GMTX 2081

Word has it that Pan Am has bought GP38 GATX 2081. It last served on the New York and Atlantic. It was shipped out yesterday to Rotterdam Jct. for interchange to Pan Am. Any ideas?

No useful ideas on this topic, but...
A GP38...like the GP9s are supercharged lending themselves better to yard work than the GP40s.
And since the GP9s are painted in heritage paint....it would only make sense to paint the GP38 in B&M blue!

PAR has been going contract work for GMTX, so I suspect this unit is headed to Waterville for that.
Whether it roams PAR as a lease unit like the other three GMTX units remains to be seen.

D

According to the freight billing, it is a flat out purchase from GATX.

Hi Folks,

I spotted GMTX 2081 in the consist of SEPO (Selkirk, NY- Portland, ME) early this morning 5/20. Observed in Ayer, MA from MBCR's inbound Train #408. It was behind SEPO's usual CSXT power. There was also an ex-BNSF leaser in there. Unfortunately, I only observed it from a distance- it is getting harder to see these days with leaves and brush obstructing the view of the Hill Yard and Ayer Wye. When I saw it, I thought to myself, "hmmm.. that looks like an IAIS unit. Possible, but not likely." Then I saw this thread and it makes total sense.

Thanks and have a great day..

-Mike

It is in IAIS paint. When it left NY&A, I was wondering who would buy a 1966 gp38. I should have guessed Pan Am.

DogBert wrote:It is in IAIS paint. When it left NY&A, I was wondering who would buy a 1966 gp38. I should have guessed Pan Am.

I wonder if they bought it for parts? Is there alot of parts commonality between a GP38 and their GP40's/SD40s of roughly the same vintage?

-Mike

DogBert wrote:It is in IAIS paint. When it left NY&A, I was wondering who would buy a 1966 gp38. I should have guessed Pan Am.

It has not been purchased by PAR to my knowledge. I believe it is going to Waterville for contract work and paint.

mdamico23 wrote:

DogBert wrote:It is in IAIS paint. When it left NY&A, I was wondering who would buy a 1966 gp38. I should have guessed Pan Am.

I wonder if they bought it for parts? Is there alot of parts commonality between a GP38 and their GP40's/SD40s of roughly the same vintage?

-Mike

Besides the lower horsepower, no turbocharger, and whatever associated differences come with that, they're pretty much exactly the same.

690 wrote:

mdamico23 wrote:Is there alot of parts commonality between a GP38 and their GP40's/SD40s of roughly the same vintage?

Besides the lower horsepower, no turbocharger, and whatever associated differences come with that, they're pretty much exactly the same.

The problem, if you will, is that they have increasingly few locomotives of "roughly the same vintage." Slowly but surely, post-1972 (Dash 2) locomotives are starting to dominate the roster. Electrically they are much more reliable and much easier to maintain. I think we sometimes have a tendency to forget that these aren't just diesel locomotives, they're diesel-electric locomotives, and it's often the electric side that creates the most problems, especially in pre-1972 locomotives. If PAR is leasing this locomotive (as opposed to doing contract work for GATX), they must be pretty desperate for four-axle power. I also suspect that lease rates on a '66 GP38 would be a bit lower than a '72+ GP38-2, so that might have something to do with it as well.

Going back to the original question of "Is there a lot of parts commonality," the answer is that there is some, but not a lot. A '66 GP38 will have some basic mechanical things in common with a '66-'68 GP40 (such as using the same power assemblies and traction motors), but they're far from identical, especially electrically. The GP40 has a more complex electrical system, and it uses an AR10 alternator (as opposed to a D32 generator in the GP38). EMD switched the GP38-2 to an AR10 alternator in 1972, so a GP38-2 would actually have slightly more in common with a GP40 than a GP38 does.

Likewise, the GP38 will have very little in common with PAR's 1972+ GP40-2s and SD40-2s, aside from the aforementioned power assembly and traction motor (D77/D78) compatibility; everything else on the electrical side is totally different.

If PAR is leasing this unit and they decide to buy it after the lease is up, they'd be wise to rebuild it to Dash 2 specs. Yes, it's an up-front cost and it would take the unit out of service for a while... but the increase in reliability, maintainability, compatibility, performance, and even a slight bump in fuel economy would be worth it. Let's face it, there's a reason why all but the smallest railroads will no longer touch anything pre-Dash 2, and there's a reason why so many GP38s and GP40s have been rebuilt to GP38-2/GP40-2 specs. Railroads don't do that just for fun!

2081 is still at the Waterville Shops, according to posts on GuilfordRailSightings.

Do we know that this unit never received any Dash 2 upgrades? I haven't gone digging that far, but looking at the pictures it has received some newer equipment during it's life. The trucks are a later Blomberg model that I don't think it would have been delivered with. It has single clasp brakes, rubber pads replacing the central spring, and shocks on an axle. Just wondering. Thanks-

Good question. It's certainly possible that it was upgraded/rebuilt to Dash 2 specs at some point during its 47 year life. Hard to know for sure without seeing what's in the electrical cabinet.

So what is the latest with 2081, still in the shops, or roaming the system?

This photo, taken on November 3, includes a caption which states that the unit was at Danville Junction awaiting pickup by St. Lawrence & Atlantic.