Atlas vs Micro Trains 3 Bays

[basementcalling]

$12? Hell! My average price paid for my fleet is $8. I can't believe I've out-cheaped you!

There was a guy in the SHR NTRAK club who ran a 100 car train of NW, NS, and Southern Atlas cars he had renumbered that he claimed he bought most of at Timonium for $5 a car. Course this was back in the late 80s.

[High Hood]

Thanks for the photos guys! It may sound odd, but it appears that the MT looks "fatter" while the Atlas car looks leaner. The one thing about the MT car that really bothers me is that the end panels just look off to me. While the slope sheet angle may be more accurate, Atlas end panels' size just looks better in my opinion.

The good thing about the Atlas car is that you can really get them for dirt cheap, but I feel like adding a bunch of upgrades (Trainworx body mounts, MT brake gear, etc) would make the cars overall cost exceed the MT car.

I think the Atlas car could make use of some 3D printed details, like an interior to cover up the weight and end bracing for use with the Trainworx body mounts.

[Mark5]

The good thing about the Atlas car is that you can really get them for dirt cheap, but I feel like adding a bunch of upgrades (Trainworx body mounts, MT brake gear, etc) would make the cars overall cost exceed the MT car.

Good points, but for me to make the MTL car decent I also have to add 100 ton trucks (it comes with 70 tonners) and I still have to body mount the couplers.

Mark

[nscalbitz]

From an operations stand point, I prefer the Micro-Trains car over the Atlas car. The MTL car has full interior detail, whereas the Atlas car has a round metal weight running lengthwise in the middle of the car. Removing the coal load on the Atlas car spoils the appearance of the car.

Really...?
moaning acceptable?
Duh...

[Rich_S]

Really...?
And your modelling skills don't extend as far as painting it black or some weathering, adding a few scratches of coal or other media and consider them acceptable?
Duh...

Show me a prototype hopper that has a big metal pipe running the length of the car right though the middle of the hoppers. You people wine and moan about one little detail being wrong on locomotive or a freight car having the wrong trucks, but you'll over look that metal weight in the middle of the car? Really. You want to hear the really funny part to me, I work for a railroad, I can get as much prototype as I want. You're just playing with toy trains, so go pound salt.

[Lemosteam]

@Mark5 , hoping you might know, did the PRR have a class for these 100 ton trucks?  If Yes I can likely turn a truck design around pretty quickly.

@ai5629 , What height off the rails would be required to put the MT cars at a better ride height?

[ai5629]

According to Teichmoeller’s PRR hopper book, all class H43, H43A, H43B & H43C cars should be 12’ 3” above railhead.  I am not sure how much over that the MTL car is.  I have lowered some of my MTL cars with BLMA 100 ton trucks and the ride height is much better, however the recessed bolster on these trucks is centered.  This moves the trucks closer to the slope sheets, which results in the flanges rubbing them on tighter curves.  Also, the center of the truck does not line up with the bolster.  A recessed off center 100 ton truck would minimize this I believe.  This is why I have high hopes if MTL ever produces a 100 ton version of them.  Thanks.

Jeff

[Mark5]

Show me a prototype hopper that has a big metal pipe running the length of the car right though the middle of the hoppers.

That's a great point on the Atlas car. For me, since on any layout I build the track is at my eye level I normally would not see it. So either I keep it like that or only run these with loads.

@Mark5 , hoping you might know, did the PRR have a class for these 100 ton trucks?  If Yes I can likely turn a truck design around pretty quickly.

I believe the PRR H43 is discussed in Dow's book, I'll take a look maybe this weekend. For now though, this shows the trucks as either 2F-F5 or 2F-F7:

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/classpage.html?class=H43

Mark

[High Hood]

@Lemosteam You think you could do a drop in part to cover up the metal rod? Perhaps something that looks like this?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Oh man. Just in time for my Conrail in Coal Country layout

[Lemosteam]

@Lemosteam You think you could do a drop in part to cover up the metal rod? Perhaps something that looks like this?

I do not have one of these atlas cars, so I need more info. like a pic to describe what you are referring to.

[mu26aeh]

I do not have one of these atlas cars, so I need more info. like a pic to describe what you are referring to.

Start here, flip to 9:30 mark of video for interior view/load removed.

[nsbob]

     I have improved the interior of several of the Atlas hoppers.  I used angled Evergreen styrene cut to fit the slope sheets with the angle facing up, glue them in, and paint them the appropriate color.  I prefer to paint the exposed part before gluing them but you can paint them after installation.  They are not prototypically perfect, but look a lot better than the exposed metal weight.  I believe the Evergreen part # is 194 but I am out of town for work and can't check for sure.  I have the Micro Trains and the Atlas hoppers.  When running both of them together empty in a unit train at shows, no one has ever commented on it until I pointed it out to them.
     If anyone wants to do this, let me know and I will verify the Evergreen part number when I get home this weekend.       

[nkalanaga]

Like Mark5, my layout is high enough that, with black paint, the "unfinished" interior isn't an issue.  However, High Hood's idea is a good one, and Atlas did just that with their ore cars.  The weight is in the center sill, and then there's a press-fit cover over that.

The early Atlas hoppers had the loads glued in, to the center sill ends, so one had to pry it out to see the weight.  Apparently they assumed the cars would never be unloaded.

[Lemosteam]

Start here, flip to 9:30 mark of video for interior view/load removed.

@mu26aeh Thanks.  Yes, I can quickly design something however, it appears that the pins on the load would need to be trimmed as well.  I will need someone to mail a car to me so I can measure the interior to fit the cover.

@Ed Kapuscinski , can you get me a large hi-res image straight on the side of the 2F-F5 truck (confirmed) from the CHRS folks?  Found some nicer images out there of the H43, but none straight on the truck. Still need a height from rail to bolster though.

Document provided states 33" wheels.

Can someone measure the OEM truck from the railhead to the top of the bolster plane (not needed if someone mails me a car)?  But I do need a dimension that folks want the car lowered, i.e. 0.030", 0.060"?