I need to clarify that I thought that the walkways were not metal because they were not magnetic, they are metal, just not made of the same kind as the Atlas well car. I will pay closer attention next time. Still a great model, grade moves up to A+. The fact still remains that the containers are slightly longer than other brands and they may stick inside non JTC well cars. Very detailed containers none the less. If you want to spend more money for these, go for it, in the end it is your wallet. This review is just my opinion upon first looks.
18" is a min radius for HO. I would assume it would fit. However; it would hang over the inside edge due to the length and look odd. You could have derailments if going too fast. The longer the car, the bigger the radius it should use.
Yes, for me JTC lives up to the hype. They are one of the rare companies that will-not use "one" shell and have it represent several different prototypes. When I go to www.rrpicturearchives.net/ and search for a given prototype other than weathering and real wear-and-tear the JTC model and the prototype of it will look the same. I find it sad that some manufacturers' "make-up" numbers for cars of the railroad represented on the car that was never used and worst yet never had the length/style of the car the railroad's markings are printed on.
If you go to JTC's site, jtcmodeltrains.com/ on the HOME page they state that the 53' well cars are receiving some in-transit damage to the etched walkways and new parts have been ordered. Remember from high school, not all metals are magnetic.
Because the walkways aren't magnetic, just means they are not a ferrous material (steel), they could be brass or another non-ferrous metal. Otherwise a good review.
Hey, Bob, I have bought several well cars and have found them to be a pain to hook up. They are using one truck to hook up 2 well cars. I am difficulty getting them to hook up. Can I modify these well cars or am I stuck with them. They are N scale. I forget the brand but almost threw them away because of not wanting to lock together.
You may have the Maxi 4's or similar. Kato and many other manufacturers make this type. Kato is a snap together type and others have pins that the cars sit on. My kato 3 section set fell off track and I can't figure how to fix that one now since it is in pieces. I don't like those types of well cars.
I have a couple of JTt containers. I do like them. I model late seventies early eighties so most containers are not on my era including the ones I have.
Next time you compare 53' well cars, either use cars from the same model company "OR" from the same prototype manufacturer. That is to say, use a container only car and an all-purpose car from JTC "OR" find several models of the same prototype. (Compare apples to apples and not try to compare apples to oysters.) What you did with the intermodal well cars is equivalent to comparing a '57 Chevy to a '57 Ford. Totally different design philosophies from the "prototype" point of view. The comparison of the same container between the two different model manufacturers is valid. The one thing I would like you to do in the future, get a caliper and do an actual measurement on the over-all length of the containers and not just wing-it-by-the-seat-of-your-pants, push-it-in-and-see-if-it-fits. There are web sites for containers that state the actual sizes in feet-inches/meters. Need to remember that containers are always shorter than what they are marked as. 53-foot IOS containers are 52'-10-1/2", which works out to 3.965625 actual inches and I would round up to 3.966 +/- .005" (3.961 to 3.971) Before Oct. 2001, TTX had all of the actual dimensions listed for all of the various pieces of equipment. The "wells" of well-cars tend to be the size of the largest container or a bit longer. Based on this information I would say if a container "rubbed" the ends of a well then either the well is short or the container is too long. We don't know which until something is measured. Funny how we live in an age of instant information and the actual info we models want is becoming far more difficult to get.
I need to clarify that I thought that the walkways were not metal because they were not magnetic, they are metal, just not made of the same kind as the Atlas well car. I will pay closer attention next time. Still a great model, grade moves up to A+. The fact still remains that the containers are slightly longer than other brands and they may stick inside non JTC well cars. Very detailed containers none the less. If you want to spend more money for these, go for it, in the end it is your wallet. This review is just my opinion upon first looks.
Would this fit on a 18inch curved HO scale Bachmann track EZ track
@@californiahauler6561 Nope, this is N scale and not HO.
@@DaBobsNScaleMancave oh ok but would a HO 53ft well car fit
18" is a min radius for HO. I would assume it would fit. However; it would hang over the inside edge due to the length and look odd. You could have derailments if going too fast. The longer the car, the bigger the radius it should use.
@@DaBobsNScaleMancave oh ok thanks you i appreciate it because I just got into the hobby this past weekend
stainless steel is a metal, but not magnetic. I the JTC walkways are etched stainless, if memory serves
Yes, for me JTC lives up to the hype. They are one of the rare companies that will-not use "one" shell and have it represent several different prototypes. When I go to www.rrpicturearchives.net/ and search for a given prototype other than weathering and real wear-and-tear the JTC model and the prototype of it will look the same. I find it sad that some manufacturers' "make-up" numbers for cars of the railroad represented on the car that was never used and worst yet never had the length/style of the car the railroad's markings are printed on.
We are the model manufactuer, would you like to review our models? Container models, truck models. Will be good for your channel
If you go to JTC's site, jtcmodeltrains.com/ on the HOME page they state that the 53' well cars are receiving some in-transit damage to the etched walkways and new parts have been ordered. Remember from high school, not all metals are magnetic.
since there are very few options for getting thrall well car in n scal;e(probably wathers, but toy-like), I thought the price was very plausible.
Good review, thanks Bob
They look good but I will not be getting any. Just because not in my era
Because the walkways aren't magnetic, just means they are not a ferrous material (steel), they could be brass or another non-ferrous metal. Otherwise a good review.
On closer inspection and bending a step back in place, they are metal. My mistake.
A good weathering job would make those look really good.
Hey, Bob, I have bought several well cars and have found them to be a pain to hook up. They are using one truck to hook up 2 well cars. I am difficulty getting them to hook up. Can I modify these well cars or am I stuck with them. They are N scale. I forget the brand but almost threw them away because of not wanting to lock together.
You may have the Maxi 4's or similar. Kato and many other manufacturers make this type. Kato is a snap together type and others have pins that the cars sit on. My kato 3 section set fell off track and I can't figure how to fix that one now since it is in pieces. I don't like those types of well cars.
Once I hear "die cast body" I'm out, certain parts could be made of die cast but Kato continues to make intermodal cars not too heavy
Except the couplers are tenable
Nice, when they were released I got one for my layout. It is may favorite well car
I have a couple of JTt containers. I do like them. I model late seventies early eighties so most containers are not on my era including the ones I have.
It depends on the kind of metal for a magnet to stick.
Just watched Rapido's latest video on M 420 loco. Man, they give Scale Trains a run for their money....although slightly higher cost...
Next time you compare 53' well cars, either use cars from the same model company "OR" from the same prototype manufacturer. That is to say, use a container only car and an all-purpose car from JTC "OR" find several models of the same prototype. (Compare apples to apples and not try to compare apples to oysters.)
What you did with the intermodal well cars is equivalent to comparing a '57 Chevy to a '57 Ford. Totally different design philosophies from the "prototype" point of view.
The comparison of the same container between the two different model manufacturers is valid. The one thing I would like you to do in the future, get a caliper and do an actual measurement on the over-all length of the containers and not just wing-it-by-the-seat-of-your-pants, push-it-in-and-see-if-it-fits. There are web sites for containers that state the actual sizes in feet-inches/meters. Need to remember that containers are always shorter than what they are marked as. 53-foot IOS containers are 52'-10-1/2", which works out to 3.965625 actual inches and I would round up to 3.966 +/- .005" (3.961 to 3.971)
Before Oct. 2001, TTX had all of the actual dimensions listed for all of the various pieces of equipment. The "wells" of well-cars tend to be the size of the largest container or a bit longer. Based on this information I would say if a container "rubbed" the ends of a well then either the well is short or the container is too long. We don't know which until something is measured.
Funny how we live in an age of instant information and the actual info we models want is becoming far more difficult to get.