Geared Steam: Nice job and you are right about not noticing the sideframes. I did notice the smaller wheels on the 44 tonner when I put them next to each other today. Maybe I will reconsider using the 44 tonner. Also, thanks for the prototype photo; I wasn’t sure about some of the details on the model. I just think it is an unusual loco and it has some appeal being so compact.
-Bob
Unique isnt the word. This was the first operational diesel-electric switcher in the US.
The details are ‘average’ - they didn;t ALL look the same, the whole thing was highly experimental and they tried a bunch of different options, especially witht he cooling. Instead of those radiators liek the model and that particular prototype, some had a small box with fans in it. Such as this photo of Reading #99 from Railfan.net:
The Reading units were ogirinally 50 and 51, until the Also S1’s came along, and the boxcabs were renumberd 98 and 99 for their last few years. 50 (98) looked like the model and the prototype pictured above, 51(98) had the box, although it appears this may have been changed at some point. There used to be a nice web site covering all variations of these locos (there are larger, heavier ones with dual diesel engines as well), but it appears to have been a victim of AT&T removing personal web pages. AH, it found a new home. Here, more info that you could ever want on these and similar locos: http://sbiii.com/boxcabdx.html
–Randy
Randy,
Thanks for the info and links to the boxcabs. This is becoming a new direction for me and may require another model to work on as a separate 'detailing ’ project. Not that I don’t have enough ‘projects’ already, but this is truly a unique loco and deserves more attention.
Thanks again,
-Bob
Likewise. I have a soft sopot for these locos,a nd even though the Reading ones were off the roster and scrappe dby my era, I plan to fudge a little and have one. Under the new numbers, since I already have S1’s 50 and 51, so I have to do 98 or 99. ANd yes, too many projects alreayd in the works to start another right now.
Once thing I shoudl mention, the last oen I tried to o, not only did I paint the interior in the institutional green color, I also lined it with sheet lead for more pullign power. That made it a LOT quieter - half the noise I think is the cab providing a sounding board for the noise of the gears. I remain convinced that with some careful work and maybe repalcement of a few parts they can run reasonably quietly without swapping the chassis. I’m not a rivet counter, but the 44 tonner just looks wrong to me. More so if you would plan to do an as-delivered unit like it was new, with the drivers whitewalled like a steam loco, the smalelr wheels on the 44 tonner would really stand out then. I guess I’ve paid far too much attention to these early boxcabs over the years. It’s liek the signature Reading drip rails on the cabs roofs of locos, now that I’ve put them on some of my GP7’s, I notice them missing on every other loco, so I need to add them.Tiny detail but once you see it, you knwo when it’s not there.
–Randy
I too have developed a love for these boxcabs (funny how that happens) I was at one time considering modelling the Butte, Anaconda and Pacific RR that ran from Butte to Anaconda,but instead of gas/diesel, they used a trolley. Look at those trucks!
http://greatnortherntech.com/B%20A%20&%20P/B.P.%20&%20A.%201.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butte,_Anaconda_and_Pacific_Railway
Some Tichy ore cars, cantenary plus the opportunity to model the Milwaukee Road, NP and the BAPRR all in one canyon.
Tim Warris also helped me catch the bug, check out his boxcab (with sound) on his famous Bronx Terminal layout.
Regardless of how you do it, have fun and good luck.
Gentlemen, our problems are solved! Here are some replacement sideframes for the 44 tonner trucks that look much more like the proper Boxcab ones and are more detailed than either the MDC ones or the Bachmann ones.
http://www.laserkit.com/ldgecab1.html
Note that in my searches I also found MDC made two versions of the body shell - both with and without the end doors. Most of them had end doors - which for whatever reason seems to be the shell version MDC included int he track cleaner versions of the boxcab - ie, the one where you couldn’t see the doors! The other big difference, only the first ones had the big ‘pot’ exhause stacks, almsot all others had a pair of mufflers mounted horizonatally on the roof.
ANd other modeling link I found:
http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=36088&whichpage=1
Dang it, now I want to build one for myself. I have enough things to work on without adding a new project to my list.
–Randy
Well now I have started a small book with notes, photos and sketches on the Boxcab! The more I read about what others are doing and seeing the photos, I find myself preferring the larger wheels on the MDC rather than the smaller ones on the 44 tonner. Just my preference but it seems to make a diffierence in the overall look of the engine. This is not a final decision of course! Just a lot of data to look at now and as I always say “When in doubt, do nothing!”. I obviously need to do more research on this to resolve the power train issue, so keep posting data guys!
As always, thanks for your help.
-Bob
Great link on the sideframes, I’ll be picking up set, thanks Randy
Well, with the other links I’ve found, the wheels are the next cunundrum. The MDC ones are too large, the 44 tonner ones are too small. However, with those nicer, open sideframes on the 44 tonner trucks it might not look as bad - since the model flanges are oversized anyway. The other alternative on the one site i linked it just a tad too expensive for my taste - using the NWSL STanton drives. I can buy a pair of boxcabs, a pair of 44 tonners, and 2 sets of those sideframes for the cost of one Stanton unit, though it surely is nice.
–Randy
Someone in the railroad-line.com is doing this boxcab with the Stanton drives, number 39259-4, which are 38" wheels with a 7’ wheelbase.
He says the drives zip along quite nice with a little bit of juice.
Rich
More useful info: in the April and May 1956 MR there is a two part article on scratchbuilding a model of CNJ 1000.
–Randy
Randy,
I remember that article (now that you mentioned it!) and have it somewhere in my collection of MR mags. I have most from the early 50’s to the present. Will have to unpack some boxes tomorrow as they are all in storage under my layout or in the closet in the trainroom. Would be nice to have the DVD now!
-Bob
More useful info: in the April and May 1956 MR there is a two part article on scratchbuilding a model of CNJ 1000.
–Randy
[/quote]
Nice video! What is the inside look like with the sound system? I may have to hold off on my project and wait for $$$ to go the Tsunami route.
-Bob
No idea if this will be any help.
http://2guyz.info/Forums/viewtopic/t=2095/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=0.html
http://2guyz.info/Forums/viewtopic/t=2095/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=15.html
The Climax and boxcab being almost the same essentially.
Rich
thanks Rich, I like the use of pulley and belt vs gears; should quiet it down a little.
-Bob
A possible source of parts for that might be Bachmann,. since some of their steam locos use a cogged belt drive to keep the under-boiler area clear.
–Randy
The gears and flywheel in the picture I posted are from NWSL. I found the book that Ron LaFever wrote about the Climax conversion he did which should apply to the boxcab. He has numbers for the single gear and two gear drives.
Ron did a lot of fine tuning of both trucks, plus wires instead of spring contacts.
He also did some metal frame modifying.
Too much detail to post here and I doubt if the book is available anymore.
Since the Climax and boxcab had a lot of bad rep, the conversion info was not widespread and many just ignored these two locos.
I am seeing a little more interest in different forums for both locos but cannot find anyone selling Ron’s book.
I bought the complete modified Climax from Ron and it is much quieter than an unmodified. With my hearing aids on, I do pickup a high frequency gear whine which many with normal hearing do not hear.
The Micro needed a lot of fine tuning for proper chuff sound and equalizer for small speaker. At 10 mph, it really sounds like it is flying.
Rich
[][] Necro Thread Alert !!
Many dead links in this thread and this one http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/744/t/216292.aspx However many of the responders are still active in the forum.
It happens that I have a MDC track cleaning boxcab that I painted for the Ma and Pa and a 1st generation 44 tonner.
Unfortunately the 44 tonner is the older model with 2 motors and the missing parts.
As Randy pointed out, the 44 ton has smaller wheels. The goal would be DCC conversion with sound.
My question is Is the 70 ton still a consideration? I found other threads on other forums but the links to the descriptions are dead.