Atlas 2 Rail RB Trucks

I would like to know too. I ordered the bettendorf trucks from my LHS and it's been 2 months. Seems like the newly designed trucks are hard to get. Anyone know what the problem is?

Me too. I need some 70-tons to change-out the trucks on some Santa Fe PS4427 Hopper cars and some 100-tons for a few Berwick Excess-Height cars. It'll be cheaper and faster than changing out the wheels on the cars. Will still need to drill/tap the cars for Kadees.

There no longer is an AM Hobbies, as his business was essentially taken over by J-D's Trains. 

I saw six pairs at Caboose Hobbies in Denver when I visited them on January 5.

Mike and John: Thanks a lot. I'll try those vendors.

I ended up ordering directly from Atlas....stock is too spotty at all the aforementioned places with no date for new stock delivery in the next 2 weeks and I needed 12 pairs.  Price difference was a wash in the end.

I read that the Atlas 2 rail trucks were redesigned so that they weren't so wide. Some time ago I emailed Atlas about this and I asked them how do I tell from the outside of the package if I am getting the newly designed trucks or just NOS (New Old Stock). I was told that the new trucks have a different part number. OK, I just checked 3 different catalogs from the years 2003, 2007 and 2013 and for the Andrews trucks they all had the same part number of 7033. For the 50 ton Bettendorf trucks both the '03 and '07 catalog show a part number of 7032 but there was no 7032 part number in the '13 catalog. However, there is a 7028 part number for 40 ton Bettendorf trucks with the word "NEW!" next to it. These must be the newly designed trucks I am looking for. I checked the JD Trains website and they do not have them listed on line.

I thought Atlas had redesigned all of their O Scale trucks but apparently it is just one of them.

I will check Atlas to see if they have them but I doubt it. My LHS can usually get stuff pretty quick if Atlas has it. Usually within a week or 10 days at the most. If they had it I'm sure it would have made it to the store by now.

You can find the new Atlas trucks using the P/N's from the following link

http://www.atlaso.com/o2railtrucks.htm

The P/N's are

7065    70-Ton Trucks

7066    100-Ton Trucks

Both do show in stock at Atlas.  

In spot checking JD's/AM Hobbies,  I didn't see the new part numbers online but I know he had them.  Give Jeff a call.

A couple other online dealers also don't show the newer P/N's so give them a call.. They might have them in stock!

Walthers shows the 7066 in stock, but not 7065 if your LHS get their Atlas products from Walthers and not Atlas.

Already ordered from Atlas, I spot checked everywhere...none in stock or maybe one but not the other and none on the truck for at least the next 2 weeks.  I ordered straight from atlas this morning and they've already shipped and there was less than $2 difference in the price when everything was said and done.  I'll stick with ordering straight from Atlas on these like I order Kadee's from Kadee, keeps it simple and they always have the most stock because I always place large bulk orders.

Kind of off-topic, but I have a couple of 57-foot Weaver mechanical reefers where I swapped out the hi-rail wheelsets for Intermountain 33" wheels and Kadees. The cars look like they're riding too low. Did those cars run on the 100-ton trucks with 36" wheels? Judging by the coupler height it looks like that's the case. I'm thinking about just throwing a set of Atlas trucks onto them to add a bit more weight,

Thanks.

Mike, thank you very much for the link to the Atlas trucks. So they did re-tool their entire line of trucks. I thought so. I'll give Jeff a call tomorrow.

These trucks will improve the prototype appearance of AtlasO cars - especially the narrow bodied older prototypes like the USRA box cars, wood reefers.  Prospective buyers note that these trucks do not have NMRA spec bolster height - they are drop in replacements for AtlasO cars.  Unfortunately for PRR fans new reduced width trucks are not yet listed for the PRR X29 (2D-F8)  or H21a (2E-F2).  When they do come out it will cost me a bundle!

Ed Rappe

Yep new trucks so much better.  I took photos of the preproduction samples from the 2012 O scale national.  Here they are again.

Those photos by Mike above show why I'm not a big fan of "working" springs in trucks -- it is very unusal to see springs that look like the real ones.  I'd much rather have a rigid truck that looked right.  Anybody else agree ?

    Maybe I've just been looking at the "wrong models".  I have seen some models that have sprung trucks where the visible "springs" were rigid, the real spring action being hidden.  I didn't think the complexity is worth it.

    Opinion.

SZ

Mike:

Thanks for the photos. Definitely worth a thousand words.

Vince:

Thanks for the heads up.

Check this previous post about GGD passenger cars.  The trucks are not sprung, but have springs of an appropriate gauge installed for aesthetic purposes.  The general reaction seems to be positive about this methodology.  

GGD Sleepers post

I personally agree with you.  I truly don't believe having sprung rolling stock trucks is necessary, especially at increased cost.  And the typical problem is that the spring is too "skinny" a gauge of wire and doesn't give the sense of the prototype.  Worse yet is when they are silver in color.  I'm guessing the thin gauge is necessary to get a spring of appropriate strength to flex under the relatively light load of the car.

I've looked in to miniature plastic springs as an alternative.  They seem to be thicker for a given load.  Of course if the truck is not actually sprung but simply looks like it, then any spring that looks right could be used.

At any rate, I balk at the idea of paying $18 for a pair of sprung trucks when I don't think the springing is necessary and I don't think the springs look right.

On a different note related to trucks, are die-cast trucks really necessary.  Plastic frames seemed to get pooh-poohed when I see them mentioned, but they seem to work perfectly well in N and HO scale.  Is there truly an issue of strength to support the larger cars in O scale?  Or is it an attitude of die cast being the way things are frequently done in O scale?  Just curious.

Jim

Jim

Hi Jim,  the trucks should at least be equalized if not sprung.  The diecast frames are likely for weight and low center of gravity.  And a good portion of the community like metal.  Weaver used to offer the option of 2 rail and 3 rail in plastic or diecast but it seems people voted for diecast and what is now standard for the recent runs.

Michael,

   Yes, I should have been more precise and said " working springs in trucks that don't look 'real' " or something like that, although -- speaking only of swb freight car trucks, and opinion -- I don't think any form of springing is necessary within the truck.

    Why do you say the trucks should be equalized, and what do you mean by equalized -- each side pivoting fore and aft around the bolster ?  I'm asking these questions not in the "hard to get along with mode" but to learn.

   I think I've always thought that the worst cases a truck encounters are relatively abrupt vertical curves and the beginning / ends of superelevation [ = twist ], but that the best solution to these and  "all" truck problems was a rigid truck coupled with a good three point suspension [ =  "side contact bearings" at one end ] to the carbody.  I could be wrong, and am willing to learn.

Best, SZ

All of the above truck references are to 0 scale freight car trucks on an operating layout.

SZ,  For hi-rail, the equalization doesn't really affect operation as much as it does on 2 rail because of the pizza cutter flanges.  By equalization I mean the truck allows some up/down motion of each axle around a center pivot point at center bolster. On Atlas trucks,  the side frames are screwed and doesn't allow this pivot.  To get around this stiffness, they put extra play one one side where the truck attaches to the freight car.  The opposite end has plastic stubs which help prevent side to side tipping/wobble.  Equalization help to keep cars on the rail when entering or exiting transitions and bad track work. Without proper equalization, cars tend to walk off the rail where one side lifts up, the wheel doesn't follow the contour of the rail the flanges are then unable to keep the truck on the rails.  

Unfortunately for PRR fans new reduced width trucks are not yet listed for the PRR X29 (2D-F8)  or H21a (2E-F2).  When they do come out it will cost me a bundle!

Ed, for what's it's worth, I recently replaced the OEM trucks in several Atlas X29 boxcars with Rich Yoder's 2DF8 (coil-elliptical, or is that the 2DF12?), which was a direct replacement save for a #4 nylon washer between the body and truck and a slight enlarging of the body mount hole.

If you have a gaggle of cars to convert, I suppose Atlas will be the less expensive option, but those Yoder trucks look really good on those cars.

Michael,

   OK, I think [ but am not 100% sure ] that we are defining equalization the same way:  the ability of each "journal box" to vertically ride up or down, with a bar across the tops and the bolster/spring plank resting at the midpoint.

   I can see the advantages of equalization within the truck, but wouldn't the discontinuity in the rail on one side [ severe enough to cause derailment to take place] have to be within the wheelbase of the truck -- say, 1.5 inches -- for that to be effective ?   That strikes me as a rather abrupt change -- most problems I've had with wheels climbing or just walking off the rail have been where I have a [ say ] RH curve, and the LH rail has negative superelevation;  a set of trucks would roll through OK, but a "stiff" loco or car would derail, and I'm not sure I see how equaliztion would help.

    Of course it could just be my trackwork -- and one of your 3 unit hauled frt trains on the club layout puts on more car miles in an evening than my fleet sees in a year.

    My initial comment on the springs' appearance got this thread off topic, so I won't comment any further.  When I can get some real comparative tests done, I'll post that, but it'll be a while.

Thanks, SZ

Mike, thanks for re-posting those pics. The new trucks look pretty good.

An earlier post mentioned 40 ton bettendorf trucks. These were made available for separate sale by AtlasO and they were found on Many 36' & 40' Wood Reefers, AtlasO stock number 7028. The 7028 40 ton trucks do not have the thin sideframes and are not narrowed like the new 2 rail Barber Bettendorf. See pics from the underside and a comparison of sideframes.

Food for thought

That was me. I think I ordered one set of these thinking they were the new versions with the thinner frames. Oh well, I won't screw the store. I'll still buy them if they ever show up. I'll find a use for them or sell them. Thanks a lot MaineTrains for the information and the pictures.