"To foob or not to foob, that is the question..."

[Puddington]

So; Micro Trains comes out with that really nice Pullman 3-2 Observation sleeper and covers it with a really nice Canadian Pacific paint scheme. They drop a business car number on it that isn't close, but hey, who's counting - right...?

I, of course, buy one but because CPR passenger is like an obsession with me, I don't, however, want to run it because it's not close to anything CPR-ish.... What to do ?

Then, while looking for something unrelated in the CPR archives I come across a diagram for the "Fort" series Observation-buffet-sleepers.... These were built in the early 20's, kicked around until the mid - late 50's and got scrapped... The rear half of the car bears a very, very close resemblance to the MT car and with a little minor surgery could pass for one... the front half, not so much... (the Forts had two cabins (the MT has more) and 6 sections. The MT cabins on the opposite side of the model....)

But; who the "H - E - Double hockey sticks" knows what a "Fort" series car looks like anyway (except a handful of CPR passenger nuts like me) and after all, they were gone by 1970 when I model so......

I'm going to "foob' the "Fort William", use it for a summer only local and try not and run it in front of anyone who knows anything about the CPR passenger trains.... or, atleast not let them see the front half of the car.....

"To foob, or not to foob"....that is the question.... I guess I answered it.................

[John]

Rule #1

[Puddington]

Rule #1

True enough...........

[Puddington]

Ok, so it's a foob....kinda looks right...at least the observation area !  We just ignore the bulb side roof...(it's not there...it's not there...)

Gotta address ride height however......

[mcjaco]

Foob way.

I'm getting to that point in attempting to model the Laker.

[bbussey]

At least you're getting foobs.  No New Haven varnish since the quickly sold-out RPO three or so years ago, and two of the current MTL cars are models of plans that New Haven actually had.

[Ian MacMillan]

Go foob!

Id even take these in B&M foob.

[nkalanaga]

If the prototypes were scrapped in the 1950s, and you model the 1970s, it could be argued that yours is what they would have been rebuilt into if they had survived.

[peteski]

Is it just me or does the forward truck on that car look like it is way too far towards the center of that car?

[central.vermont]

Not just you Pete. I was wondering the very same thing. I kinda looks like the truck pin
dropped out and slid back. Something we had happen just a few days ago on a friends
layout. The very last car of his grain train lost the pin and slid out from under the car but
did not come apart. Funny site to see it was! 

Jon

[up1950s]

If it is the roof that is the noteworthy error how difficult is it to find a closer match to swap out , and does it snap off ?

[Puddington]

Ah poop.......someone noticed the truck.........yep... it's backwards......funny thing is with those offset bolster hole MT trucks, they run fine backwards.....

I should see if the MT coach roof fits and then modify one for the car....good idea Richie.

[bbussey]

It doesn't, as the coach is a shorter car.  Since you are not faint of heart, I suggest taking the non A/C side of the 10-1-2 or 12-1 roof  to replace the A/C side of the obs roof, but it will take some careful cutting and sanding to do.  Talk with Joe about obtaining some spare roofs.