Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
The question wasn't which one was "best" but most unique. To me that leaves three trains. 1. The California Zephyr has to win for the dome car concept, even more for no reserve seats in the domes. The "Monument to an Idea" now resides at the Colorado Railroad Museum in Golden. 2. The High Level El Capitan. It wasn't until long into Amtrak that another train used that idea. 3. The low level Penn Central Metroliner. As far as I know, other than a few pendulum cars this idea wasn’t repeated until just recently with the new Acela cars.
If you're not counting comfort, on-time performance or looks, then the BLH RP-210 (NYC X-plorer and NH Dan'l Webster) is the most unique and original by far. Powered by a 1000hp Maybach aircraft diesel (the same as used on the Hindenburg) which drove a 4 speed hydromatic transmission built in Germany. A second, smaller Maybach diesel drove a dedicated HEP generator for lighting, controls, brakes, and communications. The New Haven Dan'l Webster trainset had an electric traction motor hooked up to the transmission so that it could drive the train on third rail power. This brings up an intersting side note as this is the only instance that I know of where a traction motor was used in conjunction with a gearbox. This in effect extended the operating range of the motor, allowing a single, relativly small motor propel the whole train at the maximum limit of the track.
This was one of the first trainsets to use 480 volt Head End Power. It also was equiped with Westinghouse HSC electro-pnumatic brakes, which is virtually identical to the brakes installed on the Amtrak Acela.
It was not the most glamorous train however. The sleek Sharknose design had been flattened into an ugly duckbill, and the lower roofline didn't help looks either. Their light weight and single axle articulated trucks gave them very poor ride qualities. Only three locomotives and 2 trainsets were constructed, a double ender for NH and a single for NYC.
As far as rare and unusual (and ugly), these are supreme.
Matthew ImbrognoMechanical Vollenteer, Arizona Railway Museum.
I may be mistaken, and I will check references and report back, but I believe the Daniel Webster was the Budd Hot Rod train, not as innovative and the John Quincy Adams, which is the train I think you are discussing. The train produced by Budd was basically the RDC concept warmed over, and yes it did have traction motors, but I am unsure that they drove through gear boxes. Later, the Budd train equipment was mixed in with regular RDC New Haven equipment, and I rode one of these cars from New Haven to Framingham, MA on Amtrak's "Bay State" during the time when Amtrak served the Inland Route via Springfield, as well as the Shore line. I have the book
The New Haven during the McGinnis Years
and that should answer the question. Possibly also "Diesels to Park Avenue"
For the most unusual, I have a few candidates. One for a full streamlined consist, another for a multiple unit, and yet another for a trainset.
Budd's Keystone: The only real pre-Talgo passenger car design which actually favored the Natural/Passive Tilt concept for taking curves at speed. True, the split level aspect for the NEC's hi-level platforms was an issue, but it was still a good attempt. Especially better than the Talgos for the time. I honestly think if the Pennsy had gone through with their initial plan for the Keystone, it could've extended the careers of the low-slung P-12-42 and RP-210 (both of which remain the closest power cars in terms of height to the Keystones). On top of that, the Pennsy introduced an alternative to HEP by having a generator in a completely seperate car. No wonder the actual coach cars weigh just under 46 tons! Plus, not that much space was taken up with the addition of the HEP car. It worked with the amount of steam-heat locos still in use, and if the concept had stayed around a bit longer, we could kept the original size of the F40's and not have them be Screamers!
Budd Metroliners: Yes, they were mechanically unreliable. But look at the impact they left. This was the closest the USA ever got to a high-speed EMU to compete with the European and Asian High-Speed trains, only being hindered by the track conditions like the later Turboliners. The Metroliners also took after the fastest steam locomotives of the Pennsy, being that they didn't need a lot of fancy aerodynamic casing to be fast. After all, they were recorded to have a higher top-speed than even the USDOT was expecting! Then of course, there was their carbodies. While the tubular shape still irks me to a degree, they fit with Amtrak's promotion of essentially being the ground equivalent to travelling in passenger jets. Plus, how many EMU's can you say inspired a family series of passenger cars, as well as an additional self-propelled railcar? While its more common today, they were still unique in terms of shape, and having a concealable diaphagm. None of the other postwar streamlined trainsets or 'MU sets in North America inspried their own line of "trailer" cars. Neither the Turboliner no the Turbotrain did. Acela has yet to do so, and I doubt the Avelia will.
Bombardier LRC: The closest successful lightweght trains we ever got. True the LRC power cars were pretty heavy, but they were pretty powerful for their size! Though, I think they could've been more powerful had the trains used the Keystone concept, but I digress. Then there's the cars. The LRC's essentially became VIA's version to the Amfleet. Lightweight (48 tons), under 13 feet tall, and forms the backbone of high speed Corridor service. Plus there's the fact that these were the last streamlined trains regularly powered by an ALCo/MLW prime-mover. That in itself is unusual.
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter