Trains.com

BNSF Executive SD70MAC Rebuild Program?

35179 views
71 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Saturday, March 10, 2018 1:53 PM

There's been a lot of strange stuff that I've seen on Wikipedia, but it tends to be better than a lot of the other fan sites. Speculation and misinformation tends to be rampant.

Many of the paint schemes are nicknamed by railfans rather than being official names.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, March 10, 2018 11:14 AM

BLS53

If it's published somewhere, it's good to go on Wikipedia. On a particular biographical article of a noted family member, of which I'm a primary source, I was called out by one of their editors. I offered to send in appropriate identification, and that wasn't good enough. The editor suggested I call a local newspaper, and have them interview me, and then publish an article in the newspaper. After that, list the article as a citation, and my contribution would be deemed satisfactory. I told him to pound sand. 

My "favorite" experience with the Wackypedia editors was comments on an article on track circuits. The article itself was accurate, detailed and well written (FWIW, I was NOT the author, nor did I now the author). The editorial comment was that the article was too technical and was being considered for deletion because of that.

You could also think of the request as the editor being very aware of the problems with Wikipedia, and allowing people a way to verify the contents of the article.

 

  • Member since
    August 2009
  • 322 posts
Posted by BLS53 on Saturday, March 10, 2018 12:26 AM

samfp1943

The Topic Title on this Thread threw me for a curve....Does the OP refer to the units by their 'paint scheme' name ?  The green and creme painted units in the classes mentioned in this Thread are often referred to as "Grinstein Green" to pay homage to the then president of the railroad Gerald Grinsterin from 1985/95 and over saw the purchase of the SD70 (varients) 

One of the first casualties of the BN>BNSF mergers were the 'Executive Train' power units BN1 (A)/Bn2(B)/BN3 (A).  In 1997 they were donated to the IRM museum's fleet.  They had just beren reworked for their roles as Executive Train power, and were a matched set of matched E-9 units. Their paint scheme was slightly darker than the Grinstein(Pulman) Green, and had a red line for the color separation. { They had also been fitted with diaphragms between the units, and extended couplings to allow for that new hardware.}    Ok, consider my 'nits' picked! Bang Head

 

 

 

Never understood why RR's have to have cutesy names for all their colors. Not like they ever wash the things once they're in service. Seems an unneccesary extention of automobile marketing. However, with RR's, the consumer doesn't care.

  • Member since
    August 2009
  • 322 posts
Posted by BLS53 on Saturday, March 10, 2018 12:18 AM

DS4-4-1000

 

 
YoHo1975
Some days I wish the knowledgeable people in these threads would become Wikipedia contributors. Their pages are only as good as the contributors. An engineering document with a copyright date would be a valid source to update the article. Not calling anyone out per se' I don't need another hobby either. :( but the info is out there, just not in the hands of the Wiki contributors.

 

The problem with contributing to Wiki with such data is that someone will come right behind you and revise the entry citing one of the "mass market" books that are full of errors as the authoritive document.

 

If it's published somewhere, it's good to go on Wikipedia. On a particular biographical article of a noted family member, of which I'm a primary source, I was called out by one of their editors. I offered to send in appropriate identification, and that wasn't good enough. The editor suggested I call a local newspaper, and have them interview me, and then publish an article in the newspaper. After that, list the article as a citation, and my contribution would be deemed satisfactory. I told him to pound sand. 

  • Member since
    August 2009
  • 322 posts
Posted by BLS53 on Friday, March 9, 2018 11:52 PM

SooBoy61

Looks like Progress Rail/BNSF is going ahead with a full rebuild of the BNSF SD75M/I units.  Recent photos show most of the remaining units at Progress Rail Mayfield, KY facility except for a couple that remain in Tacoma, WA.  I also noticed that the newly rebuilt ones are sporting the new H4 livery.  Wonder how the black will hold up over time?

 

Just saw three shiny ones today northbound at Metropolis IL on the BNSF Paducah KY-Beardstown IL sub. PAL brings them from Mayfield to Paducah.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Sunday, October 1, 2017 11:39 AM
I know for a fact the F units were donated in 1997. I've heard that the E-unit came later, but whether that means a few months later or a year later or? I don't know.
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Sunday, October 1, 2017 10:41 AM

YoHo1975

I take issue with your nits, Grinstein Green is the color green used. The paint scheme is called the Executive Scheme(or colloquially, Cream and Green), because it was put on BN1,2 and 3 FIRST! The executive units got the executive paint scheme. Also, the SD70MACs in fact ALSO have a red stripe and the shade of green is the same.To my knowledge, neither is considered Pullman Green. Finally, the 3 executive units are NOT a matched set. BN1&2 are former NP F9s that were completely rebuilt with 2000HP 16-645E Prime movers. In a sense, they are F38-2s. BN-3 was a (I assume CB&Q) E unit that had been in Chicago commuter service. It is unmodified. So, to reiterate, the OP is correct, that paint scheme is called the BN Executive Scheme. Grinstein green refers to the shade of green.

 

  To YoHo 1975  Bow  I owe you a mea culpa..Sigh  I guess my eyesight is not what it used to be as to color definition.. We get the occasional Grinstein Green scheme on units passing through this area [mostly, on coal trains/ empty returns, via KC area?]. 

 I remember reading in an old edition of TRAINS about the donation of the BN Executive Train power (A-B-A) set to the IRM. I think it was about 1997(?). Somehow it 'stuck' in my memory that they were a 'matched set' from that article(?).  I seem to recall that when they were donated, they they had just been outshopped, and were virtually rebuilt to (then) updated specifications, you had mentioned.        One of the mods mentioned were the application of full height passenger-style(?) diaphragms between the units.. Odd, but it had increased the need to lengthen the couplers between the units to accomodate that adition.    Appreciate, your addition to the info on the three units.Thumbs Up

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Saturday, September 30, 2017 6:33 PM

I take issue with your nits, Grinstein Green is the color green used. The paint scheme is called the Executive Scheme(or colloquially, Cream and Green), because it was put on BN1,2 and 3 FIRST! The executive units got the executive paint scheme. Also, the SD70MACs in fact ALSO have a red stripe and the shade of green is the same.To my knowledge, neither is considered Pullman Green. Finally, the 3 executive units are NOT a matched set. BN1&2 are former NP F9s that were completely rebuilt with 2000HP 16-645E Prime movers. In a sense, they are F38-2s. BN-3 was a (I assume CB&Q) E unit that had been in Chicago commuter service. It is unmodified. So, to reiterate, the OP is correct, that paint scheme is called the BN Executive Scheme. Grinstein green refers to the shade of green.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Saturday, September 30, 2017 2:47 PM

The Topic Title on this Thread threw me for a curve....Does the OP refer to the units by their 'paint scheme' name ?  The green and creme painted units in the classes mentioned in this Thread are often referred to as "Grinstein Green" to pay homage to the then president of the railroad Gerald Grinsterin from 1985/95 and over saw the purchase of the SD70 (varients) 

One of the first casualties of the BN>BNSF mergers were the 'Executive Train' power units BN1 (A)/Bn2(B)/BN3 (A).  In 1997 they were donated to the IRM museum's fleet.  They had just beren reworked for their roles as Executive Train power, and were a matched set of matched E-9 units. Their paint scheme was slightly darker than the Grinstein(Pulman) Green, and had a red line for the color separation. { They had also been fitted with diaphragms between the units, and extended couplings to allow for that new hardware.}    Ok, consider my 'nits' picked! Bang Head

 

 

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Thursday, September 28, 2017 1:56 PM
That's what the talk page is for. The article for the EMD 710 has nothing on the talk page. Nobody has challenged any of it.
  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 225 posts
Posted by DS4-4-1000 on Thursday, September 28, 2017 9:24 AM

YoHo1975
Some days I wish the knowledgeable people in these threads would become Wikipedia contributors. Their pages are only as good as the contributors. An engineering document with a copyright date would be a valid source to update the article. Not calling anyone out per se' I don't need another hobby either. :( but the info is out there, just not in the hands of the Wiki contributors.

The problem with contributing to Wiki with such data is that someone will come right behind you and revise the entry citing one of the "mass market" books that are full of errors as the authoritive document.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Thursday, September 28, 2017 9:15 AM
Some days I wish the knowledgeable people in these threads would become Wikipedia contributors. Their pages are only as good as the contributors. An engineering document with a copyright date would be a valid source to update the article. Not calling anyone out per se' I don't need another hobby either. :( but the info is out there, just not in the hands of the Wiki contributors.
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Thursday, September 28, 2017 8:03 AM

SooBoy61

Rather curious to see your source of information on the use of 16-710G3B-ES engines in BNSF SD70MAC units.  All my sources show the -ES version didn't come out until 2003.

 
I have the Clyde Engineering GT-46C as being fitted with the 16-710G3B-ES engine. These were built in late 1996 and entered service in 1997. I was able to visit the assembly line in the locomotive depot in Forrestfield Western Australia and was given some documents indicating the locomotive specufication.
 
So I expect that EMD would have used the G3B-ES engine also from about the end of 1996.
 
Peter
  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 10:43 PM

Entropy

Are you using Wikipedia? it's wrong.

9400-9716 had 16-710G3B-EC

9717-8800 had 16-710G3B-ES

8800-9999 had 16-710G3C-ES

9400-9716 Some are MUI the later ones are EUI.

 

 

I have no doubt that Wikipedia contains errors, I'm trying to jive a delivery date of early 1993 for the demo units, late 93 for the first of the 300 with a supposed intro date for the EC of 1995.

Are you then saying that the EC version of the 710 came out in 1993?

 

Actually, the flawed Wikipedia table actually implies this, because the 12-710G3C-EC in the F59PHI is dated as 1993. So clearly EC was available. (ugh,Someone has modified the table since our discussion in the SD90 thread some time back. All the engines are listed as 900RPM, but that is NOT true and not what it used to say.)

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 2,505 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 8:52 PM

A few questions.

1. Which road numbers have been rebuilt so far.

2. Are the units that are rebuilt being given a new designation or are they keeping the SD70MAC name?

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 149 posts
Posted by Entropy on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 1:46 PM

Another factor in selecting units for upgrade, not all MAC's have isolated cabs. It appears 9572 is the first isolated cab SD70MAC. Safe assumption the units 9400-9571 will not be upgraded, looks like they're laid up as of July, possibly "surge fleet".

In 1995 Isolated Cab and Electronic Unit Injectors was all new technology, Burlington Northern wanted these implemented, that's why they were phased in.

  • Member since
    July 2017
  • 3 posts
Posted by NorthEast on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 9:17 AM

I have EMD/BNSF Order #936445 5/24/1995 which lists ENGINE as 16-710G3B-EC covering (63) SD70MAC which were delivered in 1995 road numbers 9475-9499; 9504-9541.  It is not the complete specification, an interim summary, as this was part of the original order by BNSF of 300 or so, the first order of SD70MAC by any railroad.  Seems to confirm above to some degree, that EC were first units delivered, then replaced by ES, at least domestic deliveries. Is not the major difference of EC to ES that the EC had a dual but shared cooling system and the ES migrated to dual dedicated water pump and cooling arrangement, one for engine and the other for aftercooler, as discussed long ago on this thread?  And the EC being a dual shared system, being less desirable as it is a lesser performer and difficult to retrofit?  thanks. 

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 149 posts
Posted by Entropy on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 8:12 AM

Are you using Wikipedia? it's wrong.

9400-9716 had 16-710G3B-EC

9717-8800 had 16-710G3B-ES

8800-9999 had 16-710G3C-ES

9400-9716 Some are MUI the later ones are EUI.

 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 2:12 AM
Ignoring the question on sourcing for G3B v. G3B-EC v. G3B-ES. Presumably, BNSF and EMD chose the units they chose based on a combination of leasing/ownership status and cost and value. What, other than updated inverters has changed in the units? Is it possible that given the requirements for such a major rebuild, it was more cost effective to use the older units?
  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 27 posts
Posted by SooBoy61 on Wednesday, September 27, 2017 12:57 AM

Rather curious to see your source of information on the use of 16-710G3B-ES engines in BNSF SD70MAC units.  All my sources show the -ES version didn't come out until 2003.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Tuesday, September 26, 2017 10:18 PM

So, the initial BN order delivered prior to 1996 would all be 16-710G3B Then some number post 1/1/1996 were 16-710G3B-ES @4200HP, then they switched back to the 710G3B-EC @4000?

Is it possible to get a break down by unit number?

 

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 149 posts
Posted by Entropy on Tuesday, September 26, 2017 2:58 PM

SooBoy61

Thanks for the input but I will have to disagree with you in this case.  The first 400 or so BN/BNSF units delivered between 11/93 to  3/97 (9400-9837) were equipped with the 16-710G3B prime mover.  Those delivered after that (8800-8989, 9838-9999) were with the 16-710G3B-EC.  The 16-710G3B-ES was built for export models (Australia) . 

Oddly, from the information I have, most of the units with the EC version are in storage.  Most of the SD70MAC's in use today are with the original G3B version and were from this group the SD70MACe's were rebuilt.  Does anybody have any insight as to why BNSF chose this route?  Is the G3B a better candidate for rebuild or is it simply they haven't got around to rebuilding the EC units yet?

 

No you're wrong; they switched to 16-710G3B-ES 1/1/1996, already covered this. The ES engine no doubt was used in Australia but was not unique to there. 

The EC engines were used 9400-9716, have shown to be less desirable, have more hours more chances of being bad order, it would be expensive to convert them to SLAC (Most of the reason) . However two MACe's do use an EC engine, I believe this is most likely to compile fuel economy data, maybe they will see from data it's worth to upgrade the earlier units. 

 

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 27 posts
Posted by SooBoy61 on Monday, September 25, 2017 1:24 PM

I doubt it, all the recent rebuilds have come out with the latest livery.  It would be nice to see BNSF have some units in heritage colors like UP amd NS though.

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 1,345 posts
Posted by ATSFGuy on Monday, September 25, 2017 1:12 PM

I wonder if any will keep thier excecutive colors?

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 27 posts
Posted by SooBoy61 on Sunday, September 24, 2017 11:32 PM

Looks like Progress Rail/BNSF is going ahead with a full rebuild of the BNSF SD75M/I units.  Recent photos show most of the remaining units at Progress Rail Mayfield, KY facility except for a couple that remain in Tacoma, WA.  I also noticed that the newly rebuilt ones are sporting the new H4 livery.  Wonder how the black will hold up over time?

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Tuesday, September 19, 2017 10:06 PM

A few more SD70MACe units - 9728 coupled with 9717, and 9738, and 9748 again:

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/583129/

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/590445/

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/582112/

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Wednesday, September 13, 2017 8:19 PM
  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 27 posts
Posted by SooBoy61 on Wednesday, September 13, 2017 2:03 PM

Thanks for the input but I will have to disagree with you in this case.  The first 400 or so BN/BNSF units delivered between 11/93 to  3/97 (9400-9837) were equipped with the 16-710G3B prime mover.  Those delivered after that (8800-8989, 9838-9999) were with the 16-710G3B-EC.  The 16-710G3B-ES was built for export models (Australia) . 

Oddly, from the information I have, most of the units with the EC version are in storage.  Most of the SD70MAC's in use today are with the original G3B version and were from this group the SD70MACe's were rebuilt.  Does anybody have any insight as to why BNSF chose this route?  Is the G3B a better candidate for rebuild or is it simply they haven't got around to rebuilding the EC units yet?

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 149 posts
Posted by Entropy on Monday, September 11, 2017 10:44 PM

NorthEast

Thaks for the research and confirmation, my findings are similar with one EXCEPTION.  From earlier posts i beleive the first 200 built SD70MAC had the "EC" version of the Cooling system, two water pumps, one for each bank of the Prime Mover, which was then revised to two water pumps, one for the Prime Mover and one for the Aftercooler which improved performance and emission.  so the early 1995-1996 delivered units i think are EC, there after 1997 are the ES which are the ones that went through the rebuild program.  And others have said on this string that makes sense as they are more desirable.  If anyone can confirm this thank you. 

 

Re read my posts in this thread and it explains in the simplist terms the changes in the MAC's. The difference between EC and ES both are EUI engines, EC is jacket water aftercooled. ES is EUI and SLAC. 

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