Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
To be more specific, the GP-38 has a "non turbocharged" 16 cylinder 645 series engine, while the GP-39 has a Turbocharged 12 cylinder 645. The 38 has 2000 horsepower, while the 39 has 2300 HP. Now, to anticipate your next question, I would prefer the GP-38 over the 39. The reason is maintenance costs. The 39 was proven to have a little bit better fuel mileage, but that really depends on the application. The added maintenance of the EMD turbocharger will offset these costs in most applications. One notable exception however, is the GP-35. Aside from the electrical nightmare of these units, they are very efficient compared with other locomotives of similar vintage. <br /> If you want to hear about a REALLY fuel miser though, the ALCO 539 switchers can't be beat. Sure, lots of smoke when they load up, but when idling, (as most locos do 85% of the time) they are almost as efficient as a sub compact car. <br /> Of course i'm also using the weight to horsepower ratio to support these claims... <br /> <br /> Todd C.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag