Locomotive Front End Paints - Revision history

Josh Bernard: /* Standard Practice Front End Paints */

2025-12-17T22:12:02Z

Standard Practice Front End Paints

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 17 December 2025
Line 146:		Line 146:
	''Letter to shop foremen at Alamosa Colorado, 23 January 1926''		''Letter to shop foremen at Alamosa Colorado, 23 January 1926''

	Some locomotives received aluminum paint on the front ends in the ~~1950s~~, but no documentation has yet surfaced to indicate when this began or which locomotives received it.		Some locomotives received aluminum paint on the front ends towards the end of narrow gauge operations, but no documentation has yet surfaced to indicate when this began or which locomotives received it.

	'''M.L.P.B.&M.R.R.'''		'''M.L.P.B.&M.R.R.'''

Josh Bernard: /* Standard Practice Front End Paints */

2025-12-17T20:42:12Z

Standard Practice Front End Paints

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:42, 17 December 2025
Line 142:		Line 142:
	'''Denver & Rio Grande Western'''		'''Denver & Rio Grande Western'''

	*1926: Stay-brite paint is used on the front ends. Reiterated in ''D&RGW Standard Practice: Painting Locomotives and Tenders'' dated 1 November 1937.		*1926: Stay-brite paint is used on the front ends. Reiterated in ''D&RGW Standard Practice: Painting Locomotives and Tenders'' dated 1 November 1937; reiterated in letter 6, group L-57, dated 8 January 1945 which states that smokebox and firebox are to be painted with Staybrite Front End Paint.

	''Letter to shop foremen at Alamosa Colorado, 23 January 1926''		''Letter to shop foremen at Alamosa Colorado, 23 January 1926''

			Some locomotives received aluminum paint on the front ends in the 1950s, but no documentation has yet surfaced to indicate when this began or which locomotives received it.

	'''M.L.P.B.&M.R.R.'''		'''M.L.P.B.&M.R.R.'''

Josh Bernard at 16:04, 27 November 2025

2025-11-27T16:04:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:04, 27 November 2025
Line 11:		Line 11:
	''Gould, William John Gilbert. "My Life on the Mountain Railroads." Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press, 1995.''		''Gould, William John Gilbert. "My Life on the Mountain Railroads." Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press, 1995.''

	While many commercial options were available for locomotive front ends, many railroad shops mixed their own paint. In 1932 ''Railway Age'' recommended that railroads salvage journal oil from hotboxed axle bearings for mixing front end paints.		While many commercial options were available for locomotive front ends, many railroad shops mixed their own paint or used naturally occurring petroleums like Ozokerite. In 1932 ''Railway Age'' recommended that railroads salvage journal oil from hotboxed axle bearings for mixing front end paints.

	''Bon, I.C. "Scrap Handling and Reclamation," Railway Age 25 June 1932.''		''Bon, I.C. "Scrap Handling and Reclamation," Railway Age 25 June 1932.''
Line 161:		Line 161:

	''"Mr. Bishop's Paper," Railroad Car Journal Vol.VI No.10 October 1896 p249.''		''"Mr. Bishop's Paper," Railroad Car Journal Vol.VI No.10 October 1896 p249.''

			==Non-standard Front End Paints==

			Ozokerite is a naturally occurring petroleum or mineral wax. It was not officially described in the United States until approximately 1885, when Jacob Wallace found it being used by the citizens of Pleasant Valley Junction, Utah, as chewing gum. Wallace described the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railway engine crews stationed at the roundhouse at Pleasant Valley Junction using Ozokerite to polish their locomotives; large chunks of the solid material were pried out of outcroppings where it surfaced, and rubbed across the hot surfaces of the locomotive, which melted a thin layer over the metal then burned away the volatiles leaving a glossy brown-black finish. Soon after Wallace' identification commercial mining began in the vicinity of Pleasant Valley Junction, producing 1,500 tons annually by 1889.

			''"Ozokerite," Harper's Weekly 16 February 1889 p132.''

			''"Mineral Wax," Scientific American Supplement 10 August 1889 p11339.''

Josh Bernard: /* Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends */

2025-03-07T22:52:26Z

Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 7 March 2025
Line 72:		Line 72:
	==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==		==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==

	Crimson red paint was a non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives that emerged in the 1880s and, with few exceptions, was quickly banned by railroad companies due to the confusion red paint could cause in the railroad sphere. Based on contemporary descriptions, red ~~stacks~~ originated on New England railroads but spread briefly to a few railroads in the Rocky Mountains. It was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.		Crimson red paint was a non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives that emerged in the 1880s and, with few exceptions, was quickly banned by railroad companies due to the confusion red paint could cause in the railroad sphere. Based on contemporary descriptions, the red stack fad originated on New England railroads but spread briefly to a few railroads in the Rocky Mountains before being officially banned. The red paint was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.

	*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.		*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.
Line 88:		Line 88:
	''Connecticut Western News 20 April 1881.''		''Connecticut Western News 20 April 1881.''

	*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."		* Maine Central ordered new locomotives with red stacks and paper wheels in 1884.

			''Sun-Journal 2 April 1884.''

			*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the late 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."

	"Back in the latter part of the 80s the president of the Chicago Great Western put his color fancies into operation and all the engine smokestacks were painted red."		"Back in the latter part of the 80s the president of the Chicago Great Western put his color fancies into operation and all the engine smokestacks were painted red."
Line 94:		Line 98:
	''Topeka State Journal 21 December 1909.''		''Topeka State Journal 21 December 1909.''

	*New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad banned red paint on stacks in 1886.		*New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad banned red paint on stacks in 1886, and those locomotives that did receive red were repainted over 1887.

	"It is reported that the New York, New Haven & Hartford road ~~wil~~ do away with the familiar bright red smoke stacks upon its locomotives. The reason given is that the engineers are taught, as one of the rudimentary principles in their dangerous calling, that red always indicates danger, and that with red stacks a common sight, they in time become indifferent to the warning given by this color."		"It is reported that the New York, New Haven & Hartford road will do away with the familiar bright red smoke stacks upon its locomotives. The reason given is that the engineers are taught, as one of the rudimentary principles in their dangerous calling, that red always indicates danger, and that with red stacks a common sight, they in time become indifferent to the warning given by this color."

	''The Boston Globe 3 December 1886 p3.''		''The Boston Globe 3 December 1886 p3.''

	*The Consolidated Road banned red paint on stacks in 1886.

	"The red paint on the engine, particularly that on the smoke-stack, was confusing to the engineers. It is now thought to be desirable that whenever an engineer sees anything red in front of him he should bring his train to a stop as soon as possible. Yet it would be silly for him to stop because another engine was passing innocently on another track. And fault cannot now always be found if the engineer on a close call in a dim light mistook a red danger signal for the red stack of a locomotive and thus cased a serious disaster. If the red smoke stacks are done away with these mistakes cannot occur."		"The red paint on the engine, particularly that on the smoke-stack, was confusing to the engineers. It is now thought to be desirable that whenever an engineer sees anything red in front of him he should bring his train to a stop as soon as possible. Yet it would be silly for him to stop because another engine was passing innocently on another track. And fault cannot now always be found if the engineer on a close call in a dim light mistook a red danger signal for the red stack of a locomotive and thus cased a serious disaster. If the red smoke stacks are done away with these mistakes cannot occur."

	''"Red Stacks Must Go," The Journal (Meridan, Connecticut) 29 November 1886.''		''"Red Stacks Must Go," The Journal (Meridan, Connecticut) 29 November 1886.''

			“Of the 180 locomotives of the Consolidated road (New York, New Haven & Hartford RR) only about fifty of them retain the red smoke stack."

			''The Journal 20 July 1887.''

	*[[Union Pacific Railroad Paint Information\|Union Pacific's]] General Master Mechanic Middleton forbade the use of red on locomotive stacks in 1891.		*[[Union Pacific Railroad Paint Information\|Union Pacific's]] General Master Mechanic Middleton forbade the use of red on locomotive stacks in 1891.
Line 117:		Line 123:

	''Salt Lake Tribune 26 September 1894.''		''Salt Lake Tribune 26 September 1894.''


	==Standard Practice Front End Paints==		==Standard Practice Front End Paints==

Josh Bernard at 22:45, 7 March 2025

2025-03-07T22:45:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:45, 7 March 2025
Line 72:		Line 72:
	==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==		==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==

	Crimson red paint was a non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives that emerged in the 1880s and, with few exceptions, was quickly banned by railroad companies due to the confusion red paint could cause in the railroad sphere. It was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.		Crimson red paint was a non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives that emerged in the 1880s and, with few exceptions, was quickly banned by railroad companies due to the confusion red paint could cause in the railroad sphere. Based on contemporary descriptions, red stacks originated on New England railroads but spread briefly to a few railroads in the Rocky Mountains. It was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.

	*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.		*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.

	''"Spikes and Ties," The Rocky Mountain News 31 March 1880.''		''"Spikes and Ties," The Rocky Mountain News 31 March 1880.''

			*Housatonic Railroad turned out three locomotives with red stacks in 1881.

			“The H. R. R. Co’s. big engine, ‘A B Mygatt’ ‘looks ever so much better’ since it came out of the shop with the red stack.”

			''Connecticut Western News 9 February 1881.''

			“Two new heavy passenger locomotives, with the red straight stack, are to be put on the Housatonic R. R. about May 1st.”

			''Connecticut Western News 20 April 1881.''

	*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."		*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."

			"Back in the latter part of the 80s the president of the Chicago Great Western put his color fancies into operation and all the engine smokestacks were painted red."

			''Topeka State Journal 21 December 1909.''

	*New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad banned red paint on stacks in 1886.		*New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad banned red paint on stacks in 1886.
Line 103:		Line 117:

	''Salt Lake Tribune 26 September 1894.''		''Salt Lake Tribune 26 September 1894.''


	==Standard Practice Front End Paints==		==Standard Practice Front End Paints==

Josh Bernard: Added further references to red stacks.

2025-03-07T22:36:30Z

Added further references to red stacks.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:36, 7 March 2025
Line 72:		Line 72:
	==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==		==Red Paint on Locomotive Front Ends==

	Crimson red paint was a ~~common~~ non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives. It was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.		Crimson red paint was a non-standard practice among railroad crews in decorating their locomotives that emerged in the 1880s and, with few exceptions, was quickly banned by railroad companies due to the confusion red paint could cause in the railroad sphere. It was usually applied around the top cap of the stack. As a matter of personalization, the knowledge of the existence of red stacks usually comes from eyewitness accounts or general orders banning its use rather than official railroad documentation.

	*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.		*[[New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Paint Information\|New York Central & Hudson River Railroad]] locomotives had red stack caps.
Line 79:		Line 79:

	*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."		*The Chicago Great Western used red on their locomotive stacks so prolifically in the 1880s that the company became known as the "Red Smokestack Road."

			*New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad banned red paint on stacks in 1886.

			"It is reported that the New York, New Haven & Hartford road wil do away with the familiar bright red smoke stacks upon its locomotives. The reason given is that the engineers are taught, as one of the rudimentary principles in their dangerous calling, that red always indicates danger, and that with red stacks a common sight, they in time become indifferent to the warning given by this color."

			''The Boston Globe 3 December 1886 p3.''

			*The Consolidated Road banned red paint on stacks in 1886.

			"The red paint on the engine, particularly that on the smoke-stack, was confusing to the engineers. It is now thought to be desirable that whenever an engineer sees anything red in front of him he should bring his train to a stop as soon as possible. Yet it would be silly for him to stop because another engine was passing innocently on another track. And fault cannot now always be found if the engineer on a close call in a dim light mistook a red danger signal for the red stack of a locomotive and thus cased a serious disaster. If the red smoke stacks are done away with these mistakes cannot occur."

			''"Red Stacks Must Go," The Journal (Meridan, Connecticut) 29 November 1886.''

	*[[Union Pacific Railroad Paint Information\|Union Pacific's]] General Master Mechanic Middleton forbade the use of red on locomotive stacks in 1891.		*[[Union Pacific Railroad Paint Information\|Union Pacific's]] General Master Mechanic Middleton forbade the use of red on locomotive stacks in 1891.

Josh Bernard at 16:59, 17 June 2024

2024-06-17T16:59:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:59, 17 June 2024
Line 61:		Line 61:
	''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''		''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''

	The Charles R. Long, Jr., Company shifted its focus to railroad enamels and supplied the Pullman Company with paint for its passenger car products. It was purchased by the American-Marietta Company in 1947, joining the Marietta Paint & Color Co., Sewall Paint & Varnish Co., Ottowa Paint Works, and Schorn Paint Mfg. Co. as A-M subsidiaries.		Charles died in Battle Creek, Michigan, on 12 August 1932. The Charles R. Long, Jr., Company shifted its focus to railroad enamels and supplied the Pullman Company with paint for its passenger car products. It was purchased by the American-Marietta Company in 1947, joining the Marietta Paint & Color Co., Sewall Paint & Varnish Co., Ottowa Paint Works, and Schorn Paint Mfg. Co. as A-M subsidiaries.

	Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:		Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:

Josh Bernard: /* Staybrite Front End Paint */

2024-06-17T16:50:04Z

Staybrite Front End Paint

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:50, 17 June 2024
Line 61:		Line 61:
	''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''		''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''

	The Charles R. Long, Jr., Company was purchased by the American-Marietta Company in 1947, joining the Marietta Paint & Color Co., Sewall Paint & Varnish Co., Ottowa Paint Works, and Schorn Paint Mfg. Co. as A-M subsidiaries.		The Charles R. Long, Jr., Company shifted its focus to railroad enamels and supplied the Pullman Company with paint for its passenger car products. It was purchased by the American-Marietta Company in 1947, joining the Marietta Paint & Color Co., Sewall Paint & Varnish Co., Ottowa Paint Works, and Schorn Paint Mfg. Co. as A-M subsidiaries.

	Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:		Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:

	<blockquote>"Aluminum paint was used on the smokeboxes until the late 1980's when I started mixing up 'graphite colored' paint using high temp flat black and the same high temp aluminum to get a metallic gray. My thought is that it looks good, was historic in appearance and it weathered much more gracefully than basic aluminum. The first time engine coughed up a wad of sooty water, it trashed the paint job. In doing my research for the color, I found the D&RGW paint spec which showed the smokeboxes painted 'Staybrite front end polish. Well, looking through he paint car one day I found a 10 gallon bucket labeled "Staybrite Front End Paint".		<blockquote>"Aluminum paint was used on the smokeboxes until the late 1980's when I started mixing up 'graphite colored' paint using high temp flat black and the same high temp aluminum to get a metallic gray. My thought is that it looks good, was historic in appearance and it weathered much more gracefully than basic aluminum. The first time engine coughed up a wad of sooty water, it trashed the paint job. In doing my research for the color, I found the D&RGW paint spec which showed the smokeboxes painted 'Staybrite front end polish.' Well, looking through the paint car one day I found a 10 gallon bucket labeled "Staybrite Front End Paint".

	"Wow! It was basic metallic medium gray. That's what I based it on."		"Wow! It was basic metallic medium gray. That's what I based it on."

Josh Bernard at 16:40, 17 June 2024

2024-06-17T16:40:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:40, 17 June 2024
Line 46:		Line 46:

	Staybrite or Stabrite Front End Paint was manufactured in Louisville, Kentucky, by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company, part of Charles Long Jr.'s conglomerate of railroad supply companies. Charles R. Long Jr. Co. also produced Lo-Kost Front End Paint, locomotive black varnish, and the Lovico brand of railroad equipment paints.		Staybrite or Stabrite Front End Paint was manufactured in Louisville, Kentucky, by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company, part of Charles Long Jr.'s conglomerate of railroad supply companies. Charles R. Long Jr. Co. also produced Lo-Kost Front End Paint, locomotive black varnish, and the Lovico brand of railroad equipment paints.

			Charles R. Long Jr. was a native of Louisville, beginning his career as secretary and treasurer of the Stratler Brothers Tobacco Company from 1890 to 1896. He left the Stratler Bros. to establish his own paint manufacturing company in 1896 and co-founded railroad supply manufacturer Harry Vissering & Company in 1909.

			''"Charels R. Long, Jr. Buys Interests of Harry Vissering," Railway Mechanical Engineer May 1925.''

	Stabrite Front End Paint was first advertised in 1901. In 1905 application for trademark status was made. In 1918 the Ira D. Washburn Company also filed for a Stabrite trademark, and the Examiner of Trade-Mark Interferences determined that neither company was entitled to exclusive use of the names Stabrite nor Lo-Kost as "a monopoly cannot be acquired in the use of words which are merely descriptive of the character, properties, qualities or composition of an article." The ruling was that the trademark granted to the Charles R. Long Jr. Company was not the name itself, but the design of the company's herald which incorporated the name as an element. In 1919 the Howard L. Fisher Company also attempted to apply for a Stabrite trademark and being denied sued the Charles R. Long Jr. Co and lost. Appeals to the patent office decision carried through 1922 with every court upholding the Commissioner of Patents' decision. This ended the use of the Stabrite/Staybrite and Lo-Kost names. Both Stabrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint are last mentioned by name in the trade press in 1925. As Stabrite could no longer be registered, after abandonment by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company the name was used by various non-railroad companies to represent a brand of paint preserver, a furniture wax, a gun grease, fluorescent lighting, and stainless steel sheeting.		Stabrite Front End Paint was first advertised in 1901. In 1905 application for trademark status was made. In 1918 the Ira D. Washburn Company also filed for a Stabrite trademark, and the Examiner of Trade-Mark Interferences determined that neither company was entitled to exclusive use of the names Stabrite nor Lo-Kost as "a monopoly cannot be acquired in the use of words which are merely descriptive of the character, properties, qualities or composition of an article." The ruling was that the trademark granted to the Charles R. Long Jr. Company was not the name itself, but the design of the company's herald which incorporated the name as an element. In 1919 the Howard L. Fisher Company also attempted to apply for a Stabrite trademark and being denied sued the Charles R. Long Jr. Co and lost. Appeals to the patent office decision carried through 1922 with every court upholding the Commissioner of Patents' decision. This ended the use of the Stabrite/Staybrite and Lo-Kost names. Both Stabrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint are last mentioned by name in the trade press in 1925. As Stabrite could no longer be registered, after abandonment by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company the name was used by various non-railroad companies to represent a brand of paint preserver, a furniture wax, a gun grease, fluorescent lighting, and stainless steel sheeting.
Line 56:		Line 60:

	''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''		''"No-D-Ka Dentirrice Co. v. S. S. Kresce Co.," The Trade-Mark Reporter May 1928.''

			The Charles R. Long, Jr., Company was purchased by the American-Marietta Company in 1947, joining the Marietta Paint & Color Co., Sewall Paint & Varnish Co., Ottowa Paint Works, and Schorn Paint Mfg. Co. as A-M subsidiaries.

	Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:		Earl Knoob's description of original Staybrite paint from the Denver & Rio Grande Western, discovered during his tenure with the Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad:

Josh Bernard at 16:29, 17 June 2024

2024-06-17T16:29:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:29, 17 June 2024
Line 17:		Line 17:
	==Manufacturers of Locomotive Front End Paint==		==Manufacturers of Locomotive Front End Paint==

	*Charles J. Long Jr. Co. (Staybrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint): Louisville, KY.		*Charles R. Long Jr. Co. (Staybrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint): Louisville, KY.

	*Frazer Specialty Co. (Frazer Locomotive Joint and Boiler Front Cement): Detroit MI.		*Frazer Specialty Co. (Frazer Locomotive Joint and Boiler Front Cement): Detroit MI.
Line 45:		Line 45:
	==Staybrite Front End Paint==		==Staybrite Front End Paint==

	Staybrite or Stabrite Front End Paint was manufactured in Louisville, Kentucky, by the Charles J. Long Jr. Company, part of Charles Long Jr.'s conglomerate of railroad supply companies. Charles J. Long Jr. Co. also produced Lo-Kost Front End Paint, locomotive black varnish, and the Lovico brand of railroad equipment paints.		Staybrite or Stabrite Front End Paint was manufactured in Louisville, Kentucky, by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company, part of Charles Long Jr.'s conglomerate of railroad supply companies. Charles R. Long Jr. Co. also produced Lo-Kost Front End Paint, locomotive black varnish, and the Lovico brand of railroad equipment paints.

	Stabrite Front End Paint was first advertised in 1901. In 1905 application for trademark status was made. In 1918 the Ira D. Washburn Company also filed for a Stabrite trademark, and the Examiner of Trade-Mark Interferences determined that neither company was entitled to exclusive use of the names Stabrite nor Lo-Kost as "a monopoly cannot be acquired in the use of words which are merely descriptive of the character, properties, qualities or composition of an article." The ruling was that the trademark granted to the Charles J. Long Jr. Company was not the name itself, but the design of the company's herald which incorporated the name as an element. In 1919 the Howard L. Fisher Company also attempted to apply for a Stabrite trademark and being denied sued the Charles J. Long Jr. Co and lost. Appeals to the patent office decision carried through 1922 with every court upholding the Commissioner of Patents' decision. This ended the use of the Stabrite/Staybrite and Lo-Kost names. Both Stabrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint are last mentioned by name in the trade press in 1925. As Stabrite could no longer be registered, after abandonment by the Charles J. Long Jr. Company the name was used by various non-railroad companies to represent a brand of paint preserver, a furniture wax, a gun grease, fluorescent lighting, and stainless steel sheeting.		Stabrite Front End Paint was first advertised in 1901. In 1905 application for trademark status was made. In 1918 the Ira D. Washburn Company also filed for a Stabrite trademark, and the Examiner of Trade-Mark Interferences determined that neither company was entitled to exclusive use of the names Stabrite nor Lo-Kost as "a monopoly cannot be acquired in the use of words which are merely descriptive of the character, properties, qualities or composition of an article." The ruling was that the trademark granted to the Charles R. Long Jr. Company was not the name itself, but the design of the company's herald which incorporated the name as an element. In 1919 the Howard L. Fisher Company also attempted to apply for a Stabrite trademark and being denied sued the Charles R. Long Jr. Co and lost. Appeals to the patent office decision carried through 1922 with every court upholding the Commissioner of Patents' decision. This ended the use of the Stabrite/Staybrite and Lo-Kost names. Both Stabrite Front End Paint and Lo-Kost Front End Paint are last mentioned by name in the trade press in 1925. As Stabrite could no longer be registered, after abandonment by the Charles R. Long Jr. Company the name was used by various non-railroad companies to represent a brand of paint preserver, a furniture wax, a gun grease, fluorescent lighting, and stainless steel sheeting.

	''"Decisions of the Commissioner of Patents," The Trade-Mark Reporter July 1918.''		''"Decisions of the Commissioner of Patents," The Trade-Mark Reporter July 1918.''