C&O 40' 1930 Automobile Boxcar
|
Richard Remiarz
I just started building a Funaro & Camerlengo C&O 1930 automobile boxcar kit. In looking through my reference materials, I have found almost no information on these cars. I thought I remembered an article in a publication sometime in the last few years
(which means it was probably 5-10 years ago) about these cars and building this kit, but haven't been able to find anything. Any help getting more information on these cars and this kit would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Rich Remiarz
Vadnais Heights, MN
|
|
|
|
william darnaby
There is an article on these cars in the 6/84 Mainline Modeler on page 55 with drawings and photos.
Bill Darnaby
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Richard Remiarz
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 6:53 PM To: RealSTMFC@groups.io; ResinFreightCarBuilders@groups.io Subject: [RealSTMFC] C&O 40' 1930 Automobile Boxcar
I just started building a Funaro & Camerlengo C&O 1930 automobile boxcar kit. In looking through my reference materials, I have found almost no information on these cars. I thought I remembered an article in a publication sometime in the last few years (which means it was probably 5-10 years ago) about these cars and building this kit, but haven't been able to find anything. Any help getting more information on these cars and this kit would be appreciated.
Thanks, Rich Remiarz Vadnais Heights, MN
|
|
|
|
Garth Groff and Sally Sanford
Richard, Please allow me to add to the other suggestions that this car (series 9500-9999) is covered on Plate 37 of FREIGHT CAR EQUIPMENT OF THE CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY, AUGUST 1, 1937. The reprint with additions to the original work was edited Carl W. Shaver, and I believe is still available from Chesapeake & Ohio Historical Society. Plate 37 includes builder's photos taken from the side, as well as both ends, plus the general arrangement drawing. The end photos are slightly larger than an O-scale model, and show some really useful details. Yours Aye, Garth Groff 🦆
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 7:53 PM Richard Remiarz <rremiarz@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Chuck Cover
Rich and all,
Attached are a couple of photos of the F&C built car sitting in Northumberland yard.
Chuck Cover Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
|
Eric Hansmann
I also built one of these C&O cars several years ago. https://i0.wp.com/designbuildop.hansmanns.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/20150805_candoxm.jpg
I finished it up in 2015, snapped a few photos, then shipped it off to a friend’s layout.
Wasn’t there a height issue with these models?
Eric Hansmann Murfreesboro, TN
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chuck Cover
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 8:28 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] C&O 40' 1930 Automobile Boxcar
Rich and all,
Attached are a couple of photos of the F&C built car sitting in Northumberland yard.
Chuck Cover Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
|
william darnaby
I seem to remember that there was a height issue as in too short. I built one of these years ago and it just looked too short to me. I must have compared it to published drawings and concluded that was so because I ended up selling the completed car on Ebay.
Bill Darnaby
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Hansmann
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 8:52 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] C&O 40' 1930 Automobile Boxcar
I also built one of these C&O cars several years ago. https://i0.wp.com/designbuildop.hansmanns.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/20150805_candoxm.jpg
I finished it up in 2015, snapped a few photos, then shipped it off to a friend’s layout.
Wasn’t there a height issue with these models?
Eric Hansmann Murfreesboro, TN
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chuck Cover
Rich and all,
Attached are a couple of photos of the F&C built car sitting in Northumberland yard.
Chuck Cover Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
|
Garth Groff and Sally Sanford
C&O 9500-9500 were very short. The height over the running board was 13' 3 9/16", which is a pretty picky measurement, but that's what is on the GA drawing in Shaver's book. My 1959 ORER gives the IH as 8' 6", but the side doors only cleared a fraction over 8' These cars were fitted with Evans auto loaders when new. During WWII the loaders were removed, though some may have been briefly restored after the war. Some of these cars went into auto parts service, but most were in general service. By 1959 there were still 425 cars left, all classed as XM. Some of these cars remained as late as the 1980s in MW service, since their twin side doors and the end doors made them useful in outfit trains. I think I have a negative awaiting scanning of one of the last taken at Charlottesville around 1986. Attached is a photo of one such car on the Nelson & Albemarle in 1951 at Esmont, Virginia. The car was either carrying soapstone products of some sort, or is an empty. Other than pulpwood, soapstone was about all the N&A generated (the train is outbound to their C&O connection at Warren). The occasion was the recent delivery of N&A 1, a GE 44-tonner. Photographer Charles Arnold was engaged to take a series of views of the new diesel in action. The photo is from my personal collection. Yours Aye, Garth Groff 🦆
|
|
|
|
Clark Propst
C&O 9500 9500-9999 XM empty "3-16-48"
C&O 9948 9500-9999 XM lumber "2-1-49"
C&O 9948 9500-9999 XM lumber "2-5-49"
Above are three of those cars from the Landmesser list Gene Green transcribed. The entire list was a 'give away' at Naperville around 2000 I believe? CW Propst
|
|
|
|
Chuck Cover
I just measured my F&C model #6770 and it is the correct height as compared to the prototype schematic in the Freight Car Equipment of the C&O Railway, August 1, 1937. They were built in 1930 and ran through the 60s. I reason that I bought the kit was because they are a bit shorter in height than most automobile boxcars and give the consist and different look. We don’t want all 10’4” 40’ auto boxcars do we?
Chuck Cover Santa Fe, NM
|
|
|
|
Donald B. Valentine <riverman_vt@...>
Chuck Cover wrote: "I bought the kit was because they are a bit shorter in height than most automobile boxcars and give the consist and different look. We don’t want all 10’4” 40’ auto boxcars do we?" That's the the same reasoning I use to buy most house cars. The different hsights, different styles of roof and different car construction all contribute to the variety of freight cars we used to see in freight trains so I buy as long as the car is one for a road whose cars were known to frequent my area. Today the ony thing that seems to change is the pattern of graffitti on the cars. When I see that I wish each car had a 50 cal. turret on top of it with a gunner having a shoot to kill order for anyone seen approaching the train with a spray can. Damned sick of the irresponsibe nonsense with spray cans to the point where I'd like to see the Federally outlawed. Just my point of view, Don Valentine
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
Donald Valentine wrote:
Well, if we're going to discuss swimming up river against a good current, ancient Greek writers complained about writing on the walls, and there is plenty of Roman graffiti on the walls at Pompeii. It ain't exactly a new observation. But it really doesn't matter how you like or don't like it. It simply IS the reality today. If you model any time after 1980 (well past this list of course, as is Don's comment in the first place), you can either model reality or fantasy. But let's return to those halcyon days of yesteryear, before 1960 reared its head . . . Tony Thompson
|
|
|
|
Randy Hammill
|
|
|