MTH auto racks

On the recent ones -- yes. On the early ones -- no. I can't recall specifically which catalog release had the trucks set back with long coupler arms. Putting the trucks in the right place isn't that hard, even if you want to retain 3-rail couplers, though. You have to take the car apart, shorten the sub frame, and drill new holes in the bottom for the trucks. Then you can either mount the coupler arm to the chassis or attach an extension to the coupler arm (or you can mount Kadees.)

Hope this helps.

Need to pick up some racks and the new ones from Lionel are just too darn big the MTH racks will be just fine. Now I have to find the date MTH changed over to the inset trucks. Thanks for your help Matt.

Matt, how do you shorten the sub frame?

Shorten sub frame?

Now I have to find the date MTH changed over to the inset trucks. Thanks for your help Matt.

I believe it was 2008 Volume #1 released in 2009. IT was the same time the grab rails went with Wire instead of molded in plastic

Thanks 'Curve. I was looking through my files for the first photo. Brian Biggs had done several of these this way when converting them to 2-rail. If you add bolsters (about 1/4" thick), you can use Weaver trucks w/kadees.

I think I mentioned this in the thread on the Lionel cars, but Mark has it right: the MTH autoracks catalogued in the 2008 Vol. I were indeed the first with the relocated trucks. The change wasn't catalogued or announced, the production cars just showed up that way. I have a few cars from that run and the one before from 2007 Vol. II, and the latter were the old style. Note that even after 2008 Vol. I MTH sometimes pictured the cars in the older configuration in their catalogues, but the production cars had the improvements.

RM

I'll echo comments about the MTH catalogs not always having the correct illustrations.  Even as recent as 2011 Vol 2, the corrugated auto carriers for individual sale appear to have the outdated illustrations, whereas the 6-pack sets in the same catalog have the more accurate illustrations with the inset trucks.

Understandably, Lionel's latest catalog featuring the 89' auto carriers is causing a bit of "auto carrier mania" right now.  But once folks "re-discover" how nice the current MTH auto carriers are, they're gonna re-think forking over big bucks for the Lionel cars.  I'll even go out on a limb here and predict that... by the time the Lionel Motor City Express set and add-on cars are even delivered, most of the MTH corrugated auto carriers in the market will be gone. 

For one thing, the MTH Premier-line auto carriers come in at a shade over 20" in length vs. Lionel's 24".  So they're more "layout-friendly" for folks who don't have super broad curve radii to handle cars that are 89' scale length -- which is most of us.    And secondly, if you hunt well enough you'll find dealers are currently selling the MTH units for close to HALF the estimated street price of the new Lionel units -- and even better price/performance when you buy the MTH 6-pack sets!   So for the same $ outlay, you can build an MTH unit train that has TWICE as many cars for effect. 

So unless the Lionel pieces turn out to be absolute "must-have" items in term of detail level and overall presence, I can't really see anyone (myself included) going wrong with the MTH units.  So get 'em while they're available at great prices!

My 2 cents.

David

P.S.  By the way, I stopped in at a LHS several towns over for the very first time this weekend, and they still had  couple of the AtlasO 89' flat cars for sale.  And it only re-confirmed my comments on the other auto carrier thread that an 89' car is HUGE -- far too large for most folks' layouts.

RockyMountaineer makes some very good points. Even at discount, Lionel's price points are going to be higher than the MSRP on the MTH autoracks, plus I can tell you from experience that 89-foot cars can be unwieldy, even with broader curves. They're actually meant to roll on curves of 60" radius (O-120) or larger, but they'll make it around 36" radius (O-72) (and look strange.) Even the Atlas 2-rail piggy-back flats can make it around an O-72 curve if they're only coupled to other 89-foot flats and the locomotive has a lot of coupler swing.

I have several MTH autoracks and I got every one of them in the secondary market or at substantial discounts off MSRP. Acquired four Atlas articulated autoracks the same way. They make an impressive (and long) train with only a dozen units in place. The Atlas 89-foot piggy-back flats can be had at a discount as well (you have to track down trailers, though.)

Sacrilege! Wait till the 3RS/2 rail folks hear about this!

(kidding )

---PCJ (who somehow managed to accumulate 46 of the little monsters)

I just picked up 6 MTH CSX auto carriers and although they are very large they look great. I did make a mock up with gator foam of the 89' foot print of the proposed auto carriers and man are they large. It's only 4" longer then they MTH racks but it really makes a difference imo. They would look better on curves of O-108 and above. The MTH auto carriers are a great fill in's for us railroaders who have smaller foot prints. BTW they look great with my CSX proto 3 dash 8's.

Was there a step by step thread on the conversion?  Thanks