Your Train Gauge is Courtesy of Imperial Roman Chariots

[Bruette]

Here is an interesting article from the Lionel Tracks website.

http://tracks.lionel.com/train-gauge-courtesy-of-roman-chariots/

 

[MikeOwnby]

Makes sense, though as the article says it was based more on the contemporary coaches of the time rather than chariots. I'm sure we've all seen photos of the earliest passenger cars, which were quite literally nothing more than stagecoaches with the wheels changed out. I think the last bit of speculation was sort of silly, though. Obviously there would have eventually been a standard gauge to streamline interconnectability, and the industrial north would have eventually set the standard simply because that's where the most rail was located. Even if the South won the war. That's exactly what did happen in places where the North didn't rebuild anything. In early days when trains were short and light, it wasn't that big a deal to transfer stuff and passengers between equipment. As the locomotives got more powerful, the cars got bigger, and the trains got longer it was no longer such a minor thing to transfer freight, especially, between trains. It might have taken longer, but it would have eventually happened regardless.

 

[JazzDad]

So narrow gauge was the result of midget charioteers?

 

[Iron Horseman]

Here is an interesting article from the Lionel Tracks website.

There are physics involved in the ideal width vs weight of axle vs binding in corners. The "North" did not have a "standard" gauge either, until after it was decided to choose one for the transcontinental railroad. I read somewhere recently that the Erie railroad's (after the civil war) 6 foot gauge, would have been a better choice. Erie, by the way, was 6' gauge until 1880.

 

[Bruette]

So narrow gauge was the result of midget charioteers?

Sir you are politically incorrect, narrow gauge was a result of little people's chariots

 

[Bruette]

As for the accuracy of the article, I have no idea, I only thought it was interesting.