(A companion thread to http://www.trainboard.com/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/13/t/002159/p/1.html) What locomotives are the least popular? List the engines you find the ugliest. Not "fascinatingly ugly", but "ugly and uninteresting". Here's my list, starting with the worst: </font> Early Brookville industrial gasoline locos</font> Any industrial diesel without sideframes (includes most small Davenports, Plymouth JLA/JLB/JLC/DGT 10-tonners, DL 8-tonners and DL2 7-tonners, Porter 12- and 20-tonners, Whitcomb 5- and 8-tonners, some 20-tonners, 25- and 30-tonners, Hunslet DH 4w, etc.)</font> Any industrial diesel without sideframes but with siderods (they make the sides a bit less bare) (includes CLC 30-tonners, Baldwin 6-axle 25-tonners, Porter 14-tonners, some Whitcomb 30-tonners, Vulcan 4-, 8-, 12-, 25- and 30-tonners, etc.)</font> MP20D</font> GG20B and MP2000C</font> NYC Alco-GE T-2 electric, New Haven Alco-GE EF-1 electric</font> Any steam locomotive with the characteristic British smoke box and stack (don't know a better way to describe it) (includes all Indian and most former Yugoslavian steam, among many others)</font> BLW RS-12 "hammerhead" (Nose higher than long hood)</font> C-420/M-420 (widenose excepted; it's the long, low nose I hate)</font> GP10 low-nose (like a chop-nose GP7/9, plus the annoying Horst air filter)</font> GP20 (hate that slanted nose)</font> Chop-nose GP9s/GP7s</font> Anything steam with a small-diameter boiler and a tall stack</font> Anything with a cab on both ends</font> Most boxcab electrics and diesels</font> BL2</font> MP36 and DE30AC</font> F59PHI</font> SD40-2 "snoot"</font> Baldwin AS-416 and AS-616</font> Alco MRS-1 (in fact, any diesel with a high frame)</font> As you may notice, many European and other foreign engines fall under 14 or 15, or resemble 17 or 18. Some British diesels fall under 21. No offense to you foreigners, but I don't see anywhere outside of North America to have good-looking trains. When it comes to diesel and electric, anyway. Some German and other steam is reasonably stylish, and the South African Class 25 condensing 4-8-4 is one of the most beautiful things ever to ride the rails. Your turn.
You sure know a lot more names of loco motives than I do. Indutrial Diesels in general - Only a mother could love them. F59PHI - Maybe it would look better in GN EB but I doubt it. SD40-2 (the one with the "porch" so big you could put a lawn chair on it) Just looks un ballenced I used to include U Boats but now they have grown on me. At some point I'll have a couple done up in GandG colors.
Hmm, I don't own any of those. I buy only "pretty" locos that would be in service during the 50s. Of those, the DL-109 would be the ugly duckling, but I've read they ran pretty well. The Alaskan Railroad had some home-builts that were pretty strange.
I am going to have to differ on the DE30AC. Although they are not nearly as nice as the Alco's and Geeps that they replaced, they look great in LIRR colors and are fairly unique to NY. Sorry, but the DE's are simply "DE"vine to me! Russ
Now see, I think the SD40-2s are the most balanced looking locomotives around. Maybe it's just becaus eof their ubiquitousness, but they are what a modernish loco should look like. I'm not a fan of the RS series Alcos. I dislike all second generation High hood locos. I think the F59PHI looks fine, but the AMD-103 is a pox on mankind. The GE designers that came up with that design deserve prison time. I used to like GE Dash9 wide cabs, but the shear dirth of them on BNSF has relegated them to the should be destroyed for all time pile. I like GE modern Spartan cabs though.
Also, I used to love the BL-2. I don't like it now as much as I did, but it's got a 40s/50s modern look that appeals to me.
Most of the pre-1970's stuff looks fair to me. Am not a fan of any engines Amtrak has had built. Their lines and flattened panels, from the early F40, and onward, just don't have the class of predecessor Bulldog nosed F units. GE U50 engines looked odd. And, as classic as they may be, many Pennsy or New Haven electrics. Such as the GG1. Boxcab E50
They are NOT! well, ok, in UP colors i agree. Once you change them from UP to GN EB they are beautiful. The GG1 is the most beautiful engine ever to ride the rails. Interesting thread. The differances of esthetic appeals
I only have the great loco's of the steam transition era. (steam & diesel) I wish there was a decent running GG1 in N scale. They would be added to the fleet of the JJJ&E even though it's an eastern loco. Stay cool and run steam.....
CF7s DL109s The one-of-a-kind turret cab diesel built by Ingalls Shipbuilding and rostered by the GM&O GE B39-7 Most pre-1940 diesel switchers (except for EMD). Even the Alco HH600/900 looks like a loaf of bread on rails. Any Baldwin roadswitcher re-engined by EMD, with the ugly long hood to match Polish steam
"The one-of-a-kind turret cab diesel built by Ingalls Shipbuilding"... Ah, the bizarre 4-S. It is a bit monstrous, but I can't decide if I like it or hate it. You see, I like the ML-4000, which is ugly in sort of the same way. This thread is starting to support the suspicion I already had: the DL-109 is much disliked. Why?
No offense taken But a good many people in Europe think most American trains are ugly brutish things, whereas ours are for the most part very streamlined, smooth and beautiful My least liked US locomotives are the BL2 and the BQ23-7
The Krauss-Maffei Road Switcher varient is a little hideous, but strangely I like the cab varient. Have these ever been issued in N. I thought I saw a set in DRGW colours in a MR last year. The green goat is not very appealing, as is the NH rebuild of the RDC. Box cab electics have little appeal to me since they're boxes. The new P42s do little for me as well as they look too high (especially when dragging LRC cars). The Hunchbacked Geeps are also pretty bad looking (GP30s I think but don't quote me on that). The BL2 is actually not too bad. European stuffs is not bad but rarely exicting. Many of the older British stuff (Deltics etc) remind me of droopy dog faces. Not pretty at all.
The only locos I've seen that I thought were just butt-ugly were the K-M's and the Alco's with the high short hoods/low long hoods.
I'm not a big fan of the high hoods, they just don't do anything for me. The BL-2 make a statment about the time period it was designed, for whatever that's worth. The little switchers (Plymouths etc) hold no charm for me, more of a utility tool like a speeder or a gandy dancer than an engine. I have to agree that anything built for Amtrak from the F40PHs on does lack astetic value. Unfortuneatly for modern modelers they're what was run, makes them a nessasary evil. Of course, all oppinions are subjective.
It's odd, but I *love* ugly. I can't think of much I would find ugly and uninteresting. Looking down the lists there are sure some uggers there (ones that fell out of the ugly tree and hit a few branches on the way down) But most I still like. Amtrak's AMD103 I can't seem to find much affinity for somehow. I can't call it ugly really, but it just doesn't do it for me. Metra's MP36's come under the same thing, although it might be I just haven't got used to the looks yet! I think i'm somewhat with Alan, part of the attraction of the US scene for me is that it's more about the practicality than the asthetics...I can't call say an SD45 'pretty', but it's a really cool piece of kit. Similarly the pure ugliness of a Paducah geep makes it look really interesting, especially from a modelling point of view.
We do have some types I would call ugly (or aesthetically challenged in these modern times? )....but i'm not sure a Deltic would be on that list for me. For UK types, I would submit: Class 31 http://ukrailwaypics.fotopic.net/p6964249.html Early class 56's http://ukrailwaypics.fotopic.net/p1507840.html Dellner fitted class 57's (they looked alright till they 'Borg'd' them!) http://ukrailwaypics.fotopic.net/p14873444.html And if i'm allowed to diverge into units, class 455/8 must have hit a particularly large number of branches on their way down the ugly tree.... http://ukrailwaypics.fotopic.net/p1107761.html That doesn't mean to say I don't like them however...
