Modeling possibilities?


destron@...
 

I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar
enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a
basis for models of these cars.

The cars in question are:

CSS&SB 1266 (13 panel steel gon),
PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon),
NC%StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar),
and
FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper).

Any suggestions as to what to use as a basis for modeling these would be
appreciated.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Frank Valoczy wrote:
"I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not
familiar enough with what's available in model form to decide what to
use as a basis for models of these cars."

Frank, it would be easier for us to help out with suggestions if you
have photos you could post. I'll take a shot at the easier ones
first:

"PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon)"
http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/pmcky-91918.jpg

Westerfield 8102 or Walthers 932-7450 plus paint & lettering.
http://www.westerfield.biz/8102_73542.htm


"NC&StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar)"

No kits that I know of; this is an unusual prototype for several
reasons; very few 36 ft boxcars were rebuilt as steel boxcars, and
these cars had a unique combination of features, even for rebuilt
boxcars - 8 panel sides, trapezoidal side sill brackets, late
Hutchins ends with height extension (square corner with no indent),
and what appears to be a lap seam roof. These are distinctive cars,
especially as they were painted in the Dixieland scheme with wide
band. I'll have to explore this one more to see what approach I'd
take - my first gut feeling is to cut down the Tichy model in length
and replace the roof and ends, but I'll need a better shot of the
roof to figure out what I'd use. The ends are a problem as well, as
they are "reversed" ends - the Westerfield Southern SU boxcar
Hutchins ends won't work for this.


"FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper)"

Strangely enough, the Athearn peaked end offset hopper. See Railway
Prototype Cyclopedia Vol. 1 for photos and more details on appliances.


Ben Hom


Richard Townsend
 

About three years ago Garrett Rea of Nashville intimated that resin kits based on the NC&StL cars would be forthcoming.? As I understood things then, the project was at the stage of measuring a surviving car body.? I have not heard anything about the project since then.? He told me that the 20000-21179 series had the Hutchins ends, while the 21180-21230 had Murphy ends.? Both series were NC&StL class XM-32.


Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, Oregon

-----Original Message-----
From: destron@vcn.bc.ca
To: stmfc@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 7:27 am
Subject: [STMFC] Modeling possibilities?







I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar
enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a
basis for models of these cars.

The cars in question are:

CSS&SB 1266 (13 panel steel gon),
PMcK&Y 91918 (Lot 442-G, steel gon),
NC%StL 20000-21399 (steel rebuilt 36' boxcar),
and
FEC 13001-13030 (33' IL steel hopper).

Any suggestions as to what to use as a basis for modeling these would be
appreciated.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
 

Frank Valoczy wrote:


I have some photos of four cars I'd like to model, but am not familiar
enough with what's available in model form to decide what to use as a
basis for models of these cars.

The cars in question are:

CSS&SB 1266 (13 panel steel gon),
There are two photo on Elwood's Fallen Flags site: Nos. 1233 and 1258

http://gelwood.railfan.net/cssb/css1233ads.jpg
http://gelwood.railfan.net/cssb/css1258ads.jpg

The later one, #1258, looks like a USRA WWI 70-ton mill gon still with
its drop-ends while the former, #1233, could be a USRA mill gon, but the
end is now fixed and the sides look like replacement ones as the side
stakes appear to be different than a those on the original car.

Again the Westerfield kit or possibly the Walthers model is a place to
start. One would have to see the photo of #1266 to make a final
recommendation as it appears than these cars are second-hand and each
may have unique features.

Bob Witt


destron@...
 

Again the Westerfield kit or possibly the Walthers model is a place to
start. One would have to see the photo of #1266 to make a final
recommendation as it appears than these cars are second-hand and each
may have unique features.
Bob,

Thanks for the link to those two pictures. I can't recall where I found it
(somewhere in the ether of the www) but I'll post the photo of 1266 to the
files section of the group when I get home.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Frank Vakoczy wrote:
"...I'll post the photo of [CSS&SB] 1266 to the files section of the
group when I get home."

Frank, thanks. I concur with Bob Witt - this is a USRA 70-ton steel
gon that you can do with either the Westerfield or Walthers models.
Decals would be a challenge, but it looks like you can get close using
appropriate alphabet and data sets.


Ben Hom


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Two more observations on the photo of CSS&SB 1266:
- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.
- Interesting Monon boxcar in the background to the right.

Ben Hom


Bruce Smith
 

regarding
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Frank%27s%20Randomness/CSS% 26SB%201266.jpg

On Feb 27, 2008, at 9:46 AM, benjaminfrank_hom wrote:
Frank, thanks. I concur with Bob Witt - this is a USRA 70-ton steel
gon that you can do with either the Westerfield or Walthers models.
and

- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.
Ben, et al,

Aren't those 50 ton andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/index.pl/bruce_f._smith2

"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


destron@...
 

Two more observations on the photo of CSS&SB 1266:
- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.
- Interesting Monon boxcar in the background to the right.
Thanks for the tips, Ben.

Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;)

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Bruce Smith wrote:
"Aren't those 50 ton Andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled
for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs."

They are DEFINITELY Andrews trucks - cancel that recommendation to use
Bowser Crown trucks!


Ben Hom


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Frank Valoczy wrote:
"Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;)"

Sounds like a good call to me, and entirely appropriate for the 1930s.
Also available from Westerfield as kit number 4106.
http://www.westerfield.biz/4106_66056.htm


Ben Hom


destron@...
 


- Use Bowser Crown trucks for your model.
Ben, et al,

Aren't those 50 ton andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled
for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs.
Yeah, the stencil says 100,000, and the ORER listing says that, too. I
tweaked the gamma of the image a bit to lighten it and get a clearer view,
and compared it to an Accurail Andrews truck I have at hand... looks
fairly close to the truck on the image.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Frank Valoczy wrote:
"Yeah, the stencil says 100,000, and the ORER listing says that, too. I
tweaked the gamma of the image a bit to lighten it and get a clearer
view, and compared it to an Accurail Andrews truck I have at hand...
looks fairly close to the truck on the image."

I agree - I'd go with the Accurail Andrews truck for this model.


Ben Hom


Michael Aufderheide
 

This is the first photo of one of these cars (8000 series) I've seen in revenue service. Believe me I've been looking. According to the Monon Car Dept. records at the Monon Historical Society these cars were scraped en masse in 1939-40.

Thanks for the photo!

Mike Aufderheide
Modeling the Monon

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Frank Valoczy wrote:
"Want to bet that that Monon boxcar is an SU? ;)"

Sounds like a good call to me, and entirely appropriate for the 1930s.
Also available from Westerfield as kit number 4106.
http://www.westerfield.biz/4106_66056.htm

Ben Hom






---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.


destron@...
 

This is the first photo of one of these cars (8000 series) I've seen in
revenue service. Believe me I've been looking. According to the Monon
Car Dept. records at the Monon Historical Society these cars were scraped
en masse in 1939-40.

Thanks for the photo!
Nothing to thank.

Unfortunately I have no idea anymore as to where I found it - it was
somewhere out on the ether of the web, though.

Frank Valoczy
Vancouver, BC

-----
http://hydrorail.hostwq.net/index.html - Rails along the Fraser
http://hydrorail.rrpicturearchives.net/ - Rail Photos


rwitt_2000 <rmwitt@...>
 

Ben Hom wrote:

Bruce Smith wrote:
"Aren't those 50 ton Andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled
for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs."

They are DEFINITELY Andrews trucks - cancel that recommendation to use
Bowser Crown trucks!
I concur with Bruce and Ben the truck are 50-ton Andrews.

The question remains, I believe the CSS received these gondolas second
hand, who were the original owners?

Bob Witt


Gatwood, Elden J SAD <Elden.J.Gatwood@...>
 

Guys;



For that one that looks pretty much like an original USRA clone, with the
flat drop ends, the poling loops might be a hint. It may be an ex-NYC or
ex-P,McK&Y/P&LE car.



The B&O cars got different ends and got modified pretty quickly. The PRR
G25's did not match that car in details. The RDG's also did not exactly
match that one in details.



I also agree that the other one has replacement sides and ends. They look
too new for the rest of the car.



Elden Gatwood



________________________________

From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
rwitt_2000
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:02 PM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Modeling possibilities?




Ben Hom wrote:

Bruce Smith wrote:
"Aren't those 50 ton Andrews trucks? The car appears to be stenciled
for 100,000 lbs not 140,000 lbs."

They are DEFINITELY Andrews trucks - cancel that recommendation to use
Bowser Crown trucks!
I concur with Bruce and Ben the truck are 50-ton Andrews.

The question remains, I believe the CSS received these gondolas second
hand, who were the original owners?

Bob Witt


El Jefe
 

Hi Steam Era Friends,

On a similar subject regarding gons, why is it that
the feature distinguishing steam-era freight cars from
modern era seems to be the long vertical brake wheel
shafting as opposed to the short horizontal brake
wheel shaft seen on modern freight cars? Check out an
example:

http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/nyc-726083.jpg

If the service life of this NYC 623-G lot car lasted
until 1982, would it be a good guess that Despatch
shops or whoever updated the look of the car to have a
more modern brake wheel arrangement?

New to group with a newbie kind of question.

Allen Smithee
California, U.S.A.







____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


Carl J. Marsico <Carlmarsico@...>
 

"J. W." <ln_f7@yahoo.com> wrote:

"distinguishing steam-era freight cars from modern era " <snip>

It depends when you make the cut-off from "steam" to "modern" If you go by the definitions set by STMFC and MFCL, the cut-off is 1960, and by that time, the "long vertical brake wheel shafting" was outdated.

Carl J. Marsico


benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Carl Marsico wrote:
"It depends when you make the cut-off from "steam" to "modern" If you
go by the definitions set by STMFC and MFCL, the cut-off is 1960, and
by that time, the "long vertical brake wheel shafting" was outdated."

Outdated, perhaps, but a sizable number of older cars still had this
arrangement into the 1960s. Additionally, "long vertical brake wheel
shafting" doesn't necessarily mean a lack of power hand brakes on a car
either, particularly for flat cars.


Ben Hom