Skip to main content

Hi All...

So I've decided to re-enter the 3-rail hobby.

I've vacillated and deliberated doing so off and on for a few years now, but this time, I've made like a frog and leaped.  (i.e. 3-rail stuff is being purchased and flowing my way.) Don't know exactly where these 3-rails will lead me, or what kinds of turns it will take along the way, but off I go.

My hopping aboard the 3-rail train could end up taking me on wild ride akin to a "Nantucket sleigh ride"... or it could be that 3-rails can take me to Nirvana. That's unknown at this point. But this time, I think it just might be here to stay. I'm sure many of you here in this forum know this fact about 3-rail:

Sometimes you just can't shake it once you've truly "known" it.

Over the past few years, I've shared my deliberations and flirtations concerning the call of 3-rail with this fine community here at OGR. Typically, those mental shenanigans and deliberations were accompanied by a lot of diversionary discourse. There is no need to, nor should I, rehash that here. Besides, this is the 3-rail forum. Things non 3-rail are inappropriate for this forum, thus, I will not allow myself to veer off into other scales/etc in this ongoing thread over the coming days, weeks, months, or "??".

If, by some chance, you think it might be entertaining to get caught up on my ramblings of old, the last installment in what was my primary thread concerning same, can be accessed here:

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...webs-we-weave?page=3

THE ABOVE SAID...

I would love for you to pull up a chair, and follow along with me as (off and on) I'll be sharing all sorts of musings in this thread about 3-rail trains, and what I hope to do with them. Of course, as I do, your input and participation would be very much encouraged.

All fer now!

A pair of Lionel Hudson's running through an imaginary scene in Bantam Book's "Model Railroading", 5th Edition. From such are imaginations and dreams born...

LionelSteamEngs

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • LionelSteamEngs
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

petrifiedagg and Art:

I know what you mean. I wore out my original copy that I purchased back in '62. I kept up with it into the 70s (rubber band held it together), but alas my original got lost in one of our moves. Back in the mid-80s I was at a train meet, and lo and behold, there on the table was another copy... and for only a buck! I snatched it up, and though the binding is shot, and the pages are frayed... I still have it to this day. I love the smell of it when opened and I take a whiff of it.

BantamBook2

I can't help but feel that through all these decades of being a "serious" modeler (primarily in HO scale), that little Bantam Book has kept me in touch with my memories of 3-rail, and in its own way, has contributed to my return to 3-rail.

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • BantamBook2
@laming posted:

I hear you loud and clear, Lenny.

I'm very much looking forward to getting my first whiff of ozone and hot grease in years via my little Marx set. AND, once I get a version of Lionel's Baldwin Hudson (2055, 2065, etc)... that smoke smell, too! I still have a third bottle of SP's!

SP

All in good time, I suppose.

Andre

Andre, you mention the Lionel 2065 steamer in your above post. The 2065 was my 1st engine, included in a Lionel freight set I got as a Christmas gift in 1954 when I was 3 years old. I still have that locomotive and set, all in good working order. However, they have little exterior nicks and defects cause by the rough play of a child (me), including racing it on a plywood board layout when my 2065 took a dive onto the floor a few times.

Nothing in my collection has more sentimental value than that 2065 baby Hudson.

My heart nearly leaped out of my throat when I visited my LHS last week and saw another 2065 in mint condition. I bought it for a reasonable price, took it home, applied gear oil to the gears near the driving wheels, and ran it on my layout. It runs and smokes beautifully.

I love both of my 2065s. It is a fine, durable and affordable engine, and, IMO, ideal for starting out as an O Gauge model railroader. Arnold

Cont...

It fell to OGR's Marx enthusiasts to dangle the lure in front of me that caused me to go for the bait. With their help, after all these decades, I was able to learn exactly what Marx 3-rail "hand-me-down" train set I had been given as a youngster when I was 7 or 8 years of age (in 1959 or 1960): It was a Marx "25225" set.

Perhaps it was mere coincidence, or perhaps something more, but of all things, a very nice "25225" set was on the Bay that was an exact fit with my memories (or so close I don't know the difference)... so I went for it! With a point/click... the boxed set pictured below was on its way to me, complete with a Marx 50w Model 729 transformer and some track.

(Note: The above story is all told in detail in the "Marx Train Pictures" thread here at OGR.)

My25225set_5sm

My25225set_9sm

Alas, when received, there was not enough track that remained with the set in order to set up a loop or oval. So, I simply cleaned up the engine and cars, lubricating where needed, and fixed the transformer issue (broken wire connector). Now the little 999 engine purrs like a kitten when powered at the workbench!

When the Marx track bundle I purchased arrives, after right at 60 years, I will again see a very familiar Marx set racing around an oval of track, with it's little side rods in a blur. It will be doing exactly what Louis Marx en company designed it to do: Bring pleasure to its owner.

Oh, it should come as little surprise that additional Marx items have already arrived at my doorstep.

But Marx is not my only interest. No, Marx is just the mfg'er that is responsible for my return to 3-rail.

The other siren call for me has been Lionel Postwar. I have long admired select Lionel postwar items. I am already watching for reasonably priced items that I hope to eventually obtain. Though my most basic interest within the Postwar era are the products of Lionel and Marx (and possibly AF, Kusan, and such), in addition I will also be interested in "traditional sized" (similar to postwar) types of newer offerings, as time and opportunity afford.

The Scent Of Ozone...

Back in my Lionel collecting years (1990s), it all started with a humble little boxed Lionel 202 UP diesel set that I purchased for about $45. It was my intent to simply have a small oval of track running under the Christmas tree, for the Christmas season had arrived. I threw a white sheet down, placed the tree on it, and set up the oval of track around the base of the tree. There our the little pumpkin-colored Lionel Alco FA resumed its Christmas Tree duties that no doubt it had performed in the past. (We nicknamed the little 202 "Pumpkin"!)  No sooner had "Pumpkin" made a few circles, than that magical ozone smell began to drift into our nostrils. My daughter (I think she was 12 at the time?) noticed it too.

Like an aphrodisiac intoxicating us with the desire for more, we both laid down to get an eye-level view of our little Pumpkin, and as it neared we would raise our head up from eye level and sniff that wonderful sweet smell of ozone as it passed under our noses! She loved that aroma! Of course, so did I. With each whiff of that wondrous aroma, memories of childhood times gone by wafted through my mind! (Scenes of my little Marx set from my childhood... a friend's little Marx Monon FM set... some friend's and their Lionel sets... oh my!)

Within a day or so, I had the idea to get some of those cheap, illuminated, ceramic buildings at Walmart. We soon had a "Main Street" scene for Pumpkin to hum past, complete with snow-flocked spruce trees. This grew into a tradition that lasted for several years as our Christmas Tree trains grew in length and variety, and the town kept growing. By the next Christmas, I had some Postwar Hudson's to add to the mix for running. Much more 3-rail "stuff" followed over the ensuing years.

Those were special times, and to this day, my daughter (now in her early 40s), still talks of the fun we had laying on the floor during Christmas and enjoying the sights, sounds, and smells, of Lionel Postwar circling our Christmas tree.

Dare I hope to have that wonderful aroma of ozone to be filling my olfactory senses again after so long?

From that magical Bantam Book: "The Signal Tower operator watches as a mighty Hudson locomotive storms by on its way out of town, while behind him a hard pounding freight on a nearby track, also leaving for parts unknown. Soon, those Engineers will be pulling those throttles open and hooking their Johnson Bar's back... and the race will be on!"

BantamBook3

To be continued...

Andre

Attachments

Images (3)
  • My25225set_5sm
  • My25225set_9sm
  • BantamBook3
Last edited by laming

Cont...

BantamBook4

So why, you may ask, is an HO modeler of some 58 years (and "serious" since the early 1970s) that currently has a 20' x 16' out-building housing a 100% functional HO/DCC w/Sound layout, deciding to also return to 3-rail?

That's a good question.

If you noticed in my previous post above, I actually was quite into 3-rail during the 1990s as an adjunct to my primary interest of HO scale modeling. Though at the time I had an elaborate HO scale layout, I had no 3-rail layout. What I did happen to have was a growing collection of 3-rail equipment. Along the way I also acquired track, tons of it. Brand new "O gauge" tubular track purchased by the case, and excellent condition 022 switches, too. However, I had no permanent place to run such equipment.

Instead, I scratched my 3-rail itch by using a two wheel dolly to transport my stacks of storage boxes (engines and rolling stock) as well as cases of track, and on a Thursday evening, I would make several trips to/from the house across the paved parking lot of the church I pastored at the time, to our "Fellowship Hall". (That contained an unobstructed 35' x 50' or so of carpeted seating/table area.) Therein I would set up portable tables, pushing them together, and assemble a track layout. Lockons and jumper wires would serve as simplistic wiring. Upon that I would run trains for a couple/three evenings, running diesels or swapping out steam engines, same with the rolling stock. Often times, I would invite an O gauge 2-rail friend over that also had a past history and appreciation for 3-rail, to join in on the fun and we'd run my trains a couple evenings before I broke it down, packed it up, and back over to the house for storage until the next month or so for another night of 3-rail trains.

This was modus operandi until early 1998, when the opportunity to own our own home appeared. (Up to that time, our housing had been part of the pastoral packages provided by the churches I pastored.) The deal was extremely attractive, but the bank wanted a significant amount of "front" money to secure the deal. I didn't have a large bank account, but what I DID have was trains... lots of them.

SO, they went to market. I sold as much of my 3-rail as I could. (In the end I only had a couple pieces of rolling stock.) I raised about $6000-$7000 dollars in train sales, essentially liquidating my 3-rail and surplus HO in the process. (In fact, just about ANYTHING I could sell. Except the wife and daughter. I decided to keep them.  )

It paid off in spades, and the wife and I still live in that house we purchased (paid off long ago), and intend to continue to do so until assisted living may be required.

So, that was it for my 3-rail affliction until the early 2000's during The Great Scale Experiments when I dabbled in several different scales and themes on a small around-the-walls layout in this small computer room that I'm currently sitting in while typing this installment.

One of my more promising scales/themes was 3-rail. What I learned was with 3-rail, a small area can be quite effective when using traditional equipment. I also learned that by going to a "City" setting, cramped, track-filled scenes would much more acceptable to my eyes. (As opposed to trying to cram spacious mountain railroading into such a small room, a theme that most of my non-3-rail scales had reflected for the previous 20-30 years.) I settled on GarGraves track and switches, and that choice went even further to enhance the impact of the traditional trains. (They looked really good on it.)

In all, 3-rail was working for me. I had a "Kansas City" theme and was collecting equipment for KC roads of the 1950s/60s. I know I've shared the following picture many times before here at OGR, but it's about the best surviving picture of my KC Lines 3-rail experimental layout, and at least it illustrates where I was heading with my 3-rail:

12thStYd

Like I said, it was working. The traditional trains said to my mind: "You're playing with toy trains so don't take this too seriously", so my mind accepted the center rail as simply part of the toy train scene. Plus, the "Phantom" center rail of the GarGraves track system minimized the center rail (see above pic!), and over all, the visual impact of the traditional trains upon GarGraves "Phantom" track was quite pleasing to my eyes.

Then I made a fateful decision: I started migrating toward "Hi-Rail".

Big mistake for me. As soon as the scale equipment started appearing, all of my scale "givens n' druthers" kicked in: I wanted ALL the equipment to be scale, I wanted the engines to run as smooth and as slowly as my quality HO stuff had performed... and as I tried to migrate toward that goal something reared its head that I didn't anticipate: That center rail stuck out like a sore thumb to my eyes, as well as the deep flanges, large couplers, etc.

Then it hit me: IF I'm going to do "scale", I can't do it with 3 rails. So that was that. I went back to 2 rail scale modeling, sold off what 3-rail I had acquired, and aside from one minor 3-rail collecting spree several years ago, 3-rail was no longer on my radar.

But that was going to change.

More fodder for dreams and imagination from The Bantam Book...

BantamBook5

To be continued...

Attachments

Images (3)
  • BantamBook4
  • 12thStYd
  • BantamBook5
Last edited by laming

Andre, I had totally forgotten about that book Model Railroading until your photo brought back vague memories of when I was about six and seeing the cover of that book.  Along with that memory was of running my two first Postwar engines, a 675 steam engine and a single motored GG1. I had the two next door neighbor boys over along with a girl across the street to look at my train setup. When I blew the air whistle of the 675, the youngest boy asked “what does that mean?”. At his question the girl said “it means to be quiet”. Even then I appreciated her response and it brought a smile to my face. The girl did not want the dumb question of that young boy to interfere with her concentration of the train operations!

N5CJonny:

LOL! That's a good response from that young lady! Did you end up marrying her?

Bantam Book:

It's very gratifying to read that this thread of mine, and my use of Bantam Book illustrations, has rekindled pleasant memories for you.

I can't begin to explain how many hundreds of hours my original, and this replacement, Bantam Book have rewarded me with. Over time, I think I've come to enjoy the artist renderings (such as I've been sharing) as much, or more, than the actual pictures therein. For some reason they seem to stir my imagination more, as well as spawn more daydreaming about what I would do with 3-rail if I had a lot of space, and could just cast care and $$ to the wind.

I have discovered, and continue to discover, that for me 3-rail is primarily about nostalgia. It transports me to simpler times, it retrieves memories of childhood fun, it draws forth images of Kansas City railroading, and has the potential to indulge me into childhood dreams about having a model railroading empire similar to the ones pictured and illustrated in The Bantam Book. Plus, I just like handling them. I like the size of the traditional rolling stock, I like the heft of the engines, I even like the smell of cold engines! (To say nothing of The Scent Of Ozone when they're running!)

Strangely, I just like having them around.

Ah well, I never claimed to be "normal".

Andre

NC5Jonny:

Good for you! It helps to have a wife that's supportive of our silly obsessions!

redjimmy1955:

All the way over in MD? Wow... how's that for vibes? Yup, already got my fingers greasy when working on the Marx transformer and for sure the little Marx 999 steam engine. Also used sure 'nuf "hold-'em-in-yer-hand" screwdrivers and a small tack hammer! You know, "HE-man" stuff.

Clarence:

Wife says the towels smell like your trains?  So... where's the problem?

Andre

I do not remember the smell of ozone when running our Marx 999 set a kid at Christmas time in the 1950s. 

But the open frame electric motor, with small black transformer with a cloth covered wire from my Dads wooden box erector set, made lots of green sparks and really stunk the room up.  I do not believe the set was an official Erector set but an earlier make from the 1920s.  My brother and I built lots of gadgets powered by that motor and we remotely exploded lots of fire crackers at Halloween using steel wool as an igniter with that transformer to scare the younger kids trick or treating.

Charlie

Last edited by Choo Choo Charlie

CC Charlie...

You may be right. It's only been about 60 years since I've run a 999!

I received my track today, so I quickly cleaned an oval's worth, and after throwing down a furniture moving pad on the kitchen table, I slapped together an oval. I've been running my little 999 w/train off and on this evening, and there hasn't been that distinct smell of ozone, but more of a hot grease smell. Still quite good, though!

Now, I might be smelling a bit of ozone in the mix, for the aroma is very sweet smelling. Very pleasant.

However, it doesn't seem to have the strong scent of ozone like I remember from my Postwar Lionel back in the 1990s. SO, my memories of the 999 aroma may be a bit too distant to truly trust the recollection. No biggie... still has a great smelling aroma!

Andre

Welcome, back!

I'm just about sure I'm leaving HO now. I'm staring at it as I type. Wonderfully running equipment, but it has become so "fiddly" to me. I recently went to replace the decoder in a friends beautiful Rapido diesel ... I broke just about every detail on it trying to get the body off. I break lots of little stuff now. Enough.

I've had a little narrow O scale switching layout at home, just to play with sometimes. Time to sell the HO equipment and expand the O.

Ozone.

Happy railroading.

Cont...

Before embarking on building my current Wienie Train layout in my purpose-built out-building, I seriously considered just poop-canning HO and going directly to 3-rail, for I was dead certain that I could handle, and thus enjoy, the larger and more forgiving traditional 3-rail trains far longer than would be possible in HO. (This was discussed at length in my "The Tangled Webs We Weave" thread here at OGR.)

You see, I'm a "life planner" type. That is, I way overthink things. (That tendency can be good, or it can be bad.) So, in view of my "life planning" tendency, it should come as no surprise that I way overthink model trains, too, often times to the point of "analysis paralysis". Alas, it is what it is, and I've learned to make peace with my thought algorithms that I can't seem to change. (Hard coded, I suppose.)

So, even though I seriously considered going direct to 3-rail, when it came down to the nitty-gritty, for better or for worse, I decided to go for a "Last Hoo-rah" type HO train layout. The first plywood was cut in the middle of February, 2019, and by the middle of July of the same year, 100% of the track was in place and said track was 100% was functional. I now had a partial dual level layout on my hands with 132' of mainline in place, all yards, town tracks, etc, and all was fully operational. Layout up and running, I've been building and running Wienie Trains ever since.

But that 3-rail thing just hasn't gone away. It will not just silently sail off into the night. Which pretty much brings us to "now".

What, exactly, you may wonder, has caused this HO modeler for right at 58 years to decide to indulge in 3-rail again?

Well, it was more than one thing, really, but let's consider the most poignant:

* Over the decades I've been blessed with rock-steady and skilled hands. I can work with tiny .012" drills (and smaller), tiny files, etc, and produce models in smaller scales that I'm satisfied with. In the past, I have kit-bashed and scratch built contest winning models.

* Further, over those decades, I've been plenty fine with small trains and small rails, in fact, I preferred them over larger "scale" type trains.

But something has become apparent, and this has gotten my attention:

* At 68 years of age, I note that my hands aren't as steady and dexterous as they were, say, two years ago. Nothing I haven't been able to deal with and find ways to stabilize my hands for fine work, but this is something that is a bit disconcerting, nonetheless.

Because of that, my life planning nature reared its head with an eye toward my life long hobby of miniature trains. (I want to enjoy model trains for as long as I possibly can.) In view of the above, I began to wonder just how many more years would I be able to fully enjoy dealing with small, delicate, exacting, model trains? 10 years? 8? 6? Do you know?

Neither do I.

SO, I've decided to get a safety net under me: 3-rail. Therefore, I've made the decision to start acquiring the Postwar and PW-type trains that I have been thinking about acquiring "someday". However, instead of "someday", I've made the decision to start NOW. That way, if/when the above "small-trains-aren't-fun-anymore-but-instead-they're-frustrating" syndrome hits... I will have a good collection of 3-rail with which to re-imagine my model train future. Thus, you now see why the decision to allow myself the fun of 3-rail again.

Concurrent with this decision, as recently as a week or so ago, I intended to simply run my 3-rail trains on a small oval on the kitchen table for testing purposes (or relaxation running) when the need arose (or mood inclined), and call it good. I would face the "3-rail layout" issue if/when that time comes.

But that has changed. I now have a plan that is much more immediate for a 3-rail layout.

However, that is another installment for this thread that I'll eventually get to.

'Ya know... at 68 years of age (and counting), I really don't think floor running would be good idea!

BantamBook6

(Above pic from "The Bantam Book".)

To be continued...

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • BantamBook6


Cont...

SO, I now am allowing myself the fun of shopping and acquiring select Postwar offerings. This will be a slow process, as I'm trying not to be in a big hurry. (Besides, I have several interests vying for my monthly hobby allowance.)

In the past, when in my "daydreaming" mode concerning how I would do 3-rail, I gave many aspects thought. With my unique "Givens 'n Druthers" concerning 3-rail, this is what I distilled from my thought processes...

The Trains:

* All will be "traditional sized". By that I mean literally. Specifically: There will be NO "traditional size" trains IF they are anywhere near close to 1/4" scale. (Such as the Lionel NW2 or their F3's, TM's, etc.) Reason? Those pieces overshadow the 6464 type boxcar. The 6464-type boxcar will be the largest boxcar in my fleet. (This will include cars from other Mfg'ers, too, such as K-Line's "Classic" series.) For operating purposes, Lionel-type "knuckle" couplers will be standard. (This will relegate Marx and other coupler styles for relaxation running only, not "operation" as in yard switching, industrial switching, etc. This is a decision I'm fine with.)

* I want the rolling stock to reflect the "look" of railroading in the late 1940s into the mid-1950s. That means shades of boxcar red, oxide red, Tuscan red, boxcar brown, Mineral brown, black, etc, will be the prevalent "colors" seen in the rolling stock. (And the silver of some tank cars, etc.) Intentionally, my era choice is before the "Splash Of Color" trend that began to appear on rolling stock in the mid-50s. I think making this decision will mean that the trains following along behind the steam engines will really look good and will compliment the steam engines nicely. I also feel that this choice will help the overall visual impact of any future layout I may attempt with 3-rail.

* Steam and early diesels will be in evidence. For steam, all of the Lionel "baby" Hudsons are up for grabs, as well as the Berkshire and a few others. As for the diesels, the road engines will be Lionel cast and stamped frame Alco FA's, and very likely the little Railking F3's. The early diesels will be where the "color" can appear. In keeping with prototype practice, the road diesels can be adorned in much more colorful schemes the prototype railroads were applying to much of their road power. For switching, I am intending to use an RMT "Bang" (or a pair) that I will custom paint/decal for my mythical "Kansas City Belt" railway. (Black w/yellow or white Railroad Roman "Kansas City Belt" on the sides and yellow or white hazard stripes on the ends and side sills.) Given the larger size of the trains, the larger decals, etc, I do feel that I can enjoy painting and decaling traditional-sized equipment for a lot longer than attempting to do the same in HO.

The Layout Theme:

* The layout's theme will be urban all the way. I think an urban setting brings with it an acceptable degree of "plausibility" to my mindset as to the layout being crammed with track and a crowded setting. I also like the "gritty" look of urban railroading with its yards, industrial tracks, and mainlines crowded among the brick structures. It will gives the option of using signals to add even more visual support for the theme.

The Layout Locale:

* Kansas City! (My home town where my love for railroading was birthed!) Specificaly, scenes similar to what could be seen over in KC's "West Bottoms" industrial area. This "feel" will be reinforced by the plentiful use of my "PhotoFlat" concept on the backdrop. It is my intent to let the backdrop carry the lion's share of the "scenic support" chores, saving precious layout space for the tracks and attendant elements (line side structures) that support the "railroad" scene. No non-railroading "luxury" scenes will exist, such as "burger stand" scenes, etc. Any space for foreground "mini-scenes" will be based on the railroading theme to reinforce the overall theme and locale: Heavy duty urban/industrial railroading. The accompanying picture of  the original PAL "yard" scene illustrates the general look that I envision. Namely, note the backdrop, note the cinder-based look of the yard, and such. (Note: My yard tracks will not use the same approach as PAL used.)

BantamBookYdScene


The Layout Itself:

Well, that aspect will likely be covered in my next installment.

SO, the above treatise shares the basic concept of how I could do 3-rail in a way that I can envision it being satisfying to my specific "Givens 'n Druthers". There are other aspects, but this covers the basic concept that I've long flirted with in regards to 3-rail and me.

To Be Continued...

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • BantamBookYdScene

Cont...

LAYOUT DRAWINGS

Ever since my failed experiment back in about 2000 or so, such a 3-rail layout as I have described in my "Concept" post has been relegated to the back recesses of my mind. During that early 2000s period of serious 3-rail experimentation, encouraged by my early findings, I actually did draw up a layout "concept" that could fill a proposed out-building that I was considering at the time. Though this layout will never be constructed by me verbatim, I do think the track plan and supporting cast illustrates just how far one could take this concept, and definitely serves as food for thought.

Even now, factoring in what I've learned about myself and about 3-rail in general, I still think with some minor changes, such an extravagant layout as this could be very promising for a long term 3-rail layout. I will try to share a photo of the taped sheets of scale drawings of that layout, then hung on the wall and photographed!

LG_KCLines_Med

Specifics:

* Room 23' x 23'.

* Maximum bench work depth: 36".

* Aisle width minimum: 36".

Agreed: A layout such as the above large layout would be a significant undertaking in regards to required spaced, required finances, and required time resources. (Far more resources in space realm or the time realm than I now have.) Keep in mind that many of elements reflected in the above plan were included simply because I wanted such a scene and had the space to include said scene IF desired. Scenes such as the crossings w/bridge that's depicted at the lower left. (Though the poor access issue created by the bridge spanning the aisle is suspect, had this layout actually been undertaken, and had that feature been retained in the final version, it would no doubt have ended up being hinged to fold upward, thus negating the access issue.) In addition, the above was drawn before my discovery of the extensive line of GarGraves track and switches, so that too, would change the final track arrangement to accommodate any geometric changes such would entail. However, frankly, even if I did end up pulling down the HO layout and going back in with this 3-rail idea, I couldn't use the above layout plan, for my actual out-building is 20' x 16'.

Also during that time frame (2000 or so), I designed a much reduced and compacted KC Lines layout for this small computer room, and THAT layout drawing was actually used to guide me as I began building a layout upon which to enter the "layout" phase of my 3-rail experiment.

However, as covered extensively previously in this ongoing thread, my 3-rail experiment met with failure. So the small layout in this computer room was never completed to the extent illustrated on the plans for same. Therefore, the plans for both (the large and small) were archived, and that was that.

Or so I have thought for the following 20 years.

However, as we have now seen, 3-rail has returned to my modeling table! And, as also mentioned previously, I "assumed" that I would simply use a test track and a small oval on the kitchen table to appease my desire for 3-rail until the day arrives (IF it arrives) for me to  make a decision concerning HO and me.

Then I happened to think: Hey... I have the bench work... I have a track plan... hmmm.  What if?...

And this is an interesting "what if?" for me to ponder.

What if I retrieved the small KC Lines track plan from my archives that I had intended for this small room... and sequentially build it so I have a sincere outlet for my 3-rail interest until if/when the time comes to leave HO? That way, there would be no extended delay of gratification. As an added bonus, it would be a far better way to enjoy what I will be purchasing instead of a small train chasing its tail on a small oval on the kitchen table, no?

So I decided to give that idea serious consideration. Thus, I pulled out my old KC Lines track plan that was designed for this small room, looked it over, and figured... hey... this could work! AND, it will be up and going far quicker than however many years will pass while waiting to see what happens with me and HO.

Not a bad idea, eh?

That brings us to the track plan for this small room. So, here it is:

KCLinesV1a_sm

As you can see, it is quite compact. The entire room only measures about 12'6" by 9'6". However, I added an additional 2' to the layout width by annexing the closet as a continuous run connection. This bench work is already in place. It is ready for almost immediate use. However, I will need to clean off and organize the "stuff" that's currently stashed on top of the bench work, and I will need to re-install the hinged lift-up section. (Fortunately, I saved all the bridge parts!) Oh, and I'll want to repaint the Homasote a charcoal black. That done, it will be ready for occupancy!

Of course, there ARE elements on the above small track plan that may (probably will) be altered and/or omitted, but it's a "Start Here" point for me... and I have the existing bench work!

So, by using this small room approach to a layout, there you have it: I can do this if'n when I'm ready to take the layout plunge. However, it will be a while yet, for I need more equipment, and I'll need to purchase the track that the layout plan will require.

BUT... me thinks this is a viable option!

What say ye?

EDIT: The forum software greatly reduced the size of the above pictures, so details will likely be hard to read/etc. If you would like larger scans of the above, simply email me.

To Be Continued...


Andre

Attachments

Images (2)
  • LG_KCLines_Med
  • KCLinesV1a_sm
Last edited by laming

These layouts are awesome!  I think you're definitely "on the right track!"  I'm thrilled at the idea of a "scale-like," operations-oriented layout using Postwar.  I've wanted to do this myself for a long time, and it's totally doable!

As you're coming from the scale world, you might get a little frustrated that postwar O won't readily throttle down to scale speeds.  Series-AC motors are sensitive to changes in load, it's their nature.  Keeping the track dead level and a nice, even power distribution with no voltage drops is a must!  (I suggest a minimum of 14-gauge wire for power distribution.)

You'll probably find that dual-motored diesels like F3s and FMs are some of the best runners.  The early NW-2 switchers and Geeps are pretty good too, but plan on using them in pairs.  Since Lionel used a 3-pole motor, there's a fair amount of cogging at the slowest speeds.  Switching with two units works better, because the gears are back-drivable, and the motors can "help" each other.  You get twice as many power pulses per inch.

Can't wait to see progress as this develops!!

Hi Ted!

First off, thanks for your input. You bring up some interesting points. Let's look at them...

"These layouts are awesome!"

Thanks! I enjoyed creating them eons ago. Gotta' admit, that large room track plan would be the bomb, however, I would probably change a few things if constructing it it were to actually be attempted. However, that's simply not possible, so I offered it up to any that are interested.

The small room track plan will also likely be modified. For example, I don't think the closet switch area will survive. Instead, with GarGraves 072 switches, I may able to get 1 more yard track into the 12th St Yard. That so, I would be tempted to extend a couple the industrial track straight into the closet for more track capacity, and extend a yard track into the closet for much more yard capacity (illustrated with red lines on the plan below) and dispense with the scenic'd industrial scene in the closet.  That closet industrial area wouldn't be very user friendly to switch anyway, so no big loss.

TrkPlanV2

Also, I'm not so sure the "Eng Service" area (lower left) will survive. I might be better served to develop that into more industrial switching. If you'll compare the small room layout in the previous post, I've added a tail track at the 12th St Yard area for an engine tie up track. Given the small scope of the layout, that ought to be sufficient. The eye-candy through trains will "fiddled" on/off the layout via the closet, as will the locals that will be stopping to set out/pick up blocks of cars at 12th St. Yard.

"I think you're definitely 'on the right track!' "

Ooo! Ted's feeling punny tonight!

"I'm thrilled at the idea of a "scale-like," operations-oriented layout using Postwar."

Well, love as I would to be able to take credit for that idea, it's not original. In fact, there's a fellow OGR forumite modeling that helped me to see the potential of traditional trains in realistic setting. His OGR nickname is "Christopher2035". Several years ago, Christopher's approach to 3-rail really piqued my interest in the idea... and thus I personalized the concept as per my own "Givens 'n Druthers".

Now, I know I've shared these "Christopher photos" before, but it is appropriate to do so again to illustrate what I'm hoping to accomplish, and to point out some of the reasons for the success of Christopher's efforts. (By the way, these photos are from a previous layout of Chirstopher's.)

When my eyes originally fell upon this first pic I'm sharing, I was gobsmacked by just how good those stamped frame FA's looked in that setting. Notice how the supporting elements are "scale", like the signal bridge overhead, the crossing signals, the clutter, etc. IMHO, all of that adds to the effect and really flatters the stamp frame FA's. The supporting cast really takes the stars of the show (the FA's) and makes them look better than they really do. (They are, after all, toy trains.)

5217275911_ed9a567fb8_z

Now lets look at what the same approach can do for the ubiquitous and quite toy-like Lionel 2-6-4 steam engine:

5750828592_0c5d0499a0_z

See? The supporting cast has once again taken a toy train and made it look better than it really is! Also, the smaller looking rail of FastTrack has helped the effect. I won't be using FastTrack, instead I will be using GarGraves "Phantom" line of sectional track, and once the rail is painted and ballast is even with the tops of the ties, it too, will have that "smaller rail" look that I feel really enhances the "realism" impression a traditional train makes.

Now, there is another subtle effect that I gleaned from studying Christopher's pics. (As well as others that also have that same approach. i.e. Traditional trains in a scale setting.) It's found in this "in process" pic that Christopher posted several years ago. Note that he was still painting rail and this scene has some rail that's painted, and some that's not. I immediately spotted something that I'll share after you view the picture:

5508761153_049f185c8b_z

Do you see it?

Let me point it out: Compare the difference between the rail/roadbed that Christopher has already painted to the foreground switch area that isn't completed as yet. See how the dark painted roadbed and rail sides goes a long way toward reducing the visual impact of same?

Once I distilled that small feature, it has stuck with me ever since. Thus, my decision to go with cinder ballast and painting the rails in shades of black ranging from weathered black to charcoal black... but for sure some shades of black. (As opposed to, say, rust, which actually draws my eye to the rail instead of helping the rail blend into the overall scene.) 

"I've wanted to do this myself for a long time, and it's totally doable!"

Go for it!

"As you're coming from the scale world, you might get a little frustrated that postwar O won't readily throttle down to scale speeds... <snip: some very good advice and experience>..."

That is very astute of you, Ted. You are absolutely, positively correct. Trying to make 3-rail into Hi-rail caused that very issue to raise it's head for me back during my 3-rail experiment. That's why I'm going to stay with traditional (under sized) trains, and avoid scale sized trains. Period. As long as they're toys, I'm more forgiving and accepting of the trains themselves, as well as that center rail. BUT... if start making the trains "scale"... them I want the track have 2 rails. Can't seem to shake that. Just my nature, so IF I'm going to do this, traditional, undersized trains seems to be a "given" for me. It must be there.

"Can't wait to see progress as this develops!!"

Well, it's going to take a while. I will need to at least amass enough equipment to have a couple or three complete trains and some extra rolling stock for industries. Then it will be time to start acquiring the needed GarGraves track products. All this means it won't be happening next week, or next month, even!

Thanks for your input, Ted, I enjoyed the chat!

Who's next?

Andre

Attachments

Images (4)
  • TrkPlanV2
  • 5217275911_ed9a567fb8_z
  • 5750828592_0c5d0499a0_z
  • 5508761153_049f185c8b_z

Andre, I too think your track plan, especially the large one, is awesome.

One thing you mention intrigues me. You mention the possibility of extending your track into a closet for more track capacity. I actually considered doing that on my layout. 

My layout is essentially a long narrow one, approximately 35 feet long and the width ranges between 3 to 4 feet, in the playroom and laundry room in my basement. The layout is an "around 3 of the 4 walls layout" in both rooms. 

The 4th wall in the playroom is a wall of 3 closets. I store my trains that are not on the layout on O Gauge tubular tracks on shelves in those 3 closets. However, those tracks are not connected to the layout.

It would be awesome to build bridges connecting the tracks on the layout to the tracks in the closets, and electrify all those tracks in the closets so the trains can run from the layout onto sidings in the closets and be stored there. 

This was suggested to me years ago by a train buddy of mine who is a professional engineer that works for a construction company. 

I never attempted this closet project because I don't believe I have the skills to do it, especially by myself, and I do not have the inclination to do it at this time in my life. In my opinion, it would be very difficult for numerous reasons including that none of the shelves in the closets are anywhere near the same height as the layout. Also, I am very happy with my layout as it currently is, which I've had now for about 25 years. I like making little changes and improvements, which I find to be stimulating, but big changes like the closet project would be overwhelming.

Arnold

 

 

 

@laming posted:
Back in the mid-80s I was at a train meet, and lo and behold, there on the table was another copy... and for only a buck! I snatched it up, and though the binding is shot, and the pages are frayed... I still have it to this day. I love the smell of it when opened and I take a whiff of it.

You got ripped off, MSRP is only 75 cents!

OK, just kidding.   Nice to see something model train related go up in value.

Attachments

Images (1)
  • mceclip0

John:

LOL! Well, I think I recall paying a buck... but that was back in the mid-80s... it might have been cheaper. I just can't remember for sure. One thing is for sure: That little Bantam Book has brought me so many enjoyable hours of browsing and reading, that I've got my money's worth out of it many hundreds of times over.

Arnold:

You said...

"Andre, I too think your track plan, especially the large one, is awesome."

Thanks Arnold! That plan turned out a bit better than I meant for it to. Just goes to show you that every now 'n then even a blind hog can root up an acorn. 

Back when I designed that, my very close model railroading friend at the time (he was in HO, too) looked it over (he's a fellow track plan freak as well as a fellow ops freak) and made the comment to the effect of:

"Well... that's the first time I've ever seen a Lionel-type layout that could be operated prototypically. That's a railroad."

I took that from him as an indication that he saw the operational potential of it.

It's operational potential was intentional. When I designed that one, I used the years of designing track plans for operation, as well as my railroading exposure and experience to that point to design into it needed elements for operation. Shame is... it will never be built! That layout requires more space* than I have available, and the shrinking necessary to fit it in the largest space I do have available (20' x 16'), would cost too much of its personality to be lost. So, essentially a new layout plan would be called for should I ever decide to fill my 20' x 16' out-building with 3-rail.

* Originally, I thought to build a 24' x 24' out-building for a layout. Unfortunately, shortly thereafter a financial reversal took place, and plans for such an elaborate out-building were scuttled for well over a decade. When the possibility for an out-building came onto the radar again, I scaled-back my ambitions and went with a modified pre-fab building (built in place) instead of a ground-up construction w/footing etc.

"One thing you mention intrigues me. You mention the possibility of extending your track into a closet for more track capacity. I actually considered doing that on my layout."

Well, you really gotta' be careful. You have to know where the wall studs are for track planning purposes, and you need to hit your marks when the time comes to cut the holes in the wall! I saved the sheet rock cut-outs so I can patch and smooth when/if the time ever arrives that I need to re-claim this room as an actual bedroom/whatever.  Plus, seeing as you've been pleased with your layout for 25 years... I'd say you've built yourself a winner.

Thanks for the input, fella's! I've got another installment to this thread to get typed up and posted.

All fer now!

Andre

Last edited by laming

Cont...

TOYS...

First off, I just blew the rest of my month's hobby allowance. In return, I have the first of the PW Lionel on its way to me. I didn't need to spend the $$ right now... but I thought it was a good price for a package deal, so I went for it and got it. What I purchased: A 2055 engine, a 2065 engine, and a 2046W tender. I got them all for less than most of the 2065 w/tender listings. I am SO looking forward to their arrival. I love handling and tinkering with Lionel's PW steam!

LAYOUT...

Okay... my toy train hoorah out of the way... back to the subject at hand...

So, I've got a "Start Here" track plan. I have a concept, theme, locale, era, all that jazz. Now, what about getting down to the nitty gritty in regards to some of the details? Great! Let's go!

Figures...

Well, first off, I'm deliberating about what to use for figures with my traditional stuff.

During those times over the years that I was active in 3-rail, I've never been pleased with 90% of the figures that are readily available for O scale. Most of them are way too big (1/43 scale?) and clunky, lacking "crispness".  Given that traditional trains are noticeably smaller than true 1/48 trains, then anything oversize from 1/48 is magnified even more. My modeling mind rebels at 1/43 figures standing beside my traditional equipment. (Some might call this tendency "anal". I prefer to call it "discriminating".   Whichever the case, it's that hard coding thing and I can't really change it.)

To illustrate, let me show you a pic of two applicants that applied for positions on the KC Lines:

164_148_Figures

In this pic, the gondola on the left is a Marx 3/16" (S scale, or 1/64 scale that runs on O 3-rail), and the boxcar on the right is a Lionel 6464. The figure on the left is true 1/64 (3/16") S scale and measures just under 5' in true 1/48 O scale. The chap on the right is God knows what scale. He measures right at 6' 6" but was sold as "O" scale by Bachmann. I'll be sending the chap on the right home... he didn't receive employment. The chap on the left may get a second interview, or may not. We shall see.

Frankly, I think I need figures that are in between the S scale figure, and Goliath's baby brother. SO, what to do?

Well, it turns out there's a lot of figures available IF one goes outside the model railroad "box". For example, there are extensive lines of 28mm figures that are aimed at the war gamers. There's also figures in the same range for the war model crowd. Shucks... let me just throw a link at you that gives a glimpse of what's available:

http://www.55n3.info/people/

Learning that there are "in betweener" figures that are usable for my "Givens 'n Druthers", I'm considering figures in the 1/55 scale range. Some of the western type folk can be modified (soft metal), or better yet, some of the Shapeways resin offerings (easier modified) for the war model crowd. I won't need tons of figures, but I would like for some figures to be present... but I want them to look proportionately good among my traditional stuff. SO, 1/55 or close to, may be what I aim for.

Vehicles...

This same malady extends to vehicles: Seems they're either too big or too small. Again, looking back at my previous 3-rail efforts, 1/43 vehicles sitting in close proximity to my traditional trains wasn't satisfying. The model train didn't tower over the vehicles as they do in real life. Given that traditional trains are smaller than 1/48 scale, and the 1/43 vehicles are larger than O scale 1/48... well... that just wasn't a good fit for me.

There isn't an ready answer for this vehicle question, though.

However, a quick experiment with a left over semi-truck I had from years ago has given me cause for a thoughtful "Hmmmm.".  Consider this:

164_Truck_w6464

What you're seeing: That's a 1/64 (S scale) die-cast semi-truck sitting in front of the 6464 boxcar. In proportion to the 6464, the truck looks pretty stinkin' good. I think this has potential with the following caveats:

* It doesn't need a 1/55 figure anywhere near it.

* It would best be used on a road or dock that is not directly next to trains.

That is, with adequate distance separating the 1/64 truck from direct contact with either figures or trains... it's do-able. (A form of social distancing???  ) For sure, 1/64 die-cast vehicles would be far more available than, say, 1/50th or 1/55th.

Though I'm not fully convinced as yet concerning my above musings, I at least have a "start here" point for experimentation for the cast of "extras" that a layout requires.

Input?

All fer this 'un!

Andre

Attachments

Images (2)
  • 164_148_Figures
  • 164_Truck_w6464
Last edited by laming

Andre how do traditional Plasticville people size up?  Plasticville was marketed as being somewhere between O and S.  (Personally I think the structures were closer to S.)  But it looked great with "O27" without overwhelming the trains, and you could fit more in which added to the "busy" look.  I thought that the Plasticville people, at least the ones available in the 1970s, looked just fine on station platforms, etc.  I think the Marx people sold by K-Line are a little bigger, although the Marx structures are about the same size.

When it comes to vehicles, I feel you!  Common 1:43 look too big, even next to full O scale (because they are!)  Tootsietoy cars are also too big.  Hot Wheels are too small :-(  Plasticville cars might be the right general size, but they need a LOT of help in the detail department!  The last time I built an O27 layout, I found some 1:50 construction vehicles which were PERFECT, but I forget what brand they were.

You already have plenty to think about but I'm going to throw this idea out there... I love Plasticville!  But Lionel trains tend to tower over the buildings and vehicles, and this problem is made worse by the rail height of tinplate track.  I noticed it right away when we switched from O27 to tubular O.  It bothers me so much that I'm tempted to put only the beveled edges of HO-scale roadbed along either side of the ties, and no actual roadbed under the track to prevent the trains from standing taller than they already do.  Not sure how much this will increase the noise level.  Putting "concrete" pads under the structures helps equalize the height a little too.  Does this bother anyone else, and how did you deal with it?

 

Last edited by Ted S

Ted:

Thanks for your input!

Plasticville figures...

I don't think I realized that Plasticville made figures. That so, I took a look at some of the vintage figures. Looks like a mixed bag: Some figures look crisp and well proportioned, others appear larger and more "clunky" looking. Worth a shot, though?

1/43 vehicles...

I see we're on the same page about 1/43 vehicles!

Rail height...

All surfaces of this small layout in this computer room have plywood tops covered w/Homasote sheets thereon. That so, I would like for yard tracks to appear to be sitting in the ground, that is, the tops of the ties even with the terrain. I figured I would have to use "filler strips" the height of the ties between the tracks. Also, I think it's going to take TONS of ballast to fill between the GarGraves plastic ties.

Once the main's leave the yard, I will likely just let the height of the ties represent roadbed and taper the ballast off the ends of the ties to the Homasote. 

Experimentation will be in order when that time arrives. I think I already have two large jugs of Woodland Scenics "Cinder" ballast on hand, but I'll bet that won't go far!

EDIT:

Sound...

Forgot to say that Homasote has a sound deadening quality to it. As I did with my experimental layout decades ago, I will lay the track directly on the Homasote and call it good.

Andre

Last edited by laming

Cont...

STRUCTURES

Truth of the matter, there won't be very many. Seriously. Most of the "structures" will be my "PhotoFlats" mounted on matboard and attached to the wall. What few 3D structures there will be, will be small and typically railroad "line side" structure related.

PhotoFlats:

Back during my 3-rail experiments in 2000 or so, upon pricing what 3D "flats" were going to cost me, I about had a cardiac arrest. Using Design Preservation Models modular flats (or equivalent), the cost for one largish flat was going to be $70 and up! It would cost several hundred dollars just to do one 12' wall using such cast flats. That was not a good option, so kicked back, scratched my head... then had an idea...

I used the photo shop skills I had previously acquired and created my own flats using photos. Presto,  "PhotoFlats" were created! (Actually, I was going to package them up and offer them for sale under the "PhotoFlats" trademark, but, well... I never got the "Round Tuit" I needed to do so. That was almost 20 years ago! Still own the "PhotoFlats.net" domain, though. Maybe someday?)

Anyway, the three walls will extensively use my "PhotoFlats" to carry off the "look" of an urban industrial setting, such as this, continued on around the room:

PhotoFlats

However, I also intend to have a few 3D "cut and assemble" PhotoFlats for a few 3D structures to protrude away from the wall so not all of the PhotoFlats are truly "flat". This will afford some visual relief so not all the back drop will consist of just flats.

(FYI: That large structure in the photo above covers a window. It's attached with Velcro so I can easily remove to access the window if/when needed. Also, those PhotoFlats are actually S scale. They replaced the O scale PhotoFlats that were there previously, however, given that a lot of the traditional-sized equipment is in between O and S, I think I'll just leave them in place!)

 Conventional Structure Models...

As mentioned before, these will primarily be line side structures that are railroad-oriented, such things as a control tower, hand car shed, relay cabinets, telephone shanties, etc. These will NOT be craftsman kits, nor if at all possible, no scratch building. (Time consuming, and not worth the effort for what I want to do.) Instead, I will take a simple model, such as this Plasticville Switch Tower:

PlasticvilleSwitchTower

And with some distressing of the wood, and perhaps replacing some of the items that lend to its toy-like appearance, I'll then paint/weather it and call it good.

Here's an example of such a simplistic HO model to illustrate:

AHM_RuralDepotSm

With some distressing, a bit of hacking and some paint/weather work, it can look like this:

BM&N_MedDepot1

And another example. Nothing spectacular, nothing difficult, just some cuts and hacks, paint/weather and I went from this:

AHM_Farmhouse

To this:

house4

So, as you can see, I'm not planning on making any effort whatsoever for "contest quality" structures and the like to be on the layout... just stuff that's "good enuf" for my eyes.

VISUAL IMPACT IN SMALL SPACES

It's really quite amazing what even a shallow bench work depth can provide in the way of portraying a busy yard and such. For example, this scene is only 24" in depth, and bear in mind that one of the double main lines is open. (So a "through" train could also pass through that scene if desired.)

Flats2

In the above scene, the first two tracks are yard tracks, the MKT switcher sits on one of the double mains, the gap is where the other (open) main sits, and the Santa Fe NW2 is on the "Back Track" that serves industries.  Here's a different angle and further away to illustrate what I'm trying to explain:

Flats5

In the other "industrial" areas of the small room layout plan, there won't be near that type of track density, but the above illustrates just how much layout you can have on 24" deep bench work IF you chose a theme that can portray such activity. (Which, in this case is "urban/industrial".)

SO... there you have it. Another Ozone Tale.

This is all fer tonight. Time to hit the "Post Reply" button on this one and take a breather!

Later gator!

Andre

Attachments

Images (8)
  • PhotoFlats
  • PlasticvilleSwitchTower
  • AHM_Farmhouse
  • house4
  • BM&amp;N_MedDepot1
  • AHM_RuralDepotSm
  • Flats2
  • Flats5

Update...

As a follow up on my above findings concerning traditional 3-rail and S scale:

Touched base with my old friends on the S scale email list. They're being very helpful in giving me some tips on S scale supply lines and S products that would be useful in my "Traditional" modeling efforts.

Also relearned that many of them (over their S scale modeling years) have taken traditional 3-rail stuff and converted it to S scale. They also indicated that S scale decals will go right onto the sides of 6464 type cars and smaller (like 6454-type cars) and look fine. (I would not be aversive to picking up "basket case boxcars" at train meets, fixin' 'em up, repainting and decaling them and runnin' the wheels off 'em! Oh... that is WHEN we ever get to have train meets again!! )

Anyway...

Help from the S scale community: Just goes to show you that model railroading is a great big tent with room for everybody!

Say, would my use of S scale products in my "Traditional" 3-rail effort also make me a "sort-of-kind-of" S scale modeler, too? 

Andre

I’m a big fan of traditional sized equipment (probably due to my love of pre war):  let’s face it, until the scale Hudson rolled off the line, “scale” was something that existed in one’s mind — these were “toys” after all.  Folks looking at my collection are often dumbfounded that a 259E and a 256E are both designed to run on the same track; same with both the early, two-axle 800-series freights and their larger four-axle descendants.  At the end of the day, it’s all about what you prefer to run on “your” railroad... it’s supposed to be fun, right?  

I spent too many years rivet counting in the realm of HO that I began to lose sight of why I re-entered the hobby in the first place. And although I still buy HO trains on occasion, they’re mostly vintage — when things were meant to be played with, not programmed... and delicate trim pieces that broke off just by sneezing on them were rare.

There’s something for everyone in this hobby, and while I appreciate all approaches, for me keeping it simple is the key.

Steve:

Agreed! Fun is where we find it. Like a chap used to say here at OGR: "It's a great big tent with room for everybody!"

Dagg:

'Ya don't say! I did not know that. As you can see, when it comes to things Lionel, I ain't the sharpest Crayon in the box. Much to learn.

Great pic, really, but the size of the passenger cars and the tanks compared to that brute of an engine (it is a handsome son-of-a-gun, though) were a bit of a "??" to me as a lad.

Who knows, perhaps over time I'll mature/refine in my tastes, and be okay with such?

Andre

I get what you are saying, Andre'.  This is the reason I have either my 027 trains or the Scale trains on the layout at any one time but not together.  Now, there are crossovers, such as the tank cars mentioned above, because some types or cars came in many sizes.  But generally I have the scale Lionel/K-Line running OR the Lionel 027/8-wheel and Delux Marx running.  

Strangely, I don't have a problem with the adjacent On30 next to either one.

Last edited by palallin

The Scent of Ozone ..... great topic Andre'!!   I've been enjoying the discussion everyone!IMG_4142IMG_4096IMG_4183IMG_4313IMG_4345

I agree with you, Andre, about proportion.  My young lad eyes always told me that seeing a diesel that was larger than a steamer was " not right." ( again " not right" is for me personally and I'm not projecting my view onto anyone else ... I certainly respect everyone's tastes in model railroading .... after all our hobby is about what brings us personal joy.)   And buildings that were oversized and out of proportion with trains and vice versa did't seem ' right' to my eye.    These things did bug me a just a tad, however, that's where my imagination took over. LOL!    I also had that Bantam Book .. Model Railroads.  Cost me $75cents brand new at the time.  Loved that book!

I basically shared this experience on another site previously, however,  I thought I'd share it here as well for " the scent of ozone" is what drove my creative juices and thus my falling in love all over again with post war trains.  I've been a scale guy for many years now, however, I'm going to begin running postwar and " traditional" size trains more often.   They look more proportional to the size of my layout and postwar has a charm all it's own, for sure.   

Last Friday evening I broke out my 2065 Lionel Hudson after it sat on the shelf for a couple years.  The 2065 came with my first Lionel train set that Santa brought me back in 1957.  Upon lubing it up, putting several drops of smoke fluid down the stack,  I set the 2065 and it's tender  on the mainline and fired  up the Z4000.  Upon hearing the first blast of the air whistle, the memories started pouring in as I grinned from ear to ear!  I marveled as I watched this little engine, which had brought me so much joy when I was a kid,  go through it's paces.   Once the engine had run around the layout long for a while, the scent of ozone wafted throughout the room thus having an intoxicating effect on me! 

Next thing I know, I'm seeing this little engine with all it's glory and beauty.  Probably akin to Chevy Chase discovering the "perfect" Christmas tree in the movie Christmas Vacation! LOL!  My imagination runs wild and I break out the cell phone to begin photographing it.  After many 2065 photos, I'm now totally high on ozone!  I find myself standing on the step stool and reaching high up onto my locomotive storage shelf and grasping the 216 FA Santa Fe Diesels, also a Lionel product,  Santa Clause ( not Fe ) brought me when in grade 5.  Then reaching for the Virginian Train Master in blue and yellow.... one of the two most beautiful engines ever produced as I recall the young lad version of me thinking in the 1950's ... the other being the the F3 Santa Fe units.  Although the Train Master is a Williams reproduction of the Lionel, it was close enough for me to begin creating some scenes with these three wonderful postwar icons.  Again, I've shared most of these pics on other thread, and some are new ...  above are some of those pics  taken last Friday evening which I call ... "Postwar Paradise"

Attachments

Images (5)
  • IMG_4142
  • IMG_4096
  • IMG_4183
  • IMG_4313
  • IMG_4345
Last edited by trumptrain

Cont...

ROADNAMES

Hm... interesting topic to me, road names. Once again, my "Givens 'n Druthers" may come as a shock, or maybe not.

Steam...

I'm fine with all the steam tenders being adorned with "LIONEL LINES".  I also am fine with the engines all being basic black and carrying their OEM numbers on their sides. As a general rule, steam engines during my era were black, hulking, wheezing tons of steel. Small numbers or other on the cab sides, tenders like wise. So, "LIONEL LINES" on the sides of the tenders and numbers on the cab sides are fine and dandy with me.

While I'm at it, the same goes for cabooses: "LIONEL LINES" is fine. That way they can be mixed and matched and bring up the rear of any train. No problemo.

Diesel...

Here it gets more interesting to me. I fall into two camps:

Factory painted diesels...

IF it's a good example and IF it was a road name that could be seen in the KC area during my era choice... then I have zero problem running the scheme "as is", even if it's not accurate. (Did Lionel ever produce an accurate diesel scheme? Serious question, there.)

Custom painted diesels...

Yup, you read that right. I will not be averse to custom painting and decaling my own diesels using either a cast frame FA, or stamped frame FA, or even a Rail King "Stubby" F3. I will not aim for drop dead accuracy, for the models themselves aren't accurate. Instead, I will go after the "feel" of the KC area prototype that I want to reflect. A good example of such "impressionistic" representations can be seen in Kusan examples and their treatment of their FA line. Here's some examples of how Kusan painted some of their FA's that could be seen in the KC area:

Frisco freight FA's...

KMT_Frisco_FA_a

Katy freight FA's...

KMT_MKT_FA_d

Burlington FA's (which never owned FA's... so don't know if I'd be inclined to paint some)...

KMT_CBQ_FA_a

Mop freight FA's...

KMT_MopFA

KMT_MopFA_a

And finally, Kusan's interpretation of the Mop passenger scheme (not bad, either)...

KMT_MopFA_b

Yup, I could see some Lionel cast-frame FA's that were in "runner" (ratty) condition being stripped, fix any issues, and repainted into schemes such as the above. Ditto Rail King "Stubby" F3's.

Rolling stock...

Mentioned, but will quickly repeat: No mid-late 50's "bright" schemes. All will be in subdued "railroad-type" colors. Any custom painted? Yup. I would not have a bit of problem taking a ratty looking 6464-type (Lionel, K-Line Classic, etc) car and stripping it, fixing any significant issues, and repainting it and decaling it. In fact, I just re-discovered that I have a STACK of old Enhoning S scale boxcar decals and most of them fit within my era span and most will fit the side of a 6464 nicely!

Passenger cars

Modern...

"Lionel Lines" preferred. Their short "027" cars exclusively. You know, these cars:



Those will likely go behind any diesels appropriate for same that I may acquire or paint.

Heavyweight...

Modern "Baby Madison" cars in Pullman green will be preferred. I think those look GREAT behind the 2055/65 or 2046/56 type Hudsons! The shout "STEAM ERA!"

WAIT A MINUTE!!... HOLD THE PHONE!!!....

Yeee haw! USPS just delivered my box containing my 2055, 2065, 2046W!! 

Cutting this one off right here... and getting ready to unbox, get some pics, set up a loop, and...

Film at 11.

Andre

Attachments

Images (7)
  • KMT_Frisco_FA_a
  • KMT_MKT_FA_e
  • KMT_MKT_FA_d
  • KMT_CBQ_FA_a
  • KMT_MopFA
  • KMT_MopFA_a
  • KMT_MopFA_b
Last edited by OGR CEO-PUBLISHER

Re: steam switchers... you might find that Lionel's four-wheel switchers are also "big."  In other words, if the prototype is really a PRR A5, they scale out to more than 1:48.  In this case the true scale models from Weaver and MTH might actually fit in better size-wise, although the paint finish and level of detail is very different from Postwar.  If you want to stick with the Lionel 0-4-0's, IMO the 1656 is the smoothest runner of the bunch.  For some variety, find a prewar 203 (0-6-0) and retrofit it with knuckle couplers.  The 6-wheel small switcher was never reintroduced after the war.  But they are geared a little lower and actually have pretty decent slow-speed for switching.

Those Kusan FA's look good!  Never tried one.  I would be interested to hear about how well they run, compared to the well-known Lionel versions.  Love this topic!

 

 

@laming posted:

 

 

TWAIT A MINUTE!!... HOLD THE PHONE!!!....

Yeee haw! USPS just delivered my box containing my 2055, 2065, 2046W!! 

Cutting this one off right here... and getting ready to unbox, get some pics, set up a loop, and...

Film at 11.

Andre

Well, How do you like your purchases? I guess we won't know for a short while while you test things out (I know that feeling of anticipation mixed with excitement.)

 

By the way Andre, I was able to locate a very decent looking copy of that book "Model Railroading". I have not received it yet, but from the photo it looks great and appears to have the same photo cover as yours.

Last edited by N5CJonny

Update:

Wow, some replies before and after I posted my recent update! Cool. Let's see what y'all said...

palallin:

Don't mix 'em? Run 'em separate? Hm. Hadn't thought of that...

OKAY... enough of that! I don't even want to go there!!

You also said:

"Strangely, I don't have a problem with the adjacent On30 next to either one."

We're a weird lot, us model rails.

Trumptrain!

You hit the nail straight on the head! Looking forward to the day I can fill a room with ozone... even if its only from a locomotive circling an oval on the kitchen table!

BTW: What make of trumpet you play? "Way back when" (Jr. High, mid-60s) I played trumpet. Had a Bach Stradivarius. I understand that was quite a trumpet. It must have been, for I made the mistake of leaving it at school in the band cabinet only once. It was stolen. Ended up taking the insurance $$ and buying a bass guitar and amp (renting a trumpet to finish the school year). Played bass ever since.

Trumpets? What does that have to do with Postwar ozone??? (I'm amazing. SO hard for me to not drift in a topic.) Sheesh. Back to my topic at hand...

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Just got down unboxing my stash that arrived, put 'em on the table and snapped some "before" pics. Here they be.

2065...

2065a

2065b

2065c

2055...

2055a

2055b

2055c

2046W...

2046W_PRR_b

2046W_PRR_a

2046W_PRR_c

Setting up an oval on the kitchen table and using my trusty 1033, here's my first findings:

2065...

Runs great. E-unit works reliably. Needs disassembled cleaned and lubed. (After I'm done with this post.) Headlight does not work. Numbers nice and strong. No dents. Some edges there's paint chipping. The rods are bright and very clean. Rollers look great.

2055...

E-unit cycles reliably. Ran free in reverse, very sluggish forward at first, but freed up quickly. Headlight works. Numbers nice and strong. No dents. Some edges there's minor paint chipping. The rods need to be removed and cleaned with fine steel wool/etc. Rollers look great. Same deal: Needs disassembled, cleaned and lubed.

2046W...

I feel like such an idiot. (Not an uncommon occurrence, I might add.) When I was viewing the pics of it, I was studying the really important stuff: All steps intact, over all condition, under frame condition, wheel condition, roller condition, rust, etc, etc. Never even noticed that it's a "Pennsylvania" tender!!! (I guess my pea-sized brain ignorantly "assumed" it was LIONEL LINES??) SO... eventually the shell is going to be up for trade for a "LIONEL LINES" shell of the same quality. Whistle relay works, whistle motor tries... but I stopped right there before abusing the brushes. Needs to be disassembled, cleaned, lubed, etc.

SO...

Except for the idiot move on the tender lettering, I done good. Overall these engines are in very good (maybe excellent?) exterior condition, likewise the tender. Mechanically they seem to be sound, but will need the cleaning/lubing routine performed. Speaking of which... need to load 'em up and head out to my layout room where my workbench is located!

All fer now!

Andre

Attachments

Images (9)
  • 2065a
  • 2065b
  • 2065c
  • 2055a
  • 2055b
  • 2055c
  • 2046W_PRR_b
  • 2046W_PRR_a
  • 2046W_PRR_c

Some quick replies to the input while typing the above...

Ted:

Thanks for the insight on the 1600 series 0-4-0's. I will need to see one up close and personal before I spend the $$ on one. Also thank you for your other tips. As for the Kusan's: They're two rail. I also understand from Kusan owners that they don't run the best. However, they look GREAT. Oh, and I was also told that a Kusan shell could be made to fit the K-Line 'Lionel replica" FA.

N5CJonny:

Thrilled with 'em. (Except my Pennsylvania debacle!)

You found a copy of Bantam Book's "Model Railroading"? Cool! You're gonna' love taking the trip down Nostalgia Avenue it will produce. Love the smell of my Bantam Book too, even though I get odd looks from the Ms when I open it, and poke my nose in to inhale the fragrance! (Yeah, I'm weird.)

Okay... need to load 'em up and off to the Hobby Hut!!

Andre

Andre I wouldn't let steel wool anywhere near my trains!  Especially not the 2055 / 2065 which have magnets in their chassis for traction.  If the side rods are rusty, that's realism!  If it bothers you, you could use nylon Scotchbrite or a chemical solution that "dissolves" rust.

Yes the Kusan molds were reused by K-Line.  However the K-Line versions ride a little high, because each truck contains a huge, transversely mounted can motor geared to the wheels.  Unless you permanently rewire those traction motors in series, the K-Line diesels run REALLY fast!  I bought a set of the K-Line FAs wasn't happy, and promptly returned them.  YMMV.

@laming posted:

N5CJonny:

Thrilled with 'em. (Except my Pennsylvania debacle!)

You found a copy of Bantam Book's "Model Railroading"? Cool! You're gonna' love taking the trip down Nostalgia Avenue it will produce. Love the smell of my Bantam Book too, even though I get odd looks from the Ms when I open it, and poke my nose in to inhale the fragrance! (Yeah, I'm weird.)

Okay... need to load 'em up and off to the Hobby Hut!!

Andre

Yep, like I said it looks like your book by Bantam books. I decided to check out a train dealer in New Jersey I have been dealing with for many years (All Aboard Train Shoppe) and I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it. Not only did he have that book, but he is selling another of the same book just like it plus older issues as well!

Very glad you are happy with your purchases!

I agree with Ted saying to stay away from steel wool when cleaning those rods as the fine metal particles can find a way into everything.

Hi All:

Yup, on "stay away from fine steel wool" idea. What I had in mind was using a product for cleaning chrome called "Nevr-Dull" by Eagle One. It's a tin can filled with what looks like a roll of fiberglass that has a solution in it. You pull off a bit and polish with it. Works pretty good on motorcycle chrome. However, it may not be fiberglass... it might be metallic. SO, I'll follow y'all's advice and nixo the use of any suspect material. Scotchbrite it shall be.

UPDATE:

Engines...

Used a soft toothbrush on the boilers of both engines. Helped, but didn't get all of the dust. I think the dust has oil in it and it will take more than a dry toothbrush to cut it. Would it be okay to use warm soapy water on the boilers, or would that put the cab numbers in jeopardy?

One at a time, I removed their boilers, removed the brush plate and cleaned the armature and slots, cleaned out the brush cups and the brushes themselves. Upon reassembly of the brush plate I applied LaBelle oil at the bearing points of the armature, as well as all other bearing surfaces (axles, gear studs) and pivot points (rods/etc). I used LeBelle white grease on the spur gears.

For now, I've only insured they were mechanically sound with no mechanical issues and made sure they have fresh lubrication/etc so as not to do more harm than good when running them around the oval. They run much more quietly and smoothly now at much lower voltages. However, 2065 seems to bind up noticeably going around an 027 curve. The 2055 does not.

As for cleaning 2055's rods: I will attend to disassembly of the 2055 for rod cleaning some other time, that is if I decide to tackle it.

2065's headlight: Turned out the headlight is burned out on the 2065. It had a GE 57 bulb installed. Is that something I can pick up at O'Reily or Auto Zone? Also, I noticed it has a class light lens missing. I will want to replace that, so I figure I'll need to hit a parts supplier for same. Good opportunity to give a bit of support to OGR's advertisers.

Tender...

Removed the shell, and upon applying power and activating the whistle lever on the 1033, saw the whistle relay was being lethargic. By pushing up the contact with a screw driver, the whistle system produced a nice loud whistle, so the motor is okay, but what does that indicate on the relay? Does that indeed sound like a relay? Or, could it be the 1033's whistle circuit?

SO... that's where I'm at for right now. Time to find a headlight bulb, a set of class lights, and figure out what I need to do about the tender relay or the 1033.

Here's a pic of the 2065 after getting the boiler dusted as best I could and reassembled. Note the S scale fella' on the running board. Looks like S scale Engineer/Fireman figures will work fine with these Baldwin Hudsons.

2065e

All fer now!

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 2065e

That was pretty funny, Rusty.

Ozone...

So far, neither of these engines are producing much ozone. Perhaps they'll need to get used to being run again.

OH...

Forgot to mention: Placed one drop of smoke fluid directly onto the heater coils, and sure 'nuf, both produce smoke.

Back in the 90s, I think I recalled modifying these Postwar smoke pots/coils. I think I recall disassembling them, un-soldering the coil, removing one wind of heater wire, and re-soldering. I think I also recall that I would place a disc of fiberglass under the coil and thus have it better adapted for liquid smoke fluid? Does this sound right?

Andre

Last edited by laming

RD:

Thanks for the input. I figure the paint will be fine, it's the numbers I would worry about.

HOWEVER... I'm about to decide to just leave 'em be. They look great as is... and what little dust remains in the tighter quarters simply looks like light weathering. I'm think I'm going to be fine with some "patina" and character that will be found on the various pieces I will be acquiring.

Speaking of weathering...

Nah... that's best discussed another time. Won't be long and it'll be supper time here in my neck of the woods!

Maybe I'll blither on about weathering/etc later after supper or sumpthin'.

Andre

I will throw a pic of 2055 up, though.

Take a gander at how it cleaned up, and the remaining dust and oily dust/whatever on the rods...

2055d

In all, I think it looks mighty fine, and sort of like an "in service" steam engine of the late-40s early-50s.

In my mind's eye, my "vision" for any future 3-rail layout is to reflect a working railroad using the scenery and the trains to carry off the impression. Thus, this "gritty" look of 2055 will be absolutely fine, don't you think?

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 2055d
@laming posted:

...2065 seems to bind up noticeably going around an 027 curve. The 2055 does not. 

Both were designed for and sold with O27 track.  But these are 70-year-old toys, and who knows what they've been subjected to since!  Lionel's quality control was good but not perfect, and the variation could be due to electrical or mechanical differences.  I'm guessing that it's mechanical.

Your 2055 shows quite a bit of wear on its wheels, so it was well-loved and broken in.  The 2065 may still be new-ish, or maybe it was always a reluctant runner sentenced to the shelf by it's original owner for that reason.  At a minimum you should make sure that nothing in the valve gear, side rods, etc., is binding.  Does the problem occur both clockwise and counter-clockwise?

Turn the wheels by hand and look for tight spots, chipped teeth, etc.  Are all drive wheels secure on their axles?  Is there excess slop in the spur gear train along one side of the loco?  How does it compare to your other one?  Are the wheels out of gauge, maybe due to a fall from the table?  A lot of questions, I know.  If it's obvious you'll find it pretty quickly.  If not you might have to try a handful of these to find two or three that run really well.  That's an expensive proposition, but not as much so as it was for me in the 1980s!

I think your proposed mods to the smoke unit are on-target.  Making lots of ozone takes voltage, current, and RPMs!  That will come in the future with long straightaways and longer trains!  It'll be worth the wait :-)

Last edited by Ted S

Hi 'Ya Ted!

'Preciate your input.

2065...

Rolled it over in my hand and took a look at the gears/teeth: All present and accounted for. (That's a good thing!) All wheels are tight on the axles, and there is a bit of run-out (side to side) for each axle. (Which I assume there should be some side-to-side run-out?) I don't know what the spec would be for such run-out, and besides I don't have quick access to my feeler gauge to get a measurement on it. All in good time.

Seems to do its hitch thing either clockwise or counter-clockwise, mainly toward the exit of the curve. I suspect there is a bind or a rub somewhere. I also suspect that I can find it eventually. The bind/hitch is most noticeable at lower speeds (obviously). At typical cruising speeds, it's not as noticeable. However, if it can be found, I'll bet I can find it, especially with tips from y'all to help me when I'm stumped.

Tender...

I adjusted the relay contact tabs closer together, but that didn't seem to help when the tender was stationary under power. However as it trailed along behind the 2065, I would periodically try the whistle. It started working intermittently. The more it ran, the more willing it became. It got to where I could just about whistle indefinitely when stationary. However, whether stationary or trailing along behind the engine, it seems like I have to hold my mouth just right and the whistle handle just so for it to sound.

Now, once I hit the "sweet spot" on the handle, it will whistle nigh continually. But, if I go too far with the handle, it quits. Oh, and there does seem to be the volt "spike" that a whistle circuit is supposed to apply to the rails to overcome the resistance of the whistle relay/motor. However, I'm kind of wondering about the lever having to be "just so" in order for the whistle to blow?

In all, I'll eventually get it all sorted out.

I will say that it's awful nice to again be handling hefty Lionel Postwar steam engines and watching them pace around the little test oval. These are some mighty satisfying toys, they are.

Even though my my little Marx 999 from my 25225 set has so many good memories attached to it, the quality difference between the little Marx and one of the Hudson's is quite startling. These Lionel Hudson's are built like tanks. (Weigh about as much as one, too!)

All fer now.

Andre

 

I reckon these engines have got my imagination whirring like steam gin. Couldn't help but clear off the non-3-rail stuff off'n part of the benchwork and put the engines and some cars up there to visualize and do some imagining.

KCLines_073020a

If I squint a bit... I can almost see...

"A couple of hard working freight engines are simmering on the ready track down at 12th St. Yard. The Hostler and his helper are giving the 2065 the final going-over to make sure she's ready for the evening westbound "Hot Shot" freight she's called to be on. She'll have meat reefers and all sorts of high-priority cars tied to her apron strings when she gets the "Highball". Sister engine 2055 will be on the Night Freight later that night. 'Course, the Night Freight's not nearly as glamorous a role as 2065 drew, instead of struttin' her stuff like the 2065, she'll be blowin' her stack off as she's sluggin' her way up Sheffield Hill. In the background can be seen the boxcars the Bottoms Switcher spotted just this afternoon. They say diesels will be replacing these grand machines "soon"... but for now, it's coal smoke and steam down at 12th St Yard."

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • KCLines_073020a

palallin:

Understood! I recall the same on both ZW's I've owned: Had to hold the whistle activator "just so".

S SCALE FIGURES

So I dug through my old stash of leftover S scale stuff. Found several more S scale figures, so thought I'd see what I could do with them. These figures came from the NZ firm "Railmaster". Therefore, their attire wasn't what you would typically see in the center of the USA during the late-40s/early-50s. (That falls outside my "Givens 'n Druthers".)

I guess I was bored, but I set in to "Americanize" them. I began by filing off the squarish billed hats most had on. Some I converted into "baseball-type" hats, others into "Scally/Ascot" hats. One had an odd looking long coat on and the same square-ish looking hat... so I used my rail nippers to nip away portions of the jacket tail, then filed to reshape the legs/etc to look like the fella was wearing a mid-length jacket. Same treatment of his hat, too. Ended up filing it to reflect the "ball cap" look. This figure is much reduced in size from the others, so I figure he can represent a youth.

ANYWAY...

That time sink filled, I brought them in and placed them about to see what I thought...

164_Figures

My conclusion:

S scale figures will work nicely with the "traditional" sized trains I have in mind. You may think they look a bit small... but try putting a seated one inside the minuscule cabs these Baldwin Hudson's have!  (You discover very quickly just how "imagineered" Lionel's Baldwin Hudson is!) I'm hoping to find plastic S scale figures that are seated to use for Engineer's and Firemen in the various engines I hope to roster, 'cause it's much easier to modify plastic figures than white metal!

All fer now!

Andre

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 164_Figures
Last edited by laming

Just had to get a copy of the Bantam book Model Railroading, so I ordered a copy online yesterday from the All Aboard Train Shoppe mentioned above by N5CJonny. I ordered the 1950 first edition version. It looks like there are still a few various editions available on their website. I never had this book, but wish I would have when I was starting to build my Lionel layout in the early fifties. I was 10 years old in 1951 and it started on my bedroom floor with an oval of track, a couple of Marx signals, a Plasticville church, log cabin and a Lionel set 1469WS that included the 2035 locomotive. After receiving another set a couple of years later, which included UP silver & gray 2023 Alcos, I think my mom got tired of me setting up my little empire on the bedroom floor so my dad had a carpenter friend build a table for the basement, 5 X 9 plywood, which I believe was more readily available for ping-pong tables back then. That board, combined with two very old (and warped) wooden tables that came out of a truck stop diner, became my little world for the next couple of years. From then on it was, come home from school, go down in the basement and work on the railroad. It wasn't great, but I did it all by myself, and I was proud to have friends over and run it with me. My first train was actually a Marx wind-up set when I was 15 months old, followed by an electric Marx set a few years later. I have little, to no memory at all, of the Marx trains but thanks to a couple of photos of my bedroom floor layout and only one of my basement layout, I do recall how much fun I had with Lionel trains. Like so many on here, I'm glad I got hooked on the scent of ozone at a very early age.

 Love this thread Andre. Very interesting.

Last edited by Jerry Williams

Hi Jerry!

Glad you're enjoying this thread with me!

Bantam Book:

Yer gonna' love it. Lots of cool nostalgia resides therein.

Your Marx set:

IF you can scan/post your picture that includes your Marx set, I'll bet our (OGR's) Marx Maniacs can identify it for you! They helped me to know what I had as a youngster, and once I knew, I was able to find a complete set in very good condition on The Bay!

Of your first layout, you said:

"It wasn't great, but I did it all by myself, and I was proud to have friends over and run it with me."

Bingo! Those are two key points: You made it yourself and interacted with your friends because of it.

That right there is why I am SO glad I was raised during the era I was raised in. I pity kids today that are so engrossed in a virtual existence (texting, Tubing, Twitting, FB, etc, etc,) that they don't know the joy of hands-on creating something one's self, or the fun of interacting with your friends with a common interest, playing games, using one's (or corporate) imagination (like "Cowboys n' Indians", or "Army", etc), on and on. Our culture at that time encouraged imagination, developing motor skills, systematic thinking, problem solving and such as that. Aren't you glad you were raised during that time?

Andre

 

 

Laming posted

Trumptrain!

You hit the nail straight on the head! Looking forward to the day I can fill a room with ozone... even if its only from a locomotive circling an oval on the kitchen table!

BTW: What make of trumpet you play? "Way back when" (Jr. High, mid-60s) I played trumpet. Had a Bach Stradivarius. I understand that was quite a trumpet. It must have been, for I made the mistake of leaving it at school in the band cabinet only once. It was stolen. Ended up taking the insurance $$ and buying a bass guitar and amp (renting a trumpet to finish the school year). Played bass ever since.

Trumpets? What does that have to do with Postwar ozone??? (I'm amazing. SO hard for me to not drift in a topic.) Sheesh. Back to my topic at hand...

Andre - I'll be back in the train room soon tonight, smelling ozone and enjoying post war trains.... snapping some photos too!  I'll be running a passenger trains using Sante Fe stream line cars by Lionel which I bought in 1964.    Good luck with your twin 2065's!   Btw - Yes I play Bach Stradavarious trumpet ( I have 17 trumpets in various keys, 6 of which are Bach Stradavarious ).    

 

Andre,  Can't wait to get that book. Thank you for relating your experience with it.

Unfortunately I have no photos showing my electric Marx trains but I'm guessing it was a 9923 set with a Spam can transformer, because that's the only thing I remember about it. I remember coming home from school one day to find that the transformer no longer worked because somehow my mother had burned it up while running the train for a friend. No problem, I think it was soon replaced. I'm sure that transformer was used in more than one Marx set, but I saw a 9923 set that I liked in an antique store many years ago around Christmas time, so I bought it. I don't have very much Marx but I do love it, and I really like your set.

Yes I am very thankful that I was raised during that era. Wouldn't trade it for any other.

Cont...

Okay... so I just got done with some 3-rail tinkering, and I'm in a gabby mood.  SO, I'm going to breach a subject that is a love/hate relationship among 3-railers. Some of 'ya love it... some of 'ya don't. That subject is...

WEATHERING

In my past 3-rail excursions, weathering wasn't even considered. At the time, I sort of liked the "clean and pristine" look on my 3-rail stuff. In fact, I sought out such Postwar pieces. My longest term model railroad friend that I've been friends with since '69, also happens to like 3-rail. During my 3-rail years when we would go to train meets together (remember those?), he didn't mind one iota to purchase stuff that had lots of "play were" on the pieces. I didn't particularly care for such pieces. No, instead, during my 3-rail indulging that took place throughout most of the 1990s, I was more of a collector with a purpose: All engines had to have a KC connection. (Or could be generic, i.e. "Lionel Lines".) That was about it. I didn't have any pretensions of a permanent 3-rail layout, instead just satisfied to collect and run them on temporary layouts set up for that purpose. (And broke down and stored when not.)

Understand that my "nice and shiny" preference for my 3-rail was directly opposite of my scale modeling, where pretty much everything has to look used and "natural" looking. (Ever since I was a kid. For as a youngster, I would use talcum powder to add white streaking to some of my boxcars so they would look like some of the cars at yards in KC I would see with such an effect!) Essentially there's no exceptions: Everything is weathered, or will be. In fact, my efforts with my Kansas City & Gulf theme in "Wienie Scale" () reflects a railroad running through the Ozarks in 1964 that has undergone bankruptcy and is now in the process of trying to reorganize. This "bankrupt" aspect was mainly incorporated so I could have plausibility for modeling many of engines in the aging KC&G diesel fleet as quite worn and tired. (I enjoy weathering effects.)

Now here I am, seriously looking at a very real possibility of a 3-rail layout. And unlike my previous 3-rail experiments, this attempt has been given a lot more thought concerning my "Givens 'n Druthers" based on discoveries of 3-rail and me from my previous 3-rail attempts.

CLEAN SLATE

So, if you'll pardon the play on words, I have a "clean slate" as to how I will do 3-rail.

That means, seeing as I only have two pieces of rolling stock (both 6464 boxcars, one Postwar, and one "modern" release) the slate is pretty much clean as whether I will be okay with pieces that are very "play worn".

This much I know for a fact: When I mentally envision a future 3-rail layout, all the scenic elements (track, structures, etc) contain weathering. Everything. That so, I find that I now do not have a problem at all obtaining pieces that have lots of "play wear". (Scratches, fading, poor lettering, etc.)  SO, that is "new" for me: I'm fine with play worn pieces. In fact, I think they look like "weathered" pieces and add character to each individual piece and, get this, they are can actually be preferred.

BUT...

Would I now go so far as to entertain the idea of actually applying weathering to some of the future pieces I will be purchasing?

Here it gets kind of weird. It's kind of a "yes and no" answer:

* Yes, I'm seriously considering adding some weathering to "new" pieces.

* No, I'm not wanting to weather them to the point they look like they're ready for the junk yard.

Instead of the junk yard modeling that I see so much in HO, what I will want is for the overall scene when viewing the layout to look "natural".

To do that, in view of my "Givens 'n Druthers", the equipment will need to look "less than" brand spanking new. (There can, and will be, exceptions. We'll get to that in a bit.) That is, when you look at a yard full of rolling stock on my 3-rail effort, I want the entire scene to reflect something similar to what you'd see in one of Jack Delano's color photos.

Now, if you're not familiar with the work of Jack Delano, and you would like to take a quick view of some of Jack Delano's railroad photos, hit the link below, and within a very few pictures, you'll have a couple scenes of urban rail yards:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ph...-yards-1940s/571924/

IF you have taken a look, then I'm sure you noticed one overriding tone: Grime. Perhaps you also noted there really weren't any "rust bucket" cars that grabbed your attention, instead, everything is grimy, not  rust bucket. Why is that?

Simple: Steam power.

Steam power produced copious amounts of soot as well as cinders.

Why is this observation important?

Well, if you'll recall, I will be aiming at using traditional equipment to reflect the late-1940s/early-1950s. This is because my "Givens 'n Druthers" choices have influenced me to attempt portraying urban railroad scenes. (In my case, the KC area.) Now, if I want to reflect such scenes effectively in my modeling... then I'll need lots of grime.

That pretty much decides for me that if I want my future effort to evoke mental scenes such as are seen within Jack Delano's photos... I will need to grime things up. Not everything, mind you, but the overall tone when viewing my future 3-rail layout should reflect soot-covered equipment as well as on the nearby supporting cast (structures). Namely: Grime.

Yes, there will some exceptions to the "Grime With Time" rule. For example, rolling stock that is to reflect a relatively new car. Then there's the road diesels, many of those will just about be brand spankin' new, so those "almost new" diesel engines will get minimal grime.

That so...

Prior to this essay, I just spent about 30 minutes experimenting with this concept. I took one of my boxcars, the newest of the lot (a modern era 6464), and decided to try to add some grime, and make the car look a bit more "natural" and not like a brand spanking new car. Here's the car (right) sitting beside my Postwar M&StL 6464 just like it came out of the box:

MStL6464_Erie6464

Note how bright the white appears and its overall pristine condition. Also note that by virtue of its age, the M&StL 6464 is already looking pretty stinkin' good "as is"!  Anyway, here's the same car with a bit of grime added:

6464_wWeathering1

And a down on look:

6464_wWeathering2

And an up close and personal look:

Erie6464_wGrime

Yes, the differences are subtle. (When viewed in person, it is more readily discerned.)

Look at the rivet strips: See the shadow of "grime" along each one? Also note the roof has a subtle application of grime as well as the door and ends. Even the white of the "ERIE" herald has some grime applied to it in order to tone it down so it's not as startling. Grime is everywhere, but not heavily applied.

I've also added very slight touches of older rust (as opposed to newer rust, the two are different, with many shades in between) at select points along the floor rivets as well as touches under the door rails. Also note there's some older rust on the couplers and where the springs ride on the trucks. Seeing as these are plain bearing (commonly called "friction" bearings) trucks, then the cap areas and the wheels need to reflect being oily/greasy. (They were packed with "waste" and soaked in journal oil.)

SO, there you have it. I'm seriously considering this approach this time around. At this point, all of the above weathering is powdered chalk with no fixative applied. SO, should I decide against it, it can be wiped off and/or washed off (the plastic parts).

I'll leave it like it is for now, and give it the test of time, but I'm seriously leaning in this direction so the entire scene will look "natural" to my eyes.

Thoughts?

Oh, and what about engines? Same treatment?

Well now, that's an interesting question. I'll blather on about that in a future installment!

All fer now!

Andre

Attachments

Images (4)
  • MStL6464_Erie6464
  • 6464_wWeathering1
  • 6464_wWeathering2
  • Erie6464_wGrime
Last edited by laming

Thank you for sharing that Jack Delano link, amazing photos!!

Personally I've never weathered my rolling stock.  I'm an MPC kid.  By the time we added any Postwar to our collection, it was already "weathered" by the previous owner(s), storage conditions, etc.  As toy trains go, it looked plenty realistic to us! 

Resale value shouldn't be a consideration, because operator-grade Postwar is plentiful.   Given the demographics of our community, supply and demand, prices will only go down from here.  Besides they're YOUR trains, so do what makes YOU happy!

With Tinplate rail being as tall as it is, I agree that painting the sides rust brown, adding some kind of roadbed, etc., greatly enhances realism.

One thing I've noticed is that modern era trains have a very different paint finish, shiny brightwork, etc.  So here's my challenge and recommendation: If you decide to allow anything made in the last 50 years, don't weather it as you would a scale model.  Instead, repaint, dullcote, etc., as needed so that it harmonizes with the Postwar!  I don't have those skills, but that's what I would try to do. 

Ask yourself: Do you want your trains to look as realistic as possible, accepting that they began life as toys?  Or do you acknowledge that they are charming toys, realistic in a certain sense, but try to "homogenize" and present them in a realistic environment?  My goal was always the latter.  What's yours?

Last edited by Ted S

"Now, if you're not familiar with the work of Jack Delano, and you would like to take a quick view of some of Jack Delano's railroad photos, hit the link below, and within a very few pictures, you'll have a couple scenes of urban rail yards:"

https://www.theatlantic.com/ph...-yards-1940s/571924/

 

Hi Andre,

Just checked them out, these Jack Delano 1940's era pictures are in color.  Pure gold!  Thanks for the link!

Another aspect of the scene in your photo, Andre, is the variety or sizes, subtypes, and even eras all mixed together in service.  The modern unit train made up of identical cars did not yet exist (except in rare and unique cases). 

Too often today we value a uniformity in size and details that simply didn't exist.  If we want to reflect the reality of that time, we can take advantage of that freedom to use a wide variety of rolling stock.

Home from church... lunch et... time to read n' post up some replies!

Pete:

Thanks for that LoC link! I will likely hit that this afternoon to see if I can glean some Delano color railroad photos that I don't have in my Delano collection!

AND... 'Ya done real good on that scene! All of it. What did you do for an SW1?

palallin:

You are sooo correct. Though 6464's will be my largest boxcars, I also intend to run 6454's and such. My biggest puzzle right now is what to do for refrigerator cars, outside braced boxcars (and OB gons?), and double sheathed boxcars. I really would like to include such cars, but I need to think on the "how" part quite a bit. I don't think I have a real problem with the thought of heavy kit-bashing/modifying existing models so as to have a few representative cars. BUT, by the same token, given the vast selection of Evergreen Styrene shapes, I might consider some simplistic scratch-built shells to fit existing frames/trucks. Quick example: A 6464 frame could be used for a "40 foot" car, and the 6454 frame could be used for a "36 foot" car. Also, working in O is much more forgiving than HO, and building equipment to "traditional" detail levels would also be much more forgiving. Something for me to think about as I'm slowly amassing equipment and mentally "finalizing" my concept and approach.

Rusty:

SO true. Whereas John Allen is indeed one of my model railroad "heroes", and though I respect the work of George Sellios, when it comes to my typical modeling approach, I tend to avoid such extremities* in regards to "caricature". (Though I've tried a bit of it in my past modeling evolution.) I think the key to what I'm envisioning is "moderation". Things weathered enough to look natural... but not overdone to the point of caricature. That's not easy.

* Disclaimer: My HO theme, the 1964 era Kansas City & Gulf was created to allow for heavy weathering in the realm of the diesels and such, for in my youth years I was around junky looking diesels most typically via the Frisco, KCS, Rock Island, and Mop, along with innumerable railroad books that have photos of the "failing years" of the 60s into the 70s. SO, on my KC&G diesels, eroded and worn paint, oil leaks, touches of rust, grime, and soot are in evidence, sometimes in heavy evidence, if that particular unit is being modeled as one of the more neglected engines. (Each road had such examples during the "failing years".) However, such KC&G models are not "caricatures", they actually represent engines and effects I've seen on the prototypes. Also, I will not be modeling a bankrupt railroad in 1964 with my 3-rail, instead I'll be modeling scenes such as the above, where cinder n' soot are the main weathering agents.

All fer now!

Andre

Last edited by laming

Andre,  I always thought you've had some of the most realistic weathering out there.  I never viewed it as a caricature.  It's clear you have a good understanding on how this stuff gets down and dirty in the real world, no doubt due to your railroading and railfaning experience.

Anyhow, if you continue down the postwar vortex, the dings, dents and handling of the past is almost "instant weathering.

Rusty

Last edited by Rusty Traque

Rusty:

Thank you so much for your kind words about my KC&G stuff. Sadly, every KC&G engine that's in paint (and now in use) was painted/decaled/weathered back in the mid-90s. Though I have many more KC&G engines ready for paint (modified as desired, detailed, DCC/Sound installed/etc) I have yet to fire up the airgun and get started. I just can't seem to get off high center.

I think it's two primary reasons:

* I'm concerned about my limited supply of Floquil paints in the colors I used most.

* I'm concerned about the defunct decal sources I used.

Ah well, it is what it is.

For any 3-rail that I may paint, my thought process is entirely different: I'll use "close enough" colors from automotive/etc rattle cans (run through my airbrush) and whatever decals I can now find that's "good enough". Totally different mindset.

Yes!  Dents, dings, and scratches on pieces acquired with same will play right into the hands of some appropriate rust-colored tube acrylics and a brush!

Actually, this all sounds quite fun, as well as being a new frontier/medium for me: Weathered traditional 3-rail? Custom traditional-sized 3-rail rolling stock??

Andre

2055/2065 Test Loop Runs.

Okay, so I mentioned that both engines run, and run pretty nice, but the 2065 has a slight binding halfway through the curve. The 2065 is likely binding once it's actually in the curve, but momentum helps it enter the curve before it begins to slow.

I've set up a small test loop and thought I'd shoot a couple of short videos to illustrate how each engine performs.

First, the 2065:

Next, the 2055:


As you can see, the 2055 will run smoothly around the test speed at an acceptably constant speed (given the low throttle setting AND considering that it's a toy). Not so the 2065. It requires slightly more volts than the 2055 to keep from stalling while negotiating the curve. (Most pronounced upon exit of the curve.)I've checked for any obvious issues, but have yet to find anything that would be causing this. The side and main rods seem free: No binds could be seen/felt in the rods when manually pushing along and checking the rods for tightness at certain portions of the rotating cycle. Also, when slowly rotating the drives manually by hand, I don't feel any "tight" spots in the rotation, etc.

Open to suggestions!

All fer now!

Andre

Last edited by laming

Check the play of the spur gears between the two engines. My guess is there is a lot more wear on the 2065 bearing surfaces than the 2055. That can allow the gears to rub on the back of the wheels. 

The siderods don't really come into play on the spur gear engines unless the wheels are way out of quarter.

Pete

Last edited by Norton

First the Reefer question...  Several modern-era companies made 1930s "billboard" reefers which might blend in very well with you postwar rolling stock.  If you want to make the appearance more consistent, you could probably put Postwar trucks on them.  Lionel milk cars are expensive because they are operating cars.  But they might also be a credible stand-in for a prewar refrigerator.

I wouldn't personally be happy with the way the 2065 runs.  The slowing probably won't be as noticeable on your O42 track or when pulling a train.  But I think it should run more consistently, like your 2055 does.  As Pete said- check for slop in the gears, and also compare the wheel gauge, the 2065 might be too wide.

If the cause is worn bearings, replacing them is a heavy "class repair" best left to an experienced service person with the right tools (such as a wheel puller and press.)  I would keep looking for bargains on auction sites, train meets, etc.  You don't even need a whole loco.  If you can get another motor/chassis, swapping it in is easy.  There's a lot of variation in these old locos, I stopped asking why a long time ago.  Some just run better than others.

Ah... input!

Pete:

Thanks. I understand: Finding/fixing would not be for the novice Lionel PW enthusiast. (i.e. Me.)

Ted:

Reefers...

I recall I had some K-Line "Classic" reefers that were new tooling and looked like reefers in respect to the doors/etc. I seldom see them when I think to check to see if listed on eBay.

I have considered Lionel's ice car and if I had a "junker" that could be hacked, it could probably be made to look convincing to represent a steel-sided reefer.

2065...

In the video that is about the slowest it would run yet get around the curve dependably. At typical cruising speeds, it does pretty good. I may want to address it, but it might not be "soon". What little running it will get in the foreseeable future won't be enough to make anything "worse". Also, good thinking on picking up a junker with cosmetic issues but could have a decent mechanism.

palallin:

Marx, eh? I hadn't thought of that. Also, I might could use the bodies of cheaper "Scout" cars for hacking. Hm. Sounds to me like I ought amass boxes of junkers to set on the shelves to use for hack jobs!

I'll bet I can come up with some "do-able" cars to use for kit-bashing into various "missing" 1930s type boxcars/reefers/etc. The trick will be determining the path of least resistance.

All:

Did any mfg'er make a traditional-sized outside braced boxcar?

Andre

 

Last edited by laming
@laming posted:

All:

Did any mfg'er make a traditional-sized outside braced boxcar?

Andre

 

Crown models? I looked on Ebay with the info that you are looking for and that brand showed up. They had an outside braced PRR box car that looked like some of the postwar starter type cars that Lionel might have had. It looked like it had fixed molded in freight doors with very simple molded in detailing. Seems like Weaver should have made something as well, but I am not sure.

Weaver made an outside-braced boxcar.  It was a scale model, but I'm pretty sure that the prototype was only a 40' car, so it will blend in just fine with postwar "O27."  What you're trying to do is art as much as science.  There are no rules.  You might just have to try a bunch of stuff, and keep what you think looks good.

Andre since you are druthering and apparently in no hurry, you might want to check Industrial Rail. The O gauge blue box.  An old thread https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...d-to-industrial-rail provides some info.

I and others looked at them for S but except for the caboose they are a tad large and would require hacking. They are within O27, traditional or whatever they are called these days sizes.  They were relatively inexpensive when they came out.

Fair warning starting to explore this topic could keep you busy until suppertime.

Thanks all for your input!

I've taken a look at the Crown offerings (OB boxcar and the reefer). Those are indeed nice looking models. I think I now recall looking at these models years ago and concluded they were too "scale" to mix with my "traditional" stuff that I was messing with at the time. However, I do not clearly recall.

I do believe Ted shared a thought that I need to remind myself of:

"What you're trying to do is art as much as science.  There are no rules." 

I think he's onto something there. What I will be doing isn't "scale" modeling, in fact, that's one of the reasons this project is appealing: Instead of trying to stay as faithful to "scale" as possible (which can get exasperating), I get to set the standards. 

In that vein, it will indeed be akin to an impressionistic painting only in that I hope the elements compliment one another to the point that the overall result of various layout scenes (as well as the layout as a whole) are "acceptable" at a glance. But, like a photograph of any layout (even "scale" layouts), under closer scrutiny, even with the best layouts it becomes more apparent it's a model. Just that it won't take a microscope to spot it's a model for my "Traditional" layout! Besides, the only way any layout can ever look "real" is with excellent modeling within an excellent photo. That is, it will never be mistaken for "real" when standing looking at the actual layout.

I'm also beginning to suspect that I'm way overthinking some elements. (Me?? Overthink?? Surely you jest. )

SO...

Me thinks I need to chill, do the things that I enjoy that can be done in the immediate future, and any outside braced boxcars or "027" reefers (etc) I want to address, can be done at a later time.

Cheers!

Andre

Change of subject...

In this thread...

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...artwork-in-magazines

...We had been discussing train artwork (primarily scale drawings, but also some artist's paintings) with a "side discussion" of photo software and their use. I was getting ready to post what follows below to that thread, but then decided that doing so was going to take the OP's post even further away from what was originally being discussed.

SO... I decided I'd just post it here in my own thread so I won't be guilty of drifting someone else's thread!

PHOTOFLATS

In this thread, and other of my threads, I've made mention of my "PhotoFlats" that I will be using (have used in the past). Often when talking about "PhotoFlats", I get asked "what all is involved in doing that?"

So, I thought I would offer up a primer on what is involved, and provide some sample illustrations.

First the very basics:

* You would need "photo software" installed on your machine that can perform editing functions for digital images. There are several available, I'm sticking with "legacy" programs that I know well, such as "iPhoto4" (archaic by today's standards) and "Paint Shop Pro 7".

* You'll need to learn the basic skills, such as cut/paste, mirror, blending (via the "Clone" tool and such), how to remove "keystone" (the skewed distortion found in almost all photos of geometric shapes such as buildings). These skills aren't difficult to learn, but like any "art form", it can take a while before you're proficient enough that you can perform wonders with the software.

That so, seeing that photos are supposed to be worth 1000's of words, what follows are a few photos w/annotations that help to explain some of what is involved in taking raw photos and altering them within the software so they're usable as a flat on a layout.

This first one I saw while out exploring a town in Kansas I was stuck in while on an extended "loan out" by the RR company I worked for at the time. I knew it had potential... but it also had "issues"...

TwoStatesSamp

Next is one that I saw in my modeling "target area" in what's left of the historic West Bottoms industrial district in KC MO...

FadcoSample

Some examples I snagged while on extended loan-outs out in OK (In these examples, Tulsa area and OKC)...

AdMcSample

This one was another doozie...

OKCbldg6

However, I prevailed! And this is what I ended up with...

Central

Eventually, you get adept enough at manipulating images that you can literally construct buildings using only portions of a photograph. Here's one example of that:

AmTrans

Lastly, with careful planning and with an eye toward reuse, I can use building blocks to create some truly gigantic "PhotoFlats", such as this one for one of my previous KC Lines layout iterations:

Sunshine

(Note there are no dock doors in place. This is because the dock doors are printed separately, cut out, and applied where needed in order to line up with a string of 40' boxcars, or 6464/etc!)

However, just like the ones that got away when fishing or rail fanning, going out on a structure hunt in far away locations, invariably ends up with fraught with that same "the ones that got away" syndrome! To wit, though I shot the foreground building... once home and the photo imported to my computer...

sillyme

So, there you have it. A discussion you didn't ask for, but I decide to share anyway!!

Andre

Attachments

Images (8)
  • TwoStatesSamp
  • FadcoSample
  • AdMcSample
  • OKCbldg6
  • Central
  • AmTrans
  • Sunshine
  • sillyme
@Caldwell posted:

Andre since you are druthering and apparently in no hurry, you might want to check Industrial Rail. The O gauge blue box.  An old thread https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...d-to-industrial-rail provides some info.

I and others looked at them for S but except for the caboose they are a tad large and would require hacking. They are within O27, traditional or whatever they are called these days sizes.  They were relatively inexpensive when they came out.

Fair warning starting to explore this topic could keep you busy until suppertime.

Missed this until just a few minutes ago.

Thanks for the input, Cal!

Yes, those industrial rail cars are great. I've owned some in the past. However, my "GnC*" syndrome kicked in.

* Gnats n' Camels. You know, that syndrome we modelers have, where we'll gag at a gnat and swallow a camel? Yeah, that one.

My "gnat" with the Industrial Rail cars was their questionable decision to use roller bearing trucks under them. Darn. Perfect for representing the transition era... but with roller bearings? Roller bearings were not in wide spread use during the late-40s/early-50s, especially on such cars as "every day" boxcars, cattle cars, etc.

However, I had several (sold off years ago):

IndustrialRail_KLineClassics

IndustrialRail_TanksHoppers

Of course, now I feel pretty stupid.

Case in point, in the boxcars above? Livery wise, all but the Jade Green NYC car would have been right at home (okay, maybe the billboard MILW road car, too) in a late-40s/early-50s setting. I could have figured something out on the roller bearing trucks, or just gone ahead and ignored it. (Sort of hard to do once something draws your eye to it, though.)

And, of course, all the liveries in the tank/hoppers picture were good to go for my "transition" era that I'm now interested in portraying. 

BUT, in spite of precieved shortcomings, all of the above rolling stock were "birds in the hand", so to speak. Even that Jade Green NYC car (and the MILW?) could have been stripped and repainted/re-lettered!

Nuther "feeling stupid" thought point: I purchased the above Industrial Line cars for about 10 bucks each "then". Now? Try $35+.

Ah well... spilled milk and all that jazz.

Andre

Attachments

Images (2)
  • IndustrialRail_KLineClassics
  • IndustrialRail_TanksHoppers

All:

I ignorantly "assumed" that Library of Congress photos were "public domain". Well, apparently that is not the case, or at least some entity owns copyrights to the Delano collection.

Thus, I put OGR in a tough spot by posting the photos directly in a previous post here in my thread.

Lesson: Going forward, it's best to link to any illustrative pictures that may have copyright attached to them and thus avoid creating issues for our gracious host: OGR.

Just goes to show, you can't fix stupid (me!), but you can dull somewhat with a deft application of a 2x4!

Andre

UPDATE:

Yes, OGR (Alan) followed up and advised me that the LoC photos were fine.  All is good. Great, even.

I think what flagged my post is that I posted additional LoC photos from my folder that might not have come directly off the LoC site. (Instead Flickr perhaps?) 

Anyway, the main points I learned are:

* Insure there are NO copyrights to photos being posted directly into a thread.

* Make it CLEARLY NOTED for any LoC photos that they are indeed LoC photos.

Andre

Last edited by laming

ONE OF MY "GIVENS 'N DRUTHERS"...

Is coming under closer scrutiny.

For years, I've always intended that any 3-rail layout I attempt would be theme specific: "KC Lines". That so, as is common with "theme" layouts, some of my "PhotoFlats" would be adorned in signage that sets "locale". That is, such things as "Kansas City Wholesale Grocers", or "West Bottoms Storage Co.", etc.

Well....

Now I'm not so sure.

Instead, I wonder if I would be better served to keep the layout's "locale" more generic and avoid location setting names?

Why you ask?

Well, doing so would allow me to run equipment that is very cool (like the cast frame "ERIE" FA's or a tender with "PENNSYLVANIA" on its side, and other such engines), and they would look right at home in an urban/industrial setting.

Wow.

That's a radical thought for this KC kid.

What'cha thunk of this ideer???

All fer now. Gonna' head off to Fort Smith and snag a gallon of 99% isopropyl alcohol for use as paint stripper. (If all goes well, you'll see why later. )

Andre

Thats the beauty of traditional toy trains. Its all in your imagination. This 5 year old kid had no idea, nor cared that his 2035 K4 came with a NYC style tender nor that the 2046 NYC style engine in the catalog came with a PRR tender. Only that the headlight came on, the whistle blew, and the engine puffed smoke.

Pete

 

I knew I could count on you bunch of enablers to encourage me to feed my addiction.

The thought definitely has merit. I could definitely enjoy seeing Erie FA's and perhaps some custom painted NYC "Lightning Stripe" FA's, etc. Speaking of the NYC, was this simplified "freight" scheme also seen on the NYC FA's?

NYC1

However, it could be a mite hard to turn loose of my KC Lines concept. Time will tell. No hurry, really.

Isopropanol...

Just got back with a gallon of what the solvent dealer says is industrial grade 99% Isopropanol. Alas, I don't see "99%" anywhere on the jug, thus I'm left to trust that it is indeed. Anyway, given the way 91% isopropyl alcohol will continue to be made of unobtainium at Walmart for the long term, I turned to other sources. Hopefully, it's strong enough to strip paint.

Now, just why would I want to strip paint?

Well, that's 'cause I just made an offer on these:

AAsetOfCastFrames

According to the description the pair "runs excellent no battery leakage". although somewhere in their life's journey, they were hand painted. SO...

Assuming we can work a deal, and assuming I can strip them, they will be repainted "FRISCO" using rattle can satin black and an appropriate yellow shot through my airbrush.

If they can't be stripped with the alcohol I now have, then I reckon I'll have to get more drastic and go for an "air eraser" type approach.

Anyway, if my offer is accepted, I'll get them at a fair price, considering their "custom" painted condition.

We shall see!

Andre

Attachments

Images (2)
  • AAsetOfCastFrames
  • NYC1

On a roll, I guess...

Just purchased this for $6 (no box).

SwitchTowerParts

Here's what it looks like as per the box art from a Bachmann/Plasticville kit box:

SwitchTower

(FWIW: For some strange reason, I always enjoy seeing well done box art. I like the nostalgic "warm fuzzy" I get when I see imagination-stirring box art from way back when. (Yup... I'm a weirdo.)

Now why in the world would I purchase this when I have less than a handful of equipment, and a long way off from even having a layout??

Well, I want to see what I can do with it in view of making it look "good 'enuf" for what I envision with an eye on how much time and effort investment there will be.

OH, and also, I may use the above Switch Tower on an experimental "diorama" that I'm considering undertaking. This "diorama" would be nothing fancy, just a couple feet length (or two) of GarGraves track, a piece of scrap Homasote I have on-hand (or a ceiling tile if I want to save my Homasote pieces), and using the couple bottles of Woodland Scenics "Cinder" ballast I also have on-hand (along with some other on-hand scenery odds n' ends), make a little scene to see how my ideas look "in the flesh". Plus, the mini-diorama could be used as a display base on which to place equipment and photograph it.

Hey, what can I say? It's another of them ideer's I'm 'a havin'!

I think sometimes my brain has a mind of its own.

Andre

Attachments

Images (2)
  • SwitchTowerParts
  • SwitchTower

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×