Awhile back, there was a discussion about Super "O" track. Some people contended the middle rail could not and would not put additional wear on the middle rail contacts of locomotives and rolling stock.
My contention was that Super "O" track did. I've had my cars with the worn rollers in storage for quite awhile now, so I haven't been able to access them to take pics. Today I was perusing stuff on ebay when I chanced upon a set of 2333 Santa Fe AA units. One of them, the one with the horn, has precisely the same type of wear my cars rollers experienced. True, it's only on one of the rollers, but I'm guessing the other rollers just didn't have the same amount of pressure exerted on them.
Here is one of the pics:
The logical question that's probably running through your mind is, "How do you know Super "O" track is responsible?"
There's no proof I can come up with, since they aren't MY engines. However I'll pose a different question. If Super "O" track isn't responsible, then what else could have caused it? Note how thin the wear is. Doesn't it appear a blade from Super "O" track would fit perfectly in that groove? Surely T-Rail wouldn't fit.
I don't know if rollers were sometimes made of softer metals at different times. What I do know is that not all of the cars I used on Super "O" track suffered from the roller grooves.
I still think Super "O" track is pretty cool looking, and I prefer it over all of their other kinds of tracks. It's just a drag Lionel never chose to produce different diameter curves to increase its versatility. I think that may have helped make it a success.