Reference Guide for 1960s Freight Cars

[Dakota7820]

Does anyone know of any reference books that would be a good guide to modeling freight rolling stock used during the 60's? Something with plenty of pictures and examples of everything from boxcars and coal hoppers, to tank cars and piggyback equipment.

[Bucksco]

http://morningsunbooks.com/

[jbrock27]

First pic looks like the East side of the Hudson, just north of Manhattan.

[Piyer]

First pic looks like the East side of the Hudson, just north of Manhattan.

We have a winner! *ahem* I mean, yes, you are correct. That is Spuyten Duyvil, NY. The Amtrak train is Grand Central Terminal bound, and the wye tracks in the bottom left lead to the West Side Freight Line (later to be Amtrak's route into Penn Station from the Hudson line).

[jbrock27]

Thank you for the Kudos my friend.   It is not something I am used to experiencing around here...  

[rogertra]

Remember, in the 1960s you could easily see freight cars from the 1940s and, of course, the 1950s.  In fact, it's probably safe to say that at least up until the mid 1960s, the majority of freight cars were 1950s with a lot of 1940s vintage cars around.

Also keep in mind your typical general freight train would be made up of mainly 40 foot boxcars, with still lots of ice reefers if reefers were in the consist.

A safe guide is if the car has a roof walk, it's good for the 1960s.

If you model after 1968, don't forget ACI labels.


Cheers

Roger T.

[Dakota7820]

Thanks all!

Roger,

I got out a couple DVDs I had with some footage of railroads around the mid 1960s and watched them again. It definitely reflects what you said. From what I've seen, I guess it would be acceptable to have around 2/3 of my rolling stock in the same 40s-50s "transition era" equipment that many others model? I don't really consider myself a "rivet counter." If I can just capture the general look and feel of the era, I'm satisfied.

[jbrock27]

I guess it would be acceptable to have around 2/3 of my rolling stock in the same 40s-50s "transition era" equipment that many others model?

It is about what is acceptable to you and what pleases you, that is important

[Dakota7820]

You're right jbrock, gotta make sure we're still allowing ourselves to have fun! That's the most important 

[rogertra]

Thanks all!

Roger,

I got out a couple DVDs I had with some footage of railroads around the mid 1960s and watched them again. It definitely reflects what you said. From what I've seen, I guess it would be acceptable to have around 2/3 of my rolling stock in the same 40s-50s "transition era" equipment that many others model? I don't really consider myself a "rivet counter." If I can just capture the general look and feel of the era, I'm satisfied.

That is what I strive for though in my case it's the late 1950s, 1958 to be exact.

I want people to look at my GER and think it is/was a real railroad set in 1958 in southern Quebec and not just one I made up.

By doing this, I automatically limit my spontaneous purchases  and so don't buy anything just because it's "cool".  If it doesn't meet the, "Typically used in and around Montreal in 1958" criteria, then I simply don't purchase it.

Save a lot of money.   

Cheers

Roger T.

[Dakota7820]

Thank you sir, sounds like sound and simple advice!

[jbrock27]

I want people to look at my GER and think it is/was a real railroad set in 1958 in southern Quebec and not just one I made up.

Cheers

Roger T.

But wouldn't those people only know otherwise, only if you told them?

And there are tons of weighs to save $$ 

[rogertra]

I want people to look at my GER and think it is/was a real railroad set in 1958 in southern Quebec and not just one I made up.

Cheers

Roger T.

But wouldn't those people only know otherwise, only if you told them?

And there are tons of weighs to save $$ 

Sorry, I don't understand.  Told them what?  It's not a model of a real railway?  If I had to tell them that then I think I've achieved my goal, modelling something that looks real enough to have been a real railway.   

As for ways to save money, I agree but limiting impulse buying is a good one. 

Cheers

Roger T.

[jbrock27]

Sorry, I don't understand.  Told them what?  It's not a model of a real railway?  

Cheers

Roger T.

Yes, unless you pointed these things out to them, how would they know:  A) that only cars representing 1958 were present; B) it was Southern Quebec and C) it was not a layout you just made up?  What I am saying is, unless you went out your way to tell these people it was not any of these things, how would they possibly know?

As for ways to save money, I agree but limiting impulse buying is a good one.  

Cheers

Roger T.

I don't disagree that limiting impulse buying saves dough, but, LOL!, you'd have me believe that modeling in this fashion means that it prevents any impulse buying?  I don't think so

[Piyer]

As for ways to save money, I agree but limiting impulse buying is a good one. 

Cheers

Roger T.

I don't disagree that limiting impulse buying saves dough, but, LOL!, you'd have me believe that modeling is this fashion means that it prevents any impulse buying?  I don't think so

First off, going back to the original poster's question... Kalmbach's guide to 1940s and '50s rolling stock also touches on what stuck around and what changes were coming in the 1960s.

As to impulse buying... I'm modeling in both HO and N scales, and I've fixed both to specific times and locations. This has curbed my impulse buying only so far as I won't be buying any Big Boys or GG-1s, but my credit card statements bear witness to the fact that I still impulsively buy things that fit within my time periods / operating region / etc. - not to mention prototype rule books, employee and public timetables, and period photos or postcards of the towns I intend to model. Research, even for a proto-freelanced pike, can be loads of fun - albeit expensive fun.