Note I said D&RGW coach. See other note regarding arched roofs on
refurbished cars.
In terms of the Prospector cars - all of which, btw saw service on
the CZ (except for the mail cars) and did make it to Chicago &
Oakland, the sides on the NKP cars are better than the plastic ones
to date - in HO. The one thing that bothers me more than anything
else on these cars - like the HO Walthers 52 seat coach - is the
number board you reference. It sticks out like a sore thumb. To
me. As you say, it's personal preference. I bought a couple of the
Walthers HO models for the foreign car aspect (for the CZ) - I have a
photo of one coming into Chicago - but that number board stuck
out. Now that same car, as a C&O coach which ALSO was on the CZ at
times, is perfectly accurate. Same too with the 10-6 as done by
Lambert (the most common - and earliest - foreign sleeper were the
C&O 10-6s). I frankly hope Walthers does that car as a 1952 - 1965
CZ almost requires one hanging around.
At 02:53 PM 12/30/2007, Michal Basta wrote:
>Bob,
>
> > Well, again, it depends on your tolerance.
>
>Exactly, that always depends on one's personal tolerance!
>
> > If it is truly what is termed a "Harriman" car (a misnomer as it should be
> > "Common Standard" ) then it has no built up center sill, it has an arched
> > (oval) roof from end to end, with the roof plates perpendicular to the
> > sides from end to end, and the plates overlapping on an even/odd basis.
>
>The kit mentioned by Jerry seems just to be side etchings, so probably no
>roof nor underframe.
>
> > No
> > D&RGW car had a "Harriman roof", no D&RGW coach had an arched roof. The
> > D&RGW coaches that appear to have an arched roof have a roof that is a
> > clerestory version that is sheathed into a very much shallower arch (in
> > fact the top is not arched, but is the same as the clerestory).
>
>Ouch, I always thought the former D&SL cars did have the arched rooves. So
>they didn't.... thanks! (Or perhabs if you talk on D&RGW, you do mean the
>pre-merger one, not counting in the D&SL stock taken over?)
>
> > Again, it depends on tolerances, but that isn't anywhere close in my book.
> >
> > It may be close to a WP car, I'd have to look at it. But the WP cars were
> > not Common Standard cars, they were a UP design that was modified to suit
> > the WP. Therefore it had a built up (Pullman) centersill and other items
> > of note. Again, it depends on your tolerance.
>
>Seems I'm perhabs very intolerant guy ;-) as in my eyes these etchings don't
>match the DRGW nor WP coach close enough to be the kitbash worth (and I hate
>to shave out unwanted details out of etchings :-(
>
> > What I would like to see is passenger car modeling tolerance like that of
> > freight cars - where the ends, underframe and roof actually matter.
>
>But what about Duryea cushioned underframe with couplers distinctively
>sticking out? Just curious, how many frt car models with them did you ever
>seen?!
>
> > Add to that the method of building each side, and you have a much better
> > ability to get closer to prototype. If all we're going to do is settle
> > for stand ins, we'll not get what the freight car community has now.
> > People have, I think, learned not to say roof walk.
>
>Okay Bob, consider this: As for the DRGW 1230-1 Nscale project, being both
>RGMHS Society and
>RGMHS_group_at_yahoo member, I'm avare of it and greatly appreciate effort
>of anyone involved in it. Hovever reasons why I didn't order the sides for
>myself are as follows: 1. models of the same prototype or of the same type
>of prototypes made by different manufacturers just do not match each other,
>they do look like models of two different things (Examples from N: mixed
>loco consist of Kato and IMRC F7s just does look weird, as is the case of
>mix of MT and IMRC FTs), so, unless there would be whole line of PS DRGW
>cars by one manufacturer, the Prospector or Royal Gorge consist would just
>look weird. 2. The corrugation does have the very sophisticated profile, so
>to make good-looking corrugation (especially the large one) just by etching
>or CNC milling process (unless one does use very special profile bits) is
>very difficult if ever possible, IMHO. (Injected
>styrene or precisely cast resin would be better option, but of course the
>first is price-prohibitive in our case and the second at least tricky,
>because of need of: I) making or obtaining the right corrugation to make the
>original from II) moulding precise enough incl. avoiding deformations and
>III) avoiding shrinkage of the mold - and castings)
> So, my very own way to get my own PS DRGW cars in Nscale is as
>follows:
>I acquired 12+ of the old Rowa cars, turned new bolsters for Kato PS trucks
>on
>my lathe , did let CNC-mill accurate styrene plugs for window openings and
>also still need to CNC-mill various types/widths of the baggage/RPO doors.
>The rest is just cutting openings for new windows/doors and cross-kitbash of
>various sections of these carbodies (and interriors) and adding some
>details. That said, after 1+ year effort have 5 cars ready for the
>paintshop, but having very slow "modeling productivity" myself I do not
>expect to have the rest finished sooner than after another 2+ years ;-).
> And yes, for example, I can live with obsolete (now blank) C&O
>off-center carnumber-boards, at least for now ;-)
>
>Michal B.
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Bob Webber
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|