[PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh car trucks
Schneider Fred
fwschneider at comcast.net
Tue Jul 14 20:48:38 EDT 2009
The multiple unit control apparatus on the 5000s, 5100s, 5200s and
3750s was basically identical as built. Although called
Westinghouse HL, for Hand progression using Line voltage passed
through a dropping resistor to get a low voltage control circuit, it
differed from the generic Westinghouse HL in that most Westinghouse
HL schemes used pneumatic unit switches to control each resistance
point whereas the Pittsburgh cars used magnetic [solenoid]
switches. In effect, the Pittsburgh cars were a knock-off of
General Electric type M form K control built by Westinghouse. I
have a hunch that PRC liked type MK on the 3600s and must have just
asked the local builder if they could build the same thing.
What did the cars actually weight. DamfIknow. I suspect that the
original weights were pretty close to reality because they had to be
weighed in order to be shipped to Pittsburgh. The builder probably
had a scale. If they builder was being charged 300 pounds more on
one car by the B&O or the PRR or the Boston and Albany or theBoston
and Maine than it actually weighed, they probably screamed.
In the early 1930s the motors on the 5000s, the 5200s and the 3750s
were rewound producing a Westinghouse 514PR motor or an equivalent GE
motor. The apparatus from one wrecked car was later moved to 5149
and it later became the only high speed 5100. Obviously there had to
be some difference in weight between the original low speed cars and
the high speed conversions. The high speed cars also had changes in
the leverage of the brake rigging. They also got a stop light that
was illuminated from a pressure actuated switch on the brake pipe.
That conversion had to add some weight.
The only reference in the route cards to multiple-unit operation
shows trains on route 88 FRANKSTOWN for a few months after the 5000s
were delivered and before the 5100s arrived. Thereafter another 153
multiple unit cars were delivered with no evidence of train
operation. Chick Siebert claims to have ridden MU trains on route
82 LINCOLN ... the route cards show trailers but not multipe unit
motor trains on that line. We know the route cards are not without
error. We cannot also prove that Chick's memory is flawless. We do
know that the one surviving picture (which PTM published) showing a
train signed up for route 82 was not taken anywhere route that
line ... it was on Forbes at South Braddock at the east end of Frick
Park ... a posed picture with company officials.
The 3750s originally came with a toilet and water container / cup
dispenser and I think transverse seats the full length of the car.
All of them lost the toilet compartment and were fitted with city
seating. Half of them got a left side door. These all had to
result in weight changes. The low 3750s had to have different
weights than the high 3750s simply because of the left door, and all
had to be different from their original weight as interurban cars.
In order to tow cars in barns with a mixture of MU cars and non-MU
cars, equipment needed an adapter coupler knuckle. Or, in some
cases, PRC changed the couplers on some of the MU cars to the Van
Dorn Automatic Couplers to match other non-MU cars. I have pictures
of 5200s at Bunkerhill with Van Dorn couplers. That would have
resulted in a significant weight reduction. Was there a scale at
Homewood? Did the company guess? Did they even care?
There were 5200s at Ingram that were fitted with bucket seats. They
would have had a different weight than the conventional seats.
The 4700s, 4800s and 4900s came with a single front door. Altering
that to a double-stream front door would have changed the weight.
The normal control package on the 4700s and 4800-4939 as Jones remote
The 4800s and 4900s were later changed to K-43A for pulling
trailers. Several were refitted with Westinghouse VA control.
That suggests three different weights but since they came from three
different builders, perhaps six different weights. The 4700s, which
started out with Jones control, later mostly had K-35. However,
some had VA control. Some had Timkin trucks. Again a wide variety
of possible weights.
The 4700s, 4800s and 4900s, as built, had had operated center
doors. Any cars that were retained for one-man service would have
had air-door engines installed along with all the requisite piping.
That would have increased the weight. The normal practice was to
trigger them with a solenoid valve so we also need a switch in the
front of the car and the weight of the wiring from it back to the
middle of the car. Did this add weight or subtract weight compared
to removing the pipe frame in the middle of two-man cars and the seat
on that frame for the conductor and all the manual linkage from the
frame to the center door? I don't know but the point remains
that it is an issue to be considered.
We can also shred the 5400s and 5500s if you wish. But why bother.
If the seats were reupholstered, did the rattan come from the same
forest? Was it of the same quality? Did a cushion of the new
rattan weigh the same as the factory rattan?
And how many hundred pounds are in a coat of paint? Or the mill dirt
that fell on the car during the day?
Oh yes, and a full rush hour load of passengers probably weighed
about 15,750 pounds.
I only passed on a sheet of information I had on trucks. It was not
intended to start the Seven Days War.
On Jul 14, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:
> Mr.Schneider;
>
> I am thinking along similar lines. I checked various rosters to
> glean some more information. Here is what you wrote in your
> general roster (available in the photo section of the list)
> concerning groups 23-37:
>
> "Seating capacities and weights varied greatly over time due to
> changes in propulsion hardware and attempts to make cars
> more amenable to the public."
>
> Is it possible that MU capabilities added weight? But why only the
> 3750s and 5000 weigh more? One would speculate that the
> 5000s and 5100s should also weigh more.
>
> A roster table prepared by Charles J.Murphy 18-Sep-1944 lists
> the following weights:
>
> 3700s -- 47,000 -- Brill Interurbans 26" wheels
> 3750s -- 40,000
> 3800s -- 48,500 -- 28" wheels
> 5000s -- 36,000
> 5100s -- 36,000
> 5200s -- 39,000
> 5400s -- 35,000
> 5500s -- ???
>
> A roster dated 10-Aug-1963 by Harold Buckley, Harry Bartley,
> Charles Dengler, Henry Leinback, Charles Murphy, C.R.Cummings
> lists the same weights as above; 35,000 given for 5500s.
>
> It now seems significant that the 3750s and 5200s weigh in
> a ton or two more than the others.
>
> An extensive roster (prepared by Mr.Hamley?) lists the following:
>
> 3750s -- 44,000
> 5000s -- 40,500
> 5100s -- 40,500
> 5200s -- 40,500
> 5400s -- 39,000
> 5500s -- 39,500
>
>
> The 3750s still top the weight list; 4700s up about 38,000.
> PCCs crept upward in weight as well.
>
>
>
> Phil
> Without a 'coast' but not a 'cause.'
> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
> "The Bible is the rock on
> which this Republic rests."
>
> ........Andrew Jackson,
> ........7th President, U.S.A.
>
> http://www.eadshome.com/Andrew%20Jackson.htm
>
> http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/andy.html
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:20:33 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh car trucks
>
> But they might have added 500 pounds. Now take away one seat or two
> for toilet and you've lost 500 pounds. Now add the toilet and the
> partition walls.
>
> I do not know if those weights were real or perhaps they were off the
> freight weigh bills when the cars were shipped? Or maybe they are
> calculated weights. But I think that perhaps the real difference is
> that the weight on the 5000 order is too low and if we compare the
> 3750s to the 5100s and 5200s .... seems to be ... and please
> correct me if I'm wrong ... didn't the 3750s have forward facing
> seats in the front half of the car while the city versions had
> longitudinal seats to make more room for standees. That could easily
> account for 1000 to 1500 pounds difference because there are no steel
> seat frames below the cushion ... the base cushion simply sat on a
> light wooden frame on the city cars.
>
> Now, lets follow that theme a little farther ... was the seating in
> the 5000s different from the 5100s and 5200s? I thought all the city
> cars were the same but my experience was really with 5500s out of
> Keating. The 5200s were a Ingram or Bunkerhill. I didn't ride
> those lines in the rush hour. The 5100s virtually were all out of
> service when I was riding. I don't remember where the 5000s
> were ... Millvale maybe. Some were at Tunnel. I maybe have ridden
> a 5000 out of Tunnel but I was too damn busy looking out the front
> window to pay attention to seating.
>
> On Jul 14, 2009, at 8:24 AM, Edward H. Lybarger wrote:
>
>> By themselves, I doubt that they accounted for 2-1/2 tons. But I
>> dunno.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
>> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of
>> Mark
>> McGuire
>> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 11:45 PM
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh car trucks
>>
>> Wouldn't the high back seats be considerably heavier than the
>> standard
>> rataan(sp) seats?
>> ---------- Original Message ----------
>> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh car trucks
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:17:35 -0400
>>
>> I looked at that too and questioned it. I wondered if the toilet
>> and the extra partitions weighed more than the seats they replaced?
>> The larger pinion gears and smaller bull gears would probably be
>> offsetting so that probably doesn't matter.. We've also added field
>> weakening coils and contactors but I too have trouble believing
>> that all the
>> minor modifications added up up 4500 pounds.
>>
>> My suspicion is that the discrepancy isn't really 4500 but closer
>> to 1800.
>>
>> Notice, Ed, that the weights of the 5000s, the 5100s and the 5200s
>> are
>> inconsistent and all four groups of cars (including the 3750s) were
>> multiple
>> unit cars with the identical control package and couplers.
>>
>> The 5400s and 5500s came with K control and should have weighed about
>> the same. The 4800-4939 group were designed to tow trailers and had
>> K-43 control and the couplers were different. The 4700s were
>> single door cars with Jones control. I suspect that even though the
>> list was updated to 1937, the cars were never put on a scale after
>> the 4700s
>> and 4800s had new front doors added.
>>
>> On Jul 13, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Edward H. Lybarger wrote:
>>
>>> What no one has been able to successfully explain to me is why the
>>> 3750s are listed as being 5000 pounds heavier as essentially
>>> identical
>>> low floor cars in other series. We encountered this discrepancy
>>> when
>>> we were looking at things for 4398 a few years ago.
>>>
>>> I do not believe that there was that much difference in the weights.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
>>> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Schneider Fred
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 10:16 PM
>>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Pittsburgh car trucks
>>>
>>> Do not know if I ever put this on line before ... might be useful to
>>> some of you.
>>> Comes from a Pittsburgh Railways drawing created in 1926 and revised
>>> in 1935.
>>>
>>> Shows car series numbers, trucks, and car weights:
>>>
>>> Purfesseur Fred
>>>
>>> SERIES TRUCK CAR WEIGHT
>>>
>>> 3100 Bemis 48,000
>>>
>>> 3400 Bemis 50,000
>>>
>>> 3500 St. Louis 58,000
>>>
>>> 3600 Baldwin 71,900
>>>
>>> 3700 M-26 27" dia. 49,000
>>>
>>> 3750 M-25 45,000
>>>
>>> 3800 M-27 49,500
>>>
>>> 4000 Brill 49-E-2 48,000
>>>
>>> 4100 Standard CP-50 48,000
>>>
>>> 4200 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> 4250 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> 4300 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> 4350 M-25 41,000
>>>
>>> 4400 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> 4700 M-25 38,000
>>>
>>> 48-4900 M-25 39,000
>>>
>>> 5000 M-25 43,200
>>>
>>> 5100 M-25 40,500
>>>
>>> 5200 M-25 40,500
>>>
>>> 5400 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> 5500 M-25 40,000
>>>
>>> B200 M-25 28,000
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Turn any room into a work of art. Click now for beautiful oriental
>> rugs!
>> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/
>> BLSrjpYTn24ymbpWJQatfHg8EpbRd
>> IziNZYaPfF0yJGkSa7mCQUv1nWdO3e/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list