Cars 9848-9850 horribly tagged up

[QM1to6Ave]

So for the last 2 nights, I have caught 9848 on the F (it is the last car) and it is just so horribly painted over after being completely tagged over the whole lower body of the car, it actually made me cringe (and the people around me were staring at it as it pulled in to the station, too). The paint does not even come close to matching the original color, and you can still see the outlines of the tagging on cars 9848-9850. :eek::tdown:

 

Is this what the future of the R-160's is going to be? I have seen little blobs of cover-up on almost every M train, but this is just totally disgusting and crappylooking. Anyone else seen this on other trains on other lines or other JAM trains? I know there was a thread recently on how to cover up the paint-maybe the could take a look lol.

[Law]

Yea, I saw those cars on Saturday also, it was dark and blob-ish on the side, and the graffiti made in between the doors and the windows weren't removed, unfortunately I wasn't able to capture a picture of those cars.

[Melvin]

I honestly wish the trains come back to the 80's. The is already 1/2 way done, going back to (NYCT) days with the crime that 'supposedly' went down, now it's rising again with fare beating at historical high now with two SBS routes and stabbings almost once every week.

[R32 3838]

So for the last 2 nights, I have caught 9848 on the F (it is the last car) and it is just so horribly painted over after being completely tagged over the whole lower body of the car, it actually made me cringe (and the people around me were staring at it as it pulled in to the station, too). The paint does not even come close to matching the original color, and you can still see the outlines of the tagging on cars 9848-9850. :eek::tdown:

 

Is this what the future of the R-160's is going to be? I have seen little blobs of cover-up on almost every M train, but this is just totally disgusting and crappylooking. Anyone else seen this on other trains on other lines or other JAM trains? I know there was a thread recently on how to cover up the paint-maybe the could take a look lol.

 

Trust Me That will never come off, Vandals know that the R160 Steel is Cheap, This is going to be a Major problem in the , So Far over 90 R160's or More have been tagged, They look horrible after they clean up the paint.

[lilbluefoxie]

get your fro and your disco music, the 70s are coming back hehe

[Roadcruiser1]

I don't think the R160's are going to last long. In this condition along with the rust dust and what it goes through it might only stay here for 20 years maybe even less. Although they might look technologically advanced technology won't save it. They might have one of the shortest lifespans for all the NYCS subway cars in the history of the NYCS.

[DJ MC]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[St Louis Car 09]

 

I don't think the R160's are going to last long. In this condition along with the rust dust and what it goes through it might only stay here for 20 years maybe even less. Although they might look technologically advanced technology won't save it. They might have one of the shortest lifespans for all the NYCS subway cars in the history of the NYCS.

I agree.When you touch the R160 sheet metal,It doesnt feel like sheet metal like on a R68.It feels like brushed steel.The last real Stainless steel cars are the R68 and R62s.

[SubwayGuy]

I agree.When you touch the R160 sheet metal,It doesnt feel like sheet metal like on a R68.It feels like brushed steel.The last real Stainless steel cars are the R68 and R62s.

 

It's a different kind of stainless steel.

 

I believe the name for it is austenitic stainless steel. I would have to check though. It's a different alloy and process used in the formation of the steel.

[Roadcruiser1]

The R160B sheet mentions that the R160 isn't pure stainless steel. There is fiberglass too. The problems that forced the R40's to retirement could plague the R160's in the not so far future too. Fiberglass usually have a life rate of 20 years if exposed to harsh environment. Stainless steel usually have a life rate of 30-40 years. So what is going to kill the R160's is the fiberglass parts of the cars. So the could have had wasted their money for nothing. Basically the R160's are like the R40's. They are composed of welded stainless steel including the roof with fiberglass ends and strips. The R160's floor composes of plywood with stainless steel mats. So basically if you remove the thin stainless steel you are going to find wood. The only difference between R160's and R40's are their appearence.

[7LineFan]

The R160B sheet mentions that the R160 isn't pure stainless steel. There is fiberglass too. The problems that forced the R40's to retirement could plague the R160's in the not so far future too. Fiberglass usually have a life rate of 20 years if exposed to harsh environment. Stainless steel usually have a life rate of 30-40 years. So what is going to kill the R160's is the fiberglass parts of the cars. So the could have had wasted their money for nothing. Basically the R160's are like the R40's. They are composed of welded stainless steel including the roof with fiberglass ends and strips. The R160's floor composes of plywood with stainless steel mats. So basically if you remove the thin stainless steel you are going to find wood. The only difference between R160's and R40's are their appearence.

 

Tell me, how long did the R40s last? 40-some-odd years right? So if the only difference between the 160s and the R40s is the appearance (which is about as far from the truth as you can get) shouldn't they, by that logic, have similar lifetimes?

[R32 3838]

The R160B sheet mentions that the R160 isn't pure stainless steel. There is fiberglass too. The problems that forced the R40's to retirement could plague the R160's in the not so far future too. Fiberglass usually have a life rate of 20 years if exposed to harsh environment. Stainless steel usually have a life rate of 30-40 years. So what is going to kill the R160's is the fiberglass parts of the cars. So the could have had wasted their money for nothing. Basically the R160's are like the R40's. They are composed of welded stainless steel including the roof with fiberglass ends and strips. The R160's floor composes of plywood with stainless steel mats. So basically if you remove the thin stainless steel you are going to find wood. The only difference between R160's and R40's are their appearence.

 

Yep, this is why the needs to go back to Bombardeir.

[Roadcruiser1]

Nope there is a second difference. You see the R40's weren't affected by the rust dust that exist in the subway tunnels. The R160's are and that will kill the life span of the R160's.

[R32 3838]

Tell me, how long did the R40s last? 40-some-odd years right? So if the only difference between the 160s and the R40s is the appearance (which is about as far from the truth as you can get) shouldn't they, by that logic, have similar lifetimes?

 

The rebuilt them that's number 1, Number 2 they were forced to last 41 years, The R160's on the other hand is built with cheap steel, with fiberglass, they would last way less than the R40.

[Roadcruiser1]

Face the facts not being mean the R160's are cheap and they were built cheap. They are nothing else but rumbling rust buckets. Not just that the R40's were pure fabricated stainless steel. They were tough, durable, and long lasting. Although the fiberglass gave out later they were tough cars. The R160 on the other hand are just welded thin cheap sheets of stainless steel filled with cheap fiberglass, and plywood floors that is just covered with thin stainless steel. Even though the R40 were built out of the same materials as an R160 the train wasn't really affected by any materials in the subway tunnels for a long time, because the materials were strong. The R160B on the other hand are, and they are seriously effected by the rust dust, because they are cheap.

[7LineFan]

Nope there is a second difference. You see the R40's weren't affected by the rust dust that exist in the subway tunnels. The R160's are and that will kill the life span of the R160's.

 

Then explain all that dirty stuff that you could see on every subway car during the years of deferred maintenance.

 

The rebuilt them that's number 1, Number 2 they were forced to last 41 years, The R160's on the other hand is built with cheap steel, with fiberglass, they would last way less than the R40.

 

They were rebuilt because of the deferred maintenance period and lasted a while longer after that. We have SMS now so that the cars don't fall into that terrible state again.

 

Face the facts not being mean the R160's are cheap and they were built cheap. They are nothing else but rumbling rust buckets. Not just that the R40's were pure fabricated stainless steel. They were tough, durable, and long lasting. Although the fiberglass gave out later they were tough cars. The R160 on the other hand are just welded thin cheap sheets of stainless steel filled with cheap fiberglass, and plywood floors that is just covered with thin stainless steel. Even though the R40 were built out of the same materials as an R160 the train wasn't really affected by any materials in the subway tunnels for a long time, because the materials were strong. The R160B on the other hand are, and they are seriously effected by the rust dust, because they are cheap.

 

Rumbling? And yet the ride quality is better than any SMEE car I've ridden in, thanks to the airbag suspension.

 

Cheap? How much money did the spend on this? And they've worked fine so far haven't they? They've pretty much ironed out the kinks by now and I think these cars will last a long time. Just because it's new doesn't mean it will fall apart in a few years, which is what you two make the 160 out to be.

 

Here you go about the "rust dust" again. Can you prove this?

 

And let's face it, you're only saying these things about the R40s with the benefit of hindsight, none of which exists for the R160s. All that you are saying about the R160s is pure speculation and bias.

[Roadcruiser1]

The rust was on the outer skin of the R40. The interior sheets didn't rust and they stayed strong carrying the millions. Nope go on NYCS.com and look at the R160's spreadsheet if you don't believe me. I am just mentioning what it says on the sheet. The spent a total of 5 billion dollars on them. A two car set of R160's are about 1.5 million dollars. Also the kinks are impossible to iron out because the problems are with their thin steel plates. Also just because a train car has good technology doesn't explain the condition of the train cars.

[Ftrainfan]

Well you do have many valid points. If R160s had more money spent on them , then maybe they could have afforded to put a screen(not a rollsign) that shows the official route bullet like the interior FINDS as a pose to the same top red LED route display for every route. and they probably wouldn't have that slight screech when they break. Maybe they all could of had siemens propulsion with out the slight screech. and maybe even seating like the R44-R68 but all blue. But the R160s are at least decent the way they are now. And besides , If they do retire , people will be pretty jizzed off!

[SubwayGuy]

FACT CHECK

 

There is no such thing as "rust dust"

 

What is being referred to is the STEEL DUST which gets into the electronic propulsion control on the new tech trains and can cause problems.

 

Steel dust on the exterior of old cars in old photos was purely cosmetic, unless it worked its way into couper electric portion contacts or under covers such as in a battery box or switch group.

 

The 70s or 80s are gone. All you kiddies who just read about it can stop panicking.

 

But a new era of problems is coming, and it won't be pretty. It won't be the 70s or 80s, it will be different and its own set of problems. Numerous friends of mine who work for transit all agree and say the same thing.

 

Laying off all those provisional car inspectors certainly had at least a little bit to do with it since many yards are now understaffed.

 

SMS programs are falling behind schedule as a result.

[7LineFan]

The rust was on the outer skin of the R40. The interior sheets didn't rust and they stayed strong carrying the millions. Nope go on NYCS.com and look at the R160's spreadsheet if you don't believe me. I am just mentioning what it says on the sheet. The spent a total of 5 billion dollars on them. A two car set of R160's are about 1.5 million dollars. Also the kinks are impossible to iron out because the problems are with their thin steel plates. Also just because a train car has good technology doesn't explain the condition of the train cars.

 

I'm looking at the datasheet and I'm not seeing anything about thin. Care to be more specific?

[DJ MC]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[7LineFan]

No one should be surprised then if issues with the R160s soon appear on the news. I wonder how people will react to that?

 

If these problems appear on the news soon, what a slow news day that would be unless the 160s are crapping out left and right.

[SubwayGuy]

No one should be surprised then if issues with the R160s soon appear on the news. I wonder how people will react to that?

 

The news is too stupid to possibly be able to articulate propulsion control problems in an article. Even if they surprise, the public is too dumb to be able to comprehend to such an article and care.

 

Now if the ATO trains start having even more problems than now, that will make the news.

[Roadcruiser1]

I can't explain how thin the sheet is. Though one thing I can explain is the materials of the car are welded and put together cheaply.

[INDman]

Now if the ATO trains start having even more problems than now, that will make the news.

 

I doubt it, they try to keep as much of that in house as they can. They won't even talk about something with CBTC over the radio.