AAR Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?


proto48er
 

Guys -

I just purchased a brass model of a 1935 AAR Standard (NOT Alternate Standard) 50 ton twin offset side hopper with oval heap shields. This is an excellent PSC "O" scale model, but I cannot seem to find a prototype for it!

The car is "factory painted" as N&W #233450, which I think (not sure) is bogus for this type of car.

The model has angles (instead of little bulb braces) at the top of the sides, and the diagonal creases meet the top chord about 18" from each end of the car, correct for an AAR Std car. On the ends, the car also has a folded sheet boundary where the bottom sheets meet the end sheets, more typical of an Alt Std car.

In addition to the folded sheet boundary, the problem with the model is the oval heap shields.

AAR Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O, CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Alt Std cars with them. Does anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

If none exist, I am going to cut the ends flat - then, except for the folded sheet boundary, it represents a number of prototypes. There is not enough metal to make the oval into a peaked or notched peaked heap shield.

What say you guys??

Thanks for the help!

A.T. Kott


proto48er
 

Guys -

I am just OLD! I meant to say:


AAR Alternate Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O, CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Standard cars with them. Does anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

Thanks!

A.T. Kott


Bruce Smith
 

A.T.,

No indication of any such car in RP Cyc volume 1, which has a roster of
these cars. Looks like it might be a foobie.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"proto48er" <atkott@...> 01/18/11 6:49 PM >>>
Guys -

I am just OLD! I meant to say:


AAR Alternate Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O,
CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Standard cars with them. Does
anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

Thanks!

A.T. Kott





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


golden1014
 

AT,

I recall that Clinchfield had a series of Alt Std cars with oval heap shields that resembled the AAR standard car with angled side braces--but they were still not standard cars. The top corner indentation is the giveaway. Can you send a photo of the car so we can lend further assistance?

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL

--- In STMFC@..., "Bruce Smith" <smithbf@...> wrote:

A.T.,

No indication of any such car in RP Cyc volume 1, which has a roster of
these cars. Looks like it might be a foobie.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"proto48er" <atkott@...> 01/18/11 6:49 PM >>>
Guys -

I am just OLD! I meant to say:


AAR Alternate Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O,
CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Standard cars with them. Does
anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

Thanks!

A.T. Kott





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


water.kresse@...
 

Got a picture of the model?  The C&O had some "odd-ball" offset-side twin bay hopper cars.  I did a PPT on just those variants up thru WW2 and their 1950s rebuilds for a C&OHS conference some time back.  They had almost every combo available at times.  Those oval or radial extended-ends does limit you period-wise.



"alfred kresse" < water.kresse@... >;



Al Kresse

----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <golden1014@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 11:49:58 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AAR  Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?

AT,

I recall that Clinchfield had a series of Alt Std cars with oval heap shields that resembled the AAR standard car with angled side braces--but they were still not standard cars. The top corner indentation is the giveaway. Can you send a photo of the car so we can lend further assistance?

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL


--- In STMFC@..., "Bruce Smith" <smithbf@...> wrote:

A.T.,

No indication of any such car in RP Cyc volume 1, which has a roster of
these cars.  Looks like it might be a foobie.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"proto48er" <atkott@...> 01/18/11 6:49 PM >>>
Guys -

I am just OLD!  I meant to say:


 AAR Alternate Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O,
CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Standard cars with them.  Does
anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

Thanks!

A.T. Kott





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


proto48er
 

Bruce -

Thanks for the reply! Unfortunately, I think that you are correct! The car has such nice N&W lettering that I kinda hate to dunk it in the paint remover... I am sure that N&W did not have this type of car.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "Bruce Smith" <smithbf@...> wrote:

A.T.,

No indication of any such car in RP Cyc volume 1, which has a roster of
these cars. Looks like it might be a foobie.

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

"proto48er" <atkott@...> 01/18/11 6:49 PM >>>
Guys -

I am just OLD! I meant to say:


AAR Alternate Standard cars with oval heap shields were built for C&O,
CRR, M, and NKP, but I can find NO AAR Standard cars with them. Does
anyone have a photo of such a car (in the 1948 or earlier time period)?

Thanks!

A.T. Kott





------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


proto48er
 

Al -

I hope I get this right this time -

The offset side C&O cars, as far as I can determine, are all of the Alternate Standard design on the sides. The main spotting features for these are the (9) pressed "hat" shaped small braces at the top of the sides, and the diagonal creases on the ends of the sides going all the way to the corners of the ends before hitting the top chord. This last feature allows the top chord, when viewed from above, to remain straight from end to end. The sides also had two vertical rows of rivets below each small hat shaped brace.

In contrast, the AAR Standard design cars had (9) small vertical angles at the top of the sides with single rows of vertical rivets below. The diagonal creases meet the top chord 18" from each end of the side, causing the top chord to be bent inward 7" over the last 18". When viewed from the top, it is readily apparent that the top chords on the sides of the car are bent inward, not straight.

As far as I can determine, N&W did not have any of either type of car!

C&O did have Alternate Standard cars with oval, oval notched, peaked, peaked notched, and Drednaught oval heap shields. However, I do not think they had any AAR Standard cars in the 1948 time period. That being said, who knows whether they inherited one of these cars from a wreck, etc.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
Got a picture of the model?  The C&O had some "odd-ball" offset-side twin bay hopper cars.  I did a PPT on just those variants up thru WW2 and their 1950s rebuilds for a C&OHS conference some time back.  They had almost every combo available at times.  Those oval or radial extended-ends does limit you period-wise.

Al Kresse


proto48er
 

John -

You are correct about the CRR cars. They were oddballs, with short angle braces and single rows of rivets (AAR Std), but the diagonal creases on the side sheets went all the way to the corners, leaving the top chord straight when viewed from above (Alt Std).

I have about decided to lop off the oval heap shields and make a flat-end MoPac car (my favorite road) out of the model. I guess this was a very uncommon version (ie., limited quantity made) of the PSC model for a reason!

Thanks for the reply!

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "John" <golden1014@...> wrote:

AT,

I recall that Clinchfield had a series of Alt Std cars with oval heap shields that resembled the AAR standard car with angled side braces--but they were still not standard cars. The top corner indentation is the giveaway. Can you send a photo of the car so we can lend further assistance?

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL


proto48er
 

Tim -

I think that Erie did have both AAR Std and Alt Std design double offset side hoppers. They had two series of them. Train stuff is at home - can provide number series tomorrow if interested.

Curiously, in "O" scale, we have had scads of Alt Std models in brass - from PSC and Rich Yoder Models, but these PSC cars (#17217, #17215, and #17213) are the only brass AAR Std cars in brass we have.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:


Sigh. Maybe in the next 20 yrs, someone will at last produce an
AAR alternate standard offset hopper to match C&O/ERIE/etc. In the
meantime Sunshine did make a simple mini-kit that involves a thin
resin overlay for the Atlas twin offset. Good enough until something
Kadee-ish appears...

Tim O'Connor


water.kresse@...
 

Do you have PowerPoint or Adobe Reader?  How big of a file can you handle?



The C&O diag sheets did not specify AAR Alternate Design but a AMC Spec.  The C&O had two types of side-sheet end panels, but during the reblts or refurbishing they all received the type panels you mentioned.



They bought used offset-side hop cars from other roads around 1956.



Al

----- Original Message -----
From: "proto48er" <atkott@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:02:22 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AAR  Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?

Al -

I hope I get this right this time -  

The offset side C&O cars, as far as I can determine, are all of the Alternate Standard design on the sides.  The main spotting features for these are the (9) pressed "hat" shaped small braces at the top of the sides, and the diagonal creases on the ends of the sides going all the way to the corners of the ends before hitting the top chord.  This last feature allows the top chord, when viewed from above, to remain straight from end to end.  The sides also had two vertical rows of rivets below each small hat shaped brace.

In contrast, the AAR Standard design cars had (9) small vertical angles at the top of the sides with single rows of vertical rivets below.  The diagonal creases meet the top chord 18" from each end of the side, causing the top chord to be bent inward 7" over the last 18".  When viewed from the top, it is readily apparent that the top chords on the sides of the car are bent inward, not straight.

As far as I can determine, N&W did not have any of either type of car!

C&O did have Alternate Standard cars with oval, oval notched, peaked, peaked notched, and Drednaught oval heap shields.  However, I do not think they had any AAR Standard cars in the 1948 time period.  That being said, who knows whether they inherited one of these cars from a wreck, etc.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
Got a picture of the model?  The C&O had some "odd-ball" offset-side twin bay hopper cars.  I did a PPT on just those variants up thru WW2 and their 1950s rebuilds for a C&OHS conference some time back.  They had almost every combo available at times.  Those oval or radial extended-ends does limit you period-wise.

Al Kresse


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Rich Yoder
 

Erie was one of the roads they bought used twins from around 1956.
Rich Yoder

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of water.kresse@...
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 12:19 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: AAR Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?



Do you have PowerPoint or Adobe Reader? How big of a file can you handle?



The C&O diag sheets did not specify AAR Alternate Design but a AMC Spec. The C&O had two types of side-sheet end panels, but during the reblts or refurbishing they all received the type panels you mentioned.



They bought used offset-side hop cars from other roads around 1956.



Al


----- Original Message -----
From: "proto48er" <atkott@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:02:22 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AAR Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?

Al -

I hope I get this right this time -

The offset side C&O cars, as far as I can determine, are all of the Alternate Standard design on the sides. The main spotting features for these are the (9) pressed "hat" shaped small braces at the top of the sides, and the diagonal creases on the ends of the sides going all the way to the corners of the ends before hitting the top chord. This last feature allows the top chord, when viewed from above, to remain straight from end to end. The sides also had two vertical rows of rivets below each small hat shaped brace.

In contrast, the AAR Standard design cars had (9) small vertical angles at the top of the sides with single rows of vertical rivets below. The diagonal creases meet the top chord 18" from each end of the side, causing the top chord to be bent inward 7" over the last 18". When viewed from the top, it is readily apparent that the top chords on the sides of the car are bent inward, not straight.

As far as I can determine, N&W did not have any of either type of car!

C&O did have Alternate Standard cars with oval, oval notched, peaked, peaked notched, and Drednaught oval heap shields. However, I do not think they had any AAR Standard cars in the 1948 time period. That being said, who knows whether they inherited one of these cars from a wreck, etc.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:
Got a picture of the model? The C&O had some "odd-ball" offset-side twin bay hopper cars. I did a PPT on just those variants up thru WW2 and their 1950s rebuilds for a C&OHS conference some time back. They had almost every combo available at times. Those oval or radial extended-ends does limit you period-wise.

Al Kresse


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


Rich Yoder
 

You guys are on track.
I built the AAR CO cars in "O" The CRR car was a different car.
Rich Yoder

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...] On Behalf Of
proto48er
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:14 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AAR Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?

John -

You are correct about the CRR cars. They were oddballs, with short angle
braces and single rows of rivets (AAR Std), but the diagonal creases on the
side sheets went all the way to the corners, leaving the top chord straight
when viewed from above (Alt Std).

I have about decided to lop off the oval heap shields and make a flat-end
MoPac car (my favorite road) out of the model. I guess this was a very
uncommon version (ie., limited quantity made) of the PSC model for a reason!

Thanks for the reply!

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "John" <golden1014@...> wrote:

AT,

I recall that Clinchfield had a series of Alt Std cars with oval heap
shields that resembled the AAR standard car with angled side braces--but
they were still not standard cars. The top corner indentation is the
giveaway. Can you send a photo of the car so we can lend further assistance?

John Golden
O'Fallon, IL



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


proto48er
 

Tim & guys -

I am somewhat incorrect in stating that Erie had both AAR Std and Alt Std twin offset hoppers! I was confused by a photo on p. 91 of Vol 2 of the RPC - it shows a photo of Erie #28000-28599. This series of cars had small angles along the top, evenly spaced, like an AAR Std car, BUT it has sides that have diagonal creases like the Alt Std cars! It is neither fish nor fowl! Sorry about that!

Also, I have uploaded, pending approval, 7 photos of the models of the AAR Std and Alt Std cars to show some of the differences in their construction. These are in the Photos Section entitled "AAR Std twin hopper models". Maybe this will clear up some of the mystery of these cars.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "proto48er" <atkott@...> wrote:

Tim -

I think that Erie did have both AAR Std and Alt Std design double offset side hoppers. They had two series of them. Train stuff is at home - can provide number series tomorrow if interested.

Curiously, in "O" scale, we have had scads of Alt Std models in brass - from PSC and Rich Yoder Models, but these PSC cars (#17217, #17215, and #17213) are the only brass AAR Std cars in brass we have.

A.T. Kott


bob_karig <karig@...>
 

Just to add to the confusion, the terms Standard and Alternate Standard are being used differently than how the AAR used them. The principal difference between Standard and Alternate Standard as far as the AAR was concerned was in the construction of the underframe and various components. The Alternate Standard, proposed by Unitcast and General Steel Castings, had cast steel components. The only alternate standard body proposed by those two companies had the same layout as the Standard.

The Erie and C&O cars, which are now being called Alternate Standard, were, in fact, considered Standard by the AAR.

Bob Karig


devansprr
 

--- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Sigh. Maybe in the next 20 yrs, someone will at last produce an
AAR alternate standard offset hopper to match C&O/ERIE/etc. In the
meantime Sunshine did make a simple mini-kit that involves a thin
resin overlay for the Atlas twin offset. Good enough until something
Kadee-ish appears...

Tim O'Connor


"Al Westerfield has produced many of the C&O variants"

AAR Alternate Standard offset twins? I think not.

Ben Hom
I was talking to some of the manufacturers at Prototype Rails, and it sounds like the tooling costs for multi-part injection molds to make single piece styrene car bodies are probably too expensive for smaller hopper runs. Its one thing when you can spread the tooling costs over 50k cars, but quite another when the run will be less than 5000.

But I am curious if the Rail Shops approach to the PRR H30 might provide a more efficient method for building fleets of less common hopper cars than resin kits. From the manufacturers it sounds like flat styrene molds are a tiny fraction of the cost of a full car body mold, and for simple hoppers one mold might be usable for both sides.

Anyone have thoughts about open bay hopper car bodies being made the same way as the RailShops H30? Obviously need interior details, but do not need the top and its details.

Better yet, masks for the photo-etched ends would become pretty repetitive for different variants and may not require that much Non-recurring-engineering.

I need a boat load of PRR Glca hoppers, and resin just doesn't make sense. Tooling for a single piece car body appears to be just too expensive, because the car was limited to the PRR and a few others.

It may even be possible to use the proper color styrene and pad print the sides. Kind of a throwback to some of the really old flat kits, but today they could be made to a much higher standard, including the printing.

Thoughts? Just Curious,
Dave Evans


Tim O'Connor
 

Dave

Why do people think that a model at an AAR alt std hopper correct for
C&O, ERIE, NP, and others would sell only 5,000 cars???

Let me tell you something -- 15 yrs or so ago a small manufacturer made
a model of a 1980-built PC&F insulated box car -- the 62' "Coors beer" car.
This car sold 250,000 copies! Mostly as kits! It's still available today,
as the tooling was sold to another owner.

Think about that -- perhaps 15%-20% of model railroaders model post-1980
HO scale. Roughly double that percentage model the "transition era" in HO.
Why on earth would a freight car that existed in large numbers, that ran
all over the east and midwest from the 1930's to the 1960's, that appeals
to a large segment of model railroaders, sell only 5,000 models??

Tim O'Connor

I was talking to some of the manufacturers at Prototype Rails, and it sounds like the tooling costs for multi-part injection molds to make single piece styrene car bodies are probably too expensive for smaller hopper runs. Its one thing when you can spread the tooling costs over 50k cars, but quite another when the
Thoughts? Just Curious,
Dave Evans


water.kresse@...
 

Can we somehow use some photos or drawings  vs. subjective descriptions.  Are we talking about the end side-panel transition folds?



Al Kresse

----- Original Message -----
From: "proto48er" <atkott@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 1:48:45 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: AAR  Standard twin offset side hopper with oval ends?

Tim & guys -

I am somewhat incorrect in stating that Erie had both AAR Std and Alt Std twin offset hoppers!  I was confused by a photo on p. 91 of Vol 2 of the RPC - it shows a photo of Erie #28000-28599.  This series of cars had small angles along the top, evenly spaced, like an AAR Std car, BUT it has sides that have diagonal creases like the Alt Std cars!  It is neither fish nor fowl!  Sorry about that!

Also, I have uploaded, pending approval, 7 photos of the models of the AAR Std and Alt Std cars to show some of the differences in their construction.  These are in the Photos Section entitled "AAR Std twin hopper models".  Maybe this will clear up some of the mystery of these cars.

A.T. Kott

--- In STMFC@..., "proto48er" <atkott@...> wrote:

Tim -

I think that Erie did have both AAR Std and Alt Std design double offset side hoppers.  They had two series of them.  Train stuff is at home - can provide number series tomorrow if interested.

Curiously, in "O" scale, we have had scads of Alt Std models in brass - from PSC and Rich Yoder Models, but these PSC cars (#17217, #17215, and #17213) are the only brass AAR Std cars in brass we have.

A.T. Kott



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Schuyler Larrabee
 

Dave Evans wrote:
I was talking to some of the manufacturers at Prototype Rails, and it sounds
like the tooling costs for multi-part injection molds to make single piece
styrene car bodies are probably too expensive for smaller hopper runs. It's
one thing when you can spread the tooling costs over 50k cars, but quite
another when the run will be less than 5000.



Hello? Less than 5,000? I'll echo Tim O'Connor's later response: they're
crazy to think that a car accurate for C&O (and incidentally, the ERIE and a
few other eastern roads) would only sell 5,000 copies. This reminds me of
the response when any model manufacturer has run a model which is dead-on
right for the ERIE, EL, DL&W: they sell out, more-or-less instantly, and in
many cases, a second run is done. Life-Like found this out with the first
FA-2 models decorated for ERIE. Athearn has run multiple editions of ERIE
hoppers, with no fall-off in sales. Rapido re-ran ERIE and DL&W passenger
cars, even though some of them were not-quite-on-the-precisely-correct-level
(others were).


Anyone have thoughts about open bay hopper car bodies being made the same
way as the RailShops H30? Obviously need interior details, but do not need
the top and its details.

Yes, that's silly. Open bay hoppers were extremely common cars, and as most
of us have learned if you are modeling railroads in the 30s to 50s, you
model the PRR, at least in the east and at least in part. There are enough
SPF's (sorry) alone to make the venture profitable, let alone the part of
the modeling public that can see beyond the limits of the interchange track.

I need a boat load of PRR Glca hoppers, and resin just doesn't make sense.
Tooling for a single piece car body appears to be just too expensive,
because the car was limited to the PRR and a few others.



Correct for PRR decoration, maybe (though I bet there are other examples -
not that I know that, but that seems to have happened frequently) but
correct enough to run on other connecting roads . . .

Thoughts? Just Curious,

Well, there's a few . . .


SGL





=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16750)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======


devansprr
 

- In STMFC@..., Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Dave

Why do people think that a model at an AAR alt std hopper correct for
C&O, ERIE, NP, and others would sell only 5,000 cars???

Let me tell you something -- 15 yrs or so ago a small manufacturer made
a model of a 1980-built PC&F insulated box car -- the 62' "Coors beer" car.
This car sold 250,000 copies! Mostly as kits! It's still available today,
as the tooling was sold to another owner.

Think about that -- perhaps 15%-20% of model railroaders model post-1980
HO scale. Roughly double that percentage model the "transition era" in HO.
Why on earth would a freight car that existed in large numbers, that ran
all over the east and midwest from the 1930's to the 1960's, that appeals
to a large segment of model railroaders, sell only 5,000 models??

Tim O'Connor

Tim,

Intermountain presented some numbers for the number of cars built per tooling set - I do not think I saw any over 200k, but I could be wrong. And the biggest seller was a post-transition car (long after this list). One body run was only 13k - in today's market I suspect that would be a loser financially.

It would not surprise me if the beer cars sold in large numbers because of the paint schemes, not because they were a dominant prototype.

Such is the curse of the prototype modeler who is trying to build a "balanced" fleet. (even worse for us WWII modelers).

I have no way to know what the sales volume would be for an accurate AAR standard twin offset hopper. I do not know how much market demand is left for another twin hopper, with probably 98% of model railroaders being unable to tell difference between this car and the current offset twin RTR offerings from Atlas and Kadee and the new Accurail kit offering. I suspect that over 90% of the HO model railroaders would think that the current offset twin offerings are adequate, they have bought all they need, and would likely not pay more than what Atlas, Kadee, or Accurail currently charge.

I wish this wasn't true, but I expect that is exactly what the established manufacturers believe.

My apologies for the 5k number - that referred to my quest, the PRR Glca - I just do not think the market is that big for them. Most modelers would not know the difference between the PRR Glca and Gla, and would not care even though the cars are obviously different. Being a car quickly scrapped after WWII makes the Glca market even smaller (although it is available in Resin).

From what I heard in Cocoa Beach, tooling costs for a 50k run of RTR hoppers would be in the $2 per car range - if you think such a market exists, then it looks like new business models are evolving for car manufacture that might be able to deliver such cars in two years if 100 modelers were willing to plunk down $1,000 each as a down payment before tooling is even cut, and which could probably be used to pay for 25 to 30 cars once sales are confirmed. If sales reach 100k cars, then each investor may get a $1000 return on their original investment - the cars he rec'd just became free. Willing to gamble?

Back to my original question - Not having built one yet, I was curious if the time and skill level required to build the RailShops H30 was significantly less than a resin hopper, and if it is, could their combination of flat styrene parts and brass etched end structures be a viable method to create a wide range of currently unavailable hoppers, and would they be easy enough to build at home in assembly line mode such that building small fleets may be viable?

If modelers think this is viable, then from what I heard the tooling costs would be significantly less than a RTR model (as much as a factor of 10 lower), resulting in either lowering the unit costs, or supporting much smaller production runs (would likely only sell in kit form).

I'm just trying to see if there is a new process and business model that could break through the sticker shock price of tooling for a new RTR car when no one can be certain just how many will sell.

If this would work, it might support a LOT of new cars to be sold in kit form even if the runs were not of the magnitude of most RTR sales.

Still looking for input, Thanks,
Dave Evans


devansprr
 

--- In STMFC@..., "Schuyler Larrabee" <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

Dave Evans wrote:
snip...
It's one thing when you can spread the tooling costs over 50k cars, > but quite another when the run will be less than 5000.

Hello? Less than 5,000? I'll echo Tim O'Connor's later response: they're
crazy to think that a car accurate for C&O (and incidentally, the ERIE and a
few other eastern roads) would only sell 5,000 copies. This reminds me of
the response when any model manufacturer has run a model which is dead-on
right for the ERIE, EL, DL&W: they sell out, more-or-less instantly, and in
many cases, a second run is done. Life-Like found this out with the first
FA-2 models decorated for ERIE. Athearn has run multiple editions of ERIE
hoppers, with no fall-off in sales. Rapido re-ran ERIE and DL&W passenger
cars, even though some of them were not-quite-on-the-precisely-correct-level
(others were).
SGL,

Let me clarify - I did not talk to ANY manufacturer about this car - please do not imply from my e-mail that the manufacturers don't understand, or are unwilling to make this car - the car was never discussed.

Dave Evans

Anyone have thoughts about open bay hopper car bodies being made the same
way as the RailShops H30? Obviously need interior details, but do not need
the top and its details.

Yes, that's silly. Open bay hoppers were extremely common cars, and as most
of us have learned if you are modeling railroads in the 30s to 50s, you
model the PRR, at least in the east and at least in part. There are enough
SPF's (sorry) alone to make the venture profitable, let alone the part of
the modeling public that can see beyond the limits of the interchange track.
SGL,

Its not silly if people on this list keep insisting on road specific variations, changes in end structural elements, the detailed geometries of tapered ends, etc. There isn't a mass produced PRR H25 because 99.9% of modelers can't spot the difference between the H25 and H21a, and simply don't care - I would not invest $100k to fill that "gap".

Dave

I need a boat load of PRR Glca hoppers, and resin just doesn't make sense.
Tooling for a single piece car body appears to be just too expensive,
because the car was limited to the PRR and a few others.

Correct for PRR decoration, maybe (though I bet there are other examples -
not that I know that, but that seems to have happened frequently) but
correct enough to run on other connecting roads . . .
SGL,

I did some preliminary research and struck out on Glca look alikes (Berwind, and perhaps some C&I), and while there may be a few variants that modelers here might consider the Glca to be a "stand-in" for, my specific problem is that this is a pre-transition era car, and everywhere I go people are saying that there just isn't much market for cars that did not last past the late 40's, with the exception of cars that can be painted in bill-board schemes.

I have been monitoring this list for 4 years now, and I do not see many of these hoppers getting made - even a car with such a huge fleet like the AAR standard twin offset... (I think only two new twins came out during this period in styrene, one RTR, one kit - I wonder how they have sold...)

I am simply wondering if there is another manufacturing concept and business model that might fill the MANY gaps in hopper variants identified by this list.

Does anyone who has built the H30 and resin hoppers have an opinion on the concept?

Thanks,
Dave Evans