NAPA Auto supply sells a good digital caliper accurate to a 1/2 thousanth. very reasonably priced! Fox Valley Models makes Metal wheelsets that fit nearly all brands of rollingstock cool: 282mike
I have read that you can replace the trucks on some Lifelike Engines with trucks made by Atlas. I purchased some for my GP-20's but haven't put them on yet. I'm not running them untill I get decoders in them. Craig
Well I don't run anything at the moment, i'm still in planning stages... I have a bunch of old C-Liners that I wanted to convert to NYC scheme and remotor. After listening to folks talk about buying new trucks from atlas, maybe thats the way to go? Anyone done a power swap on the old Atlas C-Liners??
I wish you luck with paint removal, painting, decaling AND remotoring. I don't know how much it is going to cost you, but it ain't gonna be peanuts. As to the Code 55- I would reiterate my suggestion and get some track, scrap masonite, 18-22 wire and a cheap power pack and test out every piece of equipment you have to see if there are any issues with Code 55. Please remember there is a slight difference in radii between Code 80 and Code 55 track. Make your track decison and THEN draw your plan accordingly.
I will be buying some track next payday. There will be NO sharp radii curves on my layout, so at least that won't be an issue. My concern with the remotoring project, is the remotoring part... laugh: The modeling aspect isn't my main concern, as I built plastic models for many years and I can probably fumble my way through that phase. I just need to make them run.
If your C-Liner is the old Atlas made by Rivarossi with the vertical motor, B-truck in front and C-truck in rear - forget it. Even if you were able to get a motor in there, the mechanism has poor electrical pickup and drives only through one truck. Life-Like made an excellent B-B truck C-Liner. Since the prototype C-Liners all shared the same bodies and major components, the Atlas and Life-Like shells look pretty much alike. The Atlas has a shorter fuel tank to allow for the three-axle rear truck. It is the mechanism that is the problem with creating a good running 5-axle C-Liner. Since only three railroads ever ran the prototypes and so few were made, I doubt that we will see a modern version of this model offered. So what to do. People have tried swapping various trucks with no success. One person (can't remember the name or where the example was posted) created a replacement mechanism by cutting down a Con-Cor PA-1 frame, substituting a 2-axle front truck and shortening the drive train. Again, it is necessary to remove part of the fuel tank on the Atlas shell. That is the only successful conversion I have ever heard of.
I have just finished laying all the track on my Atlas c55 layout. Flange depth is the obvious problem with MT pizza cutters and LL engines. It turns out many of the problems are wheel gauge. Most out of the box locos are too narrow on gauge. Take each engine and slowly slide it through a turnout. if it sticks, even slightly, the wheels are too tight. Gently push them out with a small screwdriver until the glide through the turnout. Freight car wheels are an other story. MT changed the low profile wheel a few years ago. The new ones will pick the open point on a switch. You can test them by taking a truck and holding it against the rail with the closed switch point and rolling towards the open point. If it touches the open point it is one of the new ones and will cause problems. The wheel should not touch the open point. I gone to all old MT low profile and Fox Valley wheels. Older Atlas and MDC wheels have the same problem. Scott
Hi Mike, I just spent 20 minutes typing up my response to you and submitted. No post to the site. Website froze. Synopsis: Con-Cor PA-1 could be made into the drivetrain for the Atlas C-Liner shell. Drivetrain could be made to fit by cutting out 17/32" of the 3 piece chassis and drivetrain, removing spacer and 1 bearing. Swapping the Con-Cor front-to-rear for the C-Liner body and cutting the Con-Cor wheelsets to separate pilot and rear (now front) extra wheels. Since I can't weld pot metal, this ain't happening... :thumbs_down: Looks like they will be roundhouse queens, the NYC had 8 of them, and I can model them all... rolleyes: Purchased in 1952 all 8 lasted until 10/1966... which fits my modeling era, so I am safe on one piece...
That didn't stop Atlas/Rivarossi from making them in 1967, though in probably every roadname except those that actually ran them, how times have changed. It would be interesting to know what logic they used to pick this prototype over something more common, in that era of n scale there would have been no shortage of prototypes yet to be modeled. It's funny how many models that were made in the early days of N scale like 5 axle C-Liners, U30CG's, RSD15's and so on can't be made today because, so the manufacturers tell us, the prototypes were so rare that models wouldn't sell. With so many modellers going to great lengths to bring these, (and other, not so rare prototypes that haven't been made for years), up to modern standards to keep them running, not to mention newcomers to the hobby that weren't even born when the old ones came out, you'd think there would be a market for new versions with modern mechanisms and detailing. Come on Atlas, give us more engines to run on your great track.
I suspect someone chose them to produce due to the novelty/coolness factor of the asymetrical wheel arangement. We bought them because, lets face it- ANY North American equipment in N scale was a good (and scarce) thing back then... Mine were Sanfa Fe, & I really don't even like the Santa Fe. (I'm still fighting the "Royal Gorge War" <GG>) Are they one of the roads that actually had them? On the subject of the origional question-Man, I know how you feel. I like the looks, price, availability & selection of the Atlas "55". On the downside, I have a lot of old MiniTrix Pennsy steamers that just can't be replaced. Turning down the drivers is "iffy", and the resulting gaps won't look good... Rolling stock wheels are a minor issue by comparison, but I won't be happy if I find the bulk of my MT low-pro's are the ones that don't work on Atlas 55... To make matters worse, my home layout was planned to incorporate a bunch of current and future N-Track modules for "dual use". If I go Atlas 55, I can forget about that idea. My club only recently decided to even allow Peco 55 track...Yeesh!
I just finished counting up how much rolling stock I have with MT trucks on them. I've already decided to go with Atlas C55 on my upcoming layout. I'm thinking of going to the FVM wheelsets but want to be sure of something. Since these are one-side insulated wheels, I assume I do one truck with the insulated wheels on one side, and the other truck with them on the opposite. Is that right?
Doesn't matter. This is an issue only for a car where you are picking up electric current for lighting effects. In that case the wheel/axle orientation depends on the kind of pickup system in use.
Bob, I found my notes about the Atlas C-Liner conversion. It was done by Russell Straw and posted on the Atlas N scale RR Forum October 31, 2006 in topic 32629. I saved it as I thought I might try this some day. No welding! He created an overlapping joint secured with machine screws. The front truck was simply shortened. If you can't find the information but want to give it a try, send me an e-mail and I can send you a copy of what I have in a Microsoft Word file.
There were 2 models of 5 axle C Liners 1. CPA16-5: (1600hp, A&B versions) Canadian National 2. CPA20-5: (2000hp, A version) Long Island 3. CPA24-5: (2400hp, A version) New York Central New Haven Long Island Not sure what Atlas made them in other than the Pennsylvania & Southern Pacific schemes I have, and the Santa Fe you mention.
Huts4trains, you asked how to measure the wheel flanges on your rolling stock and the answer is an NMRA standards gauge. It has a place on the gauge where you can check the wheel flange depth on your cars.
Hi Mike, I searched the Atlas site and couldn't pull up the post. Their archive stops in 2004 and the "live" posts are from 2008. I'll PM ya. thanks
I measured the wheels on my MT trucks and they come out at .208" at the tread. That makes them 33" in real life. I'm confused though because I've read where people are using the FVM 36" wheels for MT trucks. Something about meeting the NMRA coupler height better. Last time I remember using my coupler height gauge the MT cars checked out okay. Should I use the 33" or the 36" to replace?
Given the small difference in coupler height, I use the right wheel for the car. 70 ton cars get 33's. 100 ton cars get 36's. Scott
Thanks. I was about 13 back then; & building my first 4X8 layout. I think they were given to me by a cousin that was a manager at "Two Guys". All I remember were the ATSF's. I had no idea if they were "genuine" or not; probably didn't care much then. I've been in & out of N ever since, but got into steam eventually & never learned a whole lot about diesels. JimR.
Were there any external differences between the three, and if so, which is the Atlas model based on? Santa Fe didn't even have any 4-axle C-Liners.
