|
Post by Donnell Wells on Mar 31, 2019 9:24:32 GMT -8
I will pick one for sure, maybe two. These will definitely help me upgrade/improve the three AHC Flex-i-flo hopper already in the queue.
I like specialized freight cars like this. In fact, covered hoppers are my favorite type of freight car.
Donnell
|
|
|
Post by talltim on Mar 31, 2019 15:43:31 GMT -8
Does anyone know when Conrail moved them to MDTX? Best I can do is between July 1991 and April 1995, based on ORER information. Ed Thanks for checking. Think I’ll stick with Conrail versionsthen as that’s right at the end of my period
|
|
|
Post by schroed2 on Apr 1, 2019 3:49:07 GMT -8
Aw, were the plain SHPX ones canceled? WERE there plain SHPX ones? From what I can see, there were 7 SHPX cars produced in '64-'65. They were changed to ACFX starting early 1968. If the Rapido SHPX picture shows an as-delivered car, it seems unlikely there would have been plain SHPX cars in only 5 years. I have a photo of SHPX76001 in plain scheme (similar, but not identical to the plain ACFX76000 scheme), somewhere on the SP system before the ACI and COTS time frame (my guess would be around 1967). If you are interested, send me a PM with your email address (sorry, but NO posting here due to copyright issues...picture comes from ebay) Bernd looking for an excuse for one of these cars in California 1969...SHPX/ACFX seems a better choice then NYC/PC
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 1, 2019 4:19:34 GMT -8
For the SYSX, it appears there are two versions.
Version 1 has a 3 panel COTS
Version 2 had no COTS, so pre-1971 single panel?
Anyone know of version 2 is good for 1970's? And looking at pre-order, it's not clear how you specify that version 2 if it is good for 70's.
|
|
|
Post by cp6027 on Apr 1, 2019 12:33:40 GMT -8
For the SYSX, it appears there are two versions. Version 1 has a 3 panel COTS Version 2 had no COTS, so pre-1971 single panel? Anyone know of version 2 is good for 1970's? And looking at pre-order, it's not clear how you specify that version 2 if it is good for 70's. If you pre-order a single car through Rapido, there is no way to specify the exact version/road number for a particular scheme. So in this case it would be a toss up which one you'd receive. However, if you pre-order two cars and there are two versions, they'll usually send you one of each. They also did this for the CP gons in the MOW scheme and didn't give you any way to schoose between the red or black OCS versions. Can be frustrating if only one of schemes is good for your era but that's how Rapido chooses to do things. I assume this is to minimize SKUs and balance quantities to avoid the situation where the first car number listed gets the majority of the orders while the last car number gets very few. If you pre-order through a dealer, some will allow you to specify the exact roadnumber. However, in this case that isn't completely helpful since, other than the two numbers pictured, Rapido doesn't specify which number goes with which scheme. All that said, version 2 has no COTS but only lines of weight data so might not be good for the 70s: www.rapidotrains.com/sites/default/files/19191919/03/963H%20SYSX.jpgrelated to this, one complaint about the Rapido website is that they have these nice big detailed images of each scheme but display them really small on the product pages with no way to just click and access the larger image (like on many other manufacturer websites). My question is, were these 315,000 lb GRL railcars always approved for interchange service? I thought the AAR interchange standard was capped at 263,000/268,000 lbs until the early 1990s but I could be mistaken?
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 1, 2019 13:27:33 GMT -8
My question is, were these 315,000 lb GRL railcars always approved for interchange service? I thought the AAR interchange standard was capped at 263,000/268,000 lbs until the early 1990s but I could be mistaken? LDLMT 397600 NEW 11-38 And then there are the much more mundane Union Pacific 125 ton 5250 cu ft covered hoppers, built in 1969. Ed
|
|
|
Post by ambluco on Apr 1, 2019 14:31:56 GMT -8
Ed, you're screwing with peoples memories. My question is, were these 315,000 lb GRL railcars always approved for interchange service? I thought the AAR interchange standard was capped at 263,000/268,000 lbs until the early 1990s but I could be mistaken? LDLMT 397600 NEW 11-38 And then there are the much more mundane Union Pacific 125 ton 5250 cu ft covered hoppers, built in 1969. Ed
|
|
|
Post by cp6027 on Apr 1, 2019 18:49:10 GMT -8
My question is, were these 315,000 lb GRL railcars always approved for interchange service? I thought the AAR interchange standard was capped at 263,000/268,000 lbs until the early 1990s but I could be mistaken? LDLMT 397600 NEW 11-38 And then there are the much more mundane Union Pacific 125 ton 5250 cu ft covered hoppers, built in 1969. Ed I guess I should have clarified 315k GRL for a 4-axle railcar. Also, I don't think the UP cars were in interchange service. The AAR adopted Standard S-259 for 4-axle 286k railcars in 1994. I am uncertain how heavier 4-axle railcars operated in interchange service prior to that standard agreement or if all such cars were not interchanged (or in limited interchange through special agreements between the railroads involved that did not apply to the whole industry).
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Apr 1, 2019 19:10:59 GMT -8
I assume this is to minimize SKUs and balance quantities to avoid the situation where the first car number listed gets the majority of the orders while the last car number gets very few. This is exactly why we've had to do it this way. The vast majority of people don't care which car number they get - including hobby shops doing the ordering - and always default to ordering the first SKU. Say you sell 600 cars, you'll end up selling 300 of car 1, 200 of car 2, 80 of car 3, and 20 of the rest combined. This is a logistical nightmare for production, and the factory will often refuse to do setup for a very small number. You can't explain to them that the setup time is exactly the same whether it's 6x100 or that skewed breakdown. They don't see it that way. So this way the factory gets an even balance of the numbers. related to this, one complaint about the Rapido website is that they have these nice big detailed images of each scheme but display them really small on the product pages with no way to just click and access the larger image (like on many other manufacturer websites). I have sent your note to Mike. Hopefully he can fix that. Regarding the artworks, they are not final yet. If any of you have specific information that can help the team with production please send an email to the Rapido email - trains AT rapidotrains.com - and put "Flexi Flo Assistance" in the subject line. We'll make sure it gets to the right person. Right now the emphasis is on tweaking the tooling rather than finalizing the artworks, which don't need to be finished before the end of the summer. Thanks, Jason
|
|
|
Post by talltim on Apr 2, 2019 2:37:11 GMT -8
I assume this is to minimize SKUs and balance quantities to avoid the situation where the first car number listed gets the majority of the orders while the last car number gets very few. This is exactly why we've had to do it this way. The vast majority of people don't care which car number they get - including hobby shops doing the ordering - and always default to ordering the first SKU. Say you sell 600 cars, you'll end up selling 300 of car 1, 200 of car 2, 80 of car 3, and 20 of the rest combined. This is a logistical nightmare for production, and the factory will often refuse to do setup for a very small number. You can't explain to them that the setup time is exactly the same whether it's 6x100 or that skewed breakdown. They don't see it that way. So this way the factory gets an even balance of the numbers. Presumably you could set your website up to do a round-robin to rotate the 'default' number for each viewer of the page. i.e viewer 1 gets SKU0001 as the default option, if they want a specific number they use the dropdown. Viewer 2 get SKU0002 as the default, but again can choose a specific one if they want.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 2, 2019 10:26:25 GMT -8
I've reserved a Flexi-Flo. Any idea when approximately these are due out?
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Apr 2, 2019 18:50:03 GMT -8
Presumably you could set your website up to do a round-robin to rotate the 'default' number for each viewer of the page. i.e viewer 1 gets SKU0001 as the default option, if they want a specific number they use the dropdown. Viewer 2 get SKU0002 as the default, but again can choose a specific one if they want. Actually direct orders represent only about 10% of our sales. The other 90% of our orders come from dealers and distributors. So your suggestion, which is a good one, would only solve 10% of the problem... Our dealers are very important to us. If we have limited stock of something, the orders are filled in the order they are received, even if it means we have to turn away a full-paying direct customer in favour of a wholesale customer. -Jason
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Apr 3, 2019 3:54:26 GMT -8
I noticed that deal with defaulting to the first or first and second SKUs so I tend to do the opposite when possible.
|
|
|
Post by rapidobill on Apr 3, 2019 5:40:37 GMT -8
For the SYSX, it appears there are two versions. Version 1 has a 3 panel COTS Version 2 had no COTS, so pre-1971 single panel? Anyone know of version 2 is good for 1970's? And looking at pre-order, it's not clear how you specify that version 2 if it is good for 70's. A quick note regarding the artwork on the web site - as Jason mentioned these are preliminary mock-ups. Final artwork is down the road a bit yet. As for the COTS panels, the guy that did the artwork (err.... me.....) did not put COTS panels on artwork where we had photos of cars with more than one panel - in other words spanning the transition between styles. It is likely that we will leave them off of these models in production as well since they are so easily added to match your chosen era, but difficult to remove if they don't correspond to what you need. Bill
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 6:23:23 GMT -8
For the SYSX, it appears there are two versions. Version 1 has a 3 panel COTS Version 2 had no COTS, so pre-1971 single panel? Anyone know of version 2 is good for 1970's? And looking at pre-order, it's not clear how you specify that version 2 if it is good for 70's. A quick note regarding the artwork on the web site - as Jason mentioned these are preliminary mock-ups. Final artwork is down the road a bit yet. As for the COTS panels, the guy that did the artwork (err.... me.....) did not put COTS panels on artwork where we had photos of cars with more than one panel - in other words spanning the transition between styles. It is likely that we will leave them off of these models in production as well since they are so easily added to match your chosen era, but difficult to remove if they don't correspond to what you need. Bill Bill. Thanks for the info there. Sometimes artwork is all we have to go on to decide if models fit our era or not. For me, a 3 panel COTS removes a model from my buy list. If I can confirm the SYSX is good for the 1970's, and you leave off the stencil, I can always add the 2 panel if these are 1974 and later, for example.
|
|
|
Post by rapidobill on Apr 3, 2019 6:31:33 GMT -8
"For me, a 3 panel COTS removes a model from my buy list." - I get it - I'm a 1947 modeler but have the same issue - a car that's labeled "built 2-47" is perfect for my era UNLESS it carries a reweigh of 3-58 - even if the scheme is correct. In that case I need to decide whether I want to take the time and effort to re-decal part of the model or just pass.
That's exactly why I like to leave the COTS off of a car that may have carried more than one style. Cars that carried a scheme only for a short period and/or had only the latest style will get the COTS, others will be left plain.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Apr 3, 2019 6:57:35 GMT -8
If I can confirm the SYSX is good for the 1970's, and you leave off the stencil, I can always add the 2 panel if these are 1974 and later, for example. You can just as easily put a 2-panel over the 3-panel to hide it. Just sayin.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 7:31:56 GMT -8
If I can confirm the SYSX is good for the 1970's, and you leave off the stencil, I can always add the 2 panel if these are 1974 and later, for example. You can just as easily put a 2-panel over the 3-panel to hide it. Just sayin. Part of the thing is confirming the SYSX are good for 1970's because if they are not, decal-ling over the 3 panel COTS creates a foobie. If what Bill says is true, the car is good for the 1970's and will be delivered with no stencil so it's probably moot. FWIW, last year I got decal sheets with 2-panel COTS to update freight cars as necessary, once I get caught up on basement finishing and have hobby time again, layout being the priority then. Just sayin...
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Apr 3, 2019 7:55:22 GMT -8
You can just as easily put a 2-panel over the 3-panel to hide it. Just sayin. Part of the thing is confirming the SYSX are good for 1970's because if they are not, decal-ling over the 3 panel COTS creates a foobie. If what Bill says is true, the car is good for the 1970's and will be delivered with no stencil so it's probably moot. FWIW, last year I got decal sheets with 2-panel COTS to update freight cars as necessary, once I get caught up on basement finishing and have hobby time again, layout being the priority then. Just sayin... I was talking more about your line where you said that a model with 3-panel is automatically on the 'no-buy' list. If everything else was correct, something like that would never stop me from getting something I wanted or needed for the layout when it's so easy to fix. If I were in your situation it would make no difference if I was covering an incorrect panel or adding one where there wasn't one before since it's still just a decal. You're second reply to Bill cleared things up a bit.
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Apr 3, 2019 7:55:47 GMT -8
Part of the thing is confirming the SYSX are good for 1970's because if they are not, decal-ling over the 3 panel COTS creates a foobie. If what Bill says is true, the car is good for the 1970's and will be delivered with no stencil so it's probably moot. The SYSX car looks like a 90s paint job, but maybe that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 3, 2019 7:58:58 GMT -8
Part of the thing is confirming the SYSX are good for 1970's... They are not. Ed
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 8:06:05 GMT -8
Part of the thing is confirming the SYSX are good for 1970's... They are not. Ed I think the artwork made it difficult to see the dates - not good for 70's then.
|
|
|
Post by 12bridge on Apr 3, 2019 8:08:07 GMT -8
It would be so nice if the mfg's could add a column to each road listing the build date, and the newest stencil date on the cars.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 8:17:07 GMT -8
I was talking more about your line where you said that a model with 3-panel is automatically on the 'no-buy' list. If everything else was correct, something like that would never stop me from getting something I wanted or needed for the layout when it's so easy to fix. Fair enough, given sufficient hobby time, I agree in-principle, if a model as decorated could be confirmed to be good for a modeling period, and the only thing that's "off" is the stencil, then decalling can backdate the model. As a matter of fact, I've gone through my collection and found a number of models that appear to be in that exact situation, as decorated, and dated - good for 2-panel COTS time frame. I've got a pretty good sized roster of models now, so I can afford to be a bit choosy unless a model is something signature or really cool and unique, and fits the period, then I would buy it add it to the already long to-do list. My situation at present is basically no hobby time with the basement finishing top priority, followed by layout building, followed by lots of model related stuff (switch out wheels, couplers, add decoders, decals, etc. Buying freight cars that may be good and just needs some decals only adds to the long list of things to do when I get to the point where I can chip away at the back-log. So for sake of keeping the back-log from getting longer, yeah, I'm avoiding buying models that need additional work etc. unless it's something I really want/need.
|
|
|
Post by ambluco on Apr 3, 2019 8:18:38 GMT -8
Like Intermountain does. It would be so nice if the mfg's could add a column to each road listing the build date, and the newest stencil date on the cars.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 8:20:05 GMT -8
It would be so nice if the mfg's could add a column to each road listing the build date, and the newest stencil date on the cars. This is where Tangent and Moloco really shine, and why I'm a big fan of their models! They spoon feed us with prototype photos, date related information etc. and in Moloco's case, routes, customers served and commodities carried. Atlas has on some cases, put date information in columns, but it's been inconsistent. Where I really need help is with tank cars. I know the least about them and find often the pictures or artwork are too small to make out details that assist.
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Apr 3, 2019 8:34:11 GMT -8
So for sake of keeping the back-log from getting longer, yeah, I'm avoiding buying models that need additional work etc. unless it's something I really want/need. Understood. Modeling time is something all of us need more of!
|
|
|
Post by csx3305 on Apr 3, 2019 8:39:09 GMT -8
I will point out, so the question can be asked again in a couple of weeks, that the SYSX car pictured upthread is good for no sooner than mid-80s. Maybe later. It is missing the CAPY line. No one seems to be able to agree when this line was deemed redundant and no longer required, I have seen it stated 1985 all the way up to 1994. I’m personally leaning towards 1985-ish because there are plenty of 1990 CSX repaints floating around that didn’t have a CAPY line when they came out of the shop.
So, I repeat, the SYSX is theoretically not good for earlier than circa 1985 as pictured.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Apr 3, 2019 9:44:47 GMT -8
Rapido is doing phase 2 and phase 3 Flexi-Flo's. As you know. There was one phase 1, which is not involved in this.
The phase 2 were 25 to NYC and 2 to SHPX. SHPX is a leasing arm of the manufacturer
The phase 3 were 75 + 120 to NYC and 5 to SHPX
That is the total production of 2 and 3: 227
The SHPX cars changed to ACFX about 1968, keeping same numbers.
The NYC cars went to PC which went to CR. They may or may not have kept their previous reporting marks.
The CR (and NYC and PC ??) cars went to MDTX (897011-897894), NAHX (1000-1032) and SYSX (?--see Rapido page). Some MDTX went to NRBX (apparently keeping same numbers).
And, of course, some cars were scrapped along the way.
I recommend diving into your own appropriately dated ORER's if you want more.
Ed
I started researching some dates for the "X" transformation, but got bored with it. However:
October 1990 ORER:
SYSX 11 NAHX, MDTX, NRBX none
July 2015 ORER:
SYSX 15 NAHX, MDTX, NRBX none
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Apr 3, 2019 10:40:55 GMT -8
Thanks Ed. One of these days I need to get a couple of ORER's for the late 70's/early 80's. Besides Ebay, where can they be found to purchase?
|
|