# Aristo-Heavyweights resizing? Need some infos..



## derPeter (Dec 26, 2010)

Hallo MLSers,

iam thinking about to resize some Aristo-Heavyweights from 1:29 to 1:32
They should fit to the new Accucraft Pass.cars..
I have done similar work with the Aristo-Sierra-cars, see pics..
BUT they are half the lenght and so iam afraid to get them straight..

Has anyone ever made this Action and will give me some helpful comments..
Thank you in advance
from derPeter


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm confused. What do you think needs to be done? The cars you showed are all 1:24 ish. I don't see how that applies to 1:29 to 1:32. The Aristo heavyweights are based, so I have been told, on a Central of New Jersey commuter coach. That car was shorter than the usual mainline heavyweights. By how much I don't know. I think that you could use the HWs in a 1:32 train without a lot of concern.

Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm pretty sure that they are 72' long in 1:29.... so the length may be about perfect for 1:32. They normally look fine with other 1:32 locos.

Greg


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

Perhaps Alan Rediker will see this. He has modified a number of the Aristo hw's to run with the Accucraft 1:32 Daylight cars that were produced some years ago (not the currently available smooth-side cars). Both manufacturer's cars blend together very nicely in his train.

Larry


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Peter

The only thing that I think needs to be done is to get rid of the long truck mounted coupler tongue and put on body mounted couplers. This will bring them a lot closer together and they will look much better.

Here is a picture of my heavyweight passenger train. The box car in the front is a USATrains American series box car, it scales out to a 40' car in 1:32. It is a little higher and wider than a true 1:32 car. You can see how close the cars are with body mounted couplers.











Chuck


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I believe, and the above comments confirm, that they are a little high and a little wide. I've had some success cutting plastic cars lengthwise on a Micromark table saw, using a medium-tooth blade. I can imagine cutting the roof down that way - either narrowing the clerestory or cutting alongside it and narrowing the side roof(s).
You could also cut a strip off the top of the sides and ends with the same saw to make it a little lower, and run along the floor alongside the sides to make it narrower at the bottom.

For a true scale model, you'd probably have to change the window size, at which point I would call Alan at G.A.L. (www.thegalline.com) and talk to him about laser-cutting new sides. He's done some express reefers in 1/32 recently.

However, all this is conjecture as I haven't compared a coach with a drawing. I suspect my copy of White's "American Passenger Cars" will have something useful.


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete Thornton said:


> I believe, and the above comments confirm, that they are a little high and a little wide. I've had some success cutting plastic cars lengthwise on a Microm


Im not sure if you mean they are a little high and wide for 1/29 scale, or a little high and wide for 1/32 scale.

They are right-on for 1/29 scale..
and yes, they are too big for 1/32 scale..because they arent 1/32 scale! 

IMO, trying to convert Aristo heavyweights to 1/32 scale would not work well..you would need to reduce them in size in all three dimensions..not an easy task. you could keep the length un-modified and just say they are longer prototype cars in 1/32 scale, but height and width would still need to be modified..it can be done! it would be challenging, but doable..whether its worth it or not is a matter of personal circumstances..if you already have a brace of Aristo heavyweights, and really want them to be 1/32 scale, it would make for an interesting project!

For the Aristo heavyweights:

Width in 1/29 scale = 105mm = 4.13" = 10 feet prototype width.
10 feet width in 1/32 scale = 3.75"
Thats approx 0.4 of an inch removed from the width.

Height of the car is about the same.,
the model is 4" tall, just the body..so take 0.4 inches out of the height of the body panel, horizontally..
(there is no practical way to reduce the height of the clerestory roof sections..dont even bother..they will be too tall, but that's just a compromise that will need to be accepted.) Trucks also cant be reasonably modified..they will just have to be too large..might want to lower the bodies on the trucks a bit.
as I said, its a challenging project! 

If length was unchanged, prototype length would increase from 72 feet to about 80 feet..while the length of the model didn't change.

As Pete mentioned, you would still have window issues..unmodified 1/29 scale windows will be a bit large for 1/32 scale..but if the overall width and height was decreased, that might still look ok..depends on how accurate you want to be.

I lowered and reduced the width of a passenger car to convert it from On30 scale to On2 scale..in that case, the actual scale didnt change..it started in 1/48 scale and ended in 1/48 scale, but similar techniques could be used for lowering and narrowing an Aristo heavyweights..here is the page:

http://gold.mylargescale.com/Scottychaos/On2/index.html


Scot


----------



## derPeter (Dec 26, 2010)

Hallo all,
Thank you for your Input, it is very helpful for me.
Yess the main change would be the cross-section of the car, not the length..
- Accu + MTH-cars are 125 mm high, 96 mm width
- Aristo Heavy is 142 mm high, 105 mm width
- Height can be reduced by truck bolsters arrangement
- Kadee-couplers
- lot of machining is waiting for me
- the idea of roof-frame is super, i had problems to fix it at my Sierra-cars
- Mr. Scottys site is very detailed and gave me a kick to start..
Thank you all and greetings from
derPeter


----------



## derPeter (Dec 26, 2010)

And here last pics before shreddering.. ;-)





 
greetings derPeter


----------



## Doug C (Jan 14, 2008)

Good Luck with your latest project !

and thanks for posting the vid


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

derPeter said:


> And here last pics before shreddering.. ;-)
> 
> https://youtu.be/YskKyosOlcM
> 
> greetings derPeter


Thanks for the video!
After seeing your video, I would say: Dont touch those cars! 

Yes, your 4-8-4 locomotive is 1/32 scale..but! its a *massively huge* 1/32 scale locomotive!  Its prototype is about as big as steam locomotives get..the 1/29 scale heavyweights seem to match it just fine..the height of the locomotive and the height of the coaches looks about the same..

I guess im not sure what your goal is..

Scot


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I agree with Scot. I think the train looks great with that engine. There is no obvious mismatch.

Chuck


----------



## derPeter (Dec 26, 2010)

Hallo together,

too late, too late, no return .. ;-))

greetings derPeter


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I've always believed that if you think something looks wrong, no amount of justification will make it look right. It's at that point the saw must come out. Good luck with the conversion. I think you should be able to do a reasonable downsize without a whole lot of headache. 

Later,

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I see the lowering from milling the truck flat and the chassis. How will you overcome the friction from the much enlarged contact areas?

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg if it is a problem, he could use a thin washer which would reduce the surface area of contact.

Chuck


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

chuck n said:


> Greg if it is a problem, he could use a thin washer which would reduce the surface area of contact.
> 
> Chuck


I think it would need more than a thin washer to get over a bump in the track.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Pete

I don't understand your comment. There is a lot of potential friction from the smoothing of both the top of the truck and the bolster, because of the large area now in contact. The washer would reduce the area of contact and minimize the the amount of dirt that could get caught between the two.

Chuck


----------



## riderdan (Jan 2, 2014)

chuck n said:


> The washer would reduce the area of contact and minimize the the amount of dirt that could get caught between the two.
> 
> Chuck


But a thin washer won't allow the truck to pitch or roll as much over bumpy track. The pivoting (yaw) would be OK with the reduced friction, but what about "rocking" over uneven track?


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

But there won't be any pitch and roll with two large flat surfaces in contact.

Chuck


----------



## riderdan (Jan 2, 2014)

chuck n said:


> But there won't be any pitch and roll with two large flat surfaces in contact.
> 
> Chuck


I don't have any rolling stock that big, but don't the trucks need to be able to "wobble" over uneven track work? I thought that was why some power blocks had one "tilting" axle...


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes, but look at Peter's pictures and Greg's comment. Peter leveled the top of the truck and plained down the bolster. As is see it there isn't any flexibility there. I thought that a washer might help. I could be wrong, but I think that there are problems with two flat plates meeting to hold and control the trucks.

Chuck


----------



## riderdan (Jan 2, 2014)

chuck n said:


> Yes, but look at Peter's pictures and Greg's comment. Peter leveled the top of the truck and plained down the bolster. As is see it there isn't any flexibility there. I thought that a washer might help. I could be wrong, but I think that there are problems with two flat plates meeting to hold and control the trucks.
> 
> Chuck


Understod. I guess I was thinking that across that large a flat area, a washer's thickness wouldn't be enough to allow the necessary movement. We'll have to see what Peter does and if it works


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

chuck n said:


> But there won't be any pitch and roll with two large flat surfaces in contact.
> 
> Chuck


Exactly. At the first bump or uneven track, the coach will derail.
Ya gotta allow for lateral and longitudinal rocking of the truck, unless every track it runs on is perfectly flat.

I suspect it will need a lot of thin washers to make it stay on the track.


----------



## derPeter (Dec 26, 2010)

Hallo again,

perhaps i forgot a pic incl. the washer.. ;-))
jess the truck has movement along the side and length of car and the bolster is now under the middle axle of truck (there were the weight of car presses..)
I also was canceling the idea, to cut the car at length, becaus iam from nature a lazy guy and it saves lot of work..
Only change will be the reducing of height, that can be visible from side not the width..
The bolster is cutted and turned flat and glued from inside of car.
So i will continue with the other 3 cars

Greetings from
derPeter


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Hah!

I was going to go to the flexibility issue next. With such large surfaces, you will need a pretty thick washer to give the flexibility back.

You might wind up with a 1/4" washer, which will negate a lot of the lowering achieved. Most people find a way to use a lower profile bolster on the car, or recess it.

Greg


----------

