WOT SP 53'6" Welded Flats.

[sd45elect2000]

Swapped the wheels out .. worked like a charm !!

Randy

[mark.hinds]

(text removed)
My only real gripe is the GN Big Sky Blue.  Like many releases, from various manufacturers, in the last few years, it's much closer to Conrail Blue then GN.  Way to dark, and no easy way to fix it.  With problems from Centralia Shops, Atlas, and now WOT, I'm beginning to suspect they all use the same factory.  They couldn't all have the same colorblind graphic artist!  Even Athearn's F45s are too blue, but not nearly as dark as these, so they look better.  The closest commercial BSB I have is an ancient ConCor 40 ft boxcar, probably made around 1970, and the W&R brass F45s, from the early 90s(?).

Couldn't you fix that using the techniques described in this thread?  https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=16573.0  IMHO, just about all stock paint schemes are too dark anyway (scale color, and all that ...).  MH

[nkalanaga]

Mark.hinds:  I probably could, but there's really no excuse for the color to be as far off as most manufacturers today seem to prefer.  They used to be able to get it right!  I'll admit that colors are subjective, and will probably never satisfy everyone, but just fading the color doesn't correct it if it's truly "wrong" to start with.

As for the deck, I measured mine today, using a variety of rulers and magnifiers, and the edges seem closer to 4 scale inches (0.025 inch) than 5 inches (0.031 inch).  They also look a lot better with a quick coat of "aged wood" paint.  I used Folk Art brand #936 "Barn Wood" craft paint, which doesn't cover smoothly on raw plastic.  Use a flat brush, and brush with the boards, and it does a fair job of looking like old wood.  One can then weather to suit over it, but just the basic coat is a big improvement.  The GN sometimes painted new decks, but they were the body color, and I've never seen a flatcar deck neatly painted the color of WOT's.

I had the same problem with the wheels, but only on the friction bearing trucks.  The GN and CP cars, with roller bearings, ran fine.  My solution was 0.005 inch styrene washers, made by drilling holes in a sheet and punching them out with a paper hole punch.  Raised the car all of 0.8 scale inches, and much easier than grinding the body.

A bigger problem was that one of the wheels fell off.  Not a wheelset falling out of the truck, but the metal wheel fell off the plastic insulator hub.  I replaced it with a Fox Valley set I had, but don't know if it's the same tread size.  They look the same to me...

Watch the brake wheels.  They fall out at the slightest provocation.  If you lose one, drill the mounting hole a little deeper, so the new one will stay in better, and replace it with an MT tank car wheel.  I used a #76 drill, because that's what I had handy, and a little white glue in the hole.

The sides and ends are NOT metal.  I thought it was a solid casting, but they're plastic.   Not good or bad, just interesting.  It seems that, with minimal underbody detail, a solid metal body would have been easier.

[peteski]

The sides and ends are NOT metal.  I thought it was a solid casting, but they're plastic.   Not good or bad, just interesting.  It seems that, with minimal underbody detail, a solid metal body would have been easier.

Jason's photo of the disassembled car (in the initial post) shows that there is a metal (steel)  weight cradled by (plastic) body.

[nkalanaga]

I saw that picture, but couldn't tell if it as a metal weight in a plastic body, or a single casting with a groove for the deck to sit in.  My assumption that it was a solid casting was based mostly on the weight.  They must have used a denser metal than many manufacturers, especially since these cars are heavier than the Athearn ones which, as far as I know, are solid, except for the plastic decks.

I still say that making it a one-piece metal casting sounds easier.

[peteski]

I still say that making it a one-piece metal casting sounds easier.

I would agree, but using die-cast metal would involve utilizing another technology (similar to styrene injection-molding, but different).

This way they only need to deal with injection-molded styrene and cutting sheet metal into rectangles.  I'm also not sure about how the weight would play out. Steel is much more dense than the relatively-light Zamac, which is mostly Zinc and Aluminum.

[GaryHinshaw]

Couldn't you fix that using the techniques described in this thread?  https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=16573.0  IMHO, just about all stock paint schemes are too dark anyway (scale color, and all that ...).  MH

Based on some online photos from MBK (famous last words...) it looks to me like the hue of the WOT model is quite a bit different than "true" Big Sky Blue, so I don't think fading methods will be very effective here.  To get a better idea of this, I put together a composite image showing the WOT car next to a Kato SD45 in BSB, which seems to me to be much closer to true BSB:



The colour swatches on the left are my imperfect attempts to match the two models; the colour wheels on the right shows the HSV coordinates of those two swatches.  The swatches on the right are roughly what you would get from fading (moving radially inward on the wheel).  There seems to be too much purple in the WOT blue, though it appears to be a pretty nice rendition of Conrail blue. 

On the subject of weight: 1 oz is just about bang on the NMRA recommended practice for a 50' car (FWIW).  But flat car weight is always problematic, for the reasons given above.  I just wish Exactrail had made the same weight/underbody detail trade that WOT did: their 73' bulkhead flat has a highly detailed underbody, but it weighs only 0.5 oz, and doesn't operate very well.  Oh well.

[sd45elect2000]

Did anyone else notice that the couplers are REALLY stiff ? They look like MT but the boxes do not look like MT.

Randy

[jagged ben]

Did anyone else notice that the couplers are REALLY stiff ? They look like MT but the boxes do not look like MT.

Randy

Yes I noticed this issue on the bulkhead version.  There seems to be something off with the box.  And of course they are not  MT boxes. They are a custom design for this car, but many other models have followed this concept without problems. Something seems to have gone wrong with the execution on this model though.

On wide radius curves mine have not had problems,  but I don't run them on much narrower than18" radii.

[wcfn100]

On the subject of weight: 1 oz is just about bang on the NMRA recommended practice for a 50' car (FWIW).  But flat car weight is always problematic, for the reasons given above.  I just wish Exactrail had made the same weight/underbody detail trade that WOT did: their 73' bulkhead flat has a highly detailed underbody, but it weighs only 0.5 oz, and doesn't operate very well.  Oh well.

That RP is a quarter century old.   

I personally feel enough has changed with rolling stock to move away from 25 year old recommendations.

Jason

[Cajonpassfan]

That RP is a quarter century old.   

I personally feel enough has changed with rolling stock to move away from 25 year old recommendations.

Jason

Well, this is an interesting topic, and I suspect that's why Gary qualified his observation with "FWIW".
Is there a more recent, up to date "collective wisdom" relative to the weighing of freight cars?
Might be a good topic for a new thread? Or is there another thread somewhere?
Otto K.

[GaryHinshaw]

Well, this is an interesting topic, and I suspect that's why Gary qualified his observation with "FWIW".

Exactly right.  Even the NMRA admits that their weight RP is "controversial."

The most recent TRW thread I recall about this featured a full spectrum of opinions, so I think this will always be a case of do what works best for your railroad.  Flat cars pose a special challenge because we'd like to be able to run them empty or loaded -- in some cases with heavy loads, so there is no perfect solution. Maybe removable weights?

[jagged ben]

I think I'd rather have a car designed with weight that I can possibly remove than a car designed with no way to add weight.  The WoT car certainly counts as the former.

I'm happy with the weight of the ones I have (just the bulkhead version, haven't gotten the new ones yet).   

[wcfn100]

The WoT car certainly counts as the former.

Only if someone can actually do it.  I'm going to try and take off the trucks and get between what I'm still assuming are two metal weights. 

Jason

[peteski]

Exactly right.  Even the NMRA admits that their weight RP is "controversial."
 Flat cars pose a special challenge because we'd like to be able to run them empty or loaded -- in some cases with heavy loads, so there is no perfect solution. Maybe removable weights?

Doesn't the same challenge exist for the real railroads?  Would they put an empty flat car at the head, or in the middle of a string of heavily loaded boxcars, tankers or hoppers?