Date
1 - 2 of 2
Fw: Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar
|
Steve SANDIFER
The tackboards, being black, stick out drawing attention to their inaccuracy. They have a pin in the back of them that hold them to the car. However, a quick paint job to make them the same color as the car and the discrepancy goes away for the average modeler. I did not try to replace them at this point, just paint them (too many other projects on my work table). I also replaced the 2-piece Atlas coupler with Kadee whisker 58s.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: mcindoefalls To: STMFC@... Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:39 AM Subject: [STMFC] Re: Atlas 1932 ARA Boxcar --- In STMFC@..., "culturalinfidel9" <djmiller@...> wrote: > > I've seen only limited discussion on the new Atlas 1932 boxcars. How > is the level of detailing? Any blatant inaccuracies? Recently there was a brief discussion here, which mostly questioned the two-board tackboards. But while we're on the subject, I have to question Atlas's choice of road names. The only ones I'm even remotely, and I mean remotely, interested in are CofG and MEC. If they had offered WM, C&O or Seaboard in the first run, they would have sold a car or three to me already. But, Warrior River Terminal??? Walt Lankenau
|
|
|
|
jerryglow2
They should be black for MP and it's sub roads who made up the largest
ownership of the cars. Jerry Glow --- In STMFC@..., "Steve Sandifer" <steve.sandifer@...> wrote: inaccuracy. They have a pin in the back of them that hold them to the car. However, a quick paint job to make them the same color as the car and the discrepancy goes away for the average modeler. I did not try to replace them at this point, just paint them (too many other projects on my work table). I also replaced the 2-piece Atlas coupler with Kadee whisker 58s.
|
|
|