What was the reason for creating a wide or narrow gauge track?

[Overmod]

Kevin C. Smith

 

Murphy Siding

 

Either *is* correct?  

(  Sorry man.  The made me do it.  )

 

 

Either am correct? 

 

No,

It's I, there, am correct.

[Kyle]

I did a bit of research on the history of railroads in the United States, and I remember I read somewhere some railroads had a different gauge to discourage competition from another railroad, however they realized that by using a standard gauge, they could link their systems together and capture a larger share of the tonnage hauled in the US.

[DS4-4-1000]

Kyle

I did a bit of research on the history of railroads in the United States, and I remember I read somewhere some railroads had a different gauge to discourage competition from another railroad, however they realized that by using a standard gauge, they could link their systems together and capture a larger share of the tonnage hauled in the US.

You also had situations like the city of Erie Pennsylvania which passed laws that any railroad entering the city from the east or southeast had to be 4 foot 8 inches or less in gage and any railroad entering from the west or southwest had to be 5 foot or more in gage.  Also no railroad could enter the city more than 1 city block.  Erie wanted to ensure business for the carriages and the hotels.

[Wizlish]

GERALD ALEXANDER

Just like the spelling of theater/theatre. Either is correct...

But the semantics are commonly recognized as different.  Nobody talks about 'theater people' who knows anything about the theatre; nobody but MI6 would refer to a 'theatre of war'.

The thesaurus is a guide to semantic meanings, not a table of equivalents.  Too many people get lazy and use it the wrong way.  Please don't be one of them.

[Boyd]

I heard on the radio that 4' 8.5" was from one of the first railroads having wheels with the flanges on the outer sides. That configuration had a 5' gage when measured from outside railhead to outside railhead. Then the same RR changed their wheels to have the flanges on the inside and the gage measured from inside of railhead to inside of railhead. Without changing the distance between the rails this new way of measuring gage came out to 4' 8.5".
The word "gage or gauge" has gotten twisted up over the years. Some people who had Lionel trains as a kid but were not hobbyist thought that "O" gauge track used a wider railhead spacing than "027" gauge track and thus thought 027 trains couldn't operate on "O" gauge track.

[PNWRMNM]

zkr123

What is the point of creating a wider or narrower gauge railroad? It seems like a lot of extra and specialized parts.

 

zkr,

For a book length treatment of this subject world wide buy the book "Tracks Across Continents Paths through History" by Douglas J. Puffert. Available from University of Chicago Press. It is item 58 in 2014/15 Book Sale Catalog. Tell them price code is AD1200 and it will cost $17.00 plus $6.00 S&H. Phone [phone] and have credit card in hand.

Puffert is an ecconomist interested in "path dependent" phenomina, and he uses gauge to as a case study. The historical part is very good, is the bulk of the book, and itself is worth the price. My only complaint is that he accepts without examination the claims that some broader gauge would have been better. Doing calculations on this question would be largely dependent on what assumptions and what time period (technoloy) one might choose. Also important, and unexplored, is the issue of "light" vs. "heavy" practice holding gauge constant. The author mentions this with a few first cost examples, but that is as far as he goes. Think of the difference between early British and early American practice in terms of grades and curves. He also avoided the issue of loading gauge, that is how big a hole must be built to handle taller, wider equipment. Here the American built it cheap and quick evolved into one of the larger loading gauges while the Brits have long been constrained by the small loading gauge that was "good enough" in the 1840's and 1850's.

Complaints aside, the book is well worth the cost. Get it now if you want it since this looks to be a close-out offering.

Mac McCulloch

[Euclid]

I don’t believe anybody knows what the ideal gage should be on any railroad.  It would change over time with a wide variety of factors such as the forces of economics, traffic type and patterns, and state of the railroad art.  Making this calculation of ideal gage has been a combination of art and science.  It would be very interesting if someone were to develop a comprehensive program that would process all of the input data, and then spit out the measurement of the perfect gage to do the job.  I think it would be highly unlikely to spit out 4’-8 ½”.

But the point is moot because we can’t change it now.  Actually, we could change it, but the cost of that change would have to become one of the many variables factored into the calculation, and that cost would render any change to be less than ideal.

[Euclid]

PNWRMNM

 

zkr123

What is the point of creating a wider or narrower gauge railroad? It seems like a lot of extra and specialized parts.

 

 

 

 

zkr,

For a book length treatment of this subject world wide buy the book "Tracks Across Continents Paths through History" by Douglas J. Puffert. Available from University of Chicago Press. It is item 58 in 2014/15 Book Sale Catalog. Tell them price code is AD1200 and it will cost $17.00 plus $6.00 S&H. Phone [phone] and have credit card in hand.

Puffert is an ecconomist interested in "path dependent" phenomina, and he uses gauge to as a case study. The historical part is very good, is the bulk of the book, and itself is worth the price. My only complaint is that he accepts without examination the claims that some broader gauge would have been better.

Mac McCulloch

 

Do you see a general consensus for what gage would be better than standard gage?  I am thinking it has to be somewhere around 5 ft.

[ccltrains]

Think of poor Australia.  They had three main gauges: 5' 3" Irish gauge, Standard (4' 8 1/2") and cape gauge (3' 6") plus many other gauges used in mining, forestry, temporary building lines etc which did not interchange.  Fortunately  they are standardizing on 4' 8 1/2".  When the Ghans was finally completed to Darwin it was rebuilt to standard gauge.  Wikipedia has a nice discussion on Australian gauges.  Google "Australian Railroad Gauges".

[ccltrains]

The origin of the 4' 8 1/2" gauge is lost in history. One of the most believable accounts is that was the width of the ruts in roads made by Roman chariots.

[ccltrains]

The BART wide gauge also made the cost higher because very few off the shelf items could be used.

[tree68]

ccltrains

The origin of the 4' 8 1/2" gauge is lost in history. One of the most believable accounts is that was the width of the ruts in roads made by Roman chariots.

Which, by association, means it's about the width of two horse's behinds.  At least according to one theory...

[Murphy Siding]

ccltrains

The BART wide gauge also made the cost higher because very few off the shelf items could be used.

 

  Wouldn't just require trucks that were set up for wider gauge?

[erikem]

Murph,

Think special order wheelsets, MOW equipment specific to BART, etc.

Had Marin County voted to join BART, the the rans from SF to Marin and beyond would have traveled over the Golden Gate Bridge on a deck below the roadway. The Golden Gate experiences periods of high winds, so the gauge was made wider to provide a larger margin of safety with respect to overturning from wind forces and bridge swaying.

The other odd aspect of BART is the 1,000V potential on the third rail.

- Erik

[ccltrains]

BART potentially could not purchase off the shelf rolling stock as in addition to wider wheel sets the car bodies may require a slightly different design other than cosmetic appearance.