TheRailwire
General Discussion => N and Z Scales => Topic started by: Mark5 on March 23, 2010, 11:35:26 PM
-
I've been examining options to equip the Atlas 100 ton hopper (for some reason Atlas calls these 90 ton hoppers ::)) with 100 ton trucks.
When this tooling first came out it came with Bettendorf trucks (just like everything else!).
At some point (1990s I guess) Atlas started shipping these with 70 ton roller bearing trucks. Today they ship with 70 roller bearing trucks with Accumates.
Since these cars should have 100 ton roller bearing (RB) trucks, I've been trying various 100 ton RB trucks. In N scale this mostly means Atlas and BLMA. MTL does not make a 100 ton truck. Maybe Athearn makes one, but I have doubts about availability.
The first focus was Atlas. Atlas recently (well not that long ago) introduced a newer lower slung coupler box on the Thrall 4750 Trainman car. I'm pretty sure this is the one BLMA used on its Top Gons. So I popped a pair on the hopper - looks good! Put it on the track and roll it .... rub a dub on the inner axles (against the slope sheet for the outer bays). Drat. I suppose I could add a space washer to get clearance, but I want the cars to stay at the height they are (overall height closely matches drawings). Then I got this brilliant idea that maybe I could swap the Atlas 36" wheels from the Atlas 100T truck onto the Atlas 70 ton truck (the wheelbase on the 70 truck is shorter, so maybe the slight move of the inner axle towards the end of the car would be enough to eliminate the rubbing). But oddly to me, the 36" wheels would not roll freely in the 70 ton truck. So that shot down that idea.
I would like to try a FVM or similar 36" wheel in the Atlas 100 Ton truck - the smaller flanges might be enough to eliminate the rubbing. Will definately try this. 8)
Next I tried the BLMA 100 Ton RB truck. 8) I popped them on and sure enough they rubbed. Then I remembered that the BLMA truck has a lower "bolster area" than most N scale trucks so I decided a spacer washer was in order. I used one MT washer on each end and the result was a roller!
For your viewing here is a picture of the BLMA 100 Ton truck on a Atlas 100T hopper (the hopper on the right has MTL 70 ton RBs on it with the new "mid pros"):
(http://i41.tinypic.com/20743dz.jpg)
Cool aint it?
Of course to use these I'd have to add coupler "pads" to both ends, and couplers too. I really like the look but I have a fleet and well ... we'll see.
I suppose I could also try a 36" wheel in a MT RB truck (not entirely correct but at least I'd get 36" wheels) - stay tuned, will try this one night soon.
Mark
-
Looking good Mark!
As a quick side note: I'm going to request that future re-stocks of our new trucks come with a plastic washer (spacer) for this very purpose. Keep us posted on your efforts!
-
So the BLMA one have smaller flanges than the other? Guess I'll pick up some for my cars that rub.
Mark, I have an N&W hopper with the number 92000...
-
I've had this same problem when putting 100t trucks in these cars. I think my solution was to wimp out and go with 33" wheels (because I have some of them floating around).
-
I once called the Atlas hoppers 100 ton hoppers when the MTL 100 ton hoppers came out and received a verbal drubbing by several people. I never got the MTL hoppers to compare them so I don't know the difference between them but it's bugging the hades out of me.
-
I once called the Atlas hoppers 100 ton hoppers when the MTL 100 ton hoppers came out and received a verbal drubbing by several people. I never got the MTL hoppers to compare them so I don't know the difference between them but it's bugging the hades out of me.
Both the MT and Atlas hoppers are based on the N&W H11a through H11e series. These are 100 ton hoppers.
When N&W first built them in 1963, they were rated at 95 tons, but not long after that N&W rerated the early production to 100 tons.
Mark
-
I'm guessing it's just a holdover from ye olden days of N scale when calling something a "50' Modern Boxcar" was the road to fame and riches.
-
Mark, I have an N&W hopper with the number 92000...
Here's the real 92000:
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/ns2125.jpeg
Mark
-
Those trucks do look great on that car Mark. I hope that load is routed to the washer. Don't you guys in the East wash your coal?
-
I hope that load is routed to the washer. Don't you guys in the East wash your coal?
Bryan, that car is loaded with a special "plastic coal" from an unknown location. I can assure you future loads will be more authentic. ;)
-
Ok, a little more experimentation tonight (I'm lazy and tired tonight so no pix).
First, I compared a hopper with the "stock" Atlas trucks to one that was fitted with MTL RB trucks (33"). Interestingly, simply putting the MTL trucks on increased the car height an inch or so. I think it has to do with the "bolster" section of the MTL tuck rising toward the center while the Atlas truck is flat in that area.
Next, I removed the MTL trucks and fitted them with the new MTL 36" wheels. Good news! The wheels fit and spin freely. Thus equipped, I re-installed the MTL trucks on the hopper. As I suspected, the shorter sideframes on the MTL 70 ton RB truck mean that with the 36" wheels no clearance problems. :D As expected, the MTL trucks with 36" wheels raised the car another inch or so (predicted increase would be 1.5" due to the larger wheels). As a result the overall car height increased about 3" over the "stock" Atlas hopper. The overall appearance is improved compared to "stock" but not quite as nice as the BLMA option.8) And of course 36" wheels in a 70 ton sideframe is "wrong", but so are 70 ton trucks on a 100 ton hopper. ;) If I were to use this on my fleet I would have to take a little off the bolsters to bring this hopper in line with prototype height.
The MTL solution would be cheaper, which may be factor to the fleet supervisor.
I will post some pics later this week.
Mark
-
I think it would look even better if you moved the bolster closer to the ends like it's supposed to be! Compare to the photo of 92000 that you posted.
-
I think it would look even better if you moved the bolster closer to the ends like it's supposed to be! Compare to the photo of 92000 that you posted.
Dammit - good eye. 8)
Here's a better side view of an H11c:
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/ns2367.jpeg
I wonder how many modelers would move bolsters on 50+ cars ...
-
The problem with moving the bolsters outboard is...you would have to have 48" radius curves so that the trucks didn't hit the stirrups. I think that is a compromise in our scale dating to the 9-3/4" era.
-
It seems that nothing is easy and simple. Even on a simple thing as a piece of rolling stock we find that several compromises [deviations from the prototype] have been made to arrive at the final product. So addressing one of them does not solve the whole problem. You got to address all of them and that becomes time consuming and expensive. Let's face it the Atlas 90 ton hopper is a basic staple of the industry due to price and availability. People tend to have a lot more than one or two because no one can have enough coal hoppers. I got around a hundred or so and while I did put MTL truck/couplers and lo pros on them that will be the extent of my investment. I'll leave that to who ever buys my stuff after I am out of here.
-
The problem with moving the bolsters outboard is...you would have to have 48" radius curves so that the trucks didn't hit the stirrups. I think that is a compromise in our scale dating to the 9-3/4" era.
Are the stirrups that thick on the Atlas "90" ton hoppers? Cause most coal porters have wheels that stick out past the end too:
(http://www.katousa.com/N/Coalporter/BNSF.jpg)
And they run fine.
And the BLMA correct in every dimension trucks should be narrower anyway.
-
Well I don't own any of those 90/100T cars or really any older Atlas cars for that matter but the picture Mark posted does appear to have pretty close tolerances. I am sure the stirrups could be filed but really the point is pretty moot. I can't imagine the hassle of moving these bolsters on a car let alone a fleet.
-
And the BLMA correct in every dimension trucks should be narrower anyway.
They are :)
-
Appears
to be room for an entepreneur to make a killing with a variety of replacement bolsters...
-
Appears
to be room for an entepreneur to make a killing with a variety of replacement bolsters...
I understand Craig is planning that as a supplement to his new body-mount coupler line. ::)
Ok, now I'm a pathological liar. But cripe, he does owe it to us since he released such fine trucks w/o couplers.
-
Appears
to be room for an entepreneur to make a killing with a variety of replacement bolsters...
I understand Craig is planning that as a supplement to his new body-mount coupler line. ::)
Ok, now I'm a pathological liar. But cripe, he does owe it to us since he released such fine trucks w/o couplers.
:-*
-
For fun, this weekend I'll pop these on the MT 100 ton hopper too. Pix and all. 8)
The purpose in this for me is to come up with a feasible plan for my fleet of hoppers.
Mark
-
Appears
to be room for an entepreneur to make a killing with a variety of replacement bolsters...
I understand Craig is planning that as a supplement to his new body-mount coupler line. ::)
Ok, now I'm a pathological liar. But cripe, he does owe it to us since he released such fine trucks w/o couplers.
:-*
Feeling
that speial BLMA love, now more than ever...
-
Appears
to be room for an entepreneur to make a killing with a variety of replacement bolsters...
....and body mount coupler adapters (for open/covered hoppers etc).
-
I think it would look even better if you moved the bolster closer to the ends like it's supposed to be! Compare to the photo of 92000 that you posted.
Upon review, I don't think the bolsters need to be moved.
see this:
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/thumbs/photos/NW02646.jpg
-
The only 100T hopper I can find drawings of:
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n255/Chris333_33/hop001.jpg)
-
I think it would look even better if you moved the bolster closer to the ends like it's supposed to be! Compare to the photo of 92000 that you posted.
Upon review, I don't think the bolsters need to be moved.
see this:
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/thumbs/photos/NW02646.jpg
Bolsters are in line with the last side stake on the H11s, and pretty much any other hopper out there.
-
(http://i41.tinypic.com/20743dz.jpg)
Ok, so referring back to the original shot, there appears to be quite a difference between the center of the BLMA and MT trucks. Is that just due to the offset bolster hole in the MT's? I didn't think it was that large.
-gfh
-
Just spin the trucks 180 degrees if there is an offset.
-
I think it would look even better if you moved the bolster closer to the ends like it's supposed to be! Compare to the photo of 92000 that you posted.
Upon review, I don't think the bolsters need to be moved.
see this:
http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/thumbs/photos/NW02646.jpg
Remember there are some optical illusions here because the truck sideframe is set back from the side of the car. So you can't line up the bolster when the camera is at the middle of the car. You need a shot centered on the sideframe instead. Look at your original photo with the BLMA trucks and that the BLMA truck is inboard while the offset bolster hole in the MTL truck is helping its cause.
-
Those steps could be filed, but they're still off. Atlas's only feature one rung, the prototype looks to have two, on both ends. Looks like you need a etched upgrade kit, that could also feature end braces, door detail, brake wheel, etc.
-
Those steps could be filed, but they're still off. Atlas's only feature one rung, the prototype looks to have two, on both ends. Looks like you need a etched upgrade kit, that could also feature end braces, door detail, brake wheel, etc.
The MTL pieces might work for this. ;)
(http://i40.tinypic.com/xmrg2r.jpg)
-
Here's the bottom of the Atlas 100 tonner. The bolsters could be moved out a tiny bit.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/333a1om.jpg)
But this falls way into the "Too much trouble FWIW" category for me.
Mark
-
Here's the bottom of the Atlas 100 tonner. The bolsters could be moved out a tiny bit.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/333a1om.jpg)
But this falls way into the "Too much trouble FWIW" category for me.
Mark
Does this mean you're back to the three foot rule instead of the 12" rule?
-
Does this mean you're back to the three foot rule instead of the 12" rule?
No, it means life's too short to move bolsters on 50 100 ton hoppers.
As I've stated before, my personal goal is to model a railroad not build models of individual railroad cars.
I don't see this as inconsistent with the 12" rule. ;)
Mark
-
No, it means life's too short to move bolsters on 50 100 ton hoppers.
Mark
Ok, so what if you didn't actually have to move the bolster over? I'd be tempted to go to town with the proper diameter end mill in a drill press. (regular drill would never center properly in this instance) Just move the hole toward the end in the existing bolster and use a drop of super glue on the pin when you are done with the car and ready to attach the trucks.
(http://cgwrr.com/images/movebolster.JPG)
Once set up you could probably do 50 cars in a night.
-
Here's the real 92000:
http://spec.lib.vt.edu/imagebase/norfolksouthern/full/ns2125.jpeg
Mark
This is what I have, except in the paint scheme like you posted:
(http://trainworldonline.com/upload/iblock/40b/40bd41dfcdd8781924a4fb58ea4dfb1c.gif)
A few sites mention they are the H-11a but I'm no expert. I picked up a few in varying roads for less than $5 a piece with metal wheels and knuckle couplers.
Does the MTL offset bolster truck actually fix the bolster issue?
-
Ok, five years later and Trainworx has made this easier ... :D
Using the Trainworx 622 - one thing I don't like is that the coupler box is screwed in from the top:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-54W8JX_b-kI/VmCIDiBkF5I/AAAAAAAABEY/ODyltzBPTA4/s800-Ic42/TWX622.jpg)
Hopefully, the coupler will not need servicing, as once glued in I won't be able to get to it.
For my Atlas 100 ton hoppers, I am adding the Microtrains brake hardware (available in MTL part 1064, new part # 49965935) - here it is glued to the Trainworx 622:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-NWqV8fS89eQ/VmCIbH3W7KI/AAAAAAAABEs/IykGEUrIQGg/s800-Ic42/TWX622r.jpg)
Here I have glued the pieces in (they fit nicely) - I used spots of glue in case I ever need to separate these for some reason:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-gjNRX1nDw4I/VmCI2XAHZkI/AAAAAAAABE0/yaSISy-8oS8/s1440-Ic42/Atlas100tx.jpg)
Here, I borrowed Microtrains 100 ton trucks from my 60' 12200050 box car and placed them on the car - the car to the left has Atlas 70 ton roller bearing trucks:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-bjw4jSG2py4/VmCI8G0BWWI/AAAAAAAABE8/Ab7WhxkH8qw/s1024-Ic42/Atlas100txMTL100.jpg)
With the MTL 100 ton truck, the hopper comes in at about 12' tall, close enough to the proto's 12'3" for me. 8)
I will likely replace the MTL plastic 36" wheels with metal ones if MTL makes this truck available.
Now if only these trucks were available separately from MTL ...
BLMA trucks are also available but not sure if 50 pairs are currently available. :o
Still undecided as to which truck the fleet will get. :trollface:
Mark
-
I put Atlas 100 ton trucks under mine the easy way. Take your Dremel, or a knife if you like scraping and only have a few cars, and grind away the slope sheet where the flanges scrape. You don't have to grind all the way through, and black is easy to match, so it won't show. The limiting factor on truck swing is now the 1025 coupler boxes, and the cars will take an 11 inch curve. They don't like it, and probably wouldn't accept 10 inches, but they will roll down my mine yard tracks.
To make the grinding easier I took a piece of 1x4, glued 1/4 inch balsa strips to it to hold the upside-down car in place, and grind on that. Much easier, and safer, than trying to hold the loose car in ones hand, as all that is needed is to hold the other end down. A little practice and it goes very quickly. The same board has jigs for my other 100 ton hoppers, most of which needed the same grinding.
-
Is all of this applicable to the Like Like car? I was never sure if the LL and Atlas cars are the same thing.
-
I put Atlas 100 ton trucks under mine the easy way. Take your Dremel, or a knife if you like scraping and only have a few cars, and grind away the slope sheet where the flanges scrape. You don't have to grind all the way through, and black is easy to match, so it won't show. The limiting factor on truck swing is now the 1025 coupler boxes,
Odd that the Atlas 100 ton trucks have clearance issues. I have no clearance issues or need for grinding with either the BLMA or MTL 100 ton trucks. I had ruled out the Atlas 100 ton trucks as they have not been available for some years.
Mark
-
Is all of this applicable to the Like Like car? I was never sure if the LL and Atlas cars are the same thing.
The Lifelike car is different tooling. I can post pix if curious as I still have an example somewhere.
-
Mark: I bought a bunch of new Atlas trucks from Feather River Trains early this year, and 50+ pair used from Kisatchie. In my case, I haven't been able to get any BLMA 100 ton trucks, even ordering direct, and the Intermountain trucks I tried several years ago were discontinued(?) after I bought my first ten pair.
Atlas also has metal wheels that fit the trucks, so you can use whichever wheels you like. I found that the Atlas metal wheels would clear some cars where the plastic wheels scraped, but the hoppers still needed some grinding.
Do the MT trucks have centered or offset bolster holes? That could make a difference there, and there may also be slight wheelbase differences.
-
Do the MT trucks have centered or offset bolster holes? That could make a difference there, and there may also be slight wheelbase differences.
The MTL 100 Ton Roller bearing truck has a centered bolster.
Mark
-
The wheel flanges for the BLMA 100-ton trucks touch the hopper bays, so I'm curious to get my hands on the MTL 100-ton trucks.
-
The wheel flanges for the BLMA 100-ton trucks touch the hopper bays, so I'm curious to get my hands on the MTL 100-ton trucks.
With one MTL washer they are fine. Will check the resulting height sometime this weekend as I bought the remaining stock of BLMA 100 ton trucks this week.
Will have word on acquiring the MTL (Barber) 100 ton trucks next week when I call in my order.
Next up after that will be 100 ton trucks on the MTL 100 ton hopper. 8)
Mark
-
Will have word on acquiring the MTL (Barber) 100 ton trucks next week when I call in my order.
Next up after that will be 100 ton trucks on the MTL 100 ton hopper. 8)
Mark
If the bolster hole on the MTL 100 ton truck is not offset, then you will be running into the same problem with the MTL hoppers. The MTL hoppers require an off center truck for the truck to line up with the last side stake. BLMA trucks will be positioned slightly inward toward the slope sheets and not in line with the last side stake since the bolster hole on the BLMA truck is centered. BLMA trucks will also require the MTL washer to prevent the wheels from hitting the slope sheets. What the MTL hoppers need is Trainworx 100 ton trucks, like those used on the PD3000 cars. The TW 100 ton truck has an off center bolster. Although I have not tried it yet, I believe it would line up correctly with the last side stake of the MTL hopper. I managed to drop two TW Conrail PD3000 cars (since replaced), and they are now parts donors. I will have to try using the TW 100 ton truck with the MTL hopper to see how it lines up. Thanks.
Jeff
-
Jeff,
Interesting info on the MTL cars. Will start a separate MTL 100 ton hopper thread in the coming days.
As aside, for those interested in modelling the N&W - N&W used both ASF and Barber 100 ton trucks on these hoppers (I have a complete breakdown if anyone is interested - PM me). So I need to use some of each.
Mark
-
The Lifelike car is different tooling. I can post pix if curious as I still have an example somewhere.
The frame on the Life-Like car extends past the bolsters and provides a surface to mount a coupler after the ends of the frame are secured to the ends of the car (to prevent the couplers from sagging) and the car is lowered (BLMA trucks)
-
Placed a phone order with MTL today for 10 pairs of the 100 Ton Roller Bearing Trucks, hopefully will have by next weekend.
Also hope that they'll eventually add these to the website.
Mark
-
Update:
Although my absolute minumum radius is 15" or so, I tested the MTL 100 ton truck equiped Atlas car on some Kato 11" radius track that I have and there was some rubbing at that radius, so see nkalanaga's posts about clearance if you are running tight curves. (The test car was fine on 15" radius curves).
I also re-fitted the car with BLMA 100 ton ASF trucks and got results that contradicted my first post in this thread - I got some wheel rubbing. :facepalm: Will figure out where the prob is this week.
Mark
-
I received 10 pairs of 100 ton roller bearing trucks from Micro-Trains last week so this week I picked up some Fox Valley wheelsets to use with them.
When I looked closely at them I was surprised to see that the bolster holes were offset - unlike the 100 ton trucks that I removed from my MTL 122 00 050 N&W 60' Double Plug Box Car.
In this photo (snapped very hastily!), the truck on the left is one that I removed from the box car and the one on the right is one of the ones I just received from Microtrains:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yhGNruT27O0/VnnsiEPdc-I/AAAAAAAABFs/Eqqi2iEypLI/s1152-Ic42/MTL100.jpg)
The one on the left clearly has a centered bolster hole, while the "newer" one on the right has an offset bolster hole. Perhaps the early releases were no "finalized" and they decided to make offset on the
"production" version. You can see that "Micro Trains" was added to the newer truck. I'll ask around. ;)
I will experiment a little further with this later this week.
-
Interesting observation about the 100 ton truck bolster. It will be interesting to see what the offset bolster looks like on the Atlas cars and the MTL cars. Does the offset bolster 100 ton truck have the slight hump to the bolster that the MTL trucks usually come with? Thanks.
Jeff
-
Mark, got a price for those 100 ton trucks? They do look useful. :D
-
Does the offset bolster 100 ton truck have the slight hump to the bolster that the MTL trucks usually come with? Thanks.
Jeff
Jeff, the bolster is the same height as on the "early" MTL 100 ton truck. The car on the left has the "early" MTL 100 ton trucks while the car on the right has the "production" MTL 100 ton truck:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JPkALhiAmCg/VntjO3IU9NI/AAAAAAAABGA/mf3mbbTQ8cU/s1280-Ic42/newMTL100tontruck.jpg)
This is good news to me. This means with the slight bolster hole offset the truck is brought a little closer to the end of the car. Not perfect but with the body mount couplers and correct 100 ton trucks this inexpensive model with late 1970s tooling is vastly improved.
I thought the pricing was the same as the other bulk truck packs w/o couplers, but will check the invoice when I get a chance over the holidays.
(bulk pricing is $36.25 for other bulk packs - sample: http://micro-trainsline.com/nscale/ntrucks/nscalebulkpacks/310040).
Mark
-
That seems like a fair price to me. Thank's for the info. :D
-
I have reached conclusions on the trucks. I have decided to use the MTL 100 Ton Barber trucks on my Atlas "90 ton" (100 ton) hoppers. Even though the BLMA 100 Ton ASF is correct on most of the N&W 100 ton hoppers, the MTL trucks are just too easy to use. The reason is that they fit the car with out modification and bring the overall height close to proto (12'6" vs proto of 12'3") - close enough for me. I am also using the FVM 36" wheels in the MTL trucks. The added benefit of the offset holes on the MTL trucks is that the truck is slightly closer to the end of the car. I added the brake detail from MTL as previously mentioned and will add better brake wheels and call it a day (I have dozens of these hoppers). What is missing from this car that the MTL 100 ton hopper does have is the end bracing. For now I can live without that, though I may add these at some point in the future.
So this car introduced in the late 1970s by Atlas:
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-cElNMHNHqSs/VoyNxDaTT3I/AAAAAAAABGU/NsD06Yw_pyc/s1440-Ic42/Atlas70s.jpg)
Can now look like this (much improved 21st century Atlas lettering!):
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-c1Y6AURS8-M/VoyN0LFVL5I/AAAAAAAABGc/WfApWoOVp3Y/s1440-Ic42/Atlas2016.jpg)
Some more shots of the two modified cars (with MTL 100 ton trucks, FVM 36" wheels, Trainworx body mounts, and MTL brake detail):
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-YfuV3iiaOls/VoyN4X0TsnI/AAAAAAAABG8/uOT2XfyCMTc/s1440-Ic42/Atlas100tFinal1.jpg)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-zX09tQFtoo8/VoyN4WOb3LI/AAAAAAAABG0/8W0EmDob27M/s1440-Ic42/Atlas100tFinal3.jpg)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-jwi3CPE5XQw/VoyN4iXUG7I/AAAAAAAABG4/i6eDOUUOllA/s1440-Ic42/Atlas100tFinal4.jpg)
That wraps this discussion up for me. I've been experimenting a little with the Micro-Trains 100 ton hopper - I will start a thread on that model soon.
Mark
-
So, when you refer to MTL 100 ton trucks, do you mean the 1035's?
-
So, when you refer to MTL 100 ton trucks, do you mean the 1035's?
No, the 1035 are 70 ton Barber roller bearing trucks.
The trucks I am using are the 1139 100 Ton Barber roller bearing trucks, which are only available direct from MTL at this point (see prior posts in this thread).
Mark
-
Yes, reading previous posts in a thread is usually a good idea :facepalm: Thanks for the info.
-
The 1139 will be available commercially starting May.
-
So are these the only MTL trucks whose span does not rise to meet the bolster? Cause if that's the case I will buy a bunch, till Atlas gets BLMA 100t trucks out again that is...
But if the spans raise to meet the bolsters then these are worthless to me, I want to lower my cars, not raise... I don't model O gauge for a reason...
-
No, the bolsters are at the same height as standard MT trucks. The frames on most 100 ton trucks are taller than on 50/70 ton trucks, so they stick up a little above the bolster, but they won't change the height of your cars.
Not all N scale cars sit too high, so there are many where the "standard" bolster is still the better choice.
-
No, the 1035 are 70 ton Barber roller bearing trucks.
The trucks I am using are the 1139 100 Ton Barber roller bearing trucks, which are only available direct from MTL at this point (see prior posts in this thread).
Mark
They just showed up at MBK: http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Micro-Trains-N-00302080-100-Ton-Barber-Trucks-p/mtl-00302080.htm
Also listed in the BLW "New Micro Trains" Page: http://www.blwnscale.com/mt-new.htm
Although both have the incorrect list price (and therefore, presumably, incorrect discounted price)according to this post by Joe:
Pricing error... they should be $4.45 a pair. We are fixing the web now.
Joe
MTL
-
Feather River Trains also lists them, although they don't say "1139", just the modern MT number.