Steam-era boxcar roof/end color Q

Sun Jul 5 15:19:29 EDT 2020

Thanks Jim B. and others,It’s good to hear from you. I appreciate your looking into this, and divining an authoritative answer. (And saving me digging out the airbrush and Boxcar red paint, 😁) Ed Hawkins and his cohort Ray Long are good men; I’m sorry their RP Cyc is no longer publishing. When I was a St. Louisian, Ed and I frequented the same hobby shop and he and Ray helped me with more than one project, among them finding info on the Mathieson Alkali Works reefers that frequented the Bristol Line.  Back when I modeled, ahem, another, local road in my youth, Ed kindly loaned me some GM&O slides back when we happened to work in the same place for awhile; this some decades before the RP Cyc began.Again, thanks for the detective work and info.

Andre Jackson
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad

On Saturday, July 4, 2020, 2:09 PM, NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

Andre,

I contacted Ed Hawkins who is a freight car historian.  He was co-publisher of the Railway PrototypeCyclopedia series and has worked with many model manufacturers to bringaccurate models to market.  Ed advisesthat he has reviewed and studied many of the Pullman-Standard contract filesand has gained a working knowledge of how PS did things.

The short answer to your original question is yes, the modelyou purchased is accurate.

Perhaps for some, the longer answer may be of interest.  Ed advises that in developing the PS-1 boxcarthe company developed not only the production line approach of assembly, but anentire Spec based on how the company dealt with the railroads.  Beginning with the first cars produced in1949 the company developed its own paint specifications.  The PS paint spec called for the car sidesand doors to be painted the freight car color as selected by the railroad.  Black car cement was to be used on theunderframe, roof and ends, and the trucks received black paint.  This was the Company’s standard andproduction was set up for the cars to be finished per this spec. Because of theassembly line process and use of standard materials PS was able to offer alower price per car to the railroads.

In 1950 PS received an order from N&W, which wouldbecome PS Lot 8002 (N&W 44000 – 44499). N&W referred to its paint specifications, known as N&W Spec 900-D,and wanted the cars painted in accordance with it.  N&W’s specification required, among otherthings, brown sides, doors, ends and roof, and black underframe andtrucks.  This conflicted with how PS didbusiness and Ed reports there was a lot of correspondence between the companies.  PS used galvanized steel for the roof panelswhile the seam caps were forged steel. PS explained that paint would not stick well to galvanized steel, evenif a primer was used.  There was asuggestion that the primer might react with the galvanized steel which wouldresult in earlier rusting.  PS explainedthat it used car cement on the roof and ends to better seal the rivets toprevent leakage into the car and onto the cargo.  Eventually N&W accepted the applicationof black car cement to the roof.  Edindicated that each car received four to six gallons of paint for the freightcar color, but forty-four gallons of black car cement.  The cost of paint was around $3.00 pergallon, while the black car cement cost just $0.32 per gallon.  PS preferred to use Mortell F-1 black carcement.

Before the cars from PS Lot 8002 were completely deliveredto N&W, the railroad placed a second order for additional cars.  This would be PS Lot 8035 (N&W 44500 –44999).  These cars would follow the samespecifications as Lot 8002; that is they received black car cement on the roofsbut not the ends.

In March 1952 N&W placed a third order with PS, whichwould become PS Lot 8100 (N&W 53000 – 53499).  Ed relates there was much correspondencebetween PS and N&W regarding the finish of these cars.  Apparently N&W had reverted back to its specificationfor an “all brown boxcar” and PS disagreed once again.  N&W Paint Spec 900-E was provided to PSand it had been revised to require the use of Mortex (another brand of carcement), or equivalent, on the roof and running boards. There was muchcorrespondence between the companies over the use of primer before theapplication of the car cement.  Severalchemists concluded no primer was necessary for any brand of car cement.

Before the cars from Lot 8100 went into production, N&Wsent another paint spec revision, this one 900-G (no idea if there was ever a 900-F).  This spec still required the use ofMortex.  PS did not recommend Mortexbecause it was a water emulsion based product and would congeal in coldweather.  Its preferred Mortell F-1 didnot have this problem and could be applied in the coldest temperatures, asthese cars were being built in its Michigan City plant.  However, N&W Spec 900-G now called forcar cement to be applied to the underframe, roof and ends!  Ed notes that at this time N&W had alsochanged the stenciling of the road name and reporting marks from 7 inches to 9inches in height.

In 1953 N&W would again place an order for more boxcarsfrom PS.  At this time PS had built 100cars to the PS-1 design, but with cushioned underframes.  PS Lot 8159 (N&W 53500 – 53994) was forcars with standard underframes, while PS Lot 8160D was for five cars with thecushioned underframes (N&W 53595 – 53599). PS Lot 8159 had Superior doors instead of Youngstown, and the placardshad been lowered in accordance with an AAR recommendation that took effectJanuary 1954.  These cars would be exactduplicates of Lot 8100.

In May 1955 N&W placed an order for an additional 450cars which would be PS Lot 8261 (N&W 42000 – 42449).  These cars were built at the PS Bessemer plantin Alabama, whereas the prior cars had been built in Michigan City.  The group of cars received Dednox 58-36 onthe roof and underframes as it could be applied in the warmer temperatures ofAlabama.  However, these cars had browndoors, sides and ends.

I hope some of you found this information interesting. Itwould be interesting to study N&W Spec 900 and see what changes were madeover the many revisions.

Jim Brewer

On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 12:10 AM NW Modeling List via NW-Modeling-List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

The model ( I also have one) looks identical to the photo of 53499 on page 52 of the N&W Handbook, but you cannot see anything of the ends or roof in the photo.
Dick DunfordBlacksburg

-----Original Message-----
From: NW Modeling List via NW-Modeling-List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>; NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Cc: NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Tue, Jun 30, 2020 12:34 pm
Subject: Steam-era boxcar roof/end color Q

Hello all,In a moment of weakness, I bought a Kadee HO scale 40’ boxcar that poses as an N&W B8, with a 1953 build date in the 53000-53499 number group. Unlike most all others I’ve seen, this one has a black roof and ends. Izzat prototypical? The microscopic lettering on the car side denotes “For Clean Freight Only” — dunno if that makes any difference.Thoughts, memories, etc., welcomed.Thanks much,

Andre Jackson
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/attachments/20200705/31e60f05/attachment-0001.html>