Date   

O&W hopper book

ed_mines
 

Has anyone seen the O&W hopper book?

Does it cover cars from other railroads? Are there a lot of photos?

Ed


Re: Cudahy reefers?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Sep 3, 2006, at 6:07 PM, Kurt Laughlin wrote:

In the May 93 RMC Richard Hendrickson had an article on making a Cudahy reefer from the MDC 36 foot wood reefer. He mentioned that Cudahy (CRLX) had two series of these cars, 5701-5850 and 5901-6100 that were similar but not identical. The 1961 ORER also lists a third series, 6101-6400 that has the same dimensions - in all respects - as these other two. Does anyone know if this third series could also be modeled in the manner of the article?
Kurt, the 1950 ORER shows the number series 6101-6300 with dimensions identical to the other number series. I have two photos of cars in this series which appear to be identical to the earlier Cudahy cars and bear built dates of 1-49 and 3-49 (yes, Cudahy was still having 36' wood reefers built to the pre-World War II design as late as 1949 and possibly even later than that). The additional 100 cars, bringing the number series up to 6101-6400, are shown in the 1953 ORER. I have no documentary or photographic evidence about those extra cars; they may be an additional group of cars built new after 1950 or they may be older cars with the same dimensions that were renumbered after receiving general repairs.

The only significant differences among the three series of cars were trucks. Cars in the 5701-5850 series had National B-1 trucks. Cars in the 5901-6100 series had Barber Stabilized S-2 trucks. Some cars in the 6101-6300 series had ASF A-3 "Ride Control" trucks, while others had Barber S-2s.

Richard Hendrickson


Santa Fe USRA Rebuilt Reefers

Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

Based on the photographs in Santa fe Railway rolling stock reference series
volume 2, Refrigerators cars, It appears the USRA rebuild up to RR-34 kept
top operated couplers and RR-35 onward (postwar or nearly so) had bottom
operated couplers. I can't find this difference noted in the text so I am
looking for confirmation. Were any of the early top operated couplers
replaced with bottom operated couplers later on in life? I am working on
detailing an RR-28 and RR-23 for 1957. Thanks.

Brian J Carlson P.E.
Cheektowaga NY


Email change

Jim King
 

I tried sending this note out last night but not all of the lists got
notified, thanks to Yahoo's screening.

Effective immediately, my email address is changed to
jimking3@.... The old address (jimking3@...) will
remain active until later this month when that account expires. Please
make a note in your address book.

Jim King
Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.
http://www.smokymountainmodelworks.com


Re: Cudahy reefers?

joebinish@...
 

Kurt,
Nice work. When I can see straight(tomorrow), I'll look at the data and see how they line up.
Thanks,
Joe Binish

----- Original Message -----
From: Kurt Laughlin
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:00 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Cudahy reefers?


>I have a further question for Dr. H. You mention in the article(I am in the material acquisition phase of modelling one of these cars) that the MDC model is "close to the correct dimensions". Could you please post a comparison between the prototype and said kit for those of us who are ORER challenged?
TIA,
Joe Binish
>

Joe, FWIW, I compiled a table a while back of the 1961 ORER dimensions for various wood reefers pictured in my references compared to the MDC 36 foot meat reefer, the Mehano/AHM(?) reefer (with steel ends), and Industrial/Varney(?) RTR kit. Hopefully the column comes across OK:

CAR
NUMBER
ORER
TYPE
INSIDE H
LENGTH
EAVE W
DOOR W
DOOR H
REF


MDC


RS

37' 2"
9' 9"
4' 1"
6' 4"



GARX
1581
572
RSM
6' 5"
37' 3"
9' 11"
3' 10"
6' 2"
CF10

SRLX
2601
572
RSM
6' 8"
37' 3"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF65

CRLX
5802
560
RSM
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR55

CRLX
5819
560
RSM
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF50

SRLX
3577
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF1

SRLX
4555
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF65

SRLX
5423
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF1

SRLX
5446
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR53

SRLX
5767
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR53

SRLX
5839
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF9

SRLX
6714
572
RAM
6' 2"
37' 5"
9' 6"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR54

URTX
77026
608
RB
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR55

ARLX
11414
561
RAM
6' 1"
37' 10"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR54

ARLX
11945
561
RAM
6' 1"
37' 10"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR54

IND


RS

38' 1"
10' 0"
3' 10"
6' 4"


URTX
63347
608
RSM
6' 8"
38' 4"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 5"
MR55

SRLX
15307
572
RAM
6' 10"
39' 0"
9' 4"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF11

NWX
4570
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF62

NWX
15265
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF61

NWX
70193
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF62

WRX
9134
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF38

WRX
9670
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF37

WRX
9787
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF37

URTX
5093
608
RS
7' 4"
40' 10"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF24

WFEX
49543
605
RS
6' 11"
40' 10"
10' 2"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF41

URTX
10728
608
RS
7' 5"
40' 11"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 6"
CF24

SRLX
1020
572
RB
7' 6"
40' 7"
10' 3"
4' 11"
7' 1"
CF10

FGEX
50098
563
RS
7' 3"
41' 8"
9' 11 "
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF52

FGEX
59608
563
RS
7' 5"
41' 8"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 1"
CF52

WFEX
72054
605
RS
7' 5"
41' 8"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 1"
CF41

AHM


RS

41' 8"
10' 0"
4' 1"
6' 4"


CP
289107
220
RSM
6' 8"
42' 2"
9' 4"
4' 0"
6' 4"
CF59

GTW
206950
210
RSM
6' 7"
42' 6"
10' 2"
5' 0"
6' 4"
CF64

BAR
6582
194
RS
7' 3"
42' 7"
9' 9"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF22

CP
285489
220
RSM
6' 8"
42' 7"
9' 11"
5' 0"
6' 4"
CF59


My dimensions were taken with a ruler rather than using my calipers, so they are probably only within 1/32 which is ~ 2.5 inches full size. Given that it's hard to be certain what exactly the ORER dimension refers to, hard to determine exactly what you measure on the car, plus the fact that injection molding requires some compromises in shapes and sizes, this is probably about as good as you could expect to get, and close enough to make a comparison.

HTH,
KL


Re: Cudahy reefers?

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

I have a further question for Dr. H. You mention in the article(I am in the material acquisition phase of modelling one of these cars) that the MDC model is "close to the correct dimensions". Could you please post a comparison between the prototype and said kit for those of us who are ORER challenged?
TIA,
Joe Binish
Joe, FWIW, I compiled a table a while back of the 1961 ORER dimensions for various wood reefers pictured in my references compared to the MDC 36 foot meat reefer, the Mehano/AHM(?) reefer (with steel ends), and Industrial/Varney(?) RTR kit. Hopefully the column comes across OK:

CAR
NUMBER
ORER
TYPE
INSIDE H
LENGTH
EAVE W
DOOR W
DOOR H
REF


MDC


RS

37' 2"
9' 9"
4' 1"
6' 4"



GARX
1581
572
RSM
6' 5"
37' 3"
9' 11"
3' 10"
6' 2"
CF10

SRLX
2601
572
RSM
6' 8"
37' 3"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF65

CRLX
5802
560
RSM
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR55

CRLX
5819
560
RSM
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF50

SRLX
3577
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF1

SRLX
4555
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF65

SRLX
5423
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF1

SRLX
5446
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR53

SRLX
5767
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR53

SRLX
5839
572
RAM
6' 6"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
CF9

SRLX
6714
572
RAM
6' 2"
37' 5"
9' 6"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR54

URTX
77026
608
RB
7' 2"
37' 5"
9' 11"
4' 0"
5' 9"
MR55

ARLX
11414
561
RAM
6' 1"
37' 10"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR54

ARLX
11945
561
RAM
6' 1"
37' 10"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 0"
MR54

IND


RS

38' 1"
10' 0"
3' 10"
6' 4"


URTX
63347
608
RSM
6' 8"
38' 4"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 5"
MR55

SRLX
15307
572
RAM
6' 10"
39' 0"
9' 4"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF11

NWX
4570
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF62

NWX
15265
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF61

NWX
70193
594
RS
7' 1"
40' 0"

4' 0"
6' 0"
CF62

WRX
9134
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF38

WRX
9670
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF37

WRX
9787
613
RS
7' 6"
40' 0"
9' 10"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF37

URTX
5093
608
RS
7' 4"
40' 10"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF24

WFEX
49543
605
RS
6' 11"
40' 10"
10' 2"
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF41

URTX
10728
608
RS
7' 5"
40' 11"
9' 11"
4' 0"
6' 6"
CF24

SRLX
1020
572
RB
7' 6"
40' 7"
10' 3"
4' 11"
7' 1"
CF10

FGEX
50098
563
RS
7' 3"
41' 8"
9' 11 "
4' 0"
6' 0"
CF52

FGEX
59608
563
RS
7' 5"
41' 8"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 1"
CF52

WFEX
72054
605
RS
7' 5"
41' 8"
10' 1"
4' 0"
6' 1"
CF41

AHM


RS

41' 8"
10' 0"
4' 1"
6' 4"


CP
289107
220
RSM
6' 8"
42' 2"
9' 4"
4' 0"
6' 4"
CF59

GTW
206950
210
RSM
6' 7"
42' 6"
10' 2"
5' 0"
6' 4"
CF64

BAR
6582
194
RS
7' 3"
42' 7"
9' 9"
4' 0"
6' 5"
CF22

CP
285489
220
RSM
6' 8"
42' 7"
9' 11"
5' 0"
6' 4"
CF59



My dimensions were taken with a ruler rather than using my calipers, so they are probably only within 1/32 which is ~ 2.5 inches full size. Given that it's hard to be certain what exactly the ORER dimension refers to, hard to determine exactly what you measure on the car, plus the fact that injection molding requires some compromises in shapes and sizes, this is probably about as good as you could expect to get, and close enough to make a comparison.

HTH,
KL


50's Vehicles

Richard Dermody <ddermody@...>
 

Here's a new list that has nothing to do with freight cars directly, but certainly relates to our period of interest and therefore might be of interest to the group.

To quote:

"50's and older vehicle list

Many people model vehicles such as trucks, busses, construction
equipment, cars etc in 1/87 or HO scale. While many lists seem to
cater more towards the equipment of today, this list will address
those modelling the vehicles typical of the 1950's era. It should be
noted that vehicles operating in the fifties included many dating
back to the 20's so there is much area for discussion."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/50sERA87thScaleVehicles

Pete Bowers is the list owner, and also runs CN Lines, so I believe you can consider this a reputable group to join.

Best regards,

Richard F. Dermody


Re: Sunshine Models IC two-bay hopper model

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Ed Hawkins wrote:
"Also possibly the D&M (5000-5024), which I've never come across a
good photo to confirm for sure."

Ed, there's a photo of D&M 5003 on page 25 of Henderson's Classic
Freight Cars Vol 4.


Ben Hom


Re: Cudahy reefers?

joebinish@...
 

Ihave a further question for Dr. H. You mention in the article(I am in the material acquisition phase of modelling one of these cars) that the MDC model is "close to the correct dimensions". Could you please post a comparison between the prototype and said kit for those of us who are ORER challenged?
TIA,
Joe Binish

----- Original Message -----
From: Kurt Laughlin
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 8:07 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Cudahy reefers?


In the May 93 RMC Richard Hendrickson had an article on making a Cudahy reefer from the MDC 36 foot wood reefer. He mentioned that Cudahy (CRLX) had two series of these cars, 5701-5850 and 5901-6100 that were similar but not identical. The 1961 ORER also lists a third series, 6101-6400 that has the same dimensions - in all respects - as these other two. Does anyone know if this third series could also be modeled in the manner of the article?

Thanks,
KL


Re: Sunshine Models IC two-bay hopper model - AAR alternate st

James D Thompson <jaydeet@...>
 

I saw on the trains.com web site that Sunshine Models is making an
Illinois Central two-bay hopper:
<http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=765>http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=765
http://www.trains.com/mrr/objects/images/mrr-np1206_25.jpg

Is this a model of what Ed Hawkins called the "Alternate Standard"
twin 1935 AAR hopper in the Railway Prototype Cyclopedia 1?

As I understand it the major spotting features of the "Alternate
Standard" hoppers are: seven almost equally spaced gussets along the
top of the hopper sides, and the end of the "offset" is very near the
ends of the car – almost where the grab irons are located.
The "AAR Alternate Standard" was essentially the Unitcast offset-side
hopper first built for the AMC roads (C&O, NKP, and Erie) in 1934. It was 4
inches lower than the standard design and had different transition panels
and gusset spacing than the otherwise similar design adopted as the AAR
Standard.

The IC car modeled by Sunshine was a third variety that traced its lineage
back to a 34'9" offset-side car promoted by Enterprise at the end of the
1920s. EREX 212 seems to be the original, built in 10/27 (p.252 of the 1931
CBC). IC, NC&StL, and GN at least received similar if not identical cars in
1929-31. The design was revised to incorporate most of the features of the
AAR Standard car but retained the Enterprise side construction and was
built in large numbers for IC and a few other roads in the 1930s-40s.

David Thompson


Cudahy reefers?

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

In the May 93 RMC Richard Hendrickson had an article on making a Cudahy reefer from the MDC 36 foot wood reefer. He mentioned that Cudahy (CRLX) had two series of these cars, 5701-5850 and 5901-6100 that were similar but not identical. The 1961 ORER also lists a third series, 6101-6400 that has the same dimensions - in all respects - as these other two. Does anyone know if this third series could also be modeled in the manner of the article?

Thanks,
KL


Re: Early RP recommendations; was: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

Thanks Tony. I'll have to get that article and your book.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Thompson
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Early RP recommendations; was: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?


Kurt Laughlin wrote:
> It looks like this may still be salvageble with new ends and details,
> however I wonder if the Athearn 1630 series isn't a better option.
> What would the rest of the group recommend as starting kits for an
> early RP?
> I have the PFE book on my Christmas list, but am also looking for
> Tony's RMC article on PFE RPs. I have his RA/RS series and they've
> been very helpful.

Kurt, in my article in the January, 1988 RMC I showed my model of
a PFE Class R-70-8 made from a Lima body. The Athearn is probably
better overall, though it needs work too. As Ben Hom said, the
overhanging roof is a distinctive feature which is needed for a good
model, and my Lima version didn't have that.

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: Early RP recommendations; was: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

Tony Thompson
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
It looks like this may still be salvageble with new ends and details, however I wonder if the Athearn 1630 series isn't a better option. What would the rest of the group recommend as starting kits for an early RP?
I have the PFE book on my Christmas list, but am also looking for Tony's RMC article on PFE RPs. I have his RA/RS series and they've been very helpful.
Kurt, in my article in the January, 1988 RMC I showed my model of a PFE Class R-70-8 made from a Lima body. The Athearn is probably better overall, though it needs work too. As Ben Hom said, the overhanging roof is a distinctive feature which is needed for a good model, and my Lima version didn't have that.

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


Early RP recommendations; was: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

"The model has the lower, almost square screen on the left B end
side, and a rectangular louver on the right B side. Is that
correct? If not, I might just junk it and get an Athearn. Louvers
are a bit much to fiddle with."
Kurt, I currently don't have this model or the Athearn model on
hand. Please verify which end that the louvers for the
refriegration unit are located. If they are indeed located at the B
end, the car is incorrect as the refrigeration unit (and the 5/5
Dreadnaught end) was located at the A end.
Yup, the refrigeration unit is definitely at the B end.

The rectangular lover is located on the left side of the car, and
the lower, almost square screen is located on the right side of the
car. See the drawing on page 210 of Thompson/Church/Jones' Pacific
Fruit Express (Second Edition).
Looking at the B end the square screen is on the left, the rectangular louver on the right. Looking at the car sides, the rectangular louver is on the left (as is the B end) while on the other side the square screen is is on the right (as is the B end).

The car has six panels on either side of the ~8 ft plug door. Both ends have a somewhat flattened 5/5 dreadnought end with square corners. It has a 15 panel roof with the center 13 embossed with diagonals. The roof panel edges are set back a bit from the car sides, perhaps their attempt to show the overhanging roof. The running boards are molded in.

It looks like this may still be salvageble with new ends and details, however I wonder if the Athearn 1630 series isn't a better option. What would the rest of the group recommend as starting kits for an early RP?

I have the PFE book on my Christmas list, but am also looking for Tony's RMC article on PFE RPs. I have his RA/RS series and they've been very helpful.

Thanks,
KL


NP 1937 AAR BOXCAR PAINTING QUESTIONS

billkeene2004 <wakeene@...>
 

Good moring Group,

I am completing the assembly of an IMWX model of a 1937 AAR Northern Pacific boxcar
and have a question regarding what color the underbody and trucks would have been
painted in the post WW2 to early 1950s period?

It also appears in some photos that the wood running boards were perhaps painted a
different color than the roof. Is this correct? And if so, what color?

Any help on this subject would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

-- Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


Re: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Kurt Laughlin wrote:
"The model has the lower, almost square screen on the left B end
side, and a rectangular louver on the right B side. Is that
correct? If not, I might just junk it and get an Athearn. Louvers
are a bit much to fiddle with."

Kurt, I currently don't have this model or the Athearn model on
hand. Please verify which end that the louvers for the
refriegration unit are located. If they are indeed located at the B
end, the car is incorrect as the refrigeration unit (and the 5/5
Dreadnaught end) was located at the A end.

The rectangular lover is located on the left side of the car, and
the lower, almost square screen is located on the right side of the
car. See the drawing on page 210 of Thompson/Church/Jones' Pacific
Fruit Express (Second Edition).


"Looking at the Athearn site, it appears that they produce their
model both with and without the diagonal braces next to the door."

Compare the models more closely - the model that we've been
discussing has exterior post sides; the other Athearn 50 ft
mechanical reefer models earlier PFE mechanical reefers and is
closest to classes R-70-9 and R-70-10, built 1954-55. It has the
same problem with ends as the models that we've been discussing, and
the roof is incorrect (it should be a ZU-section "overhanging"
eave). See PFE, pages 199-201.


Ben Hom


Re: John Golden's insults

golden1014
 

Hey Jared,

I don't recall calling Richard and/or Ed "fat", but if
I did I didn't communicate properly. If anything,
we're all fat (with knowledge) because of the hard
work these guys do and the mentorship they provide.
There's really no way for us to repay them and others
on this list and elsewhere that have taken the
prototype movement so far.

BTW, congratulations on your fine models and layout
plan appearing in the magazines. It's about time, my
friend.

And now, on to more pertinent STMFC matters.

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL



John Golden
O'Fallon, IL

Hosting the St. Louis RPM Meet
25-26 Aug 06, 9AM to 9PM
Gateway Convention Center
One Gateway Center Dr.
Collinsville, IL 62234

Updated as of 01 Jun 06: http://www.pbase.com/golden1014


Re: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

Thanks Ben & Tony! It looks workable as a kitbash for the layout. The model has the lower, almost square screen on the left B end side, and a rectangular louver on the right B side. Is that correct? If not, I might just junk it and get an Athearn. Louvers are a bit much to fiddle with.

Looking at the Athearn site, it appears that they produce their model both with and without the diagonal braces next to the door.

Thanks again,
KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Thompson
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?


> Kurt Laughlin asked:
> "Is there a prototype for this critter, #43-1009-xx (also 179xx)?
> According to John Nehrich, "PFE did have mechanical reefers like this
> model. . ."

And only PFE. It's entertaining that AHM offered it in Santa
Fe paint (along with several other bogus schemes, of course).

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: NYC Cement Car?

Ian Cranstone
 

On 1-Sep-06, at 7:53 PM, Kurt Laughlin wrote:

Does the SP car you refer to look like this?

http://www.us-train50.de/N-Bilder/400/490.JPG
http://www.us-train50.de/N-Bilder/400/488.JPG

If so, then this is probably the prototype for the 22 slot AHM "calcium carbide" car, rather than the SHPX car which has 28 slots (but was also modeled by AHM)..

The 1961 ORER list these as class LF, 2 cars, 598051 and 598099, with 22 demountable calcium carbide containers. CN 63000 seems to be bogus.
I think I can definitely say that 63400 (at least that's what the number looks like) is bogus. Although I don't seem to have any listing under that number, it was almost certainly a double-sheathed wood boxcar in bunk service. CN did have a few gondolas in the 193000 and 193100 series in container service, but no flats to my knowledge. There were some container flats in the 634000 series that they may have been thinking of, but these cars were rebuilt from 40' steel frame boxcars to move 20' containers circa 1969 and didn't look much like this model.

Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
lamontc@...
http://freightcars.nakina.net
http://siberians.nakina.net


Re: Prototype for Bachmann "51 ft Mechanical Steel Reefer"?

Tony Thompson
 

Kurt Laughlin asked:
"Is there a prototype for this critter, #43-1009-xx (also 179xx)? According to John Nehrich, "PFE did have mechanical reefers like this model. . ."
And only PFE. It's entertaining that AHM offered it in Santa Fe paint (along with several other bogus schemes, of course).

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

138501 - 138520 of 194805