I'm having trouble deciding what i should do. The bottom line is, I just came into possession of rare and expensive commuter car kits (they're $180 a piece). they are "Arrow III" EMU married pair kits. There is a low chance I'll ever be able to get more any time soon.

They're only made in short (200 unit) runs and are ridiculously expensive for kits (though they are highly detailed kits). I have 4 married pairs (8 cars), with another three (6 cars) on the way. In the end, I'll have a total of 7 pairs that I'm unsure of what to paint.

The prototype ran them in 8 to 12 car trains during rush hour, and 6 car trains for locals.

Basically, they have worn two paint schemes:

1976-1981 "NJ DOT" scheme, which matches the time period i model.



1981-Current day, which matches the trains i know from child hood Christmases outside Metropark Station, in Edison, NJ. (indeed, i credit the Arrow III and the E60MA with getting me into modeling in the first place, as well as leading me to modeling the NEC).



again, i don't think it will be viable for me to buy enough of these models to have a full train of both.

I voted for some of both, even if it's just one "hold-out" pair of NJ Transit units, just because that's what sparked your interest in the first place. I couldn't just vote without telling you why I chose the way I did ... fair?

Would it be possible to letter the cars for both schemes - one side and one end for each? As long as they're seen from only one side when in service, you'd get two trainsets for the price of one.
If you do this, remember to reverse the combination of end and side lettering on two cars, so you'll have a pair in each scheme which can serve as the lead and tail cars, while still showing the correct end lettering.

Wayne

From what you said, you're within the prototype for length. 8-12 cars for rush hour, you have 8 now so do one set. Then the next set of 6 cars for local.

I would suggest, since you have already established your time period to do more cars for it. Do the 8 cars for your time frame, then do the 6 cars for the other period

Andrew

It would seem logical that in 1981, trains might have had both schemes in the consist......at least until all had been repainted.
" 1976-1981 "NJ DOT" scheme, which matches the time period i model. "

I'd say "shorten up the time frame" from 5 years to maybe one, and run both schemes, or, split them out, and run shorter trains.......selective compression

Sumpter250 Wrote:It would seem logical that in 1981, trains might have had both schemes in the consist......at least until all had been repainted.
" 1976-1981 "NJ DOT" scheme, which matches the time period i model. "

I'd say "shorten up the time frame" from 5 years to maybe one, and run both schemes, or, split them out, and run shorter trains.......selective compression

Perhaps - but this is a governmetn agency thing here, not a railroad that is satisfies with painting a patch over the numbers and assigning a new one and calling it good enough until we can get it in the shop.

I always did like that NJ DOT logo, especially as a tiny added detail to the CNJ GP40P's.

--Randy

doctorwayne Wrote:Would it be possible to letter the cars for both schemes - one side and one end for each? As long as they're seen from only one side when in service, you'd get two trainsets for the price of one.
If you do this, remember to reverse the combination of end and side lettering on two cars, so you'll have a pair in each scheme which can serve as the lead and tail cars, while still showing the correct end lettering.

Wayne

I thought about this, but only for the "train number". there is a display visible over the first window on the NJ DOT photo that shows which train it is. I was considering a "north/east" bound train number on one side, and an "west/south" bound train number on the other, so when it "returns" (the club layout is a giant oval), it looks like the train is coming back. I was even thinking so far as to use a sticky piece of small plastic so i can change this at will, but it might be better to have something installed.

I'm not so sure it would work with the overall paint scheme in this case. That may be to extreme of a detail change, and in the end, i know this whole train will be visible from multiple angles at once.

Sumpter250 Wrote:It would seem logical that in 1981, trains might have had both schemes in the consist......at least until all had been repainted.

I'd say "shorten up the time frame" from 5 years to maybe one, and run both schemes, or, split them out, and run shorter trains.......selective compression

I also thought about this. I do have photos with both schemes right behind the other. I could realistically combine them all into one train during those early NJT years, but by 1981, amtrak had retired most of its GG1s, only a few were left on NJ transit, and a small bunch of Conrail E44s were soldiering on, the rest of the electric freight fleet in storage (or in the case of the GG1s, retired three years earlier). the corridor at that time was exclusively AMtrak E60s, AEM7s, Metroliners, and commuter Arrows/Silverliners. Not that those aren't exciting, but its a lot less variety.

rrinker Wrote:Perhaps - but this is a governmetn agency thing here, not a railroad that is satisfies with painting a patch over the numbers and assigning a new one and calling it good enough until we can get it in the shop.

I always did like that NJ DOT logo, especially as a tiny added detail to the CNJ GP40P's.

--Randy

Exactly. Also, Ditto on the GP40Ps. I have a bunch of spare NJ DOT decals meant for diesels like that, but alas, there are none around. I haven't quite synthesized how to make one of these locomotives. theres a few out there, but their either brass or someone's kitbash, and even then, there are just about a handful, so there isn't a whole lot to gain inspiration from.

A bash would be your best bet. I got a bunch of pics of the 40p's That I could send you if you decide to build one..

e-paw Wrote:A bash would be your best bet. I got a bunch of pics of the 40p's That I could send you if you decide to build one..

I figured so. I've just been trying to figure out whether i should totally kit bash it, or try to scratchbuild the sides from cannon parts and styrene.