FVM Sooline boxcars

[unittrain]

MBK has the FVM Sooline boxcars in stock I picked up a GN and a colormark, nice boxcars though they definatley need lowered.

[jagged ben]

This is a new body style, right?  Are the BN(SF), MRL, and GN schemes prototypical?

[nkalanaga]

Not a new body style, but it's been a while since the last release.

They're not completely accurate for the GN/BN/MRL/BNSF, but like ESM's CB&Q "X58", very close, and probably the closest mass-produced model we'll get.  They were quite close to the later Big Sky Blue GN cars.

However, they're not quite as close to the mid-60s green cars these are painted as.  The GN had two series of these, both of which used a slightly different door style, although apparently the same size.  The bigger difference, and very hard to fix, is that these portray the FIRST order, which came with roofwalks.  The second order didn't have them, so would have been a better choice, but the "Cushioned" plaque on the second order didn't have Rocky, so it isn't as simple as changing the number.

Either way, I also have one coming, as it's still much closer than the kitbashed MDC car I've been using for years.

The GN paint scheme is accurate, and since the MRL and BNSF inherited the GN cars, those probably are as well.

[cjm413]

Not a new body style, but it's been a while since the last release.

They're not completely accurate for the GN/BN/MRL/BNSF, but like ESM's CB&Q "X58", very close, and probably the closest mass-produced model we'll get.  They were quite close to the later Big Sky Blue GN cars.

However, they're not quite as close to the mid-60s green cars these are painted as.  The GN had two series of these, both of which used a slightly different door style, although apparently the same size.  The bigger difference, and very hard to fix, is that these portray the FIRST order, which came with roofwalks.  The second order didn't have them, so would have been a better choice, but the "Cushioned" plaque on the second order didn't have Rocky, so it isn't as simple as changing the number.

Either way, I also have one coming, as it's still much closer than the kitbashed MDC car I've been using for years.

The GN paint scheme is accurate, and since the MRL and BNSF inherited the GN cars, those probably are as well.

One easy upgrade on any factory-painted GN/BN/etc stand-ins is to replace the stock FVM underframe with a ESM underframe.  GN had both PCF-built cars that would use the Hydra-Cushion underframe and Berwick-built cars that would use the Keystone underframe.

[wazzou]

The most obvious difference is that the GN cars used a Diagonal Panel roof.

[Mark5]

One easy upgrade on any factory-painted GN/BN/etc stand-ins is to replace the stock FVM underframe with a ESM underframe.  GN had both PCF-built cars that would use the Hydra-Cushion underframe and Berwick-built cars that would use the Keystone underframe.

Yeah, I think all of these box cars had some sort of extended draft gear.

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=90463

Mark

[jagged ben]

Yeah, I think all of these box cars had some sort of extended draft gear.

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=90463

Mark

Hmm, bummer that neither model scheme matches that photo precisely.

[Missaberoad]

Hmm, bummer that neither model scheme matches that photo precisely.

Both schemes are accurate however, for the record 

[nkalanaga]

Can't see the picture - login required. 

And, yes, they did have extended draft gear, but there are several ways of modeling that.  In this case, the body-mounted couplers are actually a disadvantage, as the first run didn't need to have them removed...  But they can be recycled, so all's not lost.

[cjm413]

Yeah, I think all of these box cars had some sort of extended draft gear.

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=90463

Mark

It's safe to say that Soo Line easily had the most versions of the "Soo Line boxcar" 

I recall a good number of them had EOC rather than sliding sill underframes (like either of the ESM underframes) where one could add cushioned coupler pockets to the existing (and lowered) FVM underframe:

http://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?threads/the-best-coupler-box-is-here.89213/

[Peter Amling]

http://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?threads/the-best-coupler-box-is-here.89213/

Thank you for posting that other thread. Those coupler boxes are amazing and fix my main complaints about the 1015 boxes. They are too tall and rub against axles. Now we just need to test those Shapeways boxes with the new True Scale Couplers and I will be off to the races. 

On topic: I got three of the new Soo Line Boxcars and loves them, except for the ride height of course. 

[Mark5]

It's safe to say that Soo Line easily had the most versions of the "Soo Line boxcar" 

I recall a good number of them had EOC rather than sliding sill underframes (like either of the ESM underframes) where one could add cushioned coupler pockets to the existing (and lowered) FVM underframe:

http://www.trainboard.com/highball/index.php?threads/the-best-coupler-box-is-here.89213/

Oh man, yeah thanks for that link! I've been looking for something like that!

Mark

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Ok, now... when were these schemes good for?

I really like the white with black lettering and red door. Am I good in 85?

[Mark5]

Ok, now... when were these schemes good for?

I really like the white with black lettering and red door. Am I good in 85?

Ed,

You should be good to go:

Year 2000: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/soo/soo18470dsa.jpg

Year 2005: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/soo/soo18524adl.jpg

Mark

[cjm413]

Thank you for posting that other thread. Those coupler boxes are amazing and fix my main complaints about the 1015 boxes. They are too tall and rub against axles. Now we just need to test those Shapeways boxes with the new True Scale Couplers and I will be off to the races. 

On topic: I got three of the new Soo Line Boxcars and loves them, except for the ride height of course. 

On the older FVM cars that come with truck-mounted couplers, but don't require a new ESM Hydra-Cushion or Keystone underframe, I generally file down the height of the bolsters to reuse the original MTL trucks, and while I have my file out, I'll also clear enough space to also reuse the couplers with a new 1025 coupler box.

In some cases, the thickness of the 1015/1016 coupler boxes isn't a problem if you swap out the original MTL screws with flathead screws.

The ideal solution would be to have N scale versions of Accurail's HO 40' and 50' underframes that could be purchased as separate parts at a MSRP of $3.98:

http://www.accurail.com/accurail/art/Details/120.jpg