A side note to the CP SD40-2F story...
As the SD40-2 was the backbone of CP's locomotive fleet, when it came time to purchase new units, CP approached EMD about building another group of SD40's. Since the SD40-2 was an out of production model at the time, CP and EMD worked out a deal to build the SD40-2F. EMD really didn't want to build them, and tried to convince CP to purchase a current 710-equipped model. CP wanted to stay with the proven 645 engine, since that model was already supported by their mechanical department. The 25 units were built as SD40-2F's, and delivered to CP.
Upon delivery, EVERY UNIT of the 25 unit order suffered one form of failure or another. Shortly after their arrival, every unit was out of service at CP's Winnepeg, MB shop. EMD and CP worked feverishly to get the units working, and they kept failing. Over time, the units became roadworthy. CP was very upset, EMD blamed their suppliers, and the crews hated the things.
It's generally accepted that the SD40-2F debacle was the reason CP became a strong GE customer when it came time to renew their mainline locomotive fleet. CP did sample the SD90MAC, but that also flopped. EMD's use of two inverters (as opposed to GE's six) resulted in SD90MAC's becoming worthless during a road failure. Whereas a GE C44AC would lose a single traction motor, SD90MAC's would lose 3; an entire truck. Another epic failure for EMD.
So, the SD40-2F was the "beginning of the end" for EMD as far as CP was concerned. A proven design was somehow botched, and subsequent models (SD90MAC) didn't live up to the customer's expectations.
"If I don't have it, or can't get it, neither should YOU." - America today.