Building the Pinnacle Creek Mining & Timber Co. RR

ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.


The "video" starts out kinda slow with still pics.

Let's face it, there were no video cameras "back in the day" and movie cameras were few & far between up till the 1930s-40s. It does get rolling tho and from it you get a better feel for what was going on.
 
The hump project is almost finished. The trains run much better now and no uncoupling. In the photo you can see two new track pieces I had to fit. One in on the bridge and the other coming down from the right. These pieces have be shortened to take out some tension in the original track work. Scenery to come, but for now I have running trains again through this area. Jim:)

IMG_5218.JPG
 
Last edited by a moderator:


That's good that it wasn't too much of a hassle to fix. Sounds like you've also fixed your DCC problem.

As far as introducing the kind of mess and devastation that was the "norm" on the real logging/mining operations (there probably wouldn't be a tree standing on your layout, only stumps), artistic license should prevail. (this crew were ahead of their time, conservationwise)
 
Toot, It was a hassle on a couple of levels. First, I'm upset because I had to do it in the first place. Second, IF I'm going to do a new layout I wanted to rest on my laurels. Not likely.:o Lessons to be learned? Probably do it right the first time is the best one!

Also, logger/miner caused devistation, while correct, wouldn't translate too well on our layouts I'm thinking. IF I do the next one I will definately try for much more "junk" on the layout. I'm always willing to give something a try! Jim:)
 
Alterations that improve the operation and appeal (such as your loop over the desk) give the satisfaction of the end result. Ones that are necessary to correct a fault are a chore, still satisfying but not the same.

Looking at some of those pics of the areas around the camps tend to remind me of the scenes from when Mt St Hellens erupted or the meteor strike in Russia that just flattened everything. Awesome photos but hardly photogenic.
 
Mt. St. Helens yep, I lived in Seattle that morning it blew. We felt it. In fact I'd climbed the mountain just before they closed it that year. The aftermath looked like matchsticks as far as trees were concerned.

The scene would not work on our layouts. Jim CM&T:)
 
I may have missed it but would it be good to have the hydrocal rock castings done first so as to be able to imbed them in the stucco while it is wet?
 
187, You are correct about hydrocal castings or any other 'castings' for that matter. The PCM&T has no castings whatsoever. I used stucco patch and simply carved strations here or there. I have made hundreds of castings in my day. Way too many. Stucco patch is the way I go now. If I was younger, stronger, and not as smart as I am today I would probablly still be using hydrocol rocks.

If I was building a layout that modeled semi-flat country I would use castings. But the PCM&T is about 93 square feet and just has way too much "rock" for using castings. Jim:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After four days of drying I will give stucco patch a grade of C- concerning use in moulds. Problem is that it will likely take over a week of drying in the sun and in the house at night to dry. The photo shows reasonable results from the shallower part of the mold.

IMG_5178_zpse77ab983.jpg


Bottom line. If it is summer and hot this may work. For me, it is not worth my time waiting for drying. I would stick to lightweight hydrocol. Stucco patch is so easy to work with and if you need many rocks and cliffs it is the least expensive alternative. All you need to do is scribe it with a blade and you have a reasonable result. Rocks come in all sorts of formations. I'm not sure you can go wrong freelancing. Jim :)

I am going to recommend a product for making castings that I really like and it's pretty inexpensive to buy. The product is Durham Water Putty, available at any building supply store. It's a really good product because it's not really a putty at all, it comes as a powder that you mix with water, and depending on your mixture, dries rock hard very quickly. It's meant to patch walls where you need a waterproof solution. You could have even used it on the area that needed patching because you can mix it on the dryer side and form a smooth patch with the putty knife. Once it cures, you can paint it and be done in a short amount of time.

I just checked their web site and they even recommend using for castings:
http://waterputty.com/creative/castings/

Give it a try, I think you will add this to your tool chest! Right now a 4 lb. can is $8.00 at Home Depot.

-bill
 


I have used this for filling knot holes in flooring. It expands as it dries and won't come loose. Do you use any form of mold release when casting rocks? How does it compare in cost per mold to hydrocal and why not just use hydrocal?
 
I just answered half the question. Durhams says that you don't need any mold release. Idid mix in a small amount of sawdust. This allowed stain to be absorbed instead of sitting on the surface.
 
Even though the Durham Water Putty is a good idea and will work. Just as a comparison, I can buy a 100 pound bag of white hydrocal for $32 dollars, so the hydocal will go a lot farther. And you still have to do the mixing. As far as a mold release, I have used just “wet” water, or presently a silicone spray, like you use to clean or protect automobile tires. Dupont makes a Teflon Protectant “For a shine that really lasts”. Anyway, it works.

Depending how many rock molds you have, it doesn’t take long to make up 20 or 30 or even 50 rock outcropings for you layout. Maybe a day or two. I would say go for it. - Chris
 
I don't have the need to make a ton of molds, so cost is not that great a factor. The finished texture of the two materials is very different, with hydrocal being porous and Durham's resembling rock. That might not be a big influence. One usage where Durham's is superior in my opinion, has been in the area of patching areas where I need to lay down track, much like has been pictured above. When using Durham's for patching, the hardness really is an advantage. The other advantage to Durham's is the drying time.

Just my two cents. I use it and like it - some others might as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The store I referred to specifically is Circle Supply in Houston Texas. When I am down that way, I will stop in and buy a bag. They are a type of construction outlet store that deals with brick laying, cinder blocks and stone masons, and carries bagged cement, masonry cement, stucco, moulding plaster, casting plaster, pottery plaster. The white hydrocal is made by United States Gypsum. I don’t know your locale, but a large town or city should have a building supply place. Lowes and Home Depot do not carry hydrocal.
 
I'm having a thought. (always dangerous) Since Woodland Scenics sells "Lightweight Hydrocal" do you suppose that the Circle Suppy product is a 'heavier' weight? Just wondering because back in the day it was plaster, then hydrocal, then lightweight hydrocal? Jim:)
 
After the last question I did a little research. U.S. Gypsum makes a variety of plasters: Hobby Plaster, Pottery Plaster, Molding Plaster (which is the same as Plaster of Paris), Casting Plaster, and several grades of Hydrocal. The definition of Hydrocal is: a specially designed for thin sections, which require high green (early) strength to minimize breakage during removal from intricate latex molds. It also says the dry strength is 5000 psi, the other plasters are from 2000psi - 2400psi. I do know that hydrocal is used in making dental molds. As far as the “light hydrocal”, that’s a Woodland Scenics brand name, and could be a mixture of “pure hydrocal” and some other plaster, to make it lighter in weight. All these plasters will work for making rock facings from molds, but it seems the hydrocal gives finer detail and more tensile strength in the finished product. - Chris
 


A good topic and I have an additional question, concern. I’ve started a mountain and cast a couple of rock sections with molding plaster (from HD). If I switch to hydrocal, will it take the coloring differently than plaster? After starting I can see I need to locate at least 100 pounds and stay out of HD.
 




Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)

Back
Top