Re: Goose Four Restoration?

I guess I’m getting in sort of late on this chat but I thought I’d add my two cents worth.

My hat really goes off to the Museum guys in Ridgway! They really have bitten off huge chunk of restoration work! I know that they will do a high-quality job. I think the restoration should be more appropriately referred to as “structural” also rather than just “cosmetic.” We (the GGHS) had proposed several years ago to the Telluride folks that Goose #4 should be restored and we are thrilled that it’s now being done - even though it seems, at least for now, it will just be structural and not operational.

The REO engine that was removed from Goose #3, when they put in the diesel, now resides in our shop in Dolores. We have another pretty much identical REO that we bought from a military salvage dealer. We intend to use parts from both so we can have at least one operational replacement engine if (when) the GMC 361 that’s in #5 now can no longer be kept running.

Keeping Goose #5 (or any one of them for that matter) in operating condition takes a tremendous amount of commitment – labor and money. Just this year we have replaced the clutch, drive shaft, and air compressor. We’re now in the process of replacing the drive axle with a newer model since the ring and pinion gears in the old Ford Model AA truck differential are too worn to be reliable.

What Mr. Anderson says is true and realistic about operational restoration. If a piece of old RGS equipment is to be kept strictly “prototype” – the way it was at the end of operations on the RGS – then just keep it standing, paint it, and recover the seats. In other words, make it a museum piece. That is a legitimate point of view and maybe #4 should be maintained that way. Personally, I love being able to give railfans a tangible taste of what the RGS really was like when they ride with us, not to mention the fact that I love to drive it!