Brian J Carlson wrote:

It is interesting to note that renumbering may have occurred as the 1923 list, lists P-450 as the Indiana Harbor, Ind., Car Shop, and not Fort Wayne car Shop (P-441) as mentioned by Mr. Thompson, the others match what he said.

My list came from the PRR list provided years ago by Richard Hendrickson, the era of which I don't know. I have handed that list out as part of the handout for my Pennsy freight car modeling clinic over a number of years.

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

Dennis Storzek wrote:

25 1/2" scales out to .293". Like I said, if someone is making
freightcar trucks with a centerplate height different by more than a
couple of thousandths from .296", they're not following the
prototype, or the rest of the industry, for that matter.

What is the height of the Atlas so-called bettendorf trucks? I seem to
remember those were a bit odd. Extremely free rolling tho.

Dave Nelson

Rob;

I can't answer that for you, but here is a link to their web site if you want to see what they're planning... <http://southerncarandfoundry.com>

Kind regards, Rob Adams

Rob Kirkham wrote:

--
Rob Adams
Wellman, IA
steamera@...
Modeling the CB&Q RR's Keokuk & Western branch, along with connecting Wabash and CRI&P operations, circa 1938
<http://www.KeokukandWesternRR.com>

Key question on this one: when???

Rob Kirkham

On Oct 9, 2006, at 7:44 PM, Jared Harper wrote:

Has anyone offered an HO scale model of a 6000 gallon tank car?

Precision Scale's standard gauge UTLX Van Dyke tank car model is a 6,500 gal. car; though built shortly after the turn of the century, many were still in service in the 1940s. Sunshine also offers a resin kit for a UTLX 6,500 gal. X-3 class tank car. Unfortunately, there are as yet no HO scale models of either AC&F or GATC 6,000 gal. tank cars, though - as Mike Brock says - Jon Cagle is working on a resin kit for a Standard Tank Car Co. 6,000 gallon car.

Richard Hendrickson

Jared Harper wrote:

Has anyone offered an HO scale model of a 6000 gallon tank car?

Jim Hayes suggested:

Sunshine offers a 6500 gallon tank car.

Mike Brock added:

I don't know but SC&F will be offering one.

The Sunshine 6,500 Gallon Tank Car is not generic. IIRC, it was a UTLX X-3 meaning that it was in service only to lessees of the Union Tank Car Company. The primary lessees of UTLX were the "Baby Standards."

I believe that SC&F's offering will be a model of a tank car built by the Standard Tank Car Company of Sharon PA which GATX purchased in 1927. Again, the car is not generic, although more so than a UTLX X-3.

Tim Gilbert

If anyone wants a key to the different PRR Track Scale abbreviations, a list
from 1923 can be found at
http://prr.railfan.net/lists/track_scales_1923.html. I have one from 1945
but it is not online. It is interesting to note that renumbering may have
occurred as the 1923 list, lists P-450 as the Indiana Harbor, Ind., Car
Shop, and not Fort Wayne car Shop (P-441) as mentioned by Mr. Thompson, the
others match what he said.

Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

Jared Harper asks:

"Has anyone offered an HO scale model of a 6000 gallon tank car?"

I don't know but SC&F will be offering one.

Mike Brock

Sunshine offers a 6500 gallon tank car.



Jim Hayes

Portland Oregon

,___

Thanks to everyone who has responded and provided great information.

And I'm still trying to figure out how I missed the photo on George Elwood's
site.

I obviously did not exhaust all the potential sources.

Thanks again,

Dave Owens

Has anyone offered an HO scale model of a 6000 gallon tank car?

Jared Harper
Athens, GA

Dennis, et al,

I did not say anything about what dimensions the RP/standard
should use ... and I see no reason why using a prototypical
height for the center plate and coupler mounting plate (or
whatever the correct term is ... ?) isn't the correct spec.
And if the current crop of cars, for the most part, already
is at whatever number you say is right I have no issue with
that being 'the standard'.

With respect to the center plate the key element in my proposal
is not so much the height of the center plate as it is the 'shape'
of it. I'm saying it should be a flat plane with a hole that is
either tapped or can be taped for a screw. And the truck has
a matching hole that uses the same size screw for locating the truck.
In HO scale I think that it should be a 2-56 screw ... but I don't
really care what size the screw is. What I don't like is the
fact than many trucks can't be mounted on many cars due to mismatches
of the 'post' ... and having applied enough Kadee trucks using just
a 2-56 that seems like a good choice to me. But yes, it is important
that all of the manufacturers use the same height for the center
plate so that any truck can be mounted on any car.

With respect to the coupler box mount I am also saying that there
should be a simple flat space with a hole that is taped or can be
taped for a screw. Again - in HO scale it seems to me that if it
was a 2-56 screw it would work out well ... but again I'm not that
interested in just what screw it is as that the coupler box is
attached to the car using a screw. No funky plastic posts that
rely upon friction to stay put, no cast on coupler box, just a flat
space with a hole.

And as to the different prototype center plate heights - I would
propose that the model industry just ignore that and do all of their
cars at one height and make the trucks and couplers conform to just
one size. The difference between the two heights isn't visible
because it is all out of sight under the car and what we see are
the truck side frames and the end of the coupler box.

Obviously the size of the screws will/might be different in different
scales.
- Jim in San Jose

P.S. Yes, I replied directly to Didrick and look forward to his
responses ... and more importantly to the actions that his
group takes in the coming months/years.

Thanks Tony!
I was wondering what shops those cryptic PRR codes represented.
Stefan

Not being a--- In STMFC@..., Tony Thompson
<thompsonmarytony@...> wrote:

Stefan Lerche' wrote:

What are plausible PRR reweigh codes/lettering for these and

other PRR

gons. I'm using a Komar dry transfer for a Tichy War Emergency

car and

it only has a "New" date. I can't make out the corect lettering

from

The Keystone Modeller article.

Stefan, I like to use the codes from the major PRR yards,

such as

Enola (P-50) or Conway (P-341). You also seen P-712 fairly often

(the

Terre Haute shop) and also P-450 (the Fort Wayne car shop).

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

Why is there such a thing as a half-drop grab? I had expected that
they were meant to get around a tricky mounting location, where you
couldn't have both ends of the grab at the same level. That seems to
be the case with the Southern SU box. But, I'm finishing up my W&LE
quad hopper (kitbashed from a Westerfield H21). The lower grabs on
the end are half-drop, and I have clear photos of the ends that show
the grab attaching to a clear section of the ladder upright: no
reason to do a half-drop!
Did someone suggest the half-drop was supposed to keep a brakeman's
foot from slipping off better than a straight grab? I have a P&LE
36' DS box (Funaro) that has half-drops on the lower corners, with
the half-drop on the outsides of the corners. I suppose that a half-
drop was somewhat cheaper to produce than a full-drop, but I wonder
if the cost of stocking a separate part made up for the savings. At
least on the Wheeling hopper, there is no obstruction that would get
in the way of a full drop.
So, what factors influenced the choice of straight grabs, drop grabs,
or half-drop grabs?
Dean Payne

Stefan Lerche' wrote:

What are plausible PRR reweigh codes/lettering for these and other PRR gons. I'm using a Komar dry transfer for a Tichy War Emergency car and it only has a "New" date. I can't make out the corect lettering from The Keystone Modeller article.

Stefan, I like to use the codes from the major PRR yards, such as Enola (P-50) or Conway (P-341). You also seen P-712 fairly often (the Terre Haute shop) and also P-450 (the Fort Wayne car shop).

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

What are plausible PRR reweigh codes/lettering for these and other PRR
gons. I'm using a Komar dry transfer for a Tichy War Emergency car and
it only has a "New" date. I can't make out the corect lettering from
The Keystone Modeller article.

Thanks in advance
Stefan Lerche'
Duncan, BC

11129H ERG11129 916 865-H GA 2/18/57 B&A 910000-91999 Genl Arrg, 70
Ton Hopper
11136L ERG11135 916 865-H GA 3/26/57 B&A 910000-91999 Genl Arrg, 70
Ton SC Hopper

The above drawings as well as others are available from the NYCHS:


Roger Hinman

You gotta remember: the standards & RPs are put to a vote of the members, in other words you get what you vote for, just as in politics. Also, the RPs' are just that: recommended.
Al

--- In STMFC@..., "DR Stinson" <dano@...> wrote:

You can't swap an Athearn 70 ton roller bearing truck on a
Genesis boxcar with an Athearn Genesis 100 ton roller bearing
truck without messing up the coupler height.

Do you think that might be because a 70 ton truck may have 33"
wheels and a 100 ton truck 36" wheels?

No. A 70 ton truck also has different sideframes and different truck
bolster design. It should still have the top of the truck bolster at the
same height above the rail head.

Dan Stinson
Helena, Montana

Correct. Begging Mike's pardon, but this information effects decisions
made by manufacturers of both pre and post 1960 trucks:

From AAR Recommended Practice, adopted 1964; revised 1965, 1968, 1970,
1972, 1986: effective January 1, 1980:

Limiting Nominal Design Dimensions For Freight Car Trucks-
Single Shoe Brakes – 33" Dia. Wheels

Nominal distance centerplate to rail, light car: 25 1/2"

Single Shoe Brakes – 36" Dia. Wheels

Nominal distance centerplate to rail, light car: 25 1/2"

Single shoe brakes – 7" X 12" Journals (38" Dia. Wheels)

Centerplate to rail, light car: 25 1/16"

Note, this last car has a deeper centerplate cup with 1 3/4"
engagement rather than the 1 1/8" engagement of the others.

25 1/2" scales out to .293". Like I said, if someone is making
freightcar trucks with a centerplate height different by more than a
couple of thousandths from .296", they're not following the prototype,
or the rest of the industry, for that matter.

Dennis