|
|
| Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) (381329) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 6 |
|
|
| (381329) | |
Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007 This is a three-part question, so you can answer any part or all parts if you like.Which type of cars do you prefer--modern new tech for efficiency and SOA features, or older cars for familiarity, comfort or nostalgic reasons? What do you think are the pros and cons of older vs. newer equipment? What are your best and worst memories of riding the all the rolling stock that operated on NYCT rails? |
|
|
| (381341) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Feb 4 18:12:04 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. I like the older cars better, even though they were all retired from revenue service before I was born. :(I like the mid-age cars (like the R32s and R33s/36s) much better than the R160s and R142s because they're less sterile, they don't hide the fact that you're on a train, and they have that thing at the front that I'm always The automated announcements on the new cars are nice enough (since they're never garbled) but I'd much prefer human conductors; when was the last time you heard Charlie Pellet say: "You with the blue shirt! Get out of the doorway! If we have to run express, they'll all know it's because of you!" Not to mention that the newest cars are way too brightly lit. Probably my best memory from railfanning would be the cab ride I got, but that doesn't count for your question because that wasn't on NYCT. My best memories from subway railfanning would probably be the time I rode the Brooklyn Unions. Next up would be the R9s to Coney. (The Rockaway nostalgia trip wasn't nearly as good.) One of my better memories, I suppose, was waiting for a RFW on the (A) at Broadway Junction on a weekend, before the (C) was extended into Brooklyn on weekends, getting the RFW on the first try, having it switch onto the express track just outside the station, then changing at 168th Street for a (1) train (with RFW R62A singles) which was also diverted onto the express track. That was one of the many fantrips I took with my (also railfan) father before I was old enough to go railfanning on my own. Perhaps another fun subway memory was when I was out railfanning in 6th grade and found that the slants were all running on the (Q) now. My worst subway memories would probably include the numerous cop annoyances, though only one cop encounter was thouroughly annoying. (I'd had annoying encounters with T/Os and TSSs though.) |
|
|
| (381343) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 18:15:24 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. 1. I personally prefer the old cars, for purely nostalgic reasons...the new stuff is better, cheaper, more efficient.2. The newer cars are warm in the winter, and cool in the summer...they're also more reliable. The old cars LOOK better, but I'll choose substance over style. 3. I started riding the trains in the early 1960's, when all of the old stuff was still running, so my best memories are riding in the old cars. My worst memories are riding in the old cars...FREEZING in the winter, and sweating my ass off in dark subway cars stuck somewhere underground for 25-30 (or more) minutes...a near-death experience. My absolute worst experience: Getting on a Slant 40 AA train at Columbus Circle in the summer of 1982, realizing two things when the doors closed...the heat was on for some reason, and the diarreah-smelling bum across from me was stinking up the whole car, and the heat was making it worse...as soon as I tried the end doors, which were BOTH locked, the train stopped in the tunnel for the longest 10 minutes of my life. My absolute best experience: Getting off that AA, at the next stop, and catching a bad-ass studly tank of an R-10 CC, and having it go express in the Bronx (even though it evening rush hour, and the CC was supposed to be the local) and getting me to 205th St. in no time flat. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (381350) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 18:23:52 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Nilet on Sun Feb 4 18:12:04 2007. The older cars WERE better on the weekends, when I was railfanning around the city, but on a day-to-day (riding them to work and back, etc.) experience, they were smelly, uncomfortable, and hot in the summer and cold in the winter..I think when answering these questions, one has to look at it two ways: as a railfan, and as a paying customer using the system the way it's intended: There are really two answers to the questions, based on the two mutually-exclusive criteria...let's not forget, even though our hobby is the subway, its purpose is not to entertain us, it's a public transit system to get people where they are going, we come second. |
|
|
| (381366) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 18:54:04 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. Which type of cars do you prefer--modern new tech for efficiency and SOA featuresLike these? 
|
|
|
| (381370) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 19:07:14 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 18:54:04 2007. Well, except for that incredible?? front end, it looks exactly like a 44-46. |
|
|
| (381371) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 19:07:59 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. The car that I would prefer (even though I never rode it) was the BMT Bluebird - nothing like it ever came after it!!! As for other cars - I like the BMT Standards and Triplexes. Standards had roomy interiors and styling. Triplexes were articulated. These days when you are trapped in a car due to the rules I wish more than ever that articulated cars were back!! |
|
|
| (381373) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 19:10:55 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. As much as I've like seeing the new tech cars coming in, I have a preference for the older cars. At least aesthetically-wise.Cars in the vein the R-142/142A, R-143 and R-160 serve one of their purposes of streamlining rolling stock, thereby creating, less stress on equipment maintenance that having varied types of cars of different designs and supplying differing parts for repair would require. Older equipment pros: Variation of rolling stock in outer-body components and mechanical parts, such as the old style pneumatic braking. I love the rollsigns, even though such a feature is dated by todays standards. Railfan windows--it was never a big issue with me, but it is fun to observe from, at times. New equpment pros: Updated announcements featurs, such as the automated system. No more having to listen to garbled announcements from a unstable PA system. Brighter interiors. The new tech cars are awfully bright inside, compared to the older current equipment. I love the LED side signs. That's all I have right now. I post the cons later on in this discussion. |
|
|
| (381374) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 19:11:17 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 19:07:59 2007. Numerous amounts of modern day subway cars are articulated outside of the nation but for whatever reason the MTA has yet to adopt some. |
|
|
| (381375) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 19:15:37 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Nilet on Sun Feb 4 18:12:04 2007. I love the bright interior of the new cars. A much needed improvement over dull darkened cars like those R-32's and R-38's.I agree with you about the conductors making announcements over the automated system. That feature to me, is a sign of complete train automation, which I'm not looking forward to. |
|
|
| (381376) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 19:17:15 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 18:54:04 2007. Those are cool too, too bad they were only for experimental purposes. |
|
|
| (381378) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 19:19:25 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 19:11:17 2007. I wonder why that is, too. Would an articulated subway car have an advantage over a standard length subway car? |
|
|
| (381383) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 19:28:32 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. I'll always have a fondness for older equipment. The Redbirds, R-32's, R-38's are my favorites.New equipment have the advantage of offering more features and having the provisions to meet the needs of transit operations of tomorrow, whereas older equipment does not have the all the requisite components to operate, let's say, in a fully automated subway system. My favorite memories were mostly rides on the Flushing Line, which I rode since I was about six years old. That's where my Redbird appreciation began. |
|
|
| (381385) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:33:42 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 19:19:25 2007. Would an articulated subway car have an advantage over a standard length subway car?Yes. You can stand in the articulation. You can't (or at least shouldn't) stand between cars. |
|
|
| (381387) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:34:27 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 19:17:15 2007. I like the look of the SOARFW. |
|
|
| (381393) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:42:29 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 19:07:59 2007. These days when you are trapped in a car due to the rules I wish more than ever that articulated cars were back!!Once again, I'd like to remind people that you don't need articulation for that. It's just that NYCTA does not order their cars with between-car diaphragms and plates.  
|
|
|
| (381400) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:48:32 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:33:42 2007. Come on James. You know this thing. (GIF slide show)
|
|
|
| (381402) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:51:39 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:48:32 2007. Ah, vive la France! |
|
|
| (381410) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. I honestly can't stand the new-tech trains. I used to be excited about them back in 2000 when they were coming in, but the novelty's more than worn off by now. The bright interiors, the distracting electronic displays, the horridly uncomfortable seats, and the annoying loud automatic announcements are just a few of the things I don't like.That being said, I'm not so fond of some of the older equipment either. I find the R38s and R42s to be too dim and dingy for my tastes, but at least they've got decent seats and non-annoying features (as well as railfan windows.) The R40 is my favorite car to railfan, however, for sentimental reasons -- when I was a toddler, I was too short to see out of most railfan windows, and the R40 was the only one out of which I could find a decent view without having to be carried by my parents. I also was captured by the front ends of these cars -- the slanted ends with their bars and chains fascinated me. The best cars in which to commute, IMO, are the 75-foot cars (R44, R46, R68/A), in particular the R46 as I ride these often on the F, R, and G. I also like the R32 and R62/A, whose seats are rather comfortable and whose interiors aren't too bright without being too dingy. |
|
|
| (381412) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 20:11:22 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007. "the distracting electronic displays....the annoying loud automatic announcements"...something about that just doesn't sink in. |
|
|
| (381416) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:13:40 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 20:11:22 2007. If I'm trying to read a book, get some work done, or just sit and stare into space I don't want to be interrupted by "important messages from the NYPD" or "The next stop is Union Square. Transfer is available to the 6, L, N, Q, R, and W trains."But that's just my opinion. I'm not treating it as a fact. You're welcome to have an opposing opinion. |
|
|
| (381418) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 20:14:20 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007. Agreed 99% - I don't find the R42s dim, but I agree with everything else you said. |
|
|
| (381427) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 20:31:15 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007. The R40 is my favorite car to railfan, however, for sentimental reasons -- when I was a toddler, I was too short to see out of mostrailfan windows, and the R40 was the only one out of which I could find a decent view without having to be carried by my parents. A lot of people must have felt the same way. My five-year old likes the Slants for the same reason. He calls it "the triangular train". |
|
|
| (381429) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Feb 4 20:31:50 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. Which type of cars do you prefer--modern new tech for efficiency and SOA features, or older cars for familiarity, comfort or nostalgic reasons?I'm rather content right now with the R-46s on the F where I ride mostly. Otherwise, I'd prefer the modern new tech stuff over the older stuff. I'll stand out, but I prefer the sounds of AC traction over DC traction, and I don't mind the bright lights, and I think the newer stuff looks better than the older stuff. |
|
|
| (381431) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 20:32:16 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:42:29 2007. That's basically the same thing... |
|
|
| (381432) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by (SIR) North Shore Line on Sun Feb 4 20:32:23 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:13:40 2007. That's no problem, I'm not too crazy about the obnoxious brakes on some of the R142As on the (6). |
|
|
| (381444) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by mambomta on Sun Feb 4 21:03:26 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 19:07:14 2007. Well, except for that incredible?? front end, it looks exactly like a 44-46.That's because the body shell is that of the R44/46 |
|
|
| (381446) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:09:25 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Rail Blue on Sun Feb 4 19:34:27 2007. Yeah, how about that? Too bad the R-46's never adopted that look. But then again, where would they put the full-width cab? |
|
|
| (381449) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:13:38 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by TonyBroadway on Sun Feb 4 18:15:24 2007. Getting on a Slant 40 AA train at Columbus Circle in the summer of 1982, realizing two things when the doors closed...the heat was on for some reason, and the diarreah-smelling bum across from me was stinking up the whole car, and the heat was making it worse...as soon as I tried the end doors, which were BOTH locked, the train stopped in the tunnel for the longest 10 minutes of my life.You had bad experience on those dreadful slants, I see. I think if that were me, I'd be scarred for "life". |
|
|
| (381458) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:34:04 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. Thanks for the responses so far. I going to add another element to this: what do you guys think is the best or worst equipment decisions and/or events relating to/or impacted equipment made in the history of NYCT in your opinion?Here are my thoughts on the matter Three of the best: Stainless Steel cars Retiring the remainder of the laht cars (those darn Redbirds) LCD/LED side signs and front route markers Four of the worst: The R46 truck fiasco Ordering the Slants (such a tacky design) Not keeping on top of the R44's mechanical/operational issues Bringing out the R16's from mothballs back into service when the R46's were having problems (I know it was an emergency situation, but still those cars were horrible performers) |
|
|
| (381460) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 21:40:07 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:34:04 2007. Four of the worst:1. Cancelling the balance of the BMT Bluebird order. 2. Retiring the Triplexes early 3. Ordering the boxes on wheels called Redbirds 4. Full width cabs |
|
|
| (381463) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 21:46:16 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:34:04 2007. LCD/LED side signs and front route markersSide signs yes. Front signs no. That was a step backwards. The R62 and 68 had nice, big front signs and we went back to signs the same size as the Redbirds; and the LED front signs are incapable of displaying color, so it's actually more like a step back to R9/R15s (or pre-GOH R30/R36s). |
|
|
| (381468) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Westinghouse XCB248S on Sun Feb 4 21:55:17 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by mambomta on Sun Feb 4 21:03:26 2007. Actually, because the Saint Louis Car Company was building the R44 at that time, they decided to make the frame to look like the R44. |
|
|
| (381474) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 22:03:23 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:34:04 2007. Bringing out the R16's from mothballs back into service when the R46's were having problems (I know it was an emergency situation, but still those cars were horrible performers)I was surprised to learn this when I was reading it on nycsubway.org some months ago. I've always thought that the R-16's were intended to be retired by the R-68's, not by the R-46's. |
|
|
| (381477) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 22:06:30 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sun Feb 4 20:31:50 2007. That sounds about how I feel about the new equipment over the old equipment. |
|
|
| (381483) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 22:17:13 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 20:02:00 2007. The novelty over new tech cars has worn off? It's beginning to pick up momentum, now that the R160 beatuies are plying the rails. You do have a point about the seating and the announcements.I do agree with you about the 75 foot cars (all except the R44) and the R62/62A's, riding on them is smoooth as silk. But so is the ride on the new tech cars. I also agree that the R38 and R42 lighting is too dim, so is the lighting on the R32's . The Slants are my least favorite equipment, with laht cars being at the bottom of my ranking. |
|
|
| (381489) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Feb 4 22:30:22 2007, in response to Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 17:55:21 2007. Had a brief experence on this one in los angeles metro before itended and re experenced this at the OREM museum in perris ca. liked the old lirr RFWs prefered all the pre ww2 fleet in nyc when i was there !! just do not like the ''new shit'' R46 and higher !! nope !! 
|
|
|
| (381490) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Sun Feb 4 22:34:14 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Feb 4 22:30:22 2007. R-46 is 31 years old and hardly to be considered "new shit". |
|
|
| (381494) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 22:40:33 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 22:03:23 2007. Given their debilitating mechanical problems, it's not surprising; I, too, once thought the same as you did, until I read otherwise on nycsubway.org about seven years ago. It was later confirmed here on this board in various threads back in when it was Subtalk.I was surprised to learn this when I was reading it on nycsubway.org some months ago. I've always thought that the R-16's were intended to be retired by the R-68's, not by the R-46's. From my memories of the R-16's, those cars were scary to me. |
|
|
| (381496) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 22:43:20 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 22:17:13 2007. But so is the ride on the new tech cars.If only they came with cushioned seats... boy do I miss the old rattan seats! |
|
|
| (381497) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 22:44:56 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Feb 4 22:30:22 2007. The R-68's and up are the newer stuff. The novelty of new for the R-46's has worn out since the 80's. |
|
|
| (381501) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 22:49:35 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 22:17:13 2007. You made your dislike about the slants clear in other threads, but what's wrong the laht cars? I've always favored a Redbird over stainless steel (R62/62A), when they were in serivce. I only wished they were more laht equipment for the B Division than just the R-16's, R-27/R-30's and R-10's. |
|
|
| (381504) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 22:53:12 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 22:40:33 2007. I always thought they were kind of cool, the blinking lights when running over third rail gaps, the port-hole storm door windows, the old style straphangers, the checkered floors. From my childhood memories, they remeinded me of some sort of gadget that ran on rails. |
|
|
| (381527) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:13:40 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by Rapid Transit Guy on Sun Feb 4 22:53:12 2007. That was the scary part. I didn't like the flickering lights on them, even though that was a standard occurence on all pre-GOH laht and stainless steel/carbon steel mixed cars. To me, I felt like once the lights would start flickering they would go out and not come back on. The oversized door motors looked atrocious and the fact that these cars were perpetually bathed in graffitti, inside and outside, added to the unsavory atmosphere. |
|
|
| (381529) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by (X) 2nd Avenue Local on Sun Feb 4 23:16:04 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 21:46:16 2007. I prefer the older style signs for front route markers, too. I don't care much for the default (and apparently cheaper) red marker display. It looks funny to me. |
|
|
| (381551) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Sun Feb 4 23:32:56 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by Wado MP73 on Sun Feb 4 19:48:32 2007. Very nice, all though in the interests of full disclosure I suppose its worth noting that their neighbors to the east also have articulated subway cars.But just out of curiousity, does anyone know if the MF2005s currently operating on any RATP lines, or if they will be by March? |
|
|
| (381570) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 23:49:01 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 22:17:13 2007. The novelty over new tech cars has worn off? It's beginning to pick up momentum, now that the R160 beatuies are plying the rails.No, the novelty's dying. It was interesting to see these "high-tech" trains replacing the redbirds on the 2, but honestly it's just the same thing over and over now with the R160s. I do agree with you about the 75 foot cars (all except the R44) Why not the R44? Despite its problems, it's a fine car to ride. The doors are a bit slow, but that's a minor issue. But so is the ride on the new tech cars. They aren't as comfortable IMO. I also agree that the R38 and R42 lighting is too dim, so is the lighting on the R32's . The R32s (at least most of them) are significantly brighter than the R38s, and some of the R42s. The Slants are my least favorite equipment I'll pretend I didn't hear that. |
|
|
| (381576) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 23:50:14 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by BMTLines on Sun Feb 4 22:43:20 2007. I just wish that they picked a tried-and-true seat design that had proven itself. R32-type seating should have been put in the new cars. |
|
|
| (381587) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Sun Feb 4 23:57:42 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (rolling stock decisions and issues), posted by R4 Bryn Mawr LCL/R5 Paoli EXP on Sun Feb 4 21:46:16 2007. You agree with the electronic sidesigns? Those, in their current implementation, are much harder to read than rollsigns -- look no farther than the R142 sidesigns for proof. |
|
|
| (381613) | |
Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)) |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Mon Feb 5 00:21:13 2007, in response to Re: Modern Subway Cars vs. Older Subway Cars (pros, cons, memories, thoughts)), posted by subway nutz on Sun Feb 4 21:09:25 2007. That is a full-width cab.
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 6 |
|
