PRC oddities (fwd)

[Jim Holland]

Greetings!

Kenneth Josephson wrote:

> Fortunately, St. Louis Car did not offer the double ended version of the "PCC"
> body with two roof cowls as Pullman-Standard did. The P-S roof line was very
> clumsy (at least in my opinion.)

	Pullman Standard PCCs themselves were like Velveeta Cheexe Boxes on
wheels!  I used to use those boxes for PCCs when I was quite small!
	The PE roof-line seemed quite nice - maybe the wider car de-emphasized
the roof line.
	Actually, Bob's photo of a double-end PRCo 1600 is quite attractive -
but the roof cowls would look a smidgen better if they were extended
into one instead of two.  But the nicer looks is more a St.-Louis vs
Pullmans Standard thing - St.-Louis PCCs were more finished, polished,
smoother edges and nicely rounded.

> The St. Louis versions with their low-slung,
> older style box ventilators were much more attractive. Look at the 1949 Red Arrow
> suburban cars like PTM's 24, Muni's "Magic Carpet and Torpedoes and Illinois
> Terminal's PCCs. Much nicer lines.

	The roof lines would look even better *without* the box ventilators -
much cleaner, more streamlined, smoother.
	What is it they say?!  --  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?!

> I wonder how a 1700 would look as a double ender?  Ken J.

	I thought you would have produced one by now with your computer
graphics!  Are you still working on it?

James B. Holland

        Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),   1930  --  1950
    To e-mail privately, please click here: mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net
N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190; http://www.mcs.net:80/~weyand/nmra/