0-6-0s and 0-8-0s

[tstage]

Besides the obvious extra set of driver wheels, what's the difference between an 0-6-0 and a 0-8-0?  I'm assuming the 0-6-0 come first?  Was the 0-8-0 needed/created for pulling larger/heavier cars?  Would the 0-8-0s have stayed around longer than the 0-6-0s when dieselization came onto the scene?  Or, would they have been phased out at the same time?  Thanks.

Tom

[wjstix]

I think all of your assumptions are correct. 0-6-0's would have come along first. Many RR's used old steam engines as switchers in the 19th century, often modified by removing the lead truck (so a 2-8-0 might become an 0-8-0. 0-8-0's came along about the time steel began to be used for underframes, ends and roofs, and eventually entire cars. Plus they were better suited for heavy materials like iron ore.  Generally 0-8-0's lasted longer because they were more powerful and often newer, but then some 0-6-0's made it into the 1960's on shortlines and industrial RR's. I believe (American?) Steel and Wire in Chicago used an 0-8-0 at it's plant until about 1980.

[orsonroy]

Besides the obvious extra set of driver wheels, what's the difference between an 0-6-0 and a 0-8-0?

Mostly, pulling power, tractive effort, steaming abilities, and clearances. 0-6-0s were generally 20% or more smaller than 0-8-0s, most of which were USRA inspired. Assume that the 0-8-0s were used for large yard switching, local industrial switching and SOME transfer run use, while the 0-6-0s handled the smaller yards, local switching and secondary switch jobs.

I'm assuming the 0-6-0 come first? Was the 0-8-0 needed/created for pulling larger/heavier cars?

Well, sort of. Both types were invented before the Civil War, but neither really gained a lot of popularity until the late 1870s. The 0-8-0 was actually invented as a road engine for coal drags, but didn't become popular until after 1919, when the USRA version showed roads that they could have an engine that was suited to pull LONGER cuts of HEAVIER cars, thus saving time at division point yards (switching eats up time and money, which is one reason why yards were mostly dieselized first: diesels slashed switch engine time)

Would the 0-8-0s have stayed around longer than the 0-6-0s when dieselization came onto the scene?  Or, would they have been phased out at the same time?

It depends on the road, but it was usually the 0-6-0s that got the axe first, just because they were older and smaller. Roads tended to retire the older and less powerful equipment first, hanging on to the newer, more powerful engines until the bitter end.

[tstage]

Thanks Stix, thanks Ray.   I did find some additional information on Wikipedia that confirms what you have already stated.  The 0-6-0s were the more popular and used on the smaller and lighter rail RRs.  The larger and heavier 0-8-0s were used for hauling bigger loads on the mainline then later designated for yard work because of it's higher tractive effort.  (I am aware that you do have to take the information on Wikipedia with some reserve because it can contain errors.)

Tom

[route_rock]

  The name of the steel company is Northwest steel and wire out of Sterling Illinois. The 0-8-0's were GTW locos, one is on display at a museum in Sterling wile the rest sit out in Galt Illinois and are owned by IRM in Union, and are trade pieces.

 The last locomotive built by N&W Roanoke shops I believe was an 0-8-0, but dont quote me on it ;)

[Jetrock]

Not every 0-6-0 was that old: 0-6-0 steam-powered switchers were still being built in the 1940s. One of them, Granite Rock No. 10, was built in 1942 and pulls tourist-line trains at the California State Railroad Museum. Union Pacicic's 0-6-0 No. 4466, built in 1920, currently sits in the roundhouse at CSRM. It is operable but not currently certified. 

[tomikawaTT]

Not every 0-6-0 was that old: 0-6-0 steam-powered switchers were still being built in the 1940s. One of them, Granite Rock No. 10, was built in 1942 and pulls tourist-line trains at the California State Railroad Museum. Union Pacicic's 0-6-0 No. 4466, built in 1920, currently sits in the roundhouse at CSRM. It is operable but not currently certified. 

The USRA-designed 0-8-0's hold the distinction of being the very last steam locomotives that rolled off the erecting floor and into service with a U.S. Class 1.  The year was 1953, the erecting floor was at Shaffer's Crossing, and the Norfolk and Western was both builder and user.

Chuck

[orsonroy]

  The name of the steel company is Northwest steel and wire out of Sterling Illinois. The 0-8-0's were GTW locos, one is on display at a museum in Sterling wile the rest sit out in Galt Illinois and are owned by IRM in Union, and are trade pieces.

 The last locomotive built by N&W Roanoke shops I believe was an 0-8-0, but dont quote me on it ;)

One of the 0-8-0s is at IRM, but the last I heard, the rest were scrapped.

[wjstix]

That's a good point, I believe the Duluth and NorthEastern's 0-6-0's that they used into the sixties had been built for the US Army during WW2, so were only about 20 years old at that point.

Danube Mining on the Mesabi Range, and Coppers Coke Co. in St.Paul used 0-6-0's until 1964.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The last steam locomotive out of Roanoke Shops was indeed an 0-8-0,  N&W S-1a 244, completed in 1953.  It may be the last steam locomotive built for service for a common carrier in the USA.  Baldwin built a batch of 2-8-2's for India in 1954, those may be Baldwin's last steam.

An 0-8-0 can be a pretty impressive locomotive, consider the IHB's U-4a's with three cylinders and a huge boiler.

[Anonymous]

Not only were there 0-6-0s and 0-8-0s, but there were also 0-4-0s, 0-10-0s, and 0-10-2s.

The Pensy had 0-4-0s with tenders.  The B&O had four 0-4-0ts for the Baltimore docks that have been produced in HO by Varney, Rivarossi, IHC, Life-Life, and Bowser.

The C&O had a calss of 0-10-0s, but generally found that their increased tractive effort was offset by they inability to navigate yards trackage well.

There's an 0-10-2 in Greenville, PA from one of the iron railways.

The greater the wheel base, the more limited it is in what curves it can negotiate.
The greater the axle loading, the better the track needs to be.

Generally railroads like specific types of power.  Newer and larger didn't necessarily mean that it survived longer, but it commonly helped.  The NKP retired it's 1949 S-3 berkshires before it's 1944 S-2s.  The reason was that the S-2s had been more recently gone through Class I overhauls...typically the engines that were in service at the end were the ones that were saved...hence 5 of 6 surving NKP Berks were S-2s...755, 757, 759, 763, 765.

The surving locomotives give a good idea of what was in service at the end.

[tomikawaTT]

 The last locomotive built by N&W Roanoke shops I believe was an 0-8-0, but dont quote me on it ;)

You can quote Linn Westcott on it - specifically, Model Railroader Cyclopedia Volume 1, Steam Locomotives.  It's in the caption of the photo of N&W 264 in the rain, across from the table of contents.

At least, I think it's Number 264.  It's darned hard to read the number on a wet cab side, night photo.

Chuck  (Who runs an 0-8-0t - Baldwin, class of 1897 - and several 0-6-0t's)

[wjstix]

DM&IR had some 0-10-2's that they got secondhand from the Union Ry, which like the Missabe was a U.S. Steel road. I believe that engine type were called "Unions" if I recall?? Missabe used them for switching and for ore runs from Proctor yards down to the oredocks in Duluth. I believe they are basically 2-10-2's with the front 2 wheels removed - think the Union wanted 2-10-2's but they wouldn't fit on their existing turntables, so they ordered the same engines but without the lead trucks.

I know there is a preserved 0-10-2 from the DMIR on display somewhere that is lettered for the Missabe on one side and Union on the other.

See http://www.missabe.com/union609.html