Consist for PRR M1

Well they were designed for heavy , fast freight.  and the later models had a cab radio ,  so from their hitting the rails from the mid 1920's to the mid 1950's   with 79' drivers she was a high stepper and made for speed, so my guess  any freight cars from WWI  to the mid 50's . heavy fast freight , reefer's  , maybe the occasional mail train ?  I get it your railroad  but pulling Modern era cars behind a steam engine  always looks out of place

At 2:04 a woodsided reefer can be seen behind the tender with the hatches open.

At 2:13 you can see a mixed freight :  https://youtu.be/7FzWh3Sqhnw

Heres some great audio with still shots showing various consists:  https://youtu.be/Z7b9iNTQwzU

Thank you Dave and Rick!! Much appreciated!!

I had read that the M1 was a fast/heavy freight hauler. Lionel actually has a real nice body of info about the M1 in the Volume 2 catalog on the M1 page. I agree about not hooking up something that is too modern - I am currently leaning towards reefers or box cars. I already have a coal consist with one of my Reading locomotives. Great video clips - nice to see what they were using the M1 for back then. Nothing like real footage!

Thanks, guys!

M1s ran on the Pennsy Buffalo branch into the 1950s hauling passenger trains if you wanted to go that route

@Dave Koehler posted:

Well they were designed for heavy , fast freight.  and the later models had a cab radio ,  so from their hitting the rails from the mid 1920's to the mid 1950's   with 79' drivers she was a high stepper and made for speed,

Sorry but, there is no way that a freight 4-8-2 locomotive had 79" diameter drivers! Think 72" diameter drivers at best.

so my guess  any freight cars from WWI  to the mid 50's . heavy fast freight , reefer's  , maybe the occasional mail train ?  I get it your railroad  but pulling Modern era cars behind a steam engine  always looks out of place

Hi Scott

I have read where some of the original intentions of the PRR M1 actually involved passenger service, but in reality they were not used much for passenger service. They overwhelmingly hauled freight, which suits me well because I already have lots of passenger car consists from multiple railroads.

At this point, I am leaning towards reefers or box cars. Of course, that could change over time. The locomotive won't arrive for at least a year, so no hurry. No worries on my part - gives me more time to learn about the M1 and decide on a consist.

Thank you!

The 200 PRR M1's and the 100 M1a/M1b's all had 72" drivers.  They were designed for dual service: fast freight and passenger.  They weren't designed for slow drag service, like on coal or ore trains.  But, since this was the Pennsy, never say never.  Somewhere, sometime they probably got assigned to a coal train.

Hi Bob

I love coal trains, but already have one with one of my Reading locomotives. Doesn't mean I can't put together another one, but I want some variety. I don't have any reefer or box car consists - which is why I am leaning in that direction. I also feel a reefer or box car consist would look good with the M1. (I also tend to like unit trains.)

Thanks,

Robert

Just a thought, but if you model a time period later in the M1's lifespan, how about an oil tank train?  Something a little different to move to the east coast.

Chuck

@Bob posted:

The 200 PRR M1's and the 100 M1a/M1b's all had 72" drivers.  They were designed for dual service: fast freight and passenger.  They weren't designed for slow drag service, like on coal or ore trains.  But, since this was the Pennsy, never say never.  Somewhere, sometime they probably got assigned to a coal train.

you are correct they were 72, but still fast

Question - did they have tank cars back during the life of the M1?

@DILLI posted:

Question - did they have tank cars back during the life of the M1?

Tank cars absolutely date back to the era of the M1.  Tank cars date to just right at the end of the Civil War.

The PRR was a funny railroad.  Calling themselves the Standard Railway of the World meant their standard which was pretty much anything and everything.  You could put any string of era appropriate cars behind this locomotive and there is likely a photo to substantiate it.

I have a Sunset M1a in 2 Rail with the long-distance tender and it is truly a beast of a locomotive.  While the tender is little out of proportion with the locomotive, I find the M1a/b to be a very aesthetically pleasing locomotive.  I'll likely pair it with one of my K4 tenders when I finally get a layout together to pull commuter cars which is something there likely isn't a photo to substantiate the practice with.  Still will be more realistic than pulling P70s with my J1.

@DILLI posted:

Question - did they have tank cars back during the life of the M1?

Check that first video I posted above Robert. A tank car just goes out of the frame at 2:26.

It appears that shot was edited for length. The M1 was pulling a longer train than it appears.

OK - so I learned something just now, Jonathan. I did not realize the PRR had tank cars during the life of the M1. The M1 is a beast of a locomotive, I agree. I love the look of the long-distance tender. I guess I can add tank cars to reefers and box cars in terms of consist possibilities.

Rick - you are correct! I saw the tank car!

@DILLI this is where I wish Lionel/MTH/Atlas/RMT/etc had a little bubble next to their rolling stock with the year the car was introduced. That would make it so much easier!

Great topic though. I don't have any answers but I will say you can always check the year on the car in some online listings. That's usually where I start.

Great point BillYo414. For some specific pieces of rolling stock they do indicate the year(s) they were in use or popular, but unfortunately they don't do this for most rolling stock.

Given that the M1 mostly operated between the years of roughly 1923 through 1957, if I stay within that time frame I should be OK.

@BillYo414 posted:

@DILLI this is where I wish Lionel/MTH/Atlas/RMT/etc had a little bubble next to their rolling stock with the year the car was introduced. That would make it so much easier!

Great topic though. I don't have any answers but I will say you can always check the year on the car in some online listings. That's usually where I start.

Normally the car has a build date on it, dont know if the 3 rail cars do

As mentioned, these were built as dual-purpose engines; passenger and fast freight.  One author (Alvin Staufer) said in freight service the M1/M1a "were practically worth their weight in diamonds".  However, they did perform well in passenger service.  20 M1 and 10 M1a were specifically designed for passenger service and performed that duty into the 40s.  Also, during the 40s, several M1 with the smaller tender (110-P-75) were put into passenger service.  Another comment was that after electrification of some lines, the M1-class handled practically all Middle Division traffic including heavy coal trains.

If you want to model it, in 1954 with two M1s pulling and a Decapod pushing, they took ore trains out of Philadelphia.  Another example: Based on two pictures I have of different trains, I use my MTH M1b double-headed with my MTH Decapod pulling a mixed freight.  The M1 is in the lead in both cases.

The Pennsy really should have made more, but with the Great Depression and electrification expansion in the 30s which meant more K4s available elsewhere, they decided they had enough.  The M1's biggest flaw - they were not good for hauling tonnage up mountains.

Penny engineers considered the M1 the road's best engine; it could do everything.

@Dave Koehler posted:

Normally the car has a build date on it, dont know if the 3 rail cars do

They do (except express cars for some reason).  Hard to read them in the catalog/online photos.  Plus some long lived cars, like outside braced, or single sheathed, boxcars may have had several different rebuilds/paint schemes on it during its life.  Sometimes the importers put these update dates on, sometimes not. 

@DILLI posted:

Given that the M1 mostly operated between the years of roughly 1923 through 1957, if I stay within that time frame I should be OK.

Most definitely. In my case, The Newport Railroad is made up but sits in roughly the same era as you're talking about but has a lot of old equipment from when it was started as well as some equipment purchased at bankruptcy auctions. Adding this to my narrative means I can have equipment from any time before about the 1940s/1950s. On one hand, I have a 2-10-10-2 which coes form 1915-ish. Meanwhile, I also have RS3's but they're ALCO prototypes and the Newport Railroad has been chosen by ALCO to test them haha

I like coming up with a back story to justify the model.

@DILLI posted:

OK - so I learned something just now, Jonathan. I did not realize the PRR had tank cars during the life of the M1. The M1 is a beast of a locomotive, I agree. I love the look of the long-distance tender. I guess I can add tank cars to reefers and box cars in terms of consist possibilities.

I have a San Juan tank car that is era appropriate that I'll try and get some pictures of.  Those era cars are small by comparison to modern tankers.  Actually, the postwar Lionel tank cars aren't too far off the mark proportionally to what the 1:48 equivalent was.

Lionel wood milk reefers would be appropriate too and are in my opinion some of the nicest cars Lionel has done.  Steel reefers would area also appropriate as this was a period of transition away from wood cars to steel ones.

Another era appropriate car would be the Atlas X-29 boxcars that the PRR had lots of.  They served in express service as well as general service.  The reason I mention this particular boxcar is because it is shorter than the more common Pullman Standard PS-1 40' boxcar that is offered by nearly every manufacturer.  Look at any consist during the postwar era into the early 50's and you will see the varying heights of the boxcars.

I only bring this up because you don't have to model the exact prototypes to get a train that feels right behind this locomotive, but you can get the essence of it by the rhythm of the car spacing. 

Also, I'm surprised no one has mentioned mail and express trains up until now.  A typical M&E train on the PRR would be some X29 express boxcars, R50b reefers, a BM70 RPO, several B60 and B70 baggage cars, and a rider coach on the end.  This kind of train would be a regular assignment for the T1s later, but I suspect the M1 pulled these prior.

The M1 is that great versatile locomotive that lots of possibilities!

As Mentioned above the M1 and M1a were designed as dual purpose intended for both passenger and freight work.   However, The depessions, the electrification and probably other factors caused them to be primarily freight engines.     The book "Dual Service Mountains" published by NJ Internationa (Classic Power No. 8) written by Bert Pennypacker is a good source of information on the developement on the M1/M1a.     One statement  in the book is that the driver locations in the frame were spaced far enough apart that they could use the same frame for 80 inch drivers for a future passenger version that was never built.    I think I read somewhere that 20 of them were painted in the passenger paint scheme with  the gold striping on the cab and tender and wheels, and the brown stripes along the top and bottom of the tender.

The M1 were originally built with the shorter 110P75 tenders (I think that is the class).   they looked like the typical tender on a K4, but were about 4 feet longer.     The M1a were originally built with a 6 axle long tender class 210F75.     The M1b were upgraded rebuilt M1a locos.     Many M1s recieved larger welded tender with 8 wheel trucks class 250F75.    some have also been phototgraphed with 210F75 tenders.    On the pennsy, the first 3 numbers of tender class was the water capacity and hundreds of gallons - the F or P referred to Frieght or Passenger and the last 2 digits were the height of firing deck above the rail - 250F75 carried 25,000 gallons of water and had a 75 inch above the rails firing deck.

The M1a was built with many improvement over the M1 including a one piece cast steel frame with integral cyclinders.     Also many appliances were changed or upgraded.    The main spotting difference between the M1 and M1a/M1b is the steam pipes.    The M1 has outside steam from smoke box to the cylinders, the M1a/M1b Have a huge saddle supporting the boiler front and smoke box with inside steam pipes.     There are not many obvious external spotting features between the M1a and M1b.    Most of the upgrade was internal.    The type of pilot, cast or footboard, is not a defining feature.

The M1/M1a was mostly assigned to Middle Division which ran from Harrisburg to Altoona and was most often seen on merchandise freight.     In the 50s I think they migrated west and did more drag work.

Hi Ron

Thank you for that wealth of information!! Much appreciated. The more I learn the happier I am that I preordered the M1. Sounds like it was quite the machine. I am leaning towards reefers or box cars for the consist.

Robert

Hi Jonathan

I agree about the box cars of different heights - I have seen that in the videos and photos of the M1!!

Thank you for all of the information! The X-29s sound interesting - I am going to have to consider them as well.

Robert

Hi PRRJIM

I preordered the M1 model with the longest tender - I really like the looks of that long tender. Thanks for the wealth of info and the Dual Service Mountains book suggestion by Bert Pennypacker - I am going to look for it!

Thank you!
Robert

Besides the difference in the cylinder saddle/steam pipes, another way to distinguish the M1 from the M1a was that the M1 didn't have a feedwater heater, while the M1a had the Worthington type S, with the mixing chamber behind the smoke stack.

Stuart

@Stuart posted:

Besides the difference in the cylinder saddle/steam pipes, another way to distinguish the M1 from the M1a was that the M1 didn't have a feedwater heater, while the M1a had the Worthington type S, with the mixing chamber behind the smoke stack.

Stuart

It looks like that detail is wrong in the catalog then.

The catalog picture is wrong for an M1 because Lionel used a picture of their earlier M1a. In another topic Lionel posted an engineering drawing of the M1 they are producing and it is correct; no feedwater heater and external steam pipes.  Plus only one air pump which is on the left side of the engine and not seen in the catalog.

I went in on one as well with the 8 wheel tender. I know that it was said that they had the Keystone logo because it was supposed to be dual purpose, particularly seen on 6755(did I get that number right). I am not sure if these have the Keystone logo or not, but it really doesn't matter. I've heard some started as mixed and or passenger, but most got freight duty.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

I went in on one as well with the 8 wheel tender. I know that it was said that they had the Keystone logo because it was supposed to be dual purpose, particularly seen on 6755(did I get that number right).

Yes, #6755 is the sole surviver of the PRR 4-8-2 M1/M1a/M1b class (with the big tender), and is part of the outdoor display in the Pennsylvania Railroad Museum, in Strasburg, PA.

I am not sure if these have the Keystone logo or not, but it really doesn't matter. I've heard some started as mixed and or passenger, but most got freight duty.

Yup, seen it many times but work has my brain a little fuzzy. Couldn't even remember the number on the one I pre-ordered, I think 6918????

House cars (boxcars, reefers, stock cars) were generally around 8'-6" height until the mid-1930s, when it was increased to 10'-6" height. At the time, these were sometimes called 'high cars'.

The taller height cars lead to the increased use of bay-window cabooses, and later the 'extended vision' cabooses. Most all cabooses had been built with the same 8'-6" height as the cars - a man sitting up in the cupola could see all the way to the front of the train. The new higher cars blocked the view.