A standard streetcar width?

And this is why nobody knows what you're talking about if you're from a different country....

Football, Fanny pack, tram. The mind, it boggles.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

eolesen wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2024 1:57 pm And this is why nobody knows what you're talking about if you're from a different country....

Football, Fanny pack, tram. The mind, it boggles.

When discussing USA, or North American railroads, use American terms.
When discussing European or Asian railroads, use their terms.
Not everyone speaks the same language in the same country, much less different countries.

Ex: sleepers vs. crossties

Oh, that's worth a topic of its own. After I retired I volunteered once a week at the NRHS Library, then in Philadelphia. One day we received a letter from the publishers of the Oxford English Dictionary, who had been referred to NRHS by the AAR; they were compiling a dictionary of American English and submitted a list of 30-some words and expressions in British usage pertaining to railways and wanted to know which of them meant the same thing in American and if not what was the American equivalent. About 5 or 6 of us spent a succession of Wednesdays going through them and supplying the U. S. equivalents. The dictionary was published, and there they are.

The Toronto downtown network is built to 2.54m wide, falling between the 2.45m and 2.65m widths you see on some European systems. However, that was not the main reason building the new low floor cars was tricky - curve radius was.

When Metrolinx took over building the wholly new lines, they ditched the TTC “standard” (including the 600V DC trolley power) in favour of 2.65m wide, double side, 1435mm gauge, pantograph only, 750V power. I don’t know if we could call that standard but Metrolinx clearly see that as the combination of specs which impose least specialized needs on their orders for uptown Toronto, Mississauga, and Hamilton