SD70Dude That would probably provide some significant fuel savings over the older roots-blown units (GP9, GP38-2, etc) that it would replace.
That would probably provide some significant fuel savings over the older roots-blown units (GP9, GP38-2, etc) that it would replace.
A bit of a side track... A book on the Allison V1710 engine stated that a turbocharged V1710 powered Mustang would have had ~30% more range than the Merlin power Mustang as an example of how much power is being used by an crankshaft driven compressor. Note that no V1710 powered Mustangs were equipped with a turbocharger. OTOH, the turbocharger on a two cycle EMD engine doesn't buy much below run 4 or 5.
The 8-710ECO package started just around the time the ACe and M-2 came out so it would have been about the same time. I would think. Sounds like with the 8-710 it's just a new built GP22ECO. Like, wouldn't the Canadian Pacific GP20ECOs effectively be the same? Since about the only thing kept were the swinghanger bogies? Heck, 2 of the 3 4 axle repower programs they list on their site are effectively new locomotives. On that NS Tier 4 repower. I see it's using DEF. Presumably in the existing 710? I remember asking maybe a year ago or so, I asked why nobody had tried that. Apparently I just needed to wait on Norfolk Southern.
How do steerable trucks and axles work?
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
The 8-710.. V or I?
Definitely V, the only 710 engines in I configuration are the single cylinder combustion test engines. I not sure there is more than one of those.
Dave
Definitely V, the only 710 engines in I configuration are the single cylinder combustion test engines. I'm not sure there is more than one of those.
I was under the impression that the 201's were the only engines EMD made in an I configuration, and that all of the 567's, 645's and 710"s were all V's (45 degree).
GE has straight 6 and straight 8 versions of the GEVO, as I would imagine that a 90 degree V-8 wouldn't fit in most carbodies and a 45 degree V-8 would need some impressive balancing shaftsrods. The 45 degree Liberty V-12 had a bad reputation for breaking crankshafts from torsional resonances.
If I remember correctly there were inline engines that used 567 power assemblies, but they were never used in railroad applications. I seem to remember someone like Preston Cook remarking on the single-sided blower drive these used. You'd need all 'fork' rods for best longevity, or make up special big ends and bearings to use the whole available journal surface.
Be interesting to see whether the inline GEVOs just use master-rod part numbers and handle the eccentric balance considerations in 'some other ways', or if they have special symmetrical rods...
I would imagine that a 90 degree V-8 wouldn't fit in most carbodies and a 45 degree V-8 would need some impressive balancing rods.
You mean balance shafts, right? I was pretty sure the cam weights give the working effect of balance shafts on the GM-design locomotive 2-strokes without all the stuff involved in Lanchester balancing...
What was the V angle of the Baldwin 408s in the Essl modular locomotive? For some reason I remember these as 90-degree engines -- of course they were transverse, so the 'fit' was a bit more fun.
The 45 degree Liberty V-12 had a bad reputation for breaking crankshafts from torsional resonances.
Probably doesn't hold a candle to the reputed Alco 244 V-16 breakages, which I think were a resultant of torsional resonance and firing-order choice. I recall M636C discussing this with some authority a few years ago... but I have no idea how to find that thread.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.