Randy's CF7 kits are coming!

[kiwi_al]

Just noticed on Atlas that Randy's CF7 kits are being made and he's taking orders.

http://randgust.com/pr01.htm

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Awesome! Thanks for the heads up!

[wm3798]

Oooh!  Better whip up some Maryland and Delaware decals!

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Etched handrails? Please?

What about the fact that the body is about 2 feet too long? I need to see more pictures.

[Philip H]

Even at 2 feet too long (Hello, nit, calling picker) The initial photo shows this to be a majorly improved CF7, when compared to the shell JnJ offered about a thousand years ago.  I'm sur eyou can take the two feet out, if it really bothers you.

Now I need to get some Louisianan and Delta decals run for one of these.

[wm3798]

I'm with Phil.  If it can slip onto an Atlas GP-7/9 drive without a bunch of hooey, then I'll blur my eyes (with the aid of beer of course) and try to forget about the 2 feet...

Lee

[kiwi_al]

Daniel,
You could alter the kit  slightly and use a trainman GP15-1 mechanism but you'd have to hack down the cast metal fuel tank.

[Mark5]

What about the fact that the body is about 2 feet too long? I need to see more pictures.

Using the GP9 chassis, this should be a maximum of 1' too long right?

F7/F9 - 30 ft centers
GP7/GP9 - 31 ft centers

Mark

[TiVoPrince]

Considering
what 'accurate' brass models might cost I'm perfectly willing to overlook 'some' faults as necessary shortcuts.  Getting finished CF7s for about 25% or less of that price makes it an 'everymans' loco, even if you need a fleet of them...

[randgust]

I'll be the first to admit very legit question I'll go through the logic here, which also explains how this thing can take so long to get built.

OK, basically the Atlas GP7 chassis is exactly one foot too long in the wheelbase.  CF7 is 30' centers, GP7 is 31'.  The overall GP7 is seriously a lot longer:

http://research.nprha.org/Diesel%20Diagrams/EMD%20GP-7%20569.jpg

My old scratchbuilt CF7's were done on Atlas Roco GP7 frames and steps, and yeah, I had to add a good two feet behind the cab.  So, this time, the question was, could I do it tighter?

I seriously, seriously, tried to reuse the Atlas step assemblies, and came to the conclusion you all did- it made it WAY too long, and just the wrong steps anyway.  One of the odd things about the CF7 is the really short - try 18" - end platforms.  The GP7 is much longer.  Sigh, forget it, start from scratch, and they are bears to design with four steps and compound angles.

So the question got to be just exactly how far I could push it - could I get the end-to-end dimensions close enough on the Atlas frame and still pivot the trucks?  The CF7 trucks are tucked quite under the steps at the brake shoes.

One of my criteria on this project was NO FRAME HACKING.  So given that, I was able to get the 'nose to tail' (hood) dimensions within what I scale about 3" - model 47' 6"  -  drawing 47' 3".  The end-sill to end-sill dimensions are about 6" over - model 49' 9" vs drawing 49' 3" .  The compromise is that the 6" on either truck center is basically 3" over on each end with the trucks closer to the ends.  It is a TIGHT FIT on that frame!  And right now, you have to loosen one of the 1015 truck boxes slightly to get the shell off.  I'm still concerned that the nose brake shoes may have to be trimmed to clear the steps.

The nose is definitely fat (wide) by 9".  I made it as thin as I could, but the alternative was to grind the frame.

I'll be putting photos up on my web page of the unit shot in gray primer so you can see the detail better, and also the dimensions and ruler shots to prove it.

Basically, Daniel, it is over, but no two feet here.  I think I've kept it to the 9" and under group all around except for the truck centers.  The debate since this project started has been "how much is too much?" because to make it exact require really, an entirely new cast mechanism, milling the tanks of a GP15, or something else expensive to everybody.

Rails, grabs, steps & other goodies will all be etched.  This is the most expensive part of the entire project- getting the etched parts right - and Chris333 has been a HUGE help on calculating and designing steps that will work. Those have to be run in batches, the bigger the batches the less the per-unit cost, so thats why I'm trying to get a handle - now -  on what you all think.

I'm not claiming perfection, remember this is home-brew scratchbuilding at its core.  

[Mark5]

Very Nice Randy - the small amount of compromise seems very reasonable.

And ... about a month after a handful of people post pix of their models, some rogue company will announce them in N scale.

[RockGp40]

Oooh!  Better whip up some Maryland and Delaware decals!

Hey Lee. Who's your favoritest RS3m train riding buddy?               Hook a brother up!

Thank you Randy for making this.

[randgust]

Yeah, don't I know it.  That's another reason why I delayed.  I watched Grant-SAR introduce that beautiful F45 right before Athearn, too.  I've had direct conversations with Atlas, and I got the green light from them to do this explaining to them what I was planning and using their drive and hood, not copying it.  

My 70-tonner project started life as a 44-tonner.  I had the truck sideframes done and test-casted when I found out Bachmann was working on it.  Left full rudder!  But now I'm using their mechanism in the 70-tonner and it is a sweet, sweet drive.

Update:  OK, the primer shots are up on the website: http://www.randgust.com/pr01.htm

I also did a test fit with the GP20 mech.  The good news is that the LL mech is substantially narrower, maybe a little shorter, and kinda flops around in there where the Atlas is about watertight.  The bad news is that there would have to be some minor material removal around the pickup strips retainer at the fuel tank, as it sits too high.  It looks like it could be fitted with a Dremel.  So feasible, maybe not quite as easy, but feasible....

[DKS]

Well now, looks like I'll need to get me one of these to build BR&W CF7 #42.
 


http://www.jefflubchanskycpa.com/BRW42RINGOESNJ-JUNE1991-910004-24.jpg

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Funny David, I was thinking the same thing...