# USA Trains Website - Beer Can Tanks - New Photos



## GaryY (Jan 2, 2008)

Just browsing USAT's website and noticed they have at last replaced the artwork pictures with posted photos of their latest offerings....good news... they look really sharp.

http://www.usatrains.com/usatrainsbeercantank.html


Regards

Gary


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Is it really cost effective to ship in that small of car? 
I know ore cars are small but its very heavy.


----------



## Pterosaur (May 6, 2008)

Rats, thought I was done buying rolling stock for a whlie, apparently I was wrong. Really like the Kodak one!


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Marty, tank cars are configured to carry 125 tons, regardless of length. The reason they vary from 27' to 65' is because of the extreme differences in weight. For instance, molton sulfur would weigh 125 tons in a 40' tank car, but gasoline would weight 125 tons in a 48 foot tank car. LPG weighs 125 tons in a 65 foot tank car. 

Also, tank cars diameters vary widely, depending on linings or unlined, insulated, heater pipes in the insulation and the tank diameter itself. 

Basically, the shorties USA models has made are for chemical transport. Heavy chemicals, such as acids. While it may sound kinda funny, they used to have tank cars smaller than these with a 125 ton capacity just for tetraethyl. The stuff they used to make leaded gasoline. 

I found a partial list of cargoes: 

phosphoric acid (used in food industry, cleaning solutions, etc.) 
hydrofluoric acid (glass etching, chemical refining) 
hydrochloric acid (metal cleaning, plating) 
sulfuric acid (many uses) 
caustic soda (many uses in industrial processes) 
salt brine (chemical refining) 
heavy lube oils 
Titainium Dioxide (used in paint and printing ink formulations) 
resins and catalysts (plastics industry, adhesives and coatings) 
clay slurry (paper industry) 
sulfur slurry (used in several industrial processes including fertilizers) 
fertilizer concentrate 
pesticide concentrate 

Though generally, I've seen clay slurry hauled in the 40' cars, but I guess it would depend on the density of the concentrate. 

So, why not just use a 48' tank car half empty? Safety. A half full tank is dangerous, because of the sloshing of the liquid. In addition, there's a phenomenon knowns as "climb" where on curves, the liquid all shifts to one side, and causes the tanker to overturn. Ever see a tanker truck on it's side? That's usually the cause. 

I hope that helps! Thanks, 

Robert


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Beer can cars are great,

I will have some.

Just one more modern car to add to the fleet.

We need Modern cars Fellas...........


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By rdamurphy on 09 Feb 2011 05:51 PM 
Marty, tank cars are configured to carry 125 tons, regardless of length. The reason they vary from 27' to 65' is because of the extreme differences in weight. For instance, molton sulfur would weigh 125 tons in a 40' tank car, but gasoline would weight 125 tons in a 48 foot tank car. LPG weighs 125 tons in a 65 foot tank car. 

Also, tank cars diameters vary widely, depending on linings or unlined, insulated, heater pipes in the insulation and the tank diameter itself. 

Basically, the shorties USA models has made are for chemical transport. Heavy chemicals, such as acids. While it may sound kinda funny, they used to have tank cars smaller than these with a 125 ton capacity just for tetraethyl. The stuff they used to make leaded gasoline. 

I found a partial list of cargoes: 

phosphoric acid (used in food industry, cleaning solutions, etc.) 
hydrofluoric acid (glass etching, chemical refining) 
hydrochloric acid (metal cleaning, plating) 
sulfuric acid (many uses) 
caustic soda (many uses in industrial processes) 
salt brine (chemical refining) 
heavy lube oils 
Titainium Dioxide (used in paint and printing ink formulations) 
resins and catalysts (plastics industry, adhesives and coatings) 
clay slurry (paper industry) 
sulfur slurry (used in several industrial processes including fertilizers) 
fertilizer concentrate 
pesticide concentrate 

Though generally, I've seen clay slurry hauled in the 40' cars, but I guess it would depend on the density of the concentrate. 

So, why not just use a 48' tank car half empty? Safety. A half full tank is dangerous, because of the sloshing of the liquid. In addition, there's a phenomenon knowns as "climb" where on curves, the liquid all shifts to one side, and causes the tanker to overturn. Ever see a tanker truck on it's side? That's usually the cause. 

I hope that helps! Thanks, 

Robert 

Don't forget corn syrup! 

Sloshing tankcars really stink. I can't explain how many times I been "kissed" with a nice thunk of sloshing liquids while switching in the yard. Loaded tank cars combined with a couple of long drawbars from centerbeam cars or loaded rebar cars make for a wonderful night of switching!







You get slammed back and forth all night long. When a 210 ton locomotive is at a dead stop with brakes applied gets shoved 10-20' forward from tank cars moving backward and then suddenly stopping its not a lot of fun as an engineer or anyone else in the cab unprepared.


----------



## Tom Parkins (Jan 2, 2008)

*MSRP = $149.95 each!* You know I can buy a lot of real beer cans for the price of one of those. I hope that doesn't become the new standard freight car price.


----------



## Pterosaur (May 6, 2008)

$149.95 each? What, did Marklin by USA???


----------



## GaryY (Jan 2, 2008)

I often wonder where or how they come up with the MSRP catalog pricing. The list price is much higher than the actual selling price and it scares the bejeebers out of you. I've seen these cars listed for under $100 in some online stores. Even USAT's own Charles Ro has them listed for under a $100 bucks in GR magazine...go figure.


Gary


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The list price on ALL LS is high, ever look at the list price on a K-27? 

Tom, becalm youself... I think the K msrp is $1200... 

No one buys anything for MSRP unless you go into a brick and mortar. 

Greg


----------



## livesteam53 (Jan 4, 2008)

They will sell at $90.00 a car


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

All are pretty nice paint schemes. 

But eek that BNSF is ugly, UP isn't much better.


The BNSF number 19340 falls in the BNSF MOW truck numbering series. All the BNSF tanks cars I've seen are a nice traditional black color with white lettering.


----------



## Doug C (Jan 14, 2008)

One u.s. reseller posts $80, another $90, a third one $85 . . . . next yr if they (USAT) don't run out of stock, sure to be a few price points lower !! 


IMHO, msrp is primarily there to discourage the consumer from dealing direct with the manufacturer vs their dealer/resellers whom we've seen offer close to wholesale up to the few who have no sense {they then accuse the consumer ... why they have "shelf queens and no buyers of certain product -- duh } !! 

But no one seems to have a protoype pic' yet, . . . . on any of the forums that popped up in a couple google searches ! 

Albeit, this IS a great pc. of (tanker) rolling stock for the shortlines out there that have limited space, tight radii curves but want a modern lookin' consist ! 

doug c


----------



## Tom Parkins (Jan 2, 2008)

The more I think about it, USAT missed the mark on roadnames. Skip the BNSF, UP. Gives the Bud, Bud Light, Coors Lite, Miller, Michelob........Now we're talking serious beer can cars.


----------



## Tom Parkins (Jan 2, 2008)

After some research, I'm not sure that these are truly "modern" cars. These came out in the 60s but apparently few remain in service today. Certainly more modern than the many framed tank cars on the market. 


Here is a picture taken in 1969.

http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=74006


Another in 1965

http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=73967

Again 1967

http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=73212

http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=80154 


So they do (did) exist. 

Tom


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

Don't want to divert too much. But if I was on the USA Trains design team, this is what I would have suggested:











Instead of this:

USA Trains BNSF "Beer Can" 




And this:











Instead of this:

USA Trains UP "Beer Can"


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks Robert 
cost wise for me is a no. I have too many log ones.


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

I think the Walthers "Tongue in Cheek" beercan tank car model was from the early 1970's. Remember? You had to use a real beer can for the tank. 

Anyway, that probably does put the prototypes in the 1960s. 

Yours, 
David Meashey 

P.S. I will probably still get the Hooker. It doesn't fit with anything else I run, but at least then I can take my Hooker with me to train shows. ;>)


----------



## Doug C (Jan 14, 2008)

Based on what popped up in a couple other forums these tankers have been manufactured in at least a couple other 'scales' ! But thanks to Tom P. this is the first thread that actually has linked to photos of the prototype ! 

"..not sure that these are truly "modern" cars.."
Ahhhh, but what is now considered modern though ? 

ei. when did (prototype) well cars get rolled out, 53ft evans, spline cars, autoracks, 60ft box cars, 42ft "modern" tankers, etc. . . that we've seen a couple of our G-gauge manufacturers (are) produce, or others have built ! 


I'm glad to finally SEE the prototype ! I think these will stock the reseller shelves as fast as the AC-PCC trolley did ! 


I may have to hold off purchasing anymore domed tankers for funding these ones (when the price point drops to comparable








) . . . . . . . although I have come across pics of various single-domed 40' tankers still on the tracks (even in 2000+) ! 



doug c


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

That's a very good point, Doug, some cars that we would consider "modern" are at the end of their 40 year lives. Including a great deal of intermodal equipment! So, where do we draw the line? Is an SD-45 "modern?" I wouldn't say so. What about a C44-9W? They're pretty long in the tooth. An SD90MAC? All gone to the scrapper off the Union Pacific. 

We have Steam Era, Transition Era, Early Diesel Era, and Modern Era. Perhaps we need to add Contemporary, I'm thinking, that would include only rolling stock that exists in the 21st Century? 

Robert


----------

