Dr Zarkoff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >I would like to point out that the cars used in
> Chicago weigh approximately twice as much as BART
> cars.
>
> Wooden EL cars weight more than BARTD cars??
>
> >BART pioneered use of very light weight cars.
>
> Nope, the SP's red electrics (1911/1912) were one
> of the early pioneers of unibody (lightweight)
> construction, as were the Cincinnati curveside
> cars.
>
> >Since things like axles, truck frames, and other
> parts for the most part are not in stock in some
> manufacturers warehouse, they are all built to
> order.
>
> That has been pretty much the way things have
> always been manufactured: MTO -made to order.
> However, if your order is for something for which
> there are a lot of other orders, then your wait
> time, and the cost per unit, is less. Using the
> phrase "in stock" is a bit disingenuous because
> manufacturers don't make things and stock them out
> of the good of their hearts. They do it to sell
> the stuff, not to have it sit around on shelves in
> their warehouses gathering dust.
>
> >So the additional cost for material used by broad
> gauge is only a very tiny amount of the price. I
> suspect the savings in electricity used by BART
> trains more than compensates for the additional
> cost.
>
> Agreed, although I will say that after spending
> what was considered an astronomical amount of
> money at the time on the Concord Test Track, all
> that really came out of it was a change in track
> gauge and propulsion voltage.

Hi Dr. Zarkoff- I always enjoy your highly technical reports. I took a peek in Bob Ford's Red Train book and it looks like the average weight for the IER 300-series cars was approximately "62-tons" ...

Thanks.
KRK