In the Classic tinplate period, the only cars that received actual sprung doors were the medium size 320 series passenger cars. The more elaborate 418 series, state cars, and Blue Comet cars ALL had entry doors without springs. What was the logic of cutting costs on the more expensive cars by not adding springs to the entry doors like those on the less expensive 320 series cars? Oversight or design flaw? Perhaps we will never know but I find it an interesting conundrum!
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Personally, I find it tedious to add wedges to keep the doors on my 418 series, state cars, and Blue Comet cars from flapping open! 
Being somewhat OCD, I prefer a uniform, proper train with ALL doors closed when running! 
Does this issue not bother anyone else?
Yeah, I hate that. I love that the doors on the Lionel standard gauge Hiawatha are sprung.
I have used both balsa strips and styrofoam as wedges.
I agree on the SG Hiawatha! GOOD CALL!
The Lionel Classics 320 cars in the Fireball set have them.
Yeah, this is a pet peeve of mine (is it a reason I think AF Wide Gauge cars look better?... Why, yes it is!). I use strips cut from polyethylene rubber insulation to block them closed.
I never really thought about it. After all, this is tinplate--no scale, so why worry about open doors?
Gentlemen,
The springs are cool however it's a Tin Plate fantasy toy train play world, I am not in to realism in my Tin, so never really payed much attention to it.
PCRR/Dave
My thought is, if everyone wants the doors to stay closed, why even make them operable in the first place?
that's what I thought.
If they were intended to be operable then they should have had springs.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
