I was downstairs in the basement this evening where my trains are located. On top of the stereo cabinet was a few pieces of rolling stock; two of which were a Proto 2000 40' stock car and an Accurail 40' double-sheath(?) boxcar. What stood out between the two cars was their height difference - perhaps 9-10 scale inches.
Were standard stock cars generally shorter in stature than equivalently-lengthed boxcars? The width on the stock car also looked narrower...but not quite as noticeable as the height.
Thanks for the input. Always something new to learn.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage Were standard stock cars generally shorter in stature than equivalently-lengthed boxcars? The width on the stock car also looked narrower...but not quite as noticeable as the height.
There's a benefit to having a tall boxcar: you can stack more boxes. Not so much in a stock car--lots of complaining from the customers.
Stockcars were (not "are", anymore) built around the height of the stock. There were single and double deck cars. With a single, they would also allow for the height of them-thar cowboys. But with pigs and sheep, nope.
Also, they folks who did this had in the back of their minds that the stock cars could be used for other purposes. If they were tall enough. So there would tend to be a lower limit for stock car height. I don't believe there were any stock cars with an inside height of 5 feet.
So there was less "upward pressure" for stock cars.
As for width, I expect that was the same for both types of cars--no reason to be different. But, over time, ALL cars got a bit wider. Stock cars didn't seem to be the profit centers that other cars were, so they tended to be older. And, hence, a bit narrower. Not lots, though. So boxcars would get wider firster. If there was currently room for expansion.
Ed
A couple of more factors...
On width, most stock cars were essentially single-sheathed. Just the framing on the outside, so it might appear narrower all other things being equal.
On height, carrying other commodities needed to take into consideration a stock car's relatively light capacity. For a single deck car, you didn't want a tall roof because of the temptation to overload it. To some degree, keeping the roof shorter was a design protection factor against overloading.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
Generally, a house car (boxcar, reefer, stockcar) would have the same height as other house cars built at the same time. What you're probably looking at are models of two cars where the real cars were built a couple of decades apart.
From roughly the 1890's - 1920's, house cars were generally 36'-40' long and around 8' or 8-1/2' high. Woodsided boxcars, reefers and stockcars from that time would all be about the same height - which would also be the same height as the roof height of a standard caboose, so the crew in the cupola could look over the train as it ran.
A few cars in that time were built bigger, but the common 10' high, 40' long steel boxcar that would become the standard only came along in the mid-1930's. Most new stockcars or reefers from that time would be the same size, although 50' boxcars became more common after WW2 while reefers and stockcars generally stayed at 40'.
So a 1920's stockcar is probably going to be shorter in height than a 1940's boxcar...and a 1940's stockcar would be higher than a 1910's-20's boxcar!!
That Proto 2000 stock car is probably a Mather. As far as I know, that's the only stock car P2K ever made. I don't think Mather built any new stock cars after the late 1930's or early 1940's, although I think there were some later rebuilds. At that time. Mather had not begun to use steel ends on any of their cars. End construction was of individual components of steel structural shapes and wood. This construction allowed for any height that was required. If Mather had used commercial steel ends, they might have been forced to use a taller end, or to cut down a commercially available end. A stock car didn't need to be very tall because they weren't used to haul giraffes. The height of a tall horse or steer, or two decks of hogs or sheep, was adequate. Extra height would have involved use of more materials to build the car, with no actual advantage being realized.
Meanwhile, boxcar heights were increasing. A typical Mather stock car had an overall height to running board of around 12' 9", with an inside height of 7' 9". By 1942, Mather was producing boxcars 15' 2" tall over running boards, and with an inside height of 10' 3". There was never any need for Mather to produce a stock car of comparable height.
Any stock cars that exceeded these Mather heights were probably rebuilt from older house cars, or were designed around available standard components that dictated a greater height. While the utility of a boxcar might be enhanced by greater height, there is no reason to think a stock car would be improved by that expedient.
Not all stock cars were short. In the 1964 the Northern Pacific developed their 85' long stock car, that was nearly 15' tall. They were double deck cars to carry pigs. Plan and photo in April 1982 Model Railroader.
Previously in the 1950's the NP had converted 40' stock cars to double deck pig cars. http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=68705
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.