>>1790671I get what you mean, but the English were more than comfortable servicing center cylinders, even some tucked behind fairings and underneath smokeboxes, so it doesn't seem like a huge stretch to make a mallet the size that America was fond of that could serviceable enough to go between major service intervals without an heroing itself. I could be wrong, but I understood that a big part of the American road's issues with center cylinders was a combination of poor design tolerances coupled with lackluster servicing and a general attitude of "eh, just hit it with the grease gun it'll be fine. American roads got so caught up in keeping their designs cheap, that they didn't do the math and realize that by spending a little bit extra, they could've massively cut down on operating life costs, both in terms of maintenance and fuel consumption for the power they got. I understand why they thought the way they did, but it was dumb. If only.
Great forum thread by the way. There's so many good threads that are just gone due to hosting changes or site deaths. That kind of actual granular discussion that goes beyond "I like trains and think they should be more cool" or pointless speculation is hard to find. If only the boomers who actually have the knowledge could use the internet more competently.
