Talk:WAGR P and Pr classes
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Page
editToday I created this page in its entirety, infoboxes, references, bibliography. The information comes from my older arts WAGR P and WAGR Pr classes to which I was the only contributor, so I dont believe my redirects will upset anyone. Regards, Corporal29 (talk) 02:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Great article
editGreat article - well done. There is some conjecture re the claim the Pmr was a rough rider because of some design fault. I spoke with people within HVTR (as well as old WAGR staff) when I was there once, and the opinion was that, on good track (ie up the Avon Valley) the Pm was a good rider - the only difference between the Pm and Pmr was the bearings. THe belief is that, when in service, the WAGR track was, er, average, and thus did not provide a good ride.Sulzer55 (talk) 11:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)