For decades, automobiles were shipped in boxcars. Then in the 1960s the railroads begin to experiment with more efficient designs for loading and unloading freight cars to better compete with trucks. These notes document some of those experiments. The end of this experimental phase is the autoracks we see today.
Dwayne Weber posted two photos with the comment: "Found some info on something NYC either explored or declined. Anything out there about the possible color of the flat or carrier?"
Kim Powell Guess there was a prototype for Lionel's#6414 Evans auto loader.
[Evans evidently developed this design as a transition to the autoracks we see today.]
[Evans evidently developed this design as a transition to the autoracks we see today.]
Richard Roberts shared
Greg Worobey I had a Lionel flat was black and carrier red.
Stuart Thomson I have the original press release book from Evans but it is in black and white. I am sure the flat was black. Not sure on the rack. Evans paid for the Lionel tooling. Evans designed the rack to permit end loading or side loading off to a dock. Unfortunately they never tried using a PRR 75' flat car or the new 85' trailer flat car. to load more cars. Problem was autos at that time were very high and a tri-level was not possible, thus not enough revenue. Plus the rack was very heavy and expensive. However in 1960, auto companies introduced unit body construction which lowered the car height by about a foot. Then Frisco and ATSF could make tri-levels for their high clearances. In 1961 the eastern railroads introduced elevator racks that lowered the overall height by 2'. It took three more years to open up clearances in the east for standard tri-levels with fixed decks ( the "B" deck was hinged at the ends ) on low level flats that also had EOC couplers. Those elevator racks only lasted five years and were scrapped or rebuilt.
Stuart Thomson That superstructure with the chain drive to raise and lower decks really added to the cost plus having the heavy bridge construction to permit side loading also added cost to the rack. Too bad the concept of just end loading of autos was still five years away. Also at the time box cars with autos would go to area sidings nearest the dealer and off load. Sometimes the box car would make two stops. Unlike shipping cars to a huge off load yard of today.
Greg Worobey I had a Lionel flat was black and carrier red.
Stuart Thomson I have the original press release book from Evans but it is in black and white. I am sure the flat was black. Not sure on the rack. Evans paid for the Lionel tooling. Evans designed the rack to permit end loading or side loading off to a dock. Unfortunately they never tried using a PRR 75' flat car or the new 85' trailer flat car. to load more cars. Problem was autos at that time were very high and a tri-level was not possible, thus not enough revenue. Plus the rack was very heavy and expensive. However in 1960, auto companies introduced unit body construction which lowered the car height by about a foot. Then Frisco and ATSF could make tri-levels for their high clearances. In 1961 the eastern railroads introduced elevator racks that lowered the overall height by 2'. It took three more years to open up clearances in the east for standard tri-levels with fixed decks ( the "B" deck was hinged at the ends ) on low level flats that also had EOC couplers. Those elevator racks only lasted five years and were scrapped or rebuilt.
Stuart Thomson That superstructure with the chain drive to raise and lower decks really added to the cost plus having the heavy bridge construction to permit side loading also added cost to the rack. Too bad the concept of just end loading of autos was still five years away. Also at the time box cars with autos would go to area sidings nearest the dealer and off load. Sometimes the box car would make two stops. Unlike shipping cars to a huge off load yard of today.
 |
| 1 |
 |
| 2 |
 |
| James M Morrison posted Thomas Matzell: I believe the Evans Company made those racks as a "kit" to add to standard flatcars. Dennis D'Angelo: ’54 Buicks Robert Bogie: Bud Rindfleisch It was a one of a kind experimental on the NYC. There was also one each on the UP and AT&SF. Richard Werner Jr. shared |
 |
| Michael Keiser commented on Richard's share |
Another transition solution, piggybacks.
Even the auto trailers went through an evolution.
 |
| David Mackey posted Larry Higgs 1959 Plymouth’s Imperials Dodges and I think a hiding DeSoto. Tod Riebow shared Dan Bohannon Looks like Lindenwood yard! Mike Budde Dan Bohannon it definitely is. That’s the old Arsenal Street bridge. Heading east from the brand new Fenton Chrysler Plant built in 1959. Those Plymouths, Dodges and Chryslers were their first product. [I have no idea which state, let alone town, Lindenwood Yard is in.] |
Even the auto trailers went through an evolution.
 |
| Bill Brophy shared a Ted Hoffman post |
 |
| Randy Alan posted I believe these entire trailers were attached to flat cars. Early multi-modal, I guess. |
Higher resolution copies of the new photos displayed above.
 |
| Ron Netti posted George Angelini: A whole lotta Ramblers. Robert Thatcher posted Here is how automobiles were transported by rail after using box cars and before auto racks - auto hauler trailers were moved on/off piggyback cars by a straddle crane. In this case, a shipment of Rambler Americans (about 1961 model) in various body styles are being unloaded at a distribution point. |
 |
| Dennis DeBruler shared Chuck Hart's photo. This is a picture I took of a picture I saw in an antique store. The picture was priced at $55 so I passed on it. I may go back and buy it if still available. Anyone else seen or have a picture of an auto carrier on a flat car? |
 |
| <foreign language> posted Fernando Muller shared James Williams Those carriers were sold to the Auto Train corp Vernon Davidson Those box cars were later seen with those end doors welded shut and a plywood bulkhead built inside the ends. They then just hauled general merchandise. Shortly after this time of 1957, TTX Corp. started building 89 foot flat cars and the railroads added the double and triple deck auto racks for easier handling of new autos. TTX Corp. was actually an "all" U S railroad owned corporation. |
Eric S. Huffstutler posted four photos with the comment:
Craig Nicol I remember the original batteries for those cars had their cell caps at one edge of the battery so they wouldn't spill in transit. All the underhood reservoirs too.
Eric S. Huffstutler They made over 2-million of these cars between 1971-1977. Pinto was produced 3 years longer 1971-1980 and produced just over 3-million.
Emery Flatt The Ford Pinto was shipped the same way. [This comment was evidently wrong. But as proof that he was correct, he posts a photo of a standard covered autorack. And yet later in the comments he delights in pointing out someone's typo. He has more comments, and I think I now understand what an internet group "know it all" is.]
Todd Allen Typically new cars are filled with fluids for testing, then drained for shipping. They still do this today.
Steve Dolan I know from personal experience, Toyotas are shipped via rail with all fluids. They even start them and drive them off the rail car. Watched them unload many of them at Southeast Toyota Distributors.
Al Carpenter Ed Cole's folly. GMAD Lordestown could build 100 unit per hour. Sales were far less brisk. The freedom battery was perfected, true, but rural offloading occasionally involved guiding a fork lift arm through open windows to keep rail schedules. Repairs were extensive.
Eric S. Huffstutler More info... Vega’s engineers had to design a special engine oil baffle to prevent oil from entering the No. 1 cylinder of the car’s inline-four engine. Batteries had filler caps located high up on the rear edge of the case to prevent acid spills. The carburetor float bowl had a special tube that drained gasoline into the vapor canister during shipment, and the windshield washer bottle stood at a 45 degree angle. Plastic spacers were wedged between the powertrain and chassis to prevent damage to engine and transmission mounts. The wedges were removed when cars were unloaded.
John Levy I was there. Trust me, there was a high demand for this car, along with the Pinto. In 1974, they sold over 460,000 Vegas. There were a lot of very good features on the car, but it was also woefully inadequate in many ways. I had a brand new 73 and it drove and handled very well. Obviously there aren't many left because of the dreadful rust prevention on the car. The original aluminum block engine was poorly designed. The interior was very nice and dang it was rear wheel drive. Can you imagine a bargain priced rear wheel drive car in today's market?
George Bishopric Though the Vega’s die-cast aluminum engine had undergone some 6 million miles of development testing, serious reliability issues surfaced soon after the car’s release. A six-quart cooling system and small radiator proved barely sufficient to prevent overheating in warmer climates, and the aluminum engine block soon earned a reputation for distorting when hot. This frequently led to the piston rings scraping the silica used to harden cylinder walls, increasing oil consumption (though to be fair, valve stem seals were also a known source of oil consumption). In extreme overheating, the engine block’s distortion could be severe enough to compromise the head gasket, leading to coolant leaks and further destructive overheating.
Chevrolet took until 1976 to resolve issues with the Vega’s 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine, and by then even a serious marketing effort to promote the new “Dura-Built 140” engine proved to be too little, too late. The new engine improved coolant flow through the block; used a revised head gasket and water pump; added revised valve guide seals; and changed the thermostat, but not even an increased five-year, 60,000-mile warranty was enough to restore consumer confidence. Sales in 1975 totaled just more than 206,000 units, and fell even further, to less than 161,000 units, following the release of the Dura-Built 140 engine in 1976. In 1977, the Vega’s final year of production, only 78,402 models found their way into consumer driveways.
George Bishopric I bought one when I was 18. The things I liked about it then, I still like about it.
For its time, it was a relatively comfortable small car. It handled very well, and until it began to fall apart, it was quite competitive with other small cars which you must remember we were remarkably more tinny, noisy and cramped than any small car today
The car had a appalling quality, however. The plastics used in the interior would be rejected for Walmart for use in a dishwashing rack. The carpet was basically lint, pulled from an industrial clothes dryer. The inner fenders were deleted to save money, along with a glove box
The cars began rusting, almost before they left the show room. My windshield and rear window had to be removed for rust repair within six months of purchase. The tires had to be replaced at 16,000 miles. Back in the day, that was outrageous, and these were not high-performance tires by any stretch.
George Bishopric The motor's issues were best symbolized by the oil filler cap: Basically, a rubber bottle stopper, that could only be removed with difficulty, which was a problem in such an oil thirsty motor. My engine blew a head gasket at 18,000 miles on a cool Sunday morning. By the time I traded the car in, it could not go more than 40 mph with passengers in it.
Todd Allen I remember taking a head off one of these Vegas- the bolt was so seized I used a water pipe for a hot water heater pressure relief valve drain over the rachet (about a 4 foot leverage arm) and broke two sockets with two guys working on it. Had to buy an industrial grade impact socket before that sucker woud budge and my 4 foot breaker bar.. Blown head gasket of course.
George Bishopric Patrick Mullen GM basically handed the small car market to Toyota at that point. Had GM gone with the "premium small car" concept, and not slashed quality to meet unrealistic price targets, they would have met the challenge of import competition. A massive unforced error.
George Bishopric "Contrary to popular belief, GM did rust proof the cars, but its design allowed for air pockets to develop between the front fenders, cowl, and firewall during the rustproofing process, leaving the steel in those areas dangerously unprotected. Yet while all these defects were known to company brass, the Vega debuted on September 10, 1970, and just like GM hoped...." http://www.cheatsheet.com/.../why-the-chevy-vega-set.../...
This is not new but still awesome to see. The Vert-A-Pac shipping system General Motors came up with to ship the Chevrolet Vega back in the 1970s. Developed along with Southern Pacific Railroad, GM was able to double the amount of Vega models it could ship by packing them into the unique storage cars vertically.
At the time, rail cars could fit 15 vehicles each, but Chevrolet was able to lower shipping costs by making it possible to ship 30 Vegas per rail car, in turn allowing the price of the Vega to remain as low as possible. Each rail car had 30 doors that would fold down so that a Vega could be strapped on, and then a forklift would come along and lift the door into place. All the cars were positioned nose down, and since they were shipped with all of their required fluids, certain aspects had to be designed specifically for this type of shipping, including an oil baffle in the engine, a special battery and even a repositioned windshield washer reservoir. Any other cars shipped in as an unusual way?
Craig Nicol I remember the original batteries for those cars had their cell caps at one edge of the battery so they wouldn't spill in transit. All the underhood reservoirs too.
Eric S. Huffstutler They made over 2-million of these cars between 1971-1977. Pinto was produced 3 years longer 1971-1980 and produced just over 3-million.
Emery Flatt The Ford Pinto was shipped the same way. [This comment was evidently wrong. But as proof that he was correct, he posts a photo of a standard covered autorack. And yet later in the comments he delights in pointing out someone's typo. He has more comments, and I think I now understand what an internet group "know it all" is.]
Todd Allen Typically new cars are filled with fluids for testing, then drained for shipping. They still do this today.
Steve Dolan I know from personal experience, Toyotas are shipped via rail with all fluids. They even start them and drive them off the rail car. Watched them unload many of them at Southeast Toyota Distributors.
Al Carpenter Ed Cole's folly. GMAD Lordestown could build 100 unit per hour. Sales were far less brisk. The freedom battery was perfected, true, but rural offloading occasionally involved guiding a fork lift arm through open windows to keep rail schedules. Repairs were extensive.
Eric S. Huffstutler More info... Vega’s engineers had to design a special engine oil baffle to prevent oil from entering the No. 1 cylinder of the car’s inline-four engine. Batteries had filler caps located high up on the rear edge of the case to prevent acid spills. The carburetor float bowl had a special tube that drained gasoline into the vapor canister during shipment, and the windshield washer bottle stood at a 45 degree angle. Plastic spacers were wedged between the powertrain and chassis to prevent damage to engine and transmission mounts. The wedges were removed when cars were unloaded.
John Levy I was there. Trust me, there was a high demand for this car, along with the Pinto. In 1974, they sold over 460,000 Vegas. There were a lot of very good features on the car, but it was also woefully inadequate in many ways. I had a brand new 73 and it drove and handled very well. Obviously there aren't many left because of the dreadful rust prevention on the car. The original aluminum block engine was poorly designed. The interior was very nice and dang it was rear wheel drive. Can you imagine a bargain priced rear wheel drive car in today's market?
George Bishopric Though the Vega’s die-cast aluminum engine had undergone some 6 million miles of development testing, serious reliability issues surfaced soon after the car’s release. A six-quart cooling system and small radiator proved barely sufficient to prevent overheating in warmer climates, and the aluminum engine block soon earned a reputation for distorting when hot. This frequently led to the piston rings scraping the silica used to harden cylinder walls, increasing oil consumption (though to be fair, valve stem seals were also a known source of oil consumption). In extreme overheating, the engine block’s distortion could be severe enough to compromise the head gasket, leading to coolant leaks and further destructive overheating.
Chevrolet took until 1976 to resolve issues with the Vega’s 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine, and by then even a serious marketing effort to promote the new “Dura-Built 140” engine proved to be too little, too late. The new engine improved coolant flow through the block; used a revised head gasket and water pump; added revised valve guide seals; and changed the thermostat, but not even an increased five-year, 60,000-mile warranty was enough to restore consumer confidence. Sales in 1975 totaled just more than 206,000 units, and fell even further, to less than 161,000 units, following the release of the Dura-Built 140 engine in 1976. In 1977, the Vega’s final year of production, only 78,402 models found their way into consumer driveways.
George Bishopric I bought one when I was 18. The things I liked about it then, I still like about it.
For its time, it was a relatively comfortable small car. It handled very well, and until it began to fall apart, it was quite competitive with other small cars which you must remember we were remarkably more tinny, noisy and cramped than any small car today
The car had a appalling quality, however. The plastics used in the interior would be rejected for Walmart for use in a dishwashing rack. The carpet was basically lint, pulled from an industrial clothes dryer. The inner fenders were deleted to save money, along with a glove box
The cars began rusting, almost before they left the show room. My windshield and rear window had to be removed for rust repair within six months of purchase. The tires had to be replaced at 16,000 miles. Back in the day, that was outrageous, and these were not high-performance tires by any stretch.
George Bishopric The motor's issues were best symbolized by the oil filler cap: Basically, a rubber bottle stopper, that could only be removed with difficulty, which was a problem in such an oil thirsty motor. My engine blew a head gasket at 18,000 miles on a cool Sunday morning. By the time I traded the car in, it could not go more than 40 mph with passengers in it.
Todd Allen I remember taking a head off one of these Vegas- the bolt was so seized I used a water pipe for a hot water heater pressure relief valve drain over the rachet (about a 4 foot leverage arm) and broke two sockets with two guys working on it. Had to buy an industrial grade impact socket before that sucker woud budge and my 4 foot breaker bar.. Blown head gasket of course.
George Bishopric Patrick Mullen GM basically handed the small car market to Toyota at that point. Had GM gone with the "premium small car" concept, and not slashed quality to meet unrealistic price targets, they would have met the challenge of import competition. A massive unforced error.
George Bishopric "Contrary to popular belief, GM did rust proof the cars, but its design allowed for air pockets to develop between the front fenders, cowl, and firewall during the rustproofing process, leaving the steel in those areas dangerously unprotected. Yet while all these defects were known to company brass, the Vega debuted on September 10, 1970, and just like GM hoped...." http://www.cheatsheet.com/.../why-the-chevy-vega-set.../...
 |
| 1 |
 |
| 2 |
 |
| 3 |
 |
| 4 |
 |
| Eric commented on his post |
 |
| Eric commented on his post [Al Carpenter elaborated that there was not enough room by the sidings in rural areas to lower the ramps all the way. That is why they used forklifts to unload cars.] |
 |
| Eric commented on his post The cars were hanging on the railroad car doors by four cast iron hooks attached to the chassis. |
 |
| Eric commented on his post Here are stacks showing Cadillac cars in them. [Eric posted this as part of a discussion of vertical clearances and weather or not the Vet-A-Pac cars could go all the way to the East Coast. I was not aware of this form of auto transportation.] |
Mary Stahl posted four photos with the comment:
Frisco developed the tri-level auto hauler with Chrysler to serve their plant in Fenton, MO. This one was donated to our MOT. Frisco gave employees a poster of one of the unit trains leaving the plant and back of poster showed cars being loaded. We saved Dad's copy.
 |
| 1 |
 |
| 2 |
 |
| 3, cropped |
 |
| 4, -100+50, unfortunately, I could not make it readable. |
No comments:
Post a Comment