Steam & Excursion > Portland Astoria & Pacific #102 Both Then And Now!

Back in July 1919 the United Railways of Portland Oregon ended at Banks, Oregon. There was seen a need to tap into the timber wealth lying a few miles to the northwest near Vernonia, Oregon. Thus the Portland Astoria & Pacific was formed and construction begun immediately.

By January 1920 the line was in service and 3 large 2-8-2 ALCO locomotives numbered 100. 101 and 102 were ordered. In the first view we see #102 just after delivery in the forests near Keasey, Oregon. By 1924 the United Ry's absorbed the PA&P entirely.

Although the PA&P was short-lived, #102 proved to be a real survivor. She was later sold for logging service on Vancouver Island, B.C.. She finally ended up working into the 1970's for her last operator Canadian forest Products out of Woss Camp, B.C.. We see her there in this 1967 photo taken by Jack Holst.

#113 is still at Woos Camp today. She ran on and off into the 1990's for special events. The 3rd photo was taken by me in 2000 at Woss Camp. Today it is uncertain if she will stay in camp on display or be transferred elsewhere.

As a side note, PA&P #101 was delivered to the railroad in 1920 at Vancouver, WA but not accepted by them or paid for. She then went to the Minarets & Western where she was their #101. SP took her over when the M&W failed and later sold her to the Aberdeen & Rockfish RR of Abredeen, N.C.. Today she is in service as #40 on the Valley RR in Essex, Connecticut.


Martin



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/19 03:13 by LoggerHogger.

---

---

---

What is just behind the tender in the second photo? And the price of a TO membership is worth it just because of your photos an information.

Alec

Posted from iPhone

Thanks Alec. The care behind #113 in the second photo is a transfer caboose.

Martin

So much history in a few short paragraphs and photos.

I look forward to your daily posts. Thanks!

Steve Mitchell
http://www.yardgoatimages.com

in my first posting on this site, I want to warmly endorse dh1205 and YG's comments. Most mornings you start my day out right. Many thanks. d

Some of those locos really got around! Then, even today it's still happening. McCloud 18 and 25 have found new homes and continue to provide us with excursions.

nycman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some of those locos really got around! Then, even
> today it's still happening. McCloud 18 and 25
> have found new homes and continue to provide us
> with excursions.


Wonder what they cost then compared to what they bring on todays equipment market?

Dick Samuels

Dick

Actually many of the steam locomotives sold recently have been "bargains" in the when you compare them to the original prices in the day.

Martin

Posted from iPhone



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/14 17:30 by LoggerHogger.

http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,275598 This is the URL to some discussion that occurred recently on Narrow Gauge Discussion Forum on these locomotives.

Dick Samuels wrote: "Wonder what they cost then compared to what they bring on todays equipment market?"

Martin replied: "Actually many of the steam locomotives sold recently have been "bargains" in the when you compare them to the original prices in the day."

I add: Let's use the McCloud River #18 and #25 as examples to test this, since they were brought up in this context.

#18- Baldwin factory records show an Arkansas logging railroad originally ordered the locomotive, with McCloud River assuming the order when the original purchaser's financing package fell apart. #18 in 1914 cost the McCloud $16,009 new, plus $2569.50 freight and $204.85 break-in; using the Bureau of Labor Statistic's CPI Inflation Calculator, this purchase price translated into $312,655.77 in 2005 dollars. Asking price when the #18 was placed up for sale in 2004 was $350,000, and the Nevada Commission for the Reconstruction of the V&T has reported paying $420,000 for it when they purchased it in 2005.

#25- In 1925, McCloud paid Alco $21,475 new, plus $2,103.89 freight and $93.25 break-in for this locomotive; as per the CPI Inflation Calculator, this purchase price is equivalent to $264,207.54 in 2008 dollars. When McCloud Railway placed the locomotive up for sale in 2008, asking price was $650,000.

Based on these two alone, it would appear an operating steam locomotive in today's market will command a higher, if not substantially higher, price than the new purchase price as adjusted for inflation as described above. I suspect unrestored locomotives is where the bargains can be found in today's market...but then you have to restore them...

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV

Of course there is the detail that these days you can't just pick up the Chicago Yellow Pages and order a new air pump, a set of wheels or tires, or a new tender, like you could have in the 1940s. That effectively raises the cost of the units faster than the rate of overall inflation.

Jeff, we do not publish the sales prices of most steam locomotives sold to new owners these days. Since I sold the 2 McCloud engines you mentioned (and over 30 more steam locomotives in the last 25 years) I am armed with the true sale prices that I referred to in my response to Dick's quetion. These many locomotives that I was involved with include bot operable restored engines and unrestored engines.

While your math on the cost of money over the years may be right, you do not have the actual sales prices for these 2 McCloud engines or the other engines I am referring to. If you did, when you compare the actual sales prices paid you would see that many (but not all) of these engines are "bargins" when compared to their cost new.

Martin



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/14 03:52 by LoggerHogger.

Martin, You're right, of course I don't have the final sales figures for either of these locomotives, nor did I claim to have them. What I do have is the asking prices as stated when said locomotives were offered for sale, and then the figure the Nevada Commission has discussed in a lot of their financials.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV