Jump to content

Favorite BMT/IND Subway Cars


What Is Your Favorite Subway Car  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. What Is Your Favorite Subway Car

    • Westinghouse-Amrail R68
      12
    • St. Louis Car R40 Slant
      25
    • Kawasaki R68A
      10
    • St Louis Car R40M
      1
    • Budd R32/A
      40
    • St. Louis Car R42
      6
    • Alstom R160A
      20
    • Kawasaki R160B
      40
    • St. Louis Car R38
      6
    • Pullman Standard R46
      16
    • St. Louis Car R44
      6


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 221
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Mines are Slants, followed by the R32s, R38s, R42s and R68s. These are irrelevant from this forum but I included them before i changed my mind and added the r42s and the R68s. I like the R17s (the porthole window was an ill feature) and the R21s/22s (those cars had the drop-down storm door windows; a Redbird had an R21/22 storm door, saw it in 2000 on the (2)).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my best to worst of all cars still in the system (including A Divison cars):

1. R32s

2. R160A (rank them higher than the R160Bs because i like the whirling sound the doors make when they open or close)

3. R160B (no preference over propulsion)

4. R62

5. R62A (rank them lower than the R62s because they are dirtier and have no side signs)

6. R143

7. R68A

8. R68 (rank them lower than the R68As because they are slower and dirtier)

9. R142/142A (no preference over either or)

10. R46

11. R40M

12. R42

13. R44

 

of the retired fleet, the Redbirds were my favorite with the R33/36 World's Fair Version being on top. I would rank the R40 slants between the R46s and R40Ms on my list and the R38s between the R40Ms and R42s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Finally, I've found someone that prefers the R160As over the R160B! I just in general like Alstom's trains over the Japanese-made trains for many reasons.

 

Damn dude, it's sad that you don't even like the cars made by your country! B)

 

My top ten are:

1. R40 Slants! Rode them on the (Q6) when I was 7 or 8, and the car was railfan friendly for me. B) they're the only reason why I put them ahead of the R32.

2. R32: Why? Because they are 45 friggin' years old, and these trains deserve the Old Faithful moniker. If the R32s were really problematic, be it A/C wise, doorwise or heatwise, they would have gotten rid of them already, so whoever says the R32s suck need to get their heads checked!

3. R38: I had a love/hate relationship with the R38s, but heavens knows I miss them now.

4. R40M: Set the precedent for the R42.

5. R42: Been through hell on Jamaica over the years. But they got the job done, and I'll give it up to the R42s for that.

6. R46: I like these trains somewhat, but the 75' design turns me off.

7. R68: Enjoyed them on the (D) back when they were on Brighton, but these cars are too slow.

8. R68A: Their delay issue throws me off, which I find weird that a train will respond late when you accelerate or brake. It's like you have no control of the damn train! :mad:

9. R160A/B: Too overrated. These trains are getting too much hype which is why they're second to last on my list. They would have been around the middle but like I said, too overrated.

10. R44: An epic FAIL. These cars may have set the precedent of being the first 75' car, whoop de do for them. They didn't set a precedent for having the curved sides though; technically, the Slants did. It's hard to tell, but look at the front end of an R40M or the R42 and you'll see. Their cab doors are so darn narrow; it's amazing if an oversized T/O or C/R can squeeze through the cab to start their run. And if their A/C is so great, why is it that most cars I've been on has poor A/C? The only time I've shown gratitude to an R44 was when I caught an early morning (A) train so I wouldn't miss the 6:30 a.m. ferry to Staten Island. If anything, Staten Island's R44s are more reliable than their (NYCT) counterparts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn dude, it's sad that you don't even like the cars made by your country! :P

 

I loved Budd and Pullman for commuter trains only, but now they are both gone. GE only made good diesel locomotives, but their subway propulsion systems and motors were just too noisy. For propulsion systems and motors, I would choose Westinghouse any day even though that is gone too. But hey, the R44s were made in our country!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1-BU El Cars

2-Arnines

3-R-10s

4-R-40 slants

5-BMT Bluebird

 

No love for the BQs?

This is my favorite type of R4, anyone other then Subwayguy know why it is painted yellow? It's not yellow because it is a work motor, something has been changed mechanically.

img_40482.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9. R160A/B: Too overrated. These trains are getting too much hype which is why they're second to last on my list. They would have been around the middle but like I said, too overrated.

 

 

The (MTA) has managed to get lots of life out of their trains. But here's the thing. The R160 is a huge order. And, for me, it is a conservative train. In 15 years or so it won't seem so new. We are used to seeing digital everywhere. The trains are really today's R40M/R42 with an R44 like curvature IMO. But somehow more sterile. And I don't like all of the train ID signs being red in the front or yellow or amber on the sides. Boring and takes away the line identification colors at least from the outside.

 

I'm happy with the performance of the R160/R143 in terms of their reliability. What I would like to see the (MTA) do is be really daring in the design of upcoming trains. I doubt this will happen, however. Train design language has become staid IMO. I'm not seeing in the PA5 and R160 the same sort of innovation as the PA1 or even the impact of the R40 slant, as bad as a design it turned out to be. Same colors (blue and white and silver will date itself at some point), similar look and feel. I'd like something bolder, more glass maybe, more interesting surfaces, maybe look into truly maximizing seat and standee areas, maybe looking into enclosed coupled areas that maximize space like they do in Asia (articulated, we've done it with the buses). I don't have much faith in the R179 and R188 to be much different than the R143 or R142. But, somewhere down the line, train design will take that leap that it just has not taken in this time of so many newbuilds. Maybe now it is test technology and digital displays and then in the next decade 2011-2020, something really striking and different will happen with train design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (MTA) has managed to get lots of life out of their trains. But here's the thing. The R160 is a huge order. And, for me, it is a conservative train. In 15 years or so it won't seem so new. We are used to seeing digital everywhere. The trains are really today's R40M/R42 with an R44 like curvature IMO. But somehow more sterile. And I don't like all of the train ID signs being red in the front or yellow or amber on the sides. Boring and takes away the line identification colors at least from the outside.

 

I'm happy with the performance of the R160/R143 in terms of their reliability. What I would like to see the (MTA) do is be really daring in the design of upcoming trains. I doubt this will happen, however. Train design language has become staid IMO. I'm not seeing in the PA5 and R160 the same sort of innovation as the PA1 or even the impact of the R40 slant, as bad as a design it turned out to be. Same colors (blue and white and silver will date itself at some point), similar look and feel. I'd like something bolder, more glass maybe, more interesting surfaces, maybe look into truly maximizing seat and standee areas, maybe looking into enclosed coupled areas that maximize space like they do in Asia (articulated, we've done it with the buses). I don't have much faith in the R179 and R188 to be much different than the R143 or R142. But, somewhere down the line, train design will take that leap that it just has not taken in this time of so many newbuilds. Maybe now it is test technology and digital displays and then in the next decade 2011-2020, something really striking and different will happen with train design.

 

IAWTP to an extent. The MTA has shown more innovation with their bus fleet, so why not do the same with their trains? The TA has had fishbowl buses, Classics (many of which were used by the private bus companies before being taken over), RTS, New Flyer, MCI coach buses (some of these are even used for local service!), and the many different Orion buses, from the 5s, with the CNG hump, to the 6s, which I rarely saw, to the present-day 7s and 7NGs. But the trains' have only changed their features real slowly, as if every decade. If the R179 and R188 is anything like the rest of the current NTTs, then it's going to be a real drag railfanning because of the loss of the RFW and everything the older fleet stands for. Railfans who like the newer fleet do not understand the hell the older fleet has been through, making it feel underrated. Now I'm really dreading the retirement of the R32 now. :cry::cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
The Kawasaki R160Bs, I love the propulsions on them! Hopefully in the future they can make LEDs with the colored bullets on the front! That's one thing I liked about the older trains!

 

i asked engineers about this when i was an intern.

 

They favored the all red. it gives extra visability alerting other trains of a train ahead of them. and not all colors are visable to passengers especially in various weather conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.