Date   

Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Westerfield <westerfield@...>
 

I was a member of the West Essex (NJ) club in 1965-68. One of the older members told of the time that Paul Mallery brough the X2f down to the club for evaluation. He told Paul that there were only 2 things wrong with it: it didn't look like a coupler and it didn't act like a coupler. - Al Westerfield


Re: 1926 ARA lettering change (was Accurail SS boxcars)

Bob Karig <karig@...>
 

Some issues contain diagrams showing the lettering requirements.
Maybe they all do. These appear to be the same diagrams that show up
in the Car Builders' Cycs. The Cyc diagrams are larger and easier to
read.
The interchange rules do not contain complete lettering schemes. Probably the best sources for complete stencilling schemes are the Car Builder's Cyclopedias.

Some time back I tried to create some sort of a list, graph or table
that would show the reweigh requirements over the years. The project
became quite difficult rather quickly so I gave up.
I laid these out for open top cars in my latest book.

Bob Karig


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Chris Sawicki
 

Lindsay-

How much end play along the axle length are you recommending? (I cannot make it to Anaheim)

thanks
Chris Sawicki

"W. Lindsay Smith" <wlindsays2000@...> wrote:
Truck parts are not interchangeable! "The Tool" is essential to
ensure the journal is deburred and clean to the apex. The best
rolling trucks have metal axles with polished bearing surfaces.
Kadee wheel sets are very good but if the truck does not roll, you
can only replace the wheel set. Athearn and other metal axles can be
honed to improve rolling performance. All axles should have endplay
when installed in the truck.
I'll talk about this at my Clinic at the NMRA Convention in Anaheim.
Lindsay Smith

--- In STMFC@..., "Jon Miller" <atsf@...> wrote:

Andrews trucks supplied with the Tichy car are accurate for this
B&O hopper class. However when I substituted Kadee wheel sets
for
the supplied plastic wheels, the truck would not assemble<
It has been said that it's not good to use plastic to plastic
bearing
surfaces. So with a plastic sideframe a metal axel would seem to
be better.
I would use a IM/reboxx/BL wheelset in those trucks. Besides you
can get
.088 width in those brands.

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


Report from Front (while relaxing at home).

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

Not for lack of interest am I so tardy on reporting my observations as an attendee at the recent Cocoa Beach Prototype Rails meet just a few weeks ago.

As expected from this seventh or eighth annual event each year early in January, it was pretty outstanding on several levels. The most important for me is that the meeting is always structured to attract serious modelers, embracing those who are accomplished, and those who are determined to be, and that it does quite well. Within the small confines of our hobby, it is rare to find at one meeting such a critical mass of recognized expert model railroaders. The deep sociability that results between those who are experts, those who are accomplished, and those who are on their way, is promoted by Impresario Mike Brocks dictum: "Leave your egos at the door!"

Clinics: Morning through evening with considerable break time between for yakking and visiting the exhibits and market. A major number of outstanding clinics were given by good members of these two lists, and so to avoid inadvertently leaving anyone out, you will excuse me if I do not mention names.

A popular clinic given each year is the Shake and Take, where an imaginative new HO prototype "kit" or a car not otherwise modeled made up of existing parts and custom decals from several manufacturers is provided gratis to each clinic attendee, and the clinic director then goes over exactly what has to be done- via an extensive hand out and a Power Point presentation. The car this year was a 50' welded PRR X-45 boxcar based on the Branchline welded 50' body. All parts were contributed.

A large number of completed and finished models from similar clinics in 2006 and 2007 (KCS USRA rebuild of 1948, and Kahn's ice reefer of 1954) were displayed, and it was endlessly interesting to see how different modelers could successfully address the same problems and issues that such modeling projects pose

Exhibits: The exhibit hall also was the home for the vendors, and the hall was always open except during meal hours. The vendors are not as numerous as in Naperville, but the quality is as high- and they are available for the entire show! Ted Schnepf made his first appearance, a welcome addition for his many friends. Walthers had authoritative representation and had a very nice open display of recent products and products in the pipeline available for handling, inspection, and critical comment. Ditto with Branchline.

I think that the fact that Prototype Rails is not sponsored by a single vendor (such as Naperville) probably affords the more open exposure to other attending vendors.

The display tables themselves were elevated an additional 18" by plastic piping. Naperville also did the same thing this year. Terrific. For the very first time, most of us could really inspect models relatively comfortably at eye level, and the models were a big draw.

As is increasingly evident at this show (and almost the same in Naperville), attendees are becoming increasingly comfortable bringing their models of various stages of completion and finish for display and critique without the invidious comparison that any hint of competitive "judgment" implies (as a person who once presided for years over the most competitive of judging in another very meticulous hobby, I absolutely applaud this retirement of competitive judging. Its absence leaves a much healthier hobby).

That said, there were an excess of outstanding examples of railroad modeling craft work to delight the eyes and senses, and tickle the motivations of the viewers to do better!

Hotel: The Hilton was and is a very handsome, clean and well maintained relatively small beach hotel. Not a trace of remaining hurricane damage was evident. Staff were friendly, and obviously were pleased to host us ("Oh, you are with the "train group"? Neat! You are some of our favorite guests. You guys [!} have the neatest things!"). I asked for something in the room that I thought would be turned down flat, or supplied at an exorbitant charge, and five minutes later, a bellboy was at the door with the requested item at no charge at all!

Food: Food services in medium/small hotels without "destination" restaurants can be very problematical: high overhead, and relatively low usage. Food has been an issue in this hotel in past years, but the hotel obviously listened carefully this year. A substantial buffet hot breakfast was available for a reasonable $10.00, the menu only marred by a complete absence of fruit- or juice!
Lunch had a choice of three good sandwiches. The "Cuban" seemed to be a favorite.

Dinner: As we have in the past, we head out each night to one of three shrimp restaurants (this is shrimp country- not a one of which is from a pond, or from China!) along with a bunch of devout midwestern beef-eaters ravenous for seafood (I ordered 15 broiled shrimp our last night, and I found 32 on my plate).

The annual banquet for everybody is on Saturday night (No speeches. No head table). Unlike past years, the service was at table rather than buffet. The Chicken Marsala was quite good, and hot when served. Well worth it.

Anyway, Mike Brock, and his partners in crime Marty Megregian, and Armand Premo (there are others I do not know) deserve a tremendous thank you for providing for us such a fine venue for the advance of our hobby, and such a fine event. A LOT of work.

Weather: Well, h-mm.

Now, Mike, what are you going to do for us NEXT year?

Denny








--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

W. Lindsay Smith <wlindsays2000@...>
 

Truck parts are not interchangeable! "The Tool" is essential to
ensure the journal is deburred and clean to the apex. The best
rolling trucks have metal axles with polished bearing surfaces.
Kadee wheel sets are very good but if the truck does not roll, you
can only replace the wheel set. Athearn and other metal axles can be
honed to improve rolling performance. All axles should have endplay
when installed in the truck.
I'll talk about this at my Clinic at the NMRA Convention in Anaheim.
Lindsay Smith


--- In STMFC@..., "Jon Miller" <atsf@...> wrote:

Andrews trucks supplied with the Tichy car are accurate for this
B&O hopper class. However when I substituted Kadee wheel sets
for
the supplied plastic wheels, the truck would not assemble<
It has been said that it's not good to use plastic to plastic
bearing
surfaces. So with a plastic sideframe a metal axel would seem to
be better.
I would use a IM/reboxx/BL wheelset in those trucks. Besides you
can get
.088 width in those brands.

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


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Jack Burgess wrote:
Tony Thompson was the person primarily responsible for this change in the scoring for NMRA contests, which I completely agree with...
Thanks for the support, Jack, but there were several people involved, most notably C.J. Riley, who carried most of the political water.

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


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Steve Lucas wrote:
Keep in mind that the defacto standard, Kadee couplers (as opposed to the NMRA X2f coupler), and .088" wide HO wheels (remember RP-25 wheelsets?) are not in conformance with NMRA standards and RP's either! This fortunately doesn't stop us from using them.
The X2f was only a proposal and was never standard or RP. It is really not proper to attach the "NMRA" label to it, as the NMRA committee which came up with it as a proposal could not get approval. Unfortunately, manufacturers loved its cheapness and produced millions of the things.

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


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Jack Burgess <jack@...>
 

Tony Thompson was the person primarily responsible for this change in the
scoring for NMRA contests, which I completely agree with...

Jack Burgess
www.yosemitevalleyrr.com


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Steve Lucas wrote:
Just as an aside, the NMRA acheivement programme/model constest rules years ago only awarded a small part of the total point score for conformity when judging a freight car in AP or model contest judging. I told then-AP chair Pete Moffett that I would scratchbuild a boxcar with its trucks on its roof, and that I was prepared to swallow the conformity points, as the model would likely make up the lost conformity points up in scratchbuilding, finish, and construction. To his and the NMRA's credit, the rules regarding conformity in the points score were changed after this!
But hardly for that reason, Steve. There was a committee which did some hard technical and, more important, political work to get the contest standards changed. As I worked on the committee, I know what I'm talking about. And BTW, Pete wasn't much involved.

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


Re: Weathering on new cars.

Tony Higgins
 

You probably wouldn't recognize them now. They were repainted about 5
yrs ago in "custom hot rod" style paint schemes with huge flames
trailing back the sides from the front! One of the crew is a custom
car
painter and apparently talked management into a kind of George Barris-
esque custom paint job. Each one is different. -Probably saved Kodak
a
bunch of money and got himself some OT and freedom to paint something
bigger than a V8 Ford coupe!

Tony Higgins (ex Kodak Park tenant)

--- In STMFC@..., boomer44 <boomer44@...> wrote:

I used to work at E.K.Co. here in Rochester, NY. The company has
their
own railroad for in plant use. At the time they had purchased or
newly
repainted an MP15 in white with black roof and yellow / red logo
stripes. This locomotive ran past and beneath a second story window
everyday where I worked. I was amazed at how fast this loco started
showing rust on top of the cab and hood. This was a well maintained
unit
but in six months you would have thought it had been around for
years.

Gordon Spalty


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

Just as an aside, the NMRA acheivement programme/model constest rules
years ago only awarded a small part of the total point score for
conformity when judging a freight car in AP or model contest
judging. I told then-AP chair Pete Moffett that I would scratchbuild
a boxcar with its trucks on its roof, and that I was prepared to
swallow the conformity points, as the model would likely make up the
lost conformity points up in scratchbuilding, finish, and
construction. To his and the NMRA's credit, the rules regarding
conformity in the points score were changed after this!

Steve Lucas.

--- In STMFC@..., "Jon Miller" <atsf@...> wrote:

the model cannot have the NMRA "conformance warrant" football-style
logo on the packaging.<
Standards get the football, not RPs! It's already been proven
that you
could have a really weird looking piece of equipment that had a
football on
the box <VBG>!

.088" wide HO wheels (remember RP-25 wheelsets?) are not in
conformance
with NMRA standards and RP's<
I thought that the .088 are within the RP-25 group. Remember
RP25 is a
wheel contour. They would be "code 88" but I've never seen any
testing done
to determine if they meet "code 88".

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


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

the model cannot have the NMRA "conformance warrant" football-style
logo on the packaging.<
Standards get the football, not RPs! It's already been proven that you could have a really weird looking piece of equipment that had a football on the box <VBG>!

.088" wide HO wheels (remember RP-25 wheelsets?) are not in conformance with NMRA standards and RP's<
I thought that the .088 are within the RP-25 group. Remember RP25 is a wheel contour. They would be "code 88" but I've never seen any testing done to determine if they meet "code 88".

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


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:
I certainly wish the NMRA would fix their standards, or simply do away with those which only serve to perpetuate non-prototype based dimensions.
Dennis, you dreamer! The current NMRA administration, like all recent ones, has no interest in being serious about its standards. Freight cars are only one of the areas affected.

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


Re: 1926 ARA lettering change (was Accurail SS boxcars)

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

I believe that copyright used to be protected for 50 years until US
patent law was changed a few years back at the behest of Disney to
make it 100--couldn't have Mickey Mouse falling into the public
domain!

The fallout is that we are proscribed from sharing much useful
material that otherwise would have been in the public domain under
the 50-year rule, other than perhaps through websites based in
countries where copyright laws are not as strict? What a shame.

Steve Lucas.

In STMFC@..., "Dennis Storzek" <destorzek@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "jerryglow2" <jerryglow@> wrote:
Is there any chart or description of the rules governing
lettering?

There IS a source - the Code of Rules for the Interchange of
Traffic
(the actual title is long has varied somewhat over the years)
which
lists all those conditions a freight or passenger car must meet
to be
interchanged...
Back about 1995 I discovered this reference and began an
interlibrary-
loan search for copies. I found only a few from the 1970s. Next
I
called the AAR (after letters and emails went unanswered) and
spoke
with a lawyer there who told me that the AAR no longer had
sufficient
staff to answer my questions nor would I be allowed to visit and
do
my own research...
While the interchange rules are THE source, they are hard to
use...

Thanks Gene,

Because of the above, and potential copyright issues, I doubt we'll
ever see any reprints of this material, either.

These, or other reports on the proceedings of the ARA / AAR
Mechanical
Committee are the source of drawings of other practices the AAR
recommended; the AAR Standard boxcar, flatcar, hopper, etc. in all
their iterations, the "Plate B", "C", "D", "E", and "F" clearance
diagrams, and a whole lot more. As was mentioned in a discussion
about
the AAR Standard boxcar some months ago, photocopies I have from the
sixties still show the 1937 drawing dates on these "plates", with a
complete list of revision dates; up somewhere around rev. G or H by
that time. However, the number of revisions was different on
different
drawings; they were only applied when that particular plate was
changed, not every time a new revision of the field manual was
issued,
so even that doesn't give a complete list.

in the Car Builders' Cycs. The Cyc diagrams are larger and
easier to
read.
And this is where most have likely seen them. Train Shed No. 48,
reprints from the 1931 Car Builder's Cyc. reprinted five pages
titled
"Lettering and Marking of Cars, ARA Standard - Adopted 1901; Revised
1926" which mostly remained unchanged until the end of the steam
era.
However, even these aren't complete; a quick read through the noted
that accompany the boxcar diagram brings me to items that must
"conform to instructions shown in interchange rule No. 60" and "Rule
No. 66", which are not further defined.

I also note several things that are owner options; I doubt anyone
ever
embargoed a car offered in interchange because the lettering telling
what type of dirt collector the car was equipped with was stenciled
on
the car side rather than the end. Likewise, the layout of
dimensional
data used by the NYC system and the Canadian roads does not exactly
match the diagrams presented, but photographic evidence shows that
it
continued in use for decades.

Dennis


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

NMRA RP24.3 is a recommended practice, not a standard. There is
nothing to stop a manfacturer from making model equipment that does
not conform to it. The only consequence to the manufacturer is that
the model cannot have the NMRA "conformance warrant" football-style
logo on the packaging.

Keep in mind that the defacto standard, Kadee couplers (as opposed to
the NMRA X2f coupler), and .088" wide HO wheels (remember RP-25
wheelsets?) are not in conformance with NMRA standards and RP's
either! This fortunately doesn't stop us from using them.

About NMRA RP's for axles and trucks. When you look the end of a
prototype plain-bearing truck, you'll find that the journal box is
proud of BOTH sides of the truck sideframe, front and back. How far
it protrudes is a function of bearing size. Journal boxes for 6 1/2"
x 12" bearings are necessarily deeper and thereby protrude more at
the back of the truck sideframe than those for 3 3/4" x 7" bearings.
This is seldom modelled. And those trucks that take 12" bearings are
going to be wider that those with 7" bearings.

Steve Lucas.

--- In STMFC@..., "Dennis Storzek"
<destorzek@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "benjaminfrank_hom" <b.hom@> wrote:

There is no establshed NMRA Standard or RP for wheel axle length,
so
you will find differences as you venture away from the Athearn or
Kadee trucks that most modelers are familiar with. Reboxx offers
a
variety of axle lengths for both their RP25 and semiscale
wheelsets. Here's a link to their 33" wheelset application chart:
http://www.reboxx.com/Documents/Wheelsets/33%20Application%
20Chart.pdf

Ben Hom
Sure there is. It's right here:

http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-24_3.html

Problem is, it specifies a length guaranteed to make the trucks too
wide, so everybody ignores it.

Dennis


Re: 1926 ARA lettering change (was Accurail SS boxcars)

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@...> wrote:

--- In STMFC@..., "jerryglow2" <jerryglow@> wrote:
Is there any chart or description of the rules governing lettering?
There IS a source - the Code of Rules for the Interchange of Traffic
(the actual title is long has varied somewhat over the years) which
lists all those conditions a freight or passenger car must meet to be
interchanged...
Back about 1995 I discovered this reference and began an interlibrary-
loan search for copies. I found only a few from the 1970s. Next I
called the AAR (after letters and emails went unanswered) and spoke
with a lawyer there who told me that the AAR no longer had sufficient
staff to answer my questions nor would I be allowed to visit and do
my own research...
While the interchange rules are THE source, they are hard to use...
Thanks Gene,

Because of the above, and potential copyright issues, I doubt we'll
ever see any reprints of this material, either.

These, or other reports on the proceedings of the ARA / AAR Mechanical
Committee are the source of drawings of other practices the AAR
recommended; the AAR Standard boxcar, flatcar, hopper, etc. in all
their iterations, the "Plate B", "C", "D", "E", and "F" clearance
diagrams, and a whole lot more. As was mentioned in a discussion about
the AAR Standard boxcar some months ago, photocopies I have from the
sixties still show the 1937 drawing dates on these "plates", with a
complete list of revision dates; up somewhere around rev. G or H by
that time. However, the number of revisions was different on different
drawings; they were only applied when that particular plate was
changed, not every time a new revision of the field manual was issued,
so even that doesn't give a complete list.

in the Car Builders' Cycs. The Cyc diagrams are larger and easier to
read.
And this is where most have likely seen them. Train Shed No. 48,
reprints from the 1931 Car Builder's Cyc. reprinted five pages titled
"Lettering and Marking of Cars, ARA Standard - Adopted 1901; Revised
1926" which mostly remained unchanged until the end of the steam era.
However, even these aren't complete; a quick read through the noted
that accompany the boxcar diagram brings me to items that must
"conform to instructions shown in interchange rule No. 60" and "Rule
No. 66", which are not further defined.

I also note several things that are owner options; I doubt anyone ever
embargoed a car offered in interchange because the lettering telling
what type of dirt collector the car was equipped with was stenciled on
the car side rather than the end. Likewise, the layout of dimensional
data used by the NYC system and the Canadian roads does not exactly
match the diagrams presented, but photographic evidence shows that it
continued in use for decades.

Dennis


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Dennis Storzek <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee"
<schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

Sure there is. It's right here:

http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-24_3.html
<http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-24_3.html>

Problem is, it specifies a length guaranteed to make the trucks too
wide, so everybody ignores it.

Dennis
Not exactly, Dennis. It specifies a MAX dimension. I think most
model trucks use something less
than that dimension. Reboxx only has five lengths exceeding that,
and they are for very specific
applications.

SGL
Yeah, but... RP-24.3 is just part of the series that makes up RP-24,
and taken as a whole force the trucks to be wide enough to accept
those axles.

I raise this issue here simply to remind everyone that while we may
think the NMRA is irrelevant and simply ignore what it has to say, all
these "Standards" and "Recommended Practice" that was cast in stone in
the fifties is still out there where manufacturers and designers can
easily find it. And, it seems they do find it. Most manufacturers are
not on this list. In fact, I'll argue that most major manufacturers
don't even know this list exists. When their design department, or
their contract design firm, or their designer in China is told to
"follow NMRA standards" who is going to argue that they shouldn't? I
certainly wish the NMRA would fix their standards, or simply do away
with those which only serve to perpetuate non-prototype based dimensions.

Dennis


NWX fans

rockroll50401 <cepropst@...>
 

Got a call from Stan Rydarowicz last night. I gave Stan a copy of an
article on NWX from Northwestern Lines (CNWHS mag) I guess that makes
me an expert on these cars? Anyway, Stan is making a kit for the
rebuilts with steel ends and roof, but wood sides. Somewhere in the
article they mentioned cooling fans, but none of the photos Stan has of
the cars show any.
His question is: Do any of you have photos of these rebuilt wood sided
cars with fans?
He is planning on doing the steel sided rebuilds too, so I'm sure he
would appericate any fan info on them also.
Thanks from Stan and Clark Propst


Re: 1926 ARA lettering change (was Accurail SS boxcars)

Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "jerryglow2" <jerryglow@...> wrote:
Is there any chart or description of the rules governing lettering?
There IS a source - the Code of Rules for the Interchange of Traffic
(the actual title is long has varied somewhat over the years) which
lists all those conditions a freight or passenger car must meet to be
interchanged. The rules were and still are published annually and
supplements (changes - again, actual title varies) published
occasionally or perhaps frequently.

Back about 1995 I discovered this reference and began an interlibrary-
loan search for copies. I found only a few from the 1970s. Next I
called the AAR (after letters and emails went unanswered) and spoke
with a lawyer there who told me that the AAR no longer had sufficient
staff to answer my questions nor would I be allowed to visit and do
my own research.

That disappointment motivated me to collect my own set. At least two
others in this discussion group also have pretty complete sets. In
my own case I have 15 years between 1899 and 1923 and every year from
1924 through 2006 except 2005. I'll get my 2007 from my source next
month. I have more than 40 supplements or changes but since there is
no way (that I know of) to determine when supplements were published,
I have no way of knowing how complete my set may or may not be.

While the interchange rules are THE source, they are hard to use.
I'll bet the guys on the RIP track had a heck of a time keeping up to
date. As has been pointed out frequently on this forum, deadlines
kept being extended. In order to find the real final date for
something it appears to me that one must begin searching in a recent
issue and go back in time until one finds that actual final date.

Some issues contain diagrams showing the lettering requirements.
Maybe they all do. These appear to be the same diagrams that show up
in the Car Builders' Cycs. The Cyc diagrams are larger and easier to
read.

Some time back I tried to create some sort of a list, graph or table
that would show the reweigh requirements over the years. The project
became quite difficult rather quickly so I gave up. Whether that
betrays the difficulty of the project or my lack of organizational
skills remains to be seen.

If there was ever a point to this rambling discourse I forgot it a
couple of paragraphs back.

Gene Green


Re: Tichy Andrew truck question

Mark
 

Really meant Mark Morgan

--- In STMFC@..., "Mark Morgan" <bnonut@...> wrote:



Hello, Jim.

Try Reboxx part:33-1-1.020

Sincerely, Mrak

129101 - 129120 of 198533