Re: ICC 104A300 question

Jeff Coleman

just to add that the 105's were built in 100, 300, 400, 500 and 600 psi with no bottom outlets, top loading and unloading only.
Jeff Coleman

--- In, "Gatwood, Elden J SAD " <elden.j.gatwood@...> wrote:


I wondered about that, too, but the 104's seemed to be an expedient design,
rather than permanent, and has a different commodity list from what was
allowable in a 103 (riveted or welded 2% dome with safety valves or vents).

I have never seen any evidence of a high-pressure 104, and that, in fact,
goes against what the car was designed for. Therefore, you won't see 104's
with high-pressure psi figures after the basic designation; therefore, no ICC

The ICC 105's are a wholly different case; ICC 105A300 meaning a pressurized
tank capable of containment to 300 psi internal pressure. The 105's were
also insulated, but that is about as far is it goes. The 105 had the valve
casing on top; no "dome".

Elden Gatwood

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Tim
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 5:04 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] ICC 104A300 question

No one has ever explained to me why a 104 couldn't just as well be called an
insulated 103. They made 103's with big domes and safety valves, didn't they?
Now someone is asking about a 104 built for 300psi? Doesn't that make it a

Sunshine had a Warren 104 kit -- a car built to carry "natural"

Tim O'Connor

At 7/24/2009 01:59 PM Friday, you wrote:

No, that is not exactly correct. The 104 is more like an insulated 103
made for specific commodities like ethyl ether, casinghead gas and
refine veg oils, and has a 2% dome with safety valves on its (usually
very large) insulated dome, while the 105 had insulation, but had a top
unloading valve casing with no bottom outlets, for pressurized
commodities, if I remember right. AHM used to make a late (1955+?)
model of an ICC 105A300, that I have a couple of, but I have never seen a
model of a 104.

Elden Gatwood

Join to automatically receive all group messages.