Thanks Chris.  Just as I suspected.  I honestly didn't want to think that AM 
could have done this for no reason.

Oh well, either way, time to break out the chainsaw and cutting torch...


John Degnan
[email protected]
[email protected]

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: JCRooney 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 10:50 PM
  Subject: {S-Scale List} Re: AM 3-Bay Hopper Issue / Question


  John et al
  It sounds like your issue is the end/side sills being too "fat"; they also 
don't slope upward and inward as per the 50 ton image link below. Take heart 
there is a prototype or at least an explanation for the AM car.
  The time frame for these cars is long. The 1943 car builders cyclopedia 
(Newton Gregg reprint #70) shows an AAR standard 70 ton 3 (and 4) bay hopper 
plan from 1935 lasted well into 1960's although not always the same cars as 
hoppers wear rapidly. Most coal railroads caught on a little more slowly or not 
at all with offset sides, but ATSF had a series made in 1936 also shown in the 
reprint with "fat" end sills built by ACF.
  70 ton 3 bay offset side hoppers first came into use on the C&O in 1946 and 
before that C&O favored the 50 ton variety as pictured here: 
  http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-8408.jpg
  As far as I know the AAR standard cars did not have such end sills and the 
C&O used mainly its own or modified designs anyway -- big dog with 26,000 
hoppers calls the shots. 
  On the other hand Pere Marquette had three bay offset hoppers from 1935 as 
pictured here: 
  http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-8886.jpg
  Note that these  PM cars do have the "fat" side sills at the ends (although 
they taper up some) and the external lap plates over ribs 1, 3, 8 and 10.  They 
were made by Standard Steel Car at Butler PA.  It is likely that the Bessemer 
AL plant was producing the same design in the South. Anyway the AM model highly 
resembles these cars IMHO. 
   
  Hope this helps. 
  Chris Rooney 
  [email protected]


<<cohs-8886.jpg>>

Reply via email to