# Running USA and Aristo Passenger Cars



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

I've got an Aristo heavyweight set being pulled behind LGB F7 A and B units. I'd like to add a USA streamlined or smoothside ACL passenger car in the consist, but I don't know if it will look out of place. Anyone mixing passenger cars? I mix freight cars all the time (just replace the couplers with Aristo's) and the work fine.

Thanks for the advice/comments.

Bob


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The Aristo heavyweight looks a tiny bit small, and they are a model of a shorter car than most people realize. That said, they do appear to be scale, and so are the USAT cars. Which cars are you thinking of? I could take a picture of a few cars together if you want. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

Some of the Aristo cars are models of the CNJ Blue Comet trainset. These were one off 72 foot cars and very short protoitypes for the late heavyweight era which generally featured 80 footers. The sleeper is pure fantasy as no standard gauge 10-1's were ever built ... the usual Pullman is a 12-1. The Aristo cars also have some inaccuracies in the body side height ... and the way they ride above the trucks ... and have zero underbody detail ... but ...they are the only game in town for heavyweights.

The USAT cars are lightweights and are accurate in many ways for the typical 85 foot cars. They do not have accurate details by prototype road nor has any attempt been made to accurately model lightweight cars from Budd vs ACF vs Pullman ... the three major carbuilders of the lightweight era.

The USAT cars will dwarf the Aristos in length ... and are much better detailed ... and are wayyyy heavier. It depends on your eye and what pleases you - I do not like them together and do not care much for the Aristo cars alone because they do not look right but hey that is just me. If you like em run em!

Regards ... Doug


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

I don't think the aristo HW and USA Stream Line scale well with the LGB f7. It is just so much bigger than the 1/29 stuff. It bothered me so much that raised the height of my Aristo smooth sides just to match the height of the f7 roof line.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Actually back in the days when RR where converting to the smooth sides or what ever and still mixing hevy weights thyey all did not match up. Your RR run what you like and enjoy. later RJD


----------



## Randy Stone (Jan 2, 2008)

Size wise, the Aristo Craft Heavy Weights are 29 1/2 inches long. 
The Aristo Craft Streamliners are 27 1/2 inches long 
While the USAT Streamliners are 33 inches long 

So you're talking 3 1/2 inches difference in length between the Heavy Weights and the USAT Streamliners. 
To me the difference in length isn't as big an issue as the height difference between the LGB F7s and any of the coaches mentioned above as Bill has pointed out. 

In the end, Like RJ said, run what you like unless you plan to run this combination with a bunch of rivit counters. They'll hassle you to death over it. 

Randy


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO.


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

Thanks guys, for the comments, keep them coming. That's what this hobby is about. 

Bob


----------



## Bighurt (Sep 15, 2009)

Posted By RobertHNeal on 31 Oct 2009 10:53 PM 
If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO. 
Can't we be in both....


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

Great if you're in both. I like outdoors, because my wife won't let me put HO indoors, so I have to do the best I can with G scale.


----------



## Bighurt (Sep 15, 2009)

We'll I'd like to be in both but atm just collecting...

If I ever build my 1/8 railway I'll count rivets...


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

It is possible to be a rivet counter in large scale, but then you want to be doing 1:32 or narrow gauge in 1:20.3. Trying to count rivets on LGB stuff is like having somebody stand behind you yelling out random numbers while you're counting.


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

I'm not a rivet counter. But, For my rail road, I want trains and consists that look right to me. What’s right to me may be wrong to you. My wife thinks all trains look the same. I can’t tell one mogul from another. For instance, I was reading a review of the lgb modern hoppers in garden railways, and they stated that the hopper was spot on for 1:29, however when I look at one next to a usa hopper the LGB car seem larger, they also work well with the LGB f7. It's all subjective.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

HO rivets? Who can see 'em? If you want scale fidelity go to On3, not On30 which puts O scale trains on HO track! Hmmm multiple scales on one track, where have I seen that? 

Rooflines vary, still do, that doesn't bother me at all, unless it's a model of a specific train with a matched set of rolling stock.. 

I don't find the solution above (raising the bodies) esthetically pleasing, to me, it looks more like a light rail car or subway car masquerading as a mainline passenger car. That's just my opinion and really holds no weight, as to right or wrong. It's just not something I would do. I'm also not concerned with cars that are shorter than prototypes as we don't usually have the same real estate as the 1:1 boys. Compressed curves should have compressed cars for the over all look. 

My way to deal with rivet counters is to ask if they've achieved scale weight yet? What? You make allowances for that? Well then I make allowances for this! Now step back 10' and start counting! lol 

John


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

John, how do you calculate scale weight?


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Well seeing as I'm in 1:24 I'd divide the weight by 24... a 44 tonner would need to be 1.83333 tons! Point settled! 

Of course it's impossible... but you get the idea! lol 

It's more of an exercise to stop the pickers of nit from intruding on my fun! 

We all make compromises, one guy said that he was a more serious modeler because he bought all new 1:20.3 and I in 1:24, would never acheive his level of accuracy! I shrugged and let it go, But I did tell him that while he is being Serious, I am having fun! 

John


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

So you only look at scale in one dimension? Try this 44 tons x 2000 = 88,000 pounds / 24 = 3,667 / 24= 153/ 24= 6.4 pounds The weight is more relevant to the volume, which is 3 dimensional. Thats a bit closer...


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

My F7 would not be able to move 4 hoppers with 6.4 lbs in each of them. Hows that for scale power!


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

John, I do agree that the raised roof on the aristo is not the complete solution. I just haven't figured a way to add skirting around the bottom to improve their silhouette. When I do, I will post pics for people’s opinions. That's the best part of this fourm.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Curious that weight and volume should be judged equal...40 cu yd marshmallows = 40 cu yds of lead? 

I looked at scale as being 1 :24 or 1/24th not 1:13,824 the 24 cubed.... what scale is that? 

I look at weight as gravitational not dimensional, did I miss something in the 5th grade? Are you picking my nit? lol 

Bills, 
I'd look into some plastic strips and attach them along the bottom edge the width determined by the daylight red on the loco. Evergreen or Tap Plastics (an advertiser here) might have the right width. triangle braces, points down can help hold the shape. I'd prebend for the obs tail... 

John


----------



## Ironton (Jan 2, 2008)

John, 

You got it wrong. Consider you are going to model in 1:24 scale. You want to model a cube of lead 24 feet on a side. What size will the model be? Of course it is a cube 1 foot on a side. 

Now what is the weight ratio. Will the model cube be 1/24th of the weight of the original. I don't think so  . Instead it will weigh 1/13824th of the original. That is why volume and weight have to be handled 3 dimendionally. 

Hope this helps.


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

John, we were talking trains, your comparison of marshmallows to lead is relevant how exactly?? 
Your method of scaling doesn't work... every component in the 1:1 44 tonner has 3 dimensions IF you could use all the same materials and build all the scale components, a complete scale model, do you really thing it would weigh 1.8333 tons??? 
And no I don't think we spent time in this in 5th grade... No I'm not nit picking, but I have tried to come up with a way to do this with live steam engines, and this gets the closest results... IMHO 
Jeff


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Rich, on the weight, you are right. A simple googling will give you the answer. It actually works. 

Weight is dependent on volume... so reduce the weight by the "cube root" of the scale, so to speak. (I know that is not the right terminology) 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

lead and marshmallows... fit because I can't see where weight gets abitrary dimensions thus 40 cu yd of different masses should have different values... to me. 

I can see devising formulas to support a line of thought, but see above... 

Now you are invading my fun space! lol I give up! 

John


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Going back to the original question, I think there is another aspect of running USA and Aristo passenger cars that needs to be addressed: coupling.

What are you planning to use for couplers? The USA and ARisto couplers do not mix well. You can convert them both to kadees, that might help. I have a friend who converted his USA streamliners to aristo couplers. 

As for 'what looks right', well, that's up to you. 

In the photo below: New Haven RS-3 529 handles a mixed heavyweight and lightweight train.


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Mark, 
It looks like your friend lower the height of the aristo to match the USA cars. 
On the subject of scale weight it may be better to ask if the car is capable of carrying a scale weight capacity and if the engine is capable of produces equivalent scale horse power. So for a 3000 hp f7 what is the scale horse power?


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Uh oh!!! A call to the 4th dimension! lol 

Nope I ain' t gonna go there... 

Hopefully the pickers of nit I enounter won't be as edumacated as some guys.... 

J


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

What are you using for power? At Diamondhead, Bob Pope's gas-electric had a tractive effort of 10 lbs 9.8 oz. byre bye couplers.. hehe that will get 100 hoppers moving with power to spare!!


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I am all Kadee except the USAT streamliners, they are metal knuckles and have a nice sprung mechanism that pivots well.. 

The Aristo couplers function well on their heavyweights, but I will convert to Kadees, because the Aristos eventually start pulling apart and Kadee has a nice conversion package and closer coupling. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

I have LGB couplers on my engines and use a transition car (LGB on one side, Aristo on the other) Otherwise I'm all Aristo, even on my USA's and Bachmanns. I used Kaydees back in my HO days (30 years ago) and found them difficult to match up. I assume things have changed, but I'm concerned about having the passenger cars "too" close together on my 10-foot curves. Any suggestions?


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Robert,

Both Chris and I have modified our heavyweight cars to make them couple very close. I have about a 3/4" gap between the coaches and Chris has something like 1/2". No problems from being too close. We ran them on Pete Eggink's indoor railroad where I think he has a 6.5' diameter curve with no problems.

Below is how my two coaches looked before I painted them blue. These coaches originally served on Jerry McColgan's empire in Arkansas!









That is the extent of the modification to the cars that we've both made, no shortening of height as Bills suggested. (Bills, the aristo coaches pictured in my post above are custom painted Heavyweight cars. Perhaps the black paint with the orange letterboard threw you off? The aristo streamliner and smoothside coaches need to be lowered to match both the aristo heavyweight and USA streamliner cars). I cut along the botton of the truck tank and then moved it back. I originally just used Gorilla Glue to hold it in place, but relying on adhesives alone is not a great idea, so I have since inserted a wood screw to have a positive mechanical connection. No problems here. Chris did report some of the glue breaking off on his modifcation. 









Has anyone seen the pictures of the new version of Kadee knuckles? They look more realistic. Might be a good choice for the front of my two mikados (where I rarely ever couple anything).


----------



## parkdesigner (Jan 5, 2008)

If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO. 




If you want scale fidelity go to On3 




Oh screw you guys! * I have HAD IT* with the relentless attacks against "rivet counters" here at MLS... or should I say - the people that_ take the time_ to MODEL.










Really - *TOTALWRECKER* - you are on some F%*#&NG CRUSDAE here at MLS to get every little dig in you can against me, and others who take the *TIME* and _develop_ the *SKILL* to build accurate models... and don't even start with your BS about scale weight - you look like a child when you throw out arguments that you don't even understand....










OK - we get it - you have NO SKILL - no comprehension on how to model and moreover, you don't want to.... good... great.... now, PLEASE leave those of us who do alone!



For the love of GOD - you don't see me going in to completely unrelated topics on this board *attacking YOU* for running your out-of-scale trains.... sure, I point out (quite factually) that they* ARE* out of scale... but I don't have the audacity, the sheer arrogance to attack you and your kind, claiming... "_you should all go to another scale..._" I'm not so pigheadedly myopic as to insinuate that you are NOT WELCOME in G scale[/i]... quite the opposite - I'm on the record all over this forum saying "RUN WHAT YOU LIKE".... **** let me say that again for those here that are just a bit slow....


RUN WHAT YOU LIKE.[/b]





But, _don't you dare attack me _[/b]simply because I show a more sensitive eye towards accurately scaled, and detailed models.... How DARE YOU.... How dare you!


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Thank you Josh. I believe this has needed to be said fopr a long time.


----------



## Curmudgeon (Jan 11, 2008)

Posted By parkdesigner on 03 Nov 2009 11:05 AM 


If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO. 




If you want scale fidelity go to On3 




Oh screw you guys! * I have HAD IT* with the relentless attacks against "rivet counters" here at MLS... or should I say - the people that_ take the time_ to MODEL.










Really - *TOTALWRECKER* - you are on some F%*#&NG CRUSDAE here at MLS to get every little dig in you can against me, and others who take the *TIME* and _develop_ the *SKILL* to build accurate models... and don't even start with your BS about scale weight - you look like a child when you throw out arguments that you don't even understand....










OK - we get it - you have NO SKILL - no comprehension on how to model and moreover, you don't want to.... good... great.... now, PLEASE leave those of us who do alone!



For the love of GOD - you don't see me going in to completely unrelated topics on this board *attacking YOU* for running your out-of-scale trains.... sure, I point out (quite factually) that they* ARE* out of scale... but I don't have the audacity, the sheer arrogance to attack you and your kind, claiming... "_you should all go to another scale..._" I'm not so pigheadedly myopic as to insinuate that you are NOT WELCOME in G scale[/i]... quite the opposite - I'm on the record all over this forum saying "RUN WHAT YOU LIKE".... **** let me say that again for those here that are just a bit slow....


RUN WHAT YOU LIKE.[/b]





But, _don't you dare attack me _[/b]simply because I show a more sensitive eye towards accurately scaled, and detailed models.... How DARE YOU.... How dare you!


Because they can.
They can hide behind their keyboards and spew meaningless drivel, and when the accepted norm of calculation is published, suddenly it's even more abuse.
I am reasonably certain they are getting some Physicist from Japan to calculate something to prove their point.

Of course, try to tell them 1:24 is 3'6" on #1 gauge, whilst 1:20 is 3', and it is so far beyond their comprehension, you can actually hear their minds slamming shut from several hundred miles away.

Why do you think I gave up?

Someone "convinces" them of something, it doesn't matter what amount of truth and facts you throw at them, minds are slammed shut.

Please note:

I mentioned no names.

I am reasonably certain the guilty parties will identify themselves shortly.

Signing off once again.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

In my mind, there's some "rallying cries" that are getting abused. 

In G scale, with all the mixed scales, and even mixed on the same piece of rolling stock, the "no rivet counters" cry was pretty cool about 10 years ago, when it seemed basically impossible for normal humans to have any scale fidelity (meaning all the real scale stuff was super expensive). 

Nowadays, you can buy very nice scale models, notably in 1:32 and 1:20.3, which do match the available track, and of course you can buy models that are scale in many respects, like many 1:29 models that are scale everywhere but the wheels and trucks. 

But it seems that now, any attempt at scale fidelity gets hit with the "rivet counter" moniker. I think in many cases is HAS gone too far in the wrong direction. 

I will tell you that if I went NG, I definitely would be as scale as possible, and I would want the rivets on my tenders to be right. WHY NOT? 

What is WRONG with scale modeling? 

To that end, I try to only model cars that are very close to the prototype, even though I am in 1:29 standard gauge, and I know that it's not all perfect. But I model Santa Fe, and will not buy something they did not run, and I won't buy an LGB F7 because of the poor scale. 

So, I think we need to learn to respect true modelers, not attack them with the "rivet counter!" moniker. 

my $ 0.02 

Regards, Greg


----------



## parkdesigner (Jan 5, 2008)

*Bob Neal*... I quoted you above, out of anger, and I want to say that I am sorry... it has only been after the initial posting that I noticed your post count, and I'm guessing you're relatively new to the site. My apologies... oddly enough going on 7 or so years ago, when I first joined MLS, I said something that was taken out of context and was jumped on by some overzealous members... I can _*still*_ remember the great number of MLS members that came to my defense and how that cemented in my mind how wonderful a place Mylargescale truly is...










I'm guessing due to the small post count, you are largely unaware of some of the more recent ongoing fights and skirmishes here at the site... one of those in recent months has been topics along the lines of 1:20.3 scaled items, their supplanting 1/24 and 1/22.5 in the hobby as _the choice_ to model American 3ft Narrow Gauge and the rather heated arguments this spawns...

Statements like _"If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO._" are hurtful, at least to me... I'm *not* a millionaire... I *don't* have acres of land... and I certainly *don't* have the amazing talent and skill of the MMRs out there building most of the 1:20 stuff today... but I work HARD[/b] to build the items I _do_ have. I've spent a lot of time researching and preparing myself for the builds, and even longer saving pennies, and being creative with how and what I purchase... 

The fact is, I'm young (relatively) in the hobby, and for me - I came in just as 1:20 was growing... I have, with excitement, watched through the years as companies have refined the way they produce models, increased detailing, and paid ever more attention to fidelity in the hobby. 

You're statement leads me to believe that you've had unpleasant encounters with "rivet counters" (I'm guessing in another scale)... I can understand this.. but the fact of the matter is that in *this* hobby, in *Today's* age, with *Today's* advancements, there is NO reason why ALL[/b] trains cannot be _as detailed_ and _as accurate_ as their smaller-scale or brass counterparts...









As such I have really begun to question the _"_*Rivet Counter go Home!"* cries I hear and what the impetus behind them could be...

*It sure isn't Cost*... folks like Bachmann and AMS now have 1:20.3 cars that are the same, if not cheaper[/b] than their comical, caricature, out-of-scale counter parts... I've paid far more for LGB passenger cars than I ever have for AMS ones...









*It sure isn't Availability*... Again, with Bachmann and AMS leading the charge, and Accucraft, RY Models, PCGRS, Lone Star, Berlyn, Ozark, 3-Foot, Tom Yorke, PNG, Don Winter, Jim Ferry, RGM UK, heck... _even _ARISTOCRAFT!![/b]







All, with 1:20.3 models offered over the past decade, there is as much, if not *MORE* choice in manufacturers than in any of the other scales...

*Is it Skill?* Let me tell you - I have 10 thumbs...







but I've worked at it, I've asked for help (Here on MLS that is - a *GREAT* place to get help from some _amazingly_ talented modelers, regardless of individual scale preference) and I have refined my abilities over the years...


So what is it? (Not aiming at you Bob - more rhetorical than anything) Why this hostility from, as far as I can tell, the 1/29 and 1/24 folks over *anyone*, *anything*, ANY[/b] post regarding praise or admiration for 1/20th items? I don't like diesels and I _certainly_ don't like 1/29~1/27 scale for modern modeling - but you sure as **** don't see me screaming* "go do that in N scale!!"...* you don't read threads where, after someone praises thier latest Aristo acquisition, a host of people chime in with *"too big" "wrong scale" "leave the hobby*!"... it just doesn't make sense...











Bob, again, I'm sorry I quoted on this thread - I suspect your statements, while still offensive ( at least to me), were benign and offered out of some experience from another scale, from another time...





(No longer addressing Bob, turning my attention to the crowd at hand...)


I do however still stand committed to my indictment of, what I can only describe as, this uneducated, boisterous, small group of individuals who have *infiltrated* MLS in the last 18 months, like a swarm of locust, whom loudly and with the most absurd of reasoning, continue to dismiss any attempt to MODEL... any attempt to _elevate_ the level of fidelity in the hobby as some sort of "attack" on their beloved "toy trains."

You wanna run LGB? *Great*! Like the looks of Bachmann Big Haulers? *Good for you*... enjoy... HAVE FUN[/b]... but don't you *DARE* think that because you have a half dozen, mismatched scale engines.... that because you've mastered the art of "repainting" (and _poorly_ at that) a boxcar or a caboose... you now fancy yourself an expert on the hobby. One that can dismiss other's efforts, and wishes, as "rivet counting" and unfit to keep the company of your *out-of-scale* trains...











*This isn't about money* - anybody that WANTS to, can model 1:20 for the *same costs* as any other scale in the hobby today...

*This isn't about skill* - ready to run models are there for those that want them, and kits ready for every level from novice to expert are available in the market...

*This isn't about space* - I've seen *GREAT* layouts in 1/20... even 7/8ths[/b] on shelves, inside, outside, and, frankly, in spaces that most people would look at and claim were too small, *even for LGB R1s*!!










So what is it guys? Jealously? Envy? Why on Earth would you be so damned arrogant as to think that those who support higher fidelity from manufacturers... that support *BETTER QUALITY* detailing... that support increased attention from manufacturers to the wishes and desires of today's modelers.... why should those be reasons to be OUSTED FROM THE HOBBY?! [/b]

Mylargescale has been a WONDERFUL home to countless modelers... many of them in 1/20th.... just a few short years ago, this site was brimming with photos and articles about new construction and new builds... and now, it's all but gone.... I know the models are STILL being built... the same peope that used to post their photos here... now simply don't.... they _still_ build... they _still_ post ELSEWHERE... but not on MLS... not as of late...

If you ask me, the rallying cries of the likes of TotalWrecker have been heard *loud and clear*... and Mylargescale, and it's members, are all the *worse* for it... 




I love my trains... and I love MLS... and you can scream hateful, hurtful things all you want... try your childish, silly arguments - absurd, patently false claims of "_the correct scale_" - the math be damned - it won't matter....* I AINT GOING ANYWHERE*... *not* to On3.... *not* to whatever magical place that "rivet counters" should be in your mind... 

Because guess what... I belong RIGHT HERE[/b].... 

You're damn right *I'm a rivet counter*... and I'm one of the people the market is listening to... and I'm going to be here long after you're dead and gone... I AM[/b] the next generation and I AM[/b] Mylargescale! 



If you don't like that... perhaps *YOU* should think about going somewhere else...


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

Park, calm down. Your going to get the moderators all excited! We all have a tendency to defend and even promote the scale we model. I am in a small minority because I run SG live steam so that means 1:32. 
I like to, in a light hearted way poke at the guys who model in 1:29 for being "out of scale" Most of those guys are better modelers than I will ever be. my true interest is in building and running live steam. I'm one of those that re-letter some cars to go with my engines because NO ONE makes them. Fixing or improving the performance of a live steamer.. now thats what I call modeling... 
I have seen an attraction to 20.3 even for some SG, looks cool but I think it's biggest hurdle is the lack of commercially available track, which is the common element for all of us.


----------



## SlateCreek (Jan 2, 2008)

I'll take that a step further. 

When I joined this site years ago, there were all kinds here. People who liked (and did well at) scale models (Kevin, Bruce, Gaetan, Mac, David, Burl, Jim F, Richard Schmidt, Vance to name a few off the top of my head,) as well as folks who liked the more fantastical, artistic oriented ones (Chris W, and the folks who made Doc Pfizer's world, the Brandywine and Gondor, et al.... sorry I don't remember your names!) There were folks who took a finely scaled approach and made some allowances (Richard Smith whose scale is 3' on 1:24, but otherwise is so real you can mistake photos of his railroad for the real thing) and one guy who for awhile bought trains because, well, they were red in color, and he liked that. There's a guy who builds a layout at Christmas every year that winds around his house and terrorizes his cats, and a guy who built a couple thousand feet of railroad permanently outdoors just to prove you CAN run in every kind of weather. We need to get back to where we all learned from each other, took what tips and skills we could, and did the best we could with what we had. I've learned techniques and tips here from people whose railroads are as different from mine as can be, but whose ideas made it possible for me to make something work on mine. That's what makes this hobby, and a forum like this one relevant, dynamic, and of great value to ALL kinds of modelers of "large scale" trains. 

No longer. Now the moment you mention that you think 45/3=15, the hue and cry is raised ... "Rivet Counters! Grab your torch and pitchfork!" Mention that a new model with a stated scale on the box has dimensions that don't match that scale, and you can almost smell the distinct odor of tar being heated and feathers being sacked. The message is clear: If you like to model in scale, keep it to yourself, particularly if what you want is RTR accurately scaled models; if you think scale's so important, go build it yourself, you lazy rivet counting 6%[email protected]! There's even an idea put forth that nobody should say ANYTHING the least bit critical about anything that's made, lest the manufacturers give us something to REALLY cry about and stop making models altogether just to show us what ingrates we are! To this end, folks are willing to go through all kinds of contortive arguments, flamings, and even a re-ordering of mathematics itself and the message couldn't be clearer than it was as stated above: 

*If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO. * 

I will keep my own counsel about the scale in which I ought to be modelling. And furthermore, until the hostile climate on this site toward people who might think scale modelling in large scale, to wit 1:20.3 has as much relevance here as anyone else, and there is some visible action by the management to address this issue decisively and directly this site has seen its very last dollar from me. Will I go away? Not on your life. Nobody runs me off by running their mouth. But I won't pay to be abused. I really have very little time for being told that I don't belong here followed by an admonition to "just have fun." *I* have fun when I can make a railroad look and operate like I think a railroad should. I do *NOT* have fun being told I'm an idiot for thinking that's a good way to have fun. 

Matthew (OV)


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Posted By parkdesigner on 03 Nov 2009 11:05 AM 


If you're a rivet counter, you need to be in HO. 




If you want scale fidelity go to On3 




Oh screw you guys! * I have HAD IT* with the relentless attacks against "rivet counters" here at MLS... or should I say - the people that_ take the time_ to MODEL.










Really - *TOTALWRECKER* - you are on some F%*#&NG CRUSDAE here at MLS to get every little dig in you can against me, and others who take the *TIME* and _develop_ the *SKILL* to build accurate models... and don't even start with your BS about scale weight - you look like a child when you throw out arguments that you don't even understand....










OK - we get it - you have NO SKILL - no comprehension on how to model and moreover, you don't want to.... good... great.... now, PLEASE leave those of us who do alone!



For the love of GOD - you don't see me going in to completely unrelated topics on this board *attacking YOU* for running your out-of-scale trains.... sure, I point out (quite factually) that they* ARE* out of scale... but I don't have the audacity, the sheer arrogance to attack you and your kind, claiming... "_you should all go to another scale..._" I'm not so pigheadedly myopic as to insinuate that you are NOT WELCOME in G scale[/i]... quite the opposite - I'm on the record all over this forum saying "RUN WHAT YOU LIKE".... **** let me say that again for those here that are just a bit slow....


RUN WHAT YOU LIKE.[/b]





But, _don't you dare attack me _[/b]simply because I show a more sensitive eye towards accurately scaled, and detailed models.... How DARE YOU.... How dare you!


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

'Scuse me sir, but attack you? Never.

I came from On3 where extra detailing is the norm... that was the place my rivets could be counted. HO is rather small that's all I meant

I really don't see where you think I've attacked you unless you were into On30 which I feel about the way you seem to think of my 1:24 attempts to be great like you... Oh really









I just posted 3 pics of my latest endevour I admit the scale is off and the Pooper Mario guy is way too big, but I rather like my modeling skill, still room to grow... Ox Water Buffalo

Be Blessed.
John


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Posted By JEFF RUNGE on 01 Nov 2009 10:02 AM 
So you only look at scale in one dimension? Try this 44 tons x 2000 = 88,000 pounds / 24 = 3,667 / 24= 153/ 24= 6.4 pounds The weight is more relevant to the volume, which is 3 dimensional. Thats a bit closer... 
Sorry to be so pig headed and stubborn.
I'll never expect our models to have scale weight, close is fine I guess.

I accept your line of reasoning.

Really I did say I only used that when others were counting my rivets..bugging me. Not that I went out and challenged anybody.

John


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Park, 
That has to be the single rudest post I have ever read.


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

NO. There have been far worse!


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

I think your all a bunch of DRAMA queens on this thread. Maybe you all should get together and go out to a nude bar have a beer and watch some naked CHICS and get over yourselfs........
Move on boys, there just toy trains........


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Gentlemen, enough. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

Once again, back to the original topic.....as the owner of the heavyweight/USA streamline train in Mark's photo the only modification made was to change the couplers on the USA coaches to Aristos, and shorten the coupler on the heavyweights. The heavyweights were not lowered and look pretty good with the USA Streamliners. Maybe not perfect, but pretty good.


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

Thanks Chris, this is exactly what I was looking for. 
BTW the comment about rivet counting was meant to be a light-hearted joke. I didn't mean to stir up a big controversy. Most of the folks in my group use the 10-foot rule, but I certainly appreciate (and admire) those who work hard to bring realism to our hobby. I wish I had the skills to do that, but I don't.


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

John, no reason to apologize, I just gave a different perspective, and we debated it a bit. If we don't do that, this forum becomes pointless, and boring. However I think we were hi-jacking the thread a bit. hehe


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris,

Nice pics! Looks like you need some ballast. Or perhaps you should get some jig stones and make the concrete road bed look like the NH shoreline on the West end!


----------



## Randy Stone (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris 

That is a great looking passenger train. Love those NH RS-3s 

Randy


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

What's that about RS-3s?


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

Mark....Thanks for volunteering! I'll have a yard or so delivered the day before the Holiday Party and you can come down early to help apply it!


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris,

I think there's a squirrel out of it's tree down there in Laurel. I thought you went for concrete road bed so you wouldn't have to ballast?! Besides, you should know by now that ballasting the day before a party is not the best idea. Even I know that. What you _*should*_ do is order another snowstorm like last year so that no one will notice your track isn't ballasted. Oh wait, no one will notice anyway!! I'll bring my snowplow just in case. 

If you insist on ballasting, 1-2 tons should more than do it. I should be able to show up in the afternoon, sometime between 2 and 2:10, but go ahead and get started without me. I'll need to leave to beat the rush hour traffic, so I can only stay for about 10-12 minutes, tops. 

Mark


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

OK I'm going to jump in here again and hack off a few more by talking about ballast.  I've found that a limestone product at my local quarry called "manufactured sand" makes a really prototypical-looking ballast. It's easy to shovel and level out and works pretty good here since we don't have decomposed granite like you folks in the Northeast. BUT, it will wash in a relatively heavy rain. I also have some questions about cement which I'll hold for another topic. 
Bob


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Heres an rs3 with a passenger car, I know its not a HW or SL, but, its around the same era. Gives an idea of the heights relative to each other
*







*


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually that's an RS-1, quite a different beastie (although my favorite kind). It actually has a different prime mover and hood height than an RS-3.


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Bills,

Is that good old Danbury, CT?! That coach IS a heavyweight car. That looks like one of the Yard Locals the Danbury Railway Musuem operates from the station out to the turntable. I like the metro north equipment in the background, although a few years earlier and that would have been more likely to be an ex NH FL-9..

Bob,

For your ballast and roadbed question, I would start a separate topic. Beware that limestone dissolves in water over time. My roadbed is crusher fines from a local quarry, most likely limestone, not decomposed granite. It requires yearly ballasting (more frequent ballasting has been requested by my CFO), and washes down fairly quickly. Interestingly, the track seems to stay where I put it, so the wash down doesn't really affect train operations. Just cosmetics. You do need fines in your ballast to help it set up. If it is manufactured sand, that means they have screened the fines out and your ballast will be more likely to shift. 

Mark


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Mark,
Thats Danbury, great place to visit they let you look around with few restrictions.

Chris 
I think this is an RS3 I posted the New Haven because I see you like the Road name -me too


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I think that only the RS1 did not have battery boxes, like the picture... the RS2 and 3 had battery boxes on the walkway near the cab.. 

I'm pretty sure on that. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

From the roster on the Danbury Railway Museum website, DRMX 1513 is an RSC-2. Basically an RS-2 on six-wheel trucks.


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

I do like the NH..... Anyhow the second picture is actually an RSC-2 the 6 axle version of the RS-2 a very rare beastie indeed. 

The RS-1, and RS-2 had the battery boxes below the frame (basically the same as ALCO's switchers) The RS-3 was the first model to move the battery boxes to the walkways around the cab. That said, many RS-2s were later modified to have the battery boxes moved there. 

Don't mean to be picky, I just love my ALCOs. The ironic part is that I'm an engineer at a museum that has no operating ALCOs.


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

well, I'm out of pictures of Rs whatevers... wait one more! And this one has the battery boxes!!!


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Bob:

Here are some additional pictures of the USAT streamliners with Aristo Heavy weights. There is also a picture of a lowered Aristo streamliner with an Aristo heavy weight. I think that the heavyweights look better with the USAT cars. As was mentioned earlier it is necessary to modify the coupler heights if you are going to mix USA with the Aristo heavy weights.


I also think that the head end cars might fit in better, because many trains were made up of many different styles of headend cars. 


USAT postal with Aristo heavyweight 











Closeup of USAT postal with Aristo heavyweight 










Aristo heavyweight with lowered Aristo smoothside streamliner












Aristo heavyweight with lowered Aristo smoothside streamliner












Train from distance. 












Chuck N


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Chuck those USA SL look great with the Aristo HW. I don't think they would look right behind an LGB f7


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

The LGB maybe a bit higher but the passenger cars will look just fine behind them. I run mine all the time with the heavey weights and USAT and AC cars all the time. Off course I'm not a rivet counter and as I said before, when RR went throght the transition period they has the same problems. Later RJD


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

Well, I should get to see in a week or so. My F's just came back from Klaus at Massouth who outfitted both the A and B with their new sound/control system, converted my B unit to a powered unit like the A and put in smoke generators in both the A and B. I've got a friend finishing up with decals (Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railway) for my heavyweights, so the Dixie Flyer will run again That's one of the reasons I was asking about mixing USA and Aristo because USA has a Atlantic Coast Line coach and sleeper with would have run on the Flyer. 

Bob


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Bob:

Soon, tomorrow I hope, I'll try to take pictures of an LGB F7 (AB, ABA) and an USAT f3 (AB) pulling the pictured train. My thought is that the USAT Fs (AB) will look better, the LGB if you go with a ABA I think that it will look OK.


I think that the LGB engines are a little too high, but the trailing A minimizes the difference.

One last (almost) COMMENT is that the LGB diesel sound system is the best!!!

Chuck N


----------



## Bills (Feb 20, 2008)

Bob 

That's great about the smoke units and decoders for the F7's. Do you have any information about the smoke units? I agree with Chuck, a trailing a unit would minimize the difference. I don't mean to harp on the size difference between the units, as said before engines and cars were often at different heights. Love the LGB sound, too!


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

Nice pic of the former Conrail unit. That one was an RS-3. Its one of the "Dewitt Geeps" a program started by one of Conrail's predecessors and finished by them. As part of the program an RS-3 would have its ALCO 244 prime mover removed and replaced by an EMD 12 cylinder 567 out of a retired E unit. 

BTW about couplers and coupler heights. I changed my USA streamliners to Aristo couplers by simply removing the entire USA coupler assembly down to the bracket that is mounted to the floor of the car. I then turned that bracket around for closer coupling, and mounted an Aristo coupler directly to that bracket by a screw. I do have to check the screws occasionally as curves will move them back and forth and loosen them, but height-wise they line up perfectly with the Aristo heavyweights. I'll try to take a picture this weekend and post it.


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

Coupler heights: Wow! thanks for that info. I'm looking forward to seeing that pix. I may be looking back at a USA-Aristo consist. What about the distance between cars? Were you able to get them closer than the standard Aristo couplers? 
Bob


----------



## RobertHNeal (Oct 25, 2009)

I'm out of town right now and will try to get some pix/video of the smoke units here. (Can we post video? if not, I can use facebook). As for the ABA consist, yea. that's probably the best way to do it size issue, but, unfortunately, the NC&StL never operated an ABA consist. It was always AB or ABB, so if I want to try to be prototypical I have to stay with AB. Luckily, the Dixie Flyer in the early fifties sometimes ran a reefer back from Fl with fresh fruit so I could put a FCE/ACL reefer in front of the heavyweight RPO to minimize the size discrepancy. 

Bob


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Bob:

I think that running a reefer between the B unit and the passenger cars is an excellent idea. One of the real giveaways that that there is a mismatch is the bellows at the end of the passenger cars and the "B" unit. They just don't match up and it is very noticeable. That is much more noticeable than the general height of the cars.


Since things seem to be settled, I don't see any need for additional pictures.

Chuck N


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

Reefers were often run in passenger trains BUT they were not everyday freight reefers. Reefers assigned to express service needed special high speed trucks, passenger brakes and lines for carrying the train signal and steam to a following train. Most often a railroad had a few of its own reefers or tended to use the REA reefers in intercity express service. The large private owners of reefers such as PFE also maintained a small fleet of specially equipped (and most often specially painted) reefers for express service. 

Most large scalers do not seem to care about such details (and often run non steam generator equipped freight locos heading passenger trains) and of course each modeller decides what is important to him. The concern here seemed to revolve around prototypical accuracy in the consist and selection of motive power - that same concern for accuracy could extend to the cars in the train as well. 

Regards ... Doug


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

A steam generator is just a B unit with extra equipment inside? I did not know they had reefers on pasenger trains. I also did not know there were special reefers for passenger trains.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

In the latest issue of Classic Trains is a feature on the Wabash Cannonball. It shows mixed trains of HWs and LWs.. The one thing I noticed is the tops of the Windows were at the same height, though the rooflines varied. 

Several good pics of mixed equipment. 

Doug is correct on the Express Reefers, the most obvious spotting guides are the high speed trucks with equalized suspensions.... I ran one on my HO Empire Builder. 

John


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

JJ, 
A units also carried boilers for steam heating. Sometimes the carbodies were extended to accomodate the etra equipment. 

The reefers weren't long blocks, just one maybe two. They carried higher tariffs and promised faster delivery, because back then Passenger trains had priority over frights. 

John


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

GPs and RSs of most types were also ordered with steam gennys for passenger service.


----------

