I have primarily Bettendorf 50-ton trucks on my freight cars. I have archbar trucks on a couple of maintenance cars, that is it.
But I would also like to know when 70- and 100-ton trucks came into use. Also, three-spring trucks as opposed to two-srping. And I am interested in learning about caboose trucks, which based on the models I have, appear to be a little bit different.
What info is out there?
Also, it is hard to do Google searches for “trucks,” because you get lots of hits regarding freight and the trucking industry.
The line between the different periods is blurry, because of there was a new requirement, the railroads were given time to comply. So there are big chunks of time when you’d see both the older and the newer together on the same train. In some cases, even the drop dead dates were extended. And many of the rules requiring certain truck types or wheels only applied to interchange - you said you have MOW cars with arch bar trucks, that’s perfectly prototypical. Interchanged rolling stock was forced to change the trucks to a cast type, all those arch bars had to go somewhere - they weren’t broken, or defective, they just were more prone to failure and required more maintenence than a more modern design. And if an object is still usable to a railroad - they will use it.
There are a few useful guides published by Kalmbach, written by Jeff Wilson. Not sure which are still in print, you may have to find a used copy of some. ANd specifically on trucks, May 2013 MRH had an article on freight car trucks from 1900-1960.
Trucks with 70- 77- and 100-ton nominal rating came into widespread use by the 1960s.
That varies by design. Trucks with 100-ton capacity almost all have three outboard springs. Others vary. I’ll use some examples from different manufacturers.
This Tangent 50-ton truck has two outboard springs.
This 70-ton American Steel Foundries (ASF) pattern 70-ton solid bearing truck has two outboard springs and three in the row behind them.
A 70-ton Barber pattern solid bearing truck with three visible springs.
A 70-ton Barber roller bearing truck with two outboard springs, and a different arrangement of the sideframe casting under the bolster compared to ASF.
A different variety of Barber pattern 77-ton sideframe with three visible springs, similar to their 70-ton sold bearing design.
I’m not sure that it can be called succinct, but Mainline Modeler did a three-part series on trucks.
I’m going to attempt to scan the pages, and will post them here if they appear to be legible.
While our models tend to show two- or three-spring versions in cast sideframes, or even ones with actual springs, such as are offered by Kadee, many of the real ones had spring packages with many more springs that weren’t readily visible.
Here are the scans of the Mainline article (Click on the photos for a larger view)
Don’t we have a Japanese poster who has done an extended guide on American truck types and details? (I don’t have the patience to look up his actual name, and mean no disrespect thereby!)
Or plain bearing. It just galls me to see the opposite of ‘antifriction bearing’ become a neat propaganda term.
I was not at ALL happy to find the term ‘friction bearing’ referenced several times in official New York Central motive-powerblueprints, including the master wheel-balancing reference for later Mohawks. The rot ran deep!
Yes, the name “Friction Bearing” is a conspiracy. The American Bearing Manufacturers Association called itself “the Anti-Friction Bearing Manufacturers Association” until 1993. (Wikipedia)
Yes, Japanese fans love trucks. There are many books, magazine articles and websites. However, few can understand the essence of the prototypes from them. See my Model Railroad Dictionary for overviews. Probably only here, for diesel locomotives and passenger cars. And there are some posts for cabeese and others in my blog. I wrote them in Japanese, but if you wish, I’ll translate them.
doctorwayne has been posting lots of photos, again!!
Actually, a BIG THANKS to Wayne and Rob for taking the time to compile/scan their informative posts. I’ve “grabbed” them for future reference, though I refuse to go down the “slippery slope” to ensure complete 100% accuracy on my freight cars.[swg]
“Plain Bearings” is the term I’d use in my day job; though more in a railway sense, “Journal bearings” would also be appropriate. (now where’s me cotton packing and oil can?!)
Cheers, the Bear.[:)]
As an aside. Here in the UK any model made has the era/s the real item was run. So, for example if you were modeling the early 1950s it would be Era 4 you ran models showing that Era. You know to stay clear of anyearlier or later eras.
David, the late John Armstrong attempted a similar broad categorization of USA modeling eras in his book Creative Layout Design, but it obviously had no official status or authoritative backing behind it. For a variety of reasons that particular book never established itself like Track Planning for Realistic Operation but it is well worth seeking out on the used book market or at swap meets.
It might be added that Jeff Wilson also does an analysis of freight car trucks by era in his Kalmbach book on Freight Cars - he doesn’t get into all the nooks and crannies that Hundman did in his Mainline Modeler articles. Wilson also gets into boxcar ends and roofs and other features and for MOST modeling purposes pretty much gives you what you need.
By the way it isn’t just a matter that our “sprung trucks” have two versus or 3 springs versus the 5 or more of their prototypes, it is that each spring has within it a smaller spring. So you really do not see through the springs on prototype trucks the way you can and do on model trucks with “real” springs. Some modelers fill their “real” springs with small lengths of styrene. I wish them happy and fulfilling lives. But that is why some fussy modelers have turned away from real springs and prefer all-cast truck sideframes.
And yes we are still waiting for the friction-free truck design. There are still hotboxes, and derailments due to hotboxes, in the roller-bearing truck era. Hundman was such a stickler for using the orthodox “vocabulary” of the prototype modeling movement that I was actually shocked to see his use of “friction bearing.” What next --“roof walks?” or A/B brake “triple valves?” I understand even “brake wheel” and “stirrup step” are sneered at at prototype modeler meets.
Dave N. Model makers and the Railway Magazine Editors in the UK unaminously agreed in the 1970s on the ‘Era Scheme’. It is great for the modeler. Any model or kit made since then says what era/s the real one ran.
