Athearn N Scale Announcements November 27, 2020

[Mark5]

NEW ANNOUNCEMENT: N 50’ FMC OFFSET DOUBLE DOOR BOX CAR
http://www.athearn.com/newsletter/112720/08-N_50_FMC_Offset_DD_Boxcar_112720.pdf

NEW ANNOUNCEMENT: N PS 2893 COVERED HOPPER
http://www.athearn.com/newsletter/112720/09_N_PS_2893_112720.pdf

Announcement Page: http://www.athearn.com/Articles/Hobbywire.aspx

Mark

[cjm413]

For whatever it is worth:

1) The artwork shows a 2893 with hat ribs (vs prior releases with channel ribs...unless I missed a prior release with hat ribs).  The artwork could be wrong...but:

2) I don't recall Athearn offering a HO 2893 with hat ribs for them to reuse HO artwork for a N release; and

3) all of the roadnames in this run (and at least some of the roadnumbers) correspond with prototype 2893's that have hat ribs...

CORRECTION:
It appears HO is getting a new Athearn Genesis 2893 with hat ribs (vs prior Athearn RTR with channel ribs) that will blow the Walthers model out of the water
http://www.athearn.com/newsletter/112720/03_GEN_PS_2893_112720.pdf

Given it is now a Genesis model, I assume the Southern release will have evenly spaced hatches:



Looks like N will have to either modify the Athearn model with channel ribs or upgrade the old Atlas/Roco model 

[cjm413]

Southern 2893 with hat ribs and evenly-spaced hatches that I forgot to include

http://southern.railfan.net/images/archive/southern/freight/chop/94682.jpg



Might as well post the C of G (with regular hatches) since I'm already there:

http://southern.railfan.net/images/archive/southern/freight/chop/cofg922bethlehempa1175.html

[Mark5]

I doubt if Athearn will do that. BTW, the PDF shows the 2893 as still with truck mounted couplers ... 

[cjm413]

I doubt if Athearn will do that. BTW, the PDF shows the 2893 as still with truck mounted couplers ... 

A car with truck mounted couplers can sometimes be preferable to a car with poorly executed frame-mounted couplers.

The Athearn PS 2600 is the best example that comes to mind.   Replacing the stock trucks on the older runso with BLMA 100T trucks and MTL 903/905 couplers is easy.   

The newer runs are still jacked up like a car getting a tire rotation, but there is now a giant blob with a boxing glove sticking out of it where the 903/905 should go.   This may not matter if the coupler boxes are a separate part that could easily be removed, but Athearn has been molding the coupler boxes in place on their other cars that were previously released with truck-mounted couplers where I'd rather not risk the trouble of hacking it off.

http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATH16328

[CBQ Fan]

I keep hoping for a new run of FP45’s. Especially original Santa Fe war bonnet.

[Mark5]

A car with truck mounted couplers can sometimes be preferable to a car with poorly executed frame-mounted couplers.

I'd prefer that they body mount them well. 

[High Hood]

A car with truck mounted couplers can sometimes be preferable to a car with poorly executed frame-mounted couplers

A problem I’m facing. Athearn put body mounts on their N Scale coal hoppers, and the coupling distance is even worse than the ones I have with truck mounts. It’s actually double of some my other rolling stock! 

[Tom L]

I’ve got a couple of these that I glued MT 1015s on with Walters goo, since there’s nothing to really drill into reliably. I run about 13 car trains, most of my freight cars have extra weight added, up 2% grades and have never had one break loose.

On some scratchbuilt cabooses I built, I didn’t want to run a screw up through the end platforms, so I drilled and put a “pin” up through the coupler that was made of styrene round rod, the same diameter as a 00-90 screw. I trimmed it flush on top and painted to match the top of the end platform. The couplers were then glued on with goo and the pin trimmed flush on the bottom. My theory was that the pin would take stress off the glued joint and the glue would just be holding the couplers up and prevent them from swiveling.  However, I don’t think the pin was really necessary as the glue joint seems plenty strong in my situation.

Tom L
Wellington CO

[cjm413]

I’ve got a couple of these that I glued MT 1015s on with Walters goo, since there’s nothing to really drill into reliably. I run about 13 car trains, most of my freight cars have extra weight added, up 2% grades and have never had one break loose.

On some scratchbuilt cabooses I built, I didn’t want to run a screw up through the end platforms, so I drilled and put a “pin” up through the coupler that was made of styrene round rod, the same diameter as a 00-90 screw. I trimmed it flush on top and painted to match the top of the end platform. The couplers were then glued on with goo and the pin trimmed flush on the bottom. My theory was that the pin would take stress off the glued joint and the glue would just be holding the couplers up and prevent them from swiveling.  However, I don’t think the pin was really necessary as the glue joint seems plenty strong in my situation.

Tom L
Wellington CO

MTL 1017 is a good option for cabooses - it's an underslung coupler and it has a low-profile extension that allows the screw to be placed further inward than the end platform.

The new version of the 1017 has a much smaller coupler box than the old 1017.

https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=976