One problem with the early motor cars was that of SPEED.
>From the Mack Sales Literature(reprint) I have the Mack AC had only a top
>speed
of 41.5 MPH due in part because of the single large drive wheel in the rear.
And the main reason Mack and others went to a 4-wheel truck on the rear. For
the narrow gauge that might not have been a problem. But a similar problem
showed up with instability with the GM Areo Train with two wheel trucks vis the
early Zephyrs 4 wheel.
Another interesting figure from the sales literature notes the Mack AC could
be run for a total per mile cost of just 15 cents per mile. In the Edwards
folder they said the Model 20 (the units the Q got) could be operated for just
14 cents per mile. Both say the major expense saved is in Roundhouse expenses
and they eliminated the hazard of ROW fires. The Edwards could transport up to
42 passenger with an 11 ft Baggage area while the could move 20 passengers with
a 5 ft. baggage area.
Steve in SC
________________________________
From: Rupert & Maureen <gamlenz@ihug.co.nz>
To: CBQ List <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 3:17:15 AM
Subject: Re: [CBQ] Gasoline motor car 1905
Gerald
Thanks for looking and commenting. It's hard to guess at this far remove what
the reporters were seeing and reporting - trying to
put things in the context of 1905 as opposed to 2010! I certainly prefer the
trolley proposition to the flanged wheel automobile
option, unless it had more than 4 /5 seats.
Rupert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerald & Virginia Edgar" <vje68@hotmail.com>
To: <cbq@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:25 AM
Subject: RE: [CBQ] Gasoline motor car 1905
>
> Rupert & all: I think circumstantial evidence found in CB&Q Annual Reports
> of
>1905/1906 and Fielder's "RR's of the Black Hills"
> explains why a RR journal in 1905 would state CB&Q was having good results
>using a non-steam conveyance for mail/express, etc.
> The Deadwood Central became part of Burlington & Missouri River in 1902; B&MR
>was fully absorbed into CB&Q late in "04. The DC
> had 3 trolley cars that indeed carried mail & express (& passengers) between
>Lead & Deadwood, SD via Central City. Since this
> operation was now a Burlington operation, I can understand why the Q (and the
>reporter) would state in 1905 that this service was
> working well NOW even though it had been around for several yrs previous. As
>for using the term gas vs. electric, one, in either
> case it's no longer the normal steam power one would expect on a major Class
> I
>RR in the midwest in 1905 and two, self-propelled
> non-steam power whether gasoline or electric overhead or batteries were
>sometimes confused by reporters at a distance as any
> alternative that was NOT steam was the real news.
>
> The only non-steam power listed in those Annual Reports are 3 "motor cars"
> used
>by the former Deadwood Central n.g. (CB&Q showing
> a total of 58+ miles of 3' trackage at the time)
>
> If indeed there was some other pre-1920's passenger/mail/express motor car
>being experimented with by CB&Q in 1905, the fact is
> not showing up in the Annual Reports or Overton's books.
>
> Gerald
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|