Yet another one for my Forum friends. Was there a prototype for the old Life-Like open double deck auto carrier? I was given one as part of a collection given to me by a family member. I know that early in my modeling period there were open side cars but I don't know if that car is valid or not. Thank you as usual for any assistance that can be provided.
Yes, back in the 50's early 60's. Not saying how authentic the Lifelike car is, but there was a prototype.
https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/fileSendAction/fcType/0/fcOid/38737271434992026/filePointer/38737271434992180/fodoid/38737271434992174/imageType/LARGE/inlineImage/true/EvansAutoLoader.jpg
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Athearn sold way more of their version than LifeLike or Tyco.
None of the models are perfectly scaled, but all capture the sprit of the original cars.
Since I model that era, and will be modeling an auto assembly plant on the new layout, I have a small fleet of about 15 of these.
Sheldon
dehusman Yes, back in the 50's early 60's.
Yes, back in the 50's early 60's.
I guess that answers that. I model the early 70s to 1980 so the car is too old for my era.
Mine only hauls 4 cars.
-Photograph by Kevin Parson
I think it looks better with the cars centered in the opening on the lower decks. The upper deck is too congested when there are three automobiles up there.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Look up the Evans Auto-Loader (for some odd reason, I think there was a German inspiration).
As with some of the early stack-train equipment, much heavier structure was thought necessary. Compare this to the generations of purpose-built open-sided double and triple-deck autoracks that followed.
FRRYKid I guess that answers that. I model the early 70s to 1980 so the car is too old for my era.
To the world you are someone. To someone you are the world
I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought
NorthBrit FRRYKid I guess that answers that. I model the early 70s to 1980 so the car is too old for my era. Not neccessarily. I am sure they may have ran into the 1970s. If not, you can have modelers license. I like Kevin's S&G one. David
Actually, there were not very many of those made, and they did not last real long.
Even I take liberties with roadnames and quantity of cars, and I model 1954 when they were in use.
They were only a little easier to unload than the box cars, the upper deck was loaded and unloaded with a built in ramp that makes up part of the upper deck. The wide support on the side covers the mechanism the raises and lowers that ramp.
I think the car companies had concerns about damage - turns out they were right - look at modern auto racks......
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Actually, there were not very many of those made, and they did not last real long. Even I take liberties with roadnames and quantity of cars, and I model 1954 when they were in use. They were only a little easier to unload than the box cars, the upper deck was loaded and unloaded with a built in ramp that makes up part of the upper deck. The wide support on the side covers the mechanism the raises and lowers that ramp. I think the car companies had concerns about damage - turns out they were right - look at modern auto racks...... Sheldon
Then I stand corrected, Sheldon.
Here in the U.K. automobiles were carried on trains well into the 1970s.
David
NorthBrit ATLANTIC CENTRAL Actually, there were not very many of those made, and they did not last real long. Even I take liberties with roadnames and quantity of cars, and I model 1954 when they were in use. They were only a little easier to unload than the box cars, the upper deck was loaded and unloaded with a built in ramp that makes up part of the upper deck. The wide support on the side covers the mechanism the raises and lowers that ramp. I think the car companies had concerns about damage - turns out they were right - look at modern auto racks...... Sheldon Then I stand corrected, Sheldon. Here in the U.K. automobiles were carried on trains well into the 1970s. David
David, clearly we should all just run whatever we like, and I stretch history a bit myself as indicated. I posted that info not so much to correct you, but to provide more info as the OP is known to be a little fussy about accuracy.
By the way, while I do not comment on a lot of stuff anymore, I have taken a look at you pictures. Nice work, clearly you are having fun.
I admit openly I don't know much about railroading outside North America, and my own interests are largely linked to big time mainline operations in my modeled era of 1954, but I can see the fun in your work - thanks for being part of this forum.
A large percentage of new autos are still carried by train today in North America, in fully enclosed multi level auto racks. So in a way, it evolved back to the box car in terms of providing protection.
https://www.modeltrainstuff.com/atlas-master-line-ho-20006442-gunderson-multi-max-auto-rack-ttx-695651-g100035/?gclid=CjwKCAjwkMeUBhBuEiwA4hpqEJgT0R5e74uCTfq_1jvxEKbXx4X2hv5U8_7_QRSNwBHZeFf_qjXdxhoCBWIQAvD_BwE
ATLANTIC CENTRAL David, clearly we should all just run whatever we like, and I stretch history a bit myself as indicated. I posted that info not so much to correct you, but to provide more info as the OP is known to be a little fussy about accuracy. By the way, while I do not comment on a lot of stuff anymore, I have taken a look at you pictures. Nice work, clearly you are having fun. Sheldon
Evans also made the auto loaders that fit inside boxcars -- I think four autos at a time -- so the double decker under discussion (which Lionel also offered in its toy train line) had the advantage of hauling two additioal automobiles, at the cost of open sides and tops which even in that more innocent time were invites to vandals.
Since the Evans frame was designed to fit on top of a standard 53 ft flatcar (New York Central I believe) I suspect it was an easy matter to remove the Evans frame and return the flatcar to regular service once better ways of moving automobiles to market came around -- including on the nation's highways, and older modelers might recall when Revell had a nifty Ford truck hauling a trailer that held automobiles. ConCor offered it for a while and maybe still does.
So from a strict prototypical standpoint there would have been little reason to keep the Evans 6-auto open loader in service assuming the underlying flatcar would have been likely to make more money for the New York Central. One source I found says only one was built.
Dave Nelson
dknelson Evans also made the auto loaders that fit inside boxcars -- I think four autos at a time -- so the double decker under discussion (which Lionel also offered in its toy train line) had the advantage of hauling two additioal automobiles, at the cost of open sides and tops which even in that more innocent time were invites to vandals. Since the Evans frame was designed to fit on top of a standard 53 ft flatcar (New York Central I believe) I suspect it was an easy matter to remove the Evans frame and return the flatcar to regular service once better ways of moving automobiles to market came around -- including on the nation's highways, and older modelers might recall when Revell had a nifty Ford truck hauling a trailer that held automobiles. ConCor offered it for a while and maybe still does. So from a strict prototypical standpoint there would have been little reason to keep the Evans 6-auto open loader in service assuming the underlying flatcar would have been likely to make more money for the New York Central. One source I found says only one was built. Dave Nelson
There are conflicting stories about how many Evans built. But there were several others who built similar 53' open cars around the same time. All of these cars were just for testing, used for a while and then withdrawn from service when nobody saw enough advantages.
Evans and others made a number of different systems for inside the box cars, going back to the early 30's. How many cars they held depended on the specific system and the size of the cars.
Some held as many as 6 cars, think 53 Chevy size cars, some only held 4 large cars, think 55 Buick or Caddy.
OP, thanks for the questions! I had the same question on my mind.
As a kid in the 70s I thought those cars were just made up as I had never seen anything like it in real life.
I have one of the Athearn models. I believe it came with plastic wheelsets and real coil spring trucks.
At a train show, I saw a club member who had about 20 of these cars. He had replaced the original light plastic autos with die-cast metal ones. When he tried to run this train, even on the flat show layout, it was having trouble. The sprung trucks bottomed out, and the weight of all those die-cast models was too much for the motive power.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
My understanding is that the cars and loaders/racks were (and are) separate entities from an accounting and ownership standpoint. I assume there was a financial advantage to this arrangement but have never pursued it. Maybe a cash strapped railroad had the cars but couldn't afford the racks would find an investor who would buy the superstructure and lease it to the railroad, with both taking a pre-established cut of the revenue.
The thing that made the 6 car rack obsolete was the advent of 80 and 89 foot cars that could carry several multiples of what the 6 car rack could at very little additional investment (steel is relatively cheap, you could probably use the same trucks (cars are mainly air) the flatcar originally came with (admittedly, most, if not all big autoracks rode on roller bearings, but they were supposed to pay for themself) and you had the same brake system). And you weren't shipping cars by the dozen per day, it was in the hundreds - some railroads had unit trains from factory to major distribution/transload point (unload autorack, load on truck, deliver to dealer)
BEAUSABRE The thing that made the 6 car rack obsolete was the advent of 80 and 89 foot cars that could carry several multiples of what the 6 car rack could at very little additional investment (steel is relative cheap, you could probably use the same trucks (cars are mainly air) the flatcar originally came with (admittedly, most, if not all big autoracks rode on roller bearings, but they were supposed to pay for themself) and you had the same brake system). And you weren't shipping cars by the dozen per day, it was in the hundreds - some railroads had unit trains from factory to major distribution/transload point (unload autorack, load on truck, deliver to dealer)
The thing that made the 6 car rack obsolete was the advent of 80 and 89 foot cars that could carry several multiples of what the 6 car rack could at very little additional investment (steel is relative cheap, you could probably use the same trucks (cars are mainly air) the flatcar originally came with (admittedly, most, if not all big autoracks rode on roller bearings, but they were supposed to pay for themself) and you had the same brake system). And you weren't shipping cars by the dozen per day, it was in the hundreds - some railroads had unit trains from factory to major distribution/transload point (unload autorack, load on truck, deliver to dealer)
Prior to 1953, railroads were generally afraid of freight cars longer than 60' feet, and most were below 55'.
In 1953 it was the 75' piggyback flats build for the PRR and the Wabash that proved the safety of longer freight cars and opened the door to larger auto racks.
These 75' cars were designed to carry two 35' highway vans, the longest vans legal nationwide. But just 4 years later the trucking industry got nationwide approval for 40' vans, and with the creation of TrailerTrain the 75' flat cars would soon be obsolite for piggyback.
With the success of the 75' cars, there was now confidence to build even longer cars - 85', then 89', as highway vans continued to grow in length.
It was the 85' flat car that restarted interest in the auto rack concept, and by the early 60's it was in full swing. But it did not take much more than a decade for damage concerns to start us in the direction of the modern enclosed autorack.
Why were they worried about 85' freight cars, when the had 85' passenger cars?
Different weight car, different trucks, different couplers, different draft gear, different air brakes, different mix of car lengths in a train, different center of gravity, different draft and buff forces.
Other than that, nuttin.
dehusman Different weight car, different trucks, different couplers, different draft gear, different air brakes, different mix of car lengths in a train, different center of gravity, different draft and buff forces. Other than that, nuttin.
Thanks Dave, I was waiting for someone to ask that question.
dehusmanDifferent weight car, different trucks, different couplers, different draft gear, different air brakes, different mix of car lengths in a train, different center of gravity, different draft and buff forces. Other than that, nuttin.
Look at an ACS-64 or Charger: see the trucks located at or near the quarter points of the underframe? This lessens the stresses in the frame to the minimum. Truck placement as far in from the 'ends' toward the quarter points helps long flats carry heavier loads, and resist the effects of sag longer without excessive Amfleet-like design camber.
But the result is coupler swing, often out at the ragged end of an overhang so long that hinged drawbars of substantial length are needed. I dimly recall long skeleton cars where the steps were inboard from the ends because of anticipated coupler swing being greater than the frame corners (!)
Now, much of the "issue" was thought to be solved with spring centering: relatively seldom would you expect to have to make up dedicated TOFC consists on curves. The fun started when these cars started being used in general loose-car where the fun in pickups and setouts could grow, especially with line and surface errors in siding departure. Where it could get really fun was with the proposed extension of TOFC to a 'multiplicity' of little local ramps, like the one at Minden to serve the ammunition plant. These often unwittingly involved curves to reach them that were, shall we say, not conducive to pulling cars, loaded or empty...
SeeYou190Mine only hauls 4 cars. -Photograph by Kevin Parson
A 1953 Chevy was only 195.5" long, 16'-3.5", so three of those fit easily on a 53' flat car, or even inside a 50' box car.
Even the 120" wheelbase Checker Cab/Superba/Marathon from 1956 thru 1982 was only 199.5" long
In a few short years many cars would become wider and longer, even for the "common folk".