Trains.com

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

6305 views
44 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 433 posts
Posted by ccltrains on Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:09 PM

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.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, October 25, 2014 11:36 AM

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

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, October 25, 2014 10:57 AM

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?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Saturday, October 25, 2014 7:55 AM

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...

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 433 posts
Posted by ccltrains on Saturday, October 25, 2014 7:01 AM
The BART wide gauge also made the cost higher because very few off the shelf items could be used.
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 433 posts
Posted by ccltrains on Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:59 AM
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.
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • 433 posts
Posted by ccltrains on Saturday, October 25, 2014 6:56 AM

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".

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Friday, October 24, 2014 3:26 PM

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 773-702-7000 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.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, October 23, 2014 11:28 AM
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.
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 2,593 posts
Posted by PNWRMNM on Thursday, October 23, 2014 10:52 AM

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 773-702-7000 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

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: St. Paul, Minnesota
  • 2,116 posts
Posted by Boyd on Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:23 PM
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.

Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.

  • Member since
    October 2014
  • 1,644 posts
Posted by Wizlish on Thursday, October 16, 2014 8:48 AM

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.

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:35 AM

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.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 918 posts
Posted by Kyle on Thursday, October 16, 2014 6:21 AM

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.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Monday, October 13, 2014 9:00 PM

Kevin C. Smith

Dunce

 
Murphy Siding
 

 

Either am correct?  Dunce

 

No,

It's I, there, am correct.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 7 posts
Posted by CADDguy on Monday, October 13, 2014 7:47 PM

I worked with PBTB in Atlanta (MARTA) along side many of the engineers who designed BART.  I was told that the BART gauge would provide greater stability in minor earthquakes and high coastal winds.  They also wanted a unique system evidenced by the "A" cars with the sloped nose.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 2 posts
Posted by GERALD ALEXANDER on Monday, October 13, 2014 4:23 PM

Just like the spelling of theater/theatre. Either is correct...it's just the preference of the writer.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: MP 32.8
  • 769 posts
Posted by Kevin C. Smith on Friday, October 10, 2014 2:28 AM

Dunce

Murphy Siding
 

Either am correct?  Dunce

"Look at those high cars roll-finest sight in the world."
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Thursday, October 9, 2014 9:54 PM

Euclid
Either “gage” or “gauge” are correct.  Both are equally valid spellings.  It makes no difference how railroad companies or other railroad organizations spell it.  Like everyone else, they are free to choose which of the two legitimate spellings to use. 
 

Either *is* correct?  

(  Sorry man.  The Devil made me do it.  )

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Thursday, October 9, 2014 9:02 PM

A check for on-line definitions shows that "gage" is a variation on "gauge," but that "gage" itself makes no mention of measurement at all:

noun
1.
something, as a glove, thrown down by a medieval knight in token ofchallenge to combat.
2.
Archaic. a challenge.
3.
Archaic. a pledge or pawn; security.

verb (used with object)gaged, gaging.

4.
Archaic. to pledge, stake, or wager.

 
 

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Thursday, October 9, 2014 11:21 AM

Okay; just don't spell it "guage."

Johnny

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, October 9, 2014 10:19 AM
Either “gage” or “gauge” are correct.  Both are equally valid spellings.  It makes no difference how railroad companies or other railroad organizations spell it.  Like everyone else, they are free to choose which of the two legitimate spellings to use. 
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, October 9, 2014 10:06 AM

Buslist
In North American Railway Engineering practice it's GAGE, which my former boss would frequently remind everyone. Check the AREMA Manual for example.

Much as it galls me to say this -- when referring to AREMA standards (which means when discussing the technical details of track 'width') it's "gage".  No need to invent a reason why four letters gets the job done as well as five.

Here is CSX official language (from their "Standard Specifications for the Design and Construction of Private Sidetracks"):

"The gage of track is the distance between the heads of rails, measured at right angles thereto, at a point
five-eighths (5/8”) inch below the top of rail. Standard gage is 4’-8 1/2”. No change in gage on account
of curvature will be permitted without the express permission of CSXT. Gaging must be done at the
time the rail is laid."

To drive home the point, here is language from the BNSF counterpart ("Design Guidelines for Industrial Track Projects") which not only establishes the difference, but makes it in the 'opposite' direction from the semantics I learned:

"A track gauge manufactured for the purpose of measuring gage should be used rather
than a tape measure. Gage is to be checked at every third tie. Do not strike rail directly with a maul,
either on top when driving spikes, or on side to obtain track gage."

Note that these are both references provided for non-railroad personnel, for whom the word 'gauge' would almost surely be the 'accepted' normal and correct spelling... and many of whom might be inclined to complain about the spelling that has been used...

I think now that this is stronger than some other nomenclatural controversies, like "SE Mallet" for "simple articulated", or my own "ancillaries" for "auxiliaries".  Perhaps one of the professionals like MC can weigh in on the correct use of 'gage' in technical contexts.

[Note: the wack formatting of the quoted sections is due to more stellar design by the Kalmbach IT people.  May they get around to restoring the 'compose' feature -- preferably with the ability to edit in formatted view, about the only way to fix this kind of problem with rendering line breaks -- soon!]

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, October 9, 2014 9:00 AM

Euclid

 

 
CSSHEGEWISCH
 
Euclid

I always go with "gage."  It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?

 

 

You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick.

 

 

 

No Tribune Simplfied Spelling Systen; just a word with two alternate spellings.

gage4

 

/ɡeɪdʒ/

 

noun, verb

 

1.

 

(US) a variant spelling (esp in technical senses) of gauge

 

 

 

Its interesting to note that even the FRA Track Safety Standards use gage.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, October 9, 2014 8:01 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH
 
Euclid

I always go with "gage."  It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?

 

 

You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick.

 

No Tribune Simplfied Spelling Systen; just a word with two alternate spellings.

gage4

 

/ɡeɪdʒ/

 

noun, verb

 

1.

 

(US) a variant spelling (esp in technical senses) of gauge

 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Thursday, October 9, 2014 7:08 AM

I think that's what they teach in school these days. If you can't spell it, fake it.

Norm


  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, October 9, 2014 6:59 AM

Euclid

I always go with "gage."  It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?

You appear to be a disciple of the Tribune Simplified Spelling system, one of the zanier ideas of Col. Robert McCormick.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, October 8, 2014 4:42 PM

Gage--doen't that refer to greengage plums?Smile

Johnny

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Wednesday, October 8, 2014 4:27 PM

Euclid

I always go with "gage."  It is legitimate spelling, and if you can get the job done with four letters, why use five?

 

 

My former boss who was somewhat of a linguist maintained that measurements are taken with a gauge such as pressure gauge or a rain gauge A fixed measurement or set of measurements such as the distance between the rails or a set of clearance measurements is a gage (as in loading gage for the clearance measurements). I could only take his word for it, but then he was a former PRR guy!

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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