The Class A and Roller Rods

[NW Mailing List]

Bud 

   Interesting if it coast 50K more to build I would speculate that a conversion  be will over 100K each.  What was the weight difference in the roller bearing As  ver the 

Frication bearing one’s?   Also looking at drawings  appears Timken did the design work not the N&W is there any surviving correspondence on that?

 

 

Thanks

Larry Evans  

 

 

From: NW-Mailing-List [mailto:nw-mailing-list-bounces at nwhs.org] On Behalf Of NW Mailing List
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2023 1:51 PM
To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
Subject: Re: The Class A and Roller Rods

 

Bud,
    Thank you for your reply!

Jimmy

On 1/9/2023 11:54 AM, NW Mailing List wrote:

Jimmy,
 
The two main reasons were expense and a lack of need. When 1235-42 were built in 1949-50, three had conventional rods and the last five lightweight rods like the J's. The lightweight rod A's cost about $50K more to build because of the rods and the redesigned wheel centers to accommodate the rods weighing 38 percent less. The A's with conventional rods were adequate for moving heavy freight trains between major terminals of about 120 miles where each engine were lubricated after each run. The lightweight A's were for special used in passenger service, moving troops trains and later Time Freights 77 and 78 over three districts without having to lubricate the rods.
 
Bud Jeffries
 
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20230109/b982f8ec/attachment-0001.htm>