A Distressed Z Scale 52 foot Gondola

[Jesse6669]

I'm still messing around with different modes of construction;  The kit (frame and body) test turned out ok, and takes up a lot less vat space since I oriented it with no angle.  But the best results still have been from the one-piece body/underframe.   

I've gotten some good results correcting warping with this little trick;  While in the past I've dipped models in hot water to soften them up and then re-shaped them, it's not very controlled and adding moisture directly seems to affect the resin.   So this morning while contemplating un-warping one of the gons while sipping a cup of lukewarm coffee, I popped it (the model) into the microwave for 30 sec.  Voila, it softened up but no moisture added.  I held it on a flat surface and did some light manipulation by hand until it settled/cooled.  It seems to work..   

Before:  

After: 

I have also been tooling around with distressing (no pun intended).  I got a flat-sided dental tool then warmed it (the tool) in a cup of hot water;  I put the model side down, and with practice it can be used to push out and distort the sides like I want, giving a pretty subtle look.  If you push too hard, it's pretty easy to puncture the sides so a little practice helps--although I've seen hoppers and gons with holes, so that can be worked with as well. 

   

[Sumner]

Some good tips there, thanks.....

I've used a heat gun for some items that were warped like a building's roof or side.  Works well if you can then brace it in position until it cools.

Sumner

[Jesse6669]

The Gon is pretty much good to go-- so I decided to re-do the T-scale trucks in Z.  Not bad but they need a couple tweaks..

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[Jesse6669]

Here's one where you can see the new (see through) trucks better.  Also has dummy semi-scale couplers installed because the trucks aren't talgo-style (yet).   Left side has Bowser/FT wheelsets, right has MT;   I'd like to see what the N-possible couplers might look like vs Z--if they're close to Z Kadees then that'll be a treat.   


  [ Guests cannot view attachments ]  

[Scottl]

Great work.  Inspiring to follow as I work through my own first car project.

[robert3985]

Here's one where you can see the new (see through) trucks better.  Also has dummy semi-scale couplers installed because the trucks aren't talgo-style (yet).   Left side has Bowser/FT wheelsets, right has MT;   I'd like to see what the N-possible couplers might look like vs Z--if they're close to Z Kadees then that'll be a treat.   


  (Attachment Link)

Although I am not endorsing the N-possible coupler (because I haven't had any in my possession yet to evaluate) if they are close to prototype dimensions...which I assume they are...they're going to be about the same overall size of the MTL 905/903's.

A few years ago, I took my measuring tape and sketchbook down to the Utah State Railway Museum and measured the overall dimensions of a prototype coupler that was attached to one of their transition era ice reefers on display.  I then went back home and took a 905 and measured its overall dimensions with my digital calipers to see how they compare in overall size (maybe "volume" is a better term???) and found, to my surprise, that they're pretty close in most dimensions to a prototype coupler, although they certainly don't look much like a real coupler.

Photo (1) - Measurements of a prototype AAR coupler vs an MTL 905 Z/Nn3 coupler:


If, indeed the N-possible coupler looks a lot like a scaled-down prototype N-scale coupler and is scale sized, it might be kinda compatible with the MTL 905/903's.  Here a close-up of two of my brass UP 2-8-0's double headed with the scale-sized brass dummy coupler on the pilot and a 905/903 MTL Z/Nn3 coupler on the tender.  They work okay after I fiddle to get them coupled, mostly because of my 24" minimum radius, but as is easily seen, the 905/903's look weird compared to a realistic-looking coupler.

Photo (2) - MT 905 coupler coupled up to a thickly painted brass dummy coupler when double-heading my brass UP Consolidations:


I would venture a guess that proportionally, from an overall "size" aspect, that an N-scale N-possible coupler on Z-scale cars and engines, would look about the same (from a size standpoint) as a regular MTL N-scale coupler looks on an N-scale car.  However, the N-possible coupler is going to appear exponentially better than an MTL 905/903 coupler just because it looks like a real coupler even though both couplers are essentially the same size (volume).

That make sense??

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Jesse6669]

Thanks Bob,
Just for grins, here's an AZL loco with my dummy.  It's 2.3mm wide (.09") vs the .104" you noted on the MT 905.

[turbowhiz]

I put together this comparison a while ago but never got around to posting it…

The N-Possible coupler is glued to the top of the MTL box (Z scale truck mount for clarity) for comparison purposes.

In general, the length of the MTL Z scale coupler is long relative to a N scale scale coupler. Other dimensions it’s pretty close. But they’re also pull to slink, so the pull slink slack combined with the extra length really puts coupled distance way out of scale under draft. It’s a head length per coupler in extra length, so ~2 feet coupled distance in N scale too far apart per joint!

The standard N-Possible coupler doesn't drop into the MTL Z scale boxes... The Z post is smaller, and positioned further forward. But a Z specific version wouldn't be too hard to come up with.

(You can lift over couple the MTL Z scale coupler with the N-Possible coupler. No automatic coupling. The N-Possible coupler is also not centered properly, so tight corners will be a challenge)

[Sokramiketes]

Thanks for the comparison, @turbowhiz

For me, the joy of the MTL 905 Z coupler on N scale equipment was the size of its box.  It was WAYYYY easier to appropriately mount to transition era equipment.

1) 1015 style box is bulky
2) 1015 style box was too tall in height, often kept the underframe too high or interfered with trucks
3) 1015 style box put the screw in line with the outboard axle in the truck.  So even if the box height worked out, the screw was a liability (and a shorting liability too if metal wheelsets and a metal underframe...  had to watch polarity of wheels on outer ends...

I know you're planning some boxes other than 1015 style, and the 1015 style is useful for easy loco conversion.  Just wanted to share that a nPossible in a smaller box, scale or 905 style, is going to be a lifesaver for me. 

[haasmarc]

The 1015 box is nice for locos though.  That is why I have been working on a hybrid 1015 with a z scale knuckle. So far it seems to be working pretty good. Even remotely uncouples with 905's.




I started working on it when the Atlas FA1's came out because if I put 1015's on them, the distance between locos was even more than with the Accumates.  I couldn't use 905's because the box would interfere with the trucks.

[Jesse6669]

The N-Possible coupler is glued to the top of the MTL box (Z scale truck mount for clarity) for comparison purposes.

In general, the length of the MTL Z scale coupler is long relative to a N scale scale coupler. Other dimensions it’s pretty close. But they’re also pull to slink, so the pull slink slack combined with the extra length really puts coupled distance way out of scale under draft. It’s a head length per coupler in extra length, so ~2 feet coupled distance in N scale too far apart per joint!

The standard N-Possible coupler doesn't drop into the MTL Z scale boxes... The Z post is smaller, and positioned further forward. But a Z specific version wouldn't be too hard to come up with.

(You can lift over couple the MTL Z scale coupler with the N-Possible coupler. No automatic coupling. The N-Possible coupler is also not centered properly, so tight corners will be a challenge)

@turbowhiz, I think the N-possibles looks great compared to Z MTL or others for Z scale, even if still oversized a bit.   Can't wait to get my hands on some of these.

What is the post opening diameter and shank length--as you say it's easy enough to design a pocket.  I don't suppose a spec document is available anywhere yet?

Jesse 

[Sokramiketes]

The 1015 box is nice for locos though.  That is why I have been working on a hybrid 1015 with a z scale knuckle. So far it seems to be working pretty good. Even remotely uncouples with 905's.




I started working on it when the Atlas FA1's came out because if I put 1015's on them, the distance between locos was even more than with the Accumates.  I couldn't use 905's because the box would interfere with the trucks.

Yup, of course and noted above.  And the 1015 also works better on modern cars.  Although the appearance is worse without the full pilot hiding the box size itself.

But something I note in your photo... they ran the 905's in brown?!?  Where have I been!

[Jesse6669]

Refined the Z roller bearing trucks.  They look good to me.  The wheelsets are "prototype" 43" wheelsets I printed for grins.  The trucks have standard MT 33" wheelsets in the pic of the truck alone, and Full Throttle metal wheelsets in the pic of the gon end
 
 

[haasmarc]

But something I note in your photo... they ran the 905's in brown?!?  Where have I been!

MT didn't do 905's in brown.

Those are my 3d printed hybrids.  I drew up a 905 knuckle and the guts from a 1015.  Then I modified the guts to use the z scale spring because the N scale spring was too much. 

[Jesse6669]

I tested some new "molded on" organic shaped side bulges.  A bit too subtle but this might work... they need to be bigger.   Need some "peaks" like steel bars poked a spot on the panel.