Stoney Smith's Difco Side Dump Cars

Mike Skibbe Sep 4, 2012

  1. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    I was able to spend a few good hours behind the workbench today. Last week a 4-pack of Stoney Smith's Difco side dump cars showed up. I thought it was going to be a quick project, but things in Z get out of hand quick... After cutting away the end platforms because they interfered with coupler boxes, I decided to draw replacements for etching instead. So these are lacking platforms and steps for the time being. No matter, lots of decals to do.


    I need a small string of these as BNSF's Miller River pit west of Skykomish loads very large boulders in these. Strings of loaded cars sit at Gold Bar.


    I'm getting used to modeling variations since AZL likes to make me buy 4-packs of cars as well. So here's what I've chosen for prototypes:


    [​IMG]
    BNSF 902843 by fleandca, on Flickr
    [​IMG]
    This one is a stock Stoney Smith car. For the freshly repainted BNSF cars I'm using Pollyscale Special Oxide Red. Decals for all cars are a mix of N and HO Microscale sets. The BNSF is sublettering from an HO patch-job set. Numbers are for HO number boards on same sheet. The small herald is a reflective dot from an N scale ATSF reefer set. Misc instructions are from an N scale BNSF well car set. Load data from WCL Z scale flat car decals. Yellow reflectors from stripe set. I'm using Full Throttle trucks and couplers.


    [​IMG]
    BNSF 902598 by fleandca, on Flickr
    [​IMG]
    Stock but with an added styrene plate. Prototype lettering variation from the first car. I may still go back and change the unloading device under the car on these first two.
     
  2. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    RRPictureArchives: http://railbaron.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=335598
    [​IMG]
    The cool thing about BNSF is the variety of BN and Santa Fe equipment still on the rails. This has the added plate, and is lettered for an ex-ATSF car. ATSF and roadnumber are from Microscale RR Roman alphabet set. The RR Roman just makes the car look ancient compared to the fresh BNSF cars. Paint is Pollyscale Light Freight Car Red.


    [​IMG]
    BN 964717 by fleandca, on Flickr
    [​IMG]
    And finally for some more variety, I modeled a shorter BN car. I shortened the floor and ends and added scratchbuilt styrene sides. Paint is Pollyscale Zinc Chromate Primer. BN and roadnumber are from a Microscale Gothic alphabet set. This is a great, stocky car. It'll look mean with a couple boulders in it.


    Couple notes about the Shapeways cars. Overall the product is nice. I didn't notice an less resolution in this batch of FUD versus the supposedly higher resolution ESM White Tower. I don't know if Shapeways is using better contractors or not. Several steps were broken off the cars in the package, since they just toss them in a ziploc. But it didn't matter anyway since trucks and couplers won't fit with the end platforms on. In fact, body mounting isn't even an option. That's a problem with Stoney Smith's design though. Some etched end platforms with integral steps and railings will look better than anything Shapeways can produce anyway, so it's not a deal breaker.
     
  3. stonysmith

    stonysmith TrainBoard Member

    12
    5
    13
    Mike.. thanks much for the photos. Really nice job you did here.

    The Difco is one car that I'm very proud of, but it was also one of my biggest disappointments.

    I really really wanted to make the bed and sides tippable, but the control arms required to cantilever the drop sides are just tooo small in Zscale to make them actually operate. Someday...
     
  4. minzemaennchen

    minzemaennchen TrainBoard Member

    1,491
    443
    33
    Great addition to Z!
    The sides could be make tippable, but it would require etched hinges, don't think printing will be there for a long time.
    Stony, just a suggestion: move the truck bolster bit more to the inside, as you can see on the prototype pix the edge of the outer wheel set is flush with the end of the tray, on the Z model the wheels are sticking out.
     
  5. DPSTRIPE

    DPSTRIPE TrainBoard Supporter

    794
    2
    18
    Gerd,
    I think that is because the car was designed with MT trucks with seperate couplers in mind. The wheelbase of MT trucks is shorter than FT and AZL trucks. Mike used trucks with talgo mounted couplers, so the platforms interfered with the coupler box. I think the wheel placement will look good once the platforms are in place. It will disguise it a bit.

    Mike, the cars are looking great, can't wait to see them complete.

    Stony, given everything that moves on your Bucyrus Wrecker, I'm surprised that they don't have brake lines with working quick disconnects. I bought a four pack of the wreckers and I'm still finding new bits that move.

    Dan S.
     
  6. stonysmith

    stonysmith TrainBoard Member

    12
    5
    13
    Actually, the model was first designed with operating hinges, see the attached cross section. I had to give up on it though, since the rocker arms to operate the doors would have had to be impossibly large. The trouble is that the door opens OUTWARD as the floor tilts up - in the same direction. It is not a "simple" mechanical linkage.

    You'd never see it, but I even had a moving piston inside the air cylinders.

    As long as you leave 0.1mm clearance, you can have operating parts. The trap is that anything around the hinge has to be 0.3mm thick, so the entire base of the door here (in blue) has to be 1 foot (Zscale) in diameter - it can be made to "look" approximately correct, but can't follow the prototype exactly.

    If anyone is interested, it'd be fairly easy to produce this model in the 'dump' position.. floor tilted and door open. But that too would be a static model.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    I was about to try to contact you through Shapeways. Glad you saw this.

    Do the MTL trucks fit the model as designed? I wasn't worried about the slight difference in wheelbase since the FT trucks look so much better. But I thought the FT coupler box was a lower profile. I was thinking the MTL coupler box would interfere with the end platforms in the same way.

    Or if it was always supposed to be a body mount solution, where do the couplers mount?

    I think it would be possible to move the end platforms and clearance for the talgo couplers without affection the look, but don't want to make any suggestions if I'm looking at the situation completely wrong.
     
  8. stonysmith

    stonysmith TrainBoard Member

    12
    5
    13
    My previous reply disappeared.

    The idea was to use the MTL combined truck/coupler, but from mfgr to mfgr, the height of the bolster pad varies, so I attempt to make the bolster taller than necessary - but in this specific model, I missed that, and it's too short. I'll get it fixed. I setup the bolster position to be positioned where it is on the prototype, but alas, several mfgrs seem to have trucks that have a wheelbase longer than proto. I can move the bolster easily.

    Feel free to contact me at models@stonysmith.com
     
  9. David K. Smith

    David K. Smith TrainBoard Supporter

    1,211
    1
    22
    Hate to tell you, but nobody has a rollerbearing truck with a wheelbase that's too long in Z scale. AZL is very close to correct, Full Throttle is just 2 scale inches short, and MTL is nearly a scale foot too short. May not sound like much to some folks, but when you see them all lined up together, it's pretty obvious. Also, I've measured the bolster pad in height over the rails of all three brands, and the most difference is .009 inches, so I'd call it virtually identical. There's some more data on this subject to be found here: http://jamesriverbranch.net/clinic_2a.htm
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 6, 2012
  10. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    I wouldn't change the height of the bolster, the car rides at an acceptable height and adding to the bolster will make it a 4x4. I would move the bolster inboard a bit, it looks like it should be in line with the first upright/vertical on the car side... from the protophotos I linked above. Also, remove the center beam that extends from the bolster to the end of the car. I had to cut this out on mine. Bring it flush to the bottom of the car's floor. This would also help those that want to body mount by giving them a flat pad.

    Then I would raise the end platforms a bit to clear the coupler box. They are a little low compared to the prototype now. Bumping them up to proto, and a little bit more, should clear the coupler box without looking goofy. Then maybe add a brace to each step so they survives Shapeway's hamhanded shipping. The modeler could cut them off later in the safety of his or her shop.

    Are you designing in Solidworks by any chance? I could send you a dimensional model of a MTL truck with coupler if it would help check clearances.
     
  11. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    I thought the FT truck had a lower bolster height by design... there is a visual difference when moving from MTL or AZL trucks so I'm guessing it's more than .01 inches. I haven't measured, but I don't think my eye is that good. But, maybe .01" is drastic in Z.
     
  12. David K. Smith

    David K. Smith TrainBoard Supporter

    1,211
    1
    22
    The FT bolster is not significantly lower... the truck sides are higher. So the car rides at the right height, while the truck has a more prototypical profile.

    You can see it when MTL and FT trucks are side-by-side:

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Mike Skibbe

    Mike Skibbe TrainBoard Member

    401
    9
    24
    While I wait for the etched end platforms to cross the pond I started in on the Stoney Smith caboose.

    [​IMG]


    I filed the ends flat for body mounted couplers, took about 1/8" off the bolsters, plated over the windows, and added seams to the cupola roof. Decals are a combination of Microscale N scale sets. The BN logos are from a twinstack set, the roadname from an E8/E9 set, and lettering sets for the numbers. I have a need for better Z scale lube plates. Grab irons and probably rebuilt end railings to come.


    This caboose sat in Wenatchee in 2008. Lindsay Korst photo.
    [​IMG]
     
  14. rray

    rray Staff Member

    8,277
    9,277
    133
    Nice job Mike. I like those cabooses too.
     
  15. Doug A.

    Doug A. TrainBoard Supporter

    3,509
    161
    59
    I know I'm dredging up an old thread here, but it is very relevant to what I'm doing so...
    1. How do you attach trucks to a Shapeways model? Particularly the DIFCO, which is what I have in-hand.
    2. Mike, did you happen to make extra etched end parts for the DIFCO's?

    Thanks for the info here, especially paints used, sourced decals, etc.
     

Share This Page