# amtrak horizon coaches



## amtrakwolverine (Dec 15, 2009)

Ok why does everyone hate amtrak's horizon coaches. to me on the inside they look the same as the amfleets and they ride the same. at least to me. whats the big deal.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 15, 2009)

We've been over this before in several threads. But here are the basic arguments:

1. Stairs are exposed to the elements. That means in winter they freeze which is both a work and passenger hazard.

2. They are pretty lightweight and bounce around easy on rough freight track.

3. they are prone to dirt. GML may know why they are (maybe the wrong metals) but they get really dirty and dingy easily.

4. I may not have the numbers, but compared to AFIs I find Horizons to be more cramped.

5. All single levels, including AFs, are prone to freezing up. That's why the new orders for coaches are bi-levels, and thats why Metra's bi-levels have been a success.

Don't get me wrong they're a reliable commuter coach-- but in winter, in Chicago, on Amtrak (which in many ways is a step above commuter rail) they do not suffice.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 15, 2009)

The Horizons are or were unpainted aluminum. It gets dirty very easily.

Micah's points are all true, but he has left out their high speed stability issues. Much above 90 mph, the GSC trucks, which are not optimized for the Comet body characteristics (they are designed for inboard bearing trucks) the cars start to pitch around their longitudinal axis and while no derailments have ever, thank god, occurred, their have been instances where wheels have fully lifted off the ground at speeds of 110 and over. Amtrak restricts the cars, which are rated for 125 for reasons unknown, to 90 mph.

Amtrak has been anxious to get rid of them since the early 90s.

By the way, Micah, while Amfleets do freeze up, they are not prone to it. The Viewliners and Horizons have that problem, while the Heritage diners and Amfleet cars do not. Budd had too much experience building cars to build one prone to freeze up. Actually, the Viewliners freezing issues are the result of inferior material used in certain locations for insulation, as well as a few mislocated waterlines, all as a result of "productionizing" by Morrison-Knudson. Amtrak-Budds original design would not have suffered from most of the problems that the production cars do.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 15, 2009)

> Micah's points are all true, but he has left out their high speed stability issues. Much above 90 mph, the GSC trucks, which are not optimized for the Comet body characteristics (they are designed for inboard bearing trucks) the cars start to pitch around their longitudinal axis and while no derailments have ever, thank god, occurred, their have been instances where wheels have fully lifted off the ground at speeds of 110 and over. Amtrak restricts the cars, which are rated for 125 for reasons unknown, to 90 mph.


Well, unlike the Amfleets... the Horizons are boxes, big flat boxes.


----------



## battalion51 (Dec 15, 2009)

From a comfort level I've found the Horizons to be a bit garish. I can't quite put my finger on why, but the Amfleets and Superliners just feel more comfortable and relaxing. The Horizons definitely have a purpose in life in Mid-West service, but I think they would likely have been a more successful fleet if they were primarily based in California or somewhere in the south.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 15, 2009)

I think California is quite content with its run of coaches lol.

And you're right b51, I can't put my finger on it either-- but the Horizon is the only coach I have ever felt cramped in...


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Dec 15, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Micah's points are all true, but he has left out their high speed stability issues. Much above 90 mph, the GSC trucks, which are not optimized for the Comet body characteristics (they are designed for inboard bearing trucks) the cars start to pitch around their longitudinal axis and while no derailments have ever, thank god, occurred, their have been instances where wheels have fully lifted off the ground at speeds of 110 and over. Amtrak restricts the cars, which are rated for 125 for reasons unknown, to 90 mph.


Don't know where you get info from but Horizons are not restricted to 90 mph, the timetable speed for Horizons 51000 - 54599 and 58000 - 58109 are 125 mph as per Amtrak timetable rule 37-S5 on page 287 on NEC timetable

only restriction is cars in series 53000 & 58000 are restricted from Third rail territory with exception to cars 53501, 53505, 53509, 53510, & 53511.


----------



## Pastor Dave (Dec 15, 2009)

Interesting. I haven't seen any horizon coach discussions. You learn something new everyday.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Dec 15, 2009)

Pastor Dave said:


> Interesting. I haven't seen any horizon coach discussions. You learn something new everyday.


They pop up every now and again.

With inferior gear comes debate as to what is to be done with it.

Amtrak has made a decision to purchase the Midwest Bi-Levels, which will probably look something like the Surfliners with a few minor tweaks.

As for the rest of the Horizon fleet... nobody knows what is going to be done with them quite yet.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Dec 15, 2009)

I think part of the nastiness associated with the Horizons is simply from the tighter pitch seating. Us "West Side" riders get spoiled with the Superliners and then feel cramped whenever we step on a mid or short haul train using single level equipment.


----------



## cpamtfan (Dec 15, 2009)

I was thinking, why don't they just paint em' blue? I mean wouldn't that fix one problem?


----------



## Phila 30th St (Dec 15, 2009)

My lone Horizon ride (Kalamazoo-Ann Arbor) was quite comfortable. I paid the $12 Business Class upgrade fee and ended up in 1-2 seating behind the cafe car with about three other people. Though the Coaches I walked through did look pretty cramped and dirty.


----------



## AlanB (Dec 15, 2009)

Phila 30th St said:


> My lone Horizon ride (Kalamazoo-Ann Arbor) was quite comfortable. I paid the $12 Business Class upgrade fee and ended up in 1-2 seating behind the cafe car with about three other people. Though the Coaches I walked through did look pretty cramped and dirty.


Yes, Amtrak converted the Horizon BC cars to mimic what they did with the Amfleet Club-Dinette cars. They had enough seats left over from the old Metroliner FC cars, so they invested in the upgrades to the Horizons after they finished with the Amfleets.


----------



## AudenHoggart (Dec 15, 2009)

AlanB said:


> Phila 30th St said:
> 
> 
> > My lone Horizon ride (Kalamazoo-Ann Arbor) was quite comfortable. I paid the $12 Business Class upgrade fee and ended up in 1-2 seating behind the cafe car with about three other people. Though the Coaches I walked through did look pretty cramped and dirty.
> ...


Another issue with most Amtrak single level coaches is that the windows are fairly high, and this restricts viewing of the passing scene. This dilutes one of Amtrak's major advantages. I'm reasonably tall but I still notice this, and it must be more significant for shorter people.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 15, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Micah's points are all true, but he has left out their high speed stability issues. Much above 90 mph, the GSC trucks, which are not optimized for the Comet body characteristics (they are designed for inboard bearing trucks) the cars start to pitch around their longitudinal axis and while no derailments have ever, thank god, occurred, their have been instances where wheels have fully lifted off the ground at speeds of 110 and over. Amtrak restricts the cars, which are rated for 125 for reasons unknown, to 90 mph.
> ...


That's not what I have been informed of by various Amtrak managers. Tell me, Dutch, where have you seen a Horizon doing more then 90?


----------



## como (Dec 15, 2009)

I'll be in the minority and say that based on several trips on the Missouri River Runners and their predecesors, the Horizon cars are comfortable for 2 to 4 hours. They aren't as horrible as many seem to feel.


----------



## railiner (Dec 15, 2009)

I have always been partial to Budd equipment including Amfleet, but the straight sides of the Horizons seems to me to be not as stylish as Amfleet, but more practicle.

The overhead baggage racks can be further apart and/or deeper than the Amfleets. Years ago, when they experimented with those economy sleeper rooms on an Amfleet car for the Shenandoah, they would have had more space for them.

If the Horizons are constructed of aluminum, why can't they be polished to gleam, similar to the unpainted finish on American Airlines aircraft?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 15, 2009)

Airplanes don't spend their time being buffetted by dirty, sand, and rocks.

Also, the Horizon is a smaller car then the amfleet. Shorter and narrower.


----------



## railiner (Dec 15, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Airplanes don't spend their time being buffetted by dirty, sand, and rocks.
> Also, the Horizon is a smaller car then the amfleet. Shorter and narrower.


Okay, good point about the operating environment.

What are the dimensions of Horizon cars? I thought they were the same as Amfleet....85 feet long by 10 feet, 6 inches wide?


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 15, 2009)

I don't have my spec book with me, but I think the Amfleet is actually 10'8" wide at its widest point because of the curvature.


----------



## Amtrak839 (Dec 15, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> That's not what I have been informed of by various Amtrak managers. Tell me, Dutch, where have you seen a Horizon doing more then 90?


I have seen Horizons subbing for AF II lounges on the Silvers in Virginia. I suppose they could have slowed the train down by 15-20 mph for the NEC run, but that doesn't seem terribly likely.


----------



## cpamtfan (Dec 15, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I don't have my spec book with me, but I think the Amfleet is actually 10'8" wide at its widest point because of the curvature.



I remember this is one of the reasons the LIRR (yes, the Long Island Rail Road) could not run them on the Cannonball (their once "premere" train).


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Dec 15, 2009)

also the wolverine gets up to 95MPH but i don't think 5MPH more means anything.


----------



## Long Train Runnin' (Dec 15, 2009)

Comets make great COMMUTER cars... I find a Comet V to be fine for a 90 minute or so trip through New Jersey.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Dec 15, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Airplanes don't spend their time being buffetted by dirty, sand, and rocks.
> Also, the Horizon is a smaller car then the amfleet. Shorter and narrower.



More mis-information ?? the Horizon is 85 foot over coupler surface same as the Amfleet cars.

My info about speeds is the current NEC Employee timetable, not hearsay by deskjockeys.


----------



## railiner (Dec 15, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Airplanes don't spend their time being buffetted by dirty, sand, and rocks.
> ...


Re: dimiensions.....that's what I thought. Notice that the Comet is wide enough to allow five across seating. While the sides are not curved like Amfleet, the area near the floor level is recessed about 3 inches on each side to allow clearance for the high level platforms.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 16, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Airplanes don't spend their time being buffetted by dirty, sand, and rocks.
> ...


Shorter as in short-vs-tall, not short in length.

I wouldn't call my source a desk jockey. He's too high up, and in operations.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Dec 16, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...



you got your dimentions screwed up. lenght vs height, vs width.

tell your source to read his company governing literature, specificaly the Operating rules and employeee timetable, its the governing document.


----------



## DET63 (Dec 16, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Dutchrailnut said:
> ...


_Short_ indicates a lack of both length and height. _Narrow_ indicates a lack of width.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 16, 2009)

Dutchrailnut said:


> you got your dimentions screwed up. lenght vs height, vs width.tell your source to read his company governing literature, specificaly the Operating rules and employeee timetable, its the governing document.


I didn't get my dimensions screwed up, Dutch. _You_ misunderstood what I was referring to.

Secondarily, Dutch, there are official policies and unofficial ones. The one I am referring to is the latter. As such, it is not spelled out in the employee time tables.


----------



## monorailfan (Dec 16, 2009)

como said:


> I'll be in the minority and say that based on several trips on the Missouri River Runners and their predecesors, the Horizon cars are comfortable for 2 to 4 hours. They aren't as horrible as many seem to feel.


I'll disagree. I'm glad the MRR has their performance way up. Now just get rid of the Horizon cars and runs Supers all the time, and I'll ride.

Dang, they have not yet put Supers on the MRR for the winter. I might not ride the MRR this year!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 16, 2009)

monorailfan said:


> como said:
> 
> 
> > I'll be in the minority and say that based on several trips on the Missouri River Runners and their predecesors, the Horizon cars are comfortable for 2 to 4 hours. They aren't as horrible as many seem to feel.
> ...


It's worth the $12 to ride Biz class, a nice ride from STL-KCY!!!


----------



## sunchaser (Dec 17, 2009)

Hi guys-

Can you post some pictures of both? Exterior & interior please?

Also, what rouutes are they on?

I know these sound like dumb questions, but I have never been back east so I'd like to see what you guys are talking about!

Thanks!


----------



## cpamtfan (Dec 17, 2009)

sunchaser said:


> Hi guys-Can you post some pictures of both? Exterior & interior please?
> 
> Also, what rouutes are they on?
> 
> ...



Just about every corridor route out of CHI (with the exception of STL-KSC), I believe on one of the corridor trains in California (where the cars were originally based, on San Joaquin and Capitol Corridor runs).

The only exceptions are that some Amfleets (aka cars from the NEC) are suppliments, as well as Superliners on the Michigan trains in the winter due to freezingt problems on the single level equipment.


----------



## TVRM610 (Dec 17, 2009)

railiner said:


> I have always been partial to Budd equipment including Amfleet, but the straight sides of the Horizons seems to me to be not as stylish as Amfleet, but more practicle. The overhead baggage racks can be further apart and/or deeper than the Amfleets. Years ago, when they experimented with those economy sleeper rooms on an Amfleet car for the Shenandoah, they would have had more space for them.
> 
> If the Horizons are constructed of aluminum, why can't they be polished to gleam, similar to the unpainted finish on American Airlines aircraft?


economy sleepers in an amfleet? do tell please....


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 17, 2009)

Horizon:

*Business Class Interior*







*Coach interior*






*Exterior*






Amfleet:

*Interior*






*Amfleet II*






*Amfleet I*






The Horizons are designed for corridor services with low-stop frequency, as they have manually operated doors. They are based off of the NJDOT-specified Pullman-Standard "Comet" cars built for the Erie Lackawana to replace their ancient, unairconditioned coaches. These cars were piggybacked on NJT's order of Comet II cars, which have trap doors that allow it to operate on both high level and low level platforms, and were built by Bombardier. They were purchased primarily because they were cheap.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 17, 2009)

The NJ Transit version had manually operated end doors (now automatic, like the ones you find on Amtrak) and automatic-operated exterior doors (like you find on Amfleet Is and Surfliner/California cars). The cars were always designed with centrally operated exterior doors, which is why the Amtrak version, which has the reverse (manually operated exterior doors, automatic interior doors, corresponding with more longer-distance operation) does not have stairway traps. On the NJ Transit cars, the stairs are covered over by a sliding door when the doors are closed. Lacking that door, the Amtrak version is always exposed.

The Comet I could only operate on low-level platforms, for it had no trap and had a lower door opening.

Comet I:






Comet IIs corrected that problem for service on lines other than the Erie Lackawanna (all low platform) such as the Northeast Corridor and North Jersey Cost Line, by using trap doors and a long sliding door covering the stairs. It was also, to my knowledge, the first car that could operate with its exterior door closed and its trap door opened- which really simplifies train operation. They were what the Horizon is based on and were built by Bombardier.

Comet II:






The Comet III was similar to the Comet II but had a pair of centrally located automatic exterior doors, similar to subway cars, which speed boarding at high level platforms, also built by Bombardier:

Comet III:






The Comet IV is an improved Comet III, the main difference is found in the cab cars, which do not have cab-side doors, persuant to the safety findings of a train collision in Secaucus, NJ. They are also Bombardier-built.

Comet IV:






The last car using the Comets basic shape is the Comet V. I'm not sure how technically related to the original series it is. The original Comets were built from Aluminum, and were built by Pullman-Standard, followed by Bombardier who bought out the design. The next set of cars, referred to as Comet Vs, are very different. They have much larger windows, their air conditioners are located on top of the car, rather than in the roof, and they are built out of stainless steel. They are also built by the Anglo-French company Alstom rather than the Canadian Bombardier

Comet V:






Their replacement is entirely unrelated, its a bi-level car sometimes referred to as the Comet Multi-level. I think NJ Transit has refrained from this practice, which makes sense- it isn't related to the comet in the slightest:


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 17, 2009)

TVRM610 said:


> economy sleepers in an amfleet? do tell please....


They built a few modules, similar to the Superliner Roomettes, for an Amfleet. They were used in a car on a few Harley Staggers Specials, a unique Amfleet Cafe/dinette/sleeper/coach thingie. I think there was never more than three cars on the train, a baggage, that thing, and a coach.

Actually, the Amfleet shell is pretty adaptive. To whit:

Metroliner EMUs:






Amfleet I short-distance, Amfleet II long-distance, and the SPV 2000 DMUS, seen here as cab-car on the New Haven Shoreline East:






And as a Budd demonstrator:






which I think especially attractive.

By the way, Sunchaser, notice the Amfeet IIs manual side doors and its larger windows. It was intended as a medium-distance coach, for things like the Palmetto and Carolinian. The true long-distance coach was concieved as a variation of the Viewliner design.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Dec 17, 2009)

GREAT pics GML. I especially like the shovel nose Budd demo unit. And at a fast glance, the Comet Vs almost look like a subway/elevated car.


----------



## sunchaser (Dec 17, 2009)

Thanks for posting all those great pictures with info about them! It really helps to see them labeled & see the interiors too!

Since I've only been on Superliners, I wasn't positive what an Amfleet looked like versus the Horizon cars. I think I like the look of the Horizons & Comet in general, but have no idea if they're a better car or ride. The Comet multilevel was pretty good looking too. The Amfleets remind me of an aluminum tube!


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 17, 2009)

I've come to like the Multilevels as commuter cars- I wasn't sure at first - but they are rotten for Amtrak's needs. You have to walk up and down stairs to move through the train.


----------



## PaulM (Dec 17, 2009)

monorailfan said:


> como said:
> 
> 
> > I'll be in the minority and say that based on several trips on the Missouri River Runners and their predecesors, the Horizon cars are comfortable for 2 to 4 hours. They aren't as horrible as many seem to feel.
> ...


As I chime in whenever this topic comes up, I'm also in the minority. But more to the point, I'm glad the people along the Illinois Zephyr / Carl Sandberg route don't feel the same way as *monorailfan*. It's a great service regardless of the type of coach; and I would hate to see it die because everyone is waiting for superliners.

Incidentally, I believe the 2-1 BC / cafe cars on this line are Amfleets, not Horizons. And I have never found any difference in the ride quality between the coaches and the BC/Cafe car.


----------



## monorailfan (Dec 17, 2009)

PaulM said:


> monorailfan said:
> 
> 
> > como said:
> ...


The MRR seems to be a grab bag. Sometimes it is Amfleets, usually Horizon or a mix of both. In the winters, they usually run Supers (but not yet this year). Yes, I've been spoiled by Supers. I freely admit it. I also will admit that it IS a good thing most of the MRR riders don't feel the way I do, or our MRR service would dry up. I should just be glad Missouri has what it has.

Yep - I am a proud, spoiled Superliner fan........just like others railfans are with the loco builders. Chevy/Ford thing. Time to get rid of the Horizons and Amcans....

But I'm not just a railfan, rather a tranportation fan. I'm the same way about flights - there are only a few airlines/airplanes that I will travel on.


----------



## TVRM610 (Dec 17, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I've come to like the Multilevels as commuter cars- I wasn't sure at first - but they are rotten for Amtrak's needs. You have to walk up and down stairs to move through the train.


I'm quite fond of the NJT multi-levels... if you sit in the non-locomotive end (wether trailing or leading) you get a terrific ride of swaying especially over turn-outs on the non NEC lines... WHAT FUN! Seriously though, these cars are super quite and super smooth compared to all of the comets, they are very nice.


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2009)

GML, Add me to those thanking you for those great photos. I wonder if you or anyone else might have an interior photo of those Amsleeper rooms?


----------



## zoltan (Dec 18, 2009)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> 1. Stairs are exposed to the elements. That means in winter they freeze which is both a work and passenger hazard.


So THAT'S why the amfleets and other coaches have the stange spring-loaded (I think) steps arrangement! I had never known why. You learn something new every day!


----------



## railiner (Dec 18, 2009)

zoltan said:


> ALC_Rail_Writer said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Stairs are exposed to the elements. That means in winter they freeze which is both a work and passenger hazard.
> ...


The foldaway step design, I believe, came out in the lightweight streamliner cars of the 1930's to also improve the aesthetics of the car, with the added benefit of less drag from air turbulence when travelling at high speeds of that era of around 90-100 mph. The cars sometimes featured 'skirts' that could be raised for access to undercar mechanical components.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 18, 2009)

railiner said:


> GML, Add me to those thanking you for those great photos. I wonder if you or anyone else might have an interior photo of those Amsleeper rooms?


I've been digging all over for information on those cars, including FOIAs to Amtrak themselves. To no avail.


----------



## DET63 (Dec 19, 2009)

> The cars sometimes featured 'skirts' that could be raised for access to undercar mechanical components.


Realize now that somebody is going to be Googling "raised" and "skirts" while looking for porn and get a link to this page instead.


----------



## rtabern (Dec 19, 2009)

The biggest problem is the stairs that are on the outside of the body... exposed to the elements and everything. They run that equipment from here (Milwaukee) to Chicago and they have to clean off the stairs everytime at every stop from the snow and ice and they are still often very slick. I say ship the equipment to the west coast or south or something and use bi-levels up here in the Midwest. There are no real stairs outside the Superliners and would be a lot better to use on the routes here.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Dec 19, 2009)

rtabern said:


> The biggest problem is the stairs that are on the outside of the body... exposed to the elements and everything. They run that equipment from here (Milwaukee) to Chicago and they have to clean off the stairs everytime at every stop from the snow and ice and they are still often very slick. I say ship the equipment to the west coast or south or something and use bi-levels up here in the Midwest. There are no real stairs outside the Superliners and would be a lot better to use on the routes here.


Whatever became of the bi-level Gallery Coaches Amtrak used to run in the Midwest? I know there are "newer" models of those and they do just fine on METRA and I would think with Amtrak style seats and a Business Class and Lounge area they could work on the Midwest routes.


----------



## cpamtfan (Dec 19, 2009)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> rtabern said:
> 
> 
> > The biggest problem is the stairs that are on the outside of the body... exposed to the elements and everything. They run that equipment from here (Milwaukee) to Chicago and they have to clean off the stairs everytime at every stop from the snow and ice and they are still often very slick. I say ship the equipment to the west coast or south or something and use bi-levels up here in the Midwest. There are no real stairs outside the Superliners and would be a lot better to use on the routes here.
> ...



Amtrak did used to run a few ex C&NW cars for a little while until the Horizons came. The new cars that plan to be bought are Surfliner style, rather than a gallery car.


----------



## railiner (Dec 20, 2009)

New gallery type cars would be a mistake for Amtrak, as they could not operate with Superliner or Surfliner cars. They could operate with single level cars, but then their excess height would preclude them from running to New York.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 20, 2009)

They make more sense then NJT-style bi-levels, though.


----------



## Big Iron (Dec 20, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> They make more sense then NJT-style bi-levels, though.


I've never been inside a NJT bi-level. I've read here that luggage storage would be a problem with them but much less so with a gallery car. The ones I rode many years ago appeared to have plenty of luggage storage, for both levels, in the open racks over the aisle. The upper level on the gallery car was a bit cramped with the single seating and narrow aisle. I was alot smaller then too.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Dec 20, 2009)

I never have seen the inside of an Amtrak Gallery Car but am assuming they replaced the walk-over seats with seating more typical of an Amtrak Coach. I haven't been able to find any interior pics; so does anyone have any to share or even recollections of riding in the Amtrak versions (I have done many, many miles on METRA and C&NW ones).


----------



## Big Iron (Dec 20, 2009)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> I never have seen the inside of an Amtrak Gallery Car but am assuming they replaced the walk-over seats with seating more typical of an Amtrak Coach. I haven't been able to find any interior pics; so does anyone have any to share or even recollections of riding in the Amtrak versions (I have done many, many miles on METRA and C&NW ones).


I can't recall the specific type of coach seats in the gallery cars but they were not the vinyl walkover type. They were separate seats that reclined and had foot rests. The upstairs seats were the same just one on each side separated by the railing and the view to the first level. The upper level seats were raised a bit, similar to the step up in a slumbercoach. I believe these were the cars that CNW used for its Flambeau trains to WI. Back in the day, CNW raised the roofline of a standard diner to match the roof level of the gallery cars. There is a book, "Route of the 400's", that has numerous interior pictures.

The long distance gallery cars didn't have the heavy green tint to the windows that the commuter cars did. I remember boarding the Capitol Ltd. in the late

B & O years after it was moved to the CNW station. The Cap was parked next to a commuter train and I thought how different the green glass looked. The bustle of a commuter train boarding was in stark contrast to the boarding of the long distance Cap.

Going back to your original question referring to Amtrak gallery cars. The cars I rode in were still in CNW paint just after the start up of Amtrak so I assume I'm describing the CNW version and not the Amtrak one.


----------



## railiner (Dec 20, 2009)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> I never have seen the inside of an Amtrak Gallery Car but am assuming they replaced the walk-over seats with seating more typical of an Amtrak Coach. I haven't been able to find any interior pics; so does anyone have any to share or even recollections of riding in the Amtrak versions (I have done many, many miles on METRA and C&NW ones).


The ones Amtrak acquired from the C&NW were built as long-distance cars with reclining seats....2x2 on main level, and 1x2 on upper level. There was even a dinette car.


----------



## TVRM610 (Dec 20, 2009)

who though it was a good idea to add green tint to train windows anyways? Never been a fan of that one...


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 20, 2009)

TVRM610 said:


> who though it was a good idea to add green tint to train windows anyways? Never been a fan of that one...


Bill or one of the other equipment experts from the old days can correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember tinted windows on the old day coaches back in the late 40s and early 50s when I rode the SP and Mopac and Katy trains alot.Not sure about the pullman cars, it was rare for me to ride them?

I would venture a guess that this started in the SW where it's so very hot in the summer, I remember being in Phoenix in the early days and cars had tinted windows there,it might have started in SoCal too since they start most of the trends! :lol:

Personally I like it, especially on the Superliner lounges since the greenhouse effect is very strong down this way!I have heard it causes problems with pics and videos but this just could be rumour? :unsure:


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 20, 2009)

You apparently haven't ridden a Metra train, Jim.


----------



## railiner (Dec 20, 2009)

TVRM610 said:


> who though it was a good idea to add green tint to train windows anyways? Never been a fan of that one...


I believe it was done as a way to cut maintenance costs.....much cheaper to spend a little more for tinted windows, than to have to clean and repair window shades. Pro's and Con's for tinting...cuts glare but doesn't block entire view....makes photo's come out poorly....etc.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Dec 21, 2009)

railiner said:


> TVRM610 said:
> 
> 
> > who though it was a good idea to add green tint to train windows anyways? Never been a fan of that one...
> ...


Tinted windows became a norm in air conditioned cars because the windows are the major source of heat in summer.

without the tinted windows the air conditioning systems even if running at 100% could not keep up.

Even with todays AC systems either tinted or like in Europe reflective windows are used.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 21, 2009)

Yeah, but we were referring, I think, to the massively green tinted windows of the Metra coaches as opposed to the less tinted coaches back east.


----------



## DET63 (Dec 21, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Yeah, but we were referring, I think, to the massively green tinted windows of the Metra coaches as opposed to the less tinted coaches back east.


I'm sure if it's green, GML has no problem with it, no matter the degree of tint or the reason for it.


----------



## TVRM610 (Dec 21, 2009)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Yeah, but we were referring, I think, to the massively green tinted windows of the Metra coaches as opposed to the less tinted coaches back east.


Yes that is correct GML... my word people I understand the logic of "tinting windows" I was speaking of the GREEN tint that Metra cars have, why would they tint train windows green is my question.

I've heard of looking through the world through ROSE colored glass but green? what does that mean? haha.


----------



## Dutchrailnut (Dec 21, 2009)

TVRM610 said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, but we were referring, I think, to the massively green tinted windows of the Metra coaches as opposed to the less tinted coaches back east.
> ...


Well MNCR and Amtrak cars had green tinting too, lately new cars have more of a smoked tint.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Dec 22, 2009)

Not THAT green. Its almost impossible to see out of.


----------

