What is The Fastest NYC subway car

[bstar1]

Yes but NTT's can outrun SMEE's explain that.

[Kamen Rider]

I guess folks also forgot about that multi-page thread that we had on this SAME exact topic not too long ago. God, memories are short these days...

 

why else do you think people share what they're eating on Facebook, so they'll remember what they had for dinner the next day...

 

 

Though, IIRC that discussion, that was more direct Hippos Vs R160s.

 

The thing is sort not so much "what is the answer?", but here it's "what is the question you're answering?" Because I don't think we're all on the same wavelength.

 

(excuse the following automotive analogies, I'm currently suffering from Top Gear Withdrawal)

 

The idea of "fastest" to me is based upon the same concept they have in the automotive industry. what is the achievable maximum top speed, on straight, level ground, with the engine/s at full power and no limits. Line it up and gun it.  A Bugatti Veyron weights just over 2 tones, and is, If the Stig's lap time (and my experience in Fourza) is any note, terrible in the corners.

 

The original Veyron only came in fourth, and then got bumped down to 5th by a Zonda. The super sport currently stands at 7th on the power board and the original is way down at 16.

 

But on the straights, it eats much lighter cars for breakfast. And I'm not talking about Priuses and Smart ForFours, I'm taking Mustangs and Mercedes and Porsches and all the like. a brand new Porsche 991 GT3 RS is half a ton lighter but will not match the Bugatti for speed.

 

So a smaller, slower car with better handling will win in a race on a circuit (which is why I stuck to David Letterman's American Le Mans Series BMW M3), but that does not make them "faster" than the Veyron. In the same way different trains may be better in different parts of the subway, but it doesn't mean that in a flat out drag race, one must be better than the other based solely off a lap time.

 

Sure, Subway Guys' right. The NTTs are limited. but turn that limit off, and what do you get?

 

So the question is,as far as I'm concered:

 

Who's our Veyron?

[bstar1]

Well something is makin NTT's faster Brighton maybe a better way to notice Q Loc and B Exp. R160 would always move quicker than R68.

[Fresh Pond]

Yes but NTT's can outrun SMEE's explain that.

Several train operators already explained already, and you're still stuck by your word...

[Trainmaster5]

Yes but NTT's can outrun SMEE's explain that.

A 3 year old cheetah can run almost 70 mph

A 9 year old cheetah can run almost 65 mph

That 9 year old cheetah used to be a 3 year old cheetah. See what I meant in my earlier post ? The newest/youngest equipment R160 should, in theory, be faster than all older cars because of  the wear and tear on the older cars all things being equal. Another tidbit from a schoolcar instructor around 30 years ago.

[DS4Ever]

Say that to a person who witnessed the introduction of the famous redbirds and r32.36.38

 

Back then they were super fast...but now as they have gotten old their speed is reduced

 

O wish to see the r160 by the year 2060 and they are going to be more slower and those lightin . Are going to be more dimmer and the seats all wasted

 

I never was in favour of those r142 r160 since i alwaysloved tthe redbirds and the r68 on the line especially when it was all packed up the conductor would open jointly the doors several times now that was. Retro

[Daniel The Cool]

Say that to a person who witnessed the introduction of the famous redbirds and r32.36.38

 

Back then they were super fast...but now as they have gotten old their speed is reduced

 

O wish to see the r160 by the year 2060 and they are going to be more slower and those lightin . Are going to be more dimmer and the seats all wasted

 

I never was in favour of those r142 r160 since i alwaysloved tthe redbirds and the r68 on the line especially when it was all packed up the conductor would open jointly the doors several times now that was. Retro

R68 line?

[jon2305]

Im sure they meant R62 lol, simple mistake.

[ttcsubwayfan]

Say that to a person who witnessed the introduction of the famous redbirds and r32.36.38

 

Back then they were super fast...but now as they have gotten old their speed is reduced

 

O wish to see the r160 by the year 2060 and they are going to be more slower and those lightin . Are going to be more dimmer and the seats all wasted

 

I never was in favour of those r142 r160 since i alwaysloved tthe redbirds and the r68 on the line especially when it was all packed up the conductor would open jointly the doors several times now that was. Retro

 

It's also important to note that speeds were dialed back after the Union Square wreck. NTTs may have been faster, had that, and the Williamsburg Bridge wreck not occured, but the SMEEs would have been as well.

[N6 Limited]

Speaking of programming, it seems that the L train flew through the east river tubes, does the MTA increase the programmed speed limit when CBTC is involved?

[SubwayGuy]

why else do you think people share what they're eating on Facebook, so they'll remember what they had for dinner the next day...

 

 

Though, IIRC that discussion, that was more direct Hippos Vs R160s.

 

The thing is sort not so much "what is the answer?", but here it's "what is the question you're answering?" Because I don't think we're all on the same wavelength.

 

(excuse the following automotive analogies, I'm currently suffering from Top Gear Withdrawal)

 

The idea of "fastest" to me is based upon the same concept they have in the automotive industry. what is the achievable maximum top speed, on straight, level ground, with the engine/s at full power and no limits. Line it up and gun it.  A Bugatti Veyron weights just over 2 tones, and is, If the Stig's lap time (and my experience in Fourza) is any note, terrible in the corners.

 

The original Veyron only came in fourth, and then got bumped down to 5th by a Zonda. The super sport currently stands at 7th on the power board and the original is way down at 16.

 

But on the straights, it eats much lighter cars for breakfast. And I'm not talking about Priuses and Smart ForFours, I'm taking Mustangs and Mercedes and Porsches and all the like. a brand new Porsche 991 GT3 RS is half a ton lighter but will not match the Bugatti for speed.

 

So a smaller, slower car with better handling will win in a race on a circuit (which is why I stuck to David Letterman's American Le Mans Series BMW M3), but that does not make them "faster" than the Veyron. In the same way different trains may be better in different parts of the subway, but it doesn't mean that in a flat out drag race, one must be better than the other based solely off a lap time.

 

Sure, Subway Guys' right. The NTTs are limited. but turn that limit off, and what do you get?

 

So the question is,as far as I'm concered:

 

Who's our Veyron?

 

R160s are governed, yes. But SMEEs had their high speed field shunting capabilities removed, limiting the acceleration at higher speeds also.

 

So, both have been "nerfed" over the years. Hard to compare both at full capability since they've never shared the system at the same time with full capability, plus the system itself has been slowed down over the years making a comparison across generations just about impossible.

[mediccjh]

Speaking of programming, it seems that the L train flew through the east river tubes, does the MTA increase the programmed speed limit when CBTC is involved?

Yes. When the train is in ATO (Automatic Train Operation), the speeds are faster than when the Motorman is operating the train manually. 

 

My personal speed records:

 

62 mph R160, 60th St. Tube.

58 mph R46, 60th St. Tube.

50 mph, R68, Culver Express Southbound.

 

I've hit 50 on the Flats. It depends on the train, and how you handle the timers. 

[B46 via Utica]

Okay I understand a maximum speed a train can do is 55 mph. I also realized a long time ago because a subway train can go as fast as it used to because of safety reasons and how many curves there are in the system but the R160s always seem to be the fastest to me and I also wonder why the and haul past Woodhaven Blvd than slow down at other stations are any timers involved?

[Fresh Pond]

Okay I understand a maximum speed a train can do is 55 mph. I also realized a long time ago because a subway train can go as fast as it used to because of safety reasons and how many curves there are in the system but the R160s always seem to be the fastest to me and I also wonder why the and haul past Woodhaven Blvd than slow down at other stations are any timers involved?

Yes...

[SubwayGuy]

My best with current equipment in current setup:

R-62/A - 51 MPH (south of 50th St. 2/3)

R-142/A - 52 MPH (Joralemon Tube)

 

R-32 - 47 MPH (tie Nostrand Ave. A and Rockaway Flats)

R-46 - 50 MPH (Rockaway Flats) honorable mention to 48 entering Nostrand and at 42nd/8th

R-68/A - 55 MPH (60th St. Tube)...never felt fully comfortable with the adjustment to the timers over there, so I don't take chances with them, but it is what it is. Non 60th would be 47 (tie between W4 6th Ave, the southbound Concourse tube, and north of 9 St. on 4th Ave)

R-160 - 57 MPH (60th St. Tube). Non 60th would be 50 (42nd/8th with a not in service train). Would be interested to take one over the flats to see how it handles above 45 over such a long stretch.

[BronxBombers]

Okay I understand a maximum speed a train can do is 55 mph. I also realized a long time ago because a subway train can go as fast as it used to because of safety reasons and how many curves there are in the system but the R160s always seem to be the fastest to me and I also wonder why the and haul past Woodhaven Blvd than slow down at other stations are any timers involved?

 

Eastbound there are timers around Elmhurst Av, than the flies to Forest Hills. Westbound, I think there are timers around 63rd Drive and Grand Av.

[6 Lexington Ave]

-New Tech equipment "appears" faster to the untrained eye because they can sustain 2.5 mph per second acceleration longer than SMEE equipment,

 

Boom.

But wouldn't you agree that the above matters quite a lot in a subway system where time signals have been excessively used even in places where they're not necessary? Also I think that the fact that NTTs sustain this acceleration rate for a longer period is very important since stations are usually close to each other, so the train cannot get anywhere near its top speed so acceleration is what matters most. That's how I see it though.

[CenSin]

But wouldn't you agree that the above matters quite a lot in a subway system where time signals have been excessively used even in places where they're not necessary? Also I think that the fact that NTTs sustain this acceleration rate for a longer period is very important since stations are usually close to each other, so the train cannot get anywhere near its top speed so acceleration is what matters most. That's how I see it though.

Yeah. The trains may be on even footing over long stretches, but acceleration and deceleration performance makes the difference when stations are close enough that trains have a shorter distance to run at high velocity.

[SubwayGuy]

But wouldn't you agree that the above matters quite a lot in a subway system where time signals have been excessively used even in places where they're not necessary? Also I think that the fact that NTTs sustain this acceleration rate for a longer period is very important since stations are usually close to each other, so the train cannot get anywhere near its top speed so acceleration is what matters most. That's how I see it though.

 

And yet when I get a SMEE train vs getting an NTT, I'm still able to arrive at the terminal on time, so it's all subjective. Brakes on SMEE trains tend to be better, and making good stops is every bit as important as acceleration when discussing remaining on schedule. Plus, like I said the acceleration of NTT's really tapers off at higher speeds, and even on local lines there are often enough areas where this comes into play that one is not particularly noticeably faster, even over the same stretch.