Subject:
|
Trolley car vs. Interurban
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Sat, 23 Feb 2002 06:54:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1034 times
|
| |
|
|
<snip>
One thing I glossed over is the disctinction between a trolley car and an
interurban. While there are always exceptions, check out this pic
http://www.norwich.net/~pstrany/row/sny/sny175.jpg
The car on the left is more typical of a trolley car which tended not to
venture out too far away from street railways. Low body, steps close to the
ground, relatively short, and no (or link and pin) couplers. Early trolleys
were sometimes single truck (4 wheel). Most were clearly double ended.
The car to the right is more typical of an interurban, albeit its pilot is
missing (or this is the back, not sure). Longer, higher body, knuckle
couplers, etc See also this pic of a stablemate of 53 (taken in Cooperstown
NY) which shows the interurban characteristics clearly:
http://www.norwich.net/~pstrany/row/sny/sny174.jpg
Note the front truck mounted pilot, the small baggage compartment and
motorman's cabin, central door that you'd be hard pressed to enter from the
street without a portable step, etc. Some interurbans even lacked a front
trolley pole.
And if you say to yourself: why that's sort of an electric version of a
doodlebug, and that my MTW-3002 kind of looks like that interuban car, you'd
be right. Some of the same design principles that drove interurban designs
found their way into gas electric railcars.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Metroliner question
|
| (...) VERY common. Midsized cities such as Utica had "made it" if they had a trolley line, or an interurban if you prefer. Google for Interurban. For example, it was possible to ride across vast swaths of the US on streetcars/interurbans if you were (...) (23 years ago, 23-Feb-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
