MTL PRR H47 Hopper

[cv_acr]

that's not exactly true... they were an unpainted aluminum which doesn't mean it was a shiny finish - as it ages, it dulls.

this car is about 3 years old.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/pictures%5C2994%5C1967%20cn%20cov%20hopper%20355055%20marshalltown%20ia.jpg

No it's not. That CN slabside was built in 1953, ex CN 113270-113394 series (re# in '66-67). And it's grey-painted steel, not alumnium.

Very bad example. It's not weathered aluminum, just badly backlit.

[cv_acr]

It's a Evans 4780... so the entire car is technically incorrect, other than being a three bay LO.  Biggest difference is the ends.

Isn't the corrugated roof pretty unique to the Evans cars too?

[asciibaron]

That CN slabside was built in 1953, ex CN 113270-113394 series (re# in '66-67). And it's grey-painted steel, not alumnium.

i always thought those were aluminum.  thanks.

[cv_acr]

The "slab-sides" were steel. _Some_ of the rounded side pre-cylindricals were built from aluminum. And there was one series of CNWX (the "silver"/yellow) cylindricals that were aluminum.

[JoeD]

I have no idea...I'll check into it.  Take a day off and look what happens!  ;D
Joe
MTl

My own Chuckpak arrived yesterday, including the new MTL PRR H47 covered hopper.


Can someone (Joe, I'm hoping), explain the rationale behind the extended draft gear trucks?

And does anyone know what other trucks will fit under here (I'm guessing there's a clearance reason for these)? Anyone had any luck with Atlas ones, or other MTL trucks?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I know the feeling Joe.

Thanks for checking into it. It's pretty strange, and I figure there's got to be some reason.

[Robbman]

It's a Evans 4780... so the entire car is technically incorrect, other than being a three bay LO...

Same thing applied when they launched the bodystyle with the Seaboard Air Line release (a Magor prototype if I remember correctly).

They launched it with the MKT two-pack... which actually were Evans 4780s... the SAL magor was next.

[JoeD]

Looks like the wrong truck was called out in the work order.  Part of the problem with having all these options.  Should have been the 1035....but that said, looking through the past releases there were a few that had the long box and they weren't SP Hydrocushion underframes.  Interesting...  Regardless...boo-boo on our part.

Joe
MTL

[wm3798]

To the woodshed! >

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Looks like the wrong truck was called out in the work order.  Part of the problem with having all these options.  Should have been the 1035....but that said, looking through the past releases there were a few that had the long box and they weren't SP Hydrocushion underframes.  Interesting...  Regardless...boo-boo on our part.

Joe
MTL

Ahh, ok.

Time to get out the wet noodle (or maybe just a brew...)!

[tom mann]

Ed, can you just cut the boxes and bodymount them like a big boy?  Easier than typing...

[SirTainly]

Ahh, ok.

Time to get out the wet noodle

Save that for the mistakes on the CN cars

[Robbman]

Looks like the wrong truck was called out in the work order.  Part of the problem with having all these options.

The problem is somebody called out the wrong truck on that work order, and nobody double checked to make sure it was correct... not the number of options available.

Negating it's not actually a 100T truck (that's been beaten to death)... you have all of ONE truck to use... with a short, medium or long extension... so all of three part numbers (1035, 1037 and 1038... or 041, 042, 044 under the new system)... I know this, and I don't even work for MT

Should have been the 1035....but that said, looking through the past releases there were a few that had the long box and they weren't SP Hydrocushion underframes.  Interesting...  Regardless...boo-boo on our part.

That said... you put the wrong coupler on those Evans 4780s too... which releases were they?   What's SP Hydra-cushion underframes got to do with anything?  

[Ntrainz1]

I used BLMA 100 ton trucks and body mounted z couplers. Had to add washer to get clearance.

Bob.

[bbussey]

They launched it with the MKT two-pack... which actually were Evans 4780s... the SAL magor was next.

That's right, forgot about them.  My mistake.  I mostly remember my disappointment upon learning the SAL was bogus after I had bought it, since as with this PRR car it was advertised as an Evans prototype (as opposed to merely being advertised as a scheme on the Evans model).