Question on Arnold Rapido/Revell (and whoever else did these) trucks

[brokemoto]

Recently, I acquired the Arnold Rapido boom car.  This is the flat car with "wood" sides on  half of it and the Rapido four wheel caboose shell on the other half.  It makes a pretty good short line caboose, but it would look even more "possible" if it had archbar trucks (or failing that, Andrews).

 Does anyone out there know if Arnold/Revell/Rapido ever sold a car with archbar trucks?.........or even Andrews trucks?

The reason for the question, and my not simply putting MT or Accumate archbar trucks is that as some may be aware, the Rapido cars had this unique way of holding the trucks onto the chassis.  It involves a split pin that is cast into the undercarriage.  The trucks have cast-in bolsters that are unique.  The result is that when you try to substitute other trucks, they sit funny and there are derailments.

While I did put Unimates on the OE trucks, this is not the most satisfactory solution, either.  There does not seem to be much accommodation for  a body mount (1023, 2004 or even a Z scale), which would have been an improvement, but would still leave the OE trucks.  Failing the existence of Rapido archbar or Andrews trucks, has anyone had any success mounting either MTs or Accumate trucks to these cars?

I generally avoid these cars, if for no other reason than the peculiar truck mounting arrangement, but I did buy the REA car for my mail trains and the boom car for a caboose for the non-historic

I use the B-mann boom tender as a caboose for the non-historic, as well, I did manage to lower the ride on that one, but for some reason, it was derailing with Accumate archbar trucks.  I put MT Andrews trucks on it, as it needs the medium extension.  The MTs addressed the derailing problems.  MT does not sell archbar trucks with a medium extension.  It does, however, sell archbars with the long extension (WHY?), but that is too long for my purposes.   ....but I stray............


If anyone has managed to get different trucks on these things or knows if Rapido ever sold anything with archbar or Andrews trucks, that would help.

Thank you in advance.

[Mark5]

Broke,

This one right?

http://www.spookshow.net/freight/arnoldcrane.html

Big question is did Arnold ever make an archbar truck in this era? Doubtful as N scale only had Bettendorfs for most manufactures well through the 1970s.

I have one of the bobber cabooses, but have not gotten around to modifying it.

I have some ancient N scale catalogs around - will take a look when I get a chance.

Mark

[randgust]

The trucks/wheels/bolsters everything below the frame is complete POS on those cars.   

Save yourself a lot of grief and cut the plastic bolsters flush with a Zona saw, file flat.    Get some older junker underframes from A1G Atlas or Trix or almost anybody - plastic ones - and saw the bolsters off of those the same way.   Or, make your own out of Evergreen Styrene and do a 3/32 hole and file them to shape.

Glue the new bolsters on with plastic cement or Goo, and you can put on any truck you want.   I have one of those "UP" style wood cabooses with standard MT archbar trucks on it even today.    I'd done a bunch of older cars over time including a string of ten tank cars all with MT Bettendorf trucks - back in the day that was the only decent single-dome tank car out there before MT did theirs.

[ncbqguy]

Short answer, No.
As far as I remember there were only six Arnold Rapido truck styles
ARA freight
European four wheel passenger
Six wheel Buckeye
Baldwin Pedestal tender truck
Four wheel Bobber
Pullman Standard four wheel passenger

Back in the day I converted a number of the AR cars and found the best way is to use a regular plastic under frame to correct the truck centers and get a normal push pin truck mount.   On cars that don't have a full floor under frame you can cut out just the bolster. (As randgust just posted as I was typing this!!)

The body shells done under the Revell partnership were pretty good and even now a few of them are worth salvaging (especially the Wrecking Crane).

Charlie Vlk

[cjm413]

Are the bobber caboose body and wood sides separate parts that could be removed and added to a different flat car that has relatively normal bolsters to work with?

[randgust]

There's probably a million and one ways to do boom tenders out there, but I have yet to see a 'real railroad' that put a bobber caboose body on the end of a flatcar to do one.   I'm not sure who invented the idea, Lionel, Tyco, who.... but the myth has been nicely perpetuated.   If you have made a bobber and you don't have to make more tooling, hey, why not.

You'll find a lot of shortened boxcars for sure, and Santa Fe did that.   They also hacked up heavyweight passenger cars and only left the middle intact.  They probably did more one-off weird boom tenders than anybody, but never did that.

I'd also love for somebody to produce a prototype photo of a hacked-up wood caboose on a 40' or 50' flat as the end of a boom tender.   With a cupola intact.   I've even seen what looks like outside-braced converted caboose bodies WITHOUT a cupola, just never one with the cupola.

So, if you're going to all that work for a boom tender, hack up a boxcar body instead, or even a  heavyweight passenger car.
http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/fileSendAction/fcType/0/fcOid/40849088083022152/filePointer/40849088083022275/fodoid/40849088083022272/imageType/LARGE/inlineImage/true/ATSF%20CRANE%20BOOM%20CAR.jpg

This Mexican one is close, but you'll see it's still, at heart, a shortened boxcar:  http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/1261/ags15.jpg

[cjm413]

There's probably a million and one ways to do boom tenders out there, but I have yet to see a 'real railroad' that put a bobber caboose body on the end of a flatcar to do one.   I'm not sure who invented the idea, Lionel, Tyco, who.... but the myth has been nicely perpetuated.   If you have made a bobber and you don't have to make more tooling, hey, why not.

You'll find a lot of shortened boxcars for sure, and Santa Fe did that.   They also hacked up heavyweight passenger cars and only left the middle intact.  They probably did more one-off weird boom tenders than anybody, but never did that.

I'd also love for somebody to produce a prototype photo of a hacked-up wood caboose on a 40' or 50' flat as the end of a boom tender.   With a cupola intact.   I've even seen what looks like outside-braced converted caboose bodies WITHOUT a cupola, just never one with the cupola.

So, if you're going to all that work for a boom tender, hack up a boxcar body instead, or even a  heavyweight passenger car.
http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/fileSendAction/fcType/0/fcOid/40849088083022152/filePointer/40849088083022275/fodoid/40849088083022272/imageType/LARGE/inlineImage/true/ATSF%20CRANE%20BOOM%20CAR.jpg

This Mexican one is close, but you'll see it's still, at heart, a shortened boxcar:  http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/1261/ags15.jpg

Possibly from a company that already had a bobber caboose body and designed the rest of the car around it?

[randgust]

I thought I remembered that the Revell/Rapido caboose body was actually more accurate and typical than the Bachmann.   Confirmed, but Mark (Spookshow) also has a honey of a shot for an RP-printed replacement underframe (Shapeways) for that carbody.

Seems to me that the Bachmann was based on a narrow-gauge and rare one, with the odd center window underneath the cupola, which was always kind of a 'screen door on a submarine' thing to me but I also remember that somebody managed to produce a prototype photo of one with that feature.  But none of the PRR or other major users of 4-wheelers did that third center window.

Wow, that's really nice on that RP underframe.   So I'm voting for save the caboose  body, put it on a proper underframe!
http://www.spookshow.net/freight/arnoldbobber.html

I"ve ridden in Strasburg's 4-wheeler, possibly the only operational one in the US.  It was a trip!  A rough trip!!

[brokemoto]

That is the one, Mark5.

cjm413-The caboose shell comes off as does the tool box and pile of ties.  The wood sides do not.  Funny that you mention that, when I was in HO, I built a work caboose from an Athearn Blue Box flatcar, a Varney NE caboose, some scrap wood.  What I did was cut off the platform ends of the caboose chassis, flip it over, glue it to the flatcar, pushed the caboose shell onto it, used the scrap wood to put sides onto the other end,  I could have done this, but I asked the question after I had decalled the thing,

I decided to follow the recommendations of Randy and Charlie.  I went to the parts box for several chassis.  One that looked promising was from the WKW wood automobile boxcars.  It is metal, which would provide weight.  It would require cutting down, however.  There was a B-mann plastic with a weight.  It would have required minimal cutting down.  But HARK!  There was a chassis from an Atlas First Generation thirty-eight foot gondola.  The difference between its wheelbase and that of the Rapido car is hardly worth mentioning!  This is my underframe. 

The underframe of the Arnold car will come out if you grab onto it with small pliers and pull.  This also lets fall the weight.

One thing to note:  all of the underframes were a little too wide for the Arnold car.  This meant that I knew pretty early on that there would be something that needed to be done about that. 

Out came the sandpaper.  I sanded it down so that it was narrow enough to fit but still wide enough for a tight friction fit.  I went to the MT box to look for some truck pins and archbar trucks.  I found only one good one.  The other one had a broken coupler.  I had thought that I had a blister pack of them, somewhere, but I could not find it.  Then I remembered that all was not lost.  Thanks to Kisatchie, we have the Micro-Mates Truck and Coupler System.  i found some discombobulated Accumates, slid back the cover, removed the broken MTs, replaced with Accumates, slid back the cover and now had two serviceable trucks.  I put them onto the underframe, put the car on the track and all was groovy.

I put the caboose body, tool box and tie pile onto the car.  The caboose was having problems going onto the car, the toolbox and ties would not stay and the car was sitting funny.  I took the attachments off the flatcar and noted that The Rocket Scientist had failed to alter the A1G chassis to accommodate the clippy tabs of the attachments.  Off came the underframe, out came the pin vise to make an opening at each end for the aft clip on the caboose shell and the tie pile.  Off came the weight of the A1G underframe to be drilled and Dremelled to accomodate the tool box and the front clip of the caboose shell.  Back together it all went and everything is fine.  Thank you, everyone for your help and responses.

I am using this thing as an actual caboose for my non-historic short line.  Class One railroads were cheap enough, as it was (and still is).  Short lines were even cheaper.  What these cars represent is the short line's saving money by taking an old flatcar (hence the archbar or Andrews trucks) and constructing a cabin on it.  The B-mann boom car represents similar.  In fact, it does not have a cupola as does the Rapido car.

The B-mann four wheel caboose is based on a Philadelphia and Reading prototype; the Arnold on a Baltimore and Ohio prototype.

[nkalanaga]

I'm with Randgust on this one.  Forget finding trucks that fit, just rebuild the underframe.  If you don't want to go to the trouble, and expense, of finding one that fits, bolsters are easy to build.  Here are the instructions for my "standard" design, used for lowering MT flats and gons:

For one bolster, neat way:  One piece of Evergreen 0.060 x 0.125 strip to fit between sidesills, one piece of 0.030 x 0.125 strip 1/4 inch long.   Glue the strips together, with the short one centered on the long one.  Drill a 5/64 inch hole in the center for the bolster pin.  Glue to floor.  IF you measured everything right, the hole will be centered on the car.

Easy way:  2 pieces of 0.060 x 0.125, sized to leave a 3/32 inch gap in the center of the car.  Glue these to the floor.  Drill a 5/64 inch hole in the small piece, and glue it to the larger pieces, making sure the hole is centered before the glue sets.  Not as "neat", maybe, but nobody should be looking at it, and it's a lot easier to get everything centered.

Either way, it's almost quicker to build than to read the instructions.  If the floor is flat, a 1025 coupler should be at the right height.  If it's a little low, a 0.005 or 0.010 inch piece can be added to the bolster.

I've been using this design since the early 70s, before styrene strips were readily available.  Back then I used basswood, making the bolster 3/32 inch thick, or 0.093 inches.

Extra tip:  Most pin vises don't accept 5/64 inch drill bits.  Mine is glued into a piece of 3/8 inch wood dowel, so it's always ready, and works as well as any pin vise.

[Missaberoad]

Not a boom car, but pretty close to the spirit of the Arnold car.

[brokemoto]

Not a boom car, but pretty close to the spirit of the Arnold car.

This is precisely how I am using both the B-mann and Arnold boom cars:  as short line cabooses.  The photograph that the quoted poster provided is almost what I wanted to achieve: archbar trucks, a place for the junk a railroad crew might need...........

This one appears to have been constructed in this way, whereas the effect that I want is a cabin built onto a flat car, but the idea is the same.

I do need to add ladders to both cabooses and an end railing to the Arnold.  I left the stirrups, as opposed to adding steps.  I am assuming that stirrups would be acceptable on a short line caboose.

Thank you for that excellent photograph.

[cjm413]

This is precisely how I am using both the B-mann and Arnold boom cars:  as short line cabooses.  The photograph that the quoted poster provided is almost what I wanted to achieve: archbar trucks, a place for the junk a railroad crew might need...........

This one appears to have been constructed in this way, whereas the effect that I want is a cabin built onto a flat car, but the idea is the same.

I do need to add ladders to both cabooses and an end railing to the Arnold.  I left the stirrups, as opposed to adding steps.  I am assuming that stirrups would be acceptable on a short line caboose.

Thank you for that excellent photograph.

Here's a transfer caboose that was rebuilt from a flatcar, note the new steps that replaced the original stirrups:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3328529

[brokemoto]

transfer caboose rebuilt from a flatcar, note the new steps that replaced the original stirrups:

Thank you for that.  It appears that both the short line and Class I cabooses have steps.  Thus, it appears that I must add steps to the Arnold. 

The B-mann boom tender, which also I am using as a caboose for my non-historic, has steps similar to the Northwestern car that the quoted poster so thoughtfully provided.  The steps are mid-car on the B-mann, rather than at the end, but they are steps, not stirrups.  Steps would not fit on the end of the car with the cabin, as the cabin is flush with one end of the car.  I do suppose that I could add a platform, steps and railing to the end and either body mount couplers or use the MT archbar with the long extension.  Much would depend on the extensions' fouling or not fouling the steps.  It does appear that I must add some grab irons or railings to
the B-mann

There is a small platform on the end of the Arnold car.  I could extend it, or leave it as it is and add steps an end railing and ladder.  Either that or I could extend the platform slightly and add the above.  Still, it appears that I must add steps, ladders and railings.

Was the use of steps mandated by FRA mandate, union agreements or simply the concern for safety?  I am aware that union agreements with short lines were somewhat different from those with the Class I  lines.  This allowed the short lines to employ some money saving practices, as even the unions understood that the short lines did not have as much access to funds as did the Class I lines (although given the balance sheets of some class I lines, it was a wonder that any institution would extend credit to them).

[ncbqguy]

Steps were preferred but since the C&NW transfer car was built after the steam era they were apparently not mandated.   Reading and others had crumminess with tender-style steps rather than passenger types. 
What was oulawed in most states were "Widowmakers"; cars with no end platforms and side entry.   The illlinois railroad and wharehouse commission did allow on a specified term temporary use of specific car number boxcars fitted up for as cabooses.   Also, many states outlawed the use of "Bobber" cabooses.   Both were the result of lobbying by the Brotherhoods and a consequence of injury accidents caused by the use of such cars.
The caboose body on a flat car was popular with RTR and kit manufacturers with maybe Lionel being the pattern.....but there must be a prototype somewhere that they followed.
Internet searches turn up a photos of PRR and CN examples of a flat with a shortened wood box car body on one end, but mostly Lionel, Bachman, and Mantua models.
The use of such a car on a short line would likely indicate a logging road where the conductor was more of a timber boss who needed to have cables and other gear to secure logs on the train.  On a normal short line some accommodation for passengers and way freight LCL would be more likely needed.
Charlie Vlk