Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
NS vs. CSX
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
CSX isn't even in the hunt with NS, just as C&O was never in the hunt with N&W. <br /> <br />In an era where a railroad's prosperity was judged at least partly on how much coal business it carried, C&O hauled more coal than N&W; on the west end of the railroad it took its coal all the way to Lake Erie at Toledo, and N&W had to give its coal, and part of the revenue, to connections at Columbus. Until it merged with Pere Marquette, C&O didn't have any more non-coal-involved mileage than did N&W, nor more passenger service to support. C&O didn't have N&W's grades nor N&W's curvature, against getting its coal to market. C&O had roundhouses full of the most fashionable locomotives ever devised by the mind of man - 90 big 2-8-4s, 40 2-10-4s, 60 2-6-6-6s, the world's heaviest 4-6-4s, and the Greenbrier 4-8-4s; while N&W just had a bunch of old obsolete (the smart guys said) compound 2-8-8-2s, 43 2-6-6-4s that the intelligentsia said were much inferior to the 2-6-6-6s, and some short-legged 4-8-4s. <br /> <br />Yet C&O never made the money that N&W did, as a function of carrying gross income over to net. <br /> <br />The bottom line is where it counts . . . <br /> <br />Old Timer
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy