Topics

Car weighting


Bud Rindfleisch
 

Howdy friends,
    Just curious on your opinions on weighting freight cars to NMRA specs. As an S scaler I've always subscribed to the recommended 6 oz's but our Groups io, has been having on going discussion about not weighting the freight cars and tracking ability on scale flanges and mostly code 100 track. Some say they do not add  weight to plastic or resin cars but use metal trucks and metal wheels. I do that anyway but I prefer them slightly heavier than a plastic or resin kit without weight. 
So what do you all in the HO and N world do, weight or no weight?
     Bud Rindfleisch


Brian Carlson
 

Weight to the NMRA at a minimum myself. 

On our club layout we had an O-scale modeler that didn’t add any weight. The o scale atlas and intermountain cars would just fall off the track. Everything runs better now that we weighed the cars.  (Bud I think you knew Dave Birmingham)

Brian J. Carlson 

On Jun 26, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Bud Rindfleisch <BlackDiamondRR@...> wrote:

Howdy friends,
    Just curious on your opinions on weighting freight cars to NMRA specs. As an S scaler I've always subscribed to the recommended 6 oz's but our Groups io, has been having on going discussion about not weighting the freight cars and tracking ability on scale flanges and mostly code 100 track. Some say they do not add  weight to plastic or resin cars but use metal trucks and metal wheels. I do that anyway but I prefer them slightly heavier than a plastic or resin kit without weight. 
So what do you all in the HO and N world do, weight or no weight?
     Bud Rindfleisch


Roger Huber <trainpainter@...>
 

Bud,

I modeled in S scale for several years using AM, SHS, PRS, AF conversions and other cars with stock trucks and KD 5 couplers. I hand laid all my track and turnouts with codes 100, 83, 70 and some 55 rail. I never added any weight above stock and had no issues with derailing whether pushing or pulling the cars.

I've gone back to HO and use stock weights in all my cars. They mostly have stock trucks with KD wheelsets or KD trucks. I have a few with IM wheelsets. My track is all Walthers c83 and I use #4 & #5 turnouts and #7.5 curved ones. I have no issues with derailing. I have one long 3.2% grade.

I personally find the Enemaray weight standards too heavy and not necessary.

Just my 2¢.

Roger Huber
Deer Creek Locomotive Works


On Friday, June 26, 2020, 03:37:30 PM CDT, Bud Rindfleisch <blackdiamondrr@...> wrote:


Howdy friends,
    Just curious on your opinions on weighting freight cars to NMRA specs. As an S scaler I've always subscribed to the recommended 6 oz's but our Groups io, has been having on going discussion about not weighting the freight cars and tracking ability on scale flanges and mostly code 100 track. Some say they do not add  weight to plastic or resin cars but use metal trucks and metal wheels. I do that anyway but I prefer them slightly heavier than a plastic or resin kit without weight. 
So what do you all in the HO and N world do, weight or no weight?
     Bud Rindfleisch


Bud Rindfleisch
 

Brian Carlson,
    Yes, I knew Dave well, an excellent modeler and Mr Frugal when it came to using inexpensive materials to construct his layouts! Nice to hear that weights did indeed help with staying upright! Dave modeled in S scale for a while, among many other scales!
     Bud Rindfleisch
    


Douglas Harding
 

I follow the NMRA recommendations. Mostly for consistency. Most new freight cars I purchase are delivered close to NMRA standards and come with quality trucks and wheelsets. I use IM wheelsets almost exclusively and have found with my new standards using IM wheelsets, Accurail trucks (when others don’t roll well) and Kadee couplers, I can use lighter cars. And I have some, typically flatcars where it is hard to add weight. But I prefer the NMRA recommendations. If for no other reason the engines have to actually work pulling the train.

 

 

Doug  Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bud Rindfleisch
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 3:37 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

 

Howdy friends,
    Just curious on your opinions on weighting freight cars to NMRA specs. As an S scaler I've always subscribed to the recommended 6 oz's but our Groups io, has been having on going discussion about not weighting the freight cars and tracking ability on scale flanges and mostly code 100 track. Some say they do not add  weight to plastic or resin cars but use metal trucks and metal wheels. I do that anyway but I prefer them slightly heavier than a plastic or resin kit without weight. 
So what do you all in the HO and N world do, weight or no weight?
     Bud Rindfleisch


Bruce A. Metcalf
 

On 6/26/20 4:37 PM, Bud Rindfleisch wrote:

    Just curious on your opinions on weighting freight cars to NMRA specs. As an S scaler I've always subscribed to the recommended 6 oz's but our Groups io, has been having on going discussion about not weighting the freight cars and tracking ability on scale flanges and mostly code 100 track. Some say they do not add  weight to plastic or resin cars but use metal trucks and metal wheels. I do that anyway but I prefer them slightly heavier than a plastic or resin kit without weight.
So what do you all in the HO and N world do, weight or no weight?
I think it's important to understand the conditions under which the NMRA established those weight standards. It was an era before RP-25 wheel contours, before needle-point axles, and when car sides were as likely to be cardstock as Zamac. Thus the standards are optimized for very heavy, bad-rolling cars.

I think it's well past time for us (meaning we NMRA members who care enough) to go through the testing again to see if the standards hold up with modern technology. But until we do....

I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found that when there are problems, it's not the absolute weight, but combinations of light and heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light cars or just too many cars around too-tight curves.

The NMRA gives us a starting point. It also reminds us that you probably need more than just so much per inch. I know modelers -- and clubs --
that have deliberately used underweight cars with good success. I think the key is to make *all* the cars underweight by about the same amount.

Don't know if that answers your question, but I tried.

Cheers,
/ Bruce /


Tony Thompson
 

Bruce Metcalf wrote:

I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found that when there are problems, it's not the absolute weight, but combinations of light and heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light cars or just too many cars around too-tight curves.
There were studies in the model magazines back in the 1950s that concluded (possibly correctly) that the biggest factor in car weight performance was CONSISTENT car weight. As Bruce says, mixing heavier and lighter cars can bite you. I think one could very probably choose a weight below the NMRA weight now recommended, but the key would be, again, to STICK to that weight and get as close as you can with every car.
I continue to use the NMRA weight, but then again, I don't have any heavy grades that can hurt locomotive performance.

Tony Thompson
tony@...


Schuyler Larrabee
 

Tony, with the improvements in the free-rolling of
trucks due to better wheels and more accurately
fitted axle lengths (yes, I know REBOXX is out of
business, but there's hope for another source),
locomotive performance has been enhanced
tremendously. The irony of improved trucks isn't
that they roll better, that's obvious, but the
apparent improvement of your existing locomotives
because the free rolling trucks let them pull
more.

I use the NMRA standards for weighting cars simply
because that's what it is: a standard.

Schuyler

-----Original Message-----
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
<main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Tony
Thompson
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 9:18 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

Bruce Metcalf wrote:

I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found
that when there are problems, it's not the
absolute weight, but combinations of light and
heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light
cars or just too many cars around too-tight
curves.

There were studies in the model magazines
back in the 1950s that concluded (possibly
correctly) that the biggest factor in car weight
performance was CONSISTENT car weight. As Bruce
says, mixing heavier and lighter cars can bite
you. I think one could very probably choose a
weight below the NMRA weight now recommended, but
the key would be, again, to STICK to that weight
and get as close as you can with every car.
I continue to use the NMRA weight, but then
again, I don't have any heavy grades that can hurt
locomotive performance.

Tony Thompson
tony@...


Bud Rindfleisch
 

Thanks guys for all the responses on car weighting! Consistency seems to be the way to go. In S I have quite a few heavier brass cars without needlepoint axles and most other cars have either needlepoint or Delrin bearing inserts on the blunt end axles. I use a product called Liquid Bearings with just a light amount on the brass trucks. Seems to work quite well. Smooth trackwork is paramount though!
     Bud Rindfleisch


Eric Hansmann
 

The NMRA car weight is not a standard it is a recommended practice. Here’s the PDF for RP-20.1 Car Weight. 

Many modelers use this guide for their own standards, but it is not an NMRA defined standard for modeling and manufacturing. As noted on the document, it’s a recommended practice (RP).

For my models, I use this RP to determine the car weight but install 75% of that recommendation. My train length hardly hits 20 cars and I don’t have any grades. Nearly all the models roll on metal wheel sets in trucks manufactured within the last 40 years. 

Determine what works best for your layout parameters and use the NMRA car weight RP to guide your own standard. 


Eric Hansmann
Murfreesboro, TN


On Jun 26, 2020, at 8:31 PM, Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

Tony, with the improvements in the free-rolling of
trucks due to better wheels and more accurately
fitted axle lengths (yes, I know REBOXX is out of
business, but there's hope for another source),
locomotive performance has been enhanced
tremendously.  The irony of improved trucks isn't
that they roll better, that's obvious, but the
apparent improvement of your existing locomotives
because the free rolling trucks let them pull
more.

I use the NMRA standards for weighting cars simply
because that's what it is: a standard.

Schuyler


Douglas Harding
 

Bud I’m not sure if one is available for S, but I use the truck tool reamer to clean out the journal cones on my HO trucks. I have even used it on brass trucks with great success as the cutter is machined steel. It shaves the inside of the cone to provide a smooth surface and better match the shape of the axle point. This  allows for smooth operation. I’ve had less success on cast metal trucks, and those I can’t ream get replaced.

 

 

Doug  Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

 

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bud Rindfleisch
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 8:25 AM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

 

Thanks guys for all the responses on car weighting! Consistency seems to be the way to go. In S I have quite a few heavier brass cars without needlepoint axles and most other cars have either needlepoint or Delrin bearing inserts on the blunt end axles. I use a product called Liquid Bearings with just a light amount on the brass trucks. Seems to work quite well. Smooth trackwork is paramount though!

     Bud Rindfleisch


vapeurchapelon
 

Bud, Tony, Bruce, and others,

when I started to model US prototypes more than 20 years ago I definitely wanted to run 100+ car trains with only one (larger) steam engine because this was reality for decades and is the main reason for my fascination of that era. Because of no available room and no ability to build an own layout I was restricted to "carpet or floor railroading". I purchased the only really useful track for this purpose (ROCO LINE) and choose not to use any unrealistically small curves - and the only one large enough from that company is 80" radius. The next smaller one is 35" which is already too small.
After building maybe 20 Proto 2k and Intermountain and Red Caboose kits and installing the weights per instructions and assembling these cars on a track for first trial runs I quickly thought "forget the 100 car train!"
Instantly I choose to remove all that dead weight and just add metal wheels (and Kadee couplers of course) to try how this would work - and it was very fine. I build about 120 more such kits - all without any additional weight - and frequently ran all of them in one train without any problems.
Then I wanted to "stretch the idea as far as I could" - I took the lightest car - Red Caboose 42' fishbelly side flat - re-equipped it with the original plastic wheel sets so it weighed only scary 15 grams and put it directly behind the engine. ZERO problems again. It also didn't make any difference to run some bad-rolling NMRA-weighted cars in between. One only had to be a little careful with acceleration and braking - which just adds to prototypical appearence...

Of course 80" curves are very large. Today - at the FREMO - I run half of that, and still have to try how those light weights will run there. Last year I have had a 64-car 100%-brass freight train running (mostly converted to Tahoe trucks) which went very well, too. Brass cars weigh in about 5 oz average, but the lightest one is a small frame-less tank car having only 63 grams. I had this one placed in the forward half of the train, but it really felt good, seemingly. No derailments.

As another member pointed out the NMRA rcommendations are from a time with VERY differently weighted cars and lots of bad-rolling trucks and smaller radius curves. Today I think those weights are much higher than necessary.
With the experiences mentioned above I would GUESS that steam era freight cars with free-rolling trucks (which have to be mounted properly and straight!) and metal wheel sets but without additional weight would safely run in long trains at 50" radius curves.

Sorry for the long posting.

Johannes
Modeling the early post-war years up to about 1953

Gesendet: Samstag, 27. Juni 2020 um 03:17 Uhr
Von: "Tony Thompson" <tony@...>
An: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Betreff: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

Bruce Metcalf wrote:

I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found that when there are problems, it's not the absolute weight, but combinations of light and heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light cars or just too many cars around too-tight curves.
There were studies in the model magazines back in the 1950s that concluded (possibly correctly) that the biggest factor in car weight performance was CONSISTENT car weight. As Bruce says, mixing heavier and lighter cars can bite you. I think one could very probably choose a weight below the NMRA weight now recommended, but the key would be, again, to STICK to that weight and get as close as you can with every car.
I continue to use the NMRA weight, but then again, I don't have any heavy grades that can hurt locomotive performance.

Tony Thompson
tony@...







James E Kubanick
 

I have always felt that the NMRA RP was too heavy and, for many years, have arbitrarily used 100gm. as my target weight. I have a large fleet of freight cars of every imaginable construction material and run them randomly in 40 - 50 car trains on grades. Some of these cars cannot be weighted to 100gm. and some already exceed that "limit' but all seem to run well together.

I am, however, very careful on having free-rolling trucks with metal wheelsets (of all makes) on all of my cars. Also, I am very fussy on coupler alignment - a mix of Kadee 5"s and 58's.These are all steam era cars. I do try to minimize these variables, but it is impossible to do so with a large fleet. Still, I nave no restrictions on freight car mix or volume in freight train makeup. Perhaps I could drop my standard yo, say, 75--75gms, but I'm in too deep to change-now and this is what works for me. .

By now, I have thoroughly convinces myself that the NMRA recommendation is far out of date and should be taken less seriously.

Jim Kubanick
Morgantown WV

On Saturday, June 27, 2020, 11:04:44 AM EDT, vapeurchapelon <j.markwart@...> wrote:


Bud, Tony, Bruce, and others,

when I started to model US prototypes more than 20 years ago I definitely wanted to run 100+ car trains with only one (larger) steam engine because this was reality for decades and is the main reason for my fascination of that era. Because of no available room and no ability to build an own layout I was restricted to "carpet or floor railroading". I purchased the only really useful track for this purpose (ROCO LINE) and choose not to use any unrealistically small curves - and the only one large enough from that company is 80" radius. The next smaller one is 35" which is already too small.
After building maybe 20 Proto 2k and Intermountain and Red Caboose kits and installing the weights per instructions and assembling these cars on a track for first trial runs I quickly thought "forget the 100 car train!"
Instantly I choose to remove all that dead weight and just add metal wheels (and Kadee couplers of course) to try how this would work - and it was very fine. I build about 120 more such kits - all without any additional weight - and frequently ran all of them in one train without any problems.
Then I wanted to "stretch the idea as far as I could" - I took the lightest car - Red Caboose 42' fishbelly side flat - re-equipped it with the original plastic wheel sets so it weighed only scary 15 grams and put it directly behind the engine. ZERO problems again. It also didn't make any difference to run some bad-rolling NMRA-weighted cars in between. One only had to be a little careful with acceleration and braking - which just adds to prototypical appearence...

Of course 80" curves are very large. Today - at the FREMO - I run half of that, and still have to try how those light weights will run there. Last year I have had a 64-car 100%-brass freight train running (mostly converted to Tahoe trucks) which went very well, too. Brass cars weigh in about 5 oz average, but the lightest one is a small frame-less tank car having only 63 grams. I had this one placed in the forward half of the train, but it really felt good, seemingly. No derailments.

As another member pointed out the NMRA rcommendations are from a time with VERY differently weighted cars and lots of bad-rolling trucks and smaller radius curves. Today I think those weights are much higher than necessary.
With the experiences mentioned above I would GUESS that steam era freight cars with free-rolling trucks (which have to be mounted properly and straight!) and metal wheel sets but without additional weight would safely run in long trains at 50" radius curves.

Sorry for the long posting.

Johannes
Modeling the early post-war years up to about 1953



> Gesendet: Samstag, 27. Juni 2020 um 03:17 Uhr
> Von: "Tony Thompson" <tony@...>
> An: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
> Betreff: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting
>
> Bruce Metcalf wrote:
>
> > I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found that when there are problems, it's not the absolute weight, but combinations of light and heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light cars or just too many cars around too-tight curves.
>
>      There were studies in the model magazines back in the 1950s that concluded (possibly correctly) that the biggest factor in car weight performance was CONSISTENT car weight. As Bruce says, mixing heavier and lighter cars can bite you. I think one could very probably choose a weight below the NMRA weight now recommended, but the key would be, again, to STICK to that weight and get as close as you can with every car.
>      I continue to use the NMRA weight, but then again, I don't have any heavy grades that can hurt locomotive performance.
>
> Tony Thompson
> tony@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Schuyler Larrabee
 

That’s fine, Eric, but what happens when you take your equipment to another layout?  I don’t even HAVE a home layout (yet) but I’m a member of a major club, the North Shore Model Railroad Club (www.nsmrc.org ) and one of the major issues that arise in ops there are cars that are either under or (far) over weight standards.  OK, fine, the weight recommendations in the RP.  Whatever, as I said before, it is a (de facto) standard.

 

Schuyler

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Hansmann
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 9:33 AM
To: main@realstmfc.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

 

The NMRA car weight is not a standard it is a recommended practice. Here’s the PDF for RP-20.1 Car Weight. 

 

Many modelers use this guide for their own standards, but it is not an NMRA defined standard for modeling and manufacturing. As noted on the document, it’s a recommended practice (RP).

 

For my models, I use this RP to determine the car weight but install 75% of that recommendation. My train length hardly hits 20 cars and I don’t have any grades. Nearly all the models roll on metal wheel sets in trucks manufactured within the last 40 years. 

 

Determine what works best for your layout parameters and use the NMRA car weight RP to guide your own standard. 

 

 

Eric Hansmann

Murfreesboro, TN

 


On Jun 26, 2020, at 8:31 PM, Schuyler Larrabee via groups.io <schuyler.larrabee@...> wrote:

Tony, with the improvements in the free-rolling of
trucks due to better wheels and more accurately
fitted axle lengths (yes, I know REBOXX is out of
business, but there's hope for another source),
locomotive performance has been enhanced
tremendously.  The irony of improved trucks isn't
that they roll better, that's obvious, but the
apparent improvement of your existing locomotives
because the free rolling trucks let them pull
more.

I use the NMRA standards for weighting cars simply
because that's what it is: a standard.

Schuyler


william darnaby
 

I have never paid any attention to the NMRA weighting recommendations and couldn't begin to say what they are.  For styrene cars I use what I am given.  For resin cars of any kind I use I use six of the 1/4 oz. sticky weights in a strip.  Exceptions would be resin flat cars which get what ever fits underneath and resin hoppers which get basically nothing beyond trucks and couplers.  I also run empty Kadee 2-bay hoppers with no added weight.  I have no derailment issues.  Carefully laid track helps.

Bill Darnaby 



Tim O'Connor
 


Having observed truck performance for over 50 years I think the NMRA recommended
weights give the best long term results for tracking, rolling resistance, wear & tear, coupling
inertia (ever couple into a car and send it flying?), and resistance to 'wobbling' or rocking


On 6/26/2020 9:17 PM, Tony Thompson wrote:
Bruce Metcalf wrote:

I use the NMRA weights in HO. I have also found that when there are problems, it's not the absolute weight, but combinations of light and heavy cars in one train. That, or putting light cars or just too many cars around too-tight curves.

     There were studies in the model magazines back in the 1950s that concluded (possibly correctly) that the biggest factor in car weight performance was CONSISTENT car weight. As Bruce says, mixing heavier and lighter cars can bite you. I think one could very probably choose a weight below the NMRA weight now recommended, but the key would be, again, to STICK to that weight and get as close as you can with every car.
      I continue to use the NMRA weight, but then again, I don't have any heavy grades that can hurt locomotive performance.

Tony Thompson

--
Tim O'Connor
Sterling, Massachusetts


Nelson Moyer
 

You’re pretty close to the NMRA recommendation  for a forty foot house car with metal wheels. I use seven of the ¼ oz. tire weights, and that’s very close to the recommendation. For those not familiar with the formula, it’s one ounce plus ½ oz. per inch of car length, so a 40 ft. house car would weigh 3.5 oz. It’ s better to be a little over than a little under, and some clubs have their own standards like La Mesa, which includes rollability and tipping in addition to car weight. Car weight isn’t a critical operational feature unless you run very long trains on horseshoe curves, but the minimum weight should be at least 3.25 oz. for good tracking. I’ve operated 80 plus car trains on the 2% grades on the Tehachapi, and that’s true test of car trackability.

 

Nelson Moyer

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of william darnaby
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 10:23 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

 

I have never paid any attention to the NMRA weighting recommendations and couldn't begin to say what they are.  For styrene cars I use what I am given.  For resin cars of any kind I use I use six of the 1/4 oz. sticky weights in a strip.  Exceptions would be resin flat cars which get what ever fits underneath and resin hoppers which get basically nothing beyond trucks and couplers.  I also run empty Kadee 2-bay hoppers with no added weight.  I have no derailment issues.  Carefully laid track helps.

 

Bill Darnaby 

 


Jon Miller
 

On 6/28/2020 7:29 AM, Nelson Moyer wrote:
You’re pretty close to the NMRA recommendation  for a forty foot house car with metal wheels

    For those interested in lead stickon's see below.  However they won't ship to CA and a few other states.

https://www.imperialsupplies.com/item/0798580

-- 
Jon Miller
For me time stopped in 1941
Digitrax  Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI User
SPROG User
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


william darnaby
 

I forgot to mention...cause it was late...resin gons get .020 lead sheet, hammered from .040 from McMaster-Carr, between the floor and underbody.  Years ago I standardized on Intermountain wheel sets, first the old wide wheels and then the .088"s.  In addition, everything gets 2-56 truck screws that are initially cranked town snug.  The B end then gets backed off a quarter turn and the A end gets backed off 3 quarters of a turn.  This promotes tracking without having the car tip back and forth.  I use rail sizes from code 40 to 83 on the railroad and have no issues.

Bill Darnaby

On Sunday, June 28, 2020, 09:29:55 AM CDT, Nelson Moyer <npmoyer@...> wrote:


You’re pretty close to the NMRA recommendation  for a forty foot house car with metal wheels. I use seven of the ¼ oz. tire weights, and that’s very close to the recommendation. For those not familiar with the formula, it’s one ounce plus ½ oz. per inch of car length, so a 40 ft. house car would weigh 3.5 oz. It’ s better to be a little over than a little under, and some clubs have their own standards like La Mesa, which includes rollability and tipping in addition to car weight. Car weight isn’t a critical operational feature unless you run very long trains on horseshoe curves, but the minimum weight should be at least 3.25 oz. for good tracking. I’ve operated 80 plus car trains on the 2% grades on the Tehachapi, and that’s true test of car trackability.

 

Nelson Moyer

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [mailto:main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] On Behalf Of william darnaby
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2020 10:23 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Car weighting

 

I have never paid any attention to the NMRA weighting recommendations and couldn't begin to say what they are.  For styrene cars I use what I am given.  For resin cars of any kind I use I use six of the 1/4 oz. sticky weights in a strip.  Exceptions would be resin flat cars which get what ever fits underneath and resin hoppers which get basically nothing beyond trucks and couplers.  I also run empty Kadee 2-bay hoppers with no added weight.  I have no derailment issues.  Carefully laid track helps.

 

Bill Darnaby 

 


Bud Rindfleisch
 

Tim O,
     Great observations, especially about coupling onto a light car and having it fly away! Sure takes away all that detailed realism built into our models.
     Bud Rindfleisch