Are the ridges in the following shells all considered parting lines?
The first one is on the nose of a Highliners shell; the second, a Stewart shell.
I didn't even notice the latter one until I took a photo of it and viewed it on the computer. I should be able to knock that one down fairly easily using 600-grit sandpaper then cover it over with the 2nd coat of paint after washing & drying it.
The one in the Highliners shell is more of a bevel than a ridge. Should I leave that one alone?
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.
Tom,
.
On the Stewart F unit shell I am 99% sure they are mold parting lines and should be removed.
I removed them from my models, and they sure look better for me having done that. Even if they are supposed to be there, they just look wrong.
I cannot comment on the ridge on the Highliners shell.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Yes those are mold parting lines on the Stewart shell.
On the Highliner, those are not parting lines. In fact, if you google "EMD F7 nose" and look at enough prototype pictures, you will find some, but by no means all, or even most, F units have that soft "ridge" in the door, not always so much in the body above and below the door?
Including a NYC unit pictured on the first page when I googled it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_F-unit#/media/File:EMD_FL-9_NYC_2013.jpg
Fact, is, the way EMD built those locos, no two of the noses are really exactly the same......
I think when the highliner shell was developed, they noticed this variation, and figured it could be sanded out to represent the smoother versions, choosing to model the version with the soft ridge.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALFact, is, the way EMD built those locos, no two of the noses are really exactly the same......
I agree with Sheldon's assessment. Lots of filler on those welded seams and the sanding and grinding was done by many different employees over the years.
The lighting has to be just right to notice it, but it is there:
F3_NYC_EMD by Edmund, on Flickr
NYC Photo
You can well see the rough filler job just above the door, too.
Looking at dozens of F and E noses and, weather it be lighting conditions, dirt, or even how many times the locomotive has been shopped, sanded and re-painted the ridge is there, but then again, it isn't.
Parting lines, yes, sand those off. Many other E and F noses from other manufacturers suffered from the same problem. (IIRC Life-Like E's) The nose crease, though, let stand.
Cheers! Ed
Kevin & Sheldon - Thanks! And the photo of the E-unit was especially helpful, Sheldon. I think I'll just leave the soft ridge as is on the Highliner shell and remove the ones on the Stewart.
[Edit: And your input, as well, Ed. Great pic. It's amazing how much information there is "buried" in photos that we may have viewed numerous times. I think that's what I've really come to enjoy about this hobby. There's always something new to learn - even from the familiar.]
Thanks again, fellas!
Is anyone modeling the NYC F-3 going to replicate the crack in the bottom of the herald plate ??
NHTX Is anyone modeling the NYC F-3 going to replicate the crack in the bottom of the herald plate ??
Kinda reminds me of the Liberty Bell
I'm guessing a reason for the crack may have been due to trying to coax that radius into the plate.
There's an article in the PRR Historical Society's Keystone about creasing the bronze nose keystones on the T1s when they were modified and moved from the lower screen up to the "prow", I don't recall cracking being a problem but there were marks left from the fixture used to do the pressing. Those had to have a fairly sharp crease in them.
Same story with some of the B&O Capitol plates. Some had to get a pretty good crease in them (Baldwin Sharks).
Regards, Ed