N scale vintage box cars are a blast from the past

[randgust]

Yeah, but it was fun to drag all those out and make up a rather eclectic all-Rapido train for the short video, and I really wanted the 'drag' of those old wheels as well, as that's what he uses.   I used to do an adapter car, maybe about 1973 or so.   

I'm about 98% MT wheels now, and you forget the racket of an all-metal-wheels vintage train, too.

The only thing it was missing was that annoying screech of a Con-Cor truck when the coupler spring was in contact with the metal axle - remember that?   

At one time, on my first '72 layout, I had enough B&R uncouplers and Minitrix ramps to do hands-off operation with Rapidos.  It worked well enough... unless you got right under a car axle and launched it vertically, bouncing it off the rails....   

So after all that, I got MT couplers and never looked back.  But yeah, I'm the kind of guy that stuck with Rapidos and about 30 uncoupling ramps for probably 3 years.

[peteski]

Yeah, but it was fun to drag all those out and make up a rather eclectic all-Rapido train for the short video, and I really wanted the 'drag' of those old wheels as well, as that's what he uses.   I used to do an adapter car, maybe about 1973 or so.   

The only thing it was missing was that annoying screech of a Con-Cor truck when the coupler spring was in contact with the metal axle - remember that?   
I'm about 98% MT wheels now, and you forget the racket of an all-metal-wheels vintage train, too.

I've used converter car in the late '80s on my club's NTRAK layout (I don't have a home layout).  I know there are still some club members (one in particular) who have long coal drag trains using rapido couplers.  Runs pretty reliably too.

Yes, I remember the screech.  IIRC the Con-Cor springs were also stiffer than Roco/Atlas.  And I like the sound of metal wheels. Noisy, just like 1:1 trains. 

At one time, on my first '72 layout, I had enough B&R uncouplers and Minitrix ramps to do hands-off operation with Rapidos.  It worked well enough... unless you got right under a car axle and launched it vertically, bouncing it off the rails....   

So after all that, I got MT couplers and never looked back.  But yeah, I'm the kind of guy that stuck with Rapidos and about 30 uncoupling ramps for probably 3 years.

The cars which had stiffer coupler springs would also lift up during the uncoupling process.
And as I have been repeating lately: there no need to be ashamed about using rapido couplers. Those are still used in the rest of the world on N scale models.

[nscalbitz]

FWIW,
I realise I have no cred here and open myself to ridicule for saying- some of us who were not of the wealthiest kind had to collect other peoples cast offs; I made a short hobby career of refurbishing older cars such as those cited and making them operational using a variety of techniques.
Only buying when possible 'better' and more accurate types for the home road....

Despite all the naysayers and agro-tech puffery that goes on, many of the older models are closer to prototypes that 'transition era' modellers want, and can run just as well with minor upgrades.
take-it-easy-
d

[randgust]

I'm pretty sure that I got this original Atlas "A1G" boxcar as my very first Santa Fe car from the Whistle Stop Hobby Shop in June 1972, along with a couple cars, turnouts, etc. and that infamous Atlas GP40.   As far as I know, this is the oldest car on my layout that's still in 'original' paint.   Converted to MT's probably about 1976 or so.

This was one of the very first US boxcars on the retail market from Atlas:  http://www.irwinsjournal.com/a1g/a1g_2203.jpg

The car number is wrong, 15231 was a 50-box DF boxcar, still active in 1975.   40-footers in 1972 were either scrapped, or repainted and rebuilt with the "Santa Fe" billboards, so the old schemes and cars were getting rough although the equipment resister still shows a lot of 40-footers then.  But the paint scheme and color, for the time, and even now, is acceptable as stock.

I weathered it HARD, years ago, and it's still one of my favorites.   I just upgraded it with an etched roofwalk and brake wheel, added an ACI label, etc.  I have an aerial shot of Corwith Yard in 1971 and one of the impressions is the variations on roof colors of boxcars, as they tended to be galvanized, painted, wore off, weathered, etc.





It just occured to me that at 50 years, my N boxcar is going to need another stencil:  '50 YEAR OLD CAR NOT TO BE USED FOR OFFLINE SHIPMENT'.

[OldEastRR]

It's interesting that so many of those early N scale cars both pass and freight were made with such fine detail and fidelity to the prototypes. The thing I don't understand is why some mfgrs chose weird cars/engines to model, like DL109, the PRR MPB70 combine, the helium tank car, etc. Imagine if AHM had made just a regular BM70....

[Lenny53]

The locomotives that have truly held up over the years (IMO)...
Kato built Con-Cor and Atlas locos from the 1970s and 1980s
This includes..
Con-Cor:
Hudson
PA-1/PB-1
DL109
(Might be missing 1 or 2)
EDIT... How could I forget the U-50 and Veranda Turbine..

Con-Cor E units were basically the same as the PA/DL109 drives

[peteski]

The thing I don't understand is why some mfgrs chose weird cars/engines to model, like DL109, the PRR MPB70 combine, the helium tank car, etc. Imagine if AHM had made just a regular BM70....

Very simple answer: because "weird" or oddball stuff sells!  Same reason that GG-1's and Big-Boys get produced.  Looking at my buying choices I can personally vouch for that. 

[JMaurer1]

Yes, they were interesting models of something different. Back then a box car was just a box car, but something unusual was something unusual! Of course, these days, MFRs are more concerned about what model they can get the most different roads out of. Look at how many F units have been produced by...well, everyone.

[wm3798]

When I look at my collection of vintage N, it seems to me that the oddballs came alongside a lot of decent running pretty common power.  Rivarossi's selection of USRA designs, f'rinstance.  If you wanted to have a generic steam era railroad, you had a pretty good range of wheel arrangements to pick from.  4-6-2s for your varnish, 2-8-2s for freight, and a couple of Mallets for your tonnage trains.  Add to that mix the Trix 0-6-0 switcher, and you could cover just about any job that needed to be done.  Even the extremely odd IHB 0-8-0 that was the first US prototype imported by Atlas (only three of the prototype existed on a single railroad) is a useful wheel arrangement and has a reasonably generic appearance for a burly heavy switcher. (The lack of a functional front coupler makes it a little tenuous, admittedly, but still!)
The oddballs were very road specific designs, such as the MRC Berkshire and the ConCor Hudson, and of course the inevitable Big Boys, DD40x, SP FEF, and so on, do sell, but to a modeler of a railroad that has no use for one, they are a colossal waste of resources!!

It's actually quite aggravating, after growing up with this "You'll get what you get and you'll like it" approach, where a limited range of models were available, but available pretty consistently and universally, to now, where you get runs that are so limited, you're lucky if you happen to have the giant wad of cash available RIGHT NOW to preorder something you might need in two years when it actually arrives, and God forbid you should need spare parts.  Taking those plain Jane models and fluffing them up with some decals and detail parts was part of the real enjoyment of the hobby, something that is much harder to achieve in today's super accurate custom limited run ethos.  I mean, it is nice when the planets align and you can get your mitts on something that's a perfect fit for your modeling efforts, but really, shouldn't there be a basic, go to Hell GP9 available in a handful of road names and undecorateds on a continuous basis?  Consider that the Trix F unit was produced for over 30 years!  A very simple machine, a ubiquitous prototype, reasonably priced.

Shouting down a hole, I know.

Lee

[thomasjmdavis]

Very simple answer: because "weird" or oddball stuff sells!  Same reason that GG-1's and Big-Boys get produced.  Looking at my buying choices I can personally vouch for that.

From what I've read about early N scale manufacturing, as far as the passenger cars go, it appears that many of the oddball cars were produced because US importers could easily cut the plans out of MR and RMC, and send them over to Lima and Rivarossi to tool up- resulting in the 3 obscure head end cars of the late 60s- the MPB70 (however many PRR, plus Virginian had 1, I assume second hand), the Monon rebuilt hospital mail-baggage (2 total in real life), and the ATSF Fast Mail rider cars (7 cars, used only on the Fast Mail).  When Con-cor finally ordered a full baggage from Rivarossi a few years later, they chose a one-off from ATSF (although there were also a few that were similar). 

But at least all of those oddballs were made in the thousands, or 10s of thousands, and remain fairly easy to acquire even today. And they are bash-able.  The major downside is that as a result, we never got the mass produced B60b or standard ATSF baggage car that could have been done with the same resources.

Did any of the prototypes of the Lima cars actually have that oddball PRR truck that Lima made? Certainly not the P70.

[nickelplate759]

...

Did any of the prototypes of the Lima cars actually have that oddball PRR truck that Lima made? Certainly not the P70.

I believe those trucks were correct for the MPB70 as built.  http://www.spookshow.net/trucks/prr3d5p1.html

[Albert in N]

   Lee, thank you for your astute observation!  Two of my N scale steamers are about to be decaled.  I have both Rock Island and CB&Q Microscale steam locomotive decals, plus touch up Testors paint and Dullcote.  Also, I have 91% alcohol to try to remove the stubborn berkshire ConCor Great Northern decals.  70% alcohol removed the MiniTrix Pennsy from their decapod.  Question:  Is it sinful to strip and foob decal two foob steamers from the past?  Oh well, JFRTM.  BTW, the Concor Century beer car keeps its original finish and logo.

[nickelplate759]

It's sinful to repaint the Rivarossi 2-8-4 as anything other than an NKP class S-2.   You can be forgiven for painting it as any other NKP class S though.


Seriously - paint them any way you like!  I recall seeing some sold in SP Daylight paint!

[peteski]

From what I've read about early N scale manufacturing, as far as the passenger cars go, it appears that many of the oddball cars were produced because US importers could easily cut the plans out of MR and RMC, and send them over to Lima and Rivarossi to tool up
. . .resources.

That sounds like a reasonable speculation. My post was mainly referring to oddball locos.

[thomasjmdavis]

That sounds like a reasonable speculation. My post was mainly referring to oddball locos.

I meant my post to be additive, not a correction.  Your explanation is the only one that explains how we had 2 manufactures make DL-109s before anyone made an SW-7 or NW-2.