Lowering NSA PRR F22 gun flats.

[Lemosteam]

@thenarch.com and @chicken45 , et al,

This thread https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=42804.msg563285#msg563285 shows opportunity to add weight, especially low inside the center beam cavity:

(Santa Fe Guy image)


I am about to spring for the 10 pound bag of lead shot and I can parse it out in smaller quantities.

[chicken45]

@thenarch.com and @chicken45 , et al,

This thread https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=42804.msg563285#msg563285 shows opportunity to add weight, especially low inside the center beam cavity:

(Santa Fe Guy image)


I am about to spring for the 10 pound bag of lead shot and I can parse it out in smaller quantities.

That would be pretty kickass. I know of several people who used that method on PRR flat cars in issues of TKM.

[bbussey]

All right! These are definitely 36 inch wheels. I'll respond to your email.
Makes sense about not adding weight to the gun. I remember @bbussey telling me about his well flat car and how it's super light but has a low center of gravity so it keeps on track.
The F22 is a damn small car and most of us understand it's hard to cram weight in there. I think what's in there is good, though!

The SPF Models F25 well car also rides extremely well even though it is light.  With well cars and depressed center flatcars, it's easy to have the center of gravity below the coupler line and thus not be concerned about the model weight.  With other cars that isn't possible.  But lower the center of gravity, the better, and flat cars are well suited for this, and loaded flatcars are fine as long as the loads are light or the weight is against the flat car deck.  Definitely not a good idea to add weight to a load that sits higher above the flatcar deck.

[chicken45]

Here's an update.
I used the brass weights with the kit. The deck and brass weighed in at .2oz.


Lemo sent me some balls to test out. Now it was .3oz.


If I end up doing the led BBs, I may have to make some room for wheel clearance, or for .1 of an oz, I may just say "eff it".


As for lowering the car, I knew I'd need 2004s. The deck had an area where you use CA to glue in the coupler. It was designed around a 1015 which is included with the kit. So I took used the 1015 box with a 2004 coupler.


I flipped it over and placed it on the trucks, and much to my horror this actually lined up with my MTL coupler gauge! That means that had I used the 1015 couplers out of the box, it would have been too high off the bat. Sure, filing down the bolsters would fix that, but, this is a 3D custom printed model. Why not just make it right in the first place?

Anyways, @bbussey shared some knowledge with me about couplers and the boxes. I used a 2004 coupler with its own 2004 box, but upside down. The lid is just a little bit thinner then the bottom of the box so I did that. The shape of the box is a little different so I had to carve a little bit to get it to fit.


This helped and I filed the bolsters on the car down to get it to match. It was still too high.
I decided to remove this bit of extra material to get the coupler closer to the top of the deck.


So once i removed that little coupler base block from the deck, it was reasonably flush with the rest of the underside deck.
I filed away 3/4 of the bolster. Here's the result. I also painted the car for a better effect. Painting the trucks black and the car red made it less obvious than the stark white.



Trucks and wheels swing freely and I took it for a spin around The West Slope. All was well.
Oh, Russ is sending me 33" wheels to replace the mistaken 36" ones that came with my kit, but I had happened to have exactly 4 FVM 33" .563 wheels so I put those in.
So, it looks a lot better but it's still a little high. I don't know if it can get better. Sure, I can file the bolsters down, but the problem is the coupler will still be too low. I would have to file/carve out deeper into the underside of the deck. FUD is brittle. I'm not doing that. It will be super difficult to get it correct and consistent across 3 cars.

How would I have designed this? Design the car so the top of the coupler is flush with the top of the frame. Basically, have a coupler shaped cutout that would snap in. You could then use some laser etched wood and cover it all up. I think that's what it would take.

I was also thinking about the trucks again. I looked at my MDD F23 and noticed I used Bettendorf trucks on it. I thought to myself...why didn't I use crown style trucks on it?
Well, back in '14, the PRRPro Yahoo group did the F22/23 as a project. As it turned out, nobody could find pictures of a F22 or F23 running on 2F-F1 crown trucks. Bruce, one of the PRR gods said pretty conclusivly that these cars did not ride on 2F-F1 trucks.
They rode on 2F-F2 trucks.
Here's the 2F-F1 (which is what came with the kit).


This is a 2F-F2:



Now, at first glance, this may be misidentified as a crown truck because of the 3 springs, but if you look closely, it's a 3 spring vatiation of the 2F-F2, (or something close). You can tell because the F1 has lower supports that connect to the journals whereas the F2 does not.


I also love how this is basically a 1920's FW1.

Another shot of another set. That may be an F30a on the right being used as an idler.


Lots more pics here:
http://www.richyodermodels.com/rym_fc_co_f22.htm

[coosvalley]

Kinda like the Dos Equis guy... I don't usually have much time to visit these forums but when I do it's usually when someone is trashing our product (especially when it includes a competitor... Peter ?). 

As far as I can tell, only one of you has actually purchased these kits.  Other than Joshua, these other comments appear to be based on hearsay from the other participants (or at the encouragement of our competitor... Peter ?). What's worst is that NO ONE has contacted us directly with any questions or concerns about these kits.

Throughout our 27 years as a N-Scale kit manufacturer, we have valued the input of our customers. Some of our best selling products have been derived from customer input. As such, we would like to solicit unbiased feedback from someone who has actually built these kits as designed. After all, it doesn't make sense to compare our product, which was designed to be easily built and run well, to 'yard candy' that has neither attribute. 


Thank you for your time,
Russ K.

This is not the greatest introduction. The car as shown sits too high, that is a fact. Lashing out at our members who took the time to share that with the rest of us, and discuss it is in poor taste, IMHO.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

This is not the greatest introduction. The car as shown sits too high, that is a fact. Lashing out at our members who took the time to share that with the rest of us, and discuss it is in poor taste, IMHO.

Yes. Exactly. @chicken45  is showing his observations of cars he purchased and even better, illustrating how to IMPROVE them. He's not even complaining. What's the problem?

[chicken45]

Russ did share a doc with me regarding the trucks. 
There’s a PRR doc from 1923 listing the F22 and F23 as having crown 2F-F1 trucks.
The other side of the coin is that there aren't a lot of masochists out there who ALSO model N scale PRR in the 1920-1930, and all known photographs of F22s do not show crown trucks. 

I think the 2F-F2 would be the better choice, but, I couldn't find anything online about them, let alone plans for them. I had to dig in PRRPro to even find that out.

[dougnelson]

Excellent.  Is that an official Biggest Loser scale?  Wow!

[sd45elect2000]

How were the gun cars routed? Were they ever sent to Bremerton?

[chicken45]

I got some more info on the trucks. This bit comes from TKM #26. Written by Elden Gatwood. The guy who cowrote the PRRT&HS flat car book.

The prototype F22 and F23 flat cars were 30-foot
steel-framed fish-belly flat of then-current pressed
steel, riveted construction. The car had nine cast
stake pockets per side, and an almost full-length
wooden deck on the F22, or riveted steel deck on the
F23. Trucks “as-built”, on F22 and F23, as
“completed prior to March 16, 1915”, were class
2E1-F1, of archbar construction (see photo of 435303
below). On F22 and F23 built after March 16, 1915,
of which we can find no photographs, the trucks were
supposedly of class 2F-F1 “Crown” configuration,
like on classes F25A and H24. Both classes of truck
were presumably replaced, at least by 1932, with
trucks of class 2F-F2, with a nominal capacity of
100-tons, of the type fitted on the G22B and H27
classes. These are distinguished by their drooping
center sideframe, which is broad around the spring
package, and three visible springs. However, despite
the documentation, at least cars 435308, 435337, and
925532, were fitted with trucks visually similar to the
“spring-leaf-spring”-furnished trucks, like those
furnished on classes F30A and G27, although those
classes used trucks of 70-ton capacity, not 100-ton.

I think the F30a had those National C1 trucks (from the Atlas Hart Ballast Car).
The F25a mentioned...I have a F25 (actually 3 of them) and I think I used MTL Andrews trucks.

[towl1996]

So, it looks a lot better but it's still a little high. I don't know if it can get better. Sure, I can file the bolsters down, but the problem is the coupler will still be too low. I would have to file/carve out deeper into the underside of the deck. FUD is brittle. I'm not doing that. It will be super difficult to get it correct and consistent across 3 cars.

I agree it's looking much better, you made a uuuge improvement from the "as delivered" kit.  Obviously, the kit should be redesigned and the trucks as well. I would be interested in the F2-F2 trucks as a separate item from shapeways. Also, interested to see the gun barrel portion of the kit. I don't know if your entering the contest, but the Mr. Dos Equis guy should give you a hundred bucks for what you've posted thus far.   

Thanks for the info on the trucks, good show.

[prbharris]

I would be interested in the F2-F2 trucks as a separate item from shapeways.

I understand that someone is working on this as we view this thread - but it is not me.

Peter

Peter Harris
N Scale Kits
www.nscalekits.com

[Lemosteam]

Just for posterity I found two images that show that F22's did not use 2F-F2 trucks exclusively:

[chicken45]

I think you missed this bit. 

This is a 2F-F2:



Now, at first glance, this may be misidentified as a crown truck because of the 3 springs, but if you look closely, it's a 3 spring vatiation of the 2F-F2, (or something close). You can tell because the F1 has lower supports that connect to the journals whereas the F2 does not.


I also love how this is basically a 1920's FW1.

Another shot of another set. That may be an F30a on the right being used as an idler.


Lots more pics here:
http://www.richyodermodels.com/rym_fc_co_f22.htm

[cbroughton67]

Yes. Exactly. @chicken45  is showing his observations of cars he purchased and even better, illustrating how to IMPROVE them. He's not even complaining. What's the problem?

The ride height is exactly why I chose not to purchase this kit, not knowing at the time what the options might be for lowering it to the correct ride height. I've already been burned once by N Scale Kits and their F30d kit - There was no way to lower it due to the impact on coupler height. The issues with the ride height are a statement of fact, not "trashing" what is otherwise a good product. I fully appreciate Josh's efforts to improve the ride height of the cars - modifications that NSA should consider incorporating into their kit. Knowing that it can be done, thanks to Josh's efforts, I might now consider purchasing the kit. I would have never considered it otherwise.


Chris