Micro Trains PRR coach... Possibility?

[Dave V]

And dave, speaking as one whose chosen prototype is "the standard railroad of the world" while I sympathize with your position, I am also jealous.  If you run KCS you either foob regularly, or struggle mightily to make stuff over with paint and details.

I get that...!  Of course, when the PRR did something it usually did to the tune of hundreds, or in this case, over 1,000.

[Dave V]

Contact me at work via email, I can send you some touch up paint for your project.

Cheers

Joe
MTL
joe at micro-trains.com

Awesome!  E-mail sent.

[Dave V]

I think I have some undecs in the junk box ..

If you find them and they're in useable shape, let me know; I'll make an offer.

[Bob Bufkin]

Darn it Dave, I get first dibs. I do have about 7 of the Rivirossy cars but theroof parts don't fit those. 

[Mr. G]

Ah, so I have some incentive to further procrastinate on some coach projects!

That's ridiculous.  The models won't be available until you do your part and complete at least one conversion.  Do you want Joe to deal with production problems forever?

[JoeD]

Yea...someone please scratchbuild a single window coach so I can get these production problems figured out.!!   Always seems to work that way, right?

Joe

[Sokramiketes]

Imagine the possibilities if the sides were separate from the rest of the core! 

[Alwyn Cutmore]

Hi  Sokramiketes,

While I agree and how wonderful it would be I believe that the end cost of the product would increase as it would cause a complete extra tool to be manufactured and in the process would increase the time taken to have the model assembled. While MTL is in the business of making cars I do not believe they are in the business of making it easier for their competitors. Could you imaging the sides being produced to fill this and that and spoiling the whole market for MTL.

Yes I applaud the idea and while Branchlines did a good model where are they now.

Regards

Al

[bbussey]

Actually it would have been less costly both up front and in the long run.  The multi-part tool for the core would be tooled once.  The variety of sides would be two-part flat molds, which are less expensive.  The models could be designed so that the sides snap into place, thus not adding much to the labor cost.  It also would result in less component product to inventory, which also carries a cost.  And it wouldn't matter if other manufacturers made after-market sides, as the core would still have to come from MTL, and there are so many body variations that any after-market sides would have little if any negative effect on MTL sales.

And food for thought:  instead of the current multi-part body tool and two-part roof tool for each model, with a standard heavyweights core you could have instead a two-part car sides tool and a multi-part roof tool, which would result in a more detailed model for at worst the same cost as the current configuration.

[JoeD]

Penciled out, it would be a significant increase in cost to do a modular system, especially with the Heavyweights.  I had this all planned out to be modular before we ever started, but once the math was done, and the number of parts you would have to inventory and track were listed, the plan sorta went south.  Just looking at the roofs gave me a headache!   Remember, each part touched is extra US$$   Assembly is an issue and an additonal cost...consider cutting and assembly fixtures, some or all specifically designed for a single part use.  I can see someting like this working for light weight passenger cars because so much is common and more floor plans were shared among different railroads.  Still, look at the cost of the Centralia (sp) cars even assembled in China.  Those bad boys range from $40-$50 each...

Great concept and I see the application for a whole host of car body styles...just need to figure out a way to make assemblying 8 parts together as cost sensitive as 4.

Cheers

Joe

[delamaize]

Penciled out, it would be a significant increase in cost to do a modular system, especially with the Heavyweights.  I had this all planned out to be modular before we ever started, but once the math was done, and the number of parts you would have to inventory and track were listed, the plan sorta went south.  Just looking at the roofs gave me a headache!   Remember, each part touched is extra US$$   Assembly is an issue and an additonal cost...consider cutting and assembly fixtures, some or all specifically designed for a single part use.  I can see someting like this working for light weight passenger cars because so much is common and more floor plans were shared among different railroads.  Still, look at the cost of the Centralia (sp) cars even assembled in China.  Those bad boys range from $40-$50 each...

Great concept and I see the application for a whole host of car body styles...just need to figure out a way to make assemblying 8 parts together as cost sensitive as 4.

Cheers

Joe

Problem: SOLVED!

[JoeD]

 

[victor miranda]

this post is far more a question than it sounds

I have the impression that part stability was a
direct function of process control
combinations of temperature of injection and time
cooling in the mold ... 
and I would guess where the cooling is placed.

I am not expecting any kind of answer so be careful with
any propritary info.

I was wondering if you can make a mold with the
bannana-boating in mind and do the reverse
so that when it relaxes it is the right shape?



after all, more PRR cars is my idea of a good thing.

[Alwyn Cutmore]

Hi Joe,
I am with you. You know what I do not even have one of those bad boys cars.

Regards

Al

[JoeD]

Great Questions Victor,

Your correct here, but when you throw in a huge chunk of the sides are missing...re windows will effect the rate of cooling and you get warp.  I think you may be able to stableize the process by adding some tricky water routing to cool or heat up specific sections of the mold.  I think to do that we would have to split the insert and cut the chambers for the water that way.  Keeping it from leaking would be interesting ) 

We actually do some reverse warp tooling on a few parts we produce, but this is a process that would be very difficult to calculate up front on a part as big and out in the open as a shell.  You'd only get one shot at it!

We are not that far away from working this out.  The duel window coach is almost there in complexity and warp potential...we learned a lot from that project we can put to the single window.  Funny, looking at the two projecs you wouldn't think there would be an issue, but it's just enough difference to squirl the whole thing!

Thanks for asking

Joe

this post is far more a question than it sounds

I have the impression that part stability was a
direct function of process control
combinations of temperature of injection and time
cooling in the mold ... 
and I would guess where the cooling is placed.

I am not expecting any kind of answer so be careful with
any propritary info.

I was wondering if you can make a mold with the
bannana-boating in mind and do the reverse
so that when it relaxes it is the right shape?



after all, more PRR cars is my idea of a good thing.