Center Entrance in Boston - Part 3

By Alfred Barten

I wrote this article for Electric Lines magazine, which published it in their May-June 1992 issue. I’ve omitted a few of their minor edits, reverting to my original manuscript (mostly because the edits didn’t change anything significant, and trying to search them all out seemed unnecessary), added some illustrations and omitted several others because they are no longer available.

This is the third of four parts. - AB
Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - Historical Development
Part 4 - Boston Center Entrance Car Characteristics

Boston Center-Entrance Cars

Part of the impetus for the articulated program was the Boston El's rapidly expanding system and ridership, which from 1910 to 1911 showed a remarkable 40 percent jump in surface car rider-miles from 32.9 million to 45.9 million. As reported by Cummings in Street Cars of Boston, Volume 4, Boston El officials began late in 1912 to study the possibility of using two-car surface trains. The El seriously considered equipping Type 3 and Type 4 semi-convertibles for train operation, and even tried it experimentally with the Type 4’s. In late 1914, however, the decision to add center-entrance trail cars was approved by the State Public Service Commission. The company purchased 225 over the next two years, spreading orders among the J.G. Brill Company, the Laconia Car Company, and the G.C. Kuhlman Car Company (via parent Brill). Type 4 semi-convertibles were elected to haul the trailers and the combination proved successful.

Within weeks of placing its final order for trailers on July 18, 1916, the Boston El ordered 100 center-entrance motor cars on August 1. The cars, 50 of which were built by Brill and 50 by Laconia, were nearly identical in appearance to the trailers. Over the next several years the El ordered another 305 center-entrance cars from Brill, Laconia, and Kuhlman. With the exception of MU-control capability omitted from the final 105 cars, all were practically alike.


Kuhlman center-entrance trailer 7194 shortly after delivery in 1919.


Interior of trailer 7194 in 1919.

A July 15, 1917, article in Brill Magazine reported that the motor cars, like the trailers, were built with plate girder sides to carry the entire load. "By placing the bolsters under the middle of each half of the car," the article noted, "the weight is balanced on the trucks; hence the strain at the center is reduced and the necessity for heavy construction around the center doors avoided." The car's designers also used the iron pipe stanchions alongside the center-entrance well to help support the roof and, combined with more piping, strengthen the car crosswise. Years later, restorers at the Seashore Trolley Museum were astonished to see how light the steel framing actually was when they stripped their specimen cars prior to rebuilding.




Number 6106 at Reservoir, converted for ballgame service with longitudinal seats. 1948. Kevin T. Farrell collection.

Except for the wood roof, the car was steel framed and plated to provide the fireproofing required for tunnel operation and to achieve a high strength-to-weight ratio. The sides, in classic Boston fashion, slanted inward 4" from the belt to the roof line to accommodate the tunnel clearances. At the center, the large bi-parting outside-hung doors matched the car side's profile and opened to an impressive 6'-6" width. Inside, a center well just 15" above the rail, extended the full width of the car and sloped gently upward 1-3/4" from each side to the car's longitudinal centerline. “A single step up of less than 10" on each side reached the main floors which ramped an additional 4" to achieve their final level, 32" above the rail.”

The motorized farebox, which could be turned to face either side of the car, was placed in the middle of the center well. Once started, the box churned and clunked endlessly - a characteristic not lost on attentive young riders like Richard Harris, who rode the cars four nights a week to choir practice as a boy.

Behind the farebox was the conductor's stool, which consisted of a round wood seat atop a single pipe. The pipe extended through a flange near its lower end into a flanged hole in the floor. When the car changed directions, the conductor simply lifted the stool and reinserted it in a corresponding hole on the other side of the car.

Above the center well were two roof hatches, positioned crosswise. Each could be opened and so held by a rod. The principal purpose, as with the articulated cars, was to enable the conductor to raise and lower the car's trolley poles, or if necessary, rewire the trolley without leaving his position. The rope from each pole fitted through a small notch in one edge of the corresponding hatch's top and could be secured inside the car. Al Silloway, a former conductor and motorman, recalls that in the summer they would leave the hatches open to enjoy the breezes, but that in winter the loose-fitting hatch, combined with ineffective heating in that section of the car, made the conductor's position cold and drafty.


Roof hatch above conductor’s station. Photo by Alfred Barten.

At each end of the car a motorman's cab was formed by a partition with a swinging door in the center and steel panels that dropped into pockets at the back of the stationary seats. A curtain could be pulled across the openings in the upper halves of the door and partition to block the interior lights from the motorman's view at night. Farrell recalls taking advantage of the often unlocked motorman's compartments in the trail cars "to go in and play motorman." For Harris, who rode in single or lead cars, the motorman's curtain was a frustration because it blocked his view of the track ahead. He would sometimes kneel on the hard wood slat seats to catch a glimpse through a gap where the curtain hadn't been fully closed.