Topics

Width over side sheets for CNW/CMO USRA DS rebuilds

Benjamin Scanlon
 

Believe from an earlier comment that I cannot find (Yahoo Groups search capacity not being what it was) that many USRA DS rebuilds were taken out to the width of a 1932 ARA/AAR boxcar, so that would be taking the inside width from 8'9" (??) to 9'4", IIRC.


However, I am unsure of the width over side sheets? 


Further, does anyone know what the width over side sheets (or at least inside width, if that is unknown) was for the C&NW/CMO cars? These were CNW 65000-67418 and CMO 36100-37098


As the CNW rebuilds were done between 1937-40 and the last 200 for the Omaha Road were rebuilt in 1941, I'm wondering if they took the car out to the same width as the then current 1937 AAR boxcar?  


Regards


Ben Scanlon


Jack Mullen
 

Ben,

First a correction - inside widths for USRA and AAR std boxcars were 8' 6" and 9' 2" respectively. 

You're right about IW being increased when the cars were rebuilt.  The CNW/CMO rebuilds had 9'2 IW.  Assuming the lining is 13/16" lumber, and the side framing is 3" deep, the width over the side framing should be 9' 9 5/8".  Allowing 0.1" steel sheathing on each side brings the total just a bit shy of 9' 10".  

The assumed values are consistent with the AAR standard boxcars, and very typical for the era. I wish I could be a bit more definite, but most of my references are still in boxes.

Jack Mullen

Benjamin Scanlon
 

Dear Jack, thanks for the correction  All very helpful and I thank you   

I'd assumed the railroads would, if it were possible, rebuild their cars to conform to designs and practices in vogue at the time.  

However, Martin Lofton's categorisation of some rebuilds as 'AAR design' made me think that some earlier 'extended height' category rebuilds maybe differed from AAR dimensions. 

Cheers, 

Ben Scanlon

Dennis Storzek
 




---In STMFC@..., <benjaminscanlon@...> wrote :


However, Martin Lofton's categorisation of some rebuilds as 'AAR design' made me think that some earlier 'extended height' category rebuilds maybe differed from AAR dimensions. 

Cheers, 

Ben Scanlon
===================

Which would be correct. The early Youngstown Steel Door Co. pre-fab car sides offered no increase in height, the sheathing pattern differed from the AAR design, and were intended to use the existing roof components. The last iteration of the design essentially supplied an AAR standard body modified to adapt it to a narrower underframe.

Dennis Storzek

Greg Martin
 

Ben and all,

I think I can answer many of Ben's questions after all the research for SHAKE-N-TAKE© in 2014 .

BTW Ben Homm has the second hand rebuilds pretty well covered. I will see what I can add.

In context

Eventually all things merge into one and a river runs through it.
Norman Maclean



Ben Scalon comments:

"Believe from an earlier comment that I cannot find (Yahoo Groups search capacity not being what it was) that many USRA DS rebuilds were taken out to the width of a 1932 ARA/AAR boxcar, so that would be taking the inside width from 8'9" (??) to 9'4", IIRC."

The inside width of the CNW/RI design was 9' 2-1/16"

The width over the side sills was 8' 6-5/8" 

The width over the Upper and Lower Eves was (up) 10' 4-1/16" (lower) 10' 4-3/8"

 

I try not to make generalizations,  there were many commonalities but as much alike they all differed.  

It depends on the era they were rebuilt. There was variation and lots of roads rebuilt USRA DS and USRA SS freight cars. I find them all interesting.

 

Martin Lofton's article in RMC ids a good starting point , certainly only scratches the surface.

 

"However, I am unsure of the width over side sheets?"

 

I am not sure why this would be important? If you are scratch building you might need to know the thicknesses of the material overlapping the side sheathing. There are several 1937 AAR 10' IH  cars in good condition at he railway/ trolley museum that might help for those rebuilt later to '37 spec's like the Santa Fe cars.  

"Further, does anyone know what the width over side sheets (or at least inside width, if that is unknown) was for the C&NW/CMO cars? These were CNW 65000-67418 and CMO 36100-37098"

 

If you were to join the SHAKE-N-TAKE Yahoo Group most of this would be easily sovled as we did the car at Cocoa Beach in 2014 and followed along after the event. The data we accumulated was generously shared for free and with the Sunshine kit long go this is a great way to model several variations of the car. I still have ends and sills for the CNW/CMO/RI cars. We improved the side sheathing that was wrong on other offerings as well.   

 

"As the CNW rebuilds were done between 1937-40 and the last 200 for the Omaha Road were rebuilt in 1941, I'm wondering if they took the car out to the same width as the then current 1937 AAR boxcar?  

Regards

Ben Scanlon"

Yes Ben but not exactly. Sign on and Feed You Head.

 

 

 


Benjamin Scanlon
 

Gday Norman

The width over side sheets is the one i'm interested in because in TT scale I've got a 1932 ARA/AAR car and a 1937 AAR ... and its easy to measure width over side sheets on an existing model .. so I just want to know how wide a model of the CNW/RI rebuild ought to be relative to those.  

I'll have a look at finding the Shake N Take group. 

Cheers, Ben Scanlon


Jeff Eggert
 

I’m a little late to the discussion, since Yahoo seems to have lost my post attempt from 3 days ago…

 

For the CNW cars, there are a number of dimensions that may or may not be useful on the car cards, diagrams, and data sheets.  This link is to some sample car cards and diagrams for the CNW series.  These came from the CNWHS Archives.  I did not find anything similar for the CMO cars.

http://www.yardoffice.com/RR/RRinfo/CNW1/

 

If someone sees cards and diagrams like these useful for other cars, the entire CNWHS car card collection is now digitized and available on a USB drive.  Similarly a group of 3 binders labeled “obsolete diagrams” is available on CD.

http://cnwhs.org/shopping/product_info.php?products_id=660

http://cnwhs.org/shopping/product_info.php?products_id=661

 

Jeff Eggert

CNWHS Archives

 

Benjamin Scanlon
 

Thanks Jeff.  I'm still waiting on whether I get accepted to the 'Shake n Take' Yahoo group, once I get to have a look there, I'll see if I've got enough information.  

Cheers, Ben Scanlon