Possible kitbash for MTL PS-1?

[cjm413]

Con-Cor makes (or made) one - they call it a plywood box car:



Is that the one?

EDIT: Apparently this is the Roco car originally imported by AHM, and also JCT (Canada)

Mark

At least it doesn't have the FUBAR diagonal panel roof that Roco put on the Atlas cars with the double sliding doors

http://www.spookshow.net/freight/atlasroco40ddbox.html

[bbussey]

To be clear, I was referring the number of accurate (but "Horribly Oversized") models of 52'6" gons.   Right off the bat, here's a single manufacturer that offers 3 of them:

https://www.tangentscalemodels.com/view-buy-models/

By the time one considers the availability of any given model (including locomotives, passenger cars, structures, etc.), parts, decals, etc from the sole perspective of building accurate models, finding enough real estate for H(orribly) O(versized) becomes a far more practical option than enforcing a zero tolerance policy in N(ot-available)

We are discussing N scale models. HO models don't factor into this discussion.

[bbussey]

That's the point.  If I could accept the flaws of four Atlas GP30's (or 3 Kato SD40's), I'm not going to get my knickers in a knot over a single car that I could potentially recycle from a surplus MTL PS-1 on a kitbash that is calculated to mitigate some (but admittedly not all) of the model's flaws.

It's not the point. There are no "better" alternative to the Atlas GP30 model and the Kato SD40 model. There ARE better alternatives to most of the MTL PS1 boxcar models.  Both the Atlas 40' version and the Athearn/MDC 50' versions are superior, and better canvases to start with for kitbashing projects.

[nkalanaga]

Mark:  That's the car.  Spookshow mentions that Con-Cor imported it, apparently they still do.

The GN probably did ship plywood IN it, but it's not what a GN fan would think of as a "plywood boxcar"...

As for the Roco model, the current Atlas version has a PS roof, with Dreadbaught ends, which is probably at least as odd.  If it had a diagonal panel roof, it wouldn't be too bad as a GN car, just needing a little work on the side sills.

[cjm413]

It's not the point. There are no "better" alternative to the Atlas GP30 model and the Kato SD40 model. There ARE better alternatives to most of the MTL PS1 boxcar models.  Both the Atlas 40' version and the Athearn/MDC 50' versions are superior, and better canvases to start with for kitbashing projects.

From the objective standpoint of building the most accurate model of a single car in N scale, that is 100% correct.

From a subjective cost/benefit perspective, it boils down to a choice between dumping a surplus MTL PS-1 vs recycling it to something that won't look out of place with everything else, e.g. locomotives such as the Atlas GP30, other freight cars such as any MTL 50' PS-1's that I still have around to represent cars with 8' doors for lack of time to build more accurate models from MDC cars with 9' doors, ESM-painted AHM Flexi-Flo cars for lack of time to rebuild a AHM car with the correct hatches and trucks* that are available (*at least for the 100T cars owned by ACF), etc.

[Missaberoad]

What it boils down to is that everyone has different standards of what is acceptable and compromises they are willing to make.

I bet there are people still buying and happlily running Atlas & Micro-Trains PS-1s side by side.

There have been lots of examples posted to this thread of what you could do with an MTL PS-1 if you were so inclined.
Of course you could start with an Atlas car and have a more accurate model, but I dont see that as the point to this conversation...

I will eventually build a few CP woodchip cars, I will have to decide when the time comes wether to use a surplus MTL car or buy an Atlas car. (I maintain that the woodchip cars hide most of the MTL car's sins)

I wouldn't hold it against someone for choosing the other option however, there is no wrong way to do this hobby...

[cjm413]

What it boils down to is that everyone has different standards of what is acceptable and compromises they are willing to make.

I bet there are people still buying and happlily running Atlas & Micro-Trains PS-1s side by side.

There have been lots of examples posted to this thread of what you could do with an MTL PS-1 if you were so inclined.
Of course you could start with an Atlas car and have a more accurate model, but I dont see that as the point to this conversation...

I will eventually build a few CP woodchip cars, I will have to decide when the time comes wether to use a surplus MTL car or buy an Atlas car. (I maintain that the woodchip cars hide most of the MTL car's sins)

I wouldn't hold it against someone for choosing the other option however, there is no wrong way to do this hobby...

Ever see the pictures of "Satan's Train set?"

I can't find the links, but it was basically a collection of atrocities at Trainmaster Models in Buford, GA including, but not limited to an Athearn Genesis F with horn hook couplers, several MDC ore cars that were glued together for "vertical storage", some Walthers autoracks that were connected with giant drawbars, an Intermountain 4750 that had a giant bolt shoved into it as a weight, etc.

[Missaberoad]

Ever see the pictures of "Satan's Train set?"

I can't find the links, but it was basically a collection of atrocities at Trainmaster Models in Buford, GA including, but not limited to an Athearn Genesis F with horn hook couplers, several MDC ore cars that were glued together for "vertical storage", some Walthers autoracks that were connected with giant drawbars, an Intermountain 4750 that had a giant bolt shoved into it as a weight, etc.

Hey I bet it made someone smile!

Back in my N-trak days there was someone who made a bullet train of actual bullets, someone else ran nothing but cabooses and a third guy built a 40 "foot" boxcar with 40 actual n scale feet... 

As silly as it may seem to some, if the owner likes it then rule #1 applies...

[cjm413]

Hey I bet it made someone smile!

Back in my N-trak days there was someone who made a bullet train of actual bullets, someone else ran nothing but cabooses and a third guy built a 40 "foot" boxcar with 40 actual n scale feet... 

As silly as it may seem to some, if the owner likes it then rule #1 applies...

There are exceptions.  A reefer with a smoking hot box or a line of coke cars will likely be confiscated by the prototype police 

[sirenwerks]

The GN probably did ship plywood IN it, but it's not what a GN fan would think of as a "plywood boxcar"...

Here's to hoping IMRC will release it's HO version in N.

[mark.hinds]

That's the point.  If I could accept the flaws of four Atlas GP30's (or 3 Kato SD40's), I'm not going to get my knickers in a knot over a single car that I could potentially recycle from a surplus MTL PS-1 on a kitbash that is calculated to mitigate some (but admittedly not all) of the model's flaws.

It's not the point. There are no "better" alternative to the Atlas GP30 model and the Kato SD40 model. There ARE better alternatives to most of the MTL PS1 boxcar models.  Both the Atlas 40' version and the Athearn/MDC 50' versions are superior, and better canvases to start with for kitbashing projects.

Some feel that consistency of representation across the total modeled scene trumps absolute verisimilitude in just a part of that scene.  To these people, the extra verisimilitude may in part be wasted if its not achieved everywhere.  For example, if unavoidable compromises must be accepted in a required locomotive for one's layout, for example, perhaps an equal amount of compromise is acceptable in a box car to be used on that layout.  Especially if you already own said box cars.  Temporal and monetary resources are finite. I think that's what he's alluding to here. 

In my case, consider that the Atlas PS-1 is the only 1950s-era steel box car I've found which is the correct height; all others (such as Micro Trains, Intermountain, or Deluxe Innovations) are at least 6 inches too tall, and will require extensive TBD surgery to lower.  Using all Atlas PS-1s would be way unprototypical, so I have to use (and modify) the others.  Such mods may be imperfect.  Therefore, IMHO, use of modified Micro-Trains PS-1s may be justified for reasons of consistency of overall representation. 

MH

[mark.hinds]

That's the point.  If I could accept the flaws of four Atlas GP30's (or 3 Kato SD40's), I'm not going to get my knickers in a knot over a single car that I could potentially recycle from a surplus MTL PS-1 on a kitbash that is calculated to mitigate some (but admittedly not all) of the model's flaws.

It's not the point. There are no "better" alternative to the Atlas GP30 model and the Kato SD40 model. There ARE better alternatives to most of the MTL PS1 boxcar models.  Both the Atlas 40' version and the Athearn/MDC 50' versions are superior, and better canvases to start with for kitbashing projects.

Some feel that consistency of representation across the total modeled scene trumps absolute verisimilitude in just a part of that scene.  To these people, the extra verisimilitude may in part be wasted if its not achieved everywhere.  For example, if unavoidable compromises must be accepted in a required locomotive for one's layout, for example, perhaps an equal amount of compromise is acceptable in a box car to be used on that layout.  Especially if you already own said box cars.  Temporal and monetary resources are finite. I think that's what he's alluding to here. 

In my case, consider that the Atlas PS-1 is the only 1950s-era steel box car I've found which is the correct height; all others (such as Micro Trains, Intermountain, or Deluxe Innovations) are *at least* 6 inches too tall, and will require extensive TBD surgery to lower.  Using all Atlas PS-1s would be way unprototypical, so I have to use (and modify) the others.  Such mods may be imperfect (although I am aiming for exact scale height and am willing to sacrifice some of the lower edge of the body if needed).  Therefore, IMHO, use of modified Micro-Trains PS-1s may be justified for reasons of consistency of overall representation. 

MH

[bbussey]

From the objective standpoint of building the most accurate model of a single car in N scale, that is 100% correct.

From a subjective cost/benefit perspective, it boils down to a choice between dumping a surplus MTL PS-1 vs recycling it to something that won't look out of place with everything else, e.g. locomotives such as the Atlas GP30, other freight cars such as any MTL 50' PS-1's that I still have around to represent cars with 8' doors for lack of time to build more accurate models from MDC cars with 9' doors, ESM-painted AHM Flexi-Flo cars for lack of time to rebuild a AHM car with the correct hatches and trucks* that are available (*at least for the 100T cars owned by ACF), etc.

You've totally missed the point. There is no "better" GP30 model available, so you MUST start with the Atlas model if you wish to build a model of a prototype based on a GP30. That is NOT the case with the PS1. So the GP30 scenario you sited is not analogous to the PS1 scenario.

And regarding the 3500pd, the proper trucks are NOT available. You would need 125-ton trucks with 38" diameter wheels.

[bbussey]

... In my case, consider that the Atlas PS-1 is the only 1950s-era steel box car I've found which is the correct height; all others (such as Micro Trains, Intermountain, or Deluxe Innovations) are *at least* 6 inches too tall, and will require extensive TBD surgery to lower.  Using all Atlas PS-1s would be way unprototypical, so I have to use (and modify) the others.  Such mods may be imperfect (although I am aiming for exact scale height and am willing to sacrifice some of the lower edge of the body if needed).  Therefore, IMHO, use of modified Micro-Trains PS-1s may be justified for reasons of consistency of overall representation. 

Only the MTL model is too tall in the IH. The other models can be lowered to the proper ride height very easily. Of course, that would require the models be equipped with body-mounted couplers, of which you are opposed to. So for unprototypical truck-mounted couplers, yes intensive modifications would be required.

[cjm413]

You've totally missed the point. There is no "better" GP30 model available, so you MUST start with the Atlas model if you wish to build a model of a prototype based on a GP30. That is NOT the case with the PS1. So the GP30 scenario you sited is not analogous to the PS1 scenario.

And regarding the 3500pd, the proper trucks are NOT available. You would need 125-ton trucks with 38" diameter wheels.

If building the most accurate model was my sole objective, I wouldn't limit myself to what is (or isnt) available in N.

A better GP30 could be built in N by using the correctly spaced fan hatch from an Atlas GP35.   However, the law of diminishing returns is still applicable where I'd rather spend my time and $ on something else...

Also, ACF did build some Flexi-Flo cars that did have 100T trucks in addition to the NYC cars with 125T trucks:

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=67453

The newest Morning Sun X-car Color Guide also has a shot of a later 100T car (different ribs than AHM model) with SHPX reporting marks that is painted for FMC Chemicals.