Milwaukee boxcab info needed

[draskouasshat]

Would anyone happen to have any drawings or dimensions of the Milwaukee boxcabs? im looking at building a set for fun and im needing wheels diameters and axle spacings. I cant seem to find much info on them in those regards.
Don't fret, im still needing my santa fe steam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks
Drasko

[nkalanaga]

From "The Milwaukee Electrics" by Noel T. Holley, Hundman Publishing:

pilot truck 36 inch wheels, 6 ft 0 in wheelbase
power trucks 52 inch wheels, 10 ft 6 in wheelbase.
pilot truck inner axle to first power axle 7 ft 10 in.
between axles on adjacent power trucks 11 ft 0 in, including rear axle to rear axle between units.
coupler pulling face to first pilot truck axle 4 ft 8 in.

These are for the original 2-unit EF-1.  There may have been differences in spacing between units on the later 3 and 4-unit sets, the plans don't show them.  It doesn't look like it from the pictures.

[Mark5]

EF-1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Road_class_EF-1#/media/File:MILW_EF-1_sideview.jpg

[draskouasshat]

From "The Milwaukee Electrics" by Noel T. Holley, Hundman Publishing:

pilot truck 36 inch wheels, 6 ft 0 in wheelbase
power trucks 52 inch wheels, 10 ft 6 in wheelbase.
pilot truck inner axle to first power axle 7 ft 10 in.
between axles on adjacent power trucks 11 ft 0 in, including rear axle to rear axle between units.
coupler pulling face to first pilot truck axle 4 ft 8 in.

These are for the original 2-unit EF-1.  There may have been differences in spacing between units on the later 3 and 4-unit sets, the plans don't show them.  It doesn't look like it from the pictures.

Thank you VERY much!!! that is exactly what I needed! time to find some mechanisms to start with!

Drasko

[trainutz]

As the Milw assembled 3 and 4 unit sets they sometimes kept the original drawbars between units or they added knuckle couplers; hence the difference in spacing between units. Photographs are the definitive answer.

As to suitable mechanisms: probably the best dimension-wise mechanisms are the MicroAce JNR Ed 17, Ed17/19 and ED53 units. They are quite close to @nkalanaga 's post. Your biggest problem is that there haven't been any mechanisms available for a very long time. To complicate matters, Kato's GG1 pans aren't currently available although Bachmann pans might be acceptable. 

 Gregg Scott posted pics of his boxcab project several years ago. He did his usual magic in recreating all 3 front porch variations on the A and B units, as well as 2 flavors of bob-tail bodies. He even designed dummy units - cab and bob-tail - for the project.

[peteski]

To complicate matters, Kato's GG1 pans aren't currently available although Bachmann pans might be acceptable. 

While it pains me to say this, Bachamnn GG1 pantos are actually better than Kato's version.  They are functional - sprung and equalized/stabilized (whatewer that is called).  Kato's, while they look superior to Bachmann, are simply dummies.

[nkalanaga]

"As the Milw assembled 3 and 4 unit sets they sometimes kept the original drawbars between units or they added knuckle couplers"

Thank you!  I assumed that they all had drawbars between the units, as there wouldn't be any point in uncoupling them.  They had jumper wires between the units, so that one pantograph could serve all units, and those would have been a pain to disconnect.  They weren't plug-in cables, but hardwired rooftop jumpers.  On the other hand, the MILW wasn't known for standardization, and by the 50s the shop crews did whatever was needed to keep the electrics running, usually with no help from Corporate in Milwaukee.

Peteski:  I've heard "stabilized" used for the cranks and rods that keep the pans vertical, but don't know if that's the "official" term.  Or if there even IS an official term...

[peteski]

Peteski:  I've heard "stabilized" used for the cranks and rods that keep the pans vertical, but don't know if that's the "official" term.  Or if there even IS an official term...

Ok, then it is "stabilized".  Those Bachmann pantographs have 2 links/rods coupling the bottom of the lower arms which keep the pantograph vertical in the raised position, even when the drag from the overhead wire or from being pushed by hand, wants to lean it forward or backward.   Kato pantograph does not have those links/rods.

[AlwaysSolutions]

If the Bachmann and Kato pantographs don't pan out (get it?  "pan" out?)  I do sell my own versions for the Boxcabs and Little Joes.  I knew supply would be an issue for my kits so I did a little project on the side.  They go up and down and stay straight unlike the Katos (gawd those are aweful):

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Cheers -Mike

[nkalanaga]

I use pans from the Overland Little Joe on my electrics.  Bought a dozen pair (at an outrageous price) as spare parts.  The only problem is that they don't reach as high as they should, but with a little work on the roofs, they will fit on Kato electrics AND reach a 24 ft wire.

Just out of curiosity, how much do you sell yours for?  And where can we order your kits?

[AlwaysSolutions]

Just out of curiosity, how much do you sell yours for?  And where can we order your kits?

I sell the pantographs for US $10 each / $20 pair.  I don't have a shop for items I make in-house, so I usually sell to the customers of my kits, new customers via word of mouth, or once in awhile on feeBay.  The loco kits are at my shapeways shop: https://www.shapeways.com/shops/alwayssolutions.

These Boxcabs have been a bit of an enigma as far as finding a suitable mechanism for them.  I've been wracking my brain for over a year with a few other Boxcab enthusiasts to find a good "off the shelf" solution, but haven't found the holy grail.  A couple of the Japanese locos will fit and do as stand-ins, but virtually no way to convert them to proper axle spacing.  It may end up being a custom job like I did with the Joe, or a cut-n-splice for the hardcore out there.

Cheers -Mike

[strummer]

I've probably posted this before: from a 3x5 neg I got years ago...



Is this the class of loco that's being discussed?

Mark in Oregon

[hegstad1]

Well,  This thread necessitates showing another amazing Gregg Scott/GHQ project.  His resin shells and pewter side frames and detail castings are nothing short of unbelievable.  Gregg has done shells for most of the variations of the boxcabs.  Joe Valerio did the painting, of course.  This level of detail and crispness is still not possible from 3D printing in my opinion.  This is another labor of love for Gregg that could possibly become available as a kit but unfortunately the mechanisms have not been obtainable for some time.  Joe mentioned them above.  What do you all think?

[Cajonpassfan]

Well,  This thread necessitates showing another amazing Gregg Scott/GHQ project. ..... What do you all think?

What do I think? Pardon my French, but effin’ unbelievable. Just wow!
Otto K.

[Jim Starbuck]

Outstanding!