BLI New York Central System Box Car Models


Richard Hendrickson
 

Mine were just delivered via UPS this afternoon, and after looking
them over carefully, I can say that I am very well pleased with how
they turned out. In addition to the NYC cars in post-WW-II form,with
Murphy rectangular panel roofs and steel grid running boards, they
are also offered (correctly) with Boston & Albany and Peoria &
Eastern lettering. The car bodies are accurate and well detailed,
with both corrugated and Dreadnaught ends well represented, and the
problems with running boards, doors, etc. that were discussed last
year on this list have been corrected, except that the lateral
running boards still stand too high and leave the outer running board
supports stranded in mid-air - a problem that's easily solved. Free-
standing grab irons and steel grid running boards are delicate and
close to scale, as are the sill steps. Air brake equipment is well
represented, but the brake rods slant upward at their outer end well
short of any problem of interference with the trucks and wheels;
again, this is easily corrected. I'll change out both the wheelsets
(replacing code 110 plastic with code 88 metal) and the couplers
(Kadee scale couplers for plastic #5 clones), but YMMV. These models
have been a long time in coming, but are definitely worth the wait.
Built in numbers almost as large as the Pennsy X29s, they went
everywhere on the North American rail system and most of them lasted
through the '50s and into the '60s before being retired. Most of us
will want several.

Richard Hendrickson


James F. Brewer <jfbrewer@...>
 

I picked up mine today and have had a chance to look them over.  As Richard has noted, the lateral running boards sit too high but this should be easily fixed.  I too will change out the plastic wheels for IM "semi-scale" metal wheels and Kadee "scale" couplers.  The doors still look a bit undersized to me, and I will glue them in place rather than having them open.  On the pre-1955 lettered cars, I will add repack data, although I was extremely happy the reweigh dates mostly fit within my August 1956 era.



Thanks to Richard and all who helped to make this model available.



Jim Brewer

Glenwood MD

----- Original Message -----


From: "Richard Hendrickson" <rhendrickson@...>
To: "STMFC" <STMFC@...>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 7:51:22 PM
Subject: [STMFC] BLI New York Central System Box Car Models

 




Mine were just delivered via UPS this afternoon, and after looking
them over carefully, I can say that I am very well pleased with how
they turned out. In addition to the NYC cars in post-WW-II form,with
Murphy rectangular panel roofs and steel grid running boards, they
are also offered (correctly) with Boston & Albany and Peoria &
Eastern lettering. The car bodies are accurate and well detailed,
with both corrugated and Dreadnaught ends well represented, and the
problems with running boards, doors, etc. that were discussed last
year on this list have been corrected, except that the lateral
running boards still stand too high and leave the outer running board
supports stranded in mid-air - a problem that's easily solved. Free-
standing grab irons and steel grid running boards are delicate and
close to scale, as are the sill steps. Air brake equipment is well
represented, but the brake rods slant upward at their outer end well
short of any problem of interference with the trucks and wheels;
again, this is easily corrected. I'll change out both the wheelsets
(replacing code 110 plastic with code 88 metal) and the couplers
(Kadee scale couplers for plastic #5 clones), but YMMV. These models
have been a long time in coming, but are definitely worth the wait.
Built in numbers almost as large as the Pennsy X29s, they went
everywhere on the North American rail system and most of them lasted
through the '50s and into the '60s before being retired. Most of us
will want several.

Richard Hendrickson


Tim O'Connor
 

Speaking of such cars, Jeff English once posted that NYC 131000-131999
were rebuilt in 1937 with AB brakes, lot 659-B. Is this car the same as
the BLI model?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/300636553033

Tim O'Connor


Bruce Smith
 

Richard,

What is the potential for backdating these cars to a WWII or pre-war
appearance? I would assume that they would need a new roof and running
boards.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> 12/27/11 6:52 PM >>>
Mine were just delivered via UPS this afternoon, and after looking
them over carefully, I can say that I am very well pleased with how
they turned out. In addition to the NYC cars in post-WW-II form,with
Murphy rectangular panel roofs and steel grid running boards, they
are also offered (correctly) with Boston & Albany and Peoria &
Eastern lettering. The car bodies are accurate and well detailed,
with both corrugated and Dreadnaught ends well represented, and the
problems with running boards, doors, etc. that were discussed last
year on this list have been corrected, except that the lateral
running boards still stand too high and leave the outer running board
supports stranded in mid-air - a problem that's easily solved. Free-
standing grab irons and steel grid running boards are delicate and
close to scale, as are the sill steps. Air brake equipment is well
represented, but the brake rods slant upward at their outer end well
short of any problem of interference with the trucks and wheels;
again, this is easily corrected. I'll change out both the wheelsets
(replacing code 110 plastic with code 88 metal) and the couplers
(Kadee scale couplers for plastic #5 clones), but YMMV. These models
have been a long time in coming, but are definitely worth the wait.
Built in numbers almost as large as the Pennsy X29s, they went
everywhere on the North American rail system and most of them lasted
through the '50s and into the '60s before being retired. Most of us
will want several.

Richard Hendrickson







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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 27, 2011, at 7:42 PM, Bruce F. Smith wrote:

Richard,

What is the potential for backdating these cars to a WWII or pre-war
appearance? I would assume that they would need a new roof and running
boards.
Yes, Murphy steel roof with overhanging edges and no panels, wood
running boards, and KC air brakes. Also, herald backgrounds were
black until ca. 1942. Removing the panels from the existing roofs on
the models is possible but would not be easy (though perhaps easier
than removing and replacing them).

Richard Hendrickson


pennsylvania1954
 

Mine arrived yesterday, and I am well pleased, as well. I recommend you all check your wheels again. I initially thought they were plastic, too, but I was fooled by the finish. They are indeed metal with a plastic insulator on one side of each wheelset. Also, when you change to a scale Kadee coupler, plan to change the box, too. Strangely, the original box opening and coupler shank are thinner than the Kadee shank.

Steve Hoxie
Pensacola FL


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 27, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Tim O'Connor wrote:

Speaking of such cars, Jeff English once posted that NYC 131000-131999
were rebuilt in 1937 with AB brakes, lot 659-B. Is this car the
same as
the BLI model?

No, those cars were rebuilt as single door box cars from an earlier
series of 1-1/2 door cars with inverse corrugated ends and fishbelly
center sills, among other differences.

Richard Hendrickson


spsalso
 

I got a set of four of these cars, and was happy to note that they each have different re-weigh data. Mine, which are the pre-55 Roman lettering with 7-8 ends are EB 2-57, GBAY 3-57, AJ 5-52, and EB 9-53.



Ed

Edward Sutorik


Bruce Smith
 

Ed Sutorik wrote:
I got a set of four of these cars, and was happy to note that they each
have different re-weigh data. Mine, which are the pre-55 Roman
lettering with 7-8 ends are EB 2-57, GBAY 3-57, AJ 5-52, and EB 9-53.

That's great. But, no offense Ed, you cannot run those cars together,
since the '52 and '53 reweight dates would be innappropriate for 1957 or
later and of course for dates that the '52 and '53 reweighs are proper,
the '57 reweighs are some time in the future! ;^)

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Bill Welch
 

Could he not do so under Rule 1?

Bill Welch

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

That's great. But, no offense Ed, you cannot run those cars together,
since the '52 and '53 reweight dates would be innappropriate for 1957 or
later and of course for dates that the '52 and '53 reweighs are proper,
the '57 reweighs are some time in the future! ;^)

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Bruce Smith
 

Bill,

Rule 1? Is that "Its my railroad..."? I thought that both rule 1 and
rule G were suspended on this list?

No problem and I don't typically read reweigh dates on cars when
visiting a model railroad. If I did notice, I wouldn't say a word
about the incorrect reweigh dates... unless asked. I might tactfully
ask "so, what is your era?" (although that is more likely to be
triggereed by the ATSF "Shock Control" car behind a steamer) and then
wonder (silently) if the modeler had a clue as to what reweigh dates
meant (a common enough problem). However, since the STMFC list is not
(IIRC) in the business of validating rule 1 and Ed posted a comment
regarding the dates on these cars, I felt that it was valid to comment.
Certainly, were I to model one of the periods and purchase all 4 cars,
I would definitely feel the need to change the rewiegh dates on 2 of the
4.

That said, it is great that these cars are coming out with different
reweigh dates. I also wonder if there is a way to specifiy which ones
you get? Not that I personally care, since all are too late for me!

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


"lnbill" <fgexbill@...> 12/29/11 9:32 AM >>>
Could he not do so under Rule 1?

Bill Welch

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

That's great. But, no offense Ed, you cannot run those cars together,
since the '52 and '53 reweight dates would be innappropriate for 1957
or
later and of course for dates that the '52 and '53 reweighs are
proper,
the '57 reweighs are some time in the future! ;^)

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


 

I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC boxcars. I know BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because the board would have had to authorize that. So who did the research and what was used? Not likely that this question will be answered but it would be interesting to know who provided the research package for the boxcars. Hugh T. Guillaume

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

Bill,

Rule 1? Is that "Its my railroad..."? I thought that both rule 1 and
rule G were suspended on this list?

No problem and I don't typically read reweigh dates on cars when
visiting a model railroad. If I did notice, I wouldn't say a word
about the incorrect reweigh dates... unless asked. I might tactfully
ask "so, what is your era?" (although that is more likely to be
triggereed by the ATSF "Shock Control" car behind a steamer) and then
wonder (silently) if the modeler had a clue as to what reweigh dates
meant (a common enough problem). However, since the STMFC list is not
(IIRC) in the business of validating rule 1 and Ed posted a comment
regarding the dates on these cars, I felt that it was valid to comment.
Certainly, were I to model one of the periods and purchase all 4 cars,
I would definitely feel the need to change the rewiegh dates on 2 of the
4.

That said, it is great that these cars are coming out with different
reweigh dates. I also wonder if there is a way to specifiy which ones
you get? Not that I personally care, since all are too late for me!

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


"lnbill" <fgexbill@...> 12/29/11 9:32 AM >>>
Could he not do so under Rule 1?

Bill Welch

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

That's great. But, no offense Ed, you cannot run those cars together,
since the '52 and '53 reweight dates would be innappropriate for 1957
or
later and of course for dates that the '52 and '53 reweighs are
proper,
the '57 reweighs are some time in the future! ;^)

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL



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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Benjamin Hom
 

Hugh T. Guillaume wrote:
"I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC boxcars. I know
BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because the board would have had to
authorize that. So who did the research and what was used? Not likely that this
question will be answered but it would be interesting to know who provided the
research package for the boxcars."

The person who provided the research for these cars is a long-time leader
in prototype freight car modeling and research who has produced high quality
work for over 35 years.  He's an active member of this list, so I'll leave it up
to him to comment as he sees fit.

As for the NYCSHS, if it were up to the leadership of that society at the time,
no information would have been provided and these models would have never come
to fruition.  Nothing against the efforts of the current society leadership
who is doing their best to embrace the role of modelers in historical societies,
but a simple state of fact about the "support" offered modelers by the previous
leadership.


Ben Hom


Tim O'Connor
 

Bruce why can't a 53 and 57 reweigh run together? The interval was
48 months for box cars. I'm sure more than a few cars slipped past
their deadlines... I have MANY images of freight cars incorrectly
lettered after "mandatory" deadlines.

My objection to the 55 and 57 models with pre-53 paint schemes is
that unless the paint jobs depict reweigh "patch" style lettering,
they may look like full repaints with anachronistic reweigh dates.

Tim O'Connor

That's great. But, no offense Ed, you cannot run those cars together,
since the '52 and '53 reweight dates would be innappropriate for 1957 or
later and of course for dates that the '52 and '53 reweighs are proper,
the '57 reweighs are some time in the future! ;^)

Regards
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


Tim O'Connor
 

The NYCSHS requires the approval of the Board of Directors to
release prototype information???????? No WONDER there are relatively
few NYC prototype models on the market! What it's being hoarded for?
The expected boom of young post-doublestack era modelers raised on
video games, smart phones and iThings to suddenly develop an interest
in a railroad company that disappeared 30 years before they were born?
Good grief!

Tim O'Connor

I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC boxcars. I know BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because the board would have had to authorize that. So who did the research and what was used? Not likely that this question will be answered but it would be interesting to know who provided the research package for the boxcars. Hugh T. Guillaume


 

Ben, Thanks for the prompt reply to my post. No, I don't need to know the name of the person who researched the NYC boxcars. I am very confident now, based on your post, that a competent job was done. That's good because all too often manufacturers have used a color picture book as a primary source rahter than making an effort to find some "official' documentation. Sometimes black and white pics have been used with disastrous results.

You are quite correct that the NYCSHS would probably not have been helpful. This might change for the good now that the NYCSHS actually has a Modelers' Committee. I just hope that the new committee sets the bar at a high level and does not take the low road of "good enough" or "close enough". I am by no means a master model builder but I do not like the "good enough" or "close enough" approach.

Thanks again for your reply.

Hugh T. Guillaume

--- In STMFC@..., Benjamin Hom <b.hom@...> wrote:

Hugh T. Guillaume wrote:
"I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC boxcars. I know
BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because the board would have had to
authorize that. So who did the research and what was used? Not likely that this
question will be answered but it would be interesting to know who provided the
research package for the boxcars."

The person who provided the research for these cars is a long-time leader
in prototype freight car modeling and research who has produced high quality
work for over 35 years.  He's an active member of this list, so I'll leave it up
to him to comment as he sees fit.

As for the NYCSHS, if it were up to the leadership of that society at the time,
no information would have been provided and these models would have never come
to fruition.  Nothing against the efforts of the current society leadership
who is doing their best to embrace the role of modelers in historical societies,
but a simple state of fact about the "support" offered modelers by the previous
leadership.


Ben Hom  


 

Tim,

This should change now that a Modelers' Committee has been established.

Check out the NYCSHS website for more info on this and on the e-zine for model railroaders that is edited by a director of the NYCSHS. He has published two issues so far. Both are well done and worthy of attention.

Hugh T. Guillaume

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


The NYCSHS requires the approval of the Board of Directors to
release prototype information???????? No WONDER there are relatively
few NYC prototype models on the market! What it's being hoarded for?
The expected boom of young post-doublestack era modelers raised on
video games, smart phones and iThings to suddenly develop an interest
in a railroad company that disappeared 30 years before they were born?
Good grief!

Tim O'Connor


I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC boxcars. I know BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because the board would have had to authorize that. So who did the research and what was used? Not likely that this question will be answered but it would be interesting to know who provided the research package for the boxcars. Hugh T. Guillaume


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Dec 29, 2011, at 8:18 AM, mguill1224@... wrote:

I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC
boxcars. I know BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because
the board would have had to authorize that. So who did the research
and what was used? Not likely that this question will be answered
but it would be interesting to know who provided the research
package for the boxcars. Hugh T. Guillaume
No great mystery here, Hugh. I provided them with a lot of
information and photos, and Terry Link and others were also
involved. Several of us on this list were given the opportunity to
critique pre-production samples, which corrected a number of
problems. At that time, the NYCHS was not involved because the
society had a long-established reputation for being unresponsive to
requests for prototype freight car data, or to requests of any kind
from non-members. That, fortunately appears to be changing.

Richard Hendrickson


Tim O'Connor
 

Thank you Hugh. That's good to hear, I hope this bears fruit.

Tim O'

This should change now that a Modelers' Committee has been established.
Hugh T. Guillaume


 

Richard,

Thank you for the info re BLI boxcars.

I suspected that folks such as you, Terry and others were involved after I read the post from Ben Horn.

As I just told Tim O'Connor, the establishment of a Modelers Committee by the board of the NYCSHS is a step in the right direction. Another giant step is the e-zine edited by Noel Widdifield. It can be accessed through the NYCSHS website.

A number of NYCSHS members who, like myself, are model railroaders have lobbied long and hard for a new approach to the model community. The president and the board, much to their credit, have moved forward on this.

Thank you, again, for the post, and congratulations to you, Terry and everyone else who worked on the boxcar project. I just hope that I will be able to find a few for my layout. Here in Western New York we do not really have a well-stocked model railroad store anymore. But that is another issue not relevant to this board.

Happy New Year!

Hugh T. Guillaume

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:

On Dec 29, 2011, at 8:18 AM, mguill1224@... wrote:

I would like to know what sources BLI used to produce the NYC
boxcars. I know BLI did not use any resources of the NYCSHS because
the board would have had to authorize that. So who did the research
and what was used? Not likely that this question will be answered
but it would be interesting to know who provided the research
package for the boxcars. Hugh T. Guillaume
No great mystery here, Hugh. I provided them with a lot of
information and photos, and Terry Link and others were also
involved. Several of us on this list were given the opportunity to
critique pre-production samples, which corrected a number of
problems. At that time, the NYCHS was not involved because the
society had a long-established reputation for being unresponsive to
requests for prototype freight car data, or to requests of any kind
from non-members. That, fortunately appears to be changing.

Richard Hendrickson



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