Re: D&RGW #223 & a bit of nit-picking

Dave Vollmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Yep, my wording was off. I meant to indicate it
> was an order of magnitude smaller in
> number. In other words, the C-19s are
> disproportionately represented in preserved status
> relative to their numbers on the roster. Not that
> I'm complaining, LOL!

Of course there were actually more Class 56 engines than there were Class 60's built by Baldwin. Only the 28 60's from Grant, like 223, put the 60's over the top by about 24 total. [recap: 57 Class 56, 53 Class 60 (Baldwin) & 28 Class 60 (Grant), if memory serves]
And we don't have any D&RG Class 56 engines! Note: As late as 1907 there were still 37 Class 56, as opposed to 25 Class 60(Baldwin) and 28 Class 60 (Grant) on the roster.

But yeah, either type of class 60 or the Class 56 outnumber all the Class 70 size (12 C-19 + 6 C-17 + 6 C-18 + 2 oddballs [305, 306] = 26) and there are 6 of the later still around (RGS 41, 42, D&RGW 315, 318, 340 & 346). My Inner Brat screams "It's not fair."

No other class of the smaller (pre-K) D&RG 3' gauge engine had more than 12 in it, btw. (classes with 12 engines: Class 47(T-12), Class 42, Class 70[1881 engines that became C-19's])

Hank