[PRCo] Re: Anticlimbers

[Boris Cefer]

Who knows! I expect some amount of riveting in the underfloor part of body
shell, but did not see 1711 (which has undergone some structural repairs) at
PTM, so I could not count them.

The anticlimbers on 1600 are shown in the postwar PCC specification, so I
can look at it.
No, there is no extra band! The upper channel has a small pot hole in the
center to accomodate the pin (and its head) when it is being inserted. The
bottom hannel is widely recessed to provide space for the "towing socket",
which is in fact a part of the bottom channel.

Boris

----- Original Message -----
From: "James B. Holland" <PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:56 AM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Anticlimbers


> The photo of 1600 on pg.100  PCCCar That Fought Back hints at the same
> anticlimber as their is a split in the extra band on top to allow
> dropping the pin for the tow bar.       Or it could just be a recess in
> the upper channel to accommodate the pins as the same is necessary in
> the lower portion to accept the tow bar.
>
> But on PCC 2113 it Definitely appears that there is an extra band in two
> pieces  --  again to accommodate the tow bar.
>
>
> Now let me beat you to the next question  --
>
> How  Many  Ribbits  on  a  PRCo  1700-series  Interurban??????? :-) :-P
>
>
> Jim__Holland
>
>
>
> Boris Cefer wrote:
>
> > Just went through my files and what have found! Cars 1700 to 1724 had
> > stronger anticlimbers (both front and rear) than city cars 1725 to
> > 1799. Any clue why that difference?
> > On city cars the anticlimber consisted of 2 pieces of U steel, but
> > interurbans had added a piece of flat steel in the upper U.
> > Boris
>