Atlas 60' passenger cars shipping!

[Joetrain59]

Got 8 cars today from Hogtrainz, including an obs. Will check them out a bit later.
 Joe D

[mu26aeh]

I received mine from HOG as well.  I got the undecs for an excursion train, undecided as yet for the scheme/road.  3 coaches and an obs.  Look very nice for the money.

[Cajonpassfan]

Tom, looking forward to your assessment.
Otto

[Joetrain59]

Just looked at all 8 cars, 5NH, 2 unpainted. Overall, very nice! I thought they rolled OK. Metals wheel would be better. The coupling could be closer, and I'm not sure, but maybe the couplers are adjustable? No instruction included about that. Spare diaphragms included. My NH combine has roadname spelled out just above the beltrail, not in the red letterboard at top, like the rest of my NH cars. But I'm sure Atlas looked at proto pix? On of my undec cars has a slight defect. One corner of the bottom is not sitting into carbody all the way, causing that set of steps to droop.
 I'm sure I'll be buying a few more down the road, hopefully, they'll be available. Just my 2¢.
 Joe D

[Point353]

My NH combine has roadname spelled out just above the beltrail, not in the red letterboard at top, like the rest of my NH cars. But I'm sure Atlas looked at proto pix?

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/nh6103.jpg

[Joetrain59]

Thanks for the pic, Point353. I quickly checked FF site, but no pass. car images there. Why would NH do that?? LOL
 Joe D

[Maletrain]

I received a couple of the undecorated RPOs with the 6-wheel trucks, and I am pleased. 

They are definitely a step up in detail and scaling from the old Bachmann "Shorties".  Mine seemed to roll pretty easily - better than my Rapido streamlined "Cascade" Pullmans.  There are some pretty small (and probably fragile) details, especially two unsupported pipes dropping vertically from the car bottom - they look like drains.  So, I have not yet tried to disassemble them, which I will have to do eventually to paint them.  So, I will be waiting and reading about how that goes (so I can learn from other's mistakes without having to make all of them, myself).

[Mark5]

Same friend says the 0.563 36" FVM axles work on these trucks (with better rolling too!).

I will try this on my combine this weekend.

Mark

[brokemoto]

I have not yet tried to disassemble them, which I will have to do eventually to paint them.

I received mine.  I got two combines, an RPO, a baggage and two open deck observations.

They roll in a satisfactory manner.

They do appear less clunky than do the B-manns.  The baggage doors are of a different size and do not open.  I like the sill detail over the baggage doors.

As someone pointed out, the roof and sides are one piece, or, they appear to be.  If they ain't  they are glued so tightly that you will have to saw them off if you want a round roof car.

The bottom pops out fairly easily.  One of the combines is the only one that I took apart.

The interior detail on the combine is pretty good.  There are seats, a WC (with fixtures[!]) and a bulkhead between the passenger and baggage compartment.  Impressive.  Pins hold in the trucks.  There is a long tongue for the couplers on the trucks.  I suspect that you could pull the coupler tongue on the MTs all the way out and it would work.  If not, then it is body-mount for you, if MT trucks are a necessity.

Mr. Graff must have hired someone from B-mann to do some of the work on the designing of these things, though.  The glazing is GLUED in there, and it appears to be well glued in there (those of you who have tried to re-paint or letter some of the recent B-mann offerings, especially cabooses and diseasels will be familiar).  I have yet to try to remove it, but, I am guessing that any attempt to remove it will cause its destruction.  Thus, be prepared to replace it with another panel or Mikro-Kristall-Kleer (or whatever that window stuff that Microscale sells is called).  For my part, I must remove the glazing even simply to letter for my non-historic.  It has been my experience that you must add some kind of glossy coat (even a rattle can will do), decal, then add a matte.  Skipping any of the steps all too often has rendered a result with which I have been somewhat less than pleased.

On the whole, though, I like the cars.  They do appear to be a step up from the B-mann.

[thomasjmdavis]

Looking at the photos of the model, and the artwork on Atlas website https://shop.atlasrr.com/c-1468-n170.aspx, and comparing to prototype photos http://digital.denverlibrary.org/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/p15330coll22/id/47977/rv/singleitem, it appears that the 4 wheel trucks are too far inboard.  My guess is that this was done to facilitate using a 6 wheel truck as well.  Prototype photos show the trucks within a foot or two of the steps.
 

[peteski]

Too bad about the glued-in windows.That will make it harder for custom-painters.  It seems that Kato is one of the few manufacturers (or maybe currently the only one) that has engineers clever enough (and/or tooling budget large enough) for glue-free designs.

At least that is what I recently learned when commenting on the rather thick shell walls (and windows) in the Rapido Turbo Train.  Those very complex multi-part sliding molds Kato uses to make thin-walled castings and to utilize snap-fit off the parts are very expensive to create. Not something smaller manufacturers like Rapido can budget for their designs.  I guess Kato is a powerhouse compared to the likes of Rapido or Atlas.  I guess that maybe Bachmann might be equal to Kato - why do they often come out with "Bachmann quality" models is puzzling. They could be just like Kato.  Maybe the Chinese engineers just don't have the same skills that Kato ones posses.   Oops, I don't know how Bachmann got into this conversation. Sorry. 

And if they have to use glued parts, it would be nice if they used the glue sparingly so that parts could be easily unglued. But that is also an unrealistic expectation in a high-volume production line.

[Point353]

Too bad about the glued-in windows. It seems that Kato is one of the few manufacturers (or maybe currently the only one) that has engineers clever enough (and/or tooling budget large enough) for glue-free designs.

At least that is what I recently learned when commenting on the rather thick shell walls (and windows) in the Rapido Turbo Train.  Those very complex multi-part sliding molds Kato uses to make thin-walled castings and to utilize snap-fit off the parts are very expensive to create. Not something smaller manufacturers like Rapido can budget for their designs.  I guess Kato is a powerhouse compared to the likes of Rapido or Atlas. 

And if they have to use glued parts, it would be nice if they used the glue sparingly so that parts could be easily unglued. But that is also an unrealistic expectation in a high-volume production line.

The Rowa/MRC/Con-Cor corrugated streamlined cars had the windows molded in strips that were simply press fit into the sides of the cars and then were held in place by the interior/seating piece, as well as by some tabs on the roof - no glue needed.

[thomasjmdavis]

OK, here is my "review" of the RPO, using a MT RPO as the primary comparison.....

In terms of overall looks, the Atlas is a very nice car, and it is within a few rivets (or rivet line placement) of many prototypes of the common 6 window heavyweight RPO car. 

The two major issues that I have read about to date are that the car is much too light in weight and that it does not roll well. My RPO, according to my trusty kitchen scale the Atlas car weighs in at 1.3 ounce, while the MT car weighs in at 1.4 ounce (read a report on another site that the Atlas weight 0.91 ounce- but perhaps the coach or obs weigh less?).  The caveat here is that there are 2 weights- one trapped between the frame in interior floor (where you expect it) and a second one glued inside the roof. On a tight radius at high speed, I predict it will prove "top heavy", but would not expect problems in normal operation.

On rolling, mine rolls "OK", but not nearly so well as the MT. Out of the box, the bolster pins were a little loose, and appeared to rub a bit on the center axle.  The bolster is offset rather like a MT, but on the MT RPO, the bolster is offset toward the end, on the Atlas, it offsets toward center. The Atlas is also "loud" (I have no better way to explain it)- literally makes more noise over Peco code 55, oddly, runs smoother with less noise over Atlas code 55 (still not as smooth or quiet as the MT). Overall axle length .573 (per my cheap caliper- so please don't buy wheels based on my measurements), diameter over flange .275, over face .24 (MT axle .537, flange .272, face .227).  36"= .225

Measurement inside at the corners is 4.5 inches- 60' "over the end posts" (MT 4.44 but thicker plastic).  I get 4.61 over the outside corners (MT 4.58), and 4.815 over the diaphragms (MT 4.72, the difference being mostly the diaphragm itself). Atlas car us a bit narrower at .742" v the MT at .78

My Atlas car came with a second set of diaphragms in the box.  The ones mounted to the car had 3 folds, while the spares have 4.  I speculate this is so you can have diaphragms that touch if you want them to. 

Overall detailing of the Atlas car is (my opinion), if anything, better than MT on rivets.  The mail catchers (err... hooks....err...whatever those are called) are cast in, but it is a fine bit of casting, and they included the safety bars (not modeled on the MT car) for the other doors.  What is not included on the Atlas car (but is on the MT) is the handle that extends above the mail catcher, to give the operator leverage to extend the catcher out.  Another odd bit of detailing in the door area is that the ladder rungs below the door are actually attached to the trucks instead of the body of the car- clearly to enable the trucks to swivel in tight turns.  Atlas' truck has a thicker (edit- oops, said thinner the first time) frame and thicker wheel that MT ( Atlas .694 over the bearings, MT .624, and so has .035 space on either side to clear the ladders).

Atlas has committed the big "no no" of gluing in the windows in my UNDEC car.  That said, the glue is very soft-I imagine is some sort of flexible PVA or something similar- but although it will be easy to remove, the clear sheet is so thin that (per brokemoto earlier) I doubt it can be removed without damage- so lay in some .005 or .010 clear before you start your painting project.  The other thing missing here are the bars inside the windows, but they could be modeled with very thin wire.  The MT car has a "frosted" window, and some horizontal lines in the frosting that simulate this. 

In one of the early threads on these cars, I promised @Atlas Paul that I would buy 10 RPO interiors if they made them available as a separate part.
 Which I was thinking was an exaggeration, until I counted....and between full RPOs, and the ones I need to kitbash baggage-mail cars, yep, 10. MT does not have an interior- so this is a big plus for the Atlas car. RPO interior is well done- nice bins and shelving, given that a weight was shoved in under (so the floor is a couple feet higher in that area, and you may have to chop off the legs of any modeled employees- but that is common to most N scale model interiors).  It has detail for the "hopper" provided for convenience of the crew- ironic, since there is no window, and view is blocked from the doors by an interior wall- the heat stove is also modeled with a little cylinder of plastic- but again is invisible without taking the car apart.

Roof, sides and ends are cast together, which makes it a bit less convenient as a core, or for kitbashing.  However, a positive is that the roof does not have a lot of cast in detail, making it easier to add road specific ventilators and such.

There are also a couple starter holes provided in the ends of the underframe that appear to be for body mounting couplers, if one is so inclined. (nice touch).

My undec will go into the "to be painted box" and at some point will be wearing L&N blue with Palmer script lettering. If you are willing to accept the belt rail, you could add a "Santa Fe" sill channel, and have a reasonable stand in for an ATSF RPO (all photos I have of ATSF RPOs show no belt rail, but they did buy several them in several lots, so I would not want to state that definitively). (edit- I should also have noted that the ATSF RPO would need the unusual 4 wheel trucks they used) The Atlas car could be detailed to be representative of cars of quite a number of other roads.

[thomasjmdavis]

All those electrons burned up in the last post, and I forgot to mention that the Atlas car is, indeed, a couple scale feet longer than the Bachmann.  I don't have a coach to compare, but willing to bet those extra inches are all in window width, making the Atlas look much more like the prototype.

[Mark5]

This is to confirm my earlier post that the FVM 0.563 36" axles are the correct ones. With these axles the cars are VERY free rolling.

On the combine at least, the seat molding and the roof weight are held in by screws.

As mentioned in my earlier post - I plan to move the bolster outward towards the ends - I see no obstacles to this so that is good (for me at least). I will body mount the couplers.

These are light years ahead of the Bachmann cars in my opinion.

Mark