I think we've talked this one through, fellas. Let's get back to trains & MRRing...Thanks.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
And now it's a thread about thread direction.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
I was curious how could there possibly be more to say on this topic? It's a thought that I have more and more about threads on this forum.
It's now a car thread. I get it now.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
OvermodFor a legitimate example of a light truck doing that sort of thing:
Only had to stop twice for a new transmission.
Toyota billed it as a million pounds -- makes a better story for the advertisers and the press.
For a legitimate example of a light truck doing that sort of thing:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=13hBEX0ANVk
CSX RobertThe Space Shuttle is "only" 172,000 (dry) to 240,000 lbs, and it was probably dry.
It is way under that weight. The hull is basically an empty shell at this point. I'm not even sure it has a flight deck right now. I know they pulled the engines and OMS pods out, which is most of the weight.
OvermodOf course the best of these was the Toyota photo op with their truck pulling the whole million-pound Space Shuttle. Strange they don't seem to have advertised the hell out of that -- perhaps they did
The Space Shuttle is "only" 172,000 (dry) to 240,000 lbs, and it was probably dry.
Overmod Ringo58 My buddy had a '85 GN and a '87 T-type and those were a blast to go on rides in. A friend had a Syclone, which used that turbo V6 engine in an AWD chassis -- and was tuned correctly: it was supposedly the fastest car in the world at that time between 50 and 70mph -- which it did like pinching a wet watermelon seed.
Ringo58 My buddy had a '85 GN and a '87 T-type and those were a blast to go on rides in.
A friend had a Syclone, which used that turbo V6 engine in an AWD chassis -- and was tuned correctly: it was supposedly the fastest car in the world at that time between 50 and 70mph -- which it did like pinching a wet watermelon seed.
Id love me a Syclone or Typhoon
Ringo58My buddy had a '85 GN and a '87 T-type and those were a blast to go on rides in.
PM Railfan Did someone mention 'horsepower'? A 3000hp Dodge? Youll need it and more to catch one of these.... Sheldon: "And the blonde was fun too." PMR PS: as for the movie..... eh. Yawn. Stretch. Crickets.
Did someone mention 'horsepower'?
A 3000hp Dodge? Youll need it and more to catch one of these....
Sheldon:
"And the blonde was fun too."
PMR
PS: as for the movie..... eh. Yawn. Stretch. Crickets.
if thats yours, thats a beautiful car! My buddy had a '85 GN and a '87 T-type and those were a blast to go on rides in. The T-type would chirp all gears and pulled like a freight train.
Okay back on topic to unstoppable, I actually really enjoyed the movie. If you could over look some of the stuff, the behind the scenes on the SD-40s wrecking is pretty cool.
https://youtu.be/vOzRQ9eP-s4
This is shooting the scene where the train almost tips off the tracks
https://youtu.be/PFrIH0X8J6o
zugmannThey did a little, but Chevy beat them to that idea decades earlier
(Of course, I suspect the 350 is already 'overkill' compared to what's in the towmotors that pulled 747s regularly... but it still makes you impressed.)
Of course for 350 truck-block bragging rights, we proposed two of them running on natural gas to do all the heating and cooling for Patterns, in Delaware...
OvermodOf course the best of these was the Toyota photo op with their truck pulling the whole million-pound Space Shuttle. Strange they don't seem to have advertised the hell out of that -- perhaps they did.
They did a little, but Chevy beat them to that idea decades earlier (And with a better truck, IMO):
https://youtu.be/Y1-gHqov5w8
My takeaway from "Unstoppable" was that the engineer/conductor were having normal conversations in a locomotive cab while in Run 8 with the windows open. The sideways wheelie thing was not believeable, but one chalks that up to action enhancement.
SeeYou190I would suppose that if they said 3,000 horsepower, most of the viewing public would not believe it. I mean, that is only 10 Ford Mustangs... a locomotive must be more powerful than 10 Ford Mustangs.
Of course the best of these was the Toyota photo op with their truck pulling the whole million-pound Space Shuttle. Strange they don't seem to have advertised the hell out of that -- perhaps they did.
But of course what this brings to mind, now that Cosby is out of jail, was the poster child for all hookup-challenged cars, the Super Snake. That had a side-oiler 427 with a couple of Paxton blowers feeding a couple of ginormous 4-barrel carbs, and had no low-end throttle sensitivity at all. It ran beautifully when you got it up to reasonable speed, but that presumed you could get it rolling -- I don't remember if Cosby got it completely around the block but he gave the car back to Shelby the same day it was delivered. As I recall he had a comedy routine about it...
I remember the comedy sketch...
Cosby thought the car was dangerous and the sketch ended with Cosby instructing Shelby to deliver the car to Governor Wallace of Alabama....
Peter
Those cars are all impressive enough, but I am more interested in those who do cool stuff with less.
Like the guy a few years ago turning 12 sec 1/4 mile times with a FORD FLEX ECCOBOOST, and all he did was reprogram the ECM. Of course an ECCOBOOST FLEX does 15's off the showroom floor.
Enough money will always go faster. What can you do with less?
At age 19 I restored and rodded this for less than $4,000
Yes, not expensive, not exotic, but fast enough, and lots of fun.
283 built to about 325 hp, 4 speed, 0-60 in 5 sec, 1/4 mile in under 14 sec, top speed 135 mph.
Drove it for 7 years.
The Blonde was a lot of fun too.
Sheldon
n012944Good luck getting that thing to hook up when the boost comes on. My Gen 3 with mild mods struggles to keep it planted in 1st or 2nd gear.
Hennessey Venom was already over the top for that car. I was 6' and essentially needed a full-face cycle helmet to drive the thing anywhere over 120mph.
7j43k SeeYou190 hbgatsf Assuming there wasn't, why would they exaggerate that much? I suspect most of the viewing public wouldn't know the difference anyway. I would suppose that if they said 3,000 horsepower, most of the viewing public would not believe it. I mean, that is only 10 Ford Mustangs... a locomotive must be more powerful than 10 Ford Mustangs. A lot of what gets said in movies is there to bring the audience into the picture, and even if the truth is accurate, but seems unrealistic, it might be an obstacle. -Kevin Mustang? Here's MY car: https://carbuzz.com/news/listen-to-the-3000-hp-twin-turbo-dodge-viper-from-hell And your giant locomotive better have more HP than my car! Dude! Ed
SeeYou190 hbgatsf Assuming there wasn't, why would they exaggerate that much? I suspect most of the viewing public wouldn't know the difference anyway. I would suppose that if they said 3,000 horsepower, most of the viewing public would not believe it. I mean, that is only 10 Ford Mustangs... a locomotive must be more powerful than 10 Ford Mustangs. A lot of what gets said in movies is there to bring the audience into the picture, and even if the truth is accurate, but seems unrealistic, it might be an obstacle. -Kevin
hbgatsf Assuming there wasn't, why would they exaggerate that much? I suspect most of the viewing public wouldn't know the difference anyway.
I would suppose that if they said 3,000 horsepower, most of the viewing public would not believe it. I mean, that is only 10 Ford Mustangs... a locomotive must be more powerful than 10 Ford Mustangs.
A lot of what gets said in movies is there to bring the audience into the picture, and even if the truth is accurate, but seems unrealistic, it might be an obstacle.
-Kevin
Mustang?
Here's MY car:
https://carbuzz.com/news/listen-to-the-3000-hp-twin-turbo-dodge-viper-from-hell
And your giant locomotive better have more HP than my car! Dude!
Ed
Good luck getting that thing to hook up when the boost comes on. My Gen 3 with mild mods struggels to keep it planted in 1st or 2nd gear.
An "expensive model collector"
And because I can tell the difference, I laugh when the movie set in 1964 has a Checker Motors cab from 1978.
Yes, Checker did not change the basic body from 1959 to 1982, and even that car was the same platform and very similar to the 1956-1958 cars, but there are differences.
Some of them VERY obvious, like the battering ram bumpers after 1973, or the larger windshield from mid 1968 on.......
BATMANThey have no idea what buttons or levers they are pushing or pulling and it is ridiculous to those of us that know what ones they should be pushing.
Have you seen the scene in "Sharknado 3, Oh Hell No!" where Mohawk Guy (Bobak Ferdowsi) teaches David Hasselhoff how to fly the Space Shuttle so he can go battle the sharks in space?
Best nerd cameo ever!
Living the dream.
BATMAN My biggest pet peeve is actor pilots in the cockpit of an airplane just pushing and pulling buttons and levers trying to look like they are flying the plane. They have no idea what buttons or levers they are pushing or pulling and it is ridiculous to those of us that know what ones they should be pushing. Not to mention the cockpit never matches the exterior shots of the plane or the passenger cabin for that matter.
My biggest pet peeve is actor pilots in the cockpit of an airplane just pushing and pulling buttons and levers trying to look like they are flying the plane. They have no idea what buttons or levers they are pushing or pulling and it is ridiculous to those of us that know what ones they should be pushing. Not to mention the cockpit never matches the exterior shots of the plane or the passenger cabin for that matter.
Just don't call me Shirley.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
SeeYou190No need to exceed 80 MPH, so a larger engine would be a waste.
That bigger engine will get you to 80 a lot quicker
ROBERT PETRICKI think the movie facts compared to the actual facts are even a little more loose . . .
The movie was not "based on" real events, but "inspired by" real events, which gives a lot more leaway in the facts.
Let's face it, we all have expertise in something or many things in our lives and there is probably not a movie that has been made that can not be ripped apart in some fashion. We can be railroad snobs about inaccuracies in movies about trains, but how much flies over our heads when movies contain ridiculous things we know nothing about and don't pick up.
SeeYou190SeeYou190 wrote the following post 3 hours ago: riogrande5761The thing that bugged me the most about that movie was when the diesels went up on the wheels of one side around a corner. Now I need to make sure I never see that movie!
It's still a good movie and all things considered the railroad scenes are pretty accurate.That scene going around the curve is silly, but most (all?) Hollywood movies are exaggerations of reality anyway.