Wheels, Weight & Couplers on Freight

[SAH]

Whew.  With all the hot wind blowing about with regard to MT undeframes I decided to take some photos.

As it turns out MT has already redesigned the 40' XM underframe at least once.  The bottom of the stack is a relatively recent MT offering with the plastic underbody detail.  Next up is an original version.  I'll not bother with the merits of one over the other nor what "should have" been done, aside from noting both could have been designed to be a bit heavier.  Third from the bottom is the Atlas 1932 XM.  On top is an Atlas steel rebuild. 

I'll not be chucking my MT foob PS-1s anytime soon but I will be a bit more critical as to which ones I prep for the layout, knowing something better may be on the horizon.  The coupler extension problem that has been bugging me is apparent in the photo.  Especially when compared to the Atlas cars.

Here is the Atlas steel rebuild, Atlas twin HT and a MT XM I modified for height and body mount couplers.


I like the distance between the Atlas cars.  I don't like the distance between the Atlas HT and MT XM.  I think the ride height of the MT car is OK.  Note the Atlas HT factory supplied Accumates have been replaced with MT 1015s.  The distance between cars with factory supplied Accumates is not acceptable in my opinion.

My first pass at reconfiguring the MT XM.  Cut the frame with a hacksaw, reducing the frame length by the width of the saw kerf.  Reattach the pieces with a mending plate - Double thickness cardstock works fine. 


Then add a styrene shim (0.01" styrene) to the notch to raise the car slightly.


Cutting and reassembling the frame means the bolster centerlines change with relation to the body but not so much that it's noticable.  The method of lowering the car without filing the metal frame is preserved because the 1015 pocket still rests on the end of the car in the notch.  But the couplers still stick out too far, especially compared to the Atlas offerings when 1015s are installed. 

Next step:  Remount the 1015s further back to get the Atlas type car separation.  Use spacers as I did for the FVM MILW cars to perserve ride height improvements.  Wait for the Atlas PS-1 and David's new couplers.  I'll keep plugging away until I'm satisfied in the mean time.

Steve

[PAL_Houston]

This is all great stuff.  But I have a question (and probably not just one):

How do you gage coupler height?  More to the point, how do you arrive at combinations of  bolster-height changes, coupler mounting and shimming, and body height reductions that look "right" and get the couplers to be the right height off the tracks?

I poked around the "Things worth saving" section of this site and nobody really talks about this.  Must be someone's secret formula, but you are sure doing a lot of whatever it is!

[SAH]

Thanks Paul.  And welcome to The Railwire.  I've learned lots from this gang.  Many talented modelers who are happy to share hang out here.  Pretty entertaining at times too.   

I use an ancient Micro-Trains MT-1055 coupler height gauge.  They're still made.  Other tools / gauges are available too.  I work the car to get a ride height I'm happy with.  I'll generally use a proto photo of a typical car as a guide, balancing accuracy with the physical reality of our small models.  Then back the car up to the gauge to determine what needs to be done to the shell, underframe or both to get the coupler height right.  I'm kind of feeling my way through this whole exercise, so there's less science at play than meets the eye.     I suspect others on this site go about it in a far more methodical and precise manner than I am.  Whatever works for you is what matters.

Steve

[PAL_Houston]

Thanks Paul.  And welcome to The Railwire.  I've learned lots from this gang.  Many talented modelers who are happy to share hang out here.  Pretty entertaining at times too.   

I use an ancient Micro-Trains MT-1055 coupler height gauge.  They're still made.  Other tools / gauges are available too.  I work the car to get a ride height I'm happy with.  I'll generally use a proto photo of a typical car as a guide, balancing accuracy with the physical reality of our small models.  Then back the car up to the gauge to determine what needs to be done to the shell, underframe or both to get the coupler height right.  I'm kind of feeling my way through this whole exercise, so there's less science at play than meets the eye.     I suspect others on this site go about it in a far more methodical and precise manner than I am.  Whatever works for you is what matters.

Steve

Gee.  Sounds like alchemy.
I guess you've gotta have talent or something

[bbussey]

Steve,

So that you don't have the notch in the car end - what you can do is remove the front .040" or so off the front of the #1015 coupler box top, so that it rests against the inside of the boxcar shell end.  Then the bottom of the body end serves as the remaining top of the coupler box which visually looks better.  I did that with my FVM ribside boxcar.  I also cut a notch in the floor to match the dimensions of the #1015 coupler box, then glued a piece of styrene on the inside floor to cover to screw the coupler box to.



Also, BLMA trucks lower the MTL boxcars to where filing the bolsters is unnecessary.  I like the stock BLMA wheelsets, but they can be changed to any preferred wheelset that has the MTL axle length.





Nice job on the ACY 50' combo-door boxcar at the top of the thread.

[SAH]

Gee.  Sounds like alchemy.
I guess you've gotta have talent or something

It's "or something" in my case Paul.
All you really need is a willingness to give it a try, and if it doesn't work, try something else.

[SAH]

Hmmmm.  So by cutting the coupler plate the underframe can rest the thickness of the coupler plate below the end of the molded car body, if I'm following you correctly.  A new hole for the mounting screw would be needed - No problem in plastic.  A bit more of a problem in metal but certainly doable.  Moving the coupler back would make it worth the effort.  I hadn't thought about it that way Bryan.  One more trick in the bag.  Thanks for the tip.

When you say "cut a notch in the floor" I'm assuming that since you're adding a mounting surface inside the car that the size of the notch is not important.  Just so it's big enough to clear the coupler box dimensions.  Correct?

Thanks re: the AC&Y combo door.  I don't like the spacer I installed on the sliding door side.  Sure wish someone would do that shell in N. 

Steve

[bbussey]

Hmmmm.  So by cutting the coupler plate the underframe can rest the thickness of the coupler plate below the end of the molded car body, if I'm following you correctly.  A new hole for the mounting screw would be needed - No problem in plastic.  A bit more of a problem in metal but certainly doable.  Moving the coupler back would make it worth the effort.  I hadn't thought about it that way Bryan.  One more trick in the bag.  Thanks for the tip.

For MTL cars a new hole possibly, but I think the current holes place end face of the coupler box flush with the ends.

When you say "cut a notch in the floor" I'm assuming that since you're adding a mounting surface inside the car that the size of the notch is not important.  Just so it's big enough to clear the coupler box dimensions.  Correct?

Correct.  The internal mounting surface size just has to have enough overlap so it can be cemented to the floor top.

Thanks re: the AC&Y combo door.  I don't like the spacer I installed on the sliding door side.  Sure wish someone would do that shell in N. 

You don't like it only because you know what you had to do to make the door look reasonably correct.  You could cut out the correct right-hand doors from an Athearn/MDC 50' double-door boxcar if it's really bothering you, but to everyone else the model looks fine as it is currently.

[PAL_Houston]

So, inspired by what I see you guys doing, I spent an evening or 2 this week lowering some 4 stock cars, and repainting and decaling them for CBQ. (FYI, there was a Bachmann CNW, a "Hong Kong" UP, and 2 Industrial CNW & ATSF models, which I picked up at train shows for $3 or $4 each.)  I have not attempted to body-mount the couplers  -- these are Atlas trucks with truck-mounted Accumates -- but I did lower them by filing the bolsters and milling enough of the floors to allow low-profile FVM metal wheelsets to roll freely. 

These "works of art" were a learning experience for me.  Not a single one of the stock cars in the photo is prototypically accurate for CBQ  -- for one thing the trusswork is all wrong. For another, the doors are all wrong, and for a third thing the ends are wrong.  So, while I painted them red and put on the Burlington Route heralds, and the road and car number panels, I couldn't justify adding lading info and car data on the end panels.

But, they are lower than they were, and they still roll.  See if you can't pick them out in this photo!!


In the past I have thought about building some replacement stock car sides that I could mold and reproduce to use in place of these.  That is not so high on my priority list, so red stock cars with CBQ heralds are gonna have to do...for now and some while longer, I think!

[Chris333]

Cue the Skibbe CB&Q stock car...

It is always fun to take something you already have and turn it into something else 

[PAL_Houston]

...

It is always fun to take something you already have and turn it into something else 

Yes.  Especially when you have no conscience, and are willing to delude yourself that a new paint job and some decals changes some random piece of plastic into a prototypically accurate model of your favorite road's particular take a certain class of car!!!  This means you can do little work and achieve great results!

[I should be CEO of Chase, don't you think?]

[Chris333]

BTW Skibbe's stockcar here:
http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=32163

[Sokramiketes]

BTW Skibbe's stockcar here:
http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=32163

Wow, that was 6 years ago already?  Crazy. 

At some point I added a photoetched roofwalk and some weathering.  And hay. 



And here's a side by side comparison. 



While it doesn't have the correct slat count, I think the look changed dramatically with the removal of the sill and setting it on its trucks lower.  It looks long and low, and that's good for a stock car. 

[PAL_Houston]

Wow, that was 6 years ago already?  Crazy. 

At some point I added a photoetched roofwalk and some weathering.  And hay. 



And here's a side by side comparison. 



While it doesn't have the correct slat count, I think the look changed dramatically with the removal of the sill and setting it on its trucks lower.  It looks long and low, and that's good for a stock car.

Nice work.  I especially like the hay ...it's a nice touch that adds a lot of character.  What'd you use?

[SAH]

Way to take the plunge Paul!  That's the crux of the matter:  Just dig in.  Mike has done a lot of this kind of thing and I like his overall approach to the stock car, which is similar to my own.  Get the general "feel" of the prototype down and the rest takes care of itself.

I've had some Fine N Scale box cars for like, forever.  So now that those beautiful FVM models are one the market I figured it's time to build the FNS models.   

Here are the BeanO wagontops and a PRR X31 ready for the paint shop.  One of the wagon tops had the flat panel door which is kind of early for my layouts era so I replaced it with a wider door to represent one of the cars that went through the rebuild program.  I' m not sure the door width is correct but the impression of a modified car works when compared to the stock models.  I replaced all the running boards with MT parts, thinned to a closer to proto profile.


Here's the stock model in an early paint scheme.


The stock model with a standard door and repaint.


The wide door and the large B&O scheme.  Note the placement of the B&O logo relative to the car with the standard door.  An easy to model detail that provides a bit of variety.


A top view showing the metal running board.


I've discovered I'm REALLY poor at finding the centerline of the car for drilling coupler pocket mounting hole with resorting to a guide of some sort.  What I settled on is a template done with a computer drawing program.  I measure the ID of the car at the coupler pocket with a caliper.  Then draw the dimension and let the program find the centerline.  Print it, cut it out and paste it in place.  Then use the coupler pocket to find the right setback dimension.  Here's a photo.


And the PRR X31 finsished.  I' m not so sure about the color.  Seems a bit too purple to me but I followed what I thought was the recco'd color.  Nothing some weathering won't solve I hope, 'cause I'm not doing it over!


Thanks for looking.  Better solutions are always welcome!!!!!!

Steve