|
|
| Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New (1437481) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
|
| (1438250) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 13:17:11 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:06:16 2017. They could have run R40S-R40M-R40M-R40S as 4 car sets. |
|
|
| (1438253) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Jun 4 13:38:37 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:06:16 2017. The national perspective was that BART was going to have a"Buck Rogers" fleet and in fact ST Louis Car had done a BART mockup shown inan ad in Metro Transit magazinebackthen. |
|
|
| (1438256) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun Jun 4 13:46:45 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Handbrake on Sun Jun 4 11:57:55 2017. 
|
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1438257) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:49:09 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 13:17:11 2017. That still wouldn't have solved the gap problem.I've seen that lashup on the C train many times before. R40 head end...42s in the middle,40s in the rear. Though I particularly hate linked sets..it would have been the best thing for the 40s as four or.five car sets. |
|
|
| (1438258) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:50:26 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun Jun 4 13:46:45 2017. The porthole window made this car look ugly. |
|
|
| (1438259) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun Jun 4 13:53:34 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 13:17:11 2017.  Line: BMT Culver Line...Location: Avenue U... Route: F...Car: R-40M (St. Louis, 1969) 4301... Photo by: Doug Grotjahn...Collection of: Joe Testagrose...Date: 4/4/1969...from nycsubway.org |
|
|
| (1438262) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 14:31:58 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun Jun 4 13:53:34 2017. That whole contract was a mess.3 diffent specs for the same train. |
|
|
| (1438264) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 14:52:56 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:50:26 2017. An R10 paint scheme would have improved it. |
|
|
| (1438266) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:00:16 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:50:26 2017. I don't think so. Didn't make the R15, R17, or R34 look ugly. The R21/22 had a more menacing look than the R17. |
|
|
| (1438267) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 15:25:53 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:00:16 2017. Yeah.They had a "Dont mess with me,Im a Spartan!"look to em. |
|
|
| (1438269) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sun Jun 4 15:31:07 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 15:25:53 2017. Also the lack of visible rubber weather striping on the door window made the R21/22s kinda scary....like super-utilitarian...no frill cars.No likey.... |
|
|
| (1438270) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sun Jun 4 15:32:02 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed May 31 17:19:53 2017. Serious tile damage at that very new (23 yo) station... |
|
|
| (1438272) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:37:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sun Jun 4 13:53:34 2017. Yes, but not quite what I meant. |
|
|
| (1438275) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:37:58 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sun Jun 4 13:38:37 2017. The CTA also has the stylish 2000's from the early 1960's. . |
|
|
| (1438277) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Jun 4 15:42:25 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bzuck on Sun Jun 4 12:31:48 2017. "... they did not want to run the a A/B equipment on the IND. "Unlikely, since A/Bs were running on the IND out to Continental Ave for a few years before being replaced with the R27-30s. Its been written that Old time motormen used to notice the A/Bs getting a little peppy once they hit the IND juice leaving Queens Plaza. |
|
|
| (1438281) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:47:35 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 12:27:25 2017. The Triplexes could easily have lasted another ten years. They were still in tip-top shape and running beautifully when they sent to premature slaughter.The R-16s OTOH were mercifully put out of their misery. |
|
|
| (1438282) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:48:48 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Jun 4 15:42:25 2017. Souped up standards! |
|
|
| (1438283) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:50:08 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Sun Jun 4 15:31:07 2017. The R-10s and R-16s didn't have weather stripping, either. Nor did the R-12, R-14s and R-17s. |
|
|
| (1438284) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:51:19 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 14:31:58 2017. A Borgaschmord train!! |
|
|
| (1438285) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:53:35 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:37:58 2017. I never thought of the 2000s as slants, to be perfectly frank. They WERE quieter than the 6000s, though. They were assigned to the North-South lines in the early 80s once the 2600s started coming in and the State St. subway run became tolerable. |
|
|
| (1438286) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:54:12 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Sun Jun 4 15:42:25 2017. But imagine a Standard on a CPW Express track, with peppy R10's breathing down their back. |
|
|
| (1438287) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:56:00 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:50:08 2017. How did they change the sash ?Notice the ACF built versions of the flush mount door windows had more gasket material on their exteriors. Looked the same inside, but different outside. |
|
|
| (1438290) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:59:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:53:35 2017. They were a slightly sloped.They were trying to imitate the Fishbowls as much as the 6000's were like the PCC and the Old Look. . |
|
|
| (1438301) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jun 4 17:48:07 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:54:12 2017. I have often wondered how the Multis would have performed on full 600V IND power. |
|
|
| (1438305) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sun Jun 4 18:41:35 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Sun Jun 4 13:50:26 2017. Porthole end door windows were pretty much state of the art for that time period. In fact, as originally designed, the R-21s were supposed to have a porthole but it was changed at the last minute to the familiar drop sash. I was told that the first either 10 or 20 R-21s were actually delivered with the portholes but they were changed soon after delivery. An R-16 with A signs was not an oddity for the time since 50 R-16s did run on the A line for a while in the mid 1950s. The only thing was that 6400 never ran on the A since it was only 6300 - 6349 that were assigned to the IND. Although the R-16 was not the “latest” subway car model by 1960, The NYCTA was so IND minded that they didn’t want to show what was the real latest car which would have been the IRT R-22. |
|
|
| (1438308) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 19:10:46 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Sun Jun 4 17:48:07 2017. The TA did not want to find out. That's why they scrapped them in the late 1950's. |
|
|
| (1438337) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Sun Jun 4 23:57:56 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Fri Jun 2 21:27:11 2017. You said it. By 1977, even though they still had some giddy up, they were slowing down-accelerating slower than all other equipment except the R44s (the R44s couldn't do anything with the R10s back then).The R40s were completely opposite from the R10s. Those damn things moved. IMHO they were the fastest cars on the A train from 1977 to present. I guess I'm the only one who feels this way, but I love the R40 design. |
|
|
| (1438339) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Jun 5 00:17:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 15:37:58 2017. perhaps the prototype fiberglass front. And of course CTA's first A/C fleet. |
|
|
| (1438345) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 01:27:05 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Sun Jun 4 23:57:56 2017. Oh hell yeah.The 40s were "da shit" when it came to speed. Lighter weight... |
|
|
| (1438349) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Jun 5 07:03:37 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun Jun 4 15:50:08 2017. I didn't realize that...my memory of those specific car classes is dim...I remembered many long-gone IRT cars without the weather stripping- all I knew for sure before the internet became a things was that those doors weren't used on the ones that became Redbirds. Once the 'net became available, I just drew the mistaken assumption it was an R21/22 thing (the lack of weather stripping)Also, on my IRT cars, the weather stripping between the door halves didn't interlock... that looked quite precarious when the doors shook while the train was moving |
|
|
| (1438350) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Mon Jun 5 07:08:43 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 01:27:05 2017. Although I did not know they were called "R40s", even as a 7-year old, they seemed suited for the E and F express. I never liked them on all-local routes like the L or W.My favorite slant story (I've told it before) was from late 1999- when I rode one on the J from Broad to Essex. First and only time I saw one there. I noticed that the letter "J" itself on the front rollsign was different- narrow, and with a more prominent "hook". |
|
|
| (1438351) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 07:46:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by MainR3664 on Mon Jun 5 07:08:43 2017. Yup...Every once in awhile, you'd get one or two in JZ service,borrowed from the L or M pool. At that time,the J had mostly 40M cars with some 42s tossed in. L had a small pool of 40s with 42s ,and M mostly 42s with a mix of 40/40M cars. Whatever made service,ran on any route. That is,until the 143s came in. All the 40s and 40m cars left the east,along with a few 42s,for C service...then to the south for BNQ pool out of Coney Island. A LOT of car moves back then. |
|
|
| (1438363) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 11:36:54 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 07:46:15 2017. Most if not All of the 42GOH cars went directly to the Eastern division.The R40GOH went directly to the B,while the 40MGOH cars also went to J service. Those cars eventually pushed out the R30s which went to the C,with occasional A service. The R143 changed everything, pushing out the 40s,40m and some 42s to the A,C and southern division. |
|
|
| (1438370) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 12:30:40 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 11:36:54 2017. In 2001 2002 there were 40s and 42s on the A and C? |
|
|
| (1438374) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jun 5 13:20:09 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Sun Jun 4 19:10:46 2017. Actually, they lasted to about 1960/61. |
|
|
| (1438384) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 14:52:28 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 12:30:40 2017. When and where was this? I certainly never saw them, definitely 2008 and 2009, but not 2001 and 2002. |
|
|
| (1438386) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 15:04:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 11:36:54 2017. It was the R160s that pushed the R42s from the East to the A and C trains. The delivery of R160s to Jamaica caused a domino effect of car swapping between several lines-one which caused R40Ms and R40s respectively to be pushed from the B to the A train. |
|
|
| (1438388) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 15:13:55 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 14:52:28 2017. I don't remember that either. But Edwards! Said that when the R143s came in they forced R40s and 42s to the A, C and southern division. |
|
|
| (1438392) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 15:30:13 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 15:13:55 2017. No, that was definitely the R160s. |
|
|
| (1438393) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Jun 5 15:37:15 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 15:30:13 2017. That's the only thing I remember. Admittedly I wasn't taking the train all that much at the time the R-143s came in but I would have noticed something other than R 44s R 32s and R 38s in Rockaway Park yard |
|
|
| (1438403) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jun 5 16:40:49 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Sun May 28 14:49:27 2017. Same story with the Lo Vs and D types. |
|
|
| (1438404) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jun 5 16:43:47 2017, in response to [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Bill Newkirk on Sat May 27 19:46:43 2017. Wish they kept the blue stripe. |
|
|
| (1438413) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Mon Jun 5 17:41:35 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 15:04:15 2017. R42's were also sent to the E and F trains as R160's came in (more dependable AC). |
|
|
| (1438417) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Jun 5 18:04:29 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by BrooklynBus on Mon Jun 5 16:43:47 2017. The blue stripe was eliminated due to the graffiti epidemic. I have seen artists’ renderings of both R-62s and R-68s with a blue stripe but neither car type got them. If Prince Andrew has his way the blue stripe might reappear with gold trim per NY State colors. |
|
|
| (1438422) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Far Rockaway A Train on Mon Jun 5 18:59:50 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Mon Jun 5 17:41:35 2017. Cars were swapped all over the place. I hadn't seen that much variety since pre GOH era. It had been 23 years since R40s were on the A train, 29 years since the R46s were on the A train and 30 years since R42s were on the A train.I was mad as hell that after waiting 23 years, the R40s were pulled after a matter of months. |
|
|
| (1438431) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 19:41:14 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by randyo on Sun Jun 4 17:48:07 2017. Me too. 65-70 mph wouldn't have been a stretch. |
|
|
| (1438432) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 19:43:42 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Joe V on Mon Jun 5 17:41:35 2017. I rode on an R-42 Ethel back in October 2008 that had The French Connection cars. 4573 was the south motor. I even posed for a photo by 4572. |
|
|
| (1438433) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 19:44:56 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jun 5 01:27:05 2017. My most unforgettable slant ride was up CPW on an Abbott on Easter Sunday in 1978. That train SCREAMED up CPW! Those local stops went by in a blur. |
|
|
| (1438464) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 21:06:11 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Jun 5 00:17:15 2017. I rode on IRM's pair of 2000s back in 2015. The A/C wasn't operable yet, but the cars themselves moved smartly down the mainline. I even rode on their 2200s and their A/C worked great! |
|
|
| (1438465) | |
Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Mon Jun 5 21:09:21 2017, in response to Re: [PHOTO] When The R-40M's Were New, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Jun 5 21:06:11 2017. Several years ago at IRM an IRT car fitted w/ a trolley polewas run very nicely.As to the CTA 2000s, I rode on the shuttle demonstration set on my lunch hour Adams Wabash to Halsted Lake IIRC. |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
