Page 4 of 5
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO) .
Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 5:26 am
by dudeface
Besides, I don't know if I can change the name for the entire subject.
Yes, the OP can. You need to go back to the very first post in this thread and edit it by changing the "Subject".
However, with a long rambling thread like this one, you run the risk of folks not finding it again.
In search of the ugliest train
Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 6:33 am
by drewzero1
Some talented modelers do seem to be making it about garden railways, though. (It followed us to the forum... can we keep it?)
To keep the conversation on track, here's an early American loco that seems to fit the bill:
- Screenshot_20231125-204951.jpg (209.47 KiB) Viewed 3955 times
I always wondered why early toy trains often looked so spindly and had smokestacks of comical proportions. Turns out the real ones did too!
- Hull & Stafford floor train, 1865
- Screenshot_20231204-002933.jpg (174.88 KiB) Viewed 3955 times
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 7:05 am
by GAP
drewzero1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2023 5:13 am
dudeface wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2023 5:00 am
Should we continue this thread or start a new one under Off-Topic?
As far as I can tell it's on topic or close enough, but maybe we could change the name to "In search of the ugliest train" or something more generic like that? I don't know who Marc Horovitz is and don't want to wish him ill, but I'm enjoying the general conversation. Maybe a mod or other experienced member has a suggestion... I'm still pretty new here myself and still getting the hang of the way we do things.
Marc Horovitz
https://www.trains.com/grw/news-reviews ... -horovitz/
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO) .
Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 7:17 am
by philipy
dudeface wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2023 5:26 am
Besides, I don't know if I can change the name for the entire subject.
Yes, the OP can. You need to go back to the very first post in this thread and edit it by changing the "Subject".
However, with a long rambling thread like this one, you run the risk of folks not finding it again.
Re: In search of the ugliest train
Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2023 3:31 pm
by dudeface
drewzero1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2023 6:33 am
I always wondered why early toy trains often looked so spindly and had smokestacks of comical proportions. Turns out the real ones did too!
Much of the reason for the spindliness would have been to allow them to sell for ridiculously cheap prices, around $20 in today's money for a live steam loco.
Re: In search of the ugliest train
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 12:45 am
by dudeface
drewzero1 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 04, 2023 6:33 am
To keep the conversation on track, here's an early American loco that seems to fit the bill:
Screenshot_20231125-204951.jpg
What is this one? You don't see many American 2-2-2's. Kinda looks like a "storkleg" toy but with a trailing axle.
Re: In search of the ugliest train
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 4:25 am
by drewzero1
dudeface wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 12:45 am
What is this one? You don't see many American 2-2-2's. Kinda looks like a "storkleg" toy but with a trailing axle.
It appears to be the Cumberland Valley Railroad's "Pioneer" of 1851:
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_875724
Surprisingly, made it into preservation!
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 5:27 am
by dudeface
It seems like it might make a fairly decent looking 2-2-0 tender loco!
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 9:13 am
by ge_rik
I did a quick search on 2-2-2 locos
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ca ... ocomotives
I hadn't realised there were so many variants
Rik
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2023 5:50 pm
by drewzero1
The Belpaire locomotive:
- belg1s.jpg (57.92 KiB) Viewed 3515 times
http://douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO ... elgian.htm
Though a forward-thinking design with the cab-forward layout, it sure isn't the prettiest thing on rails.
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2023 6:14 pm
by dudeface
This must be the ugliest one yet.
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2023 8:20 pm
by GAP
dudeface wrote: ↑Tue Dec 12, 2023 6:14 pm
This must be the ugliest one yet.
I don't know the hand rails add to the aesthetics a certain je ne sais quoi
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2023 5:49 am
by dudeface
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 2:00 pm
by dudeface
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 2:45 pm
by Peter Butler
I love it Miles, especially the curtains! So, is it a 0-4-2 or a 2-4-0?... Which end is the front?
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 3:26 pm
by ge_rik
In like the gazebo on the back (or front)
Rik
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 3:44 pm
by dudeface
Peter Butler wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 2:45 pm
I love it Miles, especially the curtains! So, is it a 0-4-2 or a 2-4-0?... Which end is the front?
An 0-4-2, with driver and fireman on the open part on the front I think, based on the direction of that horn.
Edit: That could be a tube for communication between the two ends, whatever that's called.
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 5:58 pm
by dudeface
I wonder if it's some kind of inspection vehicle, with the passenger compartment being for the crew.
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 8:27 pm
by GAP
dudeface wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 3:44 pm
Peter Butler wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 2:45 pm
I love it Miles, especially the curtains! So, is it a 0-4-2 or a 2-4-0?... Which end is the front?
An 0-4-2, with driver and fireman on the open part on the front I think, based on the direction of that horn.
Edit: That could be a tube for communication between the two ends, whatever that's called.
Speaking tube, still used on ships to this day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_tube
Re: Marc Horovitz is Wrong. (IMO)
Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2023 9:19 pm
by Peter Butler
dudeface wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 5:58 pm
I wonder if it's some kind of inspection vehicle, with the passenger compartment being for the crew.
My guess would be for transporting the Chief Inspector and/or important guests of a fairly modest railway.
A little further up the scale of importance would be the Viceroy of India during Victorian days of The Raj. This is the vehicle I have wanted to build more than any other for many years but always chickened out!...
- Indian loco.jpg (176.05 KiB) Viewed 3248 times
