I have a couple of mechanical and subjective opinions to offer up here as a result of recent posts on T.O. The intention is not to start any flaming, but just offer my view, and I'd only do that if I was familiar with the locomotives involved...so lets keep this friendly, OK.
If you have any differences of opinion or the like, please state so civilly and use your real name. I do.
The first one involves former Sierra Ry. 2-6-2 32, later Tidewater Southern 132. It was mentioned by the poster that 2-6-2 30 and 2-6-2 32 were "identical Baldwin 2-6-2s". I'll respecfully differ, they were close but certainly not the same locomotive. The 30 was built in 1922 for service on the Angels Branch where geared locomotives had ran for years account of the sharp curves and steeper than normal grades. Engine 30 has 15" by 24" cylinders, 175 lbs. on the boiler, 42" drivers giving a t.e. of 19,130 lbs. Engine weight was about 49 tons.
When it came time to order a second Prairie from Baldwin, it was specified that driver diameter be increased not just to the very common 44" but out to 46". Cylinder bore was increased to 16" to compensate for this along with a bump of 5 lbs. on the boiler to give a moderate increase in t.e. to 20,440 lbs. Engine weight was increased to about 53 tons.
What does this bigger driver size tell you? That 42" was too small for the Sierra's profile.
I ran & fired the 30 (Castro Point Ry. 6) a little in the late 60's and early 70's and she was a miserable machine to be on. Just my opinion.
Eugene Vicknair stated that when bigger sister 32 was scrapped in Oakland in the 50's that
"losing this one was a shame" and I agree with him wholeheartedly. Too bad that 32 wasn't owned by PLA instead of 30. Although mechanical differences were modest, I feel that they'd add up on long operating days in Niles Canyon. If 46" drivers still sound really small, consider that Sierra Ry. 2-8-2 34 has the same size. That's still a lot of revolutions per mile, but would have been a step in the right direction. On the purely subjective end, 30 has the dropcab while 32 had the more conventional raised cab, which I happen to prefer.

There was another recent post that involves former Pickering Shay 11. One poster submitted that a Pickering employee felt that she was "the pride of the roster and flagship of the locomotive fleeet". Boy, that one needs some qualification. The Pacific Coast type Shay was a shop foremans and auditors machine. They got a lot of power out of a pretty thrify locomotive, but it came at a price as they had lower than normal gearing and some enginemen did not like this nor did they like that "all weather" cab, which was great for Washington State and Vancouver Island with their high rainfall, but not the 100 degree temps in the Stanislaus River Canyon where the 11 spent a lot of her time working. That cab got unbearably hot for some crews and I have been told by the son of a Pickering engineer that frequently after a week or two on her, she would be written up and pulled from service so crews could get a respite with Shay 6 or 33. A nice modern engine, true. But some of her plusses came at a price. In my opinion, 90-3 Shay 8 was the featured engine on the Pickering once she came out of the shop in early '53 to when she was retired to standby after the '58 season. When Pickering ran a test of Shay vs. EMD diesel from Beardsley Dam to Schoettgen Pass, the locomotive selected was the 8...and she accorded herself well, pulling not only the 11 or so loads behind her and caboose but also bunching slack on 2-3 log cars in front of her. Red faces that day by Pickering brass, but it could not change history. I had a few hundred hours on the 11 at Rio Vista Junction in the 70's and also brief times on Shays 7, 8 and 12.