Trains.com

New Amtrak Cars

6933 views
21 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:10 PM

BaltACD

Let's carry the discussion into our garages.....

You have a fleet of 1980's (or earlier) Chevy Impala's....200K miles a year for the past 30 years.

Would you rather jack up the ash tray and rebuild the vehicles or go to a fleet of 2010 vehicles that come will all the latest designs and technology....technology that doesn't have to be re-engineered to fit the 30 year old shells.

You pays your money any you takes your choices.

There is no new technology.  Amtrak's buying new 1980 "Chevy Impalas" at much greater cost than the "jack up the ash tray" rebuild price.  

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

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Wednesday, September 29, 2010 3:08 PM

BaltACD

Let's carry the discussion into our garages.....

You have a fleet of 1980's (or earlier) Chevy Impala's....200K miles a year for the past 30 years.

Would you rather jack up the ash tray and rebuild the vehicles or go to a fleet of 2010 vehicles that come will all the latest designs and technology....technology that doesn't have to be re-engineered to fit the 30 year old shells.

You pays your money any you takes your choices.

         Interesting  analogy!  Having some time back (just graduated High School '61)  rebuilt a 1927 Autocar model 27H Flatbed Truck I have a slight understanding of where you are coming from. 

       A couple of questions seem to be unanswered;

            What is the expected service life for these new Amtrak cars?      

             Is there anyway to predict or validate how many rebuilds might be made in their service life? 

         The BUDD- built, and PULLMAN- built cars seem to be able to soldier on after many cycles of rebuilding to survive somewhere around 60/70 or more years of service in various uses.  Some cars probablyhave lasted much longer as well.

          The Shops at Bear and Beech Grove have worked miracles with the current fleet, repairing, rebuilding and essentially remanufacturing from wrecks many cars to keep AMTRAK's fleet of aging cars running. 

    Let's hope these new generations of cars will preform similarly after they have been battered, brusied and beaten in AMTRAK service.

 

 


 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:45 PM

Let's carry the discussion into our garages.....

You have a fleet of 1980's (or earlier) Chevy Impala's....200K miles a year for the past 30 years.

Would you rather jack up the ash tray and rebuild the vehicles or go to a fleet of 2010 vehicles that come will all the latest designs and technology....technology that doesn't have to be re-engineered to fit the 30 year old shells.

You pays your money any you takes your choices.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, September 29, 2010 7:31 AM

Dutchrailnut

The shell is not what cost the most, by time you rebuild trucks, rewire car, redo plumbing, renew toilet equipment, the airconditioning, the heat , the windows and all interior and exterior fittings and furnishings you may have saved 20% over new price.

 but your still stuck with an old beatup leaking shell.

Some news items:

VIA is rebuilding their LRC coaches for about $1M each.  They are aluminum frame cars that need some structural repair.  Rebuild should extend life 20 years.  This is about 1/2 the cost of new.

PATCO has been planning on rebuilding it's 40+ year old  Budd stainless steel transit cars, retrofitting with AC propulsion for approx. $1.2M each versus $2.2 for new cars.

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

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Monday, September 6, 2010 8:49 AM

So are these the schematics for the new Amtrak Passenger Cars.     The drawings of the single level car specs do not look like viewliners to me.     Does that mean the viewliners are a seperate order?   Or does that mean these single level cars are the next generation spec?       Does anyone know?

http://www.highspeed-rail.org/Pages/DocsSpecs.aspx

The above link was embedded in a Amtrak news release located here:

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1249214184634&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobhead

Just curious on this.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, August 26, 2010 4:26 PM

This post is directed to not only our regular posters but the staff of Trains Mag.

1. The single level car speeds listed at various sites have several top speed differences. The original notice of the new single cars order stated permitted speed of 125 MPH.

2. October issue of trainstMag states new cars 110 MPH top speed. What is it really?

3. The Amtrak fleet strategy plan stated present viewliners top speed 110 MPH.

4. All new single level equipment built befor Viewliners is stated as 125 MPH. (Horizon, Amfleet 1 & Amfleet 2s)

5. Fleet plan lists Heritage Cars as 110 MPH for 14 -- 1700 series cars.

6. However plan lists a total of 90 Heritage cars including diners.

7. Boardman's statement said Heritage cars were 90 MPH.

8. October trains Mag lists Heritage cars as 90 MPH.

9. I suspec that there are different actual speed limits for each of the Heriutage cars.

10 What gives?? How about Trains clearing up this confusion by going to their sources at Amtrak??????

 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, August 25, 2010 5:50 PM

Paul Milenkovic
The fight provoked by the baggage car question found its way to the "back alley outside the bar" at http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/176045.aspx

Paul, I really like your description.Laugh

Johnny

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: Southington, CT
  • 1,326 posts
Posted by DMUinCT on Wednesday, August 25, 2010 2:52 PM

130 new Amtrak cars over 5 years, first delivery October 2012.  Built in Elmira, NY by CAF-USA (Spain). Cost $298 million.

 Single level cars based on the "Viewliner".

25 "Sleeping Cars", 25 "Diners", 55 "Baggage Cars", and 25 "Baggage/Crew Dormatory Cars"

Published in the "Amtrak INK" for August, statement by Joe Boardman

Don U. TCA 73-5735

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, August 25, 2010 7:38 AM
Phoebe Vet
The older the car is, the harder it is to get parts.  Eventually they cease to be available and must be custom fabricated.
This is true to some extent, but passenger cars are produced in such low volumes to begin with that there is not much cost difference between "custom" and "production". In fact, the methods of production might be the same. For example, the production method of producing a truck equalizer bar might be to flame cut it from sheet steel using a template. You might cut 50-100 at a time for a car order - not enough volume to consider stamping them. If you only have to cut one or two at a time, the extra cost is relatively small set-up time. It's not quite like a car where Ford made 10M 6VDC generators on a production line in 1950 and now you have get one custom rewound and find bearings for it.

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

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:33 PM

oltmannd
Phoebe Vet

Not true with total rebuilds of rail cars. You don't rebuild in kind. You rebuild with new components - which are identical to those you would be buying on a new car. Under car components, seats, interior fittings for example. The parts that are unique are generally reclaimable. Trucks and carbody, for example.

I understand and agree with everything you said except the phrase: "Not true".  No part lasts forever.  Everything must be replaced eventually.  The older the car is, the harder it is to get parts.  Eventually they cease to be available and must be custom fabricated.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:25 PM
Dutchrailnut

The shell is not what cost the most, by time you rebuild trucks, rewire car, redo plumbing, renew toilet equipment, the airconditioning, the heat , the windows and all interior and exterior fittings and furnishings you may have saved 20% over new price.

 but your still stuck with an old beatup leaking shell.

You save 20% and have a like-new car, unless you have fatigue life issues - which these railcars don't.

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

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:20 PM
Phoebe Vet

People calculating the price of a rebuild frequently forget to include the cost of disassembly and the fact that parts purchased after market cost more than parts used in the original build.

You can keep old equipment running and even in good shape forever ... if price is not an object.  But there comes a time in it's lifespan when it's actually cheaper to sell it to someone who has an even tighter budget than you do, or to a scrap dealer, and buy a new one.  Compare not only the cost of overhaul, but also consider it's salvage value.

After all, what is the better investment.  Making your 10 year old car, including overhauling or replacing the engine and transmission, like new, or trading it for a new one?

The secret to success is being able to calculate when in it's service life that is.  Too soon or too late is wasted money.

Not true with total rebuilds of rail cars. You don't rebuild in kind. You rebuild with new components - which are identical to those you would be buying on a new car. Under car components, seats, interior fittings for example. The parts that are unique are generally reclaimable. Trucks and carbody, for example.

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

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, August 19, 2010 3:38 PM

Phoebe Vet

to sell it to someone who has an even tighter budget than you do

(cough) Canada (cough)

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
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:25 PM

People calculating the price of a rebuild frequently forget to include the cost of disassembly and the fact that parts purchased after market cost more than parts used in the original build.

You can keep old equipment running and even in good shape forever ... if price is not an object.  But there comes a time in it's lifespan when it's actually cheaper to sell it to someone who has an even tighter budget than you do, or to a scrap dealer, and buy a new one.  Compare not only the cost of overhaul, but also consider it's salvage value.

After all, what is the better investment.  Making your 10 year old car, including overhauling or replacing the engine and transmission, like new, or trading it for a new one?

The secret to success is being able to calculate when in it's service life that is.  Too soon or too late is wasted money.

 

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Brewster, NY
  • 648 posts
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:56 AM

The shell still only accounts for less than 20% of price,  nearly 45 % is labor.

If your stripping the old shell your labor cost shoots through the roof.

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:05 AM

Unless the the shell was truly built to last indefinitely = most Budd-built classic equipment (but not all)

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: Brewster, NY
  • 648 posts
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:56 PM

The shell is not what cost the most, by time you rebuild trucks, rewire car, redo plumbing, renew toilet equipment, the airconditioning, the heat , the windows and all interior and exterior fittings and furnishings you may have saved 20% over new price.

 but your still stuck with an old beatup leaking shell.

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:15 AM
Sawtooth500
A question - so Amtrak is ordering new cars. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just completely refurbish the existing ones? I mean totally gut them, put in new wiring, upholstery, etc, instead of just buying new ones? My guess is that the actual structure of the car is still intact and good, it's just the interior furnishings that are really worn and need replacement. Am I correct in this logic, or am I missing something here?
Generally, yes.

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

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:45 PM

The main part of the discussion was actually in the general Trains Forum rather than here, but a link to it is http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/177210.aspx

The fight provoked by the baggage car question found its way to the "back alley outside the bar" at http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/176045.aspx

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
    November 2009
  • 673 posts
Posted by Sawtooth500 on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:32 PM
Do you have the link to that thread?
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:28 PM

Sawtooth500
A question - so Amtrak is ordering new cars. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just completely refurbish the existing ones? I mean totally gut them, put in new wiring, upholstery, etc, instead of just buying new ones? My guess is that the actual structure of the car is still intact and good, it's just the interior furnishings that are really worn and need replacement. Am I correct in this logic, or am I missing something here?

 

You must be new in these parts.  We just had this discussion and it ended in the War of the Amtrak Baggage Cars.

Just for suggesting this idea, you will find yourself at the bottom of a football "pileup" for being insufficiently earnest in your support for Amtrak by the suggestion that Amtrak can make do with used equipment (like they do in Canada -- with Amtrak's used equipment).

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
    November 2009
  • 673 posts
New Amtrak Cars
Posted by Sawtooth500 on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:28 PM
A question - so Amtrak is ordering new cars. Wouldn't it be cheaper to just completely refurbish the existing ones? I mean totally gut them, put in new wiring, upholstery, etc, instead of just buying new ones? My guess is that the actual structure of the car is still intact and good, it's just the interior furnishings that are really worn and need replacement. Am I correct in this logic, or am I missing something here?

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