Atlas N FMC 5077 Single Door Boxcar Production Photos Posted

[ai5629]

Atlas' new N scale FMC 5077 Single Door Boxcars have production photos posted here:

http://www.atlasrr.com/NFreight/n5077boxcar.htm#.Vxlp63qRquI

They look very nice.  Body mounted couplers, metal wheels, metal cross walks and (what appears to be) good ride height.  You have got to love a car that comes ready to go with no upgrades right out of the box (ala ESM).  Railbox, LEF&C and PH&D for me.  Thanks.

Jeff

[Philip H]

Those do look nice. I'll probably grab a couple E&LS since it runs in Green Bay by the in laws.

[mu26aeh]

Quite a few roadnames that can be weathered and patched for the short line owners that roam the rails now.  HS, EEC, etc

[asarge]

I'm in for an LEF&C and Cadiz.

[nsbob]

Looks like they have BLMA coupler platforms.  I wonder if those are BLMA 100 ton trucks and metal wheels.

[Missaberoad]

Looks like they have BLMA coupler platforms.  I wonder if those are BLMA 100 ton trucks and metal wheels.

Looking closely at the pictures the wheels are definitely Atlas (fat lip around the face)
and prototype 5077 boxcars would typically have 70ton trucks...

I'm curious as to the difference between this prototype and the FVM 5347 boxcar?
besides the cuft difference what are the spotting features?

[Chris333]

you guys really like those couplers?

[bbussey]

The couplers are easily swapped out.  The outer dimensions of the Atlas 23015 (Accu-Mate) coupler box are the same as the MTL 1015.

A pair of Railboxes for me.

[cjm413]

I'm curious as to the difference between this prototype and the FVM 5347 boxcar?
besides the cuft difference what are the spotting features?

The main difference between the 5077 cuft cars built by FMC, PS, ACF, etc vs the 5277-5347 cuft cars built by the same manufacturers is the overall height of the car, the smaller 5077 cars were Plate B while the larger 5277-5347 cars were Plate C.

It's harder to tell in N scale where a good number of freight car models are jacked-up like monster trucks, some being "selectively compressed" in height to overcompensate for this (e.g. MTL FMC 5077) while others aren't (e.g. FVM's FMC 5347, PS 5344, etc)

[Missaberoad]

The main difference between the 5077 cuft cars built by FMC, PS, ACF, etc vs the 5277-5347 cuft cars built by the same manufacturers is the overall height of the car, the smaller 5077 cars were Plate B while the larger 5277-5347 cars were Plate C.

It's harder to tell in N scale where a good number of freight car models are jacked-up like monster trucks, some being "selectively compressed" in height to overcompensate for this (e.g. MTL FMC 5077) while others aren't (e.g. FVM's FMC 5347, PS 5344, etc)

Thanks, I suspected height would be the main difference... I'll have to pick up a couple for my 1990s era WC train and try to represent the difference in rooflines

[jagged ben]

you guys really like those couplers?

I've had zero problems with Atlas' body mounted Accumates on freight cars.   (I've had some problems with them on some older locos).   Truck mounted Accumates are from another planet.  My theory is that the truck mount parts allow for too much vertical play.  They are also prone to explode of course.   But I've put e.g. the Atlas coil cars towards the front of long trains with no problems.

And as Brian says, they are easily swapped out.  They even have the spaces for the MT centering nubs.