| From the 1880s through the 1930s, Ohio was a leading center of transit vehicle manufacture. Buses, streetcars, interurbans, subway and elevated cars, and their components were produced by nationally recognized Ohio-based firms. By the late 1930s, the bus manufacturers were prospering, but only a handful of streetcar component manufacturers were still active, despite the fact that a market for both vehicles remained in place.; How makers of one group of transit vehicles were able to thrive during this period while another could not forms a major part of this study. I argue that despite the momentum developed by the street railway industry as it developed during the late nineteenth century, streetcar builders failed to develop significant improvements for their vehicles between 1900 and 1930. Only after manufacturers and surviving railways banded together in the throes of the Great Depression was the industry able to produce a standardized, state-of-the-art streetcar.; I argue that the bus industry, on the other hand, was driven by progressive momentum throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Despite a lack of unity among bus manufacturers, the efforts of individual firms succeeded in making significant improvements to the bus as a transit vehicle.; In interpreting the origin of the transit industry and the manufacture of transit vehicles in such a large geographic area as Ohio, I rely in part upon systems development theory as described by Thomas Parke Hughes, and industrial location theory. From the latter, I draw upon classical location theory, which concerns itself with the efforts of individual firms to find the best possible location for their operations, and central place theory which explores the factors that lead certain cities and regions to gain economic prominence over others. The manufacture of buses and streetcars in Ohio provides an excellent opportunity to explore the strengths and weaknesses of such theories. |
