Worst looking locomotive topic. Antidote to Best Looking Locomotive topic.

[The Johnster]

The gap between the trailing bogie wheel and the leading driver is all wrong, and the boiler is too short to be pitched that high.  43xx, basically the same locomotive in the form of a mixed traffic mogul, look perfectly proportioned, which shows that the difference between beauty and ugliness can be very small indeed.

 

All subjective opinion, of course, and of no value whatsoever; yours is as good as mine...

[rodent279]

I think the coupled wheelbase is to short. Make it a bit longer, and as you say, maybe lengthen the bogie wheelbase, and it might look a bit better proportioned. Who knows, they might even have ridden better?

[phil-b259]

8 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Seriously? I think a trip to Specsavers or Barnard Castle is in order.

 

Probably the finest looking outside cylinder 4-4-0s ever built apart from maybe the Compounds.

 

 

 

Thats one of the later builds with curves on the running plate rather than right angles.

 

The early builds looked like this https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.65b35ebbfddcdb6ecaa3b887db4d134c?rik=CHFlfEPJ5jNNOQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.warwickshirerailways.com%2fgwr%2fleamingtonstation%2fleamington_locos%2fgwrls181.jpg&ehk=RPk9IJNqxoK0zuVnrqdhQAggk3gea3ljxFMzSd2EmzU%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

[Andy Kirkham]

For an ugly GWR 4-4-0 how about the 3521 class with tapered boiler. In this case the wheels are too small.

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrhs1945.htm

 

Thay had a remarkable history, having begun life as broad gauge 0-4-2Ts

Edited December 15, 2021 by Andy Kirkham

[whart57]

10 hours ago, rodent279 said:

I was kind of thinking that, but bit worried about getting a brick through my window!

 

Seriously though, they're not bad looking, but they don't quite look right. They look a little like someone walking in high heels that they're not used to-a little unsteady, like they are about to fall over.

 

I live deep in Southern territory, I think my windows are safe.

 

I think they have the same problem as the Met tanks, the big driving wheels mess up the proportions. The classic inside cylinder 4-4-0 has scope for smoothing things out, but outside cylinders mess that up too.

 

In the hands of an artist the 4-4-0 can look very good

 

 

Designed by someone with less of an eye for shape and form they can be awful

 

 

The SECR livery didn't improve them much either.

[pH]

26 minutes ago, whart57 said:

Designed by someone with less of an eye for shape and form they can be awful

 

 

Sir, I respectfully repeat my comment, made the last time you slandered James Stirling :

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/152467-worst-looking-locomotive-topic-antidote-to-best-looking-locomotive-topic/&do=findComment&comment=3881942

 

Edited December 15, 2021 by pH

[rockershovel]

I don't feel that the "ugly 4-4-0" team are really making their case. 

 

I'd agree that there are definitely 4-4-0s that don't quite "come off" aesthetically. The Counties appear rather as though they SHOULD be 4-6-0s, but aren't for some reason. The Beyer Peacock ones are a bit odd. 

 

But ugly? No... that European 4-4-0ST posted earlier is a notable dog, but its a rare exception to prove the rule

[whart57]

2 hours ago, pH said:

Sir, I respectfully repeat my comment, made the last time you slandered James Stirling :

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/152467-worst-looking-locomotive-topic-antidote-to-best-looking-locomotive-topic/&do=findComment&comment=3881942

 

 

Sir, the South Eastern Railway is a subject dear to my heart. I will not hear a word against James Stirling on engineering and efficiency grounds, he provided the SER with a number of locomotive classes that performed as well as the best and that lasted right through the SECR and Southern days. However aesthetically they left a bit to be desired. All his designs were improved visually by Wainwright's SECR putting on domed boilers and larger cabs, yet at the same time the aesthetics of Cudworth's designs were worsened by Stirling's re-boilering with domeless boilers.

 

In evidence, here is that F class as reworked by Wainwright

 

 

55 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

But ugly? No... that European 4-4-0ST posted earlier is a notable dog, but its a rare exception to prove the rule

 

A dog? That Netherlands Central Railway 4-4-0T is quite a handsome engine in my opinion. The Midland and Great Northern had something similar and they were quite handsome too

 

Edited December 15, 2021 by whart57

[Steamport Southport]

5 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Thats one of the later builds with curves on the running plate rather than right angles.

 

The early builds looked like this https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.65b35ebbfddcdb6ecaa3b887db4d134c?rik=CHFlfEPJ5jNNOQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fwww.warwickshirerailways.com%2fgwr%2fleamingtonstation%2fleamington_locos%2fgwrls181.jpg&ehk=RPk9IJNqxoK0zuVnrqdhQAggk3gea3ljxFMzSd2EmzU%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

 

I posted both types. 

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

I don't feel that the "ugly 4-4-0" team are really making their case. 

 

I'd agree that there are definitely 4-4-0s that don't quite "come off" aesthetically. The Counties appear rather as though they SHOULD be 4-6-0s, but aren't for some reason. The Beyer Peacock ones are a bit odd. 

 

But ugly? No... that European 4-4-0ST posted earlier is a notable dog, but its a rare exception to prove the rule

 

Built because the Saints were out of gauge for some of the lines they shared with the LNWR and much of the Northern Division. It was more "needs must" than anything else. 

 

 

Jason

[pete_mcfarlane]

16 hours ago, rockershovel said:

On the whole I'd reckon it was quite difficult to make an unsightly 4-4-0. 

The Paris, Lyon and Mediterranean took up that challenge

https://railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=438486

[kevinlms]

On 14/12/2021 at 22:29, whart57 said:

Have the 4-4-0Ts of the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District railways been mentioned? To be cruel I'd say that hiding them away in tunnels was a kindness to Victorian Londoners.

 

From the front they were bad enough

 

 

But from the back .......

 

Some of the basic design made it as far as NSW, Australia.

 

https://australian-railways.fandom.com/wiki/New_South_Wales_Z13_class_locomotive

[kevinlms]

On 14/12/2021 at 22:29, whart57 said:

Have the 4-4-0Ts of the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District railways been mentioned? To be cruel I'd say that hiding them away in tunnels was a kindness to Victorian Londoners.

 

From the front they were bad enough

 

 

But from the back .......

 

But unlike many of the 'ugly' locomotive examples posted here, these at least were highly successful and lasted for many years.

[rockershovel]

On 15/12/2021 at 13:14, whart57 said:

 

Sir, the South Eastern Railway is a subject dear to my heart. I will not hear a word against James Stirling on engineering and efficiency grounds, he provided the SER with a number of locomotive classes that performed as well as the best and that lasted right through the SECR and Southern days. However aesthetically they left a bit to be desired. All his designs were improved visually by Wainwright's SECR putting on domed boilers and larger cabs, yet at the same time the aesthetics of Cudworth's designs were worsened by Stirling's re-boilering with domeless boilers.

 

In evidence, here is that F class as reworked by Wainwright

 

 

 

A dog? That Netherlands Central Railway 4-4-0T is quite a handsome engine in my opinion. The Midland and Great Northern had something similar and they were quite handsome too

 

It wasn't that one, but the 4-4-0ST on page 29 

[rockershovel]

On 15/12/2021 at 13:51, pete_mcfarlane said:

The Paris, Lyon and Mediterranean took up that challenge

https://railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=438486

Not very pretty, but they had (and still have) their admirers and bet they looked impressive at speed.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2021 by rockershovel

[rockershovel]

On 15/12/2021 at 14:17, kevinlms said:

But unlike many of the 'ugly' locomotive examples posted here, these at least were highly successful and lasted for many years.

Well, quite so. I quite like the Beyer Peacock 4-4-0T types; robust, well engineered designs, largely conventional by the standards of the time and well adapted to their role.

 

They aren't very pretty and the later cabs definitely show the esthetic problems inherent in modifying locos using unrelated parts, but ugly? No, I don't think so. 

[whart57]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

It wasn't that one, but the 4-4-0ST on page 29 

 

Yes, now that is hideous

[kevinlms]

21 hours ago, whart57 said:

 

Yes, now that is hideous

A hippo on wheels?

[Miss Prism]

Stellas were dainty originally, but a big Churchward BRO boiler rebuild made them top heavy and hideous IMO.

 

 

[kevinlms]

19 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

Stellas were dainty originally, but a big Churchward BRO boiler rebuild made them top heavy and hideous IMO.

 

 

Looks like the tender has been graffitied and painted out!

[Hroth]

3 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

Stellas were dainty originally, but a big Churchward BRO boiler rebuild made them top heavy and hideous IMO.

 

 

The driving wheels look too small for the boiler, but the main blow of the ugly hammer went to the leading wheels. like all big 2-4-0 locos, it looks unbalanced and ungainly*. With a leading bogie, it would look far better proportioned. I don't know if even that would render them "pretty", but they would look more purposeful!

 

* The Wigmore Castle problem...

 

 

[whart57]

If you want an unbalanced 2-4-0, how about these Beyer-Peacocks supplied to the Dutch State Railways

 

 

Though they don't look too bad in three quarter view

 

 

But the next offering from Beyer-Peacock was slightly bigger and had a front bogie

 

 

Overall though I think these BP locos supplied to the Netherlands should be in the thread of most handsome locomotives rather than this one. The same can't be said of their Holland Railway competitor, their Borsig locomotives definitely belong here

 

Edited December 18, 2021 by whart57

[The Johnster]

Looks like a Beattie Well Tank on acid, and is not something I'd recommend!

 

 

9 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Looks like the tender has been graffitied and painted out!

 

It has; some vandal has painted a stylised GWR tag on it...

[rockershovel]

As a general comment on 2-4-0 locos, I've always felt that they suffer from the "if it looks right, it is right" syndrome. They WEREN'T right, they suffered from a design weakness which was identified and rectified by the development of the 4-4-0.

 

I'd draw a clear distinction between development issues of this sort, and the outright aesthetic failure of that 4-4-0ST which has no obvious technical justification and looks downright unbalanced.

 

I will also exclude the Beattie well tanks, which look quite elegant on a "period" sort of way. That Borsig, on the other hand...

Edited December 18, 2021 by rockershovel

[Andy Kirkham]

6 hours ago, Hroth said:

The driving wheels look too small for the boiler, but the main blow of the ugly hammer went to the leading wheels. like all big 2-4-0 locos, it looks unbalanced and ungainly*. With a leading bogie, it would look far better proportioned. I don't know if even that would render them "pretty", but they would look more purposeful!

 

* The Wigmore Castle problem...

 

 

I rather fancy a leading bogie might make it look like a 3521, which were not the most elegant.