A diiferent way to ship cars

[charlie8575]

I remember seeing at least one of these pictures a long time ago. A very interesting way to ship new cars.

Notice the Eldorados in the double-stack containers.

http://autoholics.co...ng-Vegas-649938

http://almosteveryth...l-car-shipping/

Enjoy.

Charlie Larkin

Edited July 29, 2012 by charlie8575

[Dr. Cranky]

Wow, look at all those Vegases. Nice.

[iBorg]

I wonder how many started to rust in the containers?

I had a Vega, absolutely worst piece of junk I ever owned. This from someone who onwed MGs, VW Rabbits and a Ford Escort. I envied Pinto owners.

Edited July 29, 2012 by iBorg

[cobraman]

That was interesting.

[Art Anderson]

I remember seeing at least one of these pictures a long time ago. A very interesting way to ship new cars.

Notice the Eldorados in the double-stack containers.

http://autoholics.co...ng-Vegas-649938

http://almosteveryth...l-car-shipping/

Enjoy.

Charlie Larkin

Considering that this method did not survive the Vega, it really didn't work. By far and away, the "tri-level" 85' autorack railcars have proved out to be the best way to transport new cars from factory to distribution points. Living where I do, on Norfolk Southern's main line serving the midwest, with direct rail links into Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland and other points where new cars are built (including Subaru Indiana Automotive here in Lafayette) I have seen hundreds of those railcars move through the city.

Loading them takes no fancy infrastructure whatsoever; nothing but a set of ramps at the end of a siding, over which autos can be driven directly up into a string of autorack freight cars, then down the full length of each string of cars (SIA has these cars spotted, at the plant, in strings of up to 8 cars at a time, on 8 or 10 parallel spur tracks. the size automobiles built here allow for 5 cars per deck, or 15 per rail car, with only a small crew required including drivers and tiedown crews. Several times each day, NS loco's pull out loaded autoracks, and replace them with empties, so that the process need not stop at any time along the process. It's not uncommon to see a transfer train of these being moved from the yard next to SIA (which also serves a large Tate & Lyle Corn Sweetener plant (one of two here in Lafayette) from this "South Yard" down through our dedicated rail corridor along the river, and up the grade to NS North Yard for coupling into trains either east or west bound. Some also get transferred to CSX at their yard near downtown Lafayette, for transport south to Louisville and beyond, or north to Chicago for transport to the upper Midwest and on to the Pacific Northwest.

In this way, new cars are transported with no worries as to engine or transmission fluids leaking into areas where they don't belong, and once the crews learned how not to tie these new cars down (some years ago, Cadillacs suffered some damage to rear axles by crews chaining those cars down by the axles, which wreaked havoc on rear axle bearings).

The bilevel container concept never worked out either, abandoned before it ever really got started, as other railroads and auto companies shied away from the much more expensive equipment needed to load and offload those containers, and then unload the new cars from them.

It's interesting to note, I think, that the most common type of trilevel autorack cars were developed from 85' piggyback flatcars developed in the late 1950's by a consortium owned by the various major railroad companies: Trailer-Train" or as their reporting marks and trademark says, TTX. Even though the 85' piggyback flatcar is almost a thing of the past, save for some transcontinental use hauling UPS "pup" trailers from coast to coast (due to their being designed in the age of 40' semi-trailers, and obsoleted when the 48' and 53' trailers became legal on the highway, and the railroad limitation on car length (virtually all railroad mainlines were laid out to handle cars no longer than 85', also the standard length for railroad passenger cars from about 1910 onward). Starting about 1962 or so, TTX began welding uprights and ramps in two formats, bi-level for handling such as vans and taller new vehicles, and tri-level, for hauling the ordinary automobile.

As cars have become smaller, shorter, these railcars can carry up to 18 subcompact cars, 15 mid-sized cars, or 12 full-sized ones. Of course, with vandalism being a problem, all auto-racks have been sheathed in various styles of perforated sidewalls, which make it very hard to see what's inside, and of course, much harder for "taggers" to work their spray can havoc on new cars.

Art

[Harry P.]

Wow, look at all those Vegases.

I believe the plural of "Vega" is "Vegi"...

[Art Anderson]

Before the tri-level auto rack or the vertical stacking system developed for the Chevy Vega, new cars were shipped by rail in ordinary boxcars! Ford became the largest shipper of new cars by this method in the days of the Model T, as well as shipping subassemblies from Highland Park and Dearborn to Ford assembly plants all over the US (in such places as Indianapolis, Elizabeth NJ, Des Moines IA, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Oakland CA, Portland OR, Seattle, Atlanta, Birmingham AL, Houston and Dallas TX) for final assembly. They could ship far more cars for assembly at remote points than was possible from the Detroit area.

Enter the 50' automobile boxcar: http://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/uploads/r/null/9/2/927275/4bef4346-3c96-4df6-87d8-8552eebbb545-A28948.jpg

These were perhaps the first specialized non-refrigerated boxcars built for wide use, starting in the 1920's. Notice the very wide door opening, and the wide double sliding doors. Now, imagine if you will, maneuvering a new car into a 10' wide space, being careful to not scrape against the edge of the door opening, straightening it out as if being parallel parked, then positioning it over the necessary tie-downs in the floor for securing the car for transport. At best, only 3 modern full-sized cars could be loaded thus; and in the case of say, Cadillac, Packard, Lincoln or Chrysler in the days of the rather long wheelbase "Classic Era" luxury cars, only two, and sometimes, perhaps only one auto could be carried in this type of boxcar. Pretty inefficient and costly!

In some cases, once new cars became lower in overall height, in the 1950's, new auto's could be loaded into boxcars such as this by using a raised platform inside the car, but only holding two more automobiles, one at each end of the boxcar.

Art

[charlie8575]

One of my plans for modeling one day includes building an early (1950s) bi-level auto rack in 1/25 and an auto boxcar, combining two of my great loves (cars and trains.

The boxcar I'd probably build cut-away, with one side in clear acrylic, the rest of it finished as normal. I know the New York Central, Pennsylvania, Santa Fe and Union Pacific all had these, as did a lot of the other big railroads. Some were double-door, too,making it easier to load and unload the cars.

Charlie Larkin

[Haubenschild]

Those are way cool , I have seen many pictures of them , I just never knew what they were! Hopefully there are HO versions of those cars , It would be a great addition to any layout

[Guest Johnny]

I wonder how many started to rust in the containers?

I had a Vega, absolutely worst piece of junk I ever owned. This from someone who onwed MGs, VW Rabbits and a Ford Escort. I envied Pinto owners.

What ya talkin' about? They started rusting on the assembly line!

[charlie8575]

Those are way cool , I have seen many pictures of them , I just never knew what they were! Hopefully there are HO versions of those cars , It would be a great addition to any layout

Athearn, Roundhouse, Westerfield, Mantua, Branchline, and most other rolling stock manufacturers that do freight cars of this era have made them.

Charlie Larkin

[mademan]

i just bought a 1:1 72 v8 vega tonight. lol..... traded a 90 tempo that I paid 100.00 for, for it.

[Joe Handley]

i just bought a 1:1 72 v8 vega tonight. lol..... traded a 90 tempo that I paid 100.00 for, for it.

Considering the last Tempo I drove, even a stock Vega would probably still be an upgrade.

[iBorg]

A V8 Vega at least gives you a motor. Mine rusted so badly and burned oil so bad (a quart per fill up) that when it caught on fire, I didn't bother trying to save it. The bikes on the roof I saved. The car, why bother.

Oh yeah......I had less than 50 thousand miles on it.

[mademan]

A V8 Vega at least gives you a motor. Mine rusted so badly and burned oil so bad (a quart per fill up) that when it caught on fire, I didn't bother trying to save it. The bikes on the roof I saved. The car, why bother.

Oh yeah......I had less than 50 thousand miles on it.

dang, this one has 40k original miles. 327 that hasnt been running in years and an unknown 4 speed...... body wise the thing is gold. needs side glass. but its worth a grand in parts alone.

[slusher]

How did they tie them down??? never seen cars shipped like that but l was a kid...

[Harry P.]

How did they tie them down??? never seen cars shipped like that but l was a kid...

The cars had special tiedowns built into the chassis just for this application.

From wikipedia:

The Chevrolet Vega was designed to be shipped vertically, nose down. Special rail cars known as "Vert-A-Pac" cars designed jointly between General Motors and theSouthern Pacific Railroad and held 30 Vegas versus 18 in normal tri-level autoracks. Each Vega was fitted with four removable, cast-steel sockets inserted into the undercarriage.^[1]

Chevrolet conducted vibration and low-speed crash tests to make sure nose-down Vegas wouldn't shift or be damaged in railcar collisions. Chevrolet's goal was to deliver Vegas topped with fluids and ready to drive to the dealership. To do this Vega engineers had to design a special engine oil baffle to prevent oil from entering the No. 1 cylinder, batteries had filler caps located high up on the rear edge of the case to prevent acid spilling, the carburetor float bowl had a special tube that drained gasoline into the vapor canister during shipment, and the windshield washer bottle stood at a 45 degree angle. Plastic spacers were wedged in beside the powertrain to prevent damage to engine and transmission mounts. The wedges were removed when cars were unloaded. The rail car doors were opened and closed by means of a forklift truck.^[2]

[wisdonm]

The Vega's method of shipping is responsible for GM's switch to side post batteries. When they stood them up-right, a standard battery would short out on the hood, so rather than spend anything to insulate the hood, they designed the side post battery that we suffer with today.

They also probably sold the board of directors on these batteries by claiming lower hood lines would lead to better fuel mileage. This is the same reason they used to lobby the DOT to allow those real thin rectangular headlights. The only problem is, I have never seen a car designed with a lower hood because of the side post battery or rectangular headlights. In fact the manufactures flaunted their victory over the DOT by stacking the rectangular lights. So much for improved fuel economy.

[ffreak]

I worked at my local Chevy dealership throughout the time of the Vega as the front end alignment tech and the engine specialist. And man did those things keep me busy. Yeah we had lots of trouble with the engines, but more as a result of people running them hot and trying to hot rod them. That's not what they were designed for. But i'll admit, I hated the darn things for their front suspension. They were impossible to get any camber in them, and I always had to take the front crossmember out, slot it, and use a comealong to pull the 2 sides of the unibody together, and then tighten it down. Then I could adjust the eccentrics for camber. To do them right, it would take a couple hours, which they never charged extra for !! Mind you at the time our alignments cost $14.95 !! Yeah I still smart from that !! But all in all, I was kinda fond of them and the Monza.