Author Topic: Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?  (Read 1267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bobster

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 292
  • Respect: +37
Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?
« on: August 30, 2015, 02:48:46 PM »
0
Greetings ,

At a show earlier this year I picked up an Atlas extended vision caboose, Conrail 22133.  The trucks and pins are missing.  It currently has body mounted Rapido couplers.   Looking at the Mictortrains website I see a couple of possibilities, I'm not sure which is correct or best.   It will be tail end for Atlas' Conrail  SD-35 6002.   

The questions are:
Should I write Atlas for the missing trucks and pins?
Is there a specific Microtrains item that would be better?
Should I cut off the Rapido's and put on MT1015's or go with truck mounted couplers.

As my freight equipment is about half Rapido and half Mirotrains equipped I may put a MT on one end only.
What are your thoughts?

Thank you,
Bob L.

Mark5

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11867
  • Always with the negative waves Moriarty ...
  • Respect: +934
Re: Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2015, 03:23:40 PM »
0
This car was designed to accept MTL 1111 couplers.

http://www.atlasrr.com/Reviews/ncab.mrn.review.htm

For trucks I recommend the correct Atlas trucks:

http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Atlas-N-22060-Caboose-Roller-Bearing-Trucks-withou-p/atl-22060.htm

Mark



Bobster

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 292
  • Respect: +37
Re: Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?
« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2015, 08:10:50 PM »
0
Mark,

Thank you,

Bob

Spikre

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 580
  • Respect: 0
Re: Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2015, 02:08:29 PM »
0
 :D
  forget Truck Pins, use 2-56 Flat Head Screws
  You will be much happier in the long run.
     Spikre
       ;)
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 04:09:27 PM by Spikre »

Bobster

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 292
  • Respect: +37
Re: Conrail caboose 22133 trucks?
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2015, 08:01:12 PM »
0
Spikre,

Had not thought to use screws.  It sounds like a good idea.

Thank you,
Bob