Wheels, Weight & Couplers on Freight

[SAH]

The Atlas Trainman AC&Y covered hoppers are next.  Nothing fancy here as far as adding body mounts go.


I gave them the ladder and grab refinement treatment since the AC&Y is the featured RR on the layout.  Also thinned the running board so it tucks in between the hatches.  Now to paint the brass parts and add a different last digit with decals.


I'm going to do a batch of all kinds of different cars, paint them all in one session and them decal them all.  The paint session drives me to do this.  Once I have the air brush out and operational I try to do as many as I can.  Don't care much for the clean-up and put away part of the job.

[SAH]

A blast from the past this time:  Con Cor / Sekisui box cars.  Not bad models really.  They add something different to the box car fleet.  I tried lowering the shell on the frame by filing the bolster years ago but did not body mount the couplers at the time.  I wound up using  most of the same techniques used for the MT box cars.  Messed up the initial body mount on both cars but in different ways.  One of the cars had a screw hole drilled but I used the wrong tap (00-80 instead of 00-90).  The solution was to glue the styrene block inside the car and drill & tap it.  The other car did not have a hole and I discovered I don't have a collet sized for a #61 bit that works in a power drill.  So I drilled a 1/16" hole and plugged it with 3/32" styrene rod.  Then drill and tap.  Also note everything but the kitchen sink will work as weight in house cars.


Here's an old friend I found at a swap meet some 30 years ago.  I was living in Toledo at the time so it has a special place in my mind.  Fortunately it's no stretch to imagine Shore Line box cars coming off the NKP to the AC&Y in Spencer, OH so it will earn it's keep on the layout.


I painted and decaled the MEC car many years ago.  The running boards were thinned and BLMA foot stirrups were added on both cars.

[seusscaboose]

been reading the thread... i noticed the NKP car and the Toledo reference... 

i spent my summers as a youth in NW Ohio, Genoa specifically...  small world.

[SAH]

been reading the thread... i noticed the NKP car and the Toledo reference... 

i spent my summers as a youth in NW Ohio, Genoa specifically...  small world.

I worked with some some folks from Genoa.  Nice people.  One was even a model railroader.  Did most of my railfanning in Toledo and environs back then too.  It was a great place to shoot trains in the early 80's.  Even better before the mergers, or so I was told.  I'm surprised there hasn't been a Morning Sun "Trackside in Toledo" book.  Maybe there is one and I missed it.

[SAH]

I really like the Atlas 11,00 gallon tank car but there is no provision for body mounting couplers.  I took the simple way out and cut a piece of styrene to fit between the tank saddle and the walkway.  The placard mounting tab prevents inserting a rectangular piece so a notch must be cut to accomodate it.  The little facus to the left is a pattern with a handle attached.  Making copies is pretty easy with the pattern.  MT #1015 couplers.  I did not add weight. 

[SAH]

I've been reworking a bunch of non-MT box cars today, both and new models.  As a baseline, here's an unmodified MT car (the pretty WP one) and the SR model I did a few weeks ago using the techniques posted earlier.  Note the lowered car body for the SR model.


I painted and decalled this cars many years ago.  Model Railroading or Rail Model Journal (can't remember which) used to run a photo of a freight  train or yard and identify the cars and possible model candidates (HO scale of course).  A NYC car with a galvanized roof and shorter IH dimensions caught my eye.  As it turned out an old Bachmann model fit the bill.  I did nothing to the frame to lower the ride height.  MT #1015s were installed as was done for the MT box cars.  What I did discover (unfortunately) is that the axle on the MT Lo Profile wheelsets I've been using interfered with the #1015 mounting screw head.  Adding a washer would negate the low rider look.  So I switched to Atlas trucks and wheels.  The wheel set axle diameter is smaller.  Problem solved.  BLMA stirups were added and the running board was replaced with a thinned MT version.

[GaryHinshaw]

Very nice showcase here, and the bridge makes a great set for the characters.

-Gary

[SAH]

An old Austrian Atlas guy is next.  Painted and decaled years ago.  Before low profile wheelsets in fact.  That's why there is a chunk of the frame ground down - To clear the pizza cutter wheels.  Anyway, the old Atlas cars had a hub case into the bolster.  The hole for the kingpin in an MT truck fits around the hub nicely but the car wobbles badly.  The solution is to tap the kingpin hole (2-56) and run a screw in to hold the truck against the bolster.  Turn until it's snug and then back off 1/8 turn.  Works well.  MT1015s are fine in this instance.  No axle / screw head clearance issues.


Not up to today's standards but the car adds some variety to the 40' box car fleet.  BLMA stirups, MT brakewheel and a thinned running board finsh the job. 

[SAH]

Very nice showcase here, and the bridge makes a great set for the characters.

-Gary

Thanks Gary.  I should mention that I ran some tests the other day with 15 of the cars I've weighted and converted to body mount.  15 cars, 2 Atlas H15-44s and a caboose is nearly 6' long:  Maximum train length on my layout.  I pulled the trains from one end to the other.  No problems at all.  Then I pushed it back to the starting point.  I had two derailments but both in places that did not surprise me.  A poor section to section joint in one case.  And on the first of my hand built turnouts for the other.  Two instances at problem spots I knew I had.  I was never able to do as well with a train full of truck mounted cars.  Encouragement to press onward.

[SAH]

Sometimes I purchase a car at a LHS when I'm travelling.  Frequently when I get home I sometimes neglect to open it up for close inspection.  And so it happened with the FVM MILW rib sides.  So this project turned out to be my first real good look at the car.  VERY well done.  I really like it. 

But of course I can't leave well enough alone.  The way the car is weighted makes it a bit more difficult to lower the car height.  Open one up and you'll see what I mean.  OTOH, although it's a tad higher than my modified MT cars it's not as high as an unmodified MT.  So I'm OK with that.  A good thing too, because to use 1015s I had to swap out the MT trucks for Atlas to get more clearence at the axle / screw head interference point.  If I added washers it would be as high as a MT car.  Pay no attention to the ground down screw inside the car.  I didn't realize the weight was shorter than the car IL, enough so to allow the full screw length to protrude up into the car body.  I also added weight, glued to the up side of the supplied weight.


You can see the height difference in this photo.  Enough to provide the uneven profile you see in late steam transition era photos but not so high as to make it stand out.

[SAH]

Back to experiments in coupler mounting.  I fixed the rough track spots described earlier and then simulated an ops session running an EB and WB doing work in Spencer and Litchfield.  I tried not to favor any particular spot (knowing there may be trouble), approaching it as a new operator might.  It's hard to do when you know which closets the skeletons are in.  Anyway, I was quite pleased.  No derailments for which I was unable to find a root cause.   

The first problem was a derailing BLMA gon.  This one was easy - My curves are too tight for the as delivered frame.  The solution was simple:  Cut away the coupler pocket at an angle as shown below.  Works fine now.  Gobs of weight helps too.


I also discovered all the Bluford hoppers have wheelsets with narrow wheel guage.  The few scratch turnouts I built are to NMRA standards and I used the NMRA guage to check the wheels.  The simple solution is to swap the wheels with FVM or BLMA sets.  I'm looking at changing the couplers to MT as well, so I'm not done with this project yet.

I'm also reassessing some my earlier efforts.  Bound to happen since I'm learning as I go.  More later this week (I hope).

Steve

[SAH]

The first reconsideration:  I'm not OK with the higher riding FVM MILW boxcars.  Refer to the 12/2/11 post.  AFter seeing it next to the newer Atlas models I decided to dig in.  The solution turned out to be going with my original inclination for modifying MT box cars - Use a spacer.  I cut away the inner ribs and installed a 0.695" long (high?) piece of sheet styrene to set the height.  The end must be notched for the coupler.  Not a difficult modification all things considered.


Here's how the lowered (right) FVM car compares to an unmodified model.


And next to a V1.0 MT lowering job, which brings me to the second reconsideration.  Two things bugged me about the V1.0 mods:  1) The couplers stuck out too far.  2) I think I lowered it too much - To the point that it looks squished.  I've made another attempt but am still not completely happy.  I'll post them when I think I've got it right.


Steve

[PGE_Modeller]

On the subject of car weight, some time ago I got tired of calculating the NMRA recommended weight for each car individually.  As a result, I inverted the weight/inch of length after the initial weight so that I had length/weight increment - in my case, mm/gram but it could just as easily be inches per ounce.  I then drew up a scale with the initial weight (15 grams) at one end and each 1 gram increment marked and the scale was glued to a perspex "surface plate" from Andy W. Models in Vancouver, BC. 

Determining recommended car weight is now as simple as placing the car on the surface plate with one end lined up with the 15 gram mark and reading off the desired weight at the other end of the car.

Cheers,
Greg Kennelly
Burnaby, BC

[SAH]

Greg - Your solution is simple and effective.  My two favorite attributes for hobby matters.  Come to think of it, for most any other matters as well.  Well done and thanks for sharing.

I've not commented on weight much since the early posts.  Experience running on other's layouts has shown that following the NMRA guidelines to the letter is not necessary for good performance.  They're guidelines after all.  Being consistent within a narrow tolerance for a given car length IS important however and the NMRA guide is a good baseline from which to begin.

I've settled on 27g +/- 1g for 40' cars.  A recent MT 40' XM comes in at 20g.  The Atlas 1932 XM is 27g.  An Atlas 40' single sheathed or steel rebuild XM weighs in at 30g.  Open one up and you'll see why - photo below.  I'm gaining a new appreciation for Atlas rolling stock as I'll discuss in a later post.  I'm not removing weight from the 30g Atlas cars.


50' cars are weighted to 31g +/- 1g.  Box cars are easy.  The BLMA GB was tough.  I was able to get to 28g total.  After modifying the coupler pocket it runs fine.

Steve

[PGE_Modeller]

Steve,

Your numbers and my "car weight ruler" are in good agreement.  A 40' car on the ruler shows 28 g while a 50' shows 31 g.  The GHQ 40' 8-hatch Canadian reefer weighs in at 28 g with Fox Valley wheels and a True-Line Trains 50' newsprint box car is right on the button at 31 g.  And yes, out of the box the BLMA GB weighs in at 18 g compared to a "recommended" weight of 32 g - it is slightly longer than a 50' box car.

Cheers,
Greg Kennelly
Burnaby, BC