# Aristo Heavyweights behind ?????



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

I have a number of Bachmann Spectrum Loco and would like to find something like the Aristo Heavyweights to pull behind them, but am afraid the size difference would just be too much. First does anyone know of anything like these that would work? And second, can anyone give me the approximate size measurements of these? I just like the Bachmann line but probably have to get an Aristo loco to look right.....Which brings up the point which to get. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Mickey........ I think the Aristo heavyweights may be too heavy for the Bachmann gear boxes. What locomotive(s) would you like to pull them with?


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

I would say that the heavy weights would be out of place behind your Bachman locos. You would probably want to consider getting an Aristo Pacific to run with those cars. Later RJD


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

Right now I have the 2-8-0, Two Truck Shay, Climax and the 4-4-0. Do the Aristo loco have that much more power???


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

The aristo heavyweights are 29.5 inches long, and heavy. I think they would look too narrow behind Bachmann's Spectrum line. I would buy some of the undecorated bachmann kits and cut some up to make longer cars. You can find bachmann coaches ll day long on ebay. The Bachmann J+ S coaches are not bad but they are too short IMHO. Marty Cozad did a fantastic job turning Aristo sierra coaches into more prototypical long coaches. I'd try that, because while I really like the heavyweights they are short for the prototype and would look too small behind 1:20 engines, I think. And they'd maybe be a strain to pull 


You can significantly lighten them if you use two axle trucks, rather than the three axle trucks some come with. I've installed ball bearing wheels on mine, which significantly lowers rolling resistance and makes them easier to pull on my stiff grade

Also--and of course it's your layout, you can do as you like--I can't imagine too many situations where any of those locos was pulling a heavyweight.


----------



## artgibson (Jan 2, 2008)

Take a look under "Live Steam" at the thread on the Chilifest at Zube park. Video will give you idea about the size of the Aristo heavyweights. Also the Bachman cars


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The consolidation might be the right "era" and if it does not have or develop a split gear, would do ok, size might work. 
the Shay and Climax were for steep logging railroads, so the heavyweights would definitely look funny behind them (they pull well) 
and the 4-4-0 is not only way wrong in the era, but would probably eat it's gearbox. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By mickey on 01 Mar 2010 04:27 PM 
Right now I have the 2-8-0, Two Truck Shay, Climax and the 4-4-0. Do the Aristo loco have that much more power??? 
Mickey.... With those locomotives, I would predict that the gears would be gone in no time trying to pull the heavyweights. As Greg added, they're really not a compatible situation.

If you would purchase one of Barry's Big Train conversion motor and gearbox combination for the Connie, that could be a different story. His new 2-8-0 gearbox and motor setup is very nice.


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

So the Aristo Pacific is more prototypical???? and why does it have the pulling power? Better built? Better motor? What? I really appreciate the insight.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

I don't know about better built--the Pacific has its problems.

The Pacific is very heavy. It has a big motor that drives all the wheels via individual gearboxes for all axles, and they are all linked by a hex shaft. It's a very good puller, and so is the Mikado. They are prone to slip the wheels on the axles and get out of quarter, and there are some other issues (as with Bachmann) but when they are working well they pull very strongly.


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Mickey, 
the main problem is that Aristo heavyweights with Bachmann engines would be a really bizzare miss-match of scale, prototype gauge and era.. 
all three dont match.. 
(even before you get to any weight or pulling issues with the models themselves) 

of course there are no rules to model railroading, so if you want to run them, you can!  
but it would look just all wrong.. 

your Bachmann engines are generally 1870's to 1910's Narrow Gauge, (3 foot gauge) in 1/20.3 scale. 
The Aristo heavyweights are generally 1930's to 1950's standard Gauge, in 1/29 scale.. 

The prototypes of your Bachmann engines would have *never* pulled anything close to the prototypes of the Aristo Heavyweights..not even close. 
not only because of the different eras, but also because the prototypes had a completely incompatible gauge! 
which makes the resulting models, in two different scales, quite visually incompatable, even though they run on the same model track..
(this is one of the great conundrums of large scale! different scales, different prototype gauges, but all on the same model track gauge.) 


IMO you would be much better off with the Bachmann passenger cars, like this: 

http://cwactionhobbies.com/images/BAC89291-450.jpg 

Correct era, much better matching "look", (almost) correct scale, same prototype gauge (3-foot) and just a much better match overall between the cars and the locos. 

The Prototype Heavyweights would have been pulled by "late" steam locomotives, Standard Gauge, 1920's to 1950's era. 
or early 1940's and 1950's diesels.. 
The Aristo Pacific or the USA Trains Hudson are the best matches in Large Scale steam.. 
or the USA Trains Alco PA or Aristo EMD E8 for appropriate passenger diesels.. 

Scot


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

I really appreciate the input. As y'all can tell, I'm a newbie to this. I got the Bachmanns because I really like the look of them, the detail, etc. This is also why I got into G trains back when my son was small. We just loved the size. He had problems working with the smaller ones so we took them back and got something he could manipulate much easier. Years have passed and he graduates Air Force Basic this week. Time has flown by. I have put up a track around the tree every year for the holidays and make it stretch until February to the dismay of the boss. Now I am planning an actual outside AND inside permanent area and trying to learn my ducks before I try to get them in a row. I just love the nostalgia feeling of those heavyweights when I see the pictures. But I don't want to tear up engines doing the wrong thing due to ignorance. Personally, I am not concerned about whether or not they were prototypical or not, just looks right to me size wise and the not tearing up issue. So please keep giving me insights as they are very welcomed.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

You asked a great question

Aristo's heavyweights are made in 1:29 scale. Bachmann spectrum stuff is in 1:20 scale, and represents, as explained, narrow gage equipment, on rail lines that typically did not have large scale passenger service. 


Scot made a really fantastic graphic that showed this--maybe he will repost it

To put it in perspective, a 6 foot tall man, in 1:29, would be roughly 2.75 inches tall. That same 6 foot man, in 1:20, would be roughly 3.5 inches tall. You can see this really clearly if you look at the figures and the doors. a 1:20 figure, suitable for Bachmann Spectrum, would not be able to fit in the door of an aristo heavyweight. An aristo figure barely comes up to the middle of the door on a Bachmann coach. The heavyweight coaches will be lower than the roof of the cab, and you'll probably notice that head of the guy in the cab on the Bachmann loco would practically fill the entire window of an aristo coach. 


Not saying don't do it--if it looks good to you, go for it. I would highly recommend getting heavyweights with two axle trucks, rather than three axle trucks--much less drag on curves--and lubricate them well. I'm pretty shore cars badged for the Southern and the PRR come with 2-axle trucks 


As mentioned, locos that are prototypically appropriate for Heavyweights include Aristo's Pacific, the MTH and USAT Hudson and the USA FA and Aristo EMD 8. Probably an RS-3 would be ok, or aristo's forthcoming consolidation, definitely. The old lionel Atlantic looks great pulling heavyweights but they need a lot of tlc to be made reliable. 


On the other hand, you can run whatever you want!


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

Just looked at the USA Hudson. WOW is that high. Having never seen one before, why are they sooooooo expensive? The wife would tar and feather me and hang me out on the track as a warning to others.......Input on MTH vs Aristo.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

USAT Hudson is all die cast metal, not plastic, and the detailing is really fantastic.

Aristo vs MTH

Aristo is in 1:29, MTH is in 1:32. 1:32 is the correct scale for standard gage on our track. 1:29 is too big, deliberately "blown up " a bit for what they call the "wow factor."

There's a significant differnece betwn 1:29 and 1:32. You can see it by going to this site:


http://www.madcattoys.com/page/MCT/scaleviewer 

And clicking on "open the madcat toys scale viewer"




MTH is more expensive to start. It's much better detailed. It comes with sound built in. It has the best smoke generator on the market. It's smaller and runs on narrow curves. To get the most from the MTH loco, you need to buy their proprietary control system, which has many really excellent features. MTH has a much more limited range of rolling stock


Aristo's Pacific is much less expensive. It's more crudely detailed but pulls strongly. I have an Aristo Pacific and it looks great with heavyweights, but it looks weird on the 8 foot curves I have in some places. It looks too big. The MTH Hudsn would look better, because it's smaller.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Picture's worth a thousand words. Here is a Bachman Annie--not quite in 1:20, more like in 1:22, so it's smaller than it would be in 1:20--with an aristo heavyweight










Notice the rooflines--the cab of the Annie is higher than the heavyweight, so is the Bachmann coach. Also look at the windows, and imagine the relative sizes of the people who would fit those two coaches. The fireman on the tender is taller than the door of the heavyweight coach


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)




----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Another option along prototypical lines; Many heavyweights were bumped to commuter service pulled by all sorts of early road switcher deisels with steam generators. 
Others were sold to shortlines and might be pulled by a 2-8-0 or 4-6-0, just a couple of cars and slow.... the local mixed, with a half filled boxcar or flatcar with machinery, etc... added to the consist. 

Kinda depends if you want or care to portray realism. I go for a believable freelance, I follow prototypical operation and practices... but my way! lol For instance I just bashed a water tank tender and it sports a steel underframe while the loco it supports (running through Apache country, water stops can be deadly) is of 1860 vintage, before steel was made! 

My Hartland 4-4-0 pulls 2 Sierra Cars and a reefer and looks good doing it, soon I'll finish the water car and it will be added. That's a big passenger train to me! lol. 

Most important; Have fun and we want pics! 

John


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)




----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

We just loved the size 
Mickey, 

As you already have the locos, have you thought of going the other way? Take a look at the 1:20.3 (Fn3 scale) Accucraft J&S coaches, which are about the same length as the Aristo heavyweights, cost about the same, but \will look much better with your locos. 

Somewhere around this site there's a comparison photo of the various coaches.


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

The pics have helped a lot. Thanks. I guess the real answer is that I need to stay with the same scale on a train (or close to), but then y'all new that to start with, just had to educate me. The USA Trains Hudson is probably really nice but out of the budget by a long shot. I guess I need to see the MTH and Aristo in person to decide. Local dealer does not have much and nothing in the higher price of the heavyweights so I guess I will be waiting for the next train show or a trip to Dallas. I guess they did not make a different track for standard to keep the two loco's side by side the same scale because that would mean another track for everyone to lay and the standard loco's would be huge.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

This thread shows a lot of good comparisons between the Accucraft J&S coaches and the Bachmann J&S coaches and an aristo heavyweight

http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...fault.aspx


You can mix scales some--it depends on what you are modeling. In the 40s, for example, mainline freight included a really wide variety of sizes and styles of boxcar. The ladders and handraiils will be noticeably out of scale, but if it's just rolling past... 


Also branch lines--I kind of model a branch line, a smaller local line, and use that as an excuse to run a more motley collection of stuff. Passenger lines seem harder to mix scale with. You can get away with mixing 1:32 nd 1:29 and 1:24--1:20 to me starts to look way worng, but who cares? 


1:20 has a lot of advantages. Big stuff, and because it's based on narrow gage, it looks better on narrow curves and twisty layouts in small spaces.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Here are some pictures that show the difference between an Aristocraft heavyweight coach and an AMC J&S coach. As you can see the Aristocraft is longer, narrower and lower.




























When I first got the Bachmann 2-8-0, I tried running other scales behind it. To my eye, nothing except 1:20.3 cars looked good behind the Connie. 


Chuck N


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

One of my Diecast NYC Hudsons with 11 Heavyweights.............SWEET.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

My LGB Mikado with 11 Heavyweights......


----------



## pimanjc (Jan 2, 2008)

If you want more detail than the Bachmann coaches, you could consider [if you can find them] Aristocraft Sierra coaches/cars. They are 1/24th scale.

JimC.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes the Aristo Sierra's are better detailed. You actually have a lot of choices in 1:24, which is maybe close enough--Bachmann, Aristo's Sierras: USA Trains makes "Overton" coaches and Hartland Locomotive works makes 1:24 wooden coachs in two lengths


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

So here is the dumb question of the day. I thought Aristo did things in 1:29 so why are these Aristocraft Sierra coaches in 1:24? What were they intended for?

I just checked the Aristo catalog and it shows the Sierra but as 1:29. What am I missing here? 


Just talked with USA and they said theirs are 1:29.


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Hey Mickey,

There is a long long history to answer your question of 'why did aristo make sierra cars'. The shorter answer goes back to the mid-1980s when LGB was the only real game in town. Aristo was their importer until they decided to enter the game themselves. At the time, the LGB 3080 series coaches, loosely based on the Jackson and Sharpe coaches used on the D&RGW, were the top of the line. If you notice, the Aristo Sierra coach is about the same size as that LGB series coach. Major differences included closed vestibule doors, metal wheels, interior lighting, and smoking stoves. Also, tremendous drag on the originials. It could be argued that the aristo sierra coach is based on the Sierra Railroad's short standard gauge passenger cars. I don't really buy it, but the bottom line is that those coaches would look good behind narrow gauge and small standard gauge locomotives.

The same argument could be applied to USA Overton cars. Personally, I think they look too short and too tall at the same time, giving them an overly top heavy look and weird proportions. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of what prototype USA used. I have some old Overton passenger cars done by Roundhouse in HO scale, and those look good. Perhaps the USA person was confused and thought you were asking about their streamlined passenger cars. Those are absolutely beautiful and 1/29.

Given the photos above, I think you are better off going with the AMC passenger cars than the aristo heavyweights. 

Having fun yet?

Mark


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, it's confusing. Aristo is known mostly for its stuff in 1:29. but they make and sell a bunch of stuff that's not in 1:29. Some of it, like the "classic" rolling stock, is in 1:24. They bought the production of other companies that went out of business, and rather than retool, produce the same stuff. 

Same with USAT--they may say those overton cars are 1:29, but I'm skeptical. USAT makes first rate stuff in 1:29--and they also sell a bunch of rolling stock that's NOT in 1:29. For example, their "ultimate series" boxcars are in 1:29. But the wooden and outside braced boxcars are in something else--something closer to 1:24.


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By mickey on 03 Mar 2010 10:26 AM 
So here is the dumb question of the day. I thought Aristo did things in 1:29 so why are these Aristocraft Sierra coaches in 1:24? What were they intended for? 
These coaches are a relic of the old Delton line - 1/24th scale models of Narrow Gauge prototypes acquired by Aristocraft before the ybegan the 1/29th Standard gauge line of products. The older C-16 is also a relic of this 'before the 1/29th scale time'.

The Bachmann J&S cars still look pretty good, even though they are quite a bot too short to be called scale models - a train of six of them behind a suitable Bachmann ten-wheeler is very impressive - including baggage and observation cars withan illuminated drumhead.

tac
www.ovgrs.org


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Terry,

I think the aristo coaches in question here are actually an original REA/ aristo product. The Delton long coaches went to Hartland when aristo bought the C-16 molds and the freight car molds. The Delton long coaches seem to be a bit longer. 

From the Hartland website:








From the Aristo uncataloged database:









Seems like the Hartland (Delton) coach has 5 sets of windows, vs the Aristo (REA) coach has only 4 sets.


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

Very confusing.........So how do you get the 1:24 Aristo units? Is there a particular stock number or what? They look better to me in the picture than the Hartland. IMHO


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Mickey,

There is no 1:24 Aristo passenger car. The Sierra cars are supposedly 1:29, but could possibly pass for 1:24. Their heavyweight cars are 1:29. Aristo does have a line of "Delton Classics" that are 1:24, but the sierra coaches are not part of that. 

Stock numbers for the aristo Sierra passenger cars are 3100X, where X is the number designating the roadname of your choosing. If you have not already done so, check out the aristo website: http://www.aristocraft.com/ and look at the on line catalog for pictures of the current production Sierra cars.

These are sold in sets of 3 now. The coaches can be bought individually. Nicholas Smith and some other large scale dealers usually have these at the ECLSTS later this month in York, PA. Typically, they have new old stock and sell it accordingly. 

Mark


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Heres some photos.


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

Ok so basically where I am at is that I will stay with the Bachmann for the Bachmann and if I decide I really like the Heavyweights after I see them in person, then I will get an Aristo loco to go with Aristo. I guess it makes business sense that the manufacturers want to keep you in their stuff from front engine to rear caboose, so if you want to mix eras, then you have different sets for each. This has been a great learning experience to have BEFORE spending any money and learning this out after the fact. Thanks to all.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

OOOPPPPPPSSSSSSSS, Wrong thread..... My bad


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Are the sierra's really 1:29? They've never looked it to me, but I don't have any. 

Good luck mickey


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Mickey:

I understand your angst. There is a lot to absorb when starting out in this hobby. You have run into one of the major difficulties for newbies--SCALE. What goes well together and what doesn't. 


If you go with the heavyweights, which are great cars, that is a good choice. I have 8 and they are great looking cars. Mine are some of the earliest made. In order to get them to run around on my layout I had to remove the center axle of each 3 axle truck. I had to do this to get them to go around my layout with out burning up my engines. My ruling diameter is 10'. I think, but I don't know for sure is that the newer releases with 3 axle trucks work much better on 10' curves than the older ones. If you can get the cars with 2 axle trucks that would be better.


Just because you go with Aristo cars does not lock you into an Aristo engine. If you can find one an LGB Mogul or Mikado would be suitable engines. The Mogul would most likely pull fewer cars. I have pulled the heavyweights with a mogul and they don't look to bad together, not like a 1:20.3 Bachmann and the heavyweights. Unfortunately, my heavyweights are in Virginia and I'm in Arizona for another month or so, so no pictures. If you want to go diesel USAT has very nice F3 A&B units that go very well with the heavyweights. If steam is your liking Aristo has a Mikado and a Pacific currently available. They say that a Connie is coming!! All of these options are less expensive than the USAt Hudson. And they are all good looking locomotives.


If you go with another manufacturer for the engine, you will have to make modifications to the coupler on the engine or the cars. In my opinion Aristo couplers do not mate well with other brands of knuckle couplers. I have body mounted Kadee 830s on all of my heavyweights.


Chuck N 


PS When I started in this hobby in 1979 life was simple. It was all LGB. They were the only game in town. I was pulling American narrow gauge cars with European narrow gauge engines. ALL WITH HOOK AND LOOP COUPLERS. It is much better today.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Mickey:

In another thread you talk about building your RR with 8' diameter curves. My recommendation, before you invest in Aristo heavyweights, is to see how they look on 8' diameter curves. Find someone in your area who has some heavyweights and put them on an 8' diameter curve. There will be a lot of overhang on the ends and a lot of outside rail will show beyond the side of the car when you look down on the top while the car is in the curve. One of the reasons that I am considering rebuilding my layout to 20' diameter curves (from 10" diameter) is how the heavyweights and the USAT streamliners look on the curves. 


With 8' diameter curves I think that the Sierra or Bachmann coaches would look much better. 

Just remember that it is your railroad and if you think it looks OK, that is all that matters.

Chuck


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

After thought from that other thread, I decided to move up to 10' curves. How do think they would be on that? First, I want to see them in person and definately will go with the 2 truck instead of the three.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

My layout has some 8 foot curves on it. If I could change it I would. The heavyweights run just fine on 8 foot curves, but they do look pretty silly. They overhand by a lot. Ten will look much better and there will be less wear on your equipment. The Bachmann coaches or other shorter 1:24 coaches tend to look better on 8 foot curves. It might be worth thinking about where the layout will be viewed. On mine the bad 8 foot curves are partially hidden, which makes the overhang less noticeable. 


I've actually been downsizing--I had an aristo Mikado, the same size as the pacific, and I cut it down and made a 2-8-0 out of it. It just fits better. And I tend to run the Pacific less often. But I love the look of the heavyweights and we especially like to run them at dusk or at night.


Aristo is coming out with a 2-8-0 later this year. It's really well detailed--much better than the Pacific--and it's based on the drive unit in the Mikado, which is an excellent puller.. Although big passenger locos generally had big wheels--like the Pacific or the Hudson--and freight engines typically had smaller wheels, 2-8-0s were extremely common and ended up doing all sorts of work.


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

I know this sounds dumb, but if you want to run both the Bachmann 1:20 and some of the Pacific or Hudson for the Heavyweights which are 1:29 but you have houses, people, etc., things become a problem. I know they did not do this, but can anyone enlighten me as to why did they not forget the track part of the equation and just make all the engines and cars the same scale. I am not suggesting adding a new track size because that would put us back to not being able to mix and match. But something has to be off so why not make it one thing instead of a whole bunch. That way all of our buildings, people, cars, etc., would look right in the right proportion when you ran different stock. Would the standard gauge items dwarf the track and not run well since they would be bigger than the existing narrow gauge? For example, in the real world if you put a narrow gauge Shay next to a Pacific, about how much bigger would the Pacific be? 1/3 bigger? It just seems bass ackwards all in the name of getting the track proportions right.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

"Large Scale" or "g scale" is a total mess. 1:32 is correct for standard gauge, but just try to find people or buildings in 1:32. Hardly anything. Aristo makes figures in 1:29, but it also makes a line of pre-made houses which are in....1:24. Aristo's figures are too small for its buildings. You can find 1:24 people and structures and accessories, because it's a common dollhouse scale. But then your 1:24 figures are gazing directly into the cab of a Pacific from platform level. And 1:20 figures look like giants.


1:20 has a lot of products available for modeling, and a good variety of pre-made buildings and figures. In practice people a lot of cheat towards 1:24, I think. or they make everything from scratch.


And it creates this odd situation, where a 1:29 or 1:32 Hudson, a huge loco in real life, is barely bigger than a narrow gauge loco that would practically fit in the tender of the Hudson


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

I have never seen one in real life but are you serious that the tender is as big as a whole 4-6-0 or so ? That's impressive and would love to see one on 1:20 scale. But I guess running this monster on gauge 1 track might be like trying to run a k-27 on HO track in terms of stability, etc., and would look silly compared to the track.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Well that's a guess but it's not way wrong. A narrow 4-4-0 "american" type might have a wheelbase length of 18-20 feet. The C&O hudsons had a wheelbase length of just over 41 feet. Accoring to Wikipedia, a K-27 had a wheelbase length of 24.5 feet. So the Hudson is WAY bigger than even the biggest narrow gauge engine.

Here's a really amazing shot of an F scale 4-8-4 next to a K-27. The F scale loco is standard gauge, built to 1:20. It won't run on G scale track, it needs its own wider track. The K-27 would fit in the tender, or close to it.


http://cumberlandmodelengineering.com/images/SG%20vs.%20NG%206.jpg[/b] 

(Image exceeds 800 pixels in width changed to link, SteveC)[/i]


----------



## mickey (Jan 28, 2009)

If that is even close to a real comparison, that is impressive. That is one big a$$ engine. I can see where if you built a 1:20 scale of that and tried to run it on gauge 1 track, it would look really silly and have stability running issues, but it would be nice to have one that big, if you could afford it.


----------



## on30gn15 (May 23, 2009)

Posted By markoles on 03 Mar 2010 10:52 AM 
Hey Mickey,
I don't think I've ever seen or heard of what prototype USA used. 
Probably these:
http://www.wx4.org/to/foam/shortlines/sierra/id1930.jpg 


http://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/491/images/shorty_5_wooden_passenger_car.jpg


----------

