Gould Railroad Standard Wooden Cabooses -


mbcarson2002
 

Hello, List;

I recently have been investigating the later Gould Railroads. Mullet River Models (MRM) has recently released a Western Pacific Caboose, that is stipulated to be a Gould Standard Wooden Caboose. A series of Google searches lends credence to the stipulation. Other Gould system railroads were the Missouri Pacific, the Wabash, the Denver & Rio Grande, the Western Pacific & subsidiary roads.

Visually, a photograph of Western Pacific 764 matches the MRM kit, photographs of Missouri Pacific 333 - 369 series cabooses in Michels "Cabooses of The Missouri Pacific Lines", and the drawings and pictures in the Car Builders Dictionaries of 1916 and 1919. Plans in Mainline Modeler Volume I Number 4 (Sept/Oct 1980) suggest other Gould lines acquired similar, if not identical, cabooses.

Both the Car Builders Dictionaries and the Michels book give AC&F in 1911, as the builder of record.

Can anyone provide additional information, such as build lot numbers or details on other operators?

TIA, Mike Carson


Ed Hawkins
 

On Jun 20, 2010, at 6:19 PM, mbcarson2002 wrote:

Visually, a photograph of Western Pacific 764 matches the MRM kit,
photographs of Missouri Pacific 333 - 369 series cabooses in Michels
"Cabooses of The Missouri Pacific Lines", and the drawings and
pictures in the Car Builders Dictionaries of 1916 and 1919. Plans in
Mainline Modeler Volume I Number 4 (Sept/Oct 1980) suggest other Gould
lines acquired similar, if not identical, cabooses.

Both the Car Builders Dictionaries and the Michels book give AC&F in
1911, as the builder of record.

Can anyone provide additional information, such as build lot numbers
or details on other operators?
Mike,
AC&F lot no. 5970 was an order for 25 Missouri Pacific cabooses
numbered 333-347 and 361-370. They were split due to MP 348-360
already being assigned. The order was placed on May 3, 1910, and the
cabooses were built at AC&F's plant at Jeffersonville, Indiana. Hope
this helps.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Mike,

Most of the Gould roads used similar equipment designs, especially with locomotives. Cabooses seem to have followed similar, but NOT identical, designs from at least around 1898 (MP, AC&F-built IIRC) into the 1920s (WP post-Gould homebuilts). There were differences in almost every order. In general Gould-road cabooses had the same body design, three windows per side in the same positions, and wide platforms with tender-type steps. Roofs and cupolas, however, varied quite a bit, and underframes evolved from all wood to composite with steel center sills, bolsters and needle beams.

As for the phrase "Gould standard", there was no such thing. I know, because I originated the term, and wish I never had. I used to put it in quotes with a lower case "s", but it has migrated into otherwise well-researched railfan books and is treated as an official term. Bad, bad, bad.

Kind regards,


Garth Groff

mbcarson2002 wrote:

Hello, List;

I recently have been investigating the later Gould Railroads. Mullet River Models (MRM) has recently released a Western Pacific Caboose, that is stipulated to be a Gould Standard Wooden Caboose. A series of Google searches lends credence to the stipulation. Other Gould system railroads were the Missouri Pacific, the Wabash, the Denver & Rio Grande, the Western Pacific & subsidiary roads.

Visually, a photograph of Western Pacific 764 matches the MRM kit, photographs of Missouri Pacific 333 - 369 series cabooses in Michels "Cabooses of The Missouri Pacific Lines", and the drawings and pictures in the Car Builders Dictionaries of 1916 and 1919. Plans in Mainline Modeler Volume I Number 4 (Sept/Oct 1980) suggest other Gould lines acquired similar, if not identical, cabooses.

Both the Car Builders Dictionaries and the Michels book give AC&F in 1911, as the builder of record.

Can anyone provide additional information, such as build lot numbers or details on other operators?

TIA, Mike Carson


jerryglow2
 

Plans and a scratch building article appeared in a very early issue of Mainline Modeler.

Jerry Glow

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Ed Hawkins <hawk0621@...> wrote:


On Jun 20, 2010, at 6:19 PM, mbcarson2002 wrote:

Visually, a photograph of Western Pacific 764 matches the MRM kit,
photographs of Missouri Pacific 333 - 369 series cabooses in Michels
"Cabooses of The Missouri Pacific Lines", and the drawings and
pictures in the Car Builders Dictionaries of 1916 and 1919. Plans in
Mainline Modeler Volume I Number 4 (Sept/Oct 1980) suggest other Gould
lines acquired similar, if not identical, cabooses.

Both the Car Builders Dictionaries and the Michels book give AC&F in
1911, as the builder of record.

Can anyone provide additional information, such as build lot numbers
or details on other operators?
Mike,
AC&F lot no. 5970 was an order for 25 Missouri Pacific cabooses
numbered 333-347 and 361-370. They were split due to MP 348-360
already being assigned. The order was placed on May 3, 1910, and the
cabooses were built at AC&F's plant at Jeffersonville, Indiana. Hope
this helps.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins





mbcarson2002
 

Garth,

Although there may not have been a "formal" Gould standard for much of anything and if the results of my research is any indication, I'll suggest the Gould family (Jay & later George) practiced an extractive management style where the stockholder dividend was paramount and every thing else secondary. And towards the end, circa 1910-1911, George Gould couldn't borrow any additional monies, as his railroads had turned into "streaks of rust" as the result of deferred maintenance and had little prospect of generating profits without significant investments of capital.

The caboose examples, you cite, I'll suggest are a result of evolving technology & a changing regulatory environment.

The Eric Neubauer, Pullman-Standard Freight Car Production, copyright 2002, has a section enumerating Haskell & Barker car production prior to P-S purchase of H&B. And listed are two orders of steel center sill cabooses in 1909; one order from the Western Pacific (50 examples) and a second from the Denver & Rio Grande (10 examples). I have yet to discover photographs of these orders.

Regards, Mike Carson

PS. Incidentally, I appreciate your Sacramento Northern website, which through the SN association with the Western Pacific brought me to the subject of Gould cabooses.

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Garth G. Groff" <ggg9y@...> wrote:

Mike,

Most of the Gould roads used similar equipment designs, especially with
locomotives. Cabooses seem to have followed similar, but NOT identical,
designs from at least around 1898 (MP, AC&F-built IIRC) into the 1920s
(WP post-Gould homebuilts). There were differences in almost every
order. In general Gould-road cabooses had the same body design, three
windows per side in the same positions, and wide platforms with
tender-type steps. Roofs and cupolas, however, varied quite a bit, and
underframes evolved from all wood to composite with steel center sills,
bolsters and needle beams.

As for the phrase "Gould standard", there was no such thing. I know,
because I originated the term, and wish I never had. I used to put it in
quotes with a lower case "s", but it has migrated into otherwise
well-researched railfan books and is treated as an official term. Bad,
bad, bad.

Kind regards,


Garth Groff

mbcarson2002 wrote:
Hello, List;

I recently have been investigating the later Gould Railroads. Mullet River Models (MRM) has recently released a Western Pacific Caboose, that is stipulated to be a Gould Standard Wooden Caboose. A series of Google searches lends credence to the stipulation. Other Gould system railroads were the Missouri Pacific, the Wabash, the Denver & Rio Grande, the Western Pacific & subsidiary roads.

Visually, a photograph of Western Pacific 764 matches the MRM kit, photographs of Missouri Pacific 333 - 369 series cabooses in Michels "Cabooses of The Missouri Pacific Lines", and the drawings and pictures in the Car Builders Dictionaries of 1916 and 1919. Plans in Mainline Modeler Volume I Number 4 (Sept/Oct 1980) suggest other Gould lines acquired similar, if not identical, cabooses.

Both the Car Builders Dictionaries and the Michels book give AC&F in 1911, as the builder of record.

Can anyone provide additional information, such as build lot numbers or details on other operators?

TIA, Mike Carson


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Mike Carson wrote:
I'll suggest the Gould family (Jay & later George) practiced an extractive management style where the stockholder dividend was paramount and every thing else secondary.
If you really think this about Jay Gould, you need to read Maury Klein's bio of Gould, which explodes many of the tired and inaccurate jibes directed at Jay for decades. George, on the other hand, appears to have been either incompetent or consumed with visions of impossible glory. There's little evidence George generated much in the way of dividends to anyone but himself.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Garth G. Groff <ggg9y@...>
 

Mike,

Yes, some of the differences were due to evolving technology. However, as I noted, there were big differences in some non-technological features, including the cupolas widths of cars built for different roads at fairly close dates. There was definitely a general commonality of some Gould-era equipment purchased for the MP, D&RG (no "W" yet), and WP. WP 4-6-0, 2-8-0 and 0-6-0 locomotives were virtually identical to contemporary D&RG purchases, except that most of the small WP fleet were oil burners. The same is true of cabooses. However, there does not seem to have been the careful standardization program by the Gould lines as was seen with the UP/SP and other Harriman roads.

Of course, all this equipment went through many rebuildings and upgrades, and the general designs were recycled for new equipment by several of the former Gould roads for many years. Even more interesting/confusing are pre-Gould cabooses that were rebuilt as "Gould" designs by both the WP and D&RG. (This might have been similar to what Tony mentions in his PFE books as "jacking up the number and rolling a new car under it".) This can get really confusing for a researcher who lacks access to the original plans and specs of equipment (which is most of us railfans).

I will have to check on those 1909 H&B WP cars with steel center sills. I think the general equipment drawings I have specify wooden underframes, but maybe the sills themselves were always steel. Hmmmm.

Kind regards,


Garth Groff

mbcarson2002 wrote:

Garth,

Although there may not have been a "formal" Gould standard for much of anything and if the results of my research is any indication, I'll suggest the Gould family (Jay & later George) practiced an extractive management style where the stockholder dividend was paramount and every thing else secondary. And towards the end, circa 1910-1911, George Gould couldn't borrow any additional monies, as his railroads had turned into "streaks of rust" as the result of deferred maintenance and had little prospect of generating profits without significant investments of capital.

The caboose examples, you cite, I'll suggest are a result of evolving technology & a changing regulatory environment.

The Eric Neubauer, Pullman-Standard Freight Car Production, copyright 2002, has a section enumerating Haskell & Barker car production prior to P-S purchase of H&B. And listed are two orders of steel center sill cabooses in 1909; one order from the Western Pacific (50 examples) and a second from the Denver & Rio Grande (10 examples). I have yet to discover photographs of these orders.

Regards, Mike Carson

PS. Incidentally, I appreciate your Sacramento Northern website, which through the SN association with the Western Pacific brought me to the subject of Gould cabooses.
--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Garth G. Groff" <ggg9y@...> wrote:

Mike,

Most of the Gould roads used similar equipment designs, especially with locomotives. Cabooses seem to have followed similar, but NOT identical, designs from at least around 1898 (MP, AC&F-built IIRC) into the 1920s (WP post-Gould homebuilts). There were differences in almost every order. In general Gould-road cabooses had the same body design, three windows per side in the same positions, and wide platforms with tender-type steps. Roofs and cupolas, however, varied quite a bit, and underframes evolved from all wood to composite with steel center sills, bolsters and needle beams.

As for the phrase "Gould standard", there was no such thing. I know, because I originated the term, and wish I never had. I used to put it in quotes with a lower case "s", but it has migrated into otherwise well-researched railfan books and is treated as an official term. Bad, bad, bad.

Kind regards,


Garth Groff


asychis@...
 

Tony writes: "If you really think this about Jay Gould, you need to read
Maury Klein's bio of Gould, which explodes many of the tired and
inaccurate jibes directed at Jay for decades."

I strongly agree, Klein's book is a must read.

As to the question at hand, there might not have been a "Gould Standard",
but boy oh boy were some of those cabooses built with similar features.
MP, Wabash, T&P, D&RG and WP all had cabooses of similar design, although as
others have said, they were not Model "T's" rolling off a production line.

Jerry Michels


reporterllc
 

Chet French would probably have more detailed info but the wooden Wabash cabooses that looked very much like a Mopac caboose were known by railroaders and fans as the "Twenty-Six Hundreds". They were numbered 2600 to 2654 with the first twenty five cars build by American Car & Foundry and the balance by the Wabash. This is per a special Banner caboose magazine issue wrtitten by Dr. C.C. Drake, Jr., back in 1994. If you have an interest in critical dimensions for comparisons I can provide those here too. They were built from 1925 to 1927.

Victor Baird
Fort Wayne, Indiana