Actually, working out weld seams with bondo was rather common during the streamliner era. What's more amazing to me were the E-5's, which had gleaming natural stainless steel noses. As far as I know, these were butt welded together, then the welds ground and polished to make them invisible, sort of the way the "bean" sculpture in downtown Chicago was done. This must have been costly enough that later CB&Q E units had standard carbon steel noses painted silver.

The things you never realized you never knew....

Were the noses on E8's and E9's identical in contour to those on F3's and F7's? They look similar.

I'm pretty sure that unit is in Dennison at the Red River Railroad Museum.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.755249,-96.533472,3a,40.3y,329.67h,89.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFziWmP9JZ3H-JQiqxT-sPw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I believe they were identical. That would make sense from the point of standardization.

I have to admit, though, the long prewar snout of the E4, E5 (Burlington stainless version above) and the E-6 was much more elegant.

As those Es (and later versions, too) were meant to be seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiNjLHoLuAE

The Acela is faster, and in that way it's impressive, but it's not in the same league as Es, PAs, and of course, steam.

That photo is strangely unsettling.

With the manufacturing question, think back, what did (and still does) General Motors do by the tons???? They stamp complex car body sheet metal pieces. I wouldn't doubt the nose was 2 or 3 pieces that were welded together. Production order of the day, stamp 1000 left noses, 1000 right noses, 1000 nose tops, 1000 C10 left fenders...

"The Soo Line had one unit where they lost the headlight housing to collision damage; decided it was not worth fabricating a replacement. Looks strangely European."

"That photo is strangely unsettling."

What you realize when studying the photo of this rebuilt Soo Line loco is that, even though the compound curves of the repaired nose are somewhat crude compared to the OEM construction, the only real difference is that the headlight shroud and headlight are missing. It's remarkable to me how the way EMD located the headlight really helps to "make" the appearance of the E and F units. Without that headlight in it's proper location, the locomotives look quite odd.

Did we ever resolve the old 'wive's tale' that the windshields of some of the cab units were derived from mid-Thirties GM automobile windshields?

Spring 2015 issue of Classic Trains had a nice review of the EMD F unit on its 75th anniversary. One article in there had construction details of the different models. They had photos as well as the patent for the body and cab construction linked below.
The E and F units by that time both had a “bulldog nose” as the old slant nose Es were more difficult to manufacture.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US2530762

The vent and side windows (which roll down!) are also eerily similar to those from automobiles of the era, but I have never seen official confirmation either.

VIA 6300 was probably one of the last units to receive a cab transplant, after the 1986 crash near Hinton, AB. KCS 4062 was the donor.

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/226976/

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=4480715

Our F3A (CN 9000) had the entire left half of its cab destroyed when a boulder fell on it in the Fraser canyon in the 1960s, but CN's shop forces did an excellent repair job and you cannot tell today. The only time it was noticed was when the unit was being prepped for repainting at the Museum, and the grinder dug into the bondo!

The photo story was on pages 58 and 59 of the January, 1955, issue. The conversion was done in eleven weeks at the end of 1949 and apparently into January 1950.

Turns out that the A-units were 6-1/2 inches longer. The TP&W stretched the B-unit by only 3 inches because of concerns about weight distribution.

Part of the articles states:

Another nose transplant was PRR FP7 9859A, which after a serious collision received the nose of an early F3a with the side number boards. It remained in that configuration as PC 4359 and on several sightings always caused me to do a double take.

Don't forget various off shoots of the bulldog nose was used for overseas locomotives, and often on double ended units such as the Victorian Railways B class in Australia and the very similar DSB Class MY and similar types in Europe.

On a business trip to Australia a couple of years ago that resulted in an unplanned trip to the Railway Museum at Newport near Melbourne, I found myself staring at a B Class with a very homely feeling. BTW, the Victorian railways had the most interesting tower interlocking key transport system during the steam era you ever did see.

It is comes to this style of construction, a similar example, of course, is the PRR GG1.

Bob

Could we expand the topic a bit and include cabs of these other builders? Might we assume a similar process? My original question involved F's and E's, only because of compound curves. So much fascinating information has been reveals. Can anyone chime in on these other old Diesels?

The DSB MX and MY (later MV) class locomotives were built on contract with GM (EMD), hence the similar apperance.