If I'm not mistaken, and as Wikipedia says, "Most interurbans were built to standard gauge..." The Fort Wayne and Wabash Valley in particular seems to have been standard gauge. The exceptions tended to use even wider gauges, as the interurbans preferred to use the local streetcar tracks rather than lay their own, and those were sometimes broad gauge.
Bob Nelson
That interurban car is just spectacular! Where is it? I suspect it's at the Illinois Railroad Museum?
Hoosier interurbans should be an interesting field of study. As I understand it Indiana was the interurban capital of the US at one time.
I just remembered, the "Classic Trains" summer 2013 issue was the BIG interurban issue and was absolutely fascinating. It's still available as a back-issue.
Penny, did you do the Pocohantas lettering yourself on the little porter? It looks perfect.
No. That was a road/mill name that Bachmann used to offer.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
My father remembers riding the interurban from Peru to Fort Wayne. He said the Wabash RR tracks were separate, so they did not use the same tracks. That seems wasteful to me but that was becore boom and bust cycles led to regulation.
Firelock,
yes it was recovered by the Illinois Railway Museum in 1991 and restored.
i was able to order the interurban issue from Classic Trains via amazon. They said it was the last one in stock. Thanks for the tip.
too bad it was not digital.
Okay, folks. Here is a radical idea. Maybe Classic Toy Trains could be redefined as toy versions of classic trains. That would broaden the market enormously because people who enjoy playing with the new versions of the classic trains would be included.
The Gnome Firelock, i was able to order the interurban issue from Classic Trains via amazon. They said it was the last one in stock. Thanks for the tip. too bad it was not digital.
No it's not, you can't take a computer in the bathroom!
And you'll just love that interurban issue, that's one I've kept, it never made it to the recycle bin or the magazine rack at the gym. The thing is, I've never much had an interest in trolleys or interurbans, but that issue just fascinated me no end. "Classic Trains" hit it out of the park with that one!
And the Wabash and interurban tracks separate? No surprise there, two different companys of course, and the steam railroads, or many of them, were downright hostile to the interurban 'roads. As a matter of fact there was an interurban line in northern New Jersey (where I'm from) called the Bergen County Rapid Transit that paralelled the Erie Railroad's main line for quite a distance. In this case the Erie didn't mind all that much, the BCRT didn't steal that much business from them. As a matter of fact, the interurban cars and the Erie's trains used to race each other on occasion! Strictly non-official, but the passengers got a kick out of it!
Bob,
you are correct. I went to Wikipedia and most interurbans used standard gauge, called narrow gauge by some, but not as narrow as ON30. Thank the stars that i am not a prototyper. The freelancer label sounds better all the time.
Wikipedia also reports that cities did not want trams to use the same width track as the big trains because they did not want freight hauled on their streets. But the Ft Wayne and Wabash Valley did haul freight in addition to passengers. They issued a postcard bragging about that but it is a bit blurry or i would post it. So my alternate reality will haul some freight and it will use on30. Reality is far too constraining.
anyway, i am claiming that the standard gauge lines are close enough to on30. I never will be able to find a classic toy train that is marked Ft Wayne and Wabash Valley, but by george those trains count as classic to me so the toys i use to remember them are good enough for a freelancer.
so far i have not made a Critter the way some on30 freelancers do, but maybe in time i will do so. Marring an expensive new Spectrum on30 by repainting and relettering with fwwv seems wasteful to me. Maybe i will learn to bash other cars to make the rolling stock i need. Drop an O scale body onto an HO chassis. Or just put HO wheels on a narrow O gauge car. Or build up the sides of an HO boxcar. The result would be freelance but it would be a toy version of a classic train after it is painted and lettered.
I went to Wikipedia and most interurbans used standard gauge, called narrow gauge by some, but not as narrow as ON30. Thank the stars that i am not a prototyper.
Perhaps you didn't check widely enough?
In Belguim there was an extensive system of city and interurban lines called the "Vicinal". These were one metre gauge (which I agree is 9-3/4" more than 30") but not enough to render the principle invalid.
There is a prototype for almost anything, since prototype engineers are as resourceful as modellers.
Check:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicinal_tramway
and:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_Tram_(Belgium)
The latter system is still operating. Since the Vicinal combined both steam rural lines with electric tramways, it should suit you "right down to the ground" as they say.
Peter
Peter,
the lack of standardization is mind boggling, but i will accept your argument that using on30 for an interurban has a prototype.
as far as i can tell, no interurban tram car is currently made in on30. Spectrum has two shorty trams, which maybe i could use, but would they pull freight cars? That would look funny. If they even have couplers. Bet they dont. So, for now i will pull freight and passenger cars with a bachmann spectrum on30 loco. An excursion passenger car seems to fit the era.
You know man, let me tell you something, it's your layout! You do what you want and what pleases you, don't worry too much about scale or track gauge or anything else. "If it feels good, do it!" Or, "If it looks good, so what?"
Rmember, the whole point of this hobby is to give pleasure to yourself, everything else is nonsense. I've gone over to the "Model Railroader" site and it seems to me most of those folks are just looking for something else to worry about. Who needs the agita?
Hey, I'll run some 19th Century 4-4-0's on my layout along with 20th contemporary diesels. My excuse? "There's a Civil War re-enactment going on in town! Deal with it!"
The GnomeThank the stars that i am not a prototyper. The freelancer label sounds better all the time.
That's the definition of a Hi-railer. Someone who likes the looks of scale detailing but uses out-of-scale track.
Firelock, bravo!
why am i being defensive? I apologize to all.
Penny,
hi-railer. I will start googling that.
thanks.
The Gnome Peter, the lack of standardization is mind boggling, but i will accept your argument that using on30 for an interurban has a prototype. as far as i can tell, no interurban tram car is currently made in on30. Spectrum has two shorty trams, which maybe i could use, but would they pull freight cars? That would look funny. If they even have couplers. Bet they dont. So, for now i will pull freight and passenger cars with a bachmann spectrum on30 loco. An excursion passenger car seems to fit the era.
my skills for modfying plastic cars are limited to i am reluctant to mess up a nice car. However, the interurbans had wood bodies so maybe i could make a shell with balsa and drop it onto an HO chassis. Perhaps an HO passenger car chassis would be long enough.
your suggestion about the O scaled Baldwin steam dummie body might be the best idea, but why not put it ontop of an HO loco, covering the loco body like an overcoat.
Since my father confirmed the Wabash tracks were parallel to but separate from the FWWV interurban tracks, i have ordered the parts necessary for changing my layout to a circle within an oval. No additional space is needed. The traction car or cars can whiz around the inner circle while the freight train chugs along the outer oval, perhaps in the opposite direction.
Hey, remember back on the 21st I mentioned how floor trains were usually beyond the scope of what we discuss here?
Well, yesterday I got my latest, action-packed edition of CTT and lo and behold, what's on page 20? An Auburn Rubber Company toy floor train from the 50's! And with a good back-story with it. How 'bout that?
Looks like something I wouldn't have minded having as a kid at all!
in your opinion, is Lionel Lines classic?
also, i bought an AF tin caboose in Marshfield on Tuesday. It is beat up but it looks cool to me. Is that a classic?
the antique store had a few locos and the prices looked good but they were not what i was after.
The Gnome Firelock, in your opinion, is Lionel Lines classic? also, i bought an AF tin caboose in Marshfield on Tuesday. It is beat up but it looks cool to me. Is that a classic? the antique store had a few locos and the prices looked good but they were not what i was after.
Brother, if it's Lionel, it's classic! (Although some are more classic than others.) One day MTH will be there too.
And that American Flyer tinplate caboose? Definately classic! Certainly pre-WW2, but I'm not enough of an expert to know just how "pre."
Palallin,
because of your regard formthe Mogul 2-6-0, i have been looking into them. The tender on this mogul looks a lot like a gondola. it is about half as tall as a box car and seems to have straight sides. very simple.
Attache are two photos, one the Bmann and one original. They have the same tender, gondola style.
Firelock76 The Gnome Firelock, i bought an AF tin caboose in Marshfield on Tuesday. It is beat up but it looks cool to me. Is that a classic? the antique store had a few locos and the prices looked good but they were not what i was after. And that American Flyer tinplate caboose? Definately classic! Certainly pre-WW2, but I'm not enough of an expert to know just how "pre."
The Gnome Firelock, i bought an AF tin caboose in Marshfield on Tuesday. It is beat up but it looks cool to me. Is that a classic? the antique store had a few locos and the prices looked good but they were not what i was after.
i bought an AF tin caboose in Marshfield on Tuesday. It is beat up but it looks cool to me. Is that a classic?
The #1114 Caboose was cataloged from 1919 through 1935 according to the Greenberg guide. As you can imagine there were a number variations. Your example has Type Va trucks (8 wheel, no journals) which were used from 1927 - 1930. Your example is listed as 1114(J) in the book. I think that the brown cupola walls were more common on the 4 wheel versions of the caboose.
Enjoying the World's Greatest Hobby
Northwoods Flyer
The Northwoods Flyer Collection
of
American Flyer Trains
"The Toy For the Boy"
Northwoods, thanks for the info. I did not know any of that stuff. It looked cool so i bought it. 17$.
Glad to help. That is a great price. If you go back to the antique store you should take some photos of the engines that are available. Inquiring minds might be interested.
That antique store was the Mercantile in Marshfield WI. They had maybe a dozen cars, including some large diesels.
I will not be back in Marshfield for a while but they are nice people so if you called them and asked about the inventory of train stuff, i am sure they would be happy to help. They admit to being clueless about trains. They said Marshfield has a train club but apparently those guys never sell anything to antique stores. A recent estate sale provided some inventory for them, if i remember the story correctly.
that book you cited is expensive. Kalmbach is offering the volume that goes up to 1927 for a hundred bucks.
This is the book that I was referring to:
It has been out of print for quite awhile, however you can find it on the secondary market, and it can be quite expensive. It shows up on ebay frequently. It has errors and isn't complete on variations but it is still the best resource on Prewar American Flyer O Gauge in print. It is the first resource I turn to when trying to identify a piece of Flyer equipment.
Come visit the thread here on the CTT site for more information about Prewar Flyer and to ask questions. I don't want to hijack this thread anymore than I already have.
regarding the Mogul 2-6-0 and their use by the Wabash RR in particular, Classic Trains wrote this:
“Four 1899 Moguls remained in service until 1955 because their 124,000 pound weight was the maximum that could be carried by the Illinois River bridge on the branch to Keokuk, Iowa“.
So, that is why they were using a smaller loco. My Dad said he was working steam engines before he went to Korea but when he came back, the steamers were gone.
You know, weight wasn't the only reason some steam engines lasted as long as they did. For example, the Rio Grande narrow-gauge lines in New Mexico and Colorado that eventually became the Cumbres and Toltec and Durango and Silverton tourist 'roads kept steam well into the 1960's because the Rio Grande was planning to abandon the narrow-gauge lines anyway, so it made no sense to order custom-made narrow-gauge diesels to replace the steamers.
And wasn't that lucky for us and the rest of the railfan world?
you gave me an idea. I wonder if anyone has focused their layout on modeling tourist lines.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month