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!

Walthers Passenger Cars

19777 views
67 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Monday, March 10, 2014 11:11 PM

But something to keep in mind is that the reason a number of us want 85ft streamlined cars is simply because that's what our prototypes used, even on routes that had "one horse town" station stops. Remember that even some "puddle jumper" trains consisted of one or two 85 footers as shown on this photo of SCL's conncection train to The Chapmion:

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/CRITICAL%20Maps/SCL4900.jpg

I'm one of those modelers with a shelf layout (that will have loop capability) that's restricted to 24" radius mainline curves but that is a compromise I'm willing to work with.  As I've mentioned before, I had 72 foot HO units years ago, but having seen and ridden on prototype 85ft cars most of my life, the difference in length on HO models was too noticeable for me.  I state this because, perhaps, other modelers with sharp curves may have similar sentiments regarding proper car lengths. 

 

zstripe

I will most definitely agree with Rich and some others who posted,,the want,of having 85ft cars,seems to be over bearing in this case,,but reality sets in as to the function,or purpose of having them..One good point that was mentioned,was the locale of your layouts theme,,,a one horse town with a whistle stop station,or a two horse town?Where are all the people coming from,that will be on that train??

Just My Reality,Thinking,

Cheers,

Frank

 

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Sunday, March 9, 2014 2:12 PM

wigman

Well, now that I have heard from everyone who thinks anyone can fit huge radius turns on their layouts, I can't.  Don't have the room on my long and narrow layout, and my trains have to have some method of getting back to where they started by other than going backwards.

My serious beef here is that Walthers, BLI, and all the others who say their cars can negotiate 24" minimum radius curves. The cars SHOULD be able to do so right out of the box without a problem or weeks worth of adjustment so they will work properly. I attribute this to these companies trying to get small pike owners to buy these cars at exorbitant prices, knowing full well that they will NOT work on the stated minimum radius turns.

It is false advertising, if you ask me.

These cars cost a small fortune to purchase, and apparently they aren't worth it to anyone other than those who can run huge radius turns on their layouts.

I guess the solution to it all is go back to the old Rivarossi, Athearn, Model Power, etc. cars that don't have a problem with these radius turns, cost 1/10 as much, and to hell with the fancy stuff - they can spend their lives on the display shelves in my layout room.

I had purchased the entire Empire Builder set from Walthers at great expense and it isn't worth a crap, if you ask me, because I can't run it on track that THEY said it would run on. The Proto2000 locos will run on track down to 18" radius, they are fine and perfect examples of high quality at reasonable cost.

From this point on, I will not be purchasing any more of these cars. Their loss, not mine.

Thanks for all the replies, I appreciate your input very much!

Wig

 

Note that with Proto 2000 and 18" radius, if your gauge is too tight, you will have a problem, happened to me. On another note I have a 180' mainline and 18" radius min. as thats what I had room for or it would only be as 60' mainline, what would you have chose since I like 40' or less cars!

  • Member since
    April 2013
  • 63 posts
Posted by JDberlin on Sunday, March 9, 2014 1:41 PM

READ! Who reads the instructions which detail how to get these to run on 24" radius as advertised. Truck, wheel and coupler tuning-who has the time? Can't wait until we hear from the brass crowd as to all they must do just to get the wagons to even move.

  • Member since
    September 2009
  • 44 posts
Posted by jharrison on Sunday, March 9, 2014 11:07 AM

I have assembled a Walthers Super Chief train and have modified it to look more prototypical. The "rebuilding" that you seem to disdain consisted of replacing the couplers with short shank KD's-a job that took all of five minutes per car. That allowed the cars to be nicely close coupled and the diaphragms touch with a slight compression. The diaphragms are made to operate very well (slippery, tough Delrin). My only complaint is their appearance (really, black color where they should be silver??). But, fortunately that can be fixed, although with a little more work than the coupler fix. I first add a 0.020" dia. styrene rib to the side of the diaphragm and spray them silver. i also add a leaf spring to the top and support rods to the side. You have to realize that Walthers has to make money on these cars but as long as the defficiencies can be fixed relatively easily I am happy. By the way, my mainline minimum radius is 60" but I am trying to see if I can get down to 44-48 inches in the staging track and still have the passenger cars operate well- I don't care how they look there. 

  • Member since
    June 2010
  • From: Victor Harbor, South Australia
  • 362 posts
Posted by alexstan on Sunday, December 1, 2013 9:14 PM

...possibly slightly off-topic, but the most recent Walthers Amtrak Phase 1 passenger cars I've picked up, a PS DB sleeper, 2 10-6 sleepers and a AC&F 44 seat coach, (these are the ones with factory-fitted grab irons), the factory-mounted couplers are in such a way that the diaphragms touch, even with the slack stretched out. Maybe this is an incremental Walthers improvement, I don't know. As the older-run Walthers pax cars the diaphragms did not touch.

Modelling HO Scale with a focus on the West and Midwest USA

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Sunday, December 1, 2013 10:00 AM

Forgive my casual rambling...........

Being a member of the over-40 crowd, my perspective is that of a modeler whose passenger fleet consisted of Athearn streamlined shorties. Being that I frequently saw Amtrak trains during the 1970s, the Athearn shorties eventually turned me off due to their extreme plain looks and shortened length.

In the 80s I graduated to Rivarossi Budds. Although generic, to many of us they were beauties and I remember feeling stunned when talented modeler, Joe Oates, modfied a sleeper so well into the Atlantic Coast Line scheme that at first glance I thought it was a $300 brass unit! 

Ranging from $16-$22 at my LHS, the Riv Budds were a bargain and were ( and still are) incredibly easy to modify. With repainting or Metalizing and some basic details they can be quite attratctive, imho.  Body mounted couplers are an easy task, but for those of us with limited space that still wanted full length cars, the generic GSC 41-N-11 talgo trucks enabled running on 22" radius curves.

Rivarossis modified and refinished with Alclad:

Years later Walthers kicks things up several notches with their Budd, PS, and ACF units, including the 1st run "Super Chief".  Detailing was stunning and of course to many modelers, the Rivarossi's suddenly looked as crude as the Athearn shorties. But not long afterwards, we started criticizing Walthers (myself included) about free rolling ability, roof details and window arrangements that weren't "exact" for some roads, roof removal headaches, and occasional problems when rounding curves.  But as is often pointed out....when you want superior tooling and better detailing at "affordable prices", you're going to get the headaches associated with the demand.  

Overall I felt that, inspite of their issues, the early run Walthers units were (and still are) a bargain. The solution to enable the new and old run Walthers units was to install extended Kadee couplers. It's not neccessay to install LONG shank couplers on both ends of these cars as you would wind up with a huge gap between the diaphrams.  Long time modeler Rich Christian installed short shank couplers on the front (vestibule end) and medium shank couplers on the rear of each of his Walthers units. Results? They could handle 22" radius curves smoothly, yet the small gap from a 3 foot viewing distance was barely noticeable.  Having a narrow room, this is a compromise that I can live with.

 

 

 

Walthers "old run" units refinished with Alclad:

 

 

 

 

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    April 2013
  • 63 posts
Posted by JDberlin on Wednesday, November 20, 2013 1:38 PM
What you have done to the sills and coupler pockets has worked for others over the years. At 11 cars or more, be careful of Stringlining with no weight added to the cars-more wt-more stringlining
  • Member since
    June 2012
  • 2,297 posts
Posted by Burlington Northern #24 on Monday, November 18, 2013 9:42 PM

Rio grande, Sheldon, your pain on passenger equipment is one I very much so share, just a scale smaller. While CCS was kind enough to make SP&S passenger cars(though #305 should be #301 as there was no coach # 305), MTL won't make SP&S heavyweights which comprised a large amount of the small car fleet. Same could also be said for loco's and freight cars in N. 

Alongside the SP&S cars rarity are those for NP and GN, many modelers in N myself included are waiting for Kato to spoil us with an NP NCL and GN Empire builder(correct version, not the Uncle pete set though if I can get the $ I'll get the UP repaint set.) 

SP&S modeler, 1960's give or take a decade or two for some equipment.

 http://www.youtube.com/user/SGTDUPREY?feature=guide 

Gary DuPrey

N scale model railroader 

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, November 18, 2013 8:43 PM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

richhotrain

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

All that detail and "correctness" is just ruined for me when guys run them on 30" curves with passenger killing gaps betwwen the cars.

 
Laugh

"Martha, if you want to go to the dining car for dinner, you are doing to have to jump"

"Well I never....next time we will travel on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL"

 

ahhh, Sheldon, the truth hurts.  I plead Guilty.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, November 18, 2013 8:33 PM

richhotrain

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

All that detail and "correctness" is just ruined for me when guys run them on 30" curves with passenger killing gaps betwwen the cars.

 
Laugh

"Martha, if you want to go to the dining car for dinner, you are doing to have to jump"

"Well I never....next time we will travel on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL"

 

    

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, November 18, 2013 4:34 PM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

All that detail and "correctness" is just ruined for me when guys run them on 30" curves with passenger killing gaps betwwen the cars.

 
Laugh

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, November 18, 2013 4:19 PM

Jim,

Completely agreed.

One of the other things that brought me to my view on passenger cars was that once I saw a set of well detailed, but freelanced, selectively compressed passenger cars actually operate on a layout, close coupled, snaking through crossovers with diaphragms always touching, I was hooked by the realistic sense of motion that was just like real passenger trains I have watched.

Personally, it would take 48" radius curves and #10 turnouts to even begin to get me back into the 85' passenger car market again.

All that detail and "correctness" is just ruined for me when guys run them on 30" curves with passenger killing gaps betwwen the cars.

Even as it is, I run my 72' passenger cars on no less than 36" radius.

This hobby is full of trade offs, we all see those trade offs differently.

Sheldon 

    

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Monday, November 18, 2013 3:39 PM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

There are not enough accurate B&O passenger cars on the market, even if you bought everything that was close in the last 15 years, to make one complete correct B&O train without buying brass.

The same problem exists for me too; ain't much for D&RGW at all.  I only pushed my time frame back to allow me to run some sessions in to the mid-late 1960's so I could run the California Zephyr since I really like that train and D&RGW pulled it!  I can cheat a little and run a correct Yampa Valley Mail by using one of my 2 brass passenger cars and the Walthers 52 seat coach, both of which are based on Pullman Standard passenger cars D&RGW bought originally intended for the C&O.  Otherwise my modeling the 70's and 80's allows me to model nearly correct passenger trains using BLI CZ cars for the Rio Grande Zephyr (1971-1983) and Walthers Superliner cars for the Amtrak California Zephyr (1983-1990, end of my modeling time frame).

BUT, here is where my modeling style is REAL different from yours. I am MORE interested in the over all "impression" the layout makes than I am in worrying about the down to the rivet correctness of every piece of rolling stock.

Honestly I do want my cars to look like the real thing ever since I was in my early 20's.  It comes from reading too many of those old children's "Highlights" magazine where you gotta pick out the differences between two scenes like I Spy books.  Rivet correctness?  I'm not that neurotic.  I do want all the windows of a passenger car to be in the right place and size however, the major stuff should look like the real passenger car. 

I happily bought Athearn's SD45R diesels which have the major features look like an SP SD45R - someone who really knows the SD45R pointed out to me a host of details that were wrong for the rebuilds, but it didn't rattle my chain much, things I didn't even know about.  So that illustrates that I'm not worrying about down to the rivet correctness.  Back toward the original topic, someone on the various forums pointed out to me he wouldn't buy the Walthers P-S 52 seat coach because it wasn't 100% correct for the D&RGW Prospector coach.  Considering how few plastic passenger cars match D&RGW, I didn't feel I could be that picky!  The windows are all in the right position and size, the fluting etc. roof, but a number board is in the wrong spot cause the car is C&O prototype.  It's dang close however an I can deal with the 1% thing that is wrong.

Going back to my earlier comments about passenger cars, and how most are nearly one of a kind, and even with all these very nice models made recently, we have only scratched the surface in providing modelers with "correct" passenger cars  - even just as it relates to the BIG railroad in North America.

That's very true, so unless you are among the few who model the:

Santa Fe Chief
Santa Fe El Capitan
California Zephyr
NYC Broadway Limited
NP Empire Builder
N&W Arrow (rusty on that one)
The Canadian
UP Passenger trains
Southern Pacific Daylights (several version)

I may have missed a few, there are still quite a few never done.  All that said, we have quite a few major passenger trains to be thankful for.  Such as it is, there are many modelers who remain unsatisfied.  It's a good time to be a western modeler no doubt.  And the sad thing is here I am a western modeler and stuck in the east where there ain't much of that going on!  Crying

I understand that for some people it IS about every piece of rolling stock being exactly correct - assuming we even know for sure which cars were in use, what color they were, which modifications had or had not been made, etc, etc.

I was into that kind of modeling thirty years ago - I decided it was not fun anymore and moved to a more relaxed approach.

If you can give into the Swartz and do that, it's good for you.  For those who want things correct, well, it's still a good time to be in the hobby as there has never been more of that out there.  Problem is keeping up with it!  ExactRail is releasing beautiful D&RGW quad hoppers but heck if I can afford more than a few - will have to fill out the rest of the train with also correct but more crude Walthers quads!  I really can't complain!

BUT, I will say this, after 46 years I know what I enjoy about this hobby, I know what I like, I know what I want to accomplish with my trains. That does not change on a whim, or because some new product comes along, or because some new technolgy comes along.

Sheldon

You seem to say it like changing on a "whim" is a bad thing.  But if that makes someone happy, well, is it bad?  I'm more like you however, I know what I like, I've always like it and even better, it's pretty much all available in plastic, mostly.  Some new products came along that changed my interest marginally, mainly all the nice Southern Pacific equipment in the past ten years from Athearn, Intermountain and ExactRail.  It wasn't a paradigm shift, but since the D&RGW and SP partnered in the 1980's, my going back to my roots was serendipitous, because Rio Grande pooled with SP diesels, had bay window cabooses on their trains and hauled a lot of lumber from the Pacific northwest!

I personally think all of the wonderful products on the market only give people more choices; people who want to draw from the well of existing proven stuff like Concor or some of the older brands, and kits, there is tons of that stuff at train shows still available.  Those who want to dip from the well of the newer products can enjoy what they have to offer.  The last 10-15 years IMO have been a real golden age for the hobby.

Cheers, Jim

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, November 18, 2013 3:06 PM

Given your modeling scheme, freelance, it is totally understandable why you could be much choosier about what brand of passenger car you would buy.  However, your "solution" will not work for many people for that same reason, people who are interested in copying Santa Fe, UP, NYS, PRR, SP, D&RGW and all of those!

Jim, not to go too far a field here, but -

First I complelely agree that just like in discussing loco choices vs brands, if one needs a particular model and it is out there - buy it.

Secound, yes, my primary modeling, the ATLANTIC CENTRAL is freelanced, protolanced, fantasy, whatever you want to call it - BUT - I also model three prototype roads with realtively high accuracy - the B&O, C&O and Western Maryland.

There are not enough accurate B&O passenger cars on the market, even if you bought everything that was close in the last 15 years, to make one complete correct B&O train without buying brass.

The C&O situation is a little better, but not much.

The Western Maryland only had a hand full of heavy weight coaches, combines, baggage and RPO cars - and a special business car train - pretty easy to get real close even with some "generic" cars.

BUT, here is where my modeling style is REAL different from yours. I am MORE interested in the over all "impression" the layout makes than I am in worrying about the down to the rivet correctness of every piece of rolling stock.

Going back to my earlier comments about passenger cars, and how most are nearly one of a kind, and even with all these very nice models made recently, we have only scratched the surface in providing modelers with "correct" passenger cars  - even just as it relates to the BIG railroad in North America.

I understand that for some people it IS about every piece of rolling stock being exactly correct - assuming we even know for sure which cars were in use, what color they were, which modifications had or had not been made, etc, etc.

I was into that kind of modeling thirty years ago - I decided it was not fun anymore and moved to a more relaxed approach.

When someone looks at my layout, I want them to get the "feeling" that it 1954, here in the Mid Atlantic, in small city along this busy railroad, the ATLANTIC CENTRAL. And that will be reinforced by real life connections to the B&O, C&O and Western Maryland.

I am a protolance modeler, EVERY loco and piece of rolling stock that says ATLANTIC CENTRAL is something that any knowledgeable railfan, rail historian, or modeler would see as being plausable and believable for the era and region in question - there are no UP Big Boys lettered ATLANTIC CENTRAL.

BUT, the B&O railroad, along with countless others, stripped passenger cars down to their bones and rebuilt them repeatedly into new cars types, and dozens of roads had cars built to unique plans. So as long as construction and design follows practices consistant with the era modeled, then yes, the ATLANTIC CENTRAL will have whatever cars suit my taste.

I take no issue with those who model differently, as I said, I have tried a few different approaches myself over the 46 years I have been at this.

BUT, I will say this, after 46 years I know what I enjoy about this hobby, I know what I like, I know what I want to accomplish with my trains. That does not change on a whim, or because some new product comes along, or because some new technolgy comes along.

So in conclusion, my passenger cars may be "fantasy", stand in, selectively compressed - but close coupled with working diaphragms they look more realistic to me than "correct" cars with six scale foot gaps between them.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Monday, November 18, 2013 12:36 PM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

I am that person who runs mostly "generic" passenger cars. As for your assumption that anyone who would be concerned about touching diaphragms and and scale coupling distances would also want exactly correct cars, well I don't see the link there.

No link was needed.  The assumption I made was based on modelers who are interested in "correct" scale passenger cars" in nearly the fullest sense of the word correct (i.e. scale length plastic cars which match real passenger cars used by major railroads from the steam day to the present). 

I confess, the freelance/fantasy angle was the farthest thing from my mind - a difference between our modeling styles.  My apologies, I haven't followed your modeling style enough to remember if it was prototype or fantasy and I tend to assume most people are not freelance/fantasy.  I haven't seen any polls or surveys lately here to confirm or deny that. 

Given your modeling scheme, freelance, it is totally understandable why you could be much choosier about what brand of passenger car you would buy since following a prototype is moot.  However, your "solution" may not work for many people for that same reason, people who are interested in copying Santa Fe, UP, NYS, PRR, SP, D&RGW and all of those!

Cheers, Jim

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Sunday, November 17, 2013 1:21 PM

Sheldon,

Put chewing gum, in them?Smile

Cheers, Drinks

Frank

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Sunday, November 17, 2013 12:19 PM

wigman

The club I belong to, very high profile and nationally known for its' historic and accurate modeling, decided to get rid of the diaphragms completely.....problems solved. Cars are prototypically correct and car-to-car distance is on the mark, but the diaphragms were a pain. The cars are so close together you really don't even notice it.....

They sacrificed a little prototype accuracy for operational dependability......maybe that's what I should do.....

The secret to reliable operation of working diaphragms is to use the same diaphragms and same coupler mounting standards on all cars - something that is likely impossible to achieve on a club layout.

Just another reason why I'm not a club sort of guy - I'm not changing my equipment or modeling standards to be able to run them on a club layout.

So tell me, what do guys do with big slots left in the ends of many of these expensive new plastic models when they remove the diaphragms, since the diaphragm design is integral to the car end?

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 27 posts
Posted by wigman on Sunday, November 17, 2013 11:41 AM

The club I belong to, very high profile and nationally known for its' historic and accurate modeling, decided to get rid of the diaphragms completely.....problems solved. Cars are prototypically correct and car-to-car distance is on the mark, but the diaphragms were a pain. The cars are so close together you really don't even notice it.....

They sacrificed a little prototype accuracy for operational dependability......maybe that's what I should do.....

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Saturday, November 16, 2013 3:19 PM

riogrande5761

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

I don't buy Walthers and similar high priced RTR passenger cars - guess why?  Because they WILL go around 24" or 26" radius curves. What? That's right. I will not buy expensive RTR passenger cars that have gaps between them that allow them to go around sharp curves - yes 28" radius is a sharp curve in my view.

For the kind of money those things cost, they should couple at scale distances and have perfectly detailed working diaphragms that touch and stay touching all the time. And that can be made to work very well down to about 30" or 32" radius.

I am not about to spend that sort of money, and then have to rebuild the coupler/diaphragm system on the cars to my standards.

Sheldon

 

I didn't read all or your posts but maybe you can afford brass which allows you to turn down Walthers and other plastic passenger cars so easily.  But given that the majority of us can't afford it, we can't live up to that high standard and have to muddle through.

Here is the thing about Walther's.  If you can't afford brass - "raises hand" and you want correct passenger cars - some are - then it's that or nothing.  Unless you don't mind running "generic" passenger cars - it's true many don't.  But I'd think if a person was particular enough to want close coupled passenger cars with diaphragm's and all those things, they'd also want the passenger cars to match real passenger cars.

As it stands, Walthers doesn't make many passenger cars useful the a D&RGW fan - mainly just the 52 seat Pull man standard coach, which I paid the "high price" of $16 dollars each when Walthers had a sale on the first run.  Those match the Prospector P-S chair cars which D&RGW inherited C&O's over committed factory slots at Pullman Standard.  (they are not 100% due to a number board being in the wrong position - but I can live with that.  Then I have around 21 BLI CZ cars for the CZ and RGZ and yes I have 2 brass passenger cars I managed to acquire some years back which are Palace Car Company P-S baggage/dorm/chair cars which match the combines used by the D&RGW on the Prospector and Rio Grande Zephyr.  My main argument here is if you want plastic passenger cars which match the real thing and Walthers makes them and no body else does, then you fix them to close couple.  That is, if you can't afford brass ... just sayin...

 

So

Jim,

Actually, since you did not read my other posts, and since I don't expect anyone on here to remember what I have posted in the past, I will explain briefly as possible again.

I am that person who runs mostly "generic" passenger cars. As for your assumption that anyone who would be concerned about touching diaphragms and and scale coupling distances would also want exactly correct cars, well I don't see the link there.

Why? Because the touching diaphragms and scale coupling distances are a matter of visual proprotion that seperate models from toys in appearance. And even a novice may not know why, but he will just "feel" that the closer spaced, diaphragm connected cars are more "in proprotion".

But many experianced modelers, let alone casual observers, have no idea about the subtle differences in window arrangements, rivet detail, roof types, and actual lengths of various passenger cars.

AND, I am largely a freelance modeler - the ATLANTIC CENTRAL can commision Pullman Standard, ACF, Budd or our own shops to build, or rebuild anything we want.

AND, I believe, that unless one goes for 48" curves (which I have a few of), selectively compressed (shorty) passenger cars actually look better in our model scenes that also usually contain other selectively compressed elements - sharper turnouts, smaller buildings, etc.

AND, not all passenger cars were 85' long anyway. Most heavyweight coaches were only about 78' - that makes an Athearn car only off by 6'. Virtually no head end equipent was 85', and even many early smoothside and some light weight equipment was less than 80-85'.

So most of the passenger cars on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL are Athearn (heavyweights and streamliners) ConCor 72' smooth side, and MDC Harriman style, with just a few Bachmann heavy weights and Branchline heavy weights thrown in here and there.

Many are kitbashed into types and window arrangements not offered and most have a fair amount of additional detail in addition to the American Limited working diaphragms and close coupling that is within a few scale inches of prototype practice.

A few more thoughts on prototype passenger cars. Passenger car were built in small batches, very few to the exact same plans. THEN, they were rebuilt early and often into different uses, modernized, sold, repurposed, and so on, and so on.

Duplicating anything other than a few well documented name trains is an effort in research that is beyond even my interest in history - let alone then recreating those cars in HO - even with some close starting points from Walthers, Rapido, MTH or whoever.

And the actual roads I model are generally poorly represented by these companies anyway - B&O, C&O Western Maryland. C&O being the best represented, but B&O cars from the 50's were mostly heavy weights rebuilt into smooth side cars by the B&O shops - not often modeled even in BRASS - never yet in plastic, save one or two cars here or there.

So why sweat it! - paint them up and run them. My operating plan requires about 150 passenger cars - that's right, about a dozen 12 car trains, spread over the four roadnames. And, another advantage of shorter cars, longer car counts still fit in front of long, but still compressed , station platform lengths (about 8-9' in my case).

Brass? - I don't even buy used brass locos, let alone brass passenger cars.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Saturday, November 16, 2013 3:08 PM

There is a product out, called, Super Lube DRI-FILM Lubricant, made by Synco Chemical Corp. Bohemia, NY. That I have used many times, sprays on wet,with one of those small nozzle's and drys,leaving a slippery film on it. It is safe,for rubber,leather and most plastics. Has many uses. Will not collect,dirt, or dust..

Cheers,  Drinks

Frank

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Mount Vernon WA
  • 968 posts
Posted by skagitrailbird on Saturday, November 16, 2013 1:29 PM

If you are still having trouble, try replacing the couplers on one end of each car (front or back doesn't matter as long as all are the same) with a longer shank coupler.  If that doesn't work, go for the longer shanks on both ends. The increased spacing between cars will greatly reduce if not eliminate the diaphragm problem.  I would advise ditching the vegetable oil.  It will eventually go gooey on you and will always attract dirt & dust.  If you must lubricate then, use something dry like graphite.

Good luck!

Roger Johnson
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Saturday, November 16, 2013 1:29 PM

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

I don't buy Walthers and similar high priced RTR passenger cars - guess why?  Because they WILL go around 24" or 26" radius curves. What? That's right. I will not buy expensive RTR passenger cars that have gaps between them that allow them to go around sharp curves - yes 28" radius is a sharp curve in my view.

For the kind of money those things cost, they should couple at scale distances and have perfectly detailed working diaphragms that touch and stay touching all the time. And that can be made to work very well down to about 30" or 32" radius.

I am not about to spend that sort of money, and then have to rebuild the coupler/diaphragm system on the cars to my standards.

Sheldon

 

I didn't read all or your posts but maybe you can afford brass which allows you to turn down Walthers and other plastic passenger cars so easily.  But given that the majority of us can't afford it, we can't live up to that high standard and have to muddle through.

Here is the thing about Walther's.  If you can't afford brass - "raises hand" and you want correct passenger cars - some are - then it's that or nothing.  Unless you don't mind running "generic" passenger cars - it's true many don't.  But I'd think if a person was particular enough to want close coupled passenger cars with diaphragm's and all those things, they'd also want the passenger cars to match real passenger cars.

As it stands, Walthers doesn't make many passenger cars useful the a D&RGW fan - mainly just the 52 seat Pull man standard coach, which I paid the "high price" of $16 dollars each when Walthers had a sale on the first run.  Those match the Prospector P-S chair cars which D&RGW inherited C&O's over committed factory slots at Pullman Standard.  (they are not 100% due to a number board being in the wrong position - but I can live with that.  Then I have around 21 BLI CZ cars for the CZ and RGZ and yes I have 2 brass passenger cars I managed to acquire some years back which are Palace Car Company P-S baggage/dorm/chair cars which match the combines used by the D&RGW on the Prospector and Rio Grande Zephyr.  My main argument here is if you want plastic passenger cars which match the real thing and Walthers makes them and no body else does, then you fix them to close couple.  That is, if you can't afford brass ... just sayin...

 

So

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    October 2008
  • From: high desert so cal
  • 997 posts
Posted by BIG JERR on Saturday, November 16, 2013 1:09 PM

just to the point " you state your cars well run on 24r,  then they SHOULD run on 24r " period, the only BUTS should be" track condition " ex. level ,no kinks, no S curves etc.....

.IF coupler change  or other modification is required, seller should clearly note ,before opening the BOX .

that said I like em , but agree they don't do what they should do "out of the box"..Jerry

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 27 posts
Posted by wigman on Saturday, November 16, 2013 12:07 PM

Hi Guys:

Lots of great comments - I have done a little work on the cars, and this is the result:

The 6 axle heavyweights - I cut the framework underneath, you can barely notice it, they now will run on 22" radius with SOME derail problems remaining.24" radius works pretty well now.

Some of the diaphragms are a little tight, I put a touch of vegetable oil on them with my finger and they slide side-to-side much better now - this was a big cause of derailments.

The trucks on the heavyweights needed work - the center axle did not move up and down enough to accommodate small imperfections in track. When you would go over a minor bumps - such as a crossing or a turnout - the center axle would keep the outer wheel from maintaining contact with the rail and the truck would derail. PLEASE note that everyone can't get their track absolutely perfect - even plywood and styrofoam insulation has small undulations....Once I routed out the wheel journals so that center axle could move up and down, the problem with that was solved. This was simply poor engineering on the part of the manufacturer.

Next step: Adding weight - the cars are a little underweight according to NMRA standards - you would think that expensive cars like these would be at the proper weight.  I will almost bet that the cars will navigate without derailing after some weight is added.

As far as my use of 24" and 22" radius, my layout has only the width of plywood to turn around and will be concealed under landscaping anyway - the appearance on smaller radius curves was not a consideration - the only areas where these cars are visible are long, gradual radius turns and straights and they look absolutely awesome....

I would post some photos, but I can't figure out how to get that part to work on this site....

Again, thank you for the comments, they were very helpful, I hope my method of modifying these cars can help others....it has been a pain to do it, but I have made great progress toward actually running the beautiful cars on my layout..

I still think WALTHERS should be more honest with their customers, and I also believe that these EXPENSIVE cars should run the 24" right out of the box without modification. False advertising....

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Saturday, November 16, 2013 9:50 AM

Atlantic Central,

There are a number of photos in books, magazines, and online showing east coast trains such as;  The Silver Meteor, The Champion, and the Southern Crescent running 17 to 20 cars hauled by E-unit quartets (and GG1s in the Wash-NY section of the corridor).

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

......................................15-20 car passenger trains? Maybe out west, but not here in the east - virtually never. Historic records and photos show most passenger trains on eastern lines to be in the 7 to 15 car range......................................

Sheldon

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    January 2010
  • 699 posts
Posted by UP 4-12-2 on Wednesday, September 25, 2013 4:12 PM

At the time I really wanted some of the stuff, but especially with high priced brass models, I can be a perfectionist--if it does not cosmetically meet my standards, it is gone.  If it does not run well and I can't adjust or fix it, or get help from someone else to do the same, it is gone.

It's been too many years ago since I worked the hobby shop.  Yes, at that time I got to try out everything--but that was before my friends got me into brass, and it was before the plethora of models we have available today.

I was in the train shop during the "fathood era", when the best engines available were Atlas/Kato or Stewart/Kato...and Railpower Products shells were "new" on the scene.

Joh

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 12,897 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Wednesday, September 25, 2013 3:39 PM

UP 4-12-2

Sheldon--

The buying and selling was me trying different things and experimenting to find what I liked and what had the best quality or features for my purposes.

Few people have owned and actually run on a layout (day after day) the variety of engines and rolling stock that I have tried.  It was an expensive education, but in the end was worthwhile, as I have a good feel for what I don't need.

John

In 1967 my father built a nice starter layout for me at age 10, equiped with a Mantua Pacfic and Mikado, a Penn Line GG1, and some Varney F-3's.

At age 13 I started working in the local hobby shop. By age 14 I was doing most of the repairs there.

At age 15 I was lucky enough to be one of the few "youth" members allowed membership at the Severnal Park Model Railroad Club, where I learned a great deal from some of our hobbies masters.

At age 19 I was the train department manager of another hobby shop.

I've touched it all and played with it all - without buying stuff I did not want or need.

But I have never been into "serial ownership" in any part of my life - you know, first you think you want a boat, then after you try that you sell it to buy a sports car, then you get bored and trade it in on a monster truck, which you then sell to buy a jet ski? That's not me.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • 699 posts
Posted by UP 4-12-2 on Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:34 AM

Sheldon--

The buying and selling was me trying different things and experimenting to find what I liked and what had the best quality or features for my purposes.

Few people have owned and actually run on a layout (day after day) the variety of engines and rolling stock that I have tried.  It was an expensive education, but in the end was worthwhile, as I have a good feel for what I don't need.

John

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:19 AM

Rich,

When are we going to start?? I'll work on all the bridges and the Chgo river branches,my guess is we will need at the very least 15 bridges,not counting the vehicle ones..Think your wife would mind,if we gave her the basement and we moved upstairs??Smile, Wink & Grin

Cheers,Drinks

Frank

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!