What Locomotives Do You Find Ugly?

SP Cab forward. Yuck...

So why is "after 1964" bad? Personally I don't like the look of GP30's but it's not bad. 

Don't want to hijack the thread...but maybe a better slant on this question is what locomotive do you find most attractive...?

 

 

Steam: camelbacks; Garratts.

Diesel: Pretty much anything that came after the GP-9.  I just can't get excited over modern diesels.

 

Never saw an electric I didn't like, though.

 

Thanks for all the replies! I certainly wasn't expecting this much at all!

 

Upside-down bathtub streamlined steam locomotives.

 

Stuart

 

 

Richard Dilworth wanted to design a locomotive so ugly that no railroad would want it on their mainline. He succeeded with the BL-2 that he hoped railroads would "hide" on their branch lines for real work. He tried again with the GP7; but, like the simple functionality of Swedish furniture, it attained a beauty of its own. GM auto stylists modeled the GP30. Although I thought GM had the best auto stylists in the early 1960's, I always found the GP30 locomotive gawky and oddly proportioned as if it had a deformity on its back that someone was trying to hide.  However, I agree with Hot Water that the high hood version of the GP30 is somehow very attractive. (Maybe it's the mysterious combination of opposites. I don't like fish. I hate uncooked food. But I love sushi.)

Sorry but, you are completely wrong. Dick Dilworth was already retired when the BL1/BL2 models were designed & produced. Due to serious production problems in the Locomotive Department (The Big Bay) with the BL2 model, Mr. Dilworth was called back from retirement and he then designed the GP7. 

 

Surprisingly, the BL2 model was very popular with the railroads but, it totally tied up the Locomotive Department trying to assemble it "in-place".

As a Mechanical Engineer, I have to say there are really no locomotives that I find "Ugly".  Sure there are some that are not so aesthetically pleasing to the eye.  But there is great beauty in many of these locomotives that were engineered for a specific purpose.  The railroads were faced with certain problems based on the route that there lines followed.  These problems were solved by some marvels of engineering that maybe didn't look so great.  Now I realize that not all "Ugly" locomotives were designed for specific purposes that forced their ugliness, but even so, the power and ability of most locomotives is beautiful in itself.  That said I would say I am more partial to steam locomotives and older diesels.  I just don't find the more modern diesels as "cool" in appearance most of the time.  Some exceptions.

 

I'm feeling the love! 

Don

I also think that for me at least (and I suspect some others), whether or not a locomotive is aesthetically "ugly" can depend a lot on the paint scheme.  Some locomotives look better with certain paint schemes than others do.  The railroad it is painted for and the colors used can have a large effect on how the locomotive is perceived from a beauty standpoint.

There are many...but, I can say anything European fits the bill.

Steam:  Golly, there are sooooo many ugly ones it's hard to know where to start!  But most of the real basket cases pre date 1930 or so !   In Diesel...just about any passenger unit after the EMD E9...and any wide nose.  I do not have a problem with the BLT (BL2) !  As for juice; as a rule, the smaller.....the uglier !

This Hungarian Class 301 from Wikipedia is pretty harsh-looking (one of my books states that Hungary had some of the worst-looking steam locomotives anywhere):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...a/a1/MAVAG_4-6-2.JPG

All 2nd generation and subsequent diesel engines are ugly.

This is like talking about your buddy's wives and their looks !!  Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.  Modelers are concerned about looks but are the train crews ??  I bet not as much. I would think function would be more important.

If function is the key, then GE wins FUGLY by a landslide!.....but they sorta do anyway.

I have heard the comment that GEs are slower to load and they don't seem to like that.

It strikes me as rather quaint.

Any diesel that put steam out of business!  But honestly, most modern locomotives do not have much styling.  They are built strictly for function.  Only the modern passenger locomotives have any styling to speak of. 

I'm sure that any locomotive mechanic will tell you that a beautiful locomotive is one that is designed with easy access to all parts that need frequent maintenance.  Who cares what the sheet metal looks like.

 

Tom

I forgot to add one thing that I think ruins any locomotive or MU: advertisements.  Whether it's a full wrap or just a banner on the side, I think it strips any piece of rolling stock of its 'railroad' essence.

I should also mention that "ugly"  doesn't necessarily mean "don't like".  The Class 301 I posted above is one example: it's border-line scary- looking, but I still like it!

I'm surprised prrhorseshoecurve was the only one who nominated this unfortunate example from the shops of my Home Road.

 

The impaired esthetics of this one were not helped by the strictly practical design of the paint job with the anemic little cigar band on the nose and the functional, more than fashionable, design of the warbonnet striping.  A large nose herald and a warbonnet with a compound curve and a bullet shaped reverse curve would have drawn the eye away from that clunky windshield and the geeky radiator intake overhead.  It would have helped, anyway.  

The locomotives that I find unattractive are M10000's, FM TrainMaster's, FM H16-44's, and and any SW series switcher. I also think Cab Forwards are ok, but definitely not my favorite.

Oh, and also I don't care for the BL-2's...

For steam I find the N&W ''Y'' class,the B&O class''KK'' class, the Southern Pacific classes other than ''AC'' and the Santa Fe Articulateds QUITE ugly!!!!

So far, nobody has remembered the weird E-8 b units that CN&W converted to cab units.  They were referred to as Crandall cabs. I don't know if they ever received a letter and number designation, but it should have included the letters B, A, R, and F.

I will give you the box on stilts.  That is ugly.  Any guy who crawled up into that thing knew it was ugly, which makes it uglier still.  Magnum PI wouldn't look macho sitting in that thing.  Other than that, I don't see much ugliness.  Form and function in different degrees.  For the weakest effort made to make your equipment handsome or at least in some semblance of good taste, I vote any PC engine in dirty, grimy black and white.

       
       


?

LOL yep that sure is "fugly"

I vote for that monstrosity I saw in Portland a year or so ago - it was unbelievably ugly, kind of looked like a cross between the early UP streamliners and a pig.  Even the paint job was a joke.

 

beyond that, I like most railroad motive power - do not care for those new Amtrak streamliners, really think the upside-down bathtub style of steam streamlining was not attractive, and putting maroon feathers on a 4-6-2 had to be in poor taste.

 

But I agree - this is a little bit like comparing your neighbors' wives.  Beauty is in the eye . . .

 

Nope, not kidding at all, in MY PERSONAL OPINION the G(a)G-1 is an Ugly locomotive, but that is a PERSONAL OPINION not a quantifiable Fact, other's opinions surely vary.

 

Some have opined, that the cab-forwards were ugly, while I wont say that they were BEAUTIFUL, I have always found them INTERESTING in a Unique way, now their AC-9 Sisters truly were Attractive locomotives, the Best looking articulateds ever built in MY OPINION.

 

Doug

Jim I am sure you are right about modelers being MORE concerned about the looks than the crews, but I would be surprised if there were NO thoughts as to what the equipment looked like.

 

 As a truck driver how the truck is equipped is MORE important than what it looks like, that being said though there are many trucks even Newer or more expensive than the one that I drive, that I am GLAD are not my "Office". I drive a 2013 Peterbilt 384, that I really do like the looks of, and it was Nice to hear another driver I know comment on it being a Good Looking truck, and that he wished his company had trucks like ours, even though his Sterling is even newer than my Pete.

 

Granted many Truck Drivers are assigned tractors, like myself, so we probably take a bit more personal Pride in our equipment, but the previous company that I drove for didn't assign tractors, but rather, you would get whatever tractor was hooked up to the trailer your load was in, there guys would often come in early to swap tractors around if they got one of the "Less desirable" tractors.

 

Generally not being assigned equipment, rail crews probably don't care as much, but I would expect that many do have their preferences, as to what they would like to be assigned every day.

 

Doug

There aren't that many ugly jets, so I was always happy with whatever airplane dispatch sent my way, but I gotta tell you, there are a few airplanes I would find embarrassing to even ride in - Shorts (an Irish builder) made airplanes that were considered "Flying Winnebagos".  An Israeli company made one called the "Flying Easter Egg".

 

As a trucker, I always felt more macho in a giant Autocar.  It took more muscle than the old Fords, but it was truly good looking.

 

I truly like almost all SP steam.  the coal burners were my least favorite, from an appearance standpoint.  Nothing against burning coal; the PRR fleet is almost as beautiful, as far as I am concerned.  The PA and Train Masters are honorary steam locomotives insofar as their appearance is concerned.  And I think the GG1 styling is timeless.

Dems fightin' words!

I don't find any locomotives ugly. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some engines I wasn't really quite fond of I'm going crazy to find now. Go figure.........

I forgot to mention a D&RGW L96 is a ugly critter also!!!

Ugly locomotives.

• EMD BL2. So ugly that when it was born they slapped the parents.
• ATSF Class 1 Diesel as modified. A simple box cab was fine. What were they thinking when they did that new cab?!?!?
• Baldwin AS616. Looks like something a kid would do with three building blocks and a couple of sets of wheels for Pete's Sake.
• DL-109. If you're going to try to knock-off EMD's E-units, you can do better than that.