Trains.com

Ugliest Locomotive Modifications

15983 views
34 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Tuesday, February 26, 2013 5:03 AM

Overmod,

On one of the versions of "The Odyssey" the giant cyclops had an eye that glowed and didn't blink.  When it fell asleep, the eye's light simply grew dim. This may be the version of the creature Deggesty is referring to.

But regarding this subject..........I still think that, while mechanically efficient, those Paducah "frog eyed" Geeps were hideous!  Ick!

Overmod

Deggesty
Well, the cyclops, which is mentioned in the Odyssey, had only one eye--in the middle of its forehead. That the one who had captured Odysseus and his men when they was on their way back to Greece from Troy had only one eye made it much easier for Odysseus to blind him and make it possible for them to escape--Odyseus had to stab only one eye. Greek mythology tells us that one of the gods took pity on this blinded cyclops and gave him two good eyes (I don't think that they were frogeyes, though)--after Odysseus and his men had made good their escape

But you don't answer why you think a Cyclops (which in Greek means round eye, not single eye) is supposed to give light, or why you asked if a Paducah frogeye gave more light...

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    December 2010
  • 23 posts
Ugliest loco modification
Posted by GTCN on Tuesday, January 29, 2013 8:46 AM

All modifications, both plating and painting over cab windows which turned locomotives built with operating cabs into booster units. Include also the factory modified units, such as GP-9B's, GP-60B's, and particularly the GP-30B. None were as aesthecically pleasing as the units with cabs. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,019 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, January 29, 2013 8:46 AM

We're over here with this topic:  http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/214120.aspx

The GP30 was in part designed by GM's automotive folks, so I've heard...

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
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:33 AM

Factory-built and most shop-modified hood-unit boosters, with the possible exception of the GP30B, weren't bad at all.  The GP30, both cab and booster, was not particularly well-styled.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:11 AM

Dokrich
Hard pick between BQ23-7 and Pilbara cabs on the Australian Alcos. What a way to ruin a beatiful locomotive with forward slanted windows and a door in the middle!

Except for the door in the middle, Pilbara cabs and variants are fairly standard on late model Australian locomotives.  Also consider that Australian engine drivers preferred to operate their World Locomotives from the cab on the flat end since visibility was better from that cab.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2012
  • 8 posts
Posted by gntrain1 on Monday, January 28, 2013 9:16 PM

I still think it looks like a cross between something Amtrak would have done and a work train engine. But it is true that even ugly grows on you after awhile.......or after a couple stiff drinks.

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Guelph, Ontario
  • 4,819 posts
Posted by Ulrich on Monday, January 28, 2013 6:57 PM

Overmod

BaltACD

rdamon

Unless we count some repaints or patch jobs ..  ;)

I would say the BQ23-7 although technically a factory offering ranks high. I also thought when they added the front porch to the F40's looked odd. Speaking of the F40 ... CABBAGE!!!

UGLY in all caps doesn't come close to how ugly they are.

Guys, youi missed a sure bet -- the BQ23-7s AFTER their cabs were plated off and their status reduced to B units...  ;-}

This thing is so ugly it has come full circle and is actually quite good looking.  Look at it for awhile and it kinda just grows on you.

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • 2 posts
Posted by Dokrich on Monday, January 28, 2013 6:45 PM
Hard pick between BQ23-7 and Pilbara cabs on the Australian Alcos. What a way to ruin a beatiful locomotive with forward slanted windows and a door in the middle!
  • Member since
    March 2010
  • 266 posts
Posted by rrlineman on Monday, January 28, 2013 3:48 PM

you forgot all the junk modified by the various mexican railroads on the  60's and 70's. all them poor ALCO's and Baldwins !!!!

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, January 27, 2013 8:31 PM

Well, I guess what it comes down to is the 'roads don't care what they look like, just as long as they work.

But really...

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, January 27, 2013 3:12 PM

BaltACD

rdamon

Unless we count some repaints or patch jobs ..  ;)

I would say the BQ23-7 although technically a factory offering ranks high. I also thought when they added the front porch to the F40's looked odd. Speaking of the F40 ... CABBAGE!!!

UGLY in all caps doesn't come close to how ugly they are.

Guys, youi missed a sure bet -- the BQ23-7s AFTER their cabs were plated off and their status reduced to B units...  ;-}

  • Member since
    January 2013
  • 5 posts
Posted by CSX86FAN on Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:53 PM

You couldn't be more right about those Family Lines BQ23-7 units.  They looked like someone took one of the B23-7 models and slammed it head-on into a wall at 100 miles an hour!  From what I read in a book on cabooses by Brian Solomon, they were purchased by SCL to replace cabooses.  I think SCL would have been better off leaving the cabooses on the rear of any trains pulled by these monstrosities!  Laugh

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, January 25, 2013 2:27 PM

tree68
I would submit the "Dewitt Geeps."

...and I would "second" the submission!  The Dewitt jobs were awful.  The later Altoona versions (RS3m) were much better.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, January 25, 2013 2:19 PM

rdamon

Unless we count some repaints or patch jobs ..  ;)

I would say the BQ23-7 although technically a factory offering ranks high. I also thought when they added the front porch to the F40's looked odd. Speaking of the F40 ... CABBAGE!!!

UGLY in all caps doesn't come close to how ugly they are.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2008
  • 2,325 posts
Posted by rdamon on Friday, January 25, 2013 10:26 AM

Unless we count some repaints or patch jobs ..  ;)

I would say the BQ23-7 although technically a factory offering ranks high. I also thought when they added the front porch to the F40's looked odd. Speaking of the F40 ... CABBAGE!!!

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,019 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 10:23 PM

IC (and then ICG) for many years ran "Mars" lights on their locomotives.  As I recall, one light was white, one red, and I suspect they operated much the same as the classic SP light cluster.  They had been removed by the time the image in this thread was taken.

In the early 70's they went to a three light fixture with two whites alternating, and a flashing red when desired.

As for the frog-eye lights, I suspect somebody at Paducah saw them in the catalog (Pyle?) and thought they'd look nice.  AFAIK, they used the same bulbs as everything else.  Whether their position at the top of the short hood made any difference for the crew visibility-wise would have to come from a crew member.

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
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:46 PM

Deggesty
Well, the cyclops, which is mentioned in the Odyssey, had only one eye--in the middle of its forehead. That the one who had captured Odysseus and his men when they was on their way back to Greece from Troy had only one eye made it much easier for Odysseus to blind him and make it possible for them to escape--Odyseus had to stab only one eye. Greek mythology tells us that one of the gods took pity on this blinded cyclops and gave him two good eyes (I don't think that they were frogeyes, though)--after Odysseus and his men had made good their escape

But you don't answer why you think a Cyclops (which in Greek means round eye, not single eye) is supposed to give light, or why you asked if a Paducah frogeye gave more light...

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:26 PM

Well, the cyclops, which is mentioned in the Odyssey, had only one eye--in the middle of its forehead. That the one who had captured Odysseus and his men when they was on their way back to Greece from Troy had only one eye made it much easier for Odysseus to blind him and make it possible for them to escape--Odyseus had to stab only one eye. Greek mythology tells us that one of the gods took pity on this blinded cyclops and gave him two good eyes (I don't think that they were frogeyes, though)--after Odysseus and his men had made good their escape.

AntonioFP45

Cyclops?  Do you mean one of these:

http://espee.railfan.net/nonindex/sd09_photos/5345_sp-sd9-yardclerk.jpg

Deggesty

Does the frog-eye give more light than a cyclops?

Johnny

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 7:39 PM

CSX86FAN
I have to say that the C&NW "Crandall Cab" E9 units are definitely the UGLIEST locomotives in existence! They are uglier than the CF7 units. It looks like someone chopped the nose off an F45 locomotive and welded it onto one end of an E9B unit! I saw the picture of the unit on page 18 of the January 2011 issue of Trains Magazine, and I thought to myself, "What was C&NW THINKING when they built these locomotives?!"

For your perusal:


Kissin' Cousins by Jim53171, on Flickr

Photo taken at the M19A (40th street yard) diesel shop.

And for what it's worth, they ran as poorly as the looked; in addition, they were incredibly cold and loud in the cab (no insulation). The only nice thing about them was the rebuilt control stand, with the 26L brake valve replacing the 24RL.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 7:15 PM

eolafan

I'll add to the list from back in the 1970's when the C&NW put EMD prime movers (along with an EMD long hood for engine clearance) onto some ex-Frisco and company owned Baldwin road switchers, so you ended up with the short hood and cab of a Baldwin and hte long hood of an EMD...yuk!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Missouri_Kansas_Texas_locomotive_142.jpg

 Linked is photo of : MKTRR  (KATY) RS3m  THe one pictured is at the Midland RR in Baldwin City, Ks.

 

 


 

  • Member since
    January 2013
  • 5 posts
Posted by CSX86FAN on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:57 PM
I have to say that the C&NW "Crandall Cab" E9 units are definitely the UGLIEST locomotives in existence! They are uglier than the CF7 units. It looks like someone chopped the nose off an F45 locomotive and welded it onto one end of an E9B unit! I saw the picture of the unit on page 18 of the January 2011 issue of Trains Magazine, and I thought to myself, "What was C&NW THINKING when they built these locomotives?!"
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:03 PM

Cyclops?  Do you mean one of these:

http://espee.railfan.net/nonindex/sd09_photos/5345_sp-sd9-yardclerk.jpg

Deggesty

Does the frog-eye give more light than a cyclops?

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:31 PM

Does the frog-eye give more light than a cyclops?

Johnny

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 6:14 PM

That large single front window on the Paduch rebuilds would give the crew good visibility.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,019 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:53 PM

AntonioFP45

Here's a "Frog Eye" Geep (pertaining to the headlights).

I remember seeing them while I was in Rantoul.

They may not be beautiful, but between the "frog eyes" and the ox-yoke air intakes, they had character...

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
    December 2003
  • From: Good ol' USA
  • 9,642 posts
Posted by AntonioFP45 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:48 PM

The Paducah 1st Gen locomotive rebuilds from the 70s / 80stops my list. The mods made them more efficient but they personify the term:  "Total Lack of Style!"

Here's a "Frog Eye" Geep (pertaining to the headlights).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/57688015@N08/5355596631/in/set-72157628255099005

"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"

 


  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:33 PM

Some of the ugliest locomotives had to be those with Coffin feedwater heaters applied to them, the external applications I should say.  JMJ!  You've got to work pretty hard to come up with a steam engine I don't like!

  • Member since
    January 2013
  • From: PA
  • 481 posts
Posted by Schuylkill and Susquehanna on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:31 PM

I'll agree that the "Baby face" styling is unusual, but I think the the Centipedes turned out pretty well.  Besides, those large windows must give much better visibility from the cab.  Personally, I think that the low-nose alco RS-3 diesels are not the most aesthetically pleasing locomotives.

 

Modeling the Pennsy and loving it!

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:17 AM

I would submit the babyface for some consideration; the A1A-trucked versions perhaps being the worst (by comparison with anyone else's similar locomotive and particularly the PRR BP-20s...

There was a VERY long thread here about ugly locomotives going about 3 years ago; just search 'ugly locomotives' and it should pop up.

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