Tangent Scale Models: Bethlehem Quad Hoppers in N Scale

[H Lee]

Jagged Ben:  Probably not, but it's not surprising, if they make everything to scale, EXCEPT the over-width draft gear box.  Good thing I don't need these.

Seems that if they are truly so committed about detailing and proto fidelity they should have used the MT Z body mount coupler instead of the 'giant' 'slinky' MT N coupler (or clone).

[peteski]

Seems that if they are truly so committed about detailing and proto fidelity they should have used the MT Z body mount coupler instead of the 'giant' 'slinky' MT N coupler (or clone).

While using MTL Z scale coupler would have made a visual improvement over N scale coupler, and the draft gear box would have been smaller, it would still have been "slinky".  And as far as truly giant couplers go, those are the McHenry and Bachmann couplers (and  let's not forget the Scale Trains couplers which look like McHenry clones).

While I suspect you were only half serious in your post, I felt like the record should be set straight.

[Ike the BN Freak]

Ike, when you refer to the key that holds the proto coupler shank in the pocket, are you saying that it is an extra part designed to allow use of the MT true scale couplers?

No this is a proto feature that on the real one keeps the coupler shank from coming out of the pocket

[Ike the BN Freak]

Seems that if they are truly so committed about detailing and proto fidelity they should have used the MT Z body mount coupler instead of the 'giant' 'slinky' MT N coupler (or clone).

Except the 1015 and 1015 clone aren't prone to the slinky feature...

[peteski]

Except the 1015 and 1015 clone aren't prone to the slinky feature...

Sure they are - they just slink in the opposite direction.    Seriously, they do slink (and I'm not even a slink-hater). Just ask any slink-hater.

[Ike the BN Freak]

Sure they are - they just slink in the opposite direction.    Seriously, they do slink (and I'm not even a slink-hater). Just ask any slink-hater.

So only when pushing

[cfritschle]

Thank you David @Tangentsm!

I found and ordered 19 hoppers with paint schemes and road numbers that appear suitable for use in my mid 2000s era sugar beet trains.

I have not followed what road numbers you have already offered on these cars in HO, but if you need a prototype photo of UP 45896 (a double rotary H-100-20), that car is visible in these Google Street Views:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0380241,-112.4345331,3a,15y,138.37h,90.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6KeYEmhUd7myw84lgyk9sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0377404,-112.4346033,3a,15y,78.87h,89.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgvOb6vf-FovAkKK-ZOq-hw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Again, thank you.  I have been wanting models of these hoppers for more than 30 years.   

[coosvalley]

So, just curious, do any of our readers here have a layout with curves of 18.75R and above only?

[C855B]

So, just curious, do any of our readers here have a layout with curves of 18.75R and above only?

Yes. Mainline on my layout is designed to 24" minimums, with a couple of temporary bits at 22". Well, almost. I spec'ed 18.00" as minimum radius on branchlines and industrial. I suspect as suggested previously they didn't test on anything other than Atlas C55 sectional, where it may have rubbed on the 17.5" and not on 18.75", so I'm crossing fingers that I am "safe".

I have one curved turnout in the plan, where the inner radius is 15". It's for a short industrial spur unlikely to see the hoppers.

EDIT: In thinking more about it, what about turnouts? It's been observed that Atlas C55 turnouts have sharper-than-expected radii for their "number" within the switch. I'm all but certain that #5s will be no-go, and #10s should be safe, but what about #7s?. And the wyes? Testing awaits.

[cfritschle]

My mainline curves are at least 20 inch radius.  Since the sugar beet loading area and the sugar factory are both in my staging area, the stated suggested minimum radius will not be a problem for me.  However, I am still trying to figure out a good way to come up with 50 loads of realistic looking N scale sugar beets.   

[jagged ben]

As I stated earlier, our club layout has a couple 16" curves snuck into staging areas.  Those could be avoided if one is enough on top of it.  According to some literature, the mainline minimum radius on our layout is supposed to be 21", but there are a few places where some 'mistakes' were made and it's closer to 18".  Unfortunately, one of those mistakes is single track at the top of the highest hill in the loop.  If I buy this Tangent car and it derails at that spot as it reaches the summit, then the rest of the train behind it is likely taking a long, fast trip downhill for about 40 real feet of track, and hopefully there's not another train following behind!    

[eja]

I commented much earlier this thread regarding the price of these model saying they are out of my budget, but am continuing to follow the discussion.

Really, I cannot but wonder why a manufacturer would make a product that would not run on most modelers pike or requires removing some of the details that that make it cost so much in order to do so.

When a freight car me costs almost as much a locomotive, I find myself scratching my head and asking is that level of detail really worth it ?  Particularly when it is a car that one needs many of in order to make a reasonable looking train.

YMMV

eja

[wcfn100]

Has anyone checked the wheel gauge?  Most models are way too narrow.  Even a slight adjustment wider could make a big difference.

Jason

[nkalanaga]

Jagged Ben:  Actually, I wasn't disputing you at all.  You commented on the model minimum radius being larger than the prototype, and asked if that had ever happened before.   I said it probably hadn't, and expressed the opinion that that an exact scale model with one extra-wide part was likely to have such problems.  No dispute at all, and I agree that it's bad design on their part.

[C855B]

Has anyone checked the wheel gauge?  Most models are way too narrow.  Even a slight adjustment wider could make a big difference.

Hell, yes! F'rinstance, Kato loco wheelsets are consistently 0.015" narrow. Not only is that a very good point, but it's also been commented that the Tangent wheelsets have wide treads. While that won't make a lot if any difference in the back-to-back, it might.

OTOH, given the extreme attention to detail, I suspect much attention has been paid to the NMRA gauge, too. I would be slightly surprised if it was not centered in the template notches. But even then, there's a little bit of slop there, and gauge could be increased by ~0.010" and still meet spec.