It seems like the Pennsylvania Railorad always gets described as being the ultimate railroad back in the day. It was the 800# gorilla of it’s time. The New York Central had to compete head to head with the Pennsy in the same region. Both served many of the same cities. And yet, NYC was able to compete.
Given that NYC was usually the smaller player in the game, what did it do better than PRR, in order to get the business they both were competing for?
I’m reading Albro Martin’s “Railroads Triumphant” and he gets in to the New York Central/Pennsylvania thing as early as page 27.
There were four “Trunk Lines” operating between New York and Chicago. NYC, Pennsy, B&O, and Erie. Forget the Erie. It was pathetic from the get go. The railroads really had different core markets, although they certainly did overlap and compete in many markets.
Here’s what Albro says:
“The domination of international trade by the port of New York comfirmed the New York Central as the preferred route for passengers, high-class freight (merchandise), and high-volume tonnages such as grain and petroleum for export…” (The New York Central could actually take freight into Manhattan, Pennsy couldn’t.)
“The flowering of American heavy industry assured the eminence of the Pennsylvania Railroad.”
“But the B&O was preeminent in neither of these kinds of traffic…”
The NYC lost its passengers. But it pioneered containerization in an attempt to hold the merchandise traffic (only to be blocked by the dang government), grain quit moving through New York, and export petroeum dried up.
The Pennsy had a decent chance, because it served heavy industry more tied to rail. But it, like the NYC, it was bocked fro
I always wonder if PRR might have been saved had it been able to work out a coast-to-coast merger with say, both CNW & UP. CNW and UP, of course, had always been the Overland Route partners anyway and adding the PRR to this combination might have been good.
Ditto for NYC. I know it’s been brought up here before but a NYC + ATSF combo would have been tough to beat.
The answer here is going to be so jaded by emotion, this is, dependent on which you were a ‘fan’. It is also different from era and times and by which yardstick you use to measure. Mainline cities New York and Chicago were the only true head to head competiton as far as passengers. And since railroads were not like airlines, buses, and trucks, competition on freight routes varied if existed at all–airlines, buses, and trucks used open airways or public highways and could manipulate routes at will. The two railroads were unique and seperate railroads serving their own markets, routes, and customers with competition only on branch lines or secondary routes. Often they worked together to serve both passenger and freight customers with a viable service. If you are talking NY to Chicago, then there was head banging competition. But NY to Buffalo and Detroit, for instance, belonged to the NYC while NY to Pittsburg and CIncinnati was PRR’s. Each person is going to look at this question and will have an answer…right for them, wrong for others. Did you like the Brunswick Green or Tuscan Red of PRR over the two tone gray with with pinstripes of the NYC? Which road had the better Hudson (also an emotional answer)? And when you get to board rooms and executive levels, you’ll still find emotion and just as much differences of opinions.
Keep in mind that during the golden era of both roads the eastern United States had the advantage of an overwhelming majority of the nations population and manufacturing industry. There was plenty enough to go around for everybody. An unfortunate situation for the NYC was that the PRR and B&O controlled so many docks along the great lakes and trackage north/south. Despite that the NYC and some of the smaller bridge lines were still great and competitive roads.
The NYC controlled much of the trackage around Cleveland Ohio, an industrail giant back in the day, all other roads made a presence but the NYC was the big man on campus.
I knew several retired railroaders in Ohio that worked on the NYC, PRR and B&O. To hear them talk of how they all cooperated with one another, trackage rights, etc., I don’t think back then they view it as such the rivalry we assume today.
As to passenger service it was hard for rail lines to compete with the NYC between NYC and Chicago, give the NYC credit for not only sufficient service but great public relations to go with it.
In the post-WWII era, I think beginning in 1948 or 1949, you could go one way NY - Chicago on the NYC and bck on the PRR for the regular round-trip fare, Pullman or coach. YOu could go Boston - Chicago on the NYC and come back PRR-NYNH&H for the regular round-trip fare. So the cooperation when beyond what was absolutely necessary.
I did this more than once.
In my humble opinion, perhaps the thing the NYC did best was that it wasn’t the PRR.
When we use the terms NYC and PRR do we also mean the predecessor railroads? I think we need to, because frequently these early roads set the tone for the later giants by creating the culture as well as the public image of the company.
I can speak about Cleveland. It must be remembered that Clevelanders had a fondness and proprietary interest in the NYC if for no other reason than that predecessor Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway was founded and headquartered in the Forest City. Many prominent Clevelanders were associated with the LS&MS and NYC; and I’m not even mentioning NYC predecessor CCC&StL (Big Four).
Then there was the public perception problem: The PRR was viewed as something of a foreign road, with Cleveland at the end of a branch, as it were. Predecessor road Cleveland & Pittsburgh RR didn’t make any friends by running their line diagonally through the city and ruining the atmosphere of old Euclid Avenue (“the finest Avenue in the West”) by crossing it. The Union Depot was used and owned by both companies’ predecessor lines. The 1864 depot was almost immediately inadequate for the job at hand. After years of embarrassment over the depot, the Van Sweringen brothers stepped forward to offer plans for the grand, new Cleveland Union Terminal. The PRR wanted nothing to do with the CUT project and fought the Van Sweringens and the NYC every step of the way. Subsequently, the PRR never used the CUT and its trains continued to use the old, dirty, dilapidated embarrassment on the lake front. The PRR operated the last train from the old depot on September 27, 1953. I was a passenger on that last train (it was my first train ride!).
When the NYC needed to unload their Nickel Plate Railroad, they sold it to the Van Sweringens. The NKP was also headquartere
George W. Hilton, who liked the Erie, once opined that the leading wonder of the Erie was negative, it managed to wander between New York and Chicago and miss almost every major traffic source. Youngstown was the one sizable traffic source on the Erie main, Cleveland and Buffalo both being at the end of branches.
My take on the Erie comment was the same, NKP, but as CSSHEGEWISCH noted it was a wandering road, lots of single track, missing major cities, good for high and wide loads, and never really competed for New York-Chicago passenger traffic. And, NKP, as I noted earlier, PRR and NYC mainline competition was NY and Chi with other cities on secondary routes. Thus, Buffalo, Detroit, Cleveland Toledo were NYC citiees but off line, or secondary lines for PRR. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati were more directly served by the PRR. Erie, split the in between while the B&O was a southern railroad out of D.C. and Baltimore entering the midwest through Pittsburg on the north and Parkwerburg, WVA on the south. Two other pairings: DL&W-NKP and LV-NKP via Buffalo also gave NY to Chicago and St. Louis connections. I am not sure, NKP, by what you are looking for in "an analysis of the Erie and B&O as trunk lines: as they were not head to head competitors because their main eastern terminals were hundreds of miles a part and only got into each other’s way in the Akron-Canton-Youngstown area of Ohio; the Erie being NY to Chicago and the B&O being Baltimore and Washington to Chicago (remember B&O was not C&O at the time). All above mentioned roads did have coal hauling interests…Erie,LV and DL&W being mostly Northeastern Pennsylvania and the others Southwestern PA, Virginia, West Viginia, Ohio, etc…so their markets were different. So, if you can clarify what you are looking for, we might come up with some answers. Or opinions.
Hi Henry
Which had the better Hudson ? A question difficult to answer since the PRR Hudson never materialized , I would even think it never fully transpired from thought to drawing board .
So - would a possible P1 class ( prior to 1931 ) or P6 ( post 1935 ) 4-6-4 have been a cross-over between K5 and M1 , with arguably a bigger Belpaire , auguring T1 boiler features ? would it have been ‘slippery’ as the K5 or under-cylindered ? would it have been a keystone class to classic Pennsy contour steam or first class fully streamlined by Raymond Loewy , likely with the ‘bullet nose’ theme on what I call the ‘Nautilus’ styling Art Deco streak-lining shirt he threw over ‘Long Tall Sally-One’ - PRR #6100 ? ( see http://www.billspennsyphotos.com/GRIF%20TELLER%201939%20Calendar%20Print%20(2).jpg ) Sheet metal couture he imagined for one K4s 3768 was a first exercise of things to come , see http://www.retrovisions.com/images/_art/T006TN.jpg
Following the J-1e - K4s race out of Englewood - see http://trains-worldexpresses.com/100/101-02m.jpg - would a NYC mini-skirted J-3a have raced with a more conservatively semi-long-skirted P6 ? and - my goodness , just dare to think of it : would the Pennsy 4-6-4 have had a sixteen wheel ‘low rider’ tender ? I figure not , I mean I wouldn’t want to figure the burden of it going up Horse Shoe curve to Gallitzin ! On the other hand , there always was a plentiful supply of I1s at Altoona to share fates as members of the LWWA ( Loco Weight Watchers Annonymous ) .
Questions , questions , questions - remaining unresolved …
so what remains is to say - regards from
Juniatha
<
Yeah, well, thats really the answer: how and what do you want to compare. Both railroads were standard guage and both served NY city and Chicago on mainlines and many other cities on lesser mainlines or mainlines and lesser lines. NYC went along water courses and lake shores as much as possible, PRR went over the mountains. Both tapped PA and WVa coal fields. One used the tuscan red as its logo color, the other gray was the color but at times the oval was some kind of red. They both worked with the New Haven but in different places and different way; even the NY city connections were so different. And this is true of comparing all railroads with one another. Unless you specify the differences or similarities you are looking for…you can’t even say which railroad was better than another without qualifying “better”… , then it is just a wide open field filled with comments and no one saying one is right and the other isn’t. Only wrong if you don’t know PRR had no real Hudsons.
I second the opinion of yhe local feeling playing a big part in the NYC popularity in Cleveland, just like the local feeling of the PRR in Pittsburgh, everyone else was a foreigner. NKP Guy mentioned the Old Union Depot, a shared NYC/PRR facility. It was an embarrassment, so much so that Cleveland business’s participated in a PR endeavor posting billboards along the lakefront asking visitors not to judge Cleveland by the condition of the station. It was also stated on postcards of the era.
If the new depot along the lakefront (Mall Plan) had materialized both railroads would have been sticking their chests out, plans were for an impressive facility and one Cleveland would have been proud of.
The C&P line through Cleveland was always under pressure as to its route location and resulted in several years of problems with the city. But it was imperative at the time to connect a rail line to Pittsburgh. When the PRR took over they eventually rebuilt the area along Euclid Ave, it was nicknamed Penn Square. Raising the rails and eliminating crossings did help and a more in tune station facility for the area.
As to the PRR and NYC working together they made a joint effort to establish a rail line to the docks in Lorain Ohio to put pressure on the dominant B&O. The effort failed and both took a back seat to the B&O there. I do remember seeing NYC passenger trains through Lorain on the NKP but for what reason I don’t know.
The NYC also pushed the competitive button in the Detroit/Toledo area, prompting the PRR to look toward Henry Fords’ DT&I for competitive help. It just felt like northern Ohio belong to the NYC and the sentimental favorite the Nickel Plate. That little guy was thorn in the side of some railroads.
I don’t think this thread had any intention of comparing locomotives, the NKP had a pacific they were happy with and that was the bottom line a
“The View of the Viaduct from in Front of the Diner - coach travel on the Erie”
by Hilton, George W., Trains, May 1972, pg. 20
[Magazine Index keywords: Erie reminiscence travel ]
Did the NYC’s waterlevel route and fewer grades give it a competitive advantage over the PRR?
The NYC parlayed it into an advertising slogan which appeared for years on their passenger timetables and schedules in the OG’s,. “The Water Level Route - You Can Sleep”. This was a backhanded slap at the the PRR with the curves and grades of their mainline through the Appalachians.
Mark
They both ran their prime trains between New York and Chicago in the same time. The Central was longer but fewer grades. I don’t think anyone can definitively say one was better or more competitive than the other. The were, well, competitors. And they were different. If you lived along the PRR, you’ll be a Pennsy fan; if you lived along the NYC, you’ll be a Central fan. I enjoyed and watched both companies main lines in the East but was more fascinated with each one’s secondary mains and branch lines; really different railroads than the main lines. I lived along the Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western and, so, niether the Erie nor the Lehigh Valley were very impressive to me. Unless you define what comparison you want to make, comparing motive power or grades or electirfication philosophie, or how they treated the states of Illinoise, Indiana, or Ohio, then it is all emotion.
Not really, traveling west from NYC the Central’s line went north along the Hudson River before looping around and going west, the PRR was pretty much the opposite, south to Philly then turning west through the mountains. The midwest heavy industrial area’s things were pretty equal. I believe it was the Central that tried to bisect the both routes when they made an attempt at a straighter route through northern Pennsylvania but that never materialized due to a turf war. As mentioned earlier, time wise not much was different for the competing passenger trains.
How about for investors? I’ve read losts of times, that back in it’s heyday, PRR stock was a good widows and orphans stock. It was solid, stable, and always paid a dividend. Was NYC stock as well thought of by investors?
Only the PRR attempted and succeeded with a frontal assault on the NYC stronghold of Manhattan, by way of the Hudson River tunnels and Pennsylvania Station, then with Sunnyside Yard in Queens for servicing trains. That extension then also let in NYC (but not PRR) competitor and PRR connection New Haven via the Hell Gate Bridge. PRR then purchased the LIRR to occupy and hold that territory. Altogether, it was the railroad equivalent of the D-Day invasion of France.
In the 19-teens through 1930’s, PRR electrified its Philadelphia suburban routes and eastern main lines. NYC never attempted anything so bold - even Cleveland’s Terminal Tower was a NKP/ Van Sweringen brothers project.
PRR also had its own huge car and locomotive shops at Hollidaysburg and Altoona, and several huge yards - Enola, for example - which dwarfed most of NYC’s.
Inland, PRR and NYC were roughly equivalent - call Buffalo about equal to Pittsburgh ‘back in the day’, although PRR’s branch-line network in Pennsylvania (coal regions) was far more extensive and productive than NYC’s network in its home state of New York (Adirondack Park). They both went to Chicago, St. Louis, and most other midwestern cities, had a network of branch lines that blanketed most of the rest of that territory, went to diverse places such as most of Michigan’s “mitten” (lower peninsula), and touched West Virginia and Kentucky, etc. But PRR had good access to every major mideastern US seaport and coastal city along the strip from New York City to Washington, D.C., including Philadelphia/ Camden, NJ, Wilmington, Del., and Baltimore, MD, and those cities gave it direct connections to some southern railroads that the NYC didn’t have. NYC had only New York City, and a branch-line extension to Boston, the B&A. And the territory between those 2 NYC cities was pretty much locked-up by rival New Haven, which included Provide
Ahhh…the romance and glamour of the rails, of Wall Street fortunes, and short memories!
.jpg){kind=link}
