New Micro Trains 60' Double Plug Door Box Car...

[Philip H]

Are these actually out yet?

[JoeD]

On the way, I believe the first release will be out in a few days.

Cheers

Joe

[Robbman]

On the way, I believe the first release will be out in a few days.

Cheers

Joe

You correct the doors?

[fredmoehrle]

 
THose GBW units will look GREAT behind my Ann Arbor loco's!

[ryan_wilkerson]

November MTL release?

[Dave Schneider]

GBW 200 to 209 were 60' XAP boxcars built by Greenville 9/1963.  They appear to be a match for the Micro Trains model.
http://www.greenbayroute.com/1963gbw206.jpg

Excellent first post mmathu! This is a car that I would buy for no particular modeling purpose other than it is cool.

Best wishes, Dave

[mmathu]

"GBW 200 to 209 were 60' XAP boxcars built by Greenville 9/1963."

As for what they used them for, ???  Given the XAP type, my guess would be auto parts, but many roads used very similar cars for other things.

They were used in a pool of cars serving Ford Motor plants.  The GB&W hauled a lot of auto parts across Wisconsin coming from the Detroit area to an assembly plant in Saint Paul.  Besides the GBW 200-209 Greenville cars, the railroad also had similar GBW 210-219 cars built by ACF in 1964.

[Hyperion]

I'm going off my sketchy memory here, but I believe the way it worked with auto parts cars was that there was an industry-wide pool.  Any railroad that moved the traffic was expected to kick in a number of cars that was proportionate to the amount of ton-mile traffic that they had.  So, even if a railroad didn't terminate or originate the auto traffic and wasn't a line that one would consider automotive-oriented, if they carried some cars across their trackage, they'd be expected to kick in some cars to the pool.

[mmathu]

So, even if a railroad didn't terminate or originate the auto traffic and wasn't a line that one would consider automotive-oriented, if they carried some cars across their trackage, they'd be expected to kick in some cars to the pool.

Yes, that's how the GBW cars were used. The railroad was part of a supply link from Detroit to Saint Paul, using railroad car ferries to take the cars across Lake Michigan.

[Mark5]

Decided to skip the Wabash car and wait for a later iteration (N&W!). Maybe the little tooling problem can be fixed easily?

[cv_acr]

I'm going off my sketchy memory here, but I believe the way it worked with auto parts cars was that there was an industry-wide pool.  Any railroad that moved the traffic was expected to kick in a number of cars that was proportionate to the amount of ton-mile traffic that they had.  So, even if a railroad didn't terminate or originate the auto traffic and wasn't a line that one would consider automotive-oriented, if they carried some cars across their trackage, they'd be expected to kick in some cars to the pool.

Yep, that's why if you can read the "Empty Return to" stencilling on photos of these cars they usually reference a different railroad than what owns the car. That's the home point of the pool. For example, all of these are stencilled with a home point on the GTW at Flint, MI:

http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=cgw15000&o=cgw
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=gmo59111&o=gmo
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=gn139501&o=gn
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=np1301&o=np
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=up960094&o=up
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=up960691&o=up

Note that the different automakers have their own pools. A car in the Ford pool will never be at a GM plant and they can't just be captured for alternative service since when going back "empty" the car is still loaded with the empty specialized racks/pallets for the body panels. (ORER notes often indicate "removeable pallets considered part of car" although these would be owned by the auto maker.) There was a derailment at Hamilton, ON a few years ago involving a couple of the big 86' cars, and the damaged cars were cut up on site to get the racks out.

[LN2800]

L&N leased several of the Wabash cars during the 70's, with the roadname and flag painted out and a quick L&N reporting mark patched on. I will definitely grab a few to model these...in the meantime, please consider doing a run in L&N "Cushioned Cargo" blue, series 1056xx.

[Sokramiketes]

All this talk about the doors and nobody thinks the body mounted couplers are straight whack?

There is a notch in the car end to clear... nothing.  There is a giant coupler mounting pad like .060" thick to get an offset shank coupler to mount at the proper height.  It looks ridiculous. 

[bbussey]

Mike, do you have one in hand?  Is it easily possible to adapt the model to take a #1015 or #1016 coupler?  I would postulate that the notch in the end was tooled for the purpose of a standard coupler box, but for whatever reason a decision was made to use the #2001 instead.

It is a mystery why half of the coupler box wasn't incorporated into the underframe, similar to how a great many current models of other manufacturers have been designed.  It's not as if it's patented and can't be copied, and it would be no more extensive to assemble than a current MTL coupler.

[Sokramiketes]

Mike, do you have one in hand?  Is it easily possible to adapt the model to take a #1015 or #1016 coupler?  I would postulate that the notch in the end was tooled for the purpose of a standard coupler box, but for whatever reason a decision was made to use the #2001 instead.

It is a mystery why half of the coupler box wasn't incorporated into the underframe, similar to how a great many current models of other manufacturers have been designed.  It's not as if it's patented and can't be copied, and it would be no more extensive to assemble than a current MTL coupler.

I passed on it at the shop this weekend after seeing the large block of diecast metal that would have to be removed to make it look right.  It would not be easy to adapt to a 1015 since that block is part of the metal underframe instead of a plastic spacer.  I couldn't see any reason for the underslung 2001/4 type coupler.