EMD SD45 series official thread (covers all variations)

Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.

Moderator: GOLDEN-ARM

EMD SD45 series official thread (covers all variations)

Postby TerryC » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:07 pm

What problems did the SD40-2Fs and SD50Fs when they were deliver to Canadian Pacific and Canadian National? Are the SD50Fs rated at 3,200hp or 3,500hp? Will Canadian Pacific and Canadian National retire their SD40-2Fs, SD50Fs and SD60Fs in the near future?

http://trainiaxindex.cjb.net
Keep searching keep finding
TerryC
 

Postby Railpac » Thu Jul 22, 2004 9:53 pm

SD50Fs are rated at 3,500 hp from a 16-645F
Railpac
 

Postby missthealcos » Thu Jul 22, 2004 11:43 pm

I would imagine they will all be around for a long time to come. The major problems were with the 25 CP SD40-2F's, all were returned to GMD, or not accepted to begin with, to have serious issues dealt with. If I recall correctly, crankshft and turbo issues were top of the list.
missthealcos
 

Postby Engineer Spike » Mon Aug 02, 2004 3:38 pm

Do I remember correctly that EMD had a contractor build the engines for the CP units, since the 710 was in production by that time? I remember that CP was still stuck on the -2 line, long after the 60 series came out. I think that they twisted EMD's arm to build them. After this CP had MK build more SD40-2's from some 45's. They also bought the used ones, especially when they bought the D&H.
Engineer Spike
 
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:24 pm

Postby missthealcos » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:19 pm

CP essentially skipped the "3rd generation" entirely...at that time(or always until the last few years), their motive power philosophy was "stick with what you know, and make it run forever", which was great for railfans. Other than the Soo SD60's, and now the MAC's, there were no 710's on CP to speak of, Just 567's 645's, and 251's
missthealcos
 

Postby trainmaster_1 » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:21 pm

Well it comes to show ya that CP did really love their SD40-2's alot that they wanted more because they were so reliable. Besides CP didn't want to get more locomotives and for being a small Class 1 railway 3,000 hp was standard for them on the mainlines.

And CP did get more in regards to MK rebuilding a couple to SD40-2 specs but put the M for modified so they were SD40M-2's some still in the SD45 carbody. They also bought a couple of SD40-2's "High nose" from Norfolk Southern but they converted them to trailing service only (SD40-2B's) but now they are in hump service in Toronto Yard.

The SD40-2F's did have problems with the turbos and the engine so they had to be recalled before CP would use them but they are working fine now.

Comes to show you 30+ years of service the SD40-2's have been around a long time and they are too reliable to scrap. I figure that railroads are getting lazy with their maintaince and let units like these slip away for newer power, infact you can get the 16-645E3 prime mover rebuilt and remanufactured to meet Tier 2 specs.
trainmaster_1
 

Postby RdHseRat » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:17 pm

The CP took delivery of the 645 powered units at the same time the Soo was taking delivery of SD60's. EMD had stopped building 645's but CP insisted on having their units equipped with 645's. EMD obliged. But corporate amnesia had set in with the 645. (Most if not all of the people that had designed and solved the 645 problems had retired from EMD.) EMD used the basic plans for the CP 645's, less all of the modifications that had been made. Thus the CP ended up with the same problems that EMD had suffered with during the infancy of the engine.

The CP at that time was also having problems with broken axles on their SD40-2 fleet.
RdHseRat
 

Postby AmtrakFan » Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:30 am

CP loved their SD40-2F you can see that. Soo did take 5 SD60M's. Also I think the SD40-2's will be around until the World Ends.

AmtrakFan
AmtrakFan
 

Postby Engineer Spike » Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:18 pm

I am no fan of the CP9000 seriea, nor any of the CN carbody units. They are uncomfortable to run. The carbody retains heat in the summer. The desk type of controls suck on long runs. I like a regular SD40-2. I had CP5578-79 the other day. These units are 32 years old, running just as London and La Grange intended.
Engineer Spike
 
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:24 pm

Postby trainmaster_1 » Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:37 pm

I still see alot of CP's SD40-2's running around alot in my neck of the woods here in Toronto, most of them have been assigned to specific freights.....Xpressway is one of them and the usual 3 SD40-2 lash up is awesome to see......to bad for the GE's that were on the Xpressway Train the other day, poor suckers broke down and they got the SD40-2's in there to lift them out I'm guessing they dropped the GE's off in Toronto Yard but heck I bet CP was embarassed like hell. Anyways a couple of manifests, autos and some intermodals get some SD40-2's in there and the T22 transfer has them too so there still useful to have around when the GE's break down. Never the less the SD40-2's have lasted much longer than the old GE's have on most major class 1 railways.
trainmaster_1
 

Postby missthealcos » Tue Aug 17, 2004 9:55 pm

Unfortunatley, I don't think they will be around forever, at least on CP. As far as I can tell, they stopped overhauling them quite a while ago...I'd be glad if someone proved me wrong, but has anyone seen one in fresh paint recently? They have already sold/retired, and even scrapped quite a few, which one would have thought they would never do, given the love affair they have had with them for pushing 4 decades. The ones I see in the west, all too infrequently now I might add, are pretty rough for the most part. They were THE power for so long, many years after being bumped from that position on most other railways, and have been worked very hard for many years(in true CP style), They are probably getting quite worn out now. Even then though, I still believe CP will one day regret the switch to GE, There is no way they are going to last 30+ years.
missthealcos
 

F45 rebuilds

Postby TerryC » Sun Aug 29, 2004 11:22 am

I heard from Trains Magazine that a commuter agency rebuild some F40PHs with 710 prime movers. Did the primemovers come from Union Pacific GP60s? Is it sensible or practical to rebuild a F45 with a 710 primemover rated at 3,800 horsepower?

http://trainiaxindex.cjb.net/
Keep searching, keep finding
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=1586
TerryC
 

Postby trainmaster_1 » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:58 am

Upon reading that article in my September Issue of Trains, Metrolink operates F59PH's and F59PHI's but they have bought 4 former Amtrak F40PH's from the deadline in Beech Grove Ind. to provide that they would have a 710 engine was from 4 traded-in EMD SD60's. The Idea is to take out the 645 Engine and Alternator and stuff a 710 Engine and Alternator and by lengthing the frame to accomodate the engine and putting new state of the art technology in them but still have enough space to put in the HEP pack in the back. The other 2 SD60's that were part of the donator transplant would get the 645 components inside themand operate them in work-train service. The other 2 SD60's would be scrapped .

Another strategy was to keep the F40PH's with their 645 prime movers and rebuild them to like-new from and adding a retrofit kit from after market companies that will bring the 645 Engine to Tier 2 compliance.

TerryC wrote:Is it sensible or practical to rebuild a F45 with a 710 primemover rated at 3,800 horsepower?


It's practical to rebuild a F45 with a 710 prime mover but the railroads wouldn't bother it because you would have to lengthen the frame a bit to accomodate a bigger engine and most of the things would have to be updated or replaced to handle the 710 engine, if you remember the SD45's some of them had been rebuilt to SD40-2 spec's with the 16-645 Prime Movers, the reason for this is because of fuel consumption and that railroads never trusted anything over 16 cylinders because of failure rates (or risk's), but the 20-645 Engine was a bit more efficient than the 16-645 but the railroads never caught on except for some that still had some SD45 and SD45-2's still in use with the original 20-645E3 engine in it. But still EMD made one of the best locomotive in the 70's and early 80's that the railroads like.
trainmaster_1
 

Postby TerryC » Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:32 pm

If the unit was a FP45 with no steam generator, would the frame still have to lengthened.
http://trainiaxindex.cjb.net
Keep searching keep finding
TerryC
 

Postby crazy_nip » Tue Aug 31, 2004 5:04 pm

TerryC wrote:If the unit was a FP45 with no steam generator, would the frame still have to lengthened.
http://trainiaxindex.cjb.net
Keep searching keep finding


there werent any, there are none left (outside of museams), so it really doesnt matter...
crazy_nip
 

Next

Return to EMD - Electro-Motive

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests