Hi Folks,

I'd just like to report that the restoration of CNR 6167 began yesterday. Read all about it (Now for the first time in Motion Picture!):

http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/080419-1.html
http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/080419-2.html
http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/080419-3.html
http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/080419-4.html

See also, my Tips For Locomotive Restoration:

http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/6167/tips.html

Cheer's

Joe

This is wonderful news! I do hope the cosmetic restoration includes some kind of plan for a shelter. Seeing that she was retired prior to 6218, it's difficult to imagine the latter locomotive could be that much worse, but I gather she it. Keep us regularly informed, with plenty of pictures as well.

Richard,

The problem with 6218 is that she was butchered by a gang of idiots that only made her much, much worse then she would have been if they left her alone.

Joe

thanks for sharing! keep us updated. good luck!

Thanks for posting this Joe! Look forward to updates. Looks like you had a pretty successful first day! There is so much that is identical on your locomotive to ours!

Is there a group willing to take on 6218 and attempt to bring her back? If she goes on to total destruction, many of her parts would be worthwhile in restoring another of her class. I hope she can be brought back from the brink of scrap value.

6218 is already under the care of a so called "preservation group" in the form of the Fort Erie Railroad Museum, but they obviously haven't done too much preserving.
Last time I saw it up close, which was at least 6 or 7 years ago, there was a huge hole in the bottom of the smoke box, and every appliance and gauge in the cab was either vandalized or gone completely. To top it off, the "preservation group" had painted the inside of the cab a bright lime green.

There are two guys trying to restore her right now. They got involved last summer. They found me and I went down to Fort Erie and spoke to them.

Right now they have only raised $50,000 which is enough to sandblast the locomotive and not much else. What the engine really needs is to have the jacket removed and the insulation pulled out. She had a cosmetic restoration in the 90's, and the people involved were absolutely brain dead. They pulled the asbestos out and put insulation back in. As a result, the "new" jacket has turned into a peice of swiss cheese. The jacket itself is a travesty. Everything about it is perfectly awful. Why they didn't bother to use the original jacket as pattern for a new jacket is beyond me.

Of course, the locomotive wasn't even put back together properly. For example, we found a grease fitting from one of the rods hammered into the steam inlet of the air compressor. On second thought, why not just read all about it here:

http://www.trainweb.org/j.dimech/journal/070927.html

But yes, the best thing for that engine now, is a sourse of spare parts for 6213 (its classmate) and 6167. Its junk. The boiler is probably more far gone then 6167's, and with all that water getting into the smokebox, and has probably worked its way into the cylinders and valve chests, I'll bet she's had it.

Joe

Out of curiosity I can't seem to tell if this is a cosmetic or operational restoration. If operational where will she run and who owns her now?

Also one other thing I noticed was;


Out of curiosity is that the cost of hiring a sandblasting crew to do it professionally or is that the cost of them doing it themselves? It just seems like an awful lot of money unless labor is factored in.

Also out of curiosity, why would they ever put insulation back onto a cosmetic display piece, were they planning on running her at any time? And what did they use that it rusted that badly, was it fiberglass or something? What is traditionally used today on steam locomotives, and is asbestos itself water resistant? It seems as thou there are tons of locomotives sitting out there, how come this one fared so much worse then the rest of them? From the pictures I saw of the 6218 didn't look too terribly gone compared to some of them out there why is it that some of you are considering her good for nothing but scrap?

Adam

Adam,

The restoration of 6167 is purely cosmetic, and not operational.

As for 6218 that figure (I believe) does include labour. But the point is that is not nearly enough to do the work that's desparety needed to prevent the locomotive from collapsing into a pile of rust (not that literally though). If they just sand blast her and repaint her, the jacket and boiler shell will continue to rot and seberal years down the road, the engine will be in the same state as it is now. My photos don't show it, but we did find some very large holes that had rusted through the jacket. and its not even 20 years old. Compare that to 6213's which was put on in the mid 80's and is still in excellent shape (so good, that when 6213's turn comes up, her old jacket may wind up going to Fort Erie (which is a possibility we disscussed when I was there).

The reason they put insulation back is is that the people at the time were brain dead. Simple as that. And yes they used fibrglass.

Both fibreglass and asbestos retain water, as has been demonstrated on 6218 and 6167. All the moisture trapped in the lagging (both asbestos and fireglass) speeds up the deterioration of the boiler shell, of which repairing is very, very expensive (see CPR 136 a 4-4-0) as well as rotting the jacket from the inside out. One of the reasons 6167 "looks" so bad is simply all the lousy paint jobs she got over the last 40 years.

In addition to the boiler shell woes, 6218's stack was never properly sealed which has allowed a considerable amount of water to enter the smokebox, so much so, that a huge hole rusted right through the smokebox front TWICE. The problem seemed to have been going on for quite awhile, and the hole showed an attempt at patching it up during its botched restoration, but no-one bothered to see where the water was getting in.

Our concern is that the water that dripped down the stack may have entered the exhaust nozzle, which could have collected to the point where it got to the cylinders.

Even if that wasn't the case, someone removed all the washout plugs on the valve chest thus allowing water to get in anyways. So with the boiler AND machinery so badly deterioreted, the other thing 6218 has going against her is that she is missing so much hardware, and whatever is left on her now is not appropriate for that engine.

Another thing is that, while 6167's lagging is full of moisture, a great deal of it has actually oozed out of the bottom of the jacket, which may in fact have helped spare the upper portions of the shell, whereas 6218 had her lagging removed and more put in, thus starting the process all over again.

Also 6167 was never salvaged for parts, whereas even 6213 sat in a deadline for a while and WAS picked for parts, that didn't happen when she was retired from excursion service. She has all of her appliances, and is only really missing some jewellery such as gauges and brass plates.

The builder's plates were removed in the early 50's, and one of her Northern type plates disappered in 1959, the other in 1960-1. Her original number plate was probably destroyed in her wreck in 1943, but just everything else that was on the engine in 1959 (when she finished regular service) is still there today (although it might not be in the best shape)

So mechancially and cosmetically 6218 is in far inferior shape to 6167 (although '67's paint job looks worse -its just paint you know), so inferior that I feel she isn't worth spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to restore, as it will never be in as good of a state as 6167 will be when she is done, and if 6213 is returned to service, using 6218 as a source of spare parts to keep 6213 running (once she gets running), and to make 6167 more complete would probably be the best thing that could happen to that engine.

Also, I just remembered that the word on the street is the the musuem in Ottawa still has most of 6200's parts in storage (although some are missing). As terrible as the 6200 looks today, the one good thing she has going for her is that all her lagging was removed a long time ago, and the whole thing gets painted every now and then. Unlike 6167 and 6218, her boiler has probably susainted less damage then both engines, thus making it in superior mechanical condition. 6200 could be put back together, and all three Northern's could take what they need to make them complete from 6218, and 6218's carcass could take 6200's place on the lawn in Ottawa (for example)

So for the cost of 1 bad engine, we could get three great engines, which is why I see 6218 for its scrap value.

Joe

P.S. If you haven't figured it out, 6200, 6213 and 6218 are all the same class (U-2-g and therefore identical), and 6167 is a U-2-e which is very similar to the g's and there are a number of interchangable parts between the four engines.

Not only were the parts interchangeable with the other CNR Northerns, but a lot of parts were shared with the CNR Mountains and Hudsons also. CN Hudson #5700 (nee 5703) at the Elgin County Railway Museum has parts on it now that were originally on other locomotives. Most of of the parts are stamped "5701", "5702", etc., but there are a few parts stamped with the numbers of another class of engine. The throttle lever for example is off a Northern. It is stamped "62xx". (Sorry, I don't recall the specific number off the top of my head).