New Haven GE EP3 Parmele & Sturges 1938-41 big green juice box

Holy cow...😳

Carey, you've done it again! 👍 🙂

Mark in Oregon

Runs nice and smooth. Great work.

Yes Carey It seems to run very smoothly, worm and chain drive? Such a nice model, there's something satisfying about these older, less refined ( compared to say a modern  brass model ) they have rugged charm.  I enjoy your videos'  cTr...( Choose the Right )

Wow! Love the video.

Even has that traction motor growl! 

Mitch

Here's another.  Since this photo, it has been powered by two Pittman motors and six CLW gearboxes.

Hello,all ...my engine has two motors ..driving gears to two of the 3 axles ...

I have the Parmele & Sturges NYC box cab ..which has the same drive,...but chains to thr 3rd drive axles .,

I'm sure there were many variations of drives tried in these beasts over the years ..I suspect the drives in mine should last another 80 years without much problem.

Cheers Carey

Great locomotive and video!

I know this is an old thread, but I figured I'd add to it instead of starting a separate one. I managed to find another one of these old Parmele & Sturges EP3's.  Once I get it I'll take a closer look. This one is twin motored and as you can see all six axles are geared. Will have to compare it to Carey's more closely once it shows up.

Now string up the outside 3rd rail to run it !

@Carey Williams posted:

Now string up the outside 3rd rail to run it !

No, fix the pans and string the cat!

Oh, and here is another green one right after i unpacked it:

The wire around it was just to keep the roof in place during shipment. This one has the same three geared axle drive that Dennis' has.

Here are some pics of the motors and drive set up in my loco.

I've got problems lol, I seem to have found another one of these albeit inpretty much the raw casting only state.  Interestingly, it also has a very different mower truck mounting and drive that my other one.  Also seemingly different than the one Carey has.  This one does not have the floating spring suspension and seens to mount the power trucks fron the center of each.  Motors were horizontally mounted, looks like a bearing block at each outer truck end.I'll have to wait till it gets here to measure etc and determine if it would have been side gear drive for the other axles or intended for chain drive.  Sort of leaning toward gear drive as I see wide and thin casting section on that inner drive shassis and it really does not look like there would have been room for chain drive in the middle dur to the motor mounting.  Anyway, time will tell...

The Parmele & Sturges EP-3 is a great old model! It's heavy and rugged and it feels like a real piece of machinery rather than a piece of jewelry. According to William Middleton in his wonderful book When the Steam Railroads Electrified, the New Haven's EP-3 (delivered 1931 by GE) with twin-motor geared-quill drive "established the basic configuration for a heavy high-speed electric locomotive that was employed for several more orders of New Haven electrics as well as for the Pennsylvania's GG-1." In fact, Pennsy borrowed an EP-3 for part of the test program that led to the GG-1.

The EP-4 (1938) was very similar, but with a streamlined carbody; they were rated at 3600 hp as opposed to an EP-3's 3000 hp.

However, neither the EP-3s nor the EP-4s ever ran off third rail power; they all operated under New Haven catenary (and under PRR catenary during the tests referred to).

@Carey Williams posted:

That is the oddest place to put the reverser that I have ever seen. Hmmm, it just might hols its own against an oncoming Tiger!

drill the end and it is like a 40mm cannon lmao

@B Smith posted:

However, neither the EP-3s nor the EP-4s ever ran off third rail power; they all operated under New Haven catenary (and under PRR catenary during the tests referred to).

All New Haven electric passenger motors - from the early ones in 1907 to the later EP-2, EP-3, EP-4 and EP-5 - had third-rail shoes for 660-volt DC operation over the 12 miles of tracks of the New York Central Railroad between Woodlawn and Grand Central Terminal. The City of New York prohibited steam locomotives in GCT and the tunnels leading to GCT after 1907. This led to the New Haven Railroad's 1907 AC electrification between Woodlawn and Stamford, Connecticut so that its passenger trains could continue to operate into GCT - which required third-rail shoes. All New Haven electric passenger motors had a small overhead DC pantograph due to gaps in the third rail in the complex trackwork within GCT. New Haven electric freight motors ran to Bay Ridge yards in Brooklyn (via the Harlem River branch and H**l Gate Bridge) under AC catenary and were not equipped for DC third-rail operation.

MELGAR

That's very interesting. I did not know that about the NH electrics. The photos I was looking at did not show the third-rail shoes, but I guess I did not look closely enough.

I’m aware that this is the 2-rail forum but I think that these pictures of my modern 3-rail MTH Premier model of New Haven EP-3 electric passenger motor #0350 (20-5559-1, MSRP $799.95, PS2 produced in 2005) are relevant to the discussion of the 2-rail New Haven EP-3 models. As I mentioned in my previous post, all New Haven electric passenger motors were equipped with third-rail shoes and a small overhead pantograph (as shown in the last two photographs) to operate on 660-volt DC into Grand Central Terminal. It would be interesting to see a conversion of one of these models to 2-rail.

MELGAR

That's a very nice model!  I used to have a Parmele & Sturges 2-rail edition, and I thought it was a handsome piece of machinery.

Somehow, I managed to forget about Hew Haven's entry to NYC via Grand Central Terminal. I use William Middleton's book (When the Steam Railroads Electrified) for most of my education on electric motors, but I either didn't read -- or simply forgot -- about New Haven's EPs being adapted with the 3-rd rail shoes and the little pantographs for GCT's sections in which the third rail was hung from the overhead in areas of complex track work.

Thanks again to MELGAR for straightening me out on this one.