Lookin' good!
Didn't know furlow was a verb 
Otto K.
We kid, but when I was young and Furlow was writing (along with Olson) I thought his stuff was the shizzy. I ruined many an HO car back then with thick globs of paint and soldering-iron dents (even managed to swayback an Overton coach roof) in the name of "weathering." Later when I really started to learn more about the real narrow gauge in Colorado, I began to realize it bore little to no resemblance to what Furlow had been doing. The D&RGW, C&S, and perhaps to a lesser extent the RGS--even in their waning years--generally kept good care of their equipment. Why? These were working railroads with the same safety concerns that any other railroad had. And trestlework tended to be over-engineered and of a standard design, with a surprising number of steel bridges built to mainline standards.
As for the CMRy in 1905, it was perhaps slightly past its prime, but by all photographic evidence it was still taking meticulous care of its equipment and lineside structures. Its right-of-way on the other hand had not been improved much beyond its original 1880s construction and so light rail and dirt/cinder ballast still seemed to be the rule. I'm probably ballasting my track more methodically than the real Midland did...perhaps that's a legacy of being a PRR modeler?
