Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Heavyweight passenger car lengths

7621 views
14 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2010
  • From: outside of London, Ontario
  • 389 posts
Heavyweight passenger car lengths
Posted by lone geep on Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:23 AM

At a recent visit to my LHS, I noticed an undecorated Atlas paired window coach and was interested, when I took it out of the box, I measured it and found it to only be 76 scale feet long. For some reason I thought all heavyweight passenger cars minus some baggage and RPO cars were 85 feet long. Is the Atlas model 10 scale feet too short or where there also shorter versions built? I do have some Athearn BB heavyweights that only measure to 72 scale feet but I understand those to be made for tighter radii. 

Lone Geep 

 \

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:42 AM

Yes there were all sorts of lengths of prototype cars.

The Pennsy's most common heavyweight coach was the P70 coach.  It was 70 ft between the interior bulkheads.  Their standard heavyweight commuter coach was the P54, which was only 54 ft between the interior bulkheads.  Much shorter.

The Athearn cars are very close in length to many of the Reading's heavyweight cars  Most of them were in shorter run or commuter service.  They are prototypical for that type of service.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 869 posts
Posted by NHTX on Sunday, December 12, 2021 10:58 AM

     I also have five Atlas coaches that I cannot run due to being too short lengthwise.  Passenger car length depends on where the length was measured.  As Mr Husman stated, PRR measured theirs between the passenger compartment  bulkheads.   Others measured over coupler pulling faces or, diaphragm faces.  Cars such as commuter stock may be shorter because there is no need to allow room for luggage.  Others may have only one toilet due to their shorter hauls.   

     Generally speaking, most long haul passenger cars were in the 80-85 foot length and head end cars, (baggage, express and RPO) were between 60-70 feet.  Some baggage and express cars were converted from passenger carrying cars- Southern Railway comes to mind,-retained their 85 foot length.  A give-away to this would be vestibules at each end that were often blanked off.  Sometimes the steps remained, sometimes they were replaced with the freight car style found on other head end equipment, sometimes diaphragms may be removed.

      The Atlas car was actually introduced by Branchline Trains as a kit with a New York Central commuter coach as a prototype.  Like most ready-to-run passenger cars from Walthers, there is/was a central core onto which a variety of sides can be placed, just like Atlas/Branchlines heavyweight Pullmans.  This way a manufacturer can use it for almost any type of car you want.  The Athearn cars date back to the 1960s, when the average layout used 18 inch radius curves and their length is shortened because of it.

     A look at prototype car diagrams will show a number of places on a single car where length measurements are qouted.  You just hope the manufacturer gets them right for your prototype.  The general agreement is, Atlas/Branchline got it right for the NYC car they used.  And, like a lot of models offered to us, they painted them in roadnames that would sell, even if not totally correct.  I'm glad Rapido got it right on their Osgood Bradley's.  Too bad the Atlas's are one vestibule length too short.

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,367 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Sunday, December 12, 2021 12:52 PM

NHTX
The general agreement is, Atlas/Branchline got it right for the NYC car they used.

I agree. I have several varieties of their Branchline/Atlas coaches. The kits were fun to build and very detailed.

 Pressed-Car by Edmund, on Flickr

 

Some very good details here:

https://nycshs.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/nycheavyweightcoacharticle.pdf

Regards, Ed

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, December 12, 2021 2:27 PM

Should the subject come up, the Atlas/Branchline paired-window coach is supposed to be a C&O car.  The sides are half correct, in that they are the same piece for each side, rather than the correct mirror image.

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 869 posts
Posted by NHTX on Sunday, December 12, 2021 3:46 PM

     This discussion about heavyweight coaches brings to mind a reason cars normally associated with discription were so defined as such.  It is widely known the a vehicle with a spring suspension rides better at speed, the greater its weight.

     On the New Haven at least, part of the reason its earlier parlor cars were heavyweights is because they had concrete floors.  This fact contributed to cars of this era being known as heavyweights, usually in the 80-90 ton range.  This was especially true, and desirable in parlor and sleeping cars, where patrons paid more for, and demanded a smoother ride.  This was in the era before continuous welded rail, when there was a rail joint every 39 feet.

    An excellent article on the conversion of some heavyweight parlor cars to coaches, which mentions jackhammering these concrete floors, entitled "Butterflies to Caterpillars" appeared in the New Haven Railroad Historical and Technical Association's "Shoreliner" publication, Vol. 21, Issue 3.

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • 2,572 posts
Posted by John-NYBW on Sunday, December 12, 2021 5:35 PM

dehusman

Yes there were all sorts of lengths of prototype cars.

The Pennsy's most common heavyweight coach was the P70 coach.  It was 70 ft between the interior bulkheads.  Their standard heavyweight commuter coach was the P54, which was only 54 ft between the interior bulkheads.  Much shorter.

The Athearn cars are very close in length to many of the Reading's heavyweight cars  Most of them were in shorter run or commuter service.  They are prototypical for that type of service.

 

Glad to learn about Pennsy's short commuter coaches. I built my commuter fleet for my free lanced railroad using Life-Like and MDC 60 footers because they were dirt cheap on ebay. Around $10 plus shipping on the average. I thought I was using modeler's license to justify running these but now I see short commuter cars were not unheard of.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Sunday, December 12, 2021 6:00 PM

NHTX

     I also have five Atlas coaches that I cannot run due to being too short lengthwise.  Passenger car length depends on where the length was measured.  As Mr Husman stated, PRR measured theirs between the passenger compartment  bulkheads.   Others measured over coupler pulling faces or, diaphragm faces.  Cars such as commuter stock may be shorter because there is no need to allow room for luggage.  Others may have only one toilet due to their shorter hauls.   

Why can't you run them? Do you mean because they are not correct for New Haven? One of the few roads that had actual 80' heavyweight coaches?

As to the OP's question, any quick study of heavyweight passenger car plans from various sources will quickly show you the lengths were not standardized.

Even in the age of streamlined/lightweight cars there are a number of examples less than 80' or 85'.

Personally, I'm not real OCD about passenger car lengths. I run lots of selectively compressed passenger cars and some that are scale length.

But this feature is VERY important to me - diaphragms that touch, work and stay touching.

 

Nothing spoils the illusion of realism for me more than the perfectly detailed accurate scale model with gaps between the cars for my little HO passengers to have to jump across.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    October 2010
  • From: outside of London, Ontario
  • 389 posts
Posted by lone geep on Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:01 PM

Thanks for the replies. 

On a similar note, where there any standard length for 4 axle Harriman passenger cars? I have some Model Power ones I'm considering detailing and upgrading but I think they are 60 footers. 

Lone Geep 

 \

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:53 PM

lone geep

Thanks for the replies. 

On a similar note, where there any standard length for 4 axle Harriman passenger cars? I have some Model Power ones I'm considering detailing and upgrading but I think they are 60 footers. 

 

Harriman cars were several different lengths depending, but only a few were 80'. There were both 60' and 65' coaches, 60' baggage, 60'RPO/mail storage, 64' RPO/coach, as well as 80' diners and 75' RPO/baggage cars. And there were others, those are just few I have data on at my fingertips.

Only the 75' and 80' cars had six wheel trucks, all the rst 4 wheel trucks.

I have the Roundhouse/Athearn Harriman cars, all 60' - close enough for me.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 869 posts
Posted by NHTX on Sunday, December 12, 2021 11:01 PM

      I am hesitant to run the Atlas cars because the cars they are to represent are the New Haven 6800-6823 series, deluxe smokers, which have a length over their buffers (diaphragm strikers) uncoupled, of 84' 3 1/2'' according to the car diagram found in the New Haven section of www.alphabetroute.com.

      The New Haven's Osgood-Bradley coaches as modeled in HO by Rapido measure 84' 6 1/4" as confirmed on the diagrams for all series (8200, 8300 and 8500).  Atlas' car measures 79 feet over its diaphragms, a five foot difference which is sorely obvious when coupled to a O-B.

       My goal is to as much as possible, replicate the New Haven's commuter trains that operated out of Boston to Needham, Blackstone, Stoughton and Providence RI. in the early 1960s.  The length difference is as noticable as one truck riding the ties or an F-7 representing an FL-9.  That is something I can't tolerate.   

     I fully agree on the diaphragm issue which is why I replace the Rapido couplers with Kadee 156's to reduce the distance between cars.  I feel I have compromised enough using ten window, 8200 and 8500 series long distance cars instead of the correct 11 window, higher density cars (8300 series), which are currently unavailable in HO) in commuter service. 

      To Lone Geep, I believe the SP used shorter Harrimans in commuter service in the San Francisco Bay area.  I can't swear to this and, don't know if they were as short as 60 feet or their resemblance to the cars you refer to.  if you are freelancing, you have a much wider latitude as to what you are comfortable with.  I know the Chicago and North Western used 60 footers in their operations out of Chicago.  They were produced in HO by Rivarossi a few years back as baggage cars, RPOs and coaches lettered for C&NW, New York Central, and possibly Union Pacific.  The Rivarossi cars were based on C&NW clerestory roofed prototypes.

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Monday, December 13, 2021 9:20 AM

For heavyweight cars, 80' coaches would not be the norm. Most were shorter than that, 70'-72' being very common. Most RPO or Baggage cars were that long or even shorter, 60'-70'. Only Diners, Sleepers, and Observation cars were primarily 80'. (However, many railroads had heavyweight observation 'business cars' for the use of executives that were often around 70'-72'.)

Stix
  • Member since
    October 2010
  • From: outside of London, Ontario
  • 389 posts
Posted by lone geep on Monday, December 13, 2021 11:10 AM

NHTX

     

      To Lone Geep, I believe the SP used shorter Harrimans in commuter service in the San Francisco Bay area.  I can't swear to this and, don't know if they were as short as 60 feet or their resemblance to the cars you refer to.  if you are freelancing, you have a much wider latitude as to what you are comfortable with.  I know the Chicago and North Western used 60 footers in their operations out of Chicago.  They were produced in HO by Rivarossi a few years back as baggage cars, RPOs and coaches lettered for C&NW, New York Central, and possibly Union Pacific.  The Rivarossi cars were based on C&NW clerestory roofed prototypes.

 

My protofreelanced storyline sets my railroad in Northern Ontario so I'm trying to keep my rolling stock similar to CPR and the CNR, which did not have harrimans. However, one prototype road that mine interchanges with, the Algoma Central, did have some secondhand from the D&RGW so I can justify there use on my line. 

Wjstix, interesting to know, was it only the later lightweight/ Budds that had 85 feet as the norm?

Lone Geep 

 \

  • Member since
    January 2019
  • 2,572 posts
Posted by John-NYBW on Monday, December 13, 2021 11:51 AM

NHTX

I know the Chicago and North Western used 60 footers in their operations out of Chicago.  They were produced in HO by Rivarossi a few years back as baggage cars, RPOs and coaches lettered for C&NW, New York Central, and possibly Union Pacific.  The Rivarossi cars were based on C&NW clerestory roofed prototypes.

 

The Rivarossi set of 60 footers included a combine in addition to the coach, baggage, and RPO. Mine was lettered for the Burlington although I don't know if the Burlington ever ran 60 footers. I've relettered all of mine for my freelanced railroad. I found these cars to be a better quality than the Rivarossi line of full length passenger cars. 

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Monday, December 13, 2021 1:00 PM

lone geep
Wjstix, interesting to know, was it only the later lightweight/ Budds that had 85 feet as the norm?

Yup. Although some shorter lightweight Baggage / RPO cars were made.

Re Rivarossi: The 60' cars were based on C&NW prototypes which were all 60' cars in real life. These models ended up being sold under several manufacturer names in a fairly short period: Rivarossi, Walthers, and I think Hornby. Those cars are relatively recent models, they are not related to the AHM/Rivarossi heavyweight (and streamlined) cars that were  made in the 1960's - 1990's. 

Stix

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!