EphraimB Posted March 14, 2018 Share #1 Posted March 14, 2018 I know that the R32s lasted to this day thanks to stainless steel. Why did they stop making trains with stainless steel until the R46s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIP Posted March 14, 2018 Share #2 Posted March 14, 2018 Stop making all these threads bro! Just ask these questions in the Random Thoughts thread!! Please!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4 via Mosholu Posted March 14, 2018 Share #3 Posted March 14, 2018 40 minutes ago, EphraimB said: I know that the R32s lasted to this day thanks to stainless steel. Why did they stop making trains with stainless steel until the R46s? They never did stop making trains with stainless steel. In fact, the R33 and R36 (including their WF versions) became the last cars to be built with the steel from the R10 for the IRT. It was only the fact that because car development went to the combined IND/BMT division, the R38, R40, R40M, R42, and R44 were the ones that became stainless steel. The R44 essentially had carbon steel sections for the New York City Transit Authority while the rest of the car was stainless steel. I think that became one of the factors in how the 44 failed under the New York City Transit Authority but succeeded under the Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Authority, because during its overhaul the Staten Island Rapid did away with carbon steel bodies for stainless steel bodies. The 38, 40, 40M, and 42 had areas where there was stainless steel and the R46 became better built due to the complete use of stainless steel, although it initially failed using Rockwell trucks in mass production until they got GSI trucks from the R44 before overhaul. 12 minutes ago, VIP said: Stop making all these threads bro! Just ask these questions in the Random Thoughts thread!! Please!! I agree with you @VIP . This should be in the random thoughts thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gong Gahou Posted March 14, 2018 Share #4 Posted March 14, 2018 I'd like to add that the R-38s, R-40s, R-42s, and the R-44s were all built by the same company - St. Louis Car. As these were the last couple of railcar contracts before the company's demise, it occurred to me that a possible reason was to lower costs. Based on this discussion on Quora, the general idea is that carbon steel is less expensive than stainless steel. The difficulty of American passenger railcar manufacturing companies doing business in a car-centric nation might have also influenced St. Louis Car to not go 100% stainless steel as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share #5 Posted March 14, 2018 2 hours ago, VIP said: Stop making all these threads bro! Just ask these questions in the Random Thoughts thread!! Please!! Shouldn't only random thoughts be in the random thoughts thread? A question isn't a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share #6 Posted March 14, 2018 2 hours ago, 4 via Mosholu said: They never did stop making trains with stainless steel. In fact, the R33 and R36 (including their WF versions) became the last cars to be built with the steel from the R10 for the IRT. It was only the fact that because car development went to the combined IND/BMT division, the R38, R40, R40M, R42, and R44 were the ones that became stainless steel. The R44 essentially had carbon steel sections for the New York City Transit Authority while the rest of the car was stainless steel. I think that became one of the factors in how the 44 failed under the New York City Transit Authority but succeeded under the Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Authority, because during its overhaul the Staten Island Rapid did away with carbon steel bodies for stainless steel bodies. The 38, 40, 40M, and 42 had areas where there was stainless steel and the R46 became better built due to the complete use of stainless steel, although it initially failed using Rockwell trucks in mass production until they got GSI trucks from the R44 before overhaul. I agree with you @VIP . This should be in the random thoughts thread. Why did they go from complete stainless steel in the R32s to partial stainless steel in the R38s-R44s? Why did they decide to go back to complete stainless steel in the R46s? Why is the R42s still in service if it has partial stainless steel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 14, 2018 Share #7 Posted March 14, 2018 29 minutes ago, EphraimB said: Shouldn't only random thoughts be in the random thoughts thread? A question isn't a thought. I suggest you read over the RTT to see what it contains. It basically exists for the sole purpose of preventing cluttering of the forum with topics like the ones you've posted today. And FWIW, questions are thoughts. Anything you think is technically a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted March 14, 2018 Share #8 Posted March 14, 2018 23 minutes ago, EphraimB said: Why is the R42s still in service if it has partial stainless steel? Cause they are needed to make service, if the R44's didn't get retired first those remaining 42 sets would have been gone. I ride them regularly they are not that bad for their age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share #9 Posted March 14, 2018 11 minutes ago, trainfan22 said: Cause they are needed to make service, if the R44's didn't get retired first those remaining 42 sets would have been gone. I ride them regularly they are not that bad for their age. Why did they retire the R44s instead of the R42s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted March 14, 2018 Share #10 Posted March 14, 2018 2 minutes ago, EphraimB said: Why did they retire the R44s instead of the R42s? They had structural issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted March 14, 2018 Author Share #11 Posted March 14, 2018 1 minute ago, trainfan22 said: They had structural issues. But the R42s are made out of the same exact material as the R44s (partial stainless steel and partial carbon steel). Why would the newer car have structural integrity issues and not the R42s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucey Posted March 15, 2018 Share #12 Posted March 15, 2018 9 minutes ago, EphraimB said: But the R42s are made out of the same exact material as the R44s (partial stainless steel and partial carbon steel). Why would the newer car have structural integrity issues and not the R42s? Just because two objects have the same materials for construction doesn’t mean they’re built the same. Here’s two cognates: would you expect a Toyota Camry to survive impacts the same way as a Chevy Suburban SUV since they both have steel frames and seats? Likewise, would you expect the Knicks to win as many games and championships as the Nets just because they have professional players, they’re both NBA clubs and play in New York? R42s and R44s are like that - they may have the same characteristics but they’re two different types of the same concept with different experiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimB Posted March 15, 2018 Author Share #13 Posted March 15, 2018 1 minute ago, Deucey said: Just because two objects have the same materials for construction doesn’t mean they’re built the same. Here’s two cognates: would you expect a Toyota Camry to survive impacts the same way as a Chevy Suburban SUV since they both have steel frames and seats? Likewise, would you expect the Knicks to win as many games and championships as the Nets just because they have professional players, they’re both NBA clubs and play in New York? R42s and R44s are like that - they may have the same characteristics but they’re two different types of the same concept with different experiences. But the R42s are older than the R44s. How is it logical that the R44s had structural integrity issues and the R42s didn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RR503 Posted March 15, 2018 Share #14 Posted March 15, 2018 16 minutes ago, EphraimB said: But the R42s are older than the R44s. How is it logical that the R44s had structural integrity issues and the R42s didn't? I can't tell if this is a serious question... In the ghastly case that it is, ask yourself why cheese in one's fridge lasts longer than yogurt in the same? I mean, they're both milk, after all. A friendly word of advice: I'd strongly suggest you stop pursuing this line of questioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deucey Posted March 15, 2018 Share #15 Posted March 15, 2018 24 minutes ago, EphraimB said: But the R42s are older than the R44s. How is it logical that the R44s had structural integrity issues and the R42s didn't? I’ll put this in another way - based on something you said in an earlier post “explaining” who you are: how is it you’re 21 and autistic when there are many 22 and 23 year olds that aren’t autistic - when you all have genes, parents, hair, lungs, bones, eyes, toes and whatnot? Probably because you may have had different experiences in utero - your mom could’ve been bit by a mosquito; your mom and dad’s genes may have not been 100% compatible at the time of your conception and the wrong alleles did their thing, while others may not have autism but might be more genetically susceptible to illnesses you won’t be. Its the same with trains - R42s could’ve had different additives or concentrations added to bond the carbon to the steel; could’ve been the factory had better Quality Control or a hotter smelter; or could be that NYCTA and tested and maintained the R42 better than the R44. But if you truly want to know the differences between the two models, Wikipedia and NYCSubway.org are where to start, THEN come back and ask questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIP Posted March 15, 2018 Share #16 Posted March 15, 2018 For Christ’s sake @EphraimB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3F Posted March 15, 2018 Share #17 Posted March 15, 2018 Don't know if it's been mentioned, but apparently acid baths used on the R44s for graffiti removal speeded the deterioration. The carbon steel strips didn't help matters, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Lennon Posted March 15, 2018 Share #18 Posted March 15, 2018 I think it's because Budd held the patent for the process of shotwelding Stainless Steel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_welding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemorie Posted March 15, 2018 Share #19 Posted March 15, 2018 The R42s were kept not only because of the R44s, but also the / combo. The old required 17 trainsets compared to the one today that requires an additional 7 trainsets. That’s 24 trainsets total for rush hour service. Had the R42s been fully retired, there would have not been enough spare trains for the BMT Eastern Division overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.