Fixing MTL 40' Boxcars

[Point353]

Notched MTL on left, Atlas on right.

Did some of the prototype MILW boxcars not have the "THE" above the roadname to the left of the door?


http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/milw/milw8752arc.jpg

[nkalanaga]

I have never seen one that didn't, but as long as the scheme was used, I wouldn't be surprised.  These cars came from PS, though, and were probably never repainted in this scheme, so I would doubt it.

It would have been more likely on one of the horizontal ribbed cars, after replacing a section of the side.  If the stencil wasn't available, they'd put the car back in service with just a coat of paint on the patch.

[mark.hinds]

(removed while I check something to avoid making a fool of myself; TBD).  MH

[mark.hinds]

Ed, buy your cars, cut off the sill and renotch it to approximate the proper side height, lower the body on the frame, ignore the ends, and roll with it.

(image and text removed)

Notched MTL on left, Atlas on right.

Mike:  Why not go all the way?  I copied your technique to get this first pair with Atlas on left and MT on right; image is not Photoshopped: 



One could then further adjust the car height to be identical with the Atlas PS-1 by thinning and lowering the MT roofwalk, and by slightly lowering the shell on the underframe.  With respect to the former, you will note that the height of the MT roofwalk above the roof of the shell is over twice that of the Atlas, so lots of potential here.  With respect to the latter, you will note that after filing off the locking tabs the entire shell is supported by the 3-mm-wide ledges on the side of the plastic stirrup assembly, and these can be slightly inset into the shelf around the lower rim of the shell by about 1/2 mm.  That gives you my second image with Atlas on left and MT on right, which *is* Photoshopped from the first image:  (Caveat:  my MT PS-1s were purchased in the 80s and 90s). 



I plan to actually do this tomorrow morning when the wife is awake so I can make noise with my Dremel, and will edit this post to produce a 3rd image of the actual final lowered MT PS-1. 

(image to be inserted later)

MH

[bbussey]

To play devil’s advocate...

How to you replace the lost bottom ladder rungs?

Why not use a brass roofwalk instead of thinning a plastic one that clearly looks like plastic and that you can’t see through?

Why go through this effort for non-prototypical schemes on the model?  I don’t think Reading rostered PS-1s with 6-foot doors.

EDIT — Correction, Reading didn’t own any PS-1s.

[mark.hinds]

To play devil’s advocate...

How to you replace the lost bottom ladder rungs?

I can't speak for the other posters, but speaking for myself, I am doing this because I enjoy doing so (I like swimming against the current sometimes ...) and because the result is good enough, given the numerous other compromises on my layout.  My priorities as a modeler are first overall mass of the model (long distance), second proportion / dimensions (medium distance), and 3rd and last detail (close up); you will recognize this as a "top-down" approach.  The modified PS-1 meets the first 2 criteria, and partially meets the 3rd, and some of the details such as more to-scale weld lines and ladders are better than Atlas.  I neverthless have so far purchased 7 Atlas PS-1s to supplement my MT stash, and want them to look similar from normal viewing distance of 3 feet.  WRT the rungs (1 on each ladder), if it bothered me, I could attach something and brush paint it.  Remember my images are of a prototype hack job.  I will be more careful when I do additional selected MT PS-1s in my collection, and am creating several jigs to facilitate this. 

Why not use a brass roofwalk instead of thinning a plastic one that clearly looks like plastic and that you can’t see through?

All my spare brass roofwalks of of lower quality than the MT plastic one.  The only issue I have with the MT plastics is the thickness.  See-through isn't important to me, as it's "below the noise floor"; it also could be improved with an ink wash.  Also, I think the Atlas roofwalks, although they look a little better, are too flimsy, as are the stirrup steps. 

Why go through this effort for non-prototypical schemes on the model?  I don’t think Reading rostered PS-1s with 6-foot doors.

EDIT — Correction, Reading didn’t own any PS-1s.

According to the Mainline Modeler PS-1 article (December 1982, page 71), you are correct; they didn't.  "The table lists car numbers and road for those cars we have identified as PS-1s.  Most are confirmed through second sources, however some are with question (sic)".  Could they have purchased them from another road?

When I finish the mods to my test PS-1, I could also photograph and post page 71 above, if anyone is interested. 

MH

[bbussey]

... I neverthless have so far purchased 7 Atlas PS-1s to supplement my MT stash ...

Does this indicate that you no longer are averse to having rolling stock equipped with body-mounted couplers in your fleet?

Also, why does the fineness of the weld lines matter on the MTL model when you are essentially removing the lower sill definition?

http://www.steamerafreightcars.com/prototype/frtcars/PullmanStandard40ftPS1boxcars.xls

This roster is accurate.

[mark.hinds]

Does this indicate that you no longer are averse to having rolling stock equipped with body-mounted couplers in your fleet?

Also, why does the fineness of the weld lines matter on the MTL model when you are essentially removing the lower sill definition?

This roster is accurate.

Haven't decided yet; it all depends on how well the equipment operates on my new trackwork, including tracking, magnetic coupling/uncoupling, etc.  I do like the Atlas PS-1s though, once I've replaced the magnetic wheels with non-magnetic ones.  I just don't want to toss all the MTs (I have some of the silver WP ones with the feather, for example). 

Weld lines actually aren't that important to me; just wanted to be fair to the 2 companies    Look at the images above and compare the vertical weld lines on the prototype photo with those on the 2 models.  To be fair, I did leave a remnant of the MT lower sill detail; Atlas is better on this, plus of course the Atlas ends look better. 

Thanks for the link; I have saved all the tables which interest me. 

MH

[coosvalley]

EDIT — Correction, Reading didn’t own any PS-1s.

Correct.
There is also some info WRT Reading 40'and 50 cars here, scroll down

http://www.mgdecals.com/F-302.htm

[bbussey]

... I do like the Atlas PS-1s though, once I've replaced the magnetic wheels with non-magnetic ones.  I just don't want to toss all the MTs (I have some of the silver WP ones with the feather, for example). 

Most PS-1s ran on ASF trucks, so I swap out the Barber trucks for ex-BLMA 70-ton and use the Barbers to upgrade and lower other models (and swap out the steel wheels as you do).

The silver WP scheme is a sweet scheme. I had one of the original Kadee cars back in the day. But I did snag one of the Precision Scale special-run Atlas cars, which has the correct details regarding dimensions and door size/style.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[mark.hinds]

Nice car.

The "thinning" of the MT roofwalk is time consuming due to its flexibility; intact removal isn't that easy either; not sure the OP would want to do this.  As a back up I just ordered on speculation some of the Plano roofwalks.  Never seen them, but I have some of their F-unit grills, which are nice, so I'm hoping for the best. 

MH

[Mark5]

Another thing that now annoys me about the Kadee/MTL car are the obvious "plug" cylinders on the roof (where the MTL roofwalk "plugs in" - I can't "not" see these now.

I still have a few of the ones I bought back in 1972 when they first came out - they were amazing models in context. 40+ years on they don't make the cut on my model railroad world - so I ended up selling off most of them.

Mark

[thomasjmdavis]

Another thing that now annoys me about the Kadee/MTL car are the obvious "plug" cylinders on the roof (where the MTL roofwalk "plugs in" - I can't "not" see these now.

I still have a few of the ones I bought back in 1972 when they first came out - they were amazing models in context. 40+ years on they don't make the cut on my model railroad world - so I ended up selling off most of them.

Mark

To be fair to Micro-trains, their boxcar was not intended to compete or compare with the Atlas Master Line.

It was intended to compete and compare with what Atlas now calls its "Trainman" line.

[bbussey]

Well, that’s the normal progression of things. One company steps up, and other companies have to step up as well or surpass in order to compete.

[cjm413]

To play devil’s advocate...

How to you replace the lost bottom ladder rungs?

Why not use a brass roofwalk instead of thinning a plastic one that clearly looks like plastic and that you can’t see through?

Why go through this effort for non-prototypical schemes on the model?  I don’t think Reading rostered PS-1s with 6-foot doors.

EDIT — Correction, Reading didn’t own any PS-1s.