Trains.com

Interesting information on GE Evolution Series

5703 views
16 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Poulsbo, WA
  • 429 posts
Posted by creepycrank on Monday, July 13, 2009 1:09 PM
schlimm

 What's a typical price for the new GE vs the EMD models?

In the GM era EMD locomotives were historicaly more expensive than GE and GE offers one stop shopping for financing as well. Many years ago EMD lost an order for 100 locomotive from Conrail because they were $1000 each higher than GE's bid. I also heard a rumor that even even some EMD's were financed through GE. It was about this time that GMAC broaden there market into capital goods. As far as the report on fuel consumption I noted that the test were run in presumably cold weather and if you fiddle with the cooling fan temperature control switches you can get at 6% improvement by increasing the jacket water temperature from 150 deg to 190 deg. Alright railroad guys its time to place your bets.
Revision 1: Adds this new piece Revision 2: Improves it Revision 3: Makes it just right Revision 4: Removes it.
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 2, 2009 10:19 PM

 What's a typical price for the new GE vs the EMD models?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 803 posts
Posted by GP40-2 on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 8:39 PM
M636C

Some notes from the EMD Power Products Brochure currently on their website.

"Fuel Injectors - Electronic Unit Injectors - needle valve"

"Since EMD is the only medium speed two cycle diesel engine manufacturer in the world, we are the experts. The fact is that the EMD 710 family has been Tier 2 certified since January 2005. EMD received our EPA Tier 2 certification in May 2006. So how did we do it? Common rail fuel injection, adding another turbocharger, new electronic controls? No none of these were required,,,"

 M636C

Translation: "Since we are now owned by a cheapskate investment firm, we don't have any R&D money to update our outdated technology. However, that won't stop our Marketing Department from trying to sell it."
  • Member since
    August 2006
  • 624 posts
Posted by fredswain on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 2:01 PM

Does anyone know which engine is more reliable, the SD70ACe or the GEVO? I'd be curious to see which one on average costs more to service and/or repair.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:38 PM

All of that fancy mumbo-jumbo and they still take forever to load up. Just another bean counter loco.

.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:13 PM

carnej1

 ... the fact that the GEVOS have four fewer cyinders than an EMD 16-710 is def. a factor. That is a major difference...

...that is almost meaningless in terms of BSFB (engine fuel efficiency).

It's the engine's BMEP (compression ratio + boost, sort of) that's important!

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:01 AM

edbenton

I know GE uses a Individual metered Injecter for each Cylinder.  Emd still uses a Common rail setup with a Mechaincal linkage to the Governoer.  GE has had Electroncis controling the Fuel Injectioon since the Dash-9's.  When each piston gets the perfect amount of fuel not any extra makes a differance.   Also there are a few other things on the EVO,s that are way out there when the computer looks at the demands from the Engineer and then the power needed from the Prime mover to decide if it needs to increase the fuel flow that is why GE loads slower put while it is doing that it is pouring the amps if possible to the TM's

Some notes from the EMD Power Products Brochure currently on their website.

"Fuel Injectors - Electronic Unit Injectors - needle valve"

"Since EMD is the only medium speed two cycle diesel engine manufacturer in the world, we are the experts. The fact is that the EMD 710 family has been Tier 2 certified since January 2005. EMD received our EPA Tier 2 certification in May 2006. So how did we do it? Common rail fuel injection, adding another turbocharger, new electronic controls? No none of these were required,,,"

 M636C

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:32 PM

I know GE uses a Individual metered Injecter for each Cylinder.  Emd still uses a Common rail setup with a Mechaincal linkage to the Governoer.  GE has had Electroncis controling the Fuel Injectioon since the Dash-9's.  When each piston gets the perfect amount of fuel not any extra makes a differance.   Also there are a few other things on the EVO,s that are way out there when the computer looks at the demands from the Engineer and then the power needed from the Prime mover to decide if it needs to increase the fuel flow that is why GE loads slower put while it is doing that it is pouring the amps if possible to the TM's

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:04 PM

What are those differences? Is the 6 individual inverters vs 2 on EMD?. Or is other items and how would all these items is be a factor in electric motors?

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 803 posts
Posted by GP40-2 on Saturday, June 20, 2009 1:55 PM
In addition to prime mover differences, GEVOs have more advanced electrical transmission systems. For a given engine horsepower output, GEs put a higher percentage of that power down to the rail. This also helps in overall fuel efficiency.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Saturday, June 20, 2009 8:31 AM

3 things are different and make the Differance in the GE over the EMD prime Movers.  One is the Turbocharger arrangnement.  A clutch driven turbo/supercharger is a FUEL HOG til the motor is spinning fast enough to overrunnig the clutch.  Second is the Air to Air Intercooler When you cool the charge of air that is feeding the cylinders you get a more complete burn and better more efficent motors also.  Lastly a 4 stroke is plain and simple more efficant over a 2 storke design.  The Piston is still going down when it uncovers the intake ports and the exhaust valves open dumping out any cahnce the 710 had to catch the EVO series at all.

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Mesa, AZ
  • 778 posts
Posted by silicon212 on Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:26 AM

Keep in mind that the EMD has twice as many firing events as the GEVO does due to it being a two stroke engine ... but as it is, that's still pretty good.  The GEVO engine has a higher top speed in RPM.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, June 19, 2009 8:32 PM

carnej1

BaltACD

trainfan1221

I'm sure GE is enjoying it.  I would maybe guess the fuel economy has to do with the 12 cylinder engine.

Without knowing any specifics of either design, I am certain that the different consumption rates are the result of myriad of very subtle design and engineering differences between the prime movers, as well as the accessories that are necessary for line of road operation.

From the outside looking in, we would like to ascribe the differences to one or two specific things....the reality always goes to dozens if not hundreds of little things, that when all added together result in a much bigger difference.

 ... the fact that the GEVOS have four fewer cyinders than an EMD 16-710 is def. a factor. That is a major difference...

Off of the information I have been able to find there is very little displacement difference betwee the 12 cyl EVO and the 16 cyl 710 that EMD is using

EVO 9.84 in. bore x 12.59 in. stroke x 12 cyl = 11397.87 cu.in.

710 9.02 in. bore x 11 in. stroke x 16 cyl = 11246.45 cu.in

in theory, more cubic inches should consume more fuel.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Friday, June 19, 2009 11:35 AM

BaltACD

trainfan1221

I'm sure GE is enjoying it.  I would maybe guess the fuel economy has to do with the 12 cylinder engine.

Without knowing any specifics of either design, I am certain that the different consumption rates are the result of myriad of very subtle design and engineering differences between the prime movers, as well as the accessories that are necessary for line of road operation.

From the outside looking in, we would like to ascribe the differences to one or two specific things....the reality always goes to dozens if not hundreds of little things, that when all added together result in a much bigger difference.

 ... the fact that the GEVOS have four fewer cyinders than an EMD 16-710 is def. a factor. That is a major difference...

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:25 PM

trainfan1221

I'm sure GE is enjoying it.  I would maybe guess the fuel economy has to do with the 12 cylinder engine.

Without knowing any specifics of either design, I am certain that the different consumption rates are the result of myriad of very subtle design and engineering differences between the prime movers, as well as the accessories that are necessary for line of road operation.

From the outside looking in, we would like to ascribe the differences to one or two specific things....the reality always goes to dozens if not hundreds of little things, that when all added together result in a much bigger difference.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Elmwood Park, NJ
  • 2,385 posts
Posted by trainfan1221 on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:30 PM

I'm sure GE is enjoying it.  I would maybe guess the fuel economy has to do with the 12 cylinder engine.

  • Member since
    August 2007
  • 85 posts
Interesting information on GE Evolution Series
Posted by WSORatSussex on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:00 PM

I thought this might be of interest to some of you:

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/GEs-Evolution-Series-bw-15551743.html?.v=2

Ed

Regards, Ed

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy