The Chessepeake & Ohio Railroad (C&O) #614 was brought to Port Clinton, Pennsylvania (PN) today. It arrived at Reading, Pennsylvania by Norfolk Southern Railroad, and was brought up to PN by Andrew Muller Jr. and Stephen Gilbert. The locomotive they used was Reading, Blue Mountain & Northern Railroad #7525. The C&O #614 is on the siding at the station next to the parking lot at PN.

norfolk_western_611@hotmail.com

What time? I was over at WK&S in Kempton, should have swung by Port Clinton on the way home. Any idea where they intend to stash her next?

> The Chessepeake & Ohio Railroad
> (C&O) #614 was brought to Port Clinton,
> Pennsylvania (PN) today. It arrived at
> Reading, Pennsylvania by Norfolk Southern
> Railroad, and was brought up to PN by Andrew
> Muller Jr. and Stephen Gilbert. The
> locomotive they used was Reading, Blue
> Mountain & Northern Railroad #7525. The
> C&O #614 is on the siding at the station
> next to the parking lot at PN.


acp19809@yahoo.com

The Chessepeake & Ohio Railroad (C&O) #614 was moved to the Reading, Blue Mountain & Northern Railroad (RBMN) because New Jersey Transist wanted the locomotive off their property. The locomotive was auctioned off twice, but failed to be sold both times. The RBMN's owner, Andrew Muller Jr., offered storage for free at his railroad's headquarters based in Port Clinton, Pennsylvania. The locomotive will probably be stored away in the Port Clinton locomotive house. As far as I know the railroad is working on getting their turntable in operation.I was down to Port Clinton, Pennsylvania today. The C&O #614 looks great. Now I can see why the locomotive is worth $2.7 million! The locomotive has everything from an auxilary tender to MU capabilities! While I was there I caught a set of switcher's depart for Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania.

norfolk_western_611@hotmail.com

> Now I can see why
> the locomotive is worth $2.7 million! The
> locomotive has everything from an auxilary
> tender to MU capabilities! While I was there
> I caught a set of switcher's depart for Jim
> Thorpe, Pennsylvania.

If was worth that much, it would have sold. The highest bids weren't close to even half that much.

Virtually all of today's large, mainline-type steam engines have auxilliary tenders, diesel MU capability, 26L brakes, and those that need it have the microprocessor-based train control system and cab signals that 614 has. In fact, hype to the contrary, 614 wasn't the first steam locomotive to have such a system. UP's 844 had it a couple of years before 614 did according to US&S, which manufactured the systems.

> If was worth that much, it would have sold.
> The highest bids weren't close to even half
> that much.

Are you kidding me??? How many other J3 class C&O 4-8-4s do you see running around or lying out to pasture waiting for restoration? If someone pays $2.7 million for it, well hey they've got the funds to restore it too. If some of you think the 614 is worth less, I'm curious to know what YOUR price tag is on the only one left in existence.

Jeff Lisowski
West Chester, Pa

Great music!
unfunkyufo76@hotmail.com

> Are you kidding me??? How many other J3
> class C&O 4-8-4s do you see running
> around or lying out to pasture waiting for
> restoration?

NONE, because they were so big and appeared so late in the steam era that that there was no opportunity to survive by being bumped into lesser service and forgotten like scores of consols, mikes and ten-wheelers. They were scrapped because that was the greatest value that could be obtained. Harsh but true.

Second, this engine reportedly has a problem with burning up superheater tubes-I'll leave the more mechanically oriented to address that. If true, its a money problem.

>If someone pays $2.7 million
>for it, well hey they've got the funds to
>restore it too.

IF SOMEBODY has 2.7 mill, they didn't get it by spending it foolishly. There is NO WAY to run this engine in such a way to RECOVER a 3.7 million dollar capital expenditure, let alone to return a decent margin and establish a sinking fund for the next big overhaul. The profitable steam railroads run small engines which don't require 130 pound rail, etc.

If some of you think the 614
> is worth less, I'm curious to know what YOUR
> price tag is on the only one left in
> existence.

Because something is unique, doesn't mean its invaluable. There's always an alternative use of capital. We could all get together, drop almost 4 million on the engine OR perhaps fund the restoration of of 4 medium size engines. That's "opportunity cost".

Just because Ross is asking for 2.7 million, doesn't mean he can or should get it. The ultimate definition of value is the price fixed between a willing buy and a willing seller. Don't forget there's another big Northern sitting on the block out there, the Reading 2100 which is a lot closer to operating condition than the 614.NOBODY is buying that either, which tells me the the value isn't ANYWHERE near 2.7 mil.

Just my humble opinion.

You raise good points. But I still somewhat disagree.

Where does one actually put a real dollar value on an object. You're right, it's somewhere between what the seller is asking and what the buyer will spend. Somethings are priceless, not trying to sound like a commercial here.

I'm not saying $2.7 mil is too much or too little, I don't know. I just think that people who think even $500,000 is too much are missing the 'real' value here.

Let's compare apples to oranges for a second...
Say you've got a 1971 Pontiac GTO 'Judge' convertabile, only 17 built. Let's say it's red, only one built ever, where do you put a dollar value on that? The blue book? Remember there's only one.

If I had $2.7 mil, 614 would be pi%%ing of my neighbors sitting in my townhouse development. It's really a no win situation here on this topic of price on the 614, but It's a good topic of discussion either way. I enjoy the friendly debate.

Jeff Lisowski
West Chester, Pa

Great music!
unfunkyufo76@hotmail.com

> Let's compare apples to oranges for a
> second...
> Say you've got a 1971 Pontiac GTO 'Judge'
> convertabile, only 17 built. Let's say it's
> red, only one built ever, where do you put a
> dollar value on that? The blue book?
> Remember there's only one.

*In a case like that, the value is exactly what you can get someone else to pay for it. No more, no less. And it's only worth anything MORE if *two* people want it equally badly! There are plenty of unique steam locomotives out there; are they all thus worth millions each? Indeed, from an operating perspective, common locos with interchangeable parts (such as Army 2-8-0s or Stanier Black Fives) should be worth far more, for they are thus easier to keep running, or have parts that can be "mass-produced" for replacement!

I can sit here and draw a unique drawing of a dragon. Can I get anyone to pay $50,000 or $50 million for it? I'd be lucky to get someone to pay 50 cents for it.

> If I had $2.7 mil, 614 would be pi%%ing of
> my neighbors sitting in my townhouse
> development.

*Fine. And does it thus sit there until you die and it sells for five grand at your estate auction? (Probably to your neighbors, for the pleasure of beating it with bats and then scrapping it!)

Its perceived worth comes from being operable and being maintained in such condition. Even then, it's like a luxury yacht, consuming more money than it earns. If operating steam locomotives were inherently profitable, there would be boatloads coming in from China to replace diesels on commuter trains!

LNER4472@bcpl.net

There is a simple explanation for how Rowland and camp determines how much the 614 is worth: EGO. The bigger the steam engine the bigger the ego. Any questions?

> *In a case like that, the value is exactly
> what you can get someone else to pay for it.
> No more, no less. And it's only worth
> anything MORE if *two* people want it
> equally badly! There are plenty of unique
> steam locomotives out there; are they all
> thus worth millions each? Indeed, from an
> operating perspective, common locos with
> interchangeable parts (such as Army 2-8-0s
> or Stanier Black Fives) should be worth far
> more, for they are thus easier to keep
> running, or have parts that can be
> "mass-produced" for replacement!

> I can sit here and draw a unique drawing of
> a dragon. Can I get anyone to pay $50,000 or
> $50 million for it? I'd be lucky to get
> someone to pay 50 cents for it.

> *Fine. And does it thus sit there until you
> die and it sells for five grand at your
> estate auction? (Probably to your neighbors,
> for the pleasure of beating it with bats and
> then scrapping it!)

> Its perceived worth comes from being
> operable and being maintained in such
> condition. Even then, it's like a luxury
> yacht, consuming more money than it earns.
> If operating steam locomotives were
> inherently profitable, there would be
> boatloads coming in from China to replace
> diesels on commuter trains!

Here we go again with the Ross bashing. This is my two cents on the whole Rowland deal...

Besides certain people on this site that are affiliated with certain groups, not too many people have done what Ross has done with the 614 and 2101 in the late 70s early 80s.

The same people that bash Ross are probably the same ones who chased 2101 or 614 and picked up copies of Trains to look at all the purty pictures of them.

Can we ever drop the Ross bashing?

Jeff Lisowski
West Chester, Pa

Great music!
unfunkyufo76@hotmail.com

> Its perceived worth comes from being
> operable and being maintained in such
> condition. Even then, it's like a luxury
> yacht, consuming more money than it earns.
> If operating steam locomotives were
> inherently profitable, there would be
> boatloads coming in from China to replace
> diesels on commuter trains!

But it ISN'T operable, and that's part of the issue. At minimum, it needs the full boiler teardown and inspection and new Form 4 calculated and filed before it can even be steamed up where it sits, much less run. And the cost of that, plus the cost of any repair work required as discovered by the inspection, as Jeff points out, must be added to the asking price.

The price put on a locomotive (and sometimes on passenger cars) is usually based on what the owner has invested in it, or on his emotional attachment to it. That usually results in the engine sitting for years with no takers until the prices gets down (usually WAY down) closer to reality. And the reason that an engine comes on the market is often based on the fact that the owner had no place to run it, or did have a place and quickly satisfied the market.

Thus, on the rare occasion when a big engine is sold, it usually doesn't sell for very much.

Hi Mike,

> Second, this engine reportedly has a problem
> with burning up superheater tubes-

Can you give us a creible source on this or any other mechanical defects?

>Don't forget there's another big
> Northern sitting on the block out there, the
> Reading 2100 which is a lot closer to
> operating condition than the 614.

Hmmm... #2100 is a 55+ year old machine built with parts from a 90+year old machine. She has never proven herself in any heavy service since the Reading retired her. She was saved from a scrapyard by Ross Rowland and later restored by a consortium that included Rowland. Now, she sits in Canada converted to oil with absolutely no track record of her ability to withstand the punishment of mainline service. She has no mainline operation with her new oil burner.

#614, on the other hand, despite her many rebuilds and reworkings, represents the prime development of large passenger steam from Lima. She's a better machine to start with (and that hurts me to say, because I love the T-1's). She also has tremendous record of post-restoration mileage.

I'm not saying she's worth $XXXX, just that she might be a better buy than #2100.

Rob

> Second, this engine reportedly has a problem
> with burning up superheater tubes-I'll leave
> the more mechanically oriented to address
> that. If true, its a money problem.

No, it's not true. The engine does, however, have a long history of eating valve rings and piston rings. This history goes all the way back to it's regular C&O service days and has to do with it's capability of producing superheated steam temperatures under certain conditions that were and are beyond the ability of the valve and cylinder lubricants to withstand.

Sources: Ross Rowland and Scott Lindsay, his most recent CMO on the NJT trips.

This is a money problem and a delay-causing problem, but not a fatal problem.

> Hmmm... #2100 is a 55+ year old machine
> built with parts from a 90+year old machine.

In defense of the Reading T-1's, there isn't much of them that's "90+" years old. About all that the original I-10 consolidations contributed were the fireboxes and some of the boiler shell. Admittedly, those are important items, but just about everything else was new. No, they're not Lima super-power, but to imply that the T-1's weren't modern (for their day) locomotives just isn't fair.

Dick

> In defense of the Reading T-1's, there isn't
Dick,

I think this must be a Wowak board with T-1 defenders sprouting up without complete names or e-mail addresses.


The T-1's weren't bad engines, but they ain't Lima Super Power.

Rob

> much of them that's "90+" years
> old. About all that the original I-10
> consolidations contributed were the
> fireboxes and some of the boiler shell.
> Admittedly, those are important items, but
> just about everything else was new. No,
> they're not Lima super-power, but to imply
> that the T-1's weren't modern (for their
> day) locomotives just isn't fair.

> Dick


trains@robertjohndavis.com