Many years ago I had an Oct 1978 Railroad Model Craftsman magazine and the following issue all to do with kitbashing an FP7 using Athearn shells and a stretched Athearn frame. So I did a few , Mainly I wanted a Soo #501A which is what I built. The actual Athearn loco used it the artical was an older one with the all metal sideframes.
I have since gotten a few Atlas last run two FP7 un-dec shells . What I did is base everything off the athearn artical only made my own frame from brass square tubing and cut the fuel tank off a Dummy Athearn F7 and filled it to fit the brass frame and inside the Atlas shell and I used Kato trucks that were for a GP35 if I recall but they are the same style truck used on all EMD F units. And a can motor.
Athearn F units never looked right with the roof profile or the nose but at the time they looked fine to me.
What I did was go by the 1978 artical and mad ethe unit a scale 4' longer and made the frame 4' longer . At the time I trusted the bolster centers were right but an Athearn F7 is 29' 6" so this is where I came up 6" short.
By doing this today I decided to check the bolster ctc on the Atlas shell and brass frame loco I built and it is 33' 6" instead of 34' . I haven't checked the over all shell length now that I found an actual scale drawing . I also checked the 2 Atlas latest run FP7's I got a while back and they are also 33' 6" instead of 34' . The thing is the ladder steps do line up with the trucks meaning the front edge of the ladder steps line up with the rear of the truck hanger or truck spring pad what ever you call it just like the proto-type . I noticed years ago running Athearn F7's that if i did not trim off the rear trucks rear most brake arm that the rear truck would hit the ladder and not allow it to make the turns.
The idea behind the Atlas FP7 was that the Atlas powered loco was not around but the shells were. I was building PRR # 9833 which has the full side skirting and I even made a large water tank that sits just behind the front truck . It worked out well . I even changed the horrid Atlas FP7 number boards and fit details west boards in their place and trimmed off all the hand rails. Another detail is the PRR used passenger style pilots and I have two types one brass and the other cast white metal but neither seem to be the right conture. I can live with the bolster being 6" short since they do line up with the ladders yet the Kato trucks cast on brake cyl arms still hit the ladder at the rear truck . Also the ladders on the Atlas shell are a bit short and thick. I did get a stewart F3 shell and used an Athearn F7 frame and made it fit and filed off the bolster pins and drilled new holes to make the F7 bolster spacing the 30' because the trucks did not line up with the ladders proper that it shows I even thought this would allow the rear truck a full swing on a turn but it didn't . It's still the same brake cyl arm hitting the ladder and the stewart shell has what look like the proper length ladders and they are thin. It's not that the rear trucks don't pivot they my make a 22" curve don't know I don't have a layout. On the powered Atlas units have a different sideframe just enough so that they do clear fine.
I recall reading somewhere in railroad mag when the stewart F units came out and a fellow was building Penn Central units and his complaint was the body sat to high above the trucks so he trimmed the truck bolster area down . My units sit at the proper 14' 1/2" height.
I saw Athearn later one built FP7's and one other company that I can't recall and wondered if anyone had these and if they are right? All I can really do is take a bit off the brake cyl arm or rod because there is no way I'm going to go through all the work for 6 scale inches . On the Atlas shell I may be able the thin out the ladder steps a bit and this may help just enough. So far like I wrote before asking about bolster to bolster most HO loco's are short and more than 6". Also on the Atlas shell I don't much care for the way they cast the rear coupler box it sort of sticks out more than it should but this is the coupler mount and I did not want to re-build that entire area . I could have and made the brass frame with it's own coupler mount front and rear then I would have had an area to mount the passenger pilot on the front yet at the time I felt the mounts even though part of the shell were more than strong enough not anything like the Kato /Atlas RS3 and C424 and RS11's that flexed. I can always add a bellows to the rear door and that will fix the jutting rear coupler mount just fine . When I had the Stewart F units I do recall they coupled the scale distance from the B units which was nice, but you had to use a special Kaydee coupler in order to do that. Now as far as how the made the turns that close I cannot say.
I have since gotten a few Atlas last run two FP7 un-dec shells . What I did is base everything off the athearn artical only made my own frame from brass square tubing and cut the fuel tank off a Dummy Athearn F7 and filled it to fit the brass frame and inside the Atlas shell and I used Kato trucks that were for a GP35 if I recall but they are the same style truck used on all EMD F units. And a can motor.
Athearn F units never looked right with the roof profile or the nose but at the time they looked fine to me.
What I did was go by the 1978 artical and mad ethe unit a scale 4' longer and made the frame 4' longer . At the time I trusted the bolster centers were right but an Athearn F7 is 29' 6" so this is where I came up 6" short.
By doing this today I decided to check the bolster ctc on the Atlas shell and brass frame loco I built and it is 33' 6" instead of 34' . I haven't checked the over all shell length now that I found an actual scale drawing . I also checked the 2 Atlas latest run FP7's I got a while back and they are also 33' 6" instead of 34' . The thing is the ladder steps do line up with the trucks meaning the front edge of the ladder steps line up with the rear of the truck hanger or truck spring pad what ever you call it just like the proto-type . I noticed years ago running Athearn F7's that if i did not trim off the rear trucks rear most brake arm that the rear truck would hit the ladder and not allow it to make the turns.
The idea behind the Atlas FP7 was that the Atlas powered loco was not around but the shells were. I was building PRR # 9833 which has the full side skirting and I even made a large water tank that sits just behind the front truck . It worked out well . I even changed the horrid Atlas FP7 number boards and fit details west boards in their place and trimmed off all the hand rails. Another detail is the PRR used passenger style pilots and I have two types one brass and the other cast white metal but neither seem to be the right conture. I can live with the bolster being 6" short since they do line up with the ladders yet the Kato trucks cast on brake cyl arms still hit the ladder at the rear truck . Also the ladders on the Atlas shell are a bit short and thick. I did get a stewart F3 shell and used an Athearn F7 frame and made it fit and filed off the bolster pins and drilled new holes to make the F7 bolster spacing the 30' because the trucks did not line up with the ladders proper that it shows I even thought this would allow the rear truck a full swing on a turn but it didn't . It's still the same brake cyl arm hitting the ladder and the stewart shell has what look like the proper length ladders and they are thin. It's not that the rear trucks don't pivot they my make a 22" curve don't know I don't have a layout. On the powered Atlas units have a different sideframe just enough so that they do clear fine.
I recall reading somewhere in railroad mag when the stewart F units came out and a fellow was building Penn Central units and his complaint was the body sat to high above the trucks so he trimmed the truck bolster area down . My units sit at the proper 14' 1/2" height.
I saw Athearn later one built FP7's and one other company that I can't recall and wondered if anyone had these and if they are right? All I can really do is take a bit off the brake cyl arm or rod because there is no way I'm going to go through all the work for 6 scale inches . On the Atlas shell I may be able the thin out the ladder steps a bit and this may help just enough. So far like I wrote before asking about bolster to bolster most HO loco's are short and more than 6". Also on the Atlas shell I don't much care for the way they cast the rear coupler box it sort of sticks out more than it should but this is the coupler mount and I did not want to re-build that entire area . I could have and made the brass frame with it's own coupler mount front and rear then I would have had an area to mount the passenger pilot on the front yet at the time I felt the mounts even though part of the shell were more than strong enough not anything like the Kato /Atlas RS3 and C424 and RS11's that flexed. I can always add a bellows to the rear door and that will fix the jutting rear coupler mount just fine . When I had the Stewart F units I do recall they coupled the scale distance from the B units which was nice, but you had to use a special Kaydee coupler in order to do that. Now as far as how the made the turns that close I cannot say.
Last edited by a moderator:
Only then did I realize that the A-unit was an FP7. Well, OK, the NP did run FP7's, as did the Western Pacific (which was/is) available from IM. There's a bunch of different road names available, and some that can be "reserved". So far as the mechanisms are concerned, I like mine so far.
