@Norton posted:Here are the numbers. The announcer was correct. The comparison was made to three (count 'em) E7s which is what it took match the horsepower of the Niagara. They still fell short given their total was 6000 HP vs 6600 for the Niagara.
Initial cost was less as were maintenance costs for the three E7s.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...York_Central_Niagara
Pete
Thanks, Norton. From the Wikipedia article:
These locomotives had a small water capacity (18,000 US gallons; 68,000 litres) in the tender, because the New York Central was one of the few in North America which used track pans. This allowed a larger coal capacity—46 tons—so the New York to Chicago run could be done with one stop for coal. (The stop was said to be at Wayneport, New York, 14 miles east of Rochester, but that would leave 603 miles to Chicago via the Cleveland lakefront.)
Interesting! Wayneport is just a few miles east of my long-ago hometown of Fairport NY. The NYC tracks were right behind our house, but steam operations ended slightly before my time.
A quick Google tells me that Wayneport had a four-track coaling station and an icing facility. I had not heard about it previously. It was within six miles of where we lived.
Photo from internet, dated 1947. Is that a Niagara on the right?
More info from the Wikipedia file relating to the original question:
The 1946 steam-versus-diesel trials
Six of these locomotives were chosen by their designer, Paul W. Kiefer, for the famous 1946 Steam Versus Diesel road trials, where the 6,000 hp (4,500 kW) Niagaras were put up against some 4,000 hp (3,000 kW) diesels (E7's). The locomotives were run along the 928.1 miles (1,493.6 km) from New York (Harmon) to Chicago, via Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Cleveland, Toledo and Elkhart, and return. The results were close:
| Cost comparison Steam versus diesel, 1946 NYC road trials[2] Running from New York (Harmon) to Chicago (928.1 miles or 1,493.6 km) and return Note: dollar figures quoted in 1946 US dollars. To get 2019 US dollar figures, multiply by 13.17 | ||||||
| Steam S-1 'Niagara' (six locomotives) | Diesel E7 4,000 bhp two unit (six locomotives) | Diesel E7 6,000 bhp Three Unit (estimated by New York Central) | ||||
| Approximate relative first costs (as at December, 1946) | 100% | 147% | 214% | |||
| Total drawbar horsepower | 5,000 hp | 3,320 dbhp | 4,980 dbhp | |||
| Relative first cost, in dollars per horsepower | 100% | 265% | 258% | |||
| Total annual mileage per locomotive | 288,000 (310 trips per annum) | 324,000 (349 trips per annum) | 324,000 (349 trips per annum) | |||
| COST PER LOCOMOTIVE | Actual | As percentage of total | Actual | As percentage of total | Estimated (by New York Central) | As percentage of total |
| Repairs | $102,528 | 31.48% | $114,048 | 35.6% | $162,000 | 38.4% |
| Fuel | $118,080 | 36.26% | $90,720 | 28.3% | $136,080 | 32.3% |
| Water | $8,928 | 2.74% | $1,296 | 0.4% | $1,620 | 0.4% |
| Lubrication | $3,168 | 0.97% | $9,720 | 3.0% | $14,580 | 3.5% |
| Other Supplies | $1,440 | 0.44% | $648 | 0.2% | $648 | 0.2% |
| Enginehouse Expense | $28,800 | 8.84% | $32,400 | 10.1% | $32,400 | 7.7% |
| Crew Wages (Two men) | $55,987 | 17.19% | $64,120 | 20.0% | $66,290 | 15.7% |
| Vacation Allowance (3%) | $1,670 | 0.51% | $1,912 | 0.6% | $1,976 | 0.5% |
| Social Security & Unemployment Tax (8.75%) | $5,040 | 1.55% | $5,767 | 1.8% | $5,962 | 1.4% |
| Total Cost Per Mile (Operating) | $1.1307 | $0.9896 | $1.3011 | |||
| Total Annual Operating Cost | $325,642 | $320,630 | $421,556 | |||
| Fixed Charges (Interest, depreciation, insurance) | $24,453 | $38,841 | $56,640 | |||
| Total Annual Cost Per Locomotive | $350,095 | $359,471 | $478,196 | |||
| Total Annual Cost Per Mile Per Locomotive | $1.22 | $1.11 | $1.48 | |||
| Total Annual Cost Per Locomotive Drawbar Horsepower | $58.35 | $108.27 | $96.02 | |||
(Note that Kiefer only claimed 5050 drawbar horsepower from a 79-inch 4-8-4, and the last line (dollars/power) has been added)
The results were much closer than the diesel salesmen were comfortable with, but these steam locomotives were hampered by several factors: a series of coal miners' strikes; aggressive dieselization sales efforts; and a failure of the highly-expensive firebox-wrapper metallurgy to withstand the conditions of actual operation.[1]
