Too high. And it doesn't look like using a file on the underframe is an option. The truck bolsters don't really protrude, so there is nothing to file off.
I'm not entirely sure which reefer you are referring to, but I just got a pair of Intermountain 57' mechanicals (for SFRC/MDC cars) I was going to start a new thread on this, went searching first, found this. So I put them end-to-end with my existing SFRC's done by Micro-Trains, and those at least 'look' right, and yeah, the Intermountains are much higher at both the roofline and the side sill. For once the MT cars are right and somebody else is wrong. There is excess clearance over the coupler box. So after a couple days of study I decided it was either attack this with a new plan or send them back, because they look just wrong. I cut the entire bolster out of one with a zona saw and Xacto knife, cut all the relief off of the floor area, and put a new styrene sill extender in (not a real bolster, just styrene the thickness of the coupler box). That's the same method I've used to successfully lower MT flats and gons, done about 10 of them. Worked here too, from initial tests, and now the sill is the same height as an MT mechanical reefer and the roofline is at least close instead of much higher. I'll put photos up if anybody cares still on this. I love weathering these things, too. Oh, and yeah, I had pieces all over by the time I was done. I've got some glueup to do, it shed 3 steps, a ladder, and an end platform before I was done, but I can put that back on.
OK, this is pretty self-explanatory. 1) Destroy car by sawing out the entire original bolster, vertical cut right behind the bolster, carve out by sliding #11 blade in from the ends. Replace with styrene same thickness as coupler box. Shave away any remmants of the coupler pad. 2) Flip over and compare. For me, I think it is worth it. Others can resume cringing. Wait until you see these weathered. These are fragile cars and you can knock off a lot of stuff; I knocked loose a stirrup (again) just getting the photo, taking one for the team here. If you're not prepared to have to do some minor repairs and touchups, don't attempt. Yeah, and for any newbies, I'm the same guy that blinded the center drivers on a Hallmark 4-8-4 by filing them off under power. I've done this same technique to my entire fleet of MT gons and flats, this is the first house car I've done it to. You have to have a car floor in there to make this work. These are a BIG CAR compared to the tyical Atlas 50' reefer or even the MT cars, it stunned me how much bigger they were, then I started checking dimensions on the Official Register, yeah, they really are that big and everything else is too small.
Someone help me, maybe I missed something. Is this a prototype accurate ATSF mechanical reefer, or is it yet another PFE reefer painted ATSF?
Railroad Model Craftsman had a series on making HO Athearn cars accurate for the ATSF cars; two different classes, that was in...mid 2012. That's when I became aware that 'holy CRAP those cars were big' at 57' - at least for the later classes. There are class diagrams in the article but no drawings, and they are referencing an Athearn PFE design basically by adding enough panels to stretch it out to 57' and redoing the roof panels. Looking at what they did in HO vs. what's here this is a big step forward even if isn't exact to a class down to the last panel and rivet. I'm more concerned about the paint and finish; the roof is almost a chrome silver and needs repainted, the car suface is glossy (typical IM) and the end effect is near-Bachmann for toylike despite the additional details and features. If I can get the weathering and color right on these they should be spectacular; the lettering is spot-on, the car is way better than anything else in the basic features, and most importantly, it's a 57' no-roofwalk car. But as with some other IM things, what's off is relatively inexplicable. I've got a pair of Atlas 50-footers dating back to the '70's that get retired when these are done, they look like 40' boxcars compared to these beasts. Until I hit them with the ruler and checked out the ORER I sincerely thought they were oversized. EDIT: Here's a good class Rr-92 class 57-footer for comparison: http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=51485 And you can see the distance between the truck sideframes and the sill bottoms, and it's a Plate B, not a Plate C car. Hence the brutal hack job.
IM R-70-20 on BLMA trucks next to the Athearn 57' reefer. Looks like the couplers are going to mount a bit low.
