Author Topic: Anybody have weight data on Boxcar 309?  (Read 2461 times)

Ed Lecuyer

  • Moderator, WW&F Forum
  • Administrator
  • Supervisor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,760
    • View Profile
    • Historical Topo Maps
Anybody have weight data on Boxcar 309?
« on: April 06, 2009, 01:56:56 AM »
MODERATORS NOTE:
Anybody have weight data on Boxcar 309? has been converted from the pre-July 2008 WW&F Discussion Forum.
Some formatting may have been removed or modified from the original postings that appear quoted in this topic.
Information contained within this post may be superseded by more recent postings and conversations.

Steve Smith wrote:
Quote
As I understand it the museum built Boxcar 309 from plans the WW&F had. I don't know if any weight data accompanied the drawings, but if they did, I'd be interested to know any or all of the following weights in pounds:

-Total weight of empty car

- Maximum allowable load

-Weight per complete truck

-Weight of one wheel set

Steve Smith

John McNamara replied:
Quote
As I understand it, the museum built caboose 320 from plans found in the Maine Historical Society, said plans having been drawn by the Franklin Construction Company for the WW&F.

Box car 309 is a restored original car. It was one of the cars purchased and transported to Connecticut. Unlike locomotive 9, which was stored indoors for 60 years, 309 was stored outdoors and suffered substantial damage to the lower few feet. One of the original sides is hanging on the wall in bay 3. The roof was covered with tin and was intact, as were the interior walls.

Other than this historical information about 309, I'm afraid that I can't answer your questions.

James Patten replied:
Quote
The four wheel sets that were originally under 309 when it arrived are sitting out by the main line switch.  Steve, you're welcome to lift one and estimate it's weight!     Or maybe get Two Ties to do it for you

Steve Smith replied:
Quote
Jeez, I got mixed up about which car the volunteers built from plans. Sorry bout that, but thanks anyway John. Yeah, James, I'll be sure to ask Two-Tie for his wheelset lifting services, but only after I'm in my car and can make a quick getaway!

Anyway, right under my nose I had some reasonably good info on the weights I wanted. I decided to look in Linwood Moody's The Maine Two Footers and on Pg. 67 there's a picture of a boxcar built for the Billerica and Bedford R.R. by the Rantlett Mfg. Co. of Laconia NH with weight data given: Weight, 5,600 lb, Capacity 12,000 to 16,000 lb (I guess depending on whether the brakes are having a bad day or a good day?).

Page 64 shows a combine and a coach by same builder. The coach weighed 9,000 lb and had a capacity of 30 passengers, say 4,500 lb for 150 lb avg. weight per passenger.

Both cars had 18 inch dia wheels and journals were 2.5 in dia by 5 inches long.

A flat car on Pg. 69 , same builder, showed weight 4,500 lb and capacity 12,000 to 16,000 lb

Everything for the Billerica and Bedford seemed to be a bit on the small side, so for the WW&F one might want to scale up those weights by 15-20 per cent, I'd guess.

Steve

James Patten replied:
Quote
There may be information in the Narrow Gauge in the Sheepscot Valley books.  309 was supposedly home-built by the W&Q from a Portland Co. flatcar.

Wayne Laepple replied:
Quote
In the ICC valuations posted by Steve Hussar a few weeks back, it indicates boxcars in that series had a capacity of 20,000 pounds.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Steve, here's a link to that posting.
http://www.setbb.com/wwfmuseum/viewtopic.php?t=167&mforum=wwfmuseum
_________________
*                *                    *                   *
"Give me enough Swedes and whiskey and I'll build a railroad to Hell."
- James J. Hill

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Often over-looked original siding from boxcar 309 taken inside bay 2. I always liked how the door to the machine shop went through the original siding...who's idea was that anyway??? (geez, look how tidy the machine shop looks in there!)


_________________
*                *                    *                   *
"Give me enough Swedes and whiskey and I'll build a railroad to Hell."
- James J. Hill

Steve Smith replied:
Quote
Thanks Wayne and Steve. Looks like one could add even 25 % to the Billerica and Bedford values and have a fairly good estimate of the WW&F values.

Wow, wish the bench in S.W. corner of the shop looked as neat nowadays!

PCo622 replied:
Quote
I believe that having the door where it is was Zack's idea.  Irregardless, it does look good and is quite functional.  You also have to remember that this siding is indigenous to the 1929 rebuild.

Stephen Hussar replied:
Quote
Speaking of that, why did the 309 wear a different number in Connecticut?
_________________
*                *                    *                   *
"Give me enough Swedes and whiskey and I'll build a railroad to Hell."
- James J. Hill

James Patten replied:
Quote
The W&Q number this car wore was 29.   Either Ramsdell or Monypenny wanted it painted for the W&Q.

Flatcar 118 had the name of the railroad spelled out on the car.  It very nearly didn't fit.

BM1455 replied:
Quote
It would seem that durring the early railfan era - 1930-1950ish, the Wiscasset & Quebec was the more vogue name for our railroad.  I guess it did not matter to them that the only railroad that most of them ever saw was the WW&F.  This is clrarly evident as every surviving piece of WW&F equipment was repainted as W&Q, even if it never served on that railroad in it's then current state.
Eric.

James Patten replied:
Quote
"Wiscasset and Quebec" rolls off the tongue much easier than "Wiscasset, Waterville, and Farmington".  As Ellis Walker said in one of his musings, "it's a real jaw-buster of a name."

Maybe if the railroad's name was "Wiscasset, Western, and Pacific" it would have been more popular with the fans (because the name was prettier).

Stewart Rhine replied:
Quote
The Boothbay crew painted box car 312 in W&Q because they found the original W&Q lettering and bulls-eye number on the car when the post railroad siding material was stripped off the car.

BM1455 replied:
Quote
Stewart.
I would want more clearification on that subject first....I'll bet they either found the old W&Q and number coming through the newer paint as many of these cars had this kind of weathering pattern, or they stripped off the replacement siding that the railroad put on over the original siding on one side of these cars.  In otherwords; when the WW&F rebuilt these cars with the increased height, they did it in a strange way.  They simply sheathed over the old stuff with new siding on one side fo the car only.  (Weird, but it is the way they did it.)  Perhaps under this siding is where they found the original lettering...???... which I doubt the WW&F would have bothered to paint over in such a case as they were covering it over with new wood anyway.  Both Edavile and Boothbay were always more concerned with tourism and less so with the historical aspects.  Especially in thiose days.
Again, I think that the Wiscasset & Quebec name was more popular in those days, and they repainted it according to that reason.
Eric.

sgprailfan replied:
Quote
Hey, speeking of the box car does anyone thing this would be a good way to model the 309?

http://www.ares-server.com/Ares/Ares.asp?MerchantID=RET01229&Action=Catalog&Type=Product&ID=83489

James Patten replied:
Quote
Looks like a good way to model it to me.  If you're into kitbashing, the ladders on both ends will have to be switched to the opposite side of the car.

Mike Fox replied:
Quote
I was thinking the same thing James. And if you are kitbashing it, Smaller wheels would help it some. The coupler pocket doesn't look exact either but unless you are a rivet counter, that might not matter.
Mike

James Patten replied:
Quote
The WW&F had an unusual style of coupler, which I doubt modeler companies make (but I could be wrong).

While we're at it, I think the doors would need to open the opposite way.  At the very least they don't have the bottom guide for the door.

The top walk doesn't have the boards extending down to the ladders (instead there are grab irons on the top) and there's a platform for the brakeman to stand on while turning the wheel.  And the brakewheel is too high (unless this is a short height boxcar.

Looks like it would be easier to build it yourself than to kitbash!   
Ed Lecuyer
Moderator, WW&F Forum