I was fielding a question on what to replace the shell of the Lionel REA Sensor car, it's a 40' reefer and is 10.5" long.
Lionel also lists a number of cars as 40' reefers and they're 14" long! What am I missing? Is 14" not 56 scale feet at 1:48? Can someone explain why this is called a 40' reefer?
Pacific Fruit Express 40' Plug Door Reefer #18118 SKU: 2026092
Replies sorted oldest to newest
That 14" is probably coupler to coupler. 40' refers to the length of the car body.
That was the only thing I could come up with, but it sure adds to the confusion!
Also, the only way you get 14" over the couplers from the standard 10.25" boxcar is with a rubber ruler! I get a little over 12", so that doesn't really explain it for me.
Probably some sort of copy and paste type error /confusion with Lionel 57' mechanical reefer offerings. Which actually ARE 14" long. http://www.lionel.com/products...ical-reefer-2026480/
I believe Lionel had offered some 28 or 30 inch long mikados in the past. Or something to that effect. Also an error.
Meanwhile folks are still trying to find the extra speaker in the boiler of the legacy tank engine:
( are there even 2 in that little tender?)
That sounds more like it Rick. 
The 1: 1 railroads measure the length of the rolling stock and locos by the distance between the pulling face of the couplers. That is the inside surface of the knuckle when the coupler is closed. Why can't Lionel and all model train manufacturers use this standard ? Now I can understand that many steam locos and tenders can be coupled at two different spacings between them. How hard is it to write length, 21" / 22" depending on coupling mode. Or a similar phrase. I think that much of the confusion is the fact that toy train manufacturers have to hire people who don't know much about real or toy trains and could care less. j
I think you're right John. I can't understand if the aforementioned car is really a scale 40' reefer how they ever came up with a measurement of 14"! I think Rick is likely right, it's a 40' reefer, but they don't have any proofreaders and the magic of cut-n-paste got them once again. 
It's because the manufacturers describe their products in terms of what the model represents. If they make a model of a real 40' or whatever car, it doesn't necessarily mean (especially in the toy, rather than the scale model, world) ,that the model is going to be an exact copy in whatever scale reduction they are using. The 8" boxcars are supposed to represent the same boxcars as the 6464 series cars, but are different sized toy versions of the same prototype.
The smaller Lionel boxcars, in fact, are so close to S scale, that many S scalers use them to depict almost scale versions of their prototypes.
As has been said numerous times here, unless you are talking about a true scale depiction of a particular prototype, all bets are off as to the toy's fidelity to reality.
@JohnActon posted:The 1: 1 railroads measure the length of the rolling stock and locos by the distance between the pulling face of the couplers. That is the inside surface of the knuckle when the coupler is closed. Why can't Lionel and all model train manufacturers use this standard ?
What with those massive lobster claw couplers, and long coupler shanks attached to the trucks, such prototype dimensional comparisons would be meaningless in the 3-Rail toy-train world.
Now I can understand that many steam locos and tenders can be coupled at two different spacings between them. How hard is it to write length, 21" / 22" depending on coupling mode. Or a similar phrase. I think that much of the confusion is the fact that toy train manufacturers have to hire people who don't know much about real or toy trains and could care less.
And there you have it!!!!!! j
I am somewhat confused as well. One of my favorite railroads has several standards. Anybody want to guess how long a 60' RPO was on the SP?
I still haven't figured out how long the Daylight coaches were, so I just picked 19". That's over the ends, not coupler faces. Richard K. Wright did the definitive Daylight passenger car book, and I have a copy. Maybe I should read it more carefully?
@Hot Water posted:What with those massive lobster claw couplers, and long coupler shanks attached to the trucks, such prototype dimensional comparisons would be meaningless in the 3-Rail toy-train world.
No ! That would give the absolute length, if measured properly as 1:1 railroads do from the pulling face. When dealing with three rail usually that is the most dependable measurement you will have till it is on your bench. Just because there is a lobster claw on the piece does not preclude that the body length AND the overall length between pulling faces cannot be 1/48th scale length. I have swapped long shank couplers out for shorter ones on many of my cars and locos. No they will not round O-27 curves but that is not the problem most have when buying trains purporting scale proportions . It would be most helpful if Lionel Etal would work closer with the manufacturers in order to know what the actual length will be before catalogs go to press. Unlike having a graphic designer or copy writer in the art department guess. As is now there is no standard and many guesses. This is somewhat related to the Scale vs Semi-scale language breakdown. When I first joined the TCA in 1970 the term Semi-Scale was most commonly used to denote a model that had overall scale proportions but toy flanges and couplers. Then along comes K-Line using the term to describe O-27 trains with a bit more detail. So now we have 3railscale how long before that term becomes meaningless. However you say it we need a measurement standard. This does make me wish that when I had equal amounts of two and three rail I had gone with two instead of three. BTW "Breakheart Pass is starting on the Grit network right now. See ya. j
...and then there's the rivet counting Proto 48 modelers. A whole new ball game w/o any Lionel MLB box cars...? Gads, what a thought...LOL
@Mike CT posted:1/43, 1/48, 1/50, 1/64 common scale items, that can be on a layout. Looking close the cows are a bit small. The green machine shed needed a boost/additional foundation height.
Just to be clear Mike, my "scale confusion" was only in the measurement of the specific cars mentioned. Really, I have a pretty good grasp on what the various scales are.
I have lost track of how many mistakes have been made in Lionel catalogs over the years, so this one comes as no surprise. I agree with the way Rick explained this one.
Pat
Unfortunately, for many years, companies are reducing their head count to reduce costs; for example, since newspapers don't have copy editors anymore, how many news articles are error-free? The model railroad manufacturers have been reducing their head count and are not publishing error free catalogs anymore. My attitude is that if you don't have a sense of humor, it can be a rough life.
I was speaking to Melgar yesterday about whether the Postwar Lionel Lines extruded aluminum passenger cars (Silver Cloud, Silver Range, Silver Dawn) and Postwar 773 Hudson are scale.
I have not measured their length yet, but Melgar and I believe those passenger cars are not long enough to be scale. We also believe that the 773 is a scale Hudson.
I believe those Postwar passenger cars are comparable in size to the Congressional set and other top of the line Postwar aluminum passenger sets like the one that goes with the Lionel Santa Fe F-3s made in the early 1950s.
To me, those passenger sets look at first glance like they are big enough to be scale, especially because they dwarf the traditional sized passenger cars with the names of the NJ cities and towns (Newark, Livingston, Chatham, Mooseheart, etc.).
What do you folks think?
@Trinity River Bottoms Boomer posted:...and then there's the rivet counting Proto 48 modelers. A whole new ball game w/o any Lionel MLB box cars...? Gads, what a thought...
P48 is not relevant to car dimensions; a 40' car in O scale is a 40' car in P48. P48 is a gauge component.
@Arnold D. Cribari posted:I was speaking to Melgar yesterday about whether the Postwar Lionel Lines extruded aluminum passenger cars (Silver Cloud, Silver Range, Silver Dawn) and Postwar 773 Hudson are scale.
I have not measured their length yet, but Melgar and I believe those passenger cars are not long enough to be scale. We also believe that the 773 is a scale Hudson.
I believe those Postwar passenger cars are comparable in size to the Congressional set and other top of the line Postwar aluminum passenger sets like the one that goes with the Lionel Santa Fe F-3s made in the early 1950s.
To me, those passenger sets look at first glance like they are big enough to be scale, especially because they dwarf the traditional sized passenger cars with the names of the NJ cities and towns (Newark, Livingston, Chatham, Mooseheart, etc.).
What do you folks think?
Scale is a relative term when it comes to O, but Postwar extruded Lionel passenger cars are not scale length for 1:48. The typical length for a streamlined passenger car was 85' (roughly 21"). 72' was also used, but not as commonly and when it comes to head end equipment, the baggage and RPOs could range from 60 feet and up. The extrusion for those cars is more or less in the ballpark for 1:48, they are just short in length to make those 031 curves.
In contrast the 773 is considered to be a 1:48 locomotive. The only "scale" steam locomotive made by Lionel in the postwar era in 1953 and again in 1964. Unfortunately, unlike it's much closer to scale cousin the pre-war 700E, the tender for the 773 does not have 1:48 scale proportions and is not a tender design used by the New York Central.
The F3s are pretty close as are the GP7s, but the NW2 is a bit large and the 44 tonner closer to a 120 ton diesel. (now that gets confusing!).
@Arnold D. Cribari posted:I was speaking to Melgar yesterday about whether the Postwar Lionel Lines extruded aluminum passenger cars (Silver Cloud, Silver Range, Silver Dawn) and Postwar 773 Hudson are scale.
I have not measured their length yet, but Melgar and I believe those passenger cars are not long enough to be scale. We also believe that the 773 is a scale Hudson.
I believe those Postwar passenger cars are comparable in size to the Congressional set and other top of the line Postwar aluminum passenger sets like the one that goes with the Lionel Santa Fe F-3s made in the early 1950s.
To me, those passenger sets look at first glance like they are big enough to be scale, especially because they dwarf the traditional sized passenger cars with the names of the NJ cities and towns (Newark, Livingston, Chatham, Mooseheart, etc.).
What do you folks think?
Arnold,
I believe that the average passenger car is between 80 and 85 feet long.
The Aluminum Silver Cloud, etc., and PostWar Congressional set, cars you mention are 15 inches long. At 1/4 inch to the foot, that would scale these cars out to be 60 feet long.
Lionel's "Madison" Heavyweights are 14 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 56 feet long.
While both of the above happily run on O31 curves, I think they look best on O42 or wider.
Lionel's "Baby Madison" Heavyweights are 12 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 48 feet long. I believe that these look best running on O31 or O42 curves.
The Newark, etc. cars you mention are 11 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 44 feet long. I believe that these look best running on O27 or O31 curves.
The above lengths do not include couplers.
Passenger cars of all of these types run on The WVRR.
It's most likely a typo. Lionel lists other steel-sided 40-foot reefers at 11inches.
Jan
@Lionelski posted:Arnold,
I believe that the average passenger car is between 80 and 85 feet long.
Average for what era?
@palallin posted:Average for what era?
80' passenger cars go back to the 19th century with the Pullman Palace cars in wood with truss rod support systems. In the teens steel cars in 80' lengths were becoming a standard size for coaches on several roads as as well as Pullman sleepers. 85' came with the advent of the streamlined era and was the most common passenger car size for anything built from the late 40's on.
This is not to say other sizes were not common as well. The Harriman roads used 72' cars in the steel car era as well as 80' cars. Some of the Harriman baggage cars on the SP and subsidiary TN&O were as short as 30'. CNJ and other anthracite roads had 72' cars for commuter operations.
Short answer is that it all depends on era and regional preferences. However, if you go by the numbers the PRR alone built in the range of 1200 80' P70 coaches starting in 1914 and ran as late as 1983 in commuter operation.
There really is no black and white answer to this question.
Got to be copy issue, or Lionel marketing has come out with a New Lionel Scale, 1/34.25, works perfectly! Ok, I'll see myself out.
mwb: Sorry. I'm aware that 40 ft. is 40 ft. in all scales. I just wanted to add some spice to the thread. Forgot to add LOL after the Lionel MLB comment. I have since edited the comment to avoid any confusion.
GG1 4877: You're absolutely Right On!
Item: The Sierra Railroad combine is a prime example. It became a legend in it's own time, having starred in countless westerns over the years, motion picture as well as TV series.
@Lionelski posted:Arnold,
I believe that the average passenger car is between 80 and 85 feet long.
The Aluminum Silver Cloud, etc., and PostWar Congressional set, cars you mention are 15 inches long. At 1/4 inch to the foot, that would scale these cars out to be 60 feet long.
Lionel's "Madison" Heavyweights are 14 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 56 feet long.
While both of the above happily run on O31 curves, I think they look best on O42 or wider.
Lionel's "Baby Madison" Heavyweights are 12 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 48 feet long. I believe that these look best running on O31 or O42 curves.
The Newark, etc. cars you mention are 11 inches long - that would scale these cars out to be 44 feet long. I believe that these look best running on O27 or O31 curves.
The above lengths do not include couplers.
Passenger cars of all of these types run on The WVRR.
I agree 100% with everything you say, John.
Why Lionel. Keeps making these mistakes is that the Chinese don't understand English and the buyers really don't care. I mean how many times have you measured a new box car against what was described in the catalog, I will bet very few.
Dave
I think it's time for everybody to return their slide rules to the bottom desk drawer and bring back the slogan that used to be on the cover of Model Railroader each month: Model Railroading is Fun!
@Trinity River Bottoms Boomer posted:I think it's time for everybody to return their slide rules to the bottom desk drawer and bring back the slogan that used to be on the cover of Model Railroader each month: Model Railroading is Fun!
Aren't you the guy that doesn't actually have a layout anymore? What's fun about that?
@david1 posted:Why Lionel. Keeps making these mistakes is that the Chinese don't understand English and the buyers really don't care. I mean how many times have you measured a new box car against what was described in the catalog, I will bet very few.
Dave
Myth. I don't care what country a product is produced in, if you don't have effective management over your workers then the error falls back on the manufacturer every time. In my profession, if one of my employees made the mistake and it goes out without me catching I am just as liable as if I made the mistake myself.
However, I must say I agree with the sentiment "model railroading is fun" and that fun comes in many forms. To some it's counting rivets and measuring cars. That's just a legitimate as running 027 cars around tight curves at light speed. As long as we enjoy our hobby personally why does it matter what anyone else thinks?
You guys are making my head explode.........
@Trinity River Bottoms Boomer posted:I think it's time for everybody to return their slide rules to the bottom desk drawer and bring back the slogan that used to be on the cover of Model Railroader each month: Model Railroading is Fun!
...and with every issue of O Gauge Railroading that's just what you get too: FUN, and plenty of it! With a Digital Subscription you get an added bonus with added material included in each issue and access to every OGR from the very first issue no less! Yes, where less is more when you take out a DS to OGR!
The best investment I made in 2020 and with the lockdown I know what to do with all my spare time and best yet...I don't even have to wear a mask!
Yep, less is more. Good words to live by. Hint.
gunrunnerjohn: True, currently I have no layout, however, I took out a Digital Subscription when Alan invited me to do so, and since then really enjoy the companionship with all the OGR modelers who share their layouts with fellow members.
I purchased a Lionel Pennsylvania Railroad GG1 and set of Lionel reproduction brass freight cars and a NYC caboose with intentions to construct a layout in my nice clean dry basement. However, due to health issues within my family the plan was put on hold. "Dr. Bill" always gets paid first you know!
That said, I still have fun every time I watch fellow member's videos (short or long) or see their latest projects that they enjoy sharing with OGR members. So please forgive me if I join in on threads that interest me even if you feel I should refrain from taking part in them. I admit and have humbly apologized for some of my more critical posts in the past but would apprecitae it if perhaps you will still personally permit me to take part in them? If not, feel free to contact the OGR staff and let them decide, but in the meantime please try to accept me just as I am and I'll do everything humanly possible to return the favor ten fold or more your way.
Respectfully,
Joe
You know, I don't have a layout either. I do have about 150 MTH, Weaver and Williams engines and a few hundred pieces of rolling stock. What is the fun in that? The fun is that I enjoy and have enjoyed trains since 1950 when I carried my 671 set home in my lap from Joske's in San Antonio. For the next 20 odd years I had ever growing layouts, introduced my sons to trains and enjoyed the fellowship of being in the TCA.
Right now I admit all I do is look at my trains but trust me, as Arnold says, it takes your mind off the day. I enjoy this site even though it is tightly focused on operating and I do not and may not ever because the clock keeps ticking. Anyway, I think the site is big enough for all of us that love the hobby.
WOWEEE!!!! It was a misprint folks, no more, no less.
@Bill DeBrooke posted:You guys are making my head explode.........
Well I had to dismantle my rather large layout so we could remodel the basement, the lovely wife said it needed to be done. no layout to run a load of trains on. Just thinking about the work ahead make me double up on the meds. so I decided to get some work done on my projects only a few hundred or so.
OK...I had a couple of alerts this morning to this thread. I have edited and deleted the off topic posts (for the most part) and ask that we keep to the OP's original thread subject. If you want to discuss something else, then contact each other via email please!
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
