Your friendly neighborhood CNW fan.
Lord Atmo wrote:you cant call those SD45s. just like i dont consider SD60Fs to be SD60s. the SD60 was a cool-looking machine and the SD60F is some fat, 4-eyed, nose-lit, hideous abomination. you cant just call it an SD60. there is no abbreviating these names.
But it is an SD60. It holds all the mechanical and electrical of an SD60, just a different car body design. Take the Car body off and you could place a regular SD60 body on that loco. There the same length.
As I stated before, you look at the locomotive and decide that it's not something when it is. Max is correct and I know you don't want him to be correct, but he is.
The locomotives he named off are all SD45s or the updated version of an SD45. But I state it again, They are still SD45's. As I have said before, If the SD45T-2 came before the original SD45 you would all consider it to be the SD45 and not that flared SD45.
You need to look at in different ways. Over the next 10 to 20 years or so, probably all of the SD45s will be history, and I'm talking all. SD45T-2s, and SD45-2's too.
Happy railroading
James
Lord Atmo wrote:SD60s look neat and those horrid things dont. and they have desktops. they cant be grouped. no matter HOW similar they are
I know what you mean. I agree with you, they look absolutely horrible and with the desktop, who would want to buy them? My dad calls them 4WBs ( 4 windowed Bit##) They are awful but it doesn't change what it is. Doesn't matter how ugly the car body is, it's still an SD60. I know what your thinking, but it won't change. They are under the classification of the SD60 and they are cousins to the original design.
LOOKS DONT MATTER ITS WHATS ON THE INSIDE THAT COUNTS!!!
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding wrote: Max- I've been trying to PM or E-mail you some info, but can't seem to make it work right. Can you send me an e-mail, or PM, and I'll see if I can reply to it? Thanks
Myself or Atmo?
coborn35 wrote: Lord Atmo wrote:SD60s look neat and those horrid things dont. and they have desktops. they cant be grouped. no matter HOW similar they areLOOKS DONT MATTER ITS WHATS ON THE INSIDE THAT COUNTS!!!
allan? is that you? :P
the insides matter only if you're intending to use the locomotive on a railroad. but for displays, looks mean everything. and i dont want to see a 4WB in a museum or an SD45T-2 really as much. the thing wasnt that unique.
I've ran some SD-45's before and I must say for the old technology in them they pull like crazy !
The 45's big draw back was the fuel consumption.My Dad said the C&O got rid of theirs because of this fact.
I know when I hired in on the NS in 1991 the NS no longer had the 45's.But the memories and stories about them still generate smiles on the old heads faces.Seems they all mention having a large grain train (120-150 loads) and three N&W 1700's and running the guts out of them.All of the people also mentioned they could run track speed,which was faster than todays posted speeds.
The 45's when powered by the 20 cylinder are very loud inside the cab.And I've had some that were fitted with a 16 cyl.engine and they was much more quiet to ride in.
The 20 cylinder defintely had a unique sound.
Collin ,operator of the " Eastern Kentucky & Ohio R.R."
Lord Atmo wrote:uh... quantity doesnt even determine uniqueness. THAT'S where looks come into play
Well how many locomotives do you see with big grills by the walkway?
mackb4 wrote: I've ran some SD-45's before and I must say for the old technology in them they pull like crazy ! The 45's big draw back was the fuel consumption.My Dad said the C&O got rid of theirs because of this fact. I know when I hired in on the NS in 1991 the NS no longer had the 45's.But the memories and stories about them still generate smiles on the old heads faces.Seems they all mention having a large grain train (120-150 loads) and three N&W 1700's and running the guts out of them.All of the people also mentioned they could run track speed,which was faster than todays posted speeds. The 45's when powered by the 20 cylinder are very loud inside the cab.And I've had some that were fitted with a 16 cyl.engine and they was much more quiet to ride in. The 20 cylinder defintely had a unique sound.
Ya, that 645 diesel engine puts out a sound like no other. I am glad I have movies of the locomotives. I have a couple WC movies by Pentrex, and I still enjoy watching them. One from 1988. Watching the SDL39s and SD45s working is still a treat to watch. Unfortunatly probably won't beable to see them anymore, but I have movies, and that works for me.
I have that same video, I love it, I watch it regularely, but....it just doesn't do the same as watching one of those beasts roar by in notch 8 going 8MPH up Byron hill, shaking the earth for miles around...
...Which I'm never going to see.
Go here for my rail shots! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9296
Building the CPR Kootenay division in N scale, blog here: http://kootenaymodelrailway.wordpress.com/
coborn35 wrote: Lord Atmo wrote:uh... quantity doesnt even determine uniqueness. THAT'S where looks come into playWell how many locomotives do you see with big grills by the walkway?
GP15-1s and SD40T-2s, including the ones with SD45T-2 bodies
how many mass produced diesels have the same flared radiators as the SD45? (mass produced meaning those GP40Xs etc dont count, as the SD45 WAS mass produced. as were all 3 tunnel motor units)