FVM Wagontop Cabooses and PRR H30's are here.

[arbomambo]

BLW delivered mine yesterday...
Bruce

[davefoxx]

That caboose would look even better with Z scale couplers.

DFF

[ntrakia]

have wanted the pennsy h30 covered hopper and b&o wagontop caboose since getting into n in 1967.  used to see a b&o train with an e60 2-8-0 (bachman)h30 hopper and the wagontop caboose.  hopper carried silica sand and another glass making product which eludes me to local glass plants.  i can now replicate this train in n after 50 years.  thanks matt.

[Chris333]

I bought a wagontop on ebay from a seller who had 5 in stock. Just got a refund because they were sold out. 

[jpec]

Must have been the same joker that got me 2 weeks ago.  After 5 days with no acknowledgement, I asked what was up. The reply was it ships 2 business days of receiving cleared payment. I used PayPal so what's to clear?  A week ago they tell me it's no longer available due to "stock issues". I'm guessing they never had any... Thank goodness Pete at BLW had some.

Jeff

[VonRyan]

I already took the funky looking weights out of my H30s. They're 10x better now 

[Jesse6669]

That caboose would look even better with Z scale couplers.

I plan on putting Bucklers on mine.. will post after completed.

[bbussey]

I already took the funky looking weights out of my H30s. They're 10x better now 

Why would you do that?  Because removing weight is hardly criteria for model improvement.

[CodyO]

I already took the funky looking weights out of my H30s. They're 10x better now 

Yes please explain, because I don't see why you would want to remove the weight

[victor miranda]

I want to brag I have one of the caboose.

and I want to share that at least one person I know thinks I paid too much for it.
I agree with that.... it needs a light.

and damn it is pretty!

victor

[VonRyan]

Why would you do that?  Because removing weight is hardly criteria for model improvement.

Yes please explain, because I don't see why you would want to remove the weight

I've found that the running characteristics of 99% of rolling stock are improved with the removal of weight.
All my Atlas 40' wood reefers have their weights removed, all my FVM wagontop boxcars, and any other car that I've discovered as having removable weight.

Oh and just a nifty tidbit, the weights in the H30s are a piece of bent metal which conforms to the shape of the bays, and is held in by two screws with plastic washers. I put the screws back in so that I don't loose them in case I must divest myself of my collection in case of fiscal emergency.
My two 40' Milw. Rd. rib-side boxcars had their weights held in by strange very thin, double-sided foam tape. No tape I've ever seen before.
The wagontop boxcars just have their slabs glued on.

[davefoxx]

I've found that the running characteristics of 99% of rolling stock are improved with the removal of weight.
All my Atlas 40' wood reefers have their weights removed, all my FVM wagontop boxcars, and any other car that I've discovered as having removable weight.

Oh and just a nifty tidbit, the weights in the H30s are a piece of bent metal which conforms to the shape of the bays, and is held in by two screws with plastic washers. I put the screws back in so that I don't loose them in case I must divest myself of my collection in case of fiscal emergency.
My two 40' Milw. Rd. rib-side boxcars had their weights held in by strange very thin, double-sided foam tape. No tape I've ever seen before.
The wagontop boxcars just have their slabs glued on.

I'm glad that this works of you, Cody, but my experience is light cars tend to:
1) Derail more often with less weight to hold the wheels firmly on the rails;
2) Suffer more from the slinky effect, because, again, less mass = less momentum; and
3) Couple less efficiently, since a light car will roll away rather than couple.

YMMV,
DFF

[bbussey]

I've found that the running characteristics of 99% of rolling stock are improved with the removal of weight.
All my Atlas 40' wood reefers have their weights removed, all my FVM wagontop boxcars, and any other car that I've discovered as having removable weight...

You're in an extremely small minority then.  Light cars are extremely susceptible to any anomaly in the trackwork, and any with truck-mounted couplers are more susceptible to being pushed or pulled off-rail on curved track and through turnouts regardless of how large the wheel flanges are.  I certainly wouldn't want to push a freight consist of weightless equipment through the throat of a classification yard, with multiple turnouts and assorted routing direction based on how the turnout points are set.

Conversely, the heavier the car, the better it performs.  And if it's heavier with body-mounted couplers, it rarely will cause a problem.  If your motive power can't pull the consist with properly-weighted cars, follow real-life protocol and add another unit on the point.  Note that if your belief was the better one, the NMRA would have set lighter-weighted car standards decades ago.

[Dave V]

Yeah, I gotta pile on too here...  I would understand if you meant to say that removing the weights from cars improves the train length for your locos (as Bryan says) but you clearly state that it is the running characteristics of the cars themselves that is improved.

No makey sensey.

[CodyO]

No makey sensey.

Exactly I`ve always added more weight to any under weight cars to help with problems and the only reason I can see is that it would increase train length but suffer since they wouldn`t perform as well.

I ran into this problem with a 20 car trainworx`s trailer train, the cars where just too light so I had to break the train in half to have it run reliably.