Railway Man:
The point I was trying to make was the difference in ride between the F7 and the FP7 and not so much as how bad the F7 rode.
My personal opinion of the F7 is very positive, but as was mentioned on jointed rail with lots of low/battered joints the ride could get "Interesting". I fully concur with what you say about the GP40.
boomer -- I had some time in FP7s but never noticed a difference in ride. I don't doubt what you say one, however.
RWM
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding wrote:Would the CF7's have inherited the same problems?
Maybe, but it probably wouldn't be relevant, since CF7's were designed for switching / road switcher service, not high speed passenger trains. F units don't offer very good visibility to the rear so don't work so well as road switchers, so Santa Fe converted them to having a more road-switcheresque body.
Back to the original question, remember too that the period of time when F units were the preferred diesel engine for freights was fairly limited, basically 1940's to the early 1950's. Even though F9's made it to 1960, many railroads had started to shift their attention toward road switchers like the GP-7 and RS-11 etc. already. In fact, that's part of the reason the Soo Line bought 'passenger' GP's in the fifties with the torpedo tubes on the roof - GP's could more easily be used as freight engines once the railroad ceased passenger operations.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.