> Re-read the information in my post, which was copied from the flyer. It'=
s in there: these are 2-packs.
Indeed, reading comprehension seems to be a skill in decline as this same m=
istaken conclusion occurred on three lists where these Walthers trailers we=
re announced and discussed.
> As for Athearn Blue box trailers, they may be cheap sure, but they don't =
look like any trailers I see in late 1970's D&RGW TOFC trains. In fact I h=
ave yet to find a photo of a real trailer matching them completely.
See PFE=E2=80=99s PFT 120000-120200 series. These were the only early-mid 1=
960s 13-6 high Fruehauf Seal Temp Volume Van reefers like the Athearn blue =
box model that I am aware of, but even then there are minor differences on =
the nose of the model, specificaly the projecting box housing the electrica=
l and air connections as on a trailer built for TOFC service nothing should=
project beyond the 40-0 EXL. Otherwise the model is similar to and and a g=
ood stand-in for lower 12-6 and 13-0 high vans rostered by FGE (some were l=
eased to D&RGW), CB&Q, C&S, GN, MILW, NKP, N&W, PRR, RI, CNJ, MON, and SSW,=
among other roads, plus many truck lines. Although they were scarce by the=
late 1970s I did shoot one of the FGE vans still in TOFC service in 1980.
> Getting back to the Walthers Trailmobile ,,, from Jim Eagers comments on =
the MFCL list, it looks like most of the paint schemes are either totally b=
ogus or not correct for this version of Trailmobile prototype. Apparently =
there are quite a few schemes Walthers could have chosen that would have be=
en more accurate. Pity they didn't. If all 6 road names were correct in t=
he upcoming run, I'd likely buy them all, but my budget is limited and I'd =
rather save it for models that are a not bogus. It sounds like the CNW Fal=
con may be one of the closest in the bunch, while 3 of them are completely =
wrong for Trailmobile.
As of now I can=E2=80=99t say what prototypes the Walthers van will be accu=
rate for as only side elevation lettering artwork has been shown. Trailmob=
ile produced several different trailer designs with different nose features=
and I can=E2=80=99t tell for sure from the artwork what shape the corners =
and front of the model=E2=80=99s nose will have. However I can say that the=
CR, B&M and COE schemes are for sure bogus as those roads did not have Tra=
ilmobile vans. ATSF, CNW and IC may or may not be correct, depending on wha=
t nose the model has. This is also true for the other potential roads that =
Jim cited from my post: which ones will match depends on what nose Walthers=
tooled as they had different features among them.
Posted by: Jim Eager <firstname.lastname@example.org...>
Rio Grande Modeling & Historical Society Information: http://rgmhs.DRGW.org
Rio Grande Modeling & Historical Society Home: http://www.drgw.org/
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to: