# USA autoracks



## Terry Baumann (Nov 26, 2008)

Im currious, I see the USA autoracks are out and for sale on the street , anyone have one
yet and willing to share info and pics ?

Terry


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)




----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)




----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Does it look easy too remove the whole autorack part? I'm thinking some nice 90' flats can be bashed from these cars....


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Craig, that'll make a pricey flat car for ya! 

D


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

Looks nice. Rather large coupler box. Probably for swing on tight radius curves

Yep the would be a pricey flat. Probably sits too low for a general service flat as well. Although if the flat car part is separate then USA could easily make some modern long flats from it.


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By San Juan on 02 Dec 2012 08:13 PM 
Looks nice. Rather large coupler box. Probably for swing on tight radius curves

Yep the would be a pricey flat. Probably sits too low for a general service flat as well. Although if the flat car part is separate then USA could easily make some modern long flats from it.

I had 'heard' at one point when these were introduced that USAT was going to offer the 90' flats in 3 styles; modern auto rack, older style open rack, and plain 90' flat.







Now if that ever comes true who knows.







I don't think the flat should ride that low compared to a normal 90' flat as they are the same car bodies. The 90' flats are owned by TTX, and then the rack sections are leased by the railroad that has the logo on the side. I've seen a few former 90' racks converted back to regular service. They tend to just cut off the rack part, and leave all the other stuff the same. They look to have the same floor height as regular service 90' flats..
The USAT model represents a bi-level rack, and not a tri-level. Some of the new tri-level racks have a lowered floor to provide more clearance. 

Oh the joys of working Crew 9 & 10 switching and spotting autoracks in Kent, Wa...









Craig


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Wow they look great from here. Looks like a lot of detail. The see through panels are a nice touch.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Joe, any notions for couplers yet!! I know - not in your hands yet, but...? 

I'm first looking at car height, than placing the coupler in the upper curved recess just above the current couplers position...cut out the recess area... 

May lower the car - depending on bolster design, and overall car height after lowering... 
Should / may help in the coupler height tho! 

interested in car weight also.... then I want to complete My 90 ft. flat car... !!! barrow ideas off the auto rack.. 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

It will be interesting to see what people come up with for couplers like Kadee. With the trucks set in quite a ways from the end of the car like they are it will increase the over hang on curves. I think any coupler replacement will still need to have a lot of pivot.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

The largest problem will be for those that run smaller curves and lots of short cars next to the long autoracks. I think that strings of autoracks together will not matter so much, as they will be sitting on the rails with matching overhang as you point out Paul. 

My consideration will be one time, and may not work well at all for others, but be a great fit on My layout. 

I just put a 100ton hopper with a narrowed draft gear box ( hence limited swing ) - KD gear - on a LGB curve section #1600, R1175. Even with the much limited swing - there is more than enough to move down the radius scale to even smaller curves than a 1600 series curve, with any other car coupled to it! 

So - I waits for the truck to come with My new car.. then to play with it and see what it can do! 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

I also just was able to check on a few sections of 600mm LGB curved track, or less than 48'' diameter, using the same 100ton hopper with a narrowed draft gear box, that while the car itself refuses to get close to this curve ( allergic reaction I think! ), ....if it could - there is still more than enough coupler pivot to run a train without trouble from the coupler itself. 

This really convinces me to go ahead with a re-work upgrade to all My draft gear using KD coupler sets, for all My rolling stock as a whole!!! 

Maybe those auto racks will not be such a big deal........... 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

As a side note here, remember all the talk of grinding the corners off the OEM gear boxes to get trucks to turn - so they won't grind or drag on the wheels., .... these narrower gear boxes give even more clearance than knocking off the corners does!! The 100 ton hopper - Very nearly - will sit on the 600mm curve - but only on the end with the narrow draft gear. 

So a stock hopper with narrow gear boxes would probably be comfortable on say like a 30'' rad./5 ft. circle of track... 

Wayyyyyyyyyy to small for me. 

D


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 06 Dec 2012 09:12 AM 
The largest problem will be for those that run smaller curves and lots of short cars next to the long autoracks. I think that strings of autoracks together will not matter so much, as they will be sitting on the rails with matching overhang as you point out Paul. 

Dirk - DMS Ry. 

Even the big guys have rules and restrictions on what can go next to long cars like autoracks. The last time I looked at the train makeup charts (which was a few years ago) you weren't allowed to have a long car (80' or longer) coupled next to a 40' or smaller car. So no loaded autoracks followed by empty cement hoppers.









Craig


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Long cars coupled to long cars do indeed "match" overhangs on a curve... but put them on an "S" curve and it's way worse than a short car coupled to a long car. 

Bottom line, need wide curves for long cars... (I know that won't stop people ha ha!) 

For Kadees, you might use the flexible mount for the large draft gear... it's the ones used on Aristo HW passenger cars. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Has anyone 'noticed' the track curve recommended for this car - given by USA??? 

IT is not your grandfather's car here!!! beware!! 

D


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

minimum track diameter 10 feeeet...........according to USA's latest release info...11-27-12


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Now all those with reverse S curves set for HW passenger cars will find that an over 3 foooot long car exceeds this guide line.


----------



## Bob Pero (Jan 13, 2008)

Too new for my era but very nicely done.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

gott'a keep both threads in balance here!! 

A detail close-up of the car side and UP logo, look at all them holes... 

 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

first off, THANK YOU SHAD FOR THIS WONDERFUL SITE.

Next ,IT came ,I was so happy,,,was is the key word. two years later.












can't use it out of the box , I knew that...










I can just change plates,, No that won't work,,, I knew that ,what was I thinking for $200????











I had instock 3 pairs of old used gunderson trucks with 33" wheels, I can live with that.. NO
Now whats wrong??










OH??? The left space needs shaved off for any wheel to clear.
I can do that, plus reglue two of the door brackets on one end.
Man I can run this car after spending an hour working on it, OH JOY to the world.

Got to love this hobby.


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Marty, I feel your pain. It's crazy what we have to do to run. We are all conditioned to it? Rails need clamps, Cars need KDs, engines need control.....................what did I think? a few dollars would do?????????? 
Shhhhhhhhhhhh 
It's really a secret club.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I plan to do like I did with my 89 ft pigs, use kadee 789 box with a longer metal USAT tank car coupler modified. 
heres what I ended up doing . drilled hole and mounted a metal tank car safety coupler.










these have worded great for years on my pigs.
double nuted it.

Don't take me wrong, these are outstanding cars, and now I can run them and take photos after work tomorrow.
Then weather them some.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I ended up hot glueing some of the parts on the ladder braces. I was missing a part so I know it was broken before packing.

But as of tonight this old girl is retired, disassembled and trucks and couplers saved for the next ,"new" auto carriers.










The BN one on there bridge served us well for a number of years and I was very happy with the glue and how well she held up over time being stored in the outdoor shed.

My how small the trees were at that time..


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Marty, that's a great shot. A long time ago you gave me some pics of scratch built cars. The flat car and the auto carier. I never found out who makes the trailers on the flat cars. Are they scratch builds??


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Engineer Joe, I think they ? let anyone in this club,....?!! 

Marty - can you enlighten US with more info on the 'old girl' retired rack car above...! 

Did you build it? 
Some one else... 
How about one of Jeff's cars - from back east? 

Thanks...........


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Aristo road railers cut down to 45' trailors, , flat cars scratchbuilt. all was share on MLS in rolling stock forums. 
I will have to find info and send by e-mails 

Any one else have the new cars? thats what I was hoping to find on Terry's thread. 
I don't mean to hyjack it.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

[No message]


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Looks like C&NW one??? Will RJ be getting more??


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Marty only the shadow knows. Check later. Later RJD


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

That's a really nice car. I may have to add some to the BRR.
Whats the street price for them?

One thing I really don't understand about most all of my USA trains equipment is why they insist on having their couplers so low?
It makes it a real pain to add kadee's to them, which I use on all of my rolling stock and engines.
I love their Aluminum stream liners cars of which I about 24 of, and their intermodal 5 units cars are another favorite.
I tend to keep the USA stuff together because of the coupler issue, and just mod the lead car to match the kadee height gauge.
I hope someday they come around and set the coupler platform to the correct height.

Ron


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Don't know how they got into the habit of low couplers, but it's been a pain. 

But I can't understand why you have problems with mounting couplers, the good quality ones from them (not the cheapies) all have a kadee coupler pad at the EXACT right height... only lately has Aristo and others followed suit. 

It's one of the major reasons that all my box cars, and most other cars are USAT.

There's only a few exceptions in the rolling stock. 

The streamliners have nice couplers already and need a shim to convert so I only convert the lead car... and it's not a big deal, Kadee gives you a diagram and precise dimensions. 

Maybe you are only talking about the streamliners when you say this... do you have any USAT box cars, tank cars, etc? 

Greg


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

I mostly have the aluminum streamliners and the intermodals ( I also just modded the lead car), as well as their extended vision and center copula caboose's (no pads to speak of for body mounts made some though).
I also have several of their engines, GG-1 + SD70's, maybe I just have the ones that are like that, lol.

But it seams from what I have read the same applies to the new car carriers, I think I just like the ones that are low riders









I guess I should have said most all of my USA cars instead of most all USA cars.

I know the aristo cars also for the most part never lined up, but usually they were to high which is easier to fix than to low.

I just wish that all the players would get together and just standardize it, it would make life so much simpler, but then again if they 
did that what would Ted do with all his free time.

Ron


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, unfortunately you have picked the "worst" examples... the toughest ones. 

The new stuff is getting better... I believe the new USAT center cupola caboose has a proper mounting pad. New 2 bay hoppers from Aristo are pretty close, need a couple of shims, but Kadee sells the shims. AML is spot on for their cars. 

It is getting better. 

Greg


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well sad to say as far as I can tell no Kadee pad on the new car. Later RD


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I think the issue with any Kadee would be it needs a longer tongue. reguardless of the box. To keep corners of the cars from hitting. 









even here on 10' dia curves they were tight. These are tank cars.


----------



## N1CW (Jan 3, 2008)

[/b] 
Burrrrr[/b]

Too cold to play trains outside today so I am stuck on the kitchen table for now.[/b] 

Here is the difference between 1:29 AutoRack vs 1:32 Superliner side-by-side.[/b] 

I will get some shots with they flying in tandem when it get warmer.

No damage detected on either car.[/b]


*







*


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Ray, who makes that superliner?? Very nice looking.


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

We rallied KD for more choices in O scale than the single one they had. One of the couplers needed was for cars like the ATlas 89' flat car. So they made an extended shank version: 
http://www.kadee.com/htmbord/page746.htm 
Now, I think we need it made for G scale!!!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Excellent idea there Joe, Have you called them yet?!!!! ha.... 

Really think the 1/29 auto cars should have the travel room of the long shank, like USA has installed now! ...just with a KD end coupler!! 

I have been exploring the idea of using the more scale and smaller #1 coupler for my freight cars... 
They look nicer and come in a 'smaller' draft gear box also, both a plus / plus .... ok,... win ... win here!! 
I was so excited to see them on Paul's locos recently, that it made me re-think the concept once more, and go further with this time. 

Why would I consider this move to smaller couplers.. 
I have had tested for me a couple years ago, the tension or breaking strength of the larger big brother - the G-coupler... 

It was found to stay together until just about 51 pounds of tension.. wow - really - YES 51 pounds,.. before breaking the knuckle off.... 

So,... when I got a few recently to test - I did this one myself, and found that I got up to 32 pounds, something stretched at this point... mmm, but not broken... 
Then the knuckle broke off at 33 pounds.... on one coupler only - for this test I found it easier to set up and run the test using a pair of these couplers, again,.. only one broke... 

This shows either model of coupler 'more than capable' of pulling lots of train........... 

So how much does it take to pull - say a 50 car train.........? 

Merry Christmas - have fun with this little exercise in your back yard over Christmas...no fair jumping ahead here guys!!! 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Umm, the draft gear seem to be the same size outside dimension... check the Kadee site again Dirk. You can get the small 912 box in either coupler "size" 

I put some info here: *http://www.elmassian.com...trong>**

Based on the attention you are giving to your track, I would wager that you would be fine with the #1 scale couplers except in extremely long trains.

Did you know they make an all metal coupler in #1 scale (or at least a metal knuckle)?

Greg*


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Any one consider trying a 'straight solid shank' coupler by KD, and grafting it onto the long swing USA shank to mount to the car body? 

Greg - sorry did not see any metal knuckles on their site, got a number or....??? 

note... I have used the standard size gear box that will screw directly to a USA car...using a smaller #1 will require a new set of holes - I think to mount to... 

Dirk


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

You may have to contact them, they were the #1, and this was brought about by coupler breakage experienced in high temperature locations, namely Arizona. You might need to contact them directly, I could not find them on the site now, although have seen them before. 

Which gear box? The one for the slack action or the other ones? Supplying a part number here will avoid confusion. I think the mounting holes are the same for the #1 and G sizes, but the coupler height changes of course. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

I got a pkg of the 1906 / with gear box, 
and a pair of 1900 coupler only fer My tests here!! 

Have to Make a call when the holidays settle down some, it looks!! 

Dirk


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Got it, so the 1906 couplers come in the 1920 gear box, the "standard" box that is the only one with the slack action. 

The 1900 coupler is the correct "new style" coupler for the 1920 box. 

A word of advice... if you are ever contemplating really long trains, stay with the G coupler... even though the new style #1's are stronger, they are not stronger than the G sale ones. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Since no-one offered I think I will get a set of the 904's - a solid shank coupler - and give a try to creating a combined Auto car and KD combo unit!! 

I'm running the G-scale couplers on My equipment now, so maybe should leave well enough alone, eh!! 

Greg, I can take a hint!! 

Dirk


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

I emailed KD right on their website about making an extended length shank coupler. I believe if anyone sees them at shows, they should ask about them too. They are in the business of couplers and should have the right product available. They are very helpfull usually. 
I have never broken any KD coupler. I've heard it's happened. I have broken another brand. 
When you factor in the slack action on start ups, I wonder how fast you'd have to take off to shear one? I don't know how you administered your test Dirk. Did you apply straight tension?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I can probably even get the name of the club in Arizona who lobbied for the "metal" coupler... surprised that Stan C. does not know who it is. 

I've never broken a kadee coupler, but have snapped the boss off a coupler box. 50 cars up a 3.4% grade is tough. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Tension tests on couplers are done in a straight line fashion, and in increasing amounts of load.. 

not any 'snap action' movements.... 

Greg - did you ever try a load test on the 3.4 % grade for 50 freight cars??? 

Dirk....


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

nope, still recovering from all the missed weekends testing QSI.... have about 15 installs backed up... ouch... 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

well with that back-load of QSI's you need to go out and run some trains, and............ 

Test 50 cars uphill.... 

he..he!! 

Dirk


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yeah, well, I missed running trains for myself! 

Tell you what though, if you can find a nice recording meter... which would record the peak tension as well as the current tension (like a tachometer with a tell-tale) I'll buy one... haven't even had time to shop for toys. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

have not seen anything like that....'only in My dreams of tests does it exist'... 

but I'll peruse the web this week.. 

I want something different than a 50 pound scale for closer readings, in ranges I want to read... 

Dirk....


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'd like a digital recording one... that would be cool. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

some toy,....mmm 

The one I use runs 5-8 bucks,.. 

Fast results bring up a large variety of designs... 

65.00 up 600.00 

a very large range of choices there..! ha 

Dirk - more work.... !!!!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

OK - 'posting violation for double posting by 2 at same time!!! " 

I was........, looking at dig models... 

geeeeeeeeeezzz!! 

D


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

what is all this testing stuff?? 
run them till you have a problem show up.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'll engineer it for the type of running I want first, thank you very much. 

Running a Yugo at Indy does not make sense to me, I'll engineer what I want to run since I have a good idea of the conditions. 

Dirk has a goal, and he knows what he wants to accomplish, so some testing first makes a lot of sense. 

Just like the testing Ted Doskaris did indoors with Aristo couplers BEFORE he went outside with grades... 

I gauge all my wheelsets on new cars BEFORE they hit the rails for the first time. I'm never disappointed in the little time I take checking stuff out first. 

To each his own, but I'd rather fix problems before a derailment. 

Run it out of the box and see what breaks? Sure, you can do that... it's just not my style. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Marty, 

Before one can run,.. 
One must first walk, 

And then comes the 'marathons'... 

alas,... testing is for a propose, if one knows what one wants and how to achieve it!! 

Merry Christmas,... To all & To all a good night!! 

Thank You!!


----------



## N1CW (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Enginear on 24 Dec 2012 03:35 PM 
Ray, who makes that superliner?? Very nice looking. [/b] 
Great Trains (G/1 gauge division of American Standard Car Co {O gauge car kit producer})
They made them in 22" and 32" lengths (with or without interiors).[/b]
I obtained 5 completed 32" cars and parts to complete 5 more 32" cars from the estate.[/b]

Seasons Greetings - the_Other_Ray 
[/b]
*







*

*
-Start of a Sleeper car assembly*


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

From Marty... 

" run them till you have a problem show up ".... 

Actually this approach was used...! 

Ran trains... 
problem rears it's head... 
dissected problem, ... 

now knowledge has been gained from the experience,. 

which is resulting in more testing!!! 

IT'S ALL GOOD!!! 

There will be a test!!... 

Dirk :~ }


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

It was simple question, nothing entended behind it. 
As with my autoracks they got worked on before they hit the rail. I guess I don't call it testing. 
I already have a weathering photo picked out for one of them. They still have not hit the rails ;12 degrees out today.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Sorry - don't think you got the simple answer!! ha 

we are about 47 currently, with low overcast fog looking clouds, some sun, & light winds so far!! 

Got a box yesterday, not opened yet tho... 

seems to be a replacement UP car!!!!!!!! 

No buggered up box corners this time, maybe I got a one piece car this time!! here's hoping ( it's a good car ), I'll get to it later today!! 

will you post your weathering pix for us to see!!?? 

Merry Christmas - still . Dirk!!


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Grandkids coming at 1:00 
my gaffitii decals are really old. they would not come lose of the paper. Need to talk to Stan about a new set. 
I don't usually check MLS this much. 
you bet.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

maybe your checking 'cause your home is not 12 degrees...he he 


Dirk - got a pie to cook today, go 'fer a ride in the hills, visit neighbors, have dinner, watch a movie,,, ha!! I got some time in there for trains ...Maybe... tore more grass out - in layout area - this am for an hour...


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well Santa delievered the 2nd C&NW bi-level only problem he brought the same number I already had. Bummer







Later RJD


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Dirk, 
Sorry to be late in the conversation about the couplers, but I think you test proves that the #1 is slightly less stronger than the #G coupler, but I think both will work for your situation. I don't think the coupler strength will be too much of a problem as long as you start/slow/stop your trains in a prototype manner. The jack rabbit starts that are so common in the toy train layouts will be the biggest cause of coupler breakage. The biggest coupler strain is when you are starting to pull a train. Once it's moving the 'ideal' slack conditions for the coupler should be either all bunched or all slack. Engineers get in trouble when transitioning between the two... 
I would go with #1's personally. If you find running long trains starts breaking couplers than you need to rethink the train make-up.. and position of locomotives. Maybe having helper locomotives?? So I guess the next question would be to get a string of cars together and see how much 10 cars being pulled on 1 coupler is in terms of weight. Than you would have a base line. As Greg said having something to measure the peaks and valleys would be good to understand train dynamics. 
Maybe the stress on the couplers per car is less or more than you think....? 
Craig


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Craig, never late here!,...the comparison I made recently shows a 1/3 reduction in pulling load limits using the smaller #1 coupler over the G-coupler. ( #1 = 33#'s... vs. G = 51#'s... ) 

The info I have is based on limited runs, and therefore I will be re-running similar tests on My own layout as it progresses and time allows... 

Currently the run info I have collected shows 2.25 - 3 pounds for 50 inter-modal cars, on up to and exceeding 2.7 % grades... 

I am preferring a 50 car unit as a base measuring train car load to obtain future load test results....MY thinking is that this is about a stable sized train, and places a measuring tool in a range where it might be the easiest to read.. i.e. something like 10 cars will have a very low reading, and be more difficult to measure a 'small number' ... something longer will be easier to read as a base unit, secondly I do hope multiple runs will give a good base range and average out good or poor readings over time. 
But the hard part is finding a measuring device that will be close to the expected ranges that a load will create, ex.,.. currently I use a 50 pound scale, but only use the very lowest few pounds for the efforts I have used it for. Even pulling 8.5 pounds behind My loco is not using much of the 360 degree ranges to read from , only using about 1/6 of the total range here for loco pulls.. with cars coming in under 5 pounds, I really need to use a smaller lighter scale to get better reading results from a scale. 

So for now I need to search for a more practical device to use for tests... 

Thanks for your help and enjoy your family!! M.C. 

........... Dirk


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

50 cars Good to hear.. 
I have run 66 up 1% grades and all around with no braking of couplers. (G) stopped couple of times. these are 830s which gives slack action. 
The ONLY couplers brake that I can remember was a derailment hooked the last half of a train and sudden stop, then broke the engine coupler, knockle. which I guess happens in real life. 
WOOW, something prototipical?? cool 

off to bed Christmas night dreaming of LONG TRAINS..........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Okay 50 cars works better... I wonder if Z or N scale has problems with couplers. I know they run long trains, but not as heavy as this stuff, but the couplers are plastic.. 

The big boys have restrictions on coupler capacities too. Just use that for a reason for limiting train lengths?


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Craig, ounces to pounds, engineering plastics are up to the job. 

Aren't locos cut in mid train to ease coupler strain? 

Dirk, what if we cast brass dummies? For added reliability we could pin them together after joining 2 cars, but you'd loose slack action. 

Happy New Year 

John


----------



## mrh044 (Oct 11, 2008)

Two autoracks under the tree this morning...these cars are HUGE! I knew they were going to be big, but I was still shocked!

 

Did anyone notice the spelling error on "Ownershiop" on the car sides? As for the couplers, I raised the USA coupler up using the provided conversion cover. Then, I replaced the USA trucks with AristoCraft's roller bearing set. Even though it is not a Kadee, I plan to use the USAT coupler to avoid anymore hassle.


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Could "ownership" be misspelled on purpose to prevent paying fees? 

John, 
Your right. Helper units are cut in the middle or end to ease coupler strain. My point was real couplers have a breaking point, and 80-90% of the time you don't need helper units. But that 10% is when you do. So Dirk could figure out what 80-90% is for him, and then when train length/weight goes over that number the train make up rules for his railroad would require helpers to be cut in.. Or have it on the grades. Helpers tie on for the shove up the hill, and at the top they are cut off. Would make for some interesting operations!


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

It was well known in O scale two rail that the original older Atlas 2 rail couplers would break on long trains with fast starts. It is not common to break any KD. So Atlas made new O scale 2R couplers as they were getting complaints about breakage and tougher KD upgrading. 
Now I have personally snapped their older knuckles right off in just about any situation. So in O scale when I run more than forty cars I add helpers. I figure why stress the train. The smallest flanges will jump on a longer train with just head end power so I've got more reasons. 
I will be excited to get my G scale going outside with a bigger layout than I have now. I want to play with helpers. I have cars with stock truck mounted couplers that have never derailed. It will get interesting on grades with very long trains outside. I'm planning to start upgrading all to body mount to avoid hastles. Maybe 2% with 60 to 70 cars will dictate more testing and refinement? I like to read and see what you guys do rather than find out the hard way! My engines have the stock MTH protocouplers or added. They will pull a lot. I don't want to snap any to find their limits.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Operations should be fun, indeed!! Yes for ops here I do have at the bottom of the long main grade a short cross-over set and third passing siding with a rip track/ helper loco/ caboose,.. short siding - to set pusher helpers on that could be added at the rear for the trip up to the East dog-bone..then cut out in the smaller rural town as best I can foresee for now.. This will be quite the long run to - one of those prototypical things here again!! Keep 2 crews busy for some time I think!!! Slogging up-hill... can it be any more fun!!? 

Everyone is correct, for everyday runs this place will have to be run close to like a REAL RR.. 

Need a Great Dispatcher, maybe Craig!!!! some one with real world experiences ..... 

Any trains run here will not be exceeding any size couplers abilities.... 

So we may not need brass knuckles, but if we did - do they need to be double tied together? curious... and it sounded like the gear boxes were tied together also to 'eliminate' the slack action of the springs... 

Do you guys realize HOW many cars can be pulled 'ideally' with even anything over 20 pounds of pull on the first car...Whew... it is staggering to fathom [email protected]@@ ya!! 

If 3 pounds supports 50 cars, 18 pounds could do 300 cars................ and stay together... 

.............? What was Marty going to bed to dream about,.. again !!! WOW 

But, back to reality - Dennis S. in Mesa has "run' a 150 + car train - and had some coupler failures.... 

So rules to operate by - here - any train over 100 cars mandatory helpers added... below 100 , optional... open for interpretation here guys!!! 

I re-read John's post again... complete cast couplers.. 

I will contact KD in regards to their metal knuckles for each coupler size and see what that does.. 

John, could you be interested in running long trains here, I know they are not old steamers and all...? You sound excited at times!! Great!! 

Ya, I need to go dream too..... Craig - did one more minor track re-alignment this morning, on the west end after sleeping on a part I was not happy with...could have done it / just did not sit well with my feelings for the area tho! Like this minor change better now, ( Main line folks ) building N.G. line,, but brains are on a design issue out on the main line and adding sidings, some thing not planned yet here!!! Got to keep the mental juices working...... 

OK, now for sleep lest Marty smell some th'n burn'n again!!! ha!! ..........THX guys!! 

Dirk


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Funny - I suspect "paying fees" occurred to use the rest of the logos and such from UP anyway!! 

D


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I like all trains, I run what I can afford. 
Yes I'll help. 
I was thinking the pins through the couplers would help on vertical transitions but that's probably over kill. 
I was thinking of using plastic couplers instead of wax in lost wax casting. That will probably leave more ash than wax, but we're not doing jewelry either. Makes duplication a cinch and you can get them cheap from somebody you convince to use kd's.... 

I'm guessing that you don't plan on breaking up your 50 car blocks with switching cars out at destinations. So drawbars that look like couplers might help you achieve the length you want 

John


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Good questions sent to me. what is a long train for me.?

Greg also asked a good Q way back, How often do you see videos of long trains?

1 how long does a long train take to set up? 
A. I have about 20 cars per siding and can hook then together faily fast. At 10 siding or staging tracks.

2 How realistic does that" model" train look on the railroad?
A. 50 to 60 "looks" about right on my railkroad with out the engine falling its tail.


3 What can the railroad handle for "normal" running?

A. if friends are over even 50 car trains don't work well on my railroad because not to many places to park them without taking them apart.

again just thoughts.
one or two times a year I may try a "pulling contest" to see what will work and why. But on average 30 some cars works and looks just fine.

If I have to spend time taking cars off the shelf building a train and then puting them back. Thats not enjoyable for me. Even HO scale guys have staging yards.

3 degrees this morning heading to work.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Morning Gents! 

Opened up the latest box to find a good car,... 

well,.. one of the end corner lower curved tracks is broken.... 

this looks like a long term issue for these over size and heavy cars!!! 

Dirk


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Marty & Greg both here, ? for ya gents???!! 

The video ? above about long trains,, is this a video of real or model trains?? 

I often see trains running well over 100 cars,,, more economical for the RR's .. 

as such, some are even up in the 120 - 140 car ranges here without even being a unit coal drag.. could be unit grain trains tho! Mostly mixed merchandise .... 

I would think the lucky video of a real train that long would there fore be a rare catch for the most part... 

Dirk - a blazing 36 out today...cloudy slight winds here!!


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Over all most RRs tend to keep there train lenghts to 100 cars. Not a lot of RR so far have the siding capacity to hold those long trains for meets. Also it prevents delays as long trains tend to be problematic at times. If your observing 140 car trains they must be on a line with no grades. 

I would say most folks here do not have the capacity to operate long trains that would look prototype. And yes your exceeding the coupler cap also and just creating more headaches why would one want to do if only to prove you could pull the cars. I have about 800 ft of track and the longest train I run are 20 car sets with two to three locos. These look about right for my RR as my RR is based on main line open county running. 
Later RJD


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yep, 50 cars on my layout is really a bit long, fun to do for the kids once in a while. 

But, when I can get 50 cars on a 3.4% grade (way different than a 1% folks, WAY different)... to be reliable, then running 30-40 car trains is dead reliable, and we have fun focusing on running trains, not fixing stuff. 

Greg


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

OOOPPPSSSSS
so much for being new..


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 25 Dec 2012 10:40 PM 
Operations should be fun, indeed!! Yes for ops here I do have at the bottom of the long main grade a short cross-over set and third passing siding with a rip track/ helper loco/ caboose,.. short siding - to set pusher helpers on that could be added at the rear for the trip up to the East dog-bone..then cut out in the smaller rural town as best I can foresee for now.. This will be quite the long run to - one of those prototypical things here again!! Keep 2 crews busy for some time I think!!! Slogging up-hill... can it be any more fun!!? 

Everyone is correct, for everyday runs this place will have to be run close to like a REAL RR.. 

Need a Great Dispatcher, maybe Craig!!!! some one with real world experiences ..... 

Any trains run here will not be exceeding any size couplers abilities.... 

So rules to operate by - here - any train over 100 cars mandatory helpers added... below 100 , optional... open for interpretation here guys!!! 

I'd say anything over 90 cars would need helpers, or create some train make up rules for how trains are built up. Say 100 intermodal cars would be okay without helpers, but only 80 cars for a mixed manifest train (account different coupler types/strengths). Those 3 and 5 packs have drawbars which could in theory be better in holding the train than knuckles.
With such a huge RR you're going to need some sort of dispatching- I'm thinking CTC would be cool. Than you would need a dispatcher and signals.







But you can add that later. First get the mainline down, and have TWC type control instead. Adding helpers for the shove up the hill would be a cool thing to see. I'll come visit when the RR gets further along!








Anyone can pull a train up a hill...







It's the down hill that hogheads earn their strips!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Marty - Looks like you've been 'Tagged' there Buddy!!! great... 

The UP in the southern states runs double track mains, so meets are rare as we know them generally... each goes their own way, still have the rare turtle races also. !! great to watch! 

As far as UP challenges on grades go, starting at John's in Vail, it is all uphill.. Some distance to Mescal summit, and dropping down into Benson, then crossing the San Pedro river on the east side, it is about 20 miles of constant 1.3 - 1.4% grades to Dragoon Summit , and drops off to Willcox.. 

I am well aware I'm a different colored egg with MY trains.!!!! ha 

I'm not suggesting people should run longer trains than their layouts are built for here!! Really curious about what others perceive as being in the "long train category" tho!! 

I do fully expect to run prototype length trains here, reliably and as normal and often as possible! 

I have a scale 10,100 foot long double passing siding to play with, running up 1.3 - 1.5 % grades.. ( 350 ft., nearly 2 miles ) This will be part of an 1100 ft up-hill run, not exceeding 1.5% at any one point.. 

Must have warmed up Marty!! looks nice. 

Dirk


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Since you came up with this thought Craig, it might even be cool to run trains with helpers based on loads, a loaded or empty train - how many cars for each, and helper needs!! 

Dirk


----------



## Dick413 (Jan 7, 2008)

Marty 
what did you do to your decals, to get them to come lose of the paper?


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 26 Dec 2012 01:21 PM 
Since you came up with this thought Craig, it might even be cool to run trains with helpers based on loads, a loaded or empty train - how many cars for each, and helper needs!! 

Dirk 
If you do that you could start having actual loads/empties...


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Ok in fer a cool drink - on a semi-warm, but cool windy day... 

digging in 1/2 dry - mud - sediment. Looking for pipes I have been working on recently, to add more to. Brought home more supplies today for this... 

in the mean time 3 trains have gone by... 

W. bnd - empty hoppers - pulled by 3 locos, 75-85 cars 
E. bnd - "mixed media" - mixed revenue - pulled by 3 locos, 86 cars 
W. bnd - 53' double stacks - pulled by 3 locos, single rear DPU unit, 101 cars 

back to digging fer me lost pipes.......D


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Dick 
I had to be more patient (something I lack most of the time) and let the decals soak longer,.


----------



## Dick413 (Jan 7, 2008)

Thanks Marty good to know, oh and it does look good


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

just this morning a West bnd, 40 ft. stack train... 3 lead locos, a lone DPU at the rear.... 

124 cars!!


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

The containers are empties headed back to Chiner fer more quality guds....


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Maybe they can bring software that prevents duplicates! Arrrggghhhh


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well now you can do the math as the big boys do to determine how much power one needs to move a train over the road. You'll have to go out to your RR and determine ruling grades and such and percentages so you can have the correct power and num of cars to move. Have fun. Later RJD


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Since I designed My ROW ... it is a good chance I know the grades already, maybe??!!!! 

I tend to think they ( the RR's ) use weight as a means to judge motive power requirements, but as this is beyond my training, I'll defer to Craig for his expert knowledge in this area!! 

There is another way tho,.. but not everyone is in agreement with My choices.. 

50 cars per loco, = hence 150 cars = 3 locos 

Even Dennis S. runs that long with 4 locos!! 

My grades are well below most backyard layouts also, I run a max. ruling grade of only 1.5%....on climbing grades, yet have down hill runs of 1.8 - 2.2%. 

This does mean that some trains can be run against the grain and run on the higher grades - which are still below most layouts...!! But I do have a primary route that never exceeds the 1.5% grade climbing. 

I am having fun here.... THX :~}


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Using John's 'formula' here.. West bnd are empties headed back to China.. 

So a East bnd - 53' stacks must be full /loaded, heading for cities needing China stuff, 

pulled / pushed by 4 locos, 2 at each end...


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

John, can you see any of the rail road from your position?????


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

recieved my next two car. 1 BNSF 1 U.P. ( same cars that Michael showed in his photos)
one had a ladder broken and other missing truck rotary cap. Was not in plastic or box. 
took me about 20 mins this time knowing what to do to get them ready to roll. I did find myself having to mark a B on the bottom of the metal plate because I kept either puting the coupler upside down on the plate . or on the wrong side of the plate and redoing it again. 

This is it for me on the cars for now. 
13ft 4" long coupler end to coupler end. 4 cars.
I am still amazed at HOW well detailed they are. Very very nice.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 27 Dec 2012 11:42 AM 
John, can you see any of the rail road from your position????? 
Nope, but I can hear them as they load up to move out. I'm pretty sure the Tucson yard sends them out as fast as they can and they stack up on the line until properly staggered for the run down through Cieniga Canyon. 

John


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 27 Dec 2012 11:29 AM 
Since I designed My ROW ... it is a good chance I know the grades already, maybe??!!!! 

I tend to think they ( the RR's ) use weight as a means to judge motive power requirements, but as this is beyond my training, I'll defer to Craig for his expert knowledge in this area!! 

There is another way tho,.. but not everyone is in agreement with My choices.. 

50 cars per loco, = hence 150 cars = 3 locos 

Even Dennis S. runs that long with 4 locos!! 

My grades are well below most backyard layouts also, I run a max. ruling grade of only 1.5%....on climbing grades, yet have down hill runs of 1.8 - 2.2%. 

This does mean that some trains can be run against the grain and run on the higher grades - which are still below most layouts...!! But I do have a primary route that never exceeds the 1.5% grade climbing. 

I am having fun here.... THX :~} 



It's a combination of a bunch of different factors. HPT, Ruling grade, siding length, TOB, horsepower rating of locomotives, etc. And don't for get dynamic braking power as well. Your going to need to figure out a couple of things first; all the requirements for the track, and than all the ratings for the locomotives.
A SD90MAC will have more HP, and dyno capacity than a GP38, but the SD40-2 will be more than the GP38, but less than the 90MAC.. And if you really want to get complicated you could make each loco actually only pull that amount...








I'll take a peak through the rules and formulas to figure this stuff out for you if you want!








Just would need a list of all the stuff first! You need to start making out a Timetable and rulebook. This is why I model the prototype as I don't have to make this stuff up. I can just copy and paste!








Craig


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Marty - you got 2 more cars for Christmas eh!! nice going....more to tag? ha!! 

John, you made it sound like there was a unique situation running trains thru the wash East of you? What's up, or am I miss-reading here!!? 

Craig, it all sounds fun, but I don't see me even considering a timetable or motive power loadings in operation, while I'm busy building a layout still...just thoughts tho.. 

too busy just trying to stay warm fer now! Miss My wood stove is all!!! sooooooth'n deep heat.. ya, that's what I need!! 

was out clearing more grass yesterday, take a break - get out of wind, clear grass - get out of cold wind, clear grass, ruff day!! but got more cleared off !! 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

As for me - when I get to a point where I can get more racks, a BN is up next, then a red CP Rail car is in line..... 

........ :~ }


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Heres a good shot of how they sit after I lower them


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I was out messing around with one tring to figure out which screws to remove to get the top part to come off. 
Then I gave up. I did not want to hurt the detail. 
These cars are well worth the money. detail is outstanding. 
If anyone is good friends with Charlie ask him to come out with pair of flat cars with these. or just the parts. man, they make my older pigs look like junk. 
got to have some 89' flat cars.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Posted By SD90WLMT on 28 Dec 2012 06:02 AM 


John, you made it sound like there was a unique situation running trains thru the wash East of you? What's up, or am I miss-reading here!!? 



Dirk - DMS Ry. 

Often there is a train, just west of 'downtown' waiting to go East. There is never a train waiting to go to the big city.
I reasoned that they had to space them out to allow for limited passing places.
I can hear them at idle and then as they load up and move out and down into the canyon.
The EP and SW was the 2nd line through and I think got tighter curves and a slower running route deeper into the wash.

When I took pics of the 844, she was above on the bridge and the other route was just below my feet...
All comments are based on observation, no insider info.

John


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

OK, flip the car over on a foam bed or soft towel or blanket... 

remove the trucks 

remove every visible screw down the main frame, corners - what ever shows from the bottom 

Remove the "bottom 1/2 of the flat car" from the "TOP 1/2 of the flat car" - the decking section...... 

remove all the screws along both side edges and the auto cover will come off the flat car deck surface, combined with loosening the side support tabs from the flat car side slots, 

Then ... 

the top cover will 'come off'... 

D


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Yaa, John - the curves under the bridge look to never have been improved, really tight there!! Just no room with the wash... 

Did you know the RR built a new straight section near the freeway and short cuted the tight long key hole loop to the East, and South of the freeway? The old trackage now holds maybe a 100 or more grain hoppers in dead storage... Nothing crosses over or under the freeway - at least live tracks... 

Not sure how many cross - over sets there are to allow passing between us..??? 

The only one I'm sure of is at the old Tully stop about 4 miles West of Me. Should be some near Benson tho...? Maybe to the West of Benson... then West of Me near the AZ power plant, are a set of cross - overs... then probably on to Willcox... 

Dirk


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

D your so kind. 5AM and can't sleep.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

5 am, can't sleep... 

Heck, when it's 5 am, it's time to get up here!! 

morning Buddy! 

Most of the car tear down is above on this thread I think.. ha, only 4 threads on MLS on Auto - racks... we need a couple more ... ha!! 

Dirk - saw 4 GT rr cars yesterday on trip out in hills, for a break from cabin fever!!


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Wow Marty, that does look great. I missed what you did to lower it? If four cars are long for you, there won't be too many guys running more. Most of us don't have the real estate. I'm moving it out back for more room. Cars like these can stretch out. Now I just have to get a few. I finally just got a few more ctr fl hoppers!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Replace the trucks with a set from a USA inter-modal - well car.. 

I like the idea, it is what I have done - for now,... but am concerned over the long haul about them lasting or holding up to the much higher weight of the Auto-rack car. 

7.9 pounds!! 

D


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

The auto-rack uses a - and the same as a Center Flow hopper - metal truck frame.. 

The well car is only plastic, and break much too often...


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Yuck, my intermodal has an older (bettendorf type?) plastic side frame. I always thought that was odd. No way I'd put that on these. Maybe some NWSL wheels or something else?


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

they are all a roller bearing style of truck.. 

And the inter-modal runs on a 33'' wheel.. 

the rest use just 36'' wheels... too large for the Auto-racks, actually! 

The bene's are the 33'' wheels and the truck frame sits lower - both combine to lower a car!!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Eventually .............. 

When I have some time..................... 

I want to remove the screw in center support / pivot and machine a new 'lowered' re-placement part for the roller bearing metal frames.!!! 

And install the 33'' wheels... 

This would be the best of all worlds - I hope!! 

Dirk


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Nope, I'm wrong again. Went to look at them and they are roller brg. Don't know what I was thinking? Couldn't find the truck I had in mind.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I was about to say........
I also know they are plastic, but the price is RIGHT and I can stock up on them. I used the gunderson on LGB grain cars etc to lower them. they are a great designed truck, just not metal.


Posted By Enginear on 30 Dec 2012 11:06 AM 
Nope, I'm wrong again. Went to look at them and they are roller brg. Don't know what I was thinking? Couldn't find the truck I had in mind.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I guess I will stick with this thread on my doings and goings-on's










Dirk your right, its really weak in the middle. Now should I go ahead or back to the way it was???
My home made ones from 4 years ago are alot stronger but they are all one piece, but these REALLY look great.???

I'm leaning toward casting a few of the parts and tring to scratchbuild new cars to look closer to this one.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Marty, Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!! now what?????? 

You can do it!!! I think you can, I think you can!!! 

Not so fast there Buddy!! 

Clamp the top flat surface to something long and straight... 

Then add some internal stiffeners 'inside' the lower frame spine - the back-bone of the car!! 

With the flat in 2 pieces you can remove the last few screws and get this back-bone cover completely off, then you'll be inside the back-bone, glue it up and start adding from there. 

This should provide all the strength we need for a flat car... decide what you want to do with the weight plate inside also..probably just leave it in place!! 

Dirk - ;`)


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

Wow Marty, shame to say it as they're so nice of an autorack, but they do look great! The Atlas 89' in O scale are made of steel! I bet you could run a steel box down the center like the real ones have. 
Do you know what size wheels are on the real car? I have some Aristo trucks with spinners that need metal wheels installed. I just looked at the USA sight and those intermodal trucks are a deal. I can see why you like them. Are they equipped with steel wheels??


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

? 

know why Marty is awake early,, 

He's got "Trains on the Brain"... can't sleeeeeeezzzzzp syndrome.... 

He's getting well Gents... Back to G stuff fer' Marty!! 

Joe, as mentioned just above Auto-racks run on 33'' wheels, better tho - Bi-levels run on 33'' wheels , while the tri-levels run on 28'' wheels.. 

How do I know this, I 'read' the labels on the cars sides when they go by at crossings, something to do while 'waiting' on trains to pass.... 

OT - anybody know where our preservationist Amber has gone, she has not posted here for a long time...?? 

Last day to think about trains 'this year' going, going, gone.... 

Snow looks great in Russia, not AZ..........hummmm,..... now it is white out this am.... 

Got to go take Wife to work!!! 

Dirk - H.N.Y. to all , see ya next year!!!!


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Auto car is back together, only 3 broken parts. can't wait to run them. They feel like there maybe a little drag from the wheels to the body. I may try a thin washer and see if that frees it up.


----------



## Ron Hill (Sep 25, 2008)

Hey Marty, how much trouble would it be to duplicate the Autorack bed for a 89' TOFC as you show in the picture? You will not have to build a prototype, just cut the parts identical to the ones on the Autorack and glue together. You already made some of the 70's era TOFC, do the same for a more modern version. You can get sheets of .060" styrene from Nationwide Plastics in 48" X 96". I purchased several sheets a couple of years ago for this project and they quartered them for me. The bed will be one piece with the braces below. Their website is www.nationwideplastics.net. There are two plants in Texas. 
Ron


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

See if this link will work.
http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/manage.asp
look at flat 89' shows how I built them.
Thanks Ron
I buy 4 X 8 from a place 1 hour away. .40.125. .60


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By NTCGRR on 01 Jan 2013 07:26 AM 
See if this link will work.
look at flat 89' shows how I built them.
Thanks Ron
I buy 4 X 8 from a place 1 hour away. .40.125. .60
Marty

The link that you used only pointed to the old MLS 1st Class/Gold user interface Log In page, and unless they know your User ID & Password they will not be able to access you MLS server space.

The link you want to use is below, note this link only provides read-only access so no changes can be made.

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/ntcgrr/[/b]


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)

I got my O scale autoracks from Lionel. They have opening doors and are scale. The coupler mechanism is very cool in how it swings.









Now I have more of these on order and it has prevented me from getting the G gauge ones yet. I wonder if anyone will make an articulated set like ATlas O


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Can you post a closeup of the coupler? 

Greg


----------



## Enginear (Jul 29, 2008)




----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Backing up to Greg's remarks about those special metal knuckles on #1 couplers - on page 3 I think - I got a reply back from KD today.. they did make a metal knuckle for the #1 - old style couplers, due to heat melting the knuckles. As the new design is stronger as is, a metal version was not found to be needed. 

Not sure if they are still available however...? 

Thanks Greg, 

Dirk


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually, the new design hides the coupler knuckle spring better (almost completely) and they did make the coupler shank heaver where it attaches to the coupler body, but I don't see where they made the knuckle stronger. 

If they are still available, you will need to get the part number for them and start asking dealers. 

In the G scale size, the new couplers are definitely more robust also, but again don't really see the knuckle being stronger. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Don't know any further details - at this time, but the Gentleman from KD was further interested in My coupler testing methods!! see where it all goes!! more tomorrow... 

Dirk


----------



## AndyC (Jan 2, 2008)

I finally got around to playing with the coupler heights on my autoracks... I am still using the USA couplers, in the raised position as directed in USA's coupler instructions for raising the coupler.. 

When I scratchbuilt my autorack and TOFC's, I used old bachmann 3 bay hopper trucks, and replaced the wheels with bachmanns small diameter steel wheels... I did this with my USA autoracks, using the USA couplers, as installed in the "'raised"' position as per the USA instructions... Tested this with my kadee coupler height guage and the USA coupler on the autorack is about 1/16th of an inch lower than the coupler height guage... I figure, with a washer between the autorack and the bachmann truck, it should bring the coupler height to just about exact... 

All my other freight cars have kadee couplers on them, but with the autoracks and the new 60 ft boxcars, I'm trying to use the original USA couplers, because of their design and function.. 

Just thought I would put my results out there...


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

I worked on my Autoracks today and installed Kadee 906's on them with a simple mod.

Here is the link to my kadee mods thread USAT Autorack Kadee Install

Ron


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Broken link repaired. 

K


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Wow that was quick, Thanks!

Ron


----------

