the MRH Forum

overall length of well cars? Locos and rolling stock
Reply
New member 7 posts silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

Hi. I just registered  earlier today and have been perusing forums for a while. I think this is great and will probably be very helpful too as I am a beginner building my first layout.

My question is this; what are the overall lengths of a 40', 48' and 53' well car?

I have searched the web for answers on google more than once but surprisingly no luck!

Thanks in advance for any help.

 
Reply 0
Kirk W kirkifer Super User 1,071 posts
Kirk W kirkifer

Here are a few

 

https://www.gbrx.com/media/1446/maxi-stack-i-tech-bulletin-002.pdf

https://www.gbrx.com/media/1442/stackcarsmaxiiv.pdf

https://www.gbrx.com/media/1446/maxi-stack-i-tech-bulletin-002.pdf
Kirk Wakefield
Avon, Indiana
 

 
Reply 0
silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

Thanks! Very helpful links. I

Thanks! Very helpful links. I can't understand why I couldn't find that info on the web

That gives me a really good idea of what I wanted to know!

Thanks again
Reply 0
blindog10 Prolific poster 3,324 posts
blindog10

usually I'd say look in an ORER

But that's a lot easier for modelers of the "good old days" (before spraycan graffiti was common on freightcars). Which nicely lines up with the widespread use of the internet. (So I blame Al Gore for graffiti. Makes as much sense as anything he says.) ORERs (the Official Railway Equipment Register) is printed quarterly and has been for years. However, the rise of the internet and use of UMLER (Universal Machine Language Equipment Register) has diminished the demand for dead tree ORERs so post-2000 copies are hard to find. Amd two of the three types you asked about are post-2000 designs. Now by your question I assume you are asking about "stand alone" (single unit) well cars. Early well cars were almost all 5-car articulated sets. The first stand alones were built around 1990 by Thrall for Trailer Train and had 48-foot wells. There was an article in RMC recently about building one of these pioneering cars, which were nicknamed "battleships" because of the fenders that covered their oddball wheelsets. They didn't have traditional trucks. I don't know what they (Thrall and TTX) were thinking, but the next batch and all subsequent designs ride on traditional trucks. The Walthers model of the Thrall 48-foot stand alone well car actually pre-dates the protoypes that rode on traditional trucks. They knew the oddball design was not going to work on model railroads. Okay, so you didn't ask for a history lesson. But one of the problems the railroads have faced in intermodal equipment is the cars are built to last 50 years but tge trailers and containers they last only last 10 to 15. So the sizes they are expected to carry keep changing. The 48-footer are victims of this, so theyve been cut down to 40-foot wells. Meanwhile, new 53-foot stand alones were built to replace them. Here's a few sample car lengths from a 2012 ORER: 40-foot: 64'10" 48-foot: 71'9" 53-foot: 76'6" and 76'10" 56-foot: 80'2" The 56-footers were a dead-end design meant to carry four 28-foot containers for UPS. Today they're used like 53-foot stand alones. Scott Chatfield
Reply 0
silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

Excellent Info

Wow, you really know your stuff

Thanks for the great info!
Reply 0
silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

Thanks again for the great

Thanks again for the great info, guys. However, often more info leads to more questions...this is one of those times

Does anyone know what the necessary radius is for a Maxi I 5 well articulated car is? Would it need to be greater if I had 45' or 48' containers in the top position?

As you have probably guessed, modeling intermodal is new territory to me!

Thanks
Reply 0
blindog10 Prolific poster 3,324 posts
blindog10

HO or N

I'm in HO, so I have a couple of the Athearn Maxi-Is. Don't have a layout right now to run them on, but used to run them on 24" curves as long as they at least had one container in each well. Those models are exquisite but a bit light when empty. Frankly, if you want to play with intermodel in HO you should plan on 30" curves at a minimum. Especially if you plan to mix car types like I do. I also run 89' flats. In N Kato's Maxi-I might take 11" radius. They'll look funny doing it though. In the real world Maxi-Is mostly haul sea cans, so either 20' or 40' cans. I don't recall the limitations of putting longer domestic boxes on them. Scott Chatfield
Reply 0
silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

Thanks. Sorry I forgot to

Thanks. Sorry I forgot to mention I model in HO.

My layout is mostly 24" radius or better but I do have some 22" and even 20" in the freight yard. The container cars will not necessarily have to go to that yard though as I am planning an addition to the layout with straight runs and broad curves for the intermodal yard. If necessary I can eliminate intermodal traffic in the freight yard and run them back and forth from the intermodal yard and staging.

Do you think that sounds like it will work?

Thanks
Reply 0
blindog10 Prolific poster 3,324 posts
blindog10

easy does it

Nothing moves fast in a terminal (well, it's not supposed to), so you should be able to ease stack cars and spine cars through your trackage. And modern intermodal cars usually don't visit regular freight yard tracks, unless you're modeling one of the smaller ines like the Iowa Interstate. See Joe Atkinson's blogs for info about his Council Bluffs yard. Scott Chatfield
Reply 0
silvsub New member 7 posts
silvsub

No problem there

As a beginner I have many shortcomings but running my trains too fast is definitely not one of them! I love running my trains slowly in the yard and even on the mainlines as they pass through busy cities and industrial areas (at least they will if I ever get to scenery )

 

I never could understand why many skilled modelers took so much time, put in so much effort and spent so much money to make the layout look realistic only to run the trains like toys.

Thanks for your advise. I think I'll proceed with my plans for the intermodal addition!
Reply 0
Reply