Trains.com

Why So Few Chrome Diesels?

14667 views
33 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Anywhere there are trains
  • 578 posts
Posted by Train Guy 3 on Tuesday, May 22, 2012 4:40 PM

BaltACD

 Train Guy 3:

Stainless Steel is just a very difficult matterial to work with and to weld. I have had very limited experience with the metal in the automotive world but the times I have worked with it were not pleasant. For the uses of stainless steel I guess it does justify the price but for larger scale use of stainless and the tools for upkeep it are just not economical.

Unless it's a DeLorean DMC-12 I really have no desire to work with stainless steel.

 

Exhaust systems on virtually all motor vehicles manufactured at the present time are built from stainless materials - so they can meet (and exceed) the 50K mile longevity of the emissions requirements.  My daily driver has 228K on the orignal exhaust system. 

That's very true about many new exhast systems. I have instaled a few Borla systems for guys road racing thier Corvettes, 3000GTs, ect. The lucky part about exhast systems are most pieces and parts come prefabricated ( thank God) and can be clamped on. Until recently we had an opperating machine to build an exhast system from the exhast manifold back. I love being about to build your own stuff.

And welcome to the 200K plus club! Nothing like keeping a high mileage vehicle going.

TG3 LOOK ! LISTEN ! LIVE ! Remember the 3.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, May 22, 2012 3:55 PM

Train Guy 3

Stainless Steel is just a very difficult matterial to work with and to weld. I have had very limited experience with the metal in the automotive world but the times I have worked with it were not pleasant. For the uses of stainless steel I guess it does justify the price but for larger scale use of stainless and the tools for upkeep it are just not economical.

Unless it's a DeLorean DMC-12 I really have no desire to work with stainless steel.

Exhaust systems on virtually all motor vehicles manufactured at the present time are built from stainless materials - so they can meet (and exceed) the 50K mile longevity of the emissions requirements.  My daily driver has 228K on the orignal exhaust system. 

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, May 22, 2012 6:53 AM

Train Guy 3

Unless it's a DeLorean DMC-12 I really have no desire to work with stainless steel.

You made a time machine out of a DeLorean???Laugh

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Anywhere there are trains
  • 578 posts
Posted by Train Guy 3 on Monday, May 21, 2012 10:48 PM

Stainless Steel is just a very difficult matterial to work with and to weld. I have had very limited experience with the metal in the automotive world but the times I have worked with it were not pleasant. For the uses of stainless steel I guess it does justify the price but for larger scale use of stainless and the tools for upkeep it are just not economical.

Unless it's a DeLorean DMC-12 I really have no desire to work with stainless steel.

TG3 LOOK ! LISTEN ! LIVE ! Remember the 3.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Sunday, May 13, 2012 1:41 AM

MidlandMike

The U30GC's had fluted sides.

http://atsf.railfan.net/cowls/u30cg.html

Wikipedia says they were stainless steel, but their reference was a print article not available by link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_U30CG

If you look at the first two photographs on the ATSF Railfan site linked above, it is clear that by comparing the silver on the U30CGs with the stainless steel baggage car coupled behind, it is clear that the U30CGs are painted silver, not stainless steel, despite the fluting.

M636C 

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, May 11, 2012 10:03 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

 

 guetem1:

 

Didn't the Santa Fe have some GE's (U-30c's I think) purchased around the same time as the SDP-45's with stainless steel sheeting

 

 

The ATSF U30CG's and FP45's had carbon steel sheeting with paint.  The U30CG's in later years were painted in freight blue and yellow.

The U30GC's had fluted sides.

http://atsf.railfan.net/cowls/u30cg.html

Wikipedia says they were stainless steel, but their reference was a print article not available by link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GE_U30CG

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, May 11, 2012 10:04 AM

guetem1

Didn't the Santa Fe have some GE's (U-30c's I think) purchased around the same time as the SDP-45's with stainless steel sheeting

The ATSF U30CG's and FP45's had carbon steel sheeting with paint.  The U30CG's in later years were painted in freight blue and yellow.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    October 2010
  • From: Centennial, CO
  • 3,218 posts
Posted by Stourbridge Lion on Friday, May 11, 2012 8:39 AM

guetem1 - Welcome to trains.com! Cowboy

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 116 posts
Posted by guetem1 on Friday, May 11, 2012 5:44 AM

Didn't the Santa Fe have some GE's (U-30c's I think) purchased around the same time as the SDP-45's with stainless steel sheeting

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, May 5, 2012 3:55 PM

ISTR the 'stainless' being on some of the F *B* units -- the A units having conventional paint.

 

I'd expected more specifics in the thread by now; we just had someone mention 'yellowbonnets' with maintenance woes between dissimilar metals, but were any of the 'special' B-units given the freight paint?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vicksburg, Michigan
  • 2,303 posts
Posted by Andrew Falconer on Thursday, April 26, 2012 10:43 PM

They could try Resin Coated Steel to deal with the rust.

Andrew

Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, April 26, 2012 6:43 PM

Andrew Falconer

Stainless steel is very durable, so why not built the entire frame and body out of it?

Andrew Falconer

If it was your money and maintenance expense, the question would NEVER have been broached.Mischief

Santa Fe and others had huge problems with the rivet fastenings between the stainless and the carbon steel. It may not rust, but it does corrode. Santa Fe saw some ugly things on the old F-Unit yellow bonnets at the end of their careers (just prior to the CF7 program)

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, April 26, 2012 10:04 AM

Andrew Falconer

Stainless steel is very durable, so why not built the entire frame and body out of it?

Andrew Falconer

You would if the benefit outweighed the cost.  For "Amtrak-style" passenger cars, were technology doesn't make the car body obsolete for 50+ years, stainless is a good choice.  For freight locomotives where the lifespan is in the 15-30 year range, less so.  As long as you can keep the paint on the steel, you won't have too many rust issues.  

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

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:43 AM

How many SD7Aces or GEVO44's are you going to sell at 10 MILLION a pop.  My boss that had those Stainless Steel Reefers in 1997 paid 50K just for the Trailer in 1997 he could have gotten a Normal Aluminum Skinned trailer with the Same Specs for 30K.  He paid 20K more to have that Stainless outside.  That was without the Reefer Unint in the Nose of the Trailer.

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:57 PM

Andrew Falconer

Stainless steel is very durable, so why not built the entire frame and body out of it?

Andrew Falconer

The commodity price of stainless steel is about 5 times that of regular steel.  And as other posts have pointed out, it's very hard to work with.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vicksburg, Michigan
  • 2,303 posts
Posted by Andrew Falconer on Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:42 PM

Stainless steel is very durable, so why not built the entire frame and body out of it?

Andrew Falconer

Andrew

Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 277 posts
Posted by Thomas 9011 on Sunday, April 22, 2012 10:24 PM

I used to work with stainless steel and aluminum quite a bit when I was a reefer mechanic and I also used to overhaul passenger cars for private railroads. Stainless steel has just as many advantages as it does disadvantages. The great thing about stainless steel is that it will rarely if ever corrode because it is made mostly out of nickel instead of iron. You don't have to paint it and it will never flake off. It is also some very tough metal. I consider stainless a very low maintenance type of metal.

The disadvantages of stainless steel with railroad cars are many. Kids throw rocks at passenger cars and they get dinged up over time leaving many small dents in the stainless. Normally with steel you could put bondo over it, sand it, and paint it. Or you could try to pound the dent out from the other side if that is possible. As a last resort for large dents you would have to cut out a section, and then weld a new piece in the section and grind the welds flush.

Trying to pound out dents in stainless(especially small dents) is nearly impossible because stainless does not compress and stretch easily. You can't put bondo over the dent because that would show pink. Your really only left with two choices and that is to either fill the dent up with weld and try to sand it flush, or to section the dent out with a new piece and grind down the welds.

As stated earlier stainless is a pain to paint because it is totally smooth and not porous like metal is and the paint tends to run easily. It's very tough to drill often dulling a drill bit in a few seconds. It is actually very easy to weld though. Cutting stainless and grinding stainless is actually a major health hazard because it can sit in your lungs forever with out breaking down due to it's resistance to corrosion and acids.

Even though stainless steel is very expensive I don't think the railroads didn't produce many locomotives for that reason. I think the main reasons they didn't use stainless is because they couldn't paint them in the railroads colors and it was more less a unknown locomotive to the general public. I also think the glare from the sun reflecting off all that steel would be hard on the engineers to put up with especially on the nose.

 

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack
  • 2,011 posts
Posted by edbenton on Sunday, April 22, 2012 9:49 AM

Why no Stainless Steel Locomotives it is Very Simple it is a PAIN IN THE BUTT to repair.  Ever had to remove a panel of it to repair it or WELD it forget it.  I would rather Sandpaper the rearend of a Rabid Wolverine in a Phonebooth than ever try Welding that stuff again.  One boss I worked for had a few SS Reefer Trailers oh they were SHINY but man if they got damaged the Launguage that came out of the Shops well it turned the air BLUE.  Stainless will not Rust but it is harder than heck to repair.  The Chomruim used in it makes it a very hard metal.

Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Saturday, April 21, 2012 7:03 PM

The F40C preceded F40PH.

The standard passenger power was F-units in the mountains, E-units on the plains.  The E-unit was developed as a passenger locomotive whereas the F-unit was and adaptation of a freight unit that had more of its weight on powered axles.  As these units aged, they were replaced by 2nd-generation Diesels, but the number of 2nd-gen passenger units were few and far between because railroad company passenger service was dying in that time period. 

The replacement philosophy was based on "unit replacement" from freight operations, where a 3000-3600 HP unit on C trucks could replace a pair of 1500 HP F-units on B trucks.  Hence you saw the SDP35 for Seaboard, SDP45s on SP and Great Northern, the FP-45's on Milwaukee Road, and U28CH and U30CH supplementing FP-45's on Sante Fe.  Commuter orders such as the U34CH on New Jersey Transit and the F40C on the Milwaukee Road Chicago commuter service were a little bit later.

Then Amtrak made this mass purchase of the SDP40F locomotives to replace the aging F and E-units it inherited when it took over the passenger network.  For some reason not fully explained, these things started jumping the tracks on mainline curves.  It may have had nothing to do with the C trucks and everything to do with body-mounted water tanks for the then steam generators for train heat and the water sloshing in the tanks, setting up a rhythm that synchronized with truck hunting or body sway at the speeds some curves were taken.

The SDP40F's got traded in en-masse on the F40PH's, the "Locomotive that saved Amtrak" according to a recent Trains article, commuter agencies picked up on ordering B-trucked F40PH's, and now you know The Rest of the Story. 

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • 31 posts
Posted by boct8418 on Saturday, April 21, 2012 3:10 PM

Why the F40c instead of F40PH on the the MILW Line?

 

Thanks,

Rich

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, April 20, 2012 7:49 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Curious that it seems like they are using Coleman RV style air conditioning units mounted on top of the cab?

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, April 20, 2012 4:17 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH, thanks for the F40C pix.  I read in a railroad.net post that the stainless steel side panels were the idea of a couple of board members of the commuter agency who were also members of the Illinois Railroad Museum, home of the ex-CB&Q E5.

I also remembered that the AT&SF had stainless steel E units:

http://books.google.com/books?id=lBKFXZC-_ZYC&pg=PA113&lpg=PA113&dq=santa+fe+diesel+stainless&source=bl&ots=7pQcxb1_uf&sig=TLYjWULfeWzk3R4FDCkIwGNniF

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, April 20, 2012 2:01 PM
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, April 19, 2012 6:47 PM

DwightBranch

I recall reading that operating museums (the kind that repair their own cars with volunteer labor) are not fond of stainless steel cars because some at least have a gap between the outer stainless steel facade and the inner steel carbody where moisture can pool and cause hidden rust damage. And working on those cares is tough as one can imagine, it would be very difficult to make it look right if you had to take off the stainless steel shell, fix the rust, and then put it back together.

What you are describing is a characteristic of  Pullman-Standard manufactured cars - they had stainless steel sheathing below the window line -  being sheathing, it accumulated moisture between it and the regular steel side of the car - many of these cars had serious rust problems during their lifetime and many had the stainless sheathing removed.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2012
  • 493 posts
Posted by DwightBranch on Thursday, April 19, 2012 2:34 PM

I recall reading that operating museums (the kind that repair their own cars with volunteer labor) are not fond of stainless steel cars because some at least have a gap between the outer stainless steel facade and the inner steel carbody where moisture can pool and cause hidden rust damage. And working on those cares is tough as one can imagine, it would be very difficult to make it look right if you had to take off the stainless steel shell, fix the rust, and then put it back together.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Thursday, April 19, 2012 12:07 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

The only diesels of which I'm aware that included stainless steel construction were B&M/MEC 6000 (The Flying Yankee), CB&Q Zephyr power cars in the 9900 series, CB&Q E's and Metra F40C's.

I knew about the others except for the Metra F40C's.  Do you have any more info or pictures of them?  Thanks.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, April 19, 2012 7:00 AM

The only diesels of which I'm aware that included stainless steel construction were B&M/MEC 6000 (The Flying Yankee), CB&Q Zephyr power cars in the 9900 series, CB&Q E's and Metra F40C's.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:51 AM

Locomotives require repair work of various kinds far more frequently than non-powered passenger equipment .  Stainless steel requires very special handling, is difficult repair, and cannot be welded in a typical railroad backshop/

But hats off to the Q for the most beautiful diesels built, the E5's.

  • Member since
    September 2005
  • 965 posts
Posted by Lyon_Wonder on Tuesday, April 17, 2012 8:48 PM

IIRC, Amtrak's more modern, 1970s and newer Amfleet passenger cars are stainless steel too.

As for modern class 1s, BNSF's business cars have stainless steel sidings too, which is a legacy of it's ATSF heritage.  And I think even former "smooth" BN business cars of GN and NP heritage were modified with stainless steel sidings too.

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