Comparative sizes of North American vs. UK locos

Discussion in 'The Real Thing- North America' started by RobertInOntario, Oct 26, 2006.

  1. RobertInOntario

    RobertInOntario Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,410
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, Tom -- I appreciate seeing those pics! I'll have to make it down to the CNE grounds & see the 6213. Cheers, Rob
  2. grumbeast

    grumbeast Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    0
    Especially the GWR and subsequently WR David, if I remember the Great Western only built one 4-6-2?, they never felt the need to build pacifics because the Castle's and King's (both 4-6-0's) seemed to do the job for them (although, being a taff, I think that was down to the fine Welsh steam coal :) :) )

    One difference I seem to notice however, is that it seems that many NA steam locomotives are just 2 cylinder simples, whereas there were many 4 cylinder locomotives in the UK

    Graham
  3. Triplex

    Triplex Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,851
    Likes Received:
    0
    A 4-cylinder compound is generally more fuel-efficient but more complicated than a 2-cylinder simple, correct?

    At least regarding US vs. continental Europe... European engines are designed for fuel efficiency, as fuels cost more there. American engines are optimized for low maintenance, as repair shops are farther apart and runs are longer, but the US has more fuel reserves. This is true in the diesel era, and I'll bet it was true in the steam era as well. 4-cylinder engines were more common in Europe than North America.

    Given this, I'll assume that the British situation was/is more similar to the European one.