahontas Models did this one.

David Thompson

Re: Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

Benjamin Hom

#130441

Bill Welch wrote:
"I found the recent discussions of the two N&W boxcars interesting, even though they do not come close IMO to the most interesting 40-ft Boxcar owned be the coal-hauling N&W, namely their B5. If the 1937 AAR boxcar is a thing of Beauty, the B-5 is an ugly homely Beast, albeit charming too."

More photos from the Virginia Tech Norfolk Southern collection:
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/NS2909.jpeg
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/NS2910.jpeg
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/NS2911.jpeg
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/NS2912.jpeg


Ben Hom

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Carl Gustafson

#130440

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 11:50:40PM -0500, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:

 It's the first I've heard of them Carl. Are they a new item?
No, they've been around for some years, almost as long as the "compatible shank". On the Sergent 
Engineering site, they're listed as "narrow shank", and billed as having a scale width box. I bought a 
bunch a while ago (144 to be exact, and assemble a handful when needed), and they're about the width 
of a "typical" centersill.

Carl "Narrow minded" Gustafson

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Craig Zeni

#130439

On Jan 1, 2015, at 3:17 AM, STMFC@... wrote:

3a. Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General
   Posted by: "Schuyler Larrabee" schuyler.larrabee@... angus502001
   Date: Wed Dec 31, 2014 1:32 pm ((PST))

Kadee also sold 78's assembled in the draft gear box.  Regrettably (IMHO)
they have dropped these from their line.  I have one left, and have cut off
most of the card that they were sold on, retaining only the bubble from the
bubble pack, trying to save space in my coupler drawer.



The EXTERIOR dimension of the box is 0.245" wide, 0.148" deep, by 0.450 from
the back of the coupler box face to the back end.  The bottom side of the
box has two longitudinal ribs, one either side, and the NET depth of the box
exterior is 0.110".  The ribs are, therefore, 0.038" deep.  The INTERIOR is
approximately 0.060" deep, by 0.185" wide, by ~0.390 longitudinally.  It's
hard to measure the interior side without disassembling the box, which I am
loath to do.I have a stash of 78s...I do like them.  But...

The #262 box is the replacement for the #78...it uses their standard whisker shank couplers and has the same external dimensions of the 78.  The major difference is that the 262 box will take a 2-56 screw in the center position.  The illustration on the Kadee site for the 262 is not what the box looks like; the 178 page shows the right box...I think.  Been a while since I ordered but I usually call them to order and double check anyway.

These also had a small loop on the back of the box, because they were molded
in a slippery black plastic, and really required two screws to keep in
alignment.



I really liked these couplers and missed the announcement (if there was one)
that they were being discontinued, or I'd have bought a LOT of them.Yep, you missed it :)

And you also commented on the SC&F draft gear...easy fix recommended by Gene Fusco late of Railyard "Out Of Our Era" Models who also set up his models for the 78...the pivot post in the draft gear has a point on the back.  Trim back and round the point.  Assemble.

Craig Zeni
Cary NC

Arguably the most interesting N&W 40-ft Boxcar

Bill Welch

#130438


			Photographs
			View on archive.nmra.org	Preview by Yahoo

Bill Welch

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Scaler164@...

#130442

The Sergent Engineering boxes are not a Sergent product - they are the Accurail boxes sold with the Sergent couplers.

John Degnan

Show quoted text

From: "Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC]"
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 11:50:40 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

It's the first I've heard of them Carl. Are they a new item?

What about the Sergent Engineering scale width boxes? Not strictly Kaydee compatible, but narrower.
Carl "Corporal Engineering" Gustafson

------------------------------------
Posted by: Tim O'Connor
------------------------------------

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
STMFC-digest@...
STMFC-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STMFC-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

North Model Railroad Supplies <nmrs@...>

#130437

Hard to imagine that the X2f was even mentioned in this thread. What an
enormous error in judgment those couplers were!
Schuyler

Followed by astute judgment by the NMRA NOT to adopt them.

Dave North

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Jon Miller <atsfus@...>

#130436

On 12/31/2014 8:50 PM, Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC] wrote:

It's the first I've heard of them Carl. Are they a new item?


What about the Sergent Engineering scale width boxes? Not strictly Kaydee compatible, but narrower.
Carl "Corporal Engineering" Gustafson

Their site says;
highly prototypical Accurail^® PROTO HO scale size draft gear boxes

-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax--Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Tim O'Connor

#130435

It's the first I've heard of them Carl. Are they a new item?


What about the Sergent Engineering scale width boxes? Not strictly Kaydee compatible, but narrower.
Carl "Corporal Engineering" Gustafson

T&P box car

Thomas Baker

#130434

Group:

I just dug out my data on T&P plug-door box cars 3000 and 3001, rebuilt from cars 41429 and 41438. From the drawing I have, I cannot determine whether the cars had welded sides or riveted sides. Anyone have additional information on these two cars?

Tom Baker

Re: (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

Schleigh Mike

#130433

Schuyler Larrabee wrote,

Kadee also sold 78’s assembled in the draft gear box. Regrettably (IMHO) they have dropped these from their line. I have one left, and have cut off most of the card that they were sold on, retaining only the bubble from the bubble pack, trying to save space in my coupler drawer.

in the associated discussions. While it is true that Kadee has discontinued their #78 "scale" coupler & draft gear box, they have replaced it with an externally identical offering, the #178. The difference is the new product has a "whisker" spring design while the old used a captured coil spring. The only possible major problem this presents is for SC&F resin tank cars which used the coil spring coupler in their own draft gear housing. Perhaps someday Jon Cagel will have to find another way to do this unless he stocked up a lifetime's worth of the #78's interiors.

If you liked the #78, the #178 should be okay too. It does not have the slack run-out effect (coil compression) which may or not be for some a worthwhile feature,

Regards for a Happy New Year and lots more modeling fun! Mike Schleigh

On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 4:32 PM, "'Schuyler Larrabee' schuyler.larrabee@... [STMFC]" wrote:

The EXTERIOR dimension of the box is 0.245” wide, 0.148” deep, by 0.450 from the back of the coupler box face to the back end. The bottom side of the box has two longitudinal ribs, one either side, and the NET depth of the box exterior is 0.110”. The ribs are, therefore, 0.038” deep. The INTERIOR is approximately 0.060” deep, by 0.185” wide, by ~0.390 longitudinally. It’s hard to measure the interior side without disassembling the box, which I am loath to do.

These also had a small loop on the back of the box, because they were molded in a slippery black plastic, and really required two screws to keep in alignment.

I really liked these couplers and missed the announcement (if there was one) that they were being discontinued, or I’d have bought a LOT of them.

So if you are looking for the “Standard HO box,” the NMRA standards cited will take care of that. If you are seeking box sizes that will work that are much closer to scale, I think that’s where the Kadee 78 or the Accurail scale box are in the right neighborhood. I’d also say that while Accurail’s coupler and the Sergeant are appealing, Kadees are so much the standard coupler of the vast majority of modelers, scale adherents or not, that any new box should accommodate them.

Hard to imagine that the X2f was even mentioned in this thread. What an enormous error in judgment those couplers were!

Schuyler

Show quoted text

From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 1:43 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] (HO) Draft Gear Pockets... In General

John

In HO scale the closest-to-scale-width pocket that I'm aware, available as
a detail part, is the Accurail "semi-scale" coupler pocket. It only accepts
Accurail's coupler, which definitely limits the appeal.

Other attempts to produce Kadee-compatible detail parts are from Moloco and
Details West. These will accept the Kadee Whisker couplers as well as Sergent
couplers, which are the most realistic HO couplers and which operate in a
very similar manner to prototype couplers, using a ball & magnet in place of
a pin & lifting lever.

The Kadee 262 is a nice part, with a slight flare at the end, and is designed
for the Kadee Whisker couplers only.

Finally Railyard Models produced near-to-scale pockets for his resin freight
car kits, which accept the Kadee #78 shank semi-scale couplers. The Kadee #78
itself originally was designed for their PS-1 box car and has a clumsy box,
but Kadee later sold the #78 couplers in bulk by themselves without the box.

Tim O'Connor

This info is requested for a detail part project I'm working on...

Is there such a thing as a "common" dimensional WIDTH of draft gear pockets on models (both cast-on and add-on types)? Does the width of a Kadee # 232 draft gear box represent the 'norm', or do they vary widely and/or wildly? I know that a lot of the newer manufacturers over the last 10 years have taken to narrowing these boxes on their models, but this is an 'in general' question concerning the majority of models.

The common, inner width between the side walls of the boxes is the dimension I am trying to nail down.

Other Kadee draft gear boxes to consider are the # 234 and 242... as well as the # 262 for those who use the narrower boxes.

John Degnan

Re: early model of PFE R40-26

Bill Welch

#130432

Scott the Accurail "Sliding Flush Door" model represents the FGE/WFE/BRE group of cars. Their hinged door reefer is a Western Fruit car only.

Bill Welch

Re: early model of PFE R40-26

Schleigh Mike

#130431

You have described the old Revell offering dating from about 1957. I suggest it is just a novelty at this time. Considering the good job they did on plastic model airplanes, their adventure into HO models was quite different. Their gondola was useful as were some of the buildings.

Happy New Year!! Mike Schleigh

On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 6:25 PM, "blindog@... [STMFC]" wrote:

In my heap of stuff I have an old HO body shell molded in yellow plastic that doesn't appear to have ever had any paint or lettering on it. It is a 40-foot ice reefer with a sliding plug door. I set it aside years ago because I thought it might be useful to make an SFRD plug door reefer, perhaps class Rr-48 or so. The shell has the floor molded into the body and a separate roof that, to put it nicely, sucks. The eaves are about a foot thick and the diagonal panels run the wrong way, not an uncommon error, unfortunately.

It appears to be a model of a PFE R40-26, because it is very close to the drawings of said car in the '53 Cyc. (The diagonal panel roof is rendered correctly in those drawings, so the toolmaker was just an idiot.) The sides have the double row of rivets that I think of as an FGE characteristic. The ends are a little better than the roof, but this one is so old the brake wheel is molded onto the end, looking more like the intake for a turbine. There is no manufacturer cast into the bottom.

Can't say I've ever seen one of these before, and I don't have Tony Thompson's PFE articles handy (RMC late '80s, if memory serves). Can anyone ID this model?

It's a different prototype from the Accurail "40-foot steel reefer" with a sliding plug door. The Accurail is taller for one thing. Speaking of which, is there a close prototype for the Accurail?

Looks like I could put the sides from the ancient model onto the Accurail sub-body to make a decent R40-26. It would add some variety to a mid-50s to 1970 layout. How late did R40-26s run?

Thanks and Happy New Year everyone!

Scott Chatfield

Re: early model of PFE R40-26

Richard Townsend

#130430

Sounds like it might be a Revell model from the 1950s. If so, it is too short (in height, not length) by about that foot of roof eave to accurately model a R-40-26. I took two once and made a B&M milk reefer many years ago, but that was all I could come up with for that height. Maybe others have other suggestions. I have several of them in my junk box waiting for a plausible prototype.

As for splicing them onto the Accurail body, I think the height will trip you up.

Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, Oregon

Show quoted text

-----Original Message-----
From: blindog@... [STMFC]
To: STMFC
Sent: Wed, Dec 31, 2014 3:25 pm
Subject: [STMFC] early model of PFE R40-26

70861 - 70880 of 201305

Home Hashtags Subgroups About Features Pricing Updates Terms Help Twitter