I would like nomimate ywo locomotives from the AT&F the 3800’s 2-10-2, and their Prarrie Mallets. Thanks for time.
Have you seen the thread much closer to the bottom of the titles page with the same title?
Crandell
The AT&SF people would tell you their 2-10-4’s were a vast improvement over their 2-10-2’s.
On a previous “best freight locomotive” discussion I said I was trying to look at the “big picture” and not be parochial living in Virginia, but NOW I’m going to say it! The best freight locomotives were produced by the genius homebuilders at the Norfolk and Western ! Yes sir, the Class "A"s and the Class "Y"s. There, I said it and I’m glad!
We haven’t formalized the criteria for selecting the ‘best’ freight engine, so it will come down to favourites for many of us with no real regard to efficiency and performance.
Few would argue that one of the later 2-10-4 Texas types would be solid candidates. The H-8 Allegheny was, according to some observers/critics, misused much of the time. It was a Challenger on steroids.
The lowly Mikado, light or heavy? They were used everywhere and in large numbers. The railroads must have liked them for a reason?
Crandell
Considering large freight locomotives, the 2-8-8-4 Yellowstone type was the ultimate (the Big Boy was a Yellowstone with an extra lead axle). They had high factors of adhesion, boilers the size of the fabled Allegheny (The EM1, M3/M4 and BB all had firebox areas equal to the H8), power at speed that a 2-10-4 could only dream about. They all could move at passenger speeds (the EM1 was often used on 70 mph express trains), and were much easier on the track than a rigid frame locomotive. Plus, they were all very reliable, and lasted into the early 1960’s with minimal maintenance.
The 2-10-4s, while powerful, were extremely hard on track at speed. The 4-6-6-4s and 2-6-6-4 Class A were great machines on level track, but slippery on a hard pull. The Y Class was a great slow speed puller, but not the best choice for higher speed general merchandise trains, and forget about using them on express runs.
For smaller freight locomotives, the lowly 2-8-2 is a good pick. Cheap to build, cheap to maintain, got the work done on time. Like Selector said, there was a reason why there were so many of them, and many of the 2-8-2s lasted right to the end of steam.
Best freight locomotive, again the AT&SF 2-10-4 for non-articulateds, and they were used where the track structure could support them. Note that in direct comparison on the Sandusky line, enginemen did prefer, in general, the AT&SF over the PRR J. If we include articulateds, then of course any number of them are even better, depending on the territory and traffic. Yellowstones, of course, but the N&W didn’t build any and the N&W locos were in my opinion the best designed around, so I would vote for the Y-6 and the A-1 as a pair. depending on the grades and the traffic. And I still think the N&W J is the best 4-8-4, among some very good ones, inlcuding the Niagras, the UP’s, the Daylights, and AT&SF’s.
Sure, the Mikados lasted until the end. But with certain exceptions, the Birkshires were still a generally better locomotive for the same traffic. Saying the Mikados were better than the Birkshires is like saying the K4 was a better engine than the NYC J-3a for passenger work. And yes there was still a fleet of K4’s running on the NY&LB and PRSC and on the PRR Valpo jobs of Chicago long after the last NYC Hudson was scrapped.
I would have to say the ex-GTW 2-8-2 4070 as being the best [;)]. She needs a lot of work though…
though my personal favorite freight locomotive is… um… well… all of them [8D][tup]
Just remember that the most common wheel arrangement was a Consolidation (2-8-0). There were more of those built than any other.
Are we talking road freight or any loco that moved freight? Are we talking tonnage per train or over a lifetime? Drag freight or fast freight? There really can not be a best. They all were replaced by the internal combustion and electrically operated.
My vote would go to the often overlooked 0-6-0 for best freight mover. It was getting the job done when most of the other reciprocating fire breathing monsters were being cut up for toyotas and pintos that were years younger.
Pete
The best freight locomotive for doing what? Modern steam locomotives on American railroads were designed to do specific jobs for individual lines. NKP Berkshires could move fast freight across a flat profile. AT&SF 2-10-4s could pull a long freight of 4000+ tons up the Abo Canyon grade without a helper. PRR M1a 4-8-2s could run like a deer along the well engineered four track main between Harrisburg and Altoona. Western Maryland Decapods could lug heavy coal drags up and down the sawtooth profile West of Cumberland. Norfolk and Western Y6s could… Get the point? In late steam days some designs were good enough all around to be shared among several railroads. UPs Challengers were duplicated for the Rio Grande, Clinchfield, and Delaware and Hudson. Several roads shared a basic 4-8-4 based on a Rio Grande formula. My personal favorite is the SPs Cab Forwards. They were powerful, versatile, had wide route availability and could lug a heavy freight or wheel a fast mail train, whatever was needed.
Very good point. And the same could be said for passenger power. The Hiawatha Atalntics and CP Jubalees were for a different task the a J3a or a Daylight or N&W J or Niagra.
But I will stick my neck out and say that despite my great fondness for GG-1’s, and I did have a cab-ride once, NH-NY, the NYNH&H EF3a was still an all-around better electcric locomotive.
[:)] Firelock76~~ 10-4 on your view of N&W s A -s & Y series. With the Y6bs being the ultimate. They were designed for a specific job and they did it well . That was an event when I saw a doubleheader climbing up from Portsmouth Ohio with a string of coal hoppers.
Cannonball Y6bs evergreen in my mind
Oh, so nice to be appreciated! Even better to be agreed with!
I agree. All three of the N&W greats were the greatest of their type. No one could do a better job of designing and constructing a steam locomotive than the N&W. The Merecedes of the insdustry… The AT&SF Ripley designs (including and possibly especially the 2-10-40, the Niagra, the Daylight, the cab forwards, and the Challengers are certainly great locomotives, without doubt.
The N&W Y was the best compound freight designed without a doubt.
The A and J, from an engineering point of view, weren’t even the most advanced of their type.
The A was a very good, even great 1930’s design. The J wasn’t and “end of steam” design either.
If you think I am wrong prove it.
And saying “I read it in a railfan book” isn’t proving it.
I want hard engineering data. Not opinions based on what some biased railfan writer once said.
I believe the protestant goes first, so some further information would help the rest of us with crafting some kind of response.
Why wasn’t the A the most advanced of its type? What was?
What 2-6-6-4 was more advanced than the N&W A, particularly the last group built in 1950?
What 4-8-4 was more advanced than the N&W Class J? Several were close technologically.
The last “end of steam” commercial design in the US was the C&O 2-6-6-2 of 1949 IIRC. Good locos for the type of service they were designed for, but not very advanced.
The last road locomotives built in the US were the N&W Y6b’s of 1952. A specialized loco to be sure, but very advanced by most any comparison I can think of.
I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong, I just don’t understand your decision criteria.
Some clarification would help. It would also probably avoid a pointless flame war.
No Flame War intended.
Back to the quote that started this:
daveklepper:
"I agree. All three of the N&W greats were the greatest of their type. No one could do a better job of designing and constructing a steam locomotive than the N&W. "
As an Engineer, it just drives me nuts when people make absolute statements. Especially when I know they don’t have enough accurate comparison data between individual classes of steam locomotives, not to mention the variations of those classes between the multiple builders to even think such a statement.
The J was designed in 1941, correct? I know the later ones built had some slight modifications, but the basic design was from 1941. So let’s turn the ques
I’ve observed these discussions over the “Best Steam Locomotive” with bemusement because the comparisons are so subjective, despite the reams of engineering data that are brought out to support a particular point of view. Most of the examples that are brought out; N&W’s trio, the ATSF Big 3, Van Sweringen 2-8-4’s, etc. tended to designed with a particular task in mind and were not all-purpose locomotives. The “Best Steam Locomotive”, I would opine that no such beast actually existed.
I would opine that each carrier that ordered successive orders of any particular locomotive design on their roster felt that they had achieved the best locomotive for the task. Steam locomotives were not ‘off the shelf’ products, like diesels basically are. Each carrier had it’s own particular operating obstacles and purchased power that best solved their operating realities. Each carrier thought they had the best for their particular circumstance.