Home Open Account Help 140 users online

Nostalgia & History > You think that is a rough ride?


Date: 12/07/12 12:40
You think that is a rough ride?
Author: retcsxcfm

See N&H 12-1 @ 08:49.
Seaboard Air Line inspection automobile.It is painted in the
"Citrus" scheme that first was applied to E4's in 1938.
Any idea on make and year?


Uncle Joe,Seffner,Fl.




Date: 12/07/12 12:41
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: retcsxcfm

White wall tires?


UJ



Date: 12/07/12 14:13
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: JBB

The car appears to be a Packard Club Sedan of the late '20's
I suspect around 1928/29 . There were a number of roads that
used these for inspection trips...Thank you for sharing this.
I will try to pass it on to a friend who is a member of the
Packard Club for his input....



Date: 12/07/12 14:28
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: iliketrains

JBB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The car appears to be a Packard Club Sedan of the
> late '20's
> I suspect around 1928/29 . There were a number of
> roads that
> used these for inspection trips...Thank you for
> sharing this.
> I will try to pass it on to a friend who is a
> member of the
> Packard Club for his input....

John - I would think you would know the exact date ....!!!



Date: 12/07/12 16:13
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: lwilton

The grill appears to say either 35 or 95. Was that the road number?



Date: 12/07/12 16:17
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: up833

I think its 35 but the number board on the roof light says 93.
Roger B



Date: 12/07/12 16:48
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: CShaveRR

Is that the precursor to the Denver Boot on the right front tire?

Carl Shaver
Lombard, IL



Date: 12/07/12 18:18
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: BaltoJoey

CShaveRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is that the precursor to the Denver Boot on the
> right front tire?

Looks like it. A good idea to discourage anyone thinking of taking a joy ride.
I magnified the photo and on both the radiator and the headlight the number is definitely 95.



Date: 12/07/12 19:41
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: davew833

That's no boot- it doesn't wrap around the wheel. Methinks it's a brake shoe for a clasp- style brake.



Date: 12/08/12 17:42
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: john1082

davew833 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's no boot- it doesn't wrap around the wheel.
> Methinks it's a brake shoe for a clasp- style
> brake.


IthinkI瑟尔somesmallchainsawwrappedaround天河wheel…& chock

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA



Date: 12/08/12 20:08
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: airbrakegeezer

No, I think Dave833 is right. The black streaks on the white part of the wheel look more like oily dirt than small chains, more so because some of them are also present on other parts of the wheel, far away from the "chock". I think the "chock" is actually a conventional brake head with a standard brake shoe, mounted on a freight car brake beam.

When I first saw it, I asked myself "What the #@%&* is a railroad-type brake shoe doing on an automobile?" Then I came up with the following possibility: when adapting this car for on-rail use, the steering would have to be locked; and the shocks transmitted through the steel wheels (no rubber tires for cushioning) would really hammer the kingpins, axles, etc. I suspect the railroad has replaced the original front axle, steering knuckles, brakes, etc., with a straight, solid axle to carry the flanged wheels; but they found that some braking was needed on the front wheels, so they slung a standard truss-type brake beam below the frame, possibly hooked to a big hand-operated lever beside the driver. The brakes do not need to be anywhere near as powerful as the original (automobile) brakes, because the steel-wheel-to-steel-rail adhesion is much lower than that between a rubber tire and concrete, so the regular automobile brakes would cause the steel wheels to slide unless applied very lightly.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Roger Lewis (airbrakegeezer)



Date: 12/08/12 23:59
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: lwilton

Here. You can pretty clearly see that those lines on the "whitewall" are just rust or grease.

If you look about in the center of the pic, you can see that the hole for the manual starting crank is blocked by a cross-rod that goes between two frame members. the frame members look almost like they would be the original spring supports and springs. But if you look at the one on the right (left of the car) you can see that it is solid, not a frame and a spring.

This lends creedence to the idea that they may well have replaced the whole front suspension system with solid iron, so you will know by the seat of your pants just how smooth the rails are.




Date: 12/09/12 22:40
Re: You think that is a rough ride?
Author: john1082

lwilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here. You can pretty clearly see that those lines
> on the "whitewall" are just rust or grease.
>
> If you look about in the center of the pic, you
> can see that the hole for the manual starting
> crank is blocked by a cross-rod that goes between
> two frame members. the frame members look almost
> like they would be the original spring supports
> and springs. But if you look at the one on the
> right (left of the car) you can see that it is
> solid, not a frame and a spring.
>
> This lends creedence to the idea that they may
> well have replaced the whole front suspension
> system with solid iron, so you will know by the
> seat of your pants just how smooth the rails are.


I think you're right. I had not thought about the axle replacement and the view from the small screen on the I-Phone suggested chains and not the grease spots that I can see now on a larger screen

John Gezelius
Tustin, CA



[ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.1027 seconds