Atlas vs Micro Trains 3 Bays

[nkalanaga]

John: It could very well be a result of the weight of the caliper.  I hadn't thought of that.

And, yes, just changing the wheels makes a big difference.  I found that with my grain hoppers, which all seemed to sit too high, although they measured fine.  36 inch wheels filled the visual gap, and they looked much better.

[Ike the BN Freak]

John, on the "upgrade kits" are you designing them to be printed at Shapeways or on a resin printer?

[Lemosteam]

Shapeways.

[cjm413]

Personally I'd like to see a full upgrade kit.

As of right now, you have to get the following,

Trainworx body mount couplers
MT brake gear
100 ton trucks, whether its BLMA/Atlas or MT
and bits of styrene to make the center sill cover and end bracing.

I believe Trainworx could do the full kit, as they have the couplers, the brake rigging could probably come from the quad hoppers. They have 100 ton trucks, but believe theirs have the offset bolster hole, not sure if that is what is actually needed for these.

Atlas hoppers need the offset bolster hole on the Trainworx 100T trucks.

[Lemosteam]

Atlas hoppers need the offset bolster hole on the Trainworx 100T trucks.

@cjm413 Why? Are the axles in the wrong location (truck to truck wheelbase) for the model?

[Lemosteam]

Here is the kit so far. holes for bent wire tubing, integrated 1015 direct mount box for MT 1015 or 1016 coupler. and a weight hider for empties:





I may add a bending tool groove jig for making two-step stirrups from brass strip stock, if @High Hood wants one.

[cjm413]

They were designed with inset bolster holes to accommodate the standard Bettendorf trucks with offset bolster holes and Rapido couplers that came with pretty much every Atlas/Roco freight car.

The current releases do come with Atlas 70T roller bearing trucks with centered bolster holes that don't scrape against the slope sheets despite the inset bolster holes vs their 100T  trucks that will.

@cjm413 Why? Are the axles in the wrong location (truck to truck wheelbase) for the model?

[nkalanaga]

John:  Part of the problem is that the Atlas cars were designed back when the only trucks available were "standard" 50/70-ton solid-bearing trucks, and the 100-ton trucks are longer, both in wheelbase and due to larger wheels.  There isn't room between the bolster and the slope sheet for the longer trucks.  Even if they will work on straight track, the flanges rub the slope sheets on curves, and our oversized model flanges make it worse. 

I used Atlas 100-ton trucks on mine, and ground a hole in the slope sheet for the wheels.  It doesn't go all the way through, so the car can still be run empty, and, painted black, doesn't show from the outside.  A piece of 1x3 and some stripwood made a jig, to hold the upside-down body, and a motor tool made quick work of grinding the dent.  Don't try holding the car in your hand, the grinding bit will likely wander, damaging either the side of the car, or YOU.  My jig just held the car from sliding, while I held it in place by the other end of the body, away from the work.

I did the same thing on my Trainworx hoppers, but those really should have offset holes, so that the springs will line up with the side posts.  The Atlas trucks were all I had at the time.

[Lemosteam]

When I swapped in FVM 36" wheels in plase of the OEM 33" wheels, the car rolls perfectly and there is no contact with the shell anywhere. you can see the flange clearing the slope sheet.

[nkalanaga]

I've done that with MDC roller bearing trucks, after trimming the raised ring off the top of the bolster.  That lowered the bolster just enough to match the larger wheels, and like yours, the trucks are enough shorter than most 100-ton sideframes to clear the slope sheets.  I used quite a few of those on my grain hoppers, as they already had the trucks, and only needed new wheels.

[Lemosteam]

I've done that with MDC roller bearing trucks, after trimming the raised ring off the top of the bolster.  That lowered the bolster just enough to match the larger wheels, and like yours, the trucks are enough shorter than most 100-ton sideframes to clear the slope sheets.  I used quite a few of those on my grain hoppers, as they already had the trucks, and only needed new wheels.

To be clear here, the only modification is the wheelsets.  Everything else is stock.

I will be ordering a kit today for test fitting the parts into the car.

[nkalanaga]

"Everything else stock" may be part of the reason mine needed a little more work, besides the fact that mine didn't have roller bearing trucks.  They were some of the early ones, before Atlas had RB trucks, so had already had the trucks changed.  I'm glad your original trucks worked, as it would make the job much simpler.

Changing the wheels, and nothing else, will raise the car 1.5 scale inches, or very close to 0.01 inches.  Just like adding a washer, that gives a little more flange clearance.  And, of course, the Atlas trucks you used probably aren't exactly the same wheelbase as my MDC.

[cjm413]

When I swapped in FVM 36" wheels in plase of the OEM 33" wheels, the car rolls perfectly and there is no contact with the shell anywhere. you can see the flange clearing the slope sheet.

OEM trucks (on the current releases) are 70T and have a shorter wheelbase than a 100T truck.

The original OEM trucks from the Atlas/Roco releases were Bettendorf trucks with offset bolster holes.

[Lemosteam]

@High Hood and others,

Test kit is on order from Shapeways.

Included will be a bending/cutting/soldering gauge for strip stock lower stirrups to optionally replace the chunky OEM lower stirrups and enough parts to do two hoppers.

[High Hood]

Very exciting to see it coming together!