Interesting article I found under the "restoration page" on Steamtown's website. It's regarding questions such as “Since this locomotive is the only "Anthracite Roads" locomotive in your collection that can pull a train of any length up your hills, why isn't Reading No. 2124 being considered for restoration, and why is No. 759 being considered for restoration when it is reportedly in worse shape than 2124? PLEASE Respond. Thank You.”

It's an interesting topic, I would post the whole article, but I'd feel safer to just post the link, since it's posted directly from Steamtown.

http://www.nps.gov/stea/upload/reading2124response.pdf

That article is ten years old. I think at the time a group of local folks had been working on CPR 4-6-4 #2839 stored nearby. The 2839 was sold and the group wanted to restore something else big. They talked with the NPS and choose #759. I'm not sure if they had actually done any work or not but they seemed to fall off the radar and that was the end of the restoration of 759.

The effort Mr. Gears speaks of was called "Valley Locomotive Restorations." The head of the group used to post here, and was rather enthusiastic about getting 759 out on the road. I don't know if any actual work was done on the 759, but doubt it. After some time, the alleged "head" of the group posted that he wouldn't be at Steamtown anymore, something to the effect of "I screwed up." The "group" next popped up with the Reading Technical and Historical Society, to restore an ex-Reading RS-3. The "group" rebranded itself as "Restorations in the Valley" and promptly fell off the face of the planet.

Why I can remember crap like this, but forget where I park my car when I go to the airport, I'll never know....

wilkinsd is correct. I never met any of those involved in the project, but after a few meets in the roundhouse, no work was ever done. They might have tried to plan a schedule that wouldn't fit the park's schedule.
They weren't alone, though.
It's almost like a rite of spring. Nearly once a year, an individual or group promises to restore that locomotive, and never get much past writing an e-mail. I'm not putting anyone's intentions down, but a steam locomotive restoration is never easy. The sheer scope of a project like that can baffle the best intentions and bankbooks.

Isn't it a bit ridiculous to say one reason for favoring 759 is that there was already an RDG T-1 out there in service when the same could be said of NKP S2 Berks not to mention the nearly identical PM N-1? That kind of renders the entire document as BS.

They should all be restored and run but I do especially hope to see 759 someday having always read about it as a kid.

Steve

A quick search found much older threads.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=530&p=1272&hilit=valley+restorations+759#p1272

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=483&p=1129&hilit=valley+locomotive+restorations+759#p1129

Tom,

Thanks. I don't know what's scarier, the fact that these posts are 10 years old, or the fact I could remember the whole episode off the top of my head.

Both at the time the document was written (assuming we're discussing the year 2000) and now, there are/were TWO potentially operable (depending on your exact definitions, of course) Reading T1's. At the same time(s), there are/were at least one Nickel Plate Berk operable, plus yet another Pere Marquette one of fundamentally identical design operable (again, depending on exact dates and definitions).

So, absent a need to haul big passenger trains or freights out of Scranton--a task just as well suited to the "antique" Alcos/MLWs in the same town doing it nearly daily--why bother with either 759 or 2124? Go win the lottery and give them the money to overhaul them, and then we might have a case.

I was aware the article is 10 years old, but I still see alot of people on here, and other forums, asking why 2124 is never considered for restoration. And while Steamtown seems to be the hot topic the past few weeks, I decided to post it ow and clear things up. Whether the article remains the same after 10 years, I have no clue, but it gives the clueless an idea, at least.

It would be nice to see both locomotives return to steam at steamtown, but niceness does not help restore steam locomotives. It should be noted that Reading 2124 does not fit on the turntable at steamtown because of it's large wheel base, while the 759 can fit on the turntable with a small amount of overhang. Being able to see a steam locomotive spin on the turntable and pull into the roundhouse at the end of the excursion, or even just the yard shuttle, is what sets steamtown apart from the rest of us in the visitors eyes from an interpretive stand point.

just my 2 cents

Ummmm.... "back in"?

I don't know just what Steamtown is doing with regards to parking and displaying locos, but most roundhouses of old (and new) put the loco in pilot first and tender out, the better to have room to work on the locomotive between stalls............

I read that like "putting back into the roundhouse" than "backing into"

tomaytoe tomahtoe

I think I have seen some roundhouses having doublestacks so the engine can be either way.

I edited my post, feel better now?

The Durango roundhouse is set up for the engines backing in, with the exception of the service stall which can be used either direction.

I would suggest that those who ask about "why" 2124 is not restored to service are not actually interested in hearing the reasons or justifications for why it isn't restored to service.... Rather, they just want to see it run.