Most modern 4-4-0's ?

J.David · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 12:50 pm

Greetings:
In my opinion, the FRISCO modernized 4-4-0 are the most "modern".
Kloke's 4-4-0s are newer, but far from modern.
In addition to having piston valves and Walscherts valve gear and a feedwater heater, the FRISCO locos have a front end throttle.
My question is: why is the air compressor mounted upside down?
Please advise...
J.David

Dave · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 1:27 pm

NYAB built some like that. I think 290 had one.....

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

Erich Armpriester · **Joined:** Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:16 pm **Posts:** 47

Wow. I must second (or third, or fourth) the comments on the Frisco 4-4-0. A feedwater heater and front end throttle on a 4-4-0?!? Madness!! But very cool, and a gorgeous engine to boot.

FWIW, the Reading D-11's were not ex-Camelback, but built as end cab engines. What I wouldn't give to see one of them clipping along at 40mph or better on the R&C branch...

And, I second Kelly's comments on the NYAB air pumps. As I understand, they were essentially Siamese single stage pumps, with one side controlling the other, and one side at rest while the other was completing its stroke. I believe I read in one of my texts recently that NYAB claimed the "upside-down" design an advantage on account of the air end having much less tendency to collect condensate dripped down from the steam end as on "standard" Westinghouse pumps. How much of an issue this was in reality, I question; probably more of a straw to grasp in NYAB's hope to sell more pumps.

I would also love to know if there are any of these air compressors operating in today's preservation world. If so, I feel a vacation coming on in close proximity...

-Erich

Mount Royal · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 9:53 pm

KCS owned a total of 21 4-4-0's, all carry-overs from the days of KCP&G. All were built in the 1890's and most were scrapped by 1912. A couple lasted into the 1920's with the last two having their last hurrah in 1939. The last two were numbers 140 and 143. They pulled passenger duty between DeQuincy and Lake Charles, LA. KCS #140 is shown below.

robertjohndavis · **Joined:** Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:10 am **Posts:** 2499

Overmod wrote:

Hands down, the most modern 4-4-0 was the British 'Schools' class

I'd have to agree with that.

Rob

Great Western · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 10:23 pm

Richard Glueck wrote:

I'm asking this here as others have a wider encyclopedic knowledge of steam than do I. Which railroads had the most modern 4-4-0 Americans in service? I'm talking about both new builds and older rebuilds, taking the wheel arrangement away from the old "wild west" depiction.

Canadian Pacific ran engines 29, 136 and 144 until the end of steam in New Brunswick. No. 136 is still running in Ontario, I believe. Ex-CPR, ex-Greater Winnipeg Water District No. 3 is running at Prairie Dog Central in Manitoba. She has a welded boiler which I believe was provided by Saskatoon Boiler Manufacturing Co. a few years back.
Many Grand Trunk 4-4-0s remained in service with Canadian National into the late 1920s and even 30s and were very modernized and fine looking engines by then.

Les Beckman · **Joined:** Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:25 pm **Posts:** 6482

Mount Royal wrote:

KCS owned a total of 21 4-4-0's, all carry-overs from the days of KCP&G. All were built in the 1890's and most were scrapped by 1912. A couple lasted into the 1920's with the last two having their last hurrah in 1939. The last two were numbers 140 and 143. They pulled passenger duty between DeQuincy and Lake Charles, LA. KCS #140 is shown below.

Randy -

Not sure when the previously mentioned Frisco 4-4-0's were taken out of service, but one of the Katy 4-4-0's (number 1304) pulled a regularly scheduled Wichita Falls, Texas - Woodward, Oklahoma passenger train in January 1952. Not sure if this was the last regularly scheduled passenger run to be pulled by a 4-4-0 in the U.S. or not. The 1304 had been built by Baldwin in 1890 as number 201, became #281 in 1892, and number 312 in 1912. She received her new boiler in 1925 and was not renumbered as 1304 until 1948.

Les

bbunge · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 10:48 pm

Ok, I'll bite. On the Frisco engine, what is the gizmo in front/top of the stack? Perhaps a light so the fireman could see the stack at night? Sort of interesting it has a stack cap as well.

Thanks in advance.

Bob

Howard P. · **Posted:** Mon Oct 05, 2015 11:30 pm

Gee, no pics or additional commentary about the 3 C&IM 4-4-0s? I think they were 1927 Baldwins, and were in regular passenger service until about 1955. I always though they were the last commercially-built 4-4-0s in the US.

Also, a Pennsylvania short line, Cornwall Railroad, had a mid or late 20s BLW 4-4-0, rather husky engine if I recall.

And that SL-SF engine is a real beauty. Imagine having that one around now.....

Howard P.

j32885 · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2015 1:45 am

Would Greenfield Village #1 "Edison" (GVRR 1/DTI-FRDX/NYC-LSMS/ECCX) count as a Modern American Type 4-4-0?

Even though it started life originally as a 0-4-0, Henry Ford made it into a Modern American Type.

Steamlocomotive.Info/Greenfield Village #1 "Edison"
http://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomo ... isplay=637

The Henry Ford Blog: "Greenfield Village Perimeter Railroad: from concept to reality"
http://blog.thehenryford.org/2013/05/gr ... o-reality/

RRPictureArchives.net/GVRR 1 "Edison"
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/Locopi ... x?id=63326

Edison as LSMS 1
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24736216@N07/4367853951

Edison as LSMS 1 II
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... ?id=401806

Edison Circa Late 1980s-Early 1990s
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/AA82M3/edison- ... AA82M3.jpg

Edison (1990)
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=1780356

Edison (1991)
http://www.railroadmichigan.com/steamedison.jpg

Edison (1996)
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=2104521

Edison (1996) #2
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=2104995

Edison (2004)
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 98&nseq=27

Edison (2011)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/happilyretired/6166912669

Edison (2013)
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.p ... 675&nseq=5

Edison (2015)
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/571/2138 ... 366bb1.jpg

My recent videos on Edison:

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p6tofbvEzg

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015 #2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL5cihw9s8M

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015 #3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2BO0IRH0bE

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015 #4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61ByMaqDW94

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015 #5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FztjBzf4DeM

Greenfield Village Railroad (Edison), 09-07-2015 #6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAhoX1y0H9c

Enjoy! ^_^

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:11 am

Kelly Anderson wrote:

My opinion? #1223 is a very nice little engine, and I sure would like to see her in operation again, but modern(?), not even close. She was built in 1905, and other than being upgraded with superheaters and piston valves, she was pretty much in her "as built" configuration.

Superheating, piston valves (definitely modernizations however you want to look at it), and a reduction in driver size from 80" to 68".

Or was William M. fibbing all these years in "The Road to Paradise"?

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

Les Beckman · **Joined:** Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:25 pm **Posts:** 6482

Can I take the time to make one point here. Seems to me that some of us are equating "new" with modern. A 4-4-0 reproduction (such as Leviathan #63 as just one example) is a NEW locomotive, but still is not "modern". Locomotives such as the forementioned Frisco, Katy, PRR, etc. examples, while "old" are still "modern", due to the various types of rebuilds. The Chicago & Illinois Midland locomotives were built as "modern" examples of a 4-4-0. As I see it, this is the way I think Dick originally asked the question. Now, let the discussion continue!

Les