Pennzoil tankers? (Now Gramps)
In over 40 years in the narrow gauge business, we have found no narrow
gauge fanatics express surprise that the Gramps cars were once standard
gauge. But I suppose there could be some. On the contray we have
found some standard gauge fanatics express surprise that they were once
standard gauge and that there were two types of cars converted. Only 7
cars came from Class V while the rest came from Class VV. Only the
location of the brake cylinder on the Class V had to be moved in order
to clear the narrow gauge wheels. All of the cars from the Class VV
kept the disconnected K brakes that still could clear the narrow gauge
wheels. Cars used in narrow gauge service included cars with Type C,D,J
and R heaters. If a standard gauge modeler wishes to be accurate, he
should study the cars used on the D&RGW narrow gauge. Until 1947, all
cars still used their standard gauge UTLX numbers.
We have noticed some HO modelers who convert the HOn3 cars to standard
gauge don't bother to change the single K brake cylinder back to it's
original location. Original UTLX standard gauge drawings are shown in
the R/Robb "Narrow Gauge Pictorial" Vol. IV.
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "coronadoscalemodels"
This raises an interesting question, and now that all the fanatics
have stopped slinging mud, I'll pose it:
Since the 6000 gallon type V frameless cars were considerably easier
to convert to narrow gauge (the type W cars needed new frames
constructed that put the sills OUTSIDE the wheels) why were only seven
type V cars chosen for this conversion? Could it be that this was the
total number of 6000 gallon type V cars that UTLX had, and so by
extension, once they were converted, NO standard gauge 6000 type V
cars remained? In which case, converting the PSC model back to
standard gauge wouldn't be very useful for a WWII era modeler.
Dennis,toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I can't answer your question about why only seven type V cars were converted, but there were other standard gauge 6000 type V cars in existance. There is the one at the museum in St Louis and I have a photo of a Litchfield and Madison mike with one of these cars in the background equipped with AB brakes and AAR trucks. Unfortunately, the photo is not sharp enough to read the number.
On Jan 15, 2007, at 12:48 PM, Charles Morrill wrote:
Dennis,I have a number of photos of the 6K gal. Class V tank cars in revenue service, some of them dating from as late as the early 1950s.
I'll bet that the car in the photo with the L&M Mike was NOT a class V, however, but a class X with center sill; AFAIK, UTL never installed AB brakes on the Class Vs because of the difficulty involved in mounting the AB valve and reservoir on an obsolete car with no underframe.
I have to agree with you Richard. I looked again at a much larger enlargement (ain't computer graphics great!) and what I thought was the background showing under the tank appears now to be a portion of the center sill. Therefore, a class X as you said.toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Hendrickson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Pennzoil tankers? (Now Gramps)
On Jan 15, 2007, at 12:48 PM, Charles Morrill wrote:Dennis,I have a number of photos of the 6K gal. Class V tank cars in revenue
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...>
UTL never installed AB
brakes on the Class Vs because of the difficulty involved in mounting
If it was so difficult to convert a Van Dyke car to AB brakes, then why
did the quaint Santa Fe car shown on page 100 of "Santa Fe Tank Cars -
Vol. Five" (by Richard Hendrickson) have AB brakes? Did the Santa Fe
puchase this loan car with them, or did they spend the time and money
themselves to convert it to AB for work train service?
P.S. I'll answer some of the questions Dennis asked later today. I'm
going through my notes now. There actually were more than 7 Class V
cars, but only 7 left before the 1947 renumbering. And the standard
gauge car on display at St.Louis is actually a Class VV as it has a
split K brake.
On Jan 16, 2007, at 7:20 AM, coronadoscalemodels wrote:
If it was so difficult to convert a Van Dyke car to AB brakes, then whyFor some reason – I'm not sure why – Stan seems to be looking for an
argument here. Obviously it was possible to apply AB brakes to a Van
Dyke tank car, as is evidenced by the photo he cites. However, AFAIK
there are NO extant photos of Class V or VV tank cars in UTL revenue
service with AB brakes. Furthermore, all of the Van Dyke cars were off
the UTL roster by August, 1953, the AAR deadline requiring AB brakes on
all cars in interchange, and that's hardly a coincidence. By that time
the Van Dyke tank cars were between forty and fifty years old and the
mounting of AB equipment on them would have required cleaning the tanks
and drilling holes through the thick bottom sheets, as well as
fabricating the mountings themselves and the necessary plumbing,
certainly a more elaborate project than was required where there was a
center sill to which mountings could be bolted or welded, as on the
similar Class X cars. For economic reasons, UTL obviously decided to
retire the Class V and VV cars rather than equip them with AB brakes.
As for the car in the photo in my Santa Fe tank car book, its Arch Bar
trucks are proof that it left UTL ownership and went into MW service,
either on the Santa Fe or some smaller RR from which the Santa Fe
acquired it, at some time before the 1941 AAR ban on arch bar trucks in
interchange. So whoever put AB brakes on it, it wasn't UTL. Putting
AB brakes on a single car in MW service was a very different matter
from doing it on several hundred cars which were obsolete for revenue
service and approaching retirement age in any case.
Now, Stan, what was your point again?