Hi All,

I am just trying to take a little poll on how important moving doors and
opening hatches are for brass freight cars. I have heard "if I am paying
$XXX.XX for a car, those door better open."

The parts needed to make these items move and open actually make the car a
little less accurate, because they have to be out of scale. To me, there is
nothing more aggravating then having doors slide and hatches hanging open
while painting the car. I solder ALL of them shut. There is nothing in there
to see anyway. Then you can scratch up your weathering job too.

How many of you have ever posed a scene loading a car? OK, so that makes 3
of you. Could you have done it with a plastic car? SURE can!

Hit me with your thoughts please!

Thanks
Bill

Hi All,

I would like to thank everyone who replied to my question about the door
latch hardware. It is truly MOST appreciated. I get some great people
responding.

The collective knowledge on this STMFC list really amazed me when I first
joined. The one thing that I could not believe is that more then 1 person
knew the animal capacity (fattened and non-fattened) of stock cars. Which
leads me to my next question.

I am off to the NASG convention today. I could get some more cattle for my
stock car loads. Is this a "fattened" S Scale cattle?
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/billlane/cattle.jpg How can you tell? It
measures 34" across the midsection. If it was + - 6", would YOU be able to
notice?

Minutia is great if it does not stop your progress to your goal. I hope you
got a chuckle from my little goof here.

Thanks
Bill

Ben,

I think it treacherous to start discussing the color of on-line images, but
to me there is an rather blue "cast" to the photo you reference. Anybody know
if Sands was shooting Ektachrome because that's what that photo looks like to
me. I would be hesitatnt to paint a model based on that image alone.

Chris

In a message dated 7/9/03 6:46:19 AM, erict1361@... writes:

Is the correct color for a IC 1937 AAR Boxcar " Boxcar Red" ?

Eric,

As built by ACF, IC box cars built 1939 through 1940, series 17000-19499, had
sides and ends painted IC #11 maroon (what modelers typically call "box car
red"). Roofs and underframes were coated with black car cement. Trucks painted
black. White stencils. Wood running boards were coated with "Termineol" (no
idea what color this was). The same scheme was used on 40' and 50' box cars/auto
cars built from 1937-1941. The source of this information is from ACF bills
of materials, available for review at the Mercantile Library in St. Louis.
Paint samples are included in some folders. The color was more like "red-brown"
rather than an oxide shade.

I don't have any paint spec information for IC postwar box cars or repainted
cars. Photos indicate sides and ends were "box car red" but I don't know about
roof color. Hope this helps.

Regards,
Ed Hawkins

Yes, Mike Brock, let's hear it for "little buggers".

... with a goal of producing models of them with as great a
degree of accuracy as possible."

The last sentence is, indeed, part of the group's charter and has

always

been located in the group's description at the home site. I regret

that the

lack of this information may have misled some members regarding the
objectives of the group which does, indeed, emphasize the modeling

of

rivets, bolts, little buggers [ reference Roger Miener ], ....

As for the "little buggers", the word is on the street that the
inspector (i.e., me) charged with ascertaining the presence or absence
of "little buggers" will be present at the Hoo-Rah held in Cocoa Beach
in the month of January next forthcoming - to wit, January 2004.
Ergo, every freight car on the premises will be checked for the
presence - or absence - of "little buggers".

Youse has all been forewarned. That means that you already know what
is gonna happen. Hey, Jim Six ... oh yeah, and also Bob "Mr. Tree"
Hundman and Greg "Gee-Haw" Martin, that includes all of youse. Nobody
gets a free pass. OK? You hear what I'm sayin'? You see what I
mean? Gud!

BTW, and just in case anybody is wondering. The Six knows "little
buggers" probably better than anybody, and thus is doubtless streets
ahead of most of the rest of yah. You say that you don't know what a
"little bugger" is? No problem. Just ask The Six. He has photos.
He'll show them to you.

Cheers,
Roger Miener

(whose inspection tours will take place hard on following his
attendance at Richard Hendrickson's wine tasting seminar)

at Tacoma WA

I admire your initiative, Earl. That's quite a project you've taken on, and it must be one hellava basement that you have!

This reminds me of a project that John Allen, whose most well-known work was used as an example of caricature modeling yesterday, undertook many years ago. It was a model of a large scale (1/2", or perhaps even larger) standard gauge DS boxcar that he had built for the Smithsonian. It appeared in MR's Trackside Photos, probably in the late '60s as best I can recall. This car was 180 degrees from his "everyday" style of modeling. Every bolt head and rivet was there. It was a stunning effort, especially considering the less stringent expectations of the time.

Ron Hildebrand

Gents;
My turn to chime in about "rivet counting"...!
I model INDOORS with "G" guage, 1/29th scale (Aristocraft & USA Trains mostly) and am ATTEMPTING to stick as close as possible to PRR items as my layout is based on the PRR circa 1944, Canton (Ohio) District. You guys have it sooooooooo easy being in HO as compared to me! Nearly everything has to be scratchbuilt or kitbashed dramatically to get even close to a prototype. The car would still have probebly the wrong footholds, trucks (you can get ANY truck you want as long as it is basically Bettendorf!) grabirons and couplers (till I get around to doing body mounted Kadee 830s). I have converted numerous ARA 40'gons to 46', 52.5' and 65' as mill gons (65'ers=27" length). Decals?? ...stuck with 1/32nd scale items (but do not know of ONE guy with 1/32nd trains!). Boxcars are nearly all based on ARAs from the 30's, one style fits all!
THIS scale is a challange! You HO guys have it easy no matter the rivet count!
Earl Myers
Louisville, Ohio

In view of the fact that some messages have been recently posted on the
STMFC that suggest modeling accuracy not be pursued to as great a degree as
possible, I decided to take a look at the STMFC description and rules that I
send to all new members. Regretfully, I find that the last sentence of the
following paragraph was not included in the information that I have been
sending out.

" The purpose of this list is to discuss all aspects of North American
standard gauge freight cars of the steam era [ 1900-1960 ]. The objectives
include the sharing of information about railroad freight cars including
their operation, their activities, cargos, and distribution and various
techniques of building models of them. Emphasis is to be placed on the study
of the prototype with a goal of producing models of them with as great a
degree of accuracy as possible."

The last sentence is, indeed, part of the group's charter and has always
been located in the group's description at the home site. I regret that the
lack of this information may have misled some members regarding the
objectives of the group which does, indeed, emphasize the modeling of
rivets, bolts, little buggers [ reference Roger Miener ], board spacing [ or
the lack thereof WHEN there should be little or none ], and car interiors
[ even with sealed cars ] when any of the above may be applicable to
building a more accurate model. This sentence has been inserted into the
description and rules which will be sent to all new members. I regret the
inconvenience and misunderstandings that this lack of clarity may have
caused.

Mike Brock
STMFC Owner

On 7/8/03 10:10 PM, "Douglas Harding" <dharding@...> wrote:

Though I would share my answer with the group. I included photos in the
answer sent to George, but will post the photos I have in the photos
section on the mstl yahoo list at
http://www.yahoogroups.com/community/mstl Perhaps someone on this list
can add to, subtract from, or correct what I offer.

Would you also post them to the STMFC area? I don¹t particularly want to
have to join the MC&STL group just to see them.

Brian Ehni

Earlier today George Wells asked me about the Decker Meat Reefers I am
modeling. "You have probably seen the pictures of the new proposed Atlas
Decker Reefer. Can you tell me if this a correct paint scheme and for
what time period?" and "Where are you getting decals for all the meat
reefers you are having to build for your layout?"

Though I would share my answer with the group. I included photos in the
answer sent to George, but will post the photos I have in the photos
section on the mstl yahoo list at
http://www.yahoogroups.com/community/mstl Perhaps someone on this list
can add to, subtract from, or correct what I offer.

George
Yes, to my knowledge the Atlas Decker scheme is correct. There is a
photo in the mstl yahoo list files that shows what I believe is the same
paint scheme. The photo cited is an overhead shot and shows this scheme
has "Deckers" printed on the roof in large white letters. I have
attached the photos I do have, including one of a wood Armour meat
reefer for comparison.

To date I have seen/found three different Decker Meat Reefer lettering
schemes:
1) Dry Transfers from Clover House, circa 1915-1925. This has the large
map of Iowa with "Iowan Hams" lettered on it. Model Die Casting also
offers their 36 reefer in this scheme, check the Walther's Catalog. This
is what I have used to date to letter MDC reefers. I do not have a photo
of this scheme. Clover House offers in both HO and O. I used the O one
my Decker building, looks nice. Clover house does not have a website or
email. Though someone has their listing on a website, there are no
images. You will need to get one of their Catologs.

2) The proposed Atlas Scheme, which Atlas dates to 1934, with a 1930
built car, so may have been new in 1930 with a new order of reefers.
Just yesterday I discovered that Art Griffin offers a decal for this
scheme with the roof lettering. I do not know if the Atlas model
includes the roof lettering, I hope it does as a just ordered the Atlas
cars. Two images I sent show this scheme: Decker Meat Reefer.jpg and
PicG0001.bmp
Art's decals, with images, can be found at www.greatdecals.com

3) Clark Propst found a photo of a string of Decker reefers with plain
lettering, ie post BillBoard reefer. It looks very similar to the Armour
meat reefer scheme, only reads Decker Refrigerator Line. Armour took
over the Decker plant in 1935, so I am guessing that when BillBoard
reefers were outlawed in 1936 the Decker reefers got repainted in this
scheme patterned after the Armour scheme. DMRX-2588-Decker-reefer.jpeg
shows this scheme. Compare it to the Armour-wood-reefer-Bruins.jpg to
see what I mean about the similarities.

I used Clover House dry transfers for both my Decker and my Armour meat
reefers. Also for the Swift reefers I built for the Swift plant at
Marshalltown. I model 1949, which was kind of a change over date for
these two companies. Armour began using the gold star label in 1949,
they added the large red banner in 1947 and Swift did their first all
red with white lettering meat reefer in late 1949. Most of my cars are
for earlier paint schemes. I have used the Decker lettering because I
want to keep that name and heritage alive, even though physical evidence
was long gone by 1949. Also at the time it was the only one I had seen
or knew was offered. Now I know my whole string of reefers is wearing a
paint/lettering that disappeared about 1930. I hope to find or get some
made of the last Decker lettering and apply them. This last scheme (#3
above) disappeared about 1942-43 as the reefers were swallowed into
GATC. Armour leased all reefers from GATC, and I have a hunch the Decker
reefers became GATC property soon after Armour took over. My 1941 ORER
shows Decker reefers listed under GATC's holdings. But they and the
reporting marks DMRX are complete gone in my 1943 ORER.

Doug Harding
Iowa Central Railroad
www.iowatelecom.net/~dharding/

Ted
Thanks for you answer. I was really hoping it was Guido's fault on the
August issue.
Let me say I think your modeling and the RMC series is great stuff. I
took in your clinic this spring at the PCR convention and hope to again
in Toronto. Any thing I can learn about building better steam era
freight cars is welcome. Thanks for your efforts, and your website. As I
mentioned I "see" things, and sometimes I can even duplicate in HO, or
at least attempt. But I always admire and appreciate the skills others
have in model building and in research.

Doug Harding
Iowa Central Railroad
www.iowatelecom.net/~dharding/

Rod Smith, from Australia, wrote in part;
"I am endeavouring to research the milk industry in & out of Kansas
City in the post war years. Particularly the type & ownership of
freight cars used to carry this produce. Any web site information
would be grateful."

Rod,

I am afraid you are going to be disappointed, as there was no milk
train service to Kansas City after the Second World War. The book,
The Milk Market Industry by Roadhouse & Henderson, states milk train
service in the Kansas City milk marketed ended by 1934. Evidently,
the road network around Kansas City was good enough to make milk
train service unnecessary. The major cities, still having milk
train service after WW II, were Boston, New York, and Chicago.

If you would to discuss milk trains further, I suggest you join us
on the yahoo milktrains group.

Regards, Mike Carson

Tony Thompson asks:


Does anyone have the reference handy to the Frank Peacock article in the
UP Society "Streamliner," in which he laid out the "standard nomenclature"
for steel ends? I know it's here somewhere but it just isn't coming to
hand. It should have been ten years ago or so.

The issue is Vol 1 #2. I have it in front of me.

Mike Brock

I said:

Does anyone have the reference handy to the Frank Peacock article in the
UP Society "Streamliner," in which he laid out the "standard nomenclature"
for steel ends? I know it's here somewhere but it just isn't coming to
hand. It should have been ten years ago or so.

Naturally upon posting this, I quickly found the article (1985). Sorry
for the bandwidth--but it DID work <g>.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history

Does anyone have the reference handy to the Frank Peacock article in the
UP Society "Streamliner," in which he laid out the "standard nomenclature"
for steel ends? I know it's here somewhere but it just isn't coming to
hand. It should have been ten years ago or so.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2942 Linden Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 http://www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroads and on Western history

Mike Brock wrote:
"You may find it difficult to locate the PFE version of the Athearn
car...#5335. I cornered the market some yrs ago and can part with a few if
you need some."

If you can't find the PFE version, buy up some of the REALLY bogus schemes
(such as the Pennsy one) and strip and repaint. Help get bogus models off
the street! ;-)


Ben Hom

At 02:51 AM 7/8/03 -0400, you wrote:

The one thing that I have found out over the years in this hobby is that the ones that worry about the rivets don't have a layout, or the layout is something that people don't want to see. I have seen this to many time in the last 30 years that I have been in this hobby and started seeing other people layout. I have also found out over the years that the ones that talk the most don't have anything, and when you look at what they have it is all in boxes waiting to be build, this I have seen more then my fair share.

Mike...
Pretty broad statement, don't you think? I have a reasonably large layout (20x20, double deck, fully sceniced, scratchbuilt buildings), it has been in an Allen Keller video and in magazines dozens of times. My own standards for freight cars on the layout:
Must represent an actual prototypical car
Must be prototypical for August 1939
They must be cars which did or could have been on my prototype (YVRR) at that time
Must be weathered appropriately for August 1939
Must have full brake gear
Must have individual grab irons (i.e, no cast on ladders or grab irons)

Does anyone who visits the layout care about this stuff...most don't but some appreciate it. Does anyone but me know that all of the cars have complete brake gear...not unless I tell them but that is my own personal standard. Having such personal standards is how I like to enjoy the hobby.

Prototype research is cheap compared to the cost of producing masters or die work and the cost to produce correct rivets, etc. is the same as incorrect rivets. The fact that more and more manufacturers are trying hard to produce more accurate models must mean that such models result in more sales.

If you think that members on this list are "over the edge" regarding getting models "right", read the produce reviews in Fine Scale Modeler for tanks, vehicles, planes, etc. First, you will notice that not one of the manufacturers tries to produce a non-prototype model kit....they wouldn't sell! Second, the accepted practice 10-15 years ago was for "raised" panel lines; now a kit would get a very poor review for substituting raised panel lines for engraved panel lines even though engraved panel lines are much more difficult to reproduce in a die.

Sounds like the rivet issue, doesn't it? Of course, from 2' away, who could tell the difference?

Jack Burgess
www.YosemiteValleyRR.com

Quoting Richard Dermody <ddermody@...>:

Ben: I hate to tell you this but you can't tell 6 inches in HO scale
it is about .002 or something like that, and this is the point I am
making so let get real you can't tell 6 inches at all.
Mike Looney

Mike,

The actual 6" difference in HO is .069 and all else being equal, you
should be able to see the difference between a 10'0" boxcar and a 10'6"
boxcar.

I think Ben is right.

Richard Dermody

This will be a bit long but will serve two purposes. First, it will
bring everyone up to date on our Dominion car project. Second, it will
illustrate why three decimal places in HO scale ain't going to make it!

Last Thursday was the pre-arranged day to test shoot the four-slide
mold for the body of the first of our Dominion car series. This is the
floor, sides and ends. We SHOULD have been doing this on May 1st but have
experienced some delays even with allowances made for same when setting up
a schedule. In any case, our molder's production manager had already told
me we had a "jewel" of a mold and my hopes were running high, though the
first effort in molding such large and complicated mold is always....
shall we say interesting. The mold had already been "hung" on a nice new
Nigata molding machine by the time I arrived. The Nigata's are realy nice
machines, all electric, no hydraulics and far better and cheaper to run
than any Arburg or Newberry hydraulic machines we have used for some of
our line. The machine was turned on to warm up and away we went. We ran
about fifty shots to see where we were at. As often happens with a new
mold having a lot of detail, some of the details, such as the door latch
mechanism wanted to hang up and tear off as the carbody was ejected from
the mold. O.K., so we found a couple of areas that need a little more
polish to aqssist with the release of the molded carbody and found another
area where an adjustment needs to be made to the mold so it doesn't knock
off the top dor stop on one side of the body during the ejection process.

Our moldmaker had warned me three weeks ago that there were four small
spots where one detail was repeated that might not be quite right and he
was correct. This, however, is simply a question of taking the detail to
slightly greater depth in the cavity. We also need to beef up the
horizontal flange of the top angle in the car's frame so that it will not
be so thin as to tear off in the ejection process. Again, no biggie! In
many ways we have pushed this mold to the limits of what can be done
with both molds and styrene in HO scale. So the moldmaker, the production
manager and I sat down for twenty minutes to review what needed to be done
while the shop crew dismounted the mold to enable the toolmaker to make the
necessary adjustments, afterwhich I took a bunch of the test shots and
headed home to review all measurements.

After supper I dug out scale rules and calipers and went to work. My
first measurement was the length.....and I knew immediately we were in
deep manure no matter how good the detailing was! The 36 ft. 4 in. outside
measurement of the carbody came in at 34 ft. 9 1/2 in.!!!! You can bet
that measurement was double checked quickly...and then triple checked with
the same result each time! Then the width and height were checked with the
same result being found. I'm not the toolmaker but immediately began to
suspect we had a math problem....probably with the conversion factor. Thus
I called the production manager at home and left word for him to call when
he got in, which he did. He decided to review the math with the plant owner
in the morning and then bring the toolmaker in. What was found was that the
conversion factor is a seven decimal number when carried out. It works out
all right if one uses at least five decimal places but the toolmaker had
only used four! That small difference compounds into an error of between
4% and 5% over every dimension in the carbody and that is just plain not
acceptable!!! Our toolmaker has learned a VERY expensive lesson and is
now recutting all cavities for the carbody so we will have it RIGHT when
it is introduced to the marketplace, not afterwards. While we had planned
to have the car available at the now cancelled NMRA Convention in Toronto
next week, myu best "guesstimate" is that it will be early November before
the cars are ready for sale. If you think I'm unhappy you are absolutely
correct but I'd a damn site sooner have the car the way it is intended to
be before it leaves our place of business at all.

In any case, we know everything other than the size is correct, with
the exception of the mentioned detail that was to be corrected anyway. And
the molder's production manager was right, the tool is a jewel and so is
the product.....at least it will be when it is in the proper size! I will
put the caliber of the detailing up against anything else out there. You
don't have to take my word for it. Dick Dermody had a test shot put into
his hands just after noon today and can add whatever comments he wishes
since this tale is partly in response to his posting anyway. I will
also try to get a photo of a test shot up on our website at
www.newenglandrail.com. But please, guys, let's not hear any more about
three decimal places when it takes at least five to get it right in HO
scale! If you don't think so just ask our poor toolmaker! It is not a
topic for discussion with him at the moment, however, and I can understand
why.

Take care, Don Valentine
New England Rail Service

Jim,

A good test is to come to Naperville, or any other RPM meet where
they have a layout set up with a yard. When I can see 100 or more
well built prototype models together in context, it just knocks
me out! To be sure, on many clubs (including my own) you don't
really notice -- because for the most part, there isn't anything
worth noticing.

Or maybe you can see Mike Brock's Sherman Hill at the Cocoa Beach
RPM meet. Then everything comes together -- beautiful engines, cars,
trackwork, scenery, and sound! Oh sure, he's got that clunky H-70-1
rattling around, but you won't notice it... :o)

I just went down and looked at the railroad--there are lots of Athearn cars,
still, but as well, plenty of RC, IMW, Sunshine, Westerfield, F&C, and
scratchbuilt cars, almost all different--and you can tell. For example an Aathearn
car with a stock roofwalk, next to one that had had its stock roofwalk thinned
down, or replaced with an etched metal one. Now during an op session like last
night where maybe thirty trains of all types ran, with all this different
equipment, nobody pays much attention to this-the important things to look at are
the car reporting marks, and whether they match the waybill. But, if you're
watching, the small differences are still obvious.
Jim Dalberg

Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> -->> NOTE EMAIL CHANGE <<--
Sterling, Massachusetts

Rod Smith wrote:
I am endeavouring to research the milk industry in & out of Kansas City in
the post war years. Particularly the type & ownership of freight cars used
to carry this produce. Any web site information would be grateful.

Rod, you might want to post this question to the Milk Trains group - to
subscribe, e-mail milktrains-subscribe@... .


Ben Hom