Interesting discussion on the "Picture Puzzle" thread concerning an early LBSC 2-2-2. In order to avoid annoyance to moderators and to Picture Puzzle fans, I thought it prudent to continue discussion on a separate thread. Tom - Thanks for your further thoughts. Ref the Bodmer engine, early railway history seems to have spawned many interesting ideas that fell by the wayside. In the Ahrons book (British Steam Locos 1825-1925), I notice that John Craven gets far fewer mentions than his Southern contemporaries, Joseph Beattie of the LSWR and James Cudworth of the SER. He appears to have made less historical impact. Cudworth like Craven seems to have had charge in his early years of a rag-bag of locomotives, but moved on to become an early advocate of standard designs. The Cudworth 118-class 2-4-0 was multiplied to total 110, which I think made it the most prolific class south of the Thames in the 1870s. He set an enduring policy at Ashford, since J. Stirling and Wainwright both followed with numerically large classes of standard types. Although Stroudley would subsequently bring design standardization to the LBSC, I don't think either Brighton or Nine Elms/ Eastleigh quite matched Ashford in keeping down the number of separate types during the Pre-Grouping era. Cudworth was aligning with a developing trend to greater loco standardization during the mid-Victorian period. This was perhaps most apparent on the LNWR and Midland, where John Ramsbottom and Matthew Kirtley constructed many hundreds of standard 0-6-0 goods engines. Kirtley's double-framed goods were exceptionally long-lived, with the last being scrapped as late as 1951. The contemporary Cudworth SER engines had become extinct in the early 1900s. It is recorded that the SECR made an early preservation attempt for the last of the 118-class, but the idea fell through as nowhere could be found to display it.