357 SD45's

[Murphy Siding]

     (Not to be confused with 77 trombones)

     I read that Southern Pacific and Cotton Belt, between them had 357 SD45's, and got along very well with them.  I've also read that a lot of SD45's were retired early due to twisting crankshafts. Yet, MRL and WC both seemed to have them around a long time.  Were they a good locomotive, or a problem locomotive?

[billbtrain]

Yeah,that is kind of funny that some roads had problems with their 45's and others(ATSF,GN,EL,andSP) didn't seem to have any problems.ATSF and EL bought SD45-2's and SP bought SD45T-2's,which would suggest no problems until 1974 or 1975 when they stopped ordering them.BN appeared to have problems with the SD45's after the 1971 orders,so I wonder if it was due to changes by EMD or improper maintenance by the railroads.I believe I read that several 45 owners changed the fuel rack settings to downrate the units to 3200HP from 3600HP.It was mentioned that the units were fuel hogs,especially idling(this at a time when there was no way the unit could be shut down in cold weather).Maybe someone can shed light on the crankshaft problems.

Have a good one.

Bill B

[trainfan1221]

An SD45 was a finicky beast.  The oversized engines and therefore long crankshafts were subject to a lot of problems such as breakage.  Also the large radiators were an expensive maintenance problem, even though they are relatively small compared to some modern engines!  Most railroads considered them not worth the extra horsepower which reflects in the fact that the SD45-2 wasn't a phenomonal seller.  But roads such as EL made very good use out of them, if not just for extra fuel capacity.

[solzrules]

Here is another good question - Weren't most of the WC SD-45's ex-Santa Fe units? 

[n012944]

Here is another good question - Weren't most of the WC SD-45's ex-Santa Fe units? 

 

When the WC was first formed, most of the SD45's it started with were ex BN, with a couple of chopped nose ex NWs thrown in.  As the WC started to grow, they bought ex SF 45's.

 

Bert

[n012944]

Yeah,that is kind of funny that some roads had problems with their 45's and others(ATSF,GN,EL,andSP) didn't seem to have any problems.ATSF and EL bought SD45-2's and SP bought SD45T-2's,which would suggest no problems until 1974 or 1975 when they stopped ordering them.BN appeared to have problems with the SD45's after the 1971 orders,so I wonder if it was due to changes by EMD or improper maintenance by the railroads.I believe I read that several 45 owners changed the fuel rack settings to downrate the units to 3200HP from 3600HP.It was mentioned that the units were fuel hogs,especially idling(this at a time when there was no way the unit could be shut down in cold weather).Maybe someone can shed light on the crankshaft problems.

Have a good one.

Bill B

The early SD45's had issues with crankshaft failures, main bearing failures, crankcase weld cracks, and turbo failures.  Most of these problems were with the units built between 1966-1968, and part of the cause of them was EMD design issues, and the other part was railroads trying to maintain a high horsepower engine the same way it maintained a GP7.  The SD45 was a fuel pig, and had four more cylinders to maintain compared to an SD40.  Not traits that endeared themselves to the beancounters during the lean 70's.

 

Bert

[Murphy Siding]

Yeah,that is kind of funny that some roads had problems with their 45's and others(ATSF,GN,EL,andSP) didn't seem to have any problems.ATSF and EL bought SD45-2's and SP bought SD45T-2's,which would suggest no problems until 1974 or 1975 when they stopped ordering them.BN appeared to have problems with the SD45's after the 1971 orders,so I wonder if it was due to changes by EMD or improper maintenance by the railroads.I believe I read that several 45 owners changed the fuel rack settings to downrate the units to 3200HP from 3600HP.It was mentioned that the units were fuel hogs,especially idling(this at a time when there was no way the unit could be shut down in cold weather).Maybe someone can shed light on the crankshaft problems.

Have a good one.

Bill B

     Did ATSF,GN,EL, and SP maintian theirs better than the other railroads that had them?  Or, did they get lucky, in that their units were later production models, built after the bugs had been worked out?

[billbtrain]

Great Northern's first SD45's, 400-407, were the first production models,followed by 408-417 in 1967 and 418-426 in 1968.Santa Fe and Southern Pacific both ordered large batches of SD45's in 1966.Maybe these roads had closer relations with EMD with these early production units and stayed on top of the problems better than the others.Could be that they were more strict in sticking with a maintenance schedule on these as well.

Have a good one.

Bill B

[caldreamer]

The SP and Cotton Belt (SSW) had no problems with their SD45's.  I remember chasing trains in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California and ususally they ran 8 to 10 SD45's distributed throughout the train to get them over the mountains.  These trains were 100 plus cars long.

[arbfbe]

By the time the SD45-2 line came out EMD had worked the crankshaft issues out.  All of the SD45s which MRL purchased used had been upgraded by their former owners with the newer prime movers.  If it did not have the -2 engine inside the carbody, MRL would not purchase the unit.

All of the MRL SD45s in service have been racked back up to 3600 hp with the idea if you are going to burn the fuel you might as well get some work out of it.  The fleet provides good service and quite a return to the MRL bottom line. 

[wctransfer]

WC SD45s

Going with 6s instead of the upgraded 7 numberings.

6495-6499 Ex BN, only 6497 not rebuilt.
6500-6533 Ex BN, all but 6503,6516,6521,6529 rebuilt to 75XXs.
6550-6556 Ex NW, 7551 and 7554 the only rebuilt units
6578-6599 Ex ATSF, units rebuilt were 7580,7581,7585,7592.
6600-6631 Ex ATSF Only 7606 rebuilt.
6632-6642 Ex MKCX, Only rebuilt units were 7637 & 7638.

Alec

[Murphy Siding]

By the time the SD45-2 line came out EMD had worked the crankshaft issues out.  All of the SD45s which MRL purchased used had been upgraded by their former owners with the newer prime movers.  If it did not have the -2 engine inside the carbody, MRL would not purchase the unit.

All of the MRL SD45s in service have been racked back up to 3600 hp with the idea if you are going to burn the fuel you might as well get some work out of it.  The fleet provides good service and quite a return to the MRL bottom line. 

     Other than the crankshaft issue, I can't believe that they were any more of a maintenance issue than any other EMD product, are they?

[SSW9389]

The combined Espee/Cotton Belt SD45 fleet rostered 357 numbers built on 356 frames. You can't believe everything you read. The road liked the SD45s so much that they additionally purchased 10 SDP45s, six SD45Xs and 247 SD45T-2s.

 

     (Not to be confused with 77 trombones)

     I read that Southern Pacific and Cotton Belt, between them had 357 SD45's, and got along very well with them.  I've also read that a lot of SD45's were retired early due to twisting crankshafts. Yet, MRL and WC both seemed to have them around a long time.  Were they a good locomotive, or a problem locomotive?

[Murphy Siding]

The combined Espee/Cotton Belt SD45 fleet rostered 357 numbers built on 356 frames. You can't believe everything you read. The road liked the SD45s so much that they additionally purchased 10 SDP45s, six SD45Xs and 247 SD45T-2s.

 

     (Not to be confused with 77 trombones)

     I read that Southern Pacific and Cotton Belt, between them had 357 SD45's, and got along very well with them.  I've also read that a lot of SD45's were retired early due to twisting crankshafts. Yet, MRL and WC both seemed to have them around a long time.  Were they a good locomotive, or a problem locomotive?

     357 numbers on 356 frames?  They stacked one of them 2 high?

[SSW9389]

Cotton Belt 8971 was wrecked and burned at Tyler, TEXAS on June 25, 1970. The unit was returned to EMD and rebuilt on the same frame by EMD as Cotton Belt 9156. The 9156 was redelivered to Cotton Belt in June 1971. There were only 356 units: Southern Pacific 317 units and Cotton Belt 39 units. So you have a number range of 357 units 8800-9156, but you only have 356 frames.

[Andrew Falconer]

If the Montana Rail Link SD45 Diesel-Electric Locomtives are being run with BNSF units in Michigan, what is operating on the MRL? Are the CN SD70's and GTW GP38's now on the MRL?

[Andrew Falconer]

CN could have just taken all the old WC SD45 units and moved them to Livingston, Montana so the Montana Rail Link could have the first option on all of them.

[ericsp]

If the Montana Rail Link SD45 Diesel-Electric Locomtives are being run with BNSF units in Michigan, what is operating on the MRL? Are the CN SD70's and GTW GP38's now on the MRL?

The article in Trains a few months back said that as MRL's SD70ACes (or is it SD70M-2?) arrive, MRL will start moving SD45s into its lease fleet.

[SactoGuy188]

The SP and Cotton Belt (SSW) had no problems with their SD45's.  I remember chasing trains in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California and ususally they ran 8 to 10 SD45's distributed throughout the train to get them over the mountains.  These trains were 100 plus cars long.

If I remember correctly these SD45's were subject to the General Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (GRIP), which essentially rebuilt them into SD45-2 spec locomotives. Most of the rebuilds were done in the late 1970's to middle 1980's at SP's Sacramento Locomotive Shops.

[ericsp]

The SP and Cotton Belt (SSW) had no problems with their SD45's.  I remember chasing trains in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California and ususally they ran 8 to 10 SD45's distributed throughout the train to get them over the mountains.  These trains were 100 plus cars long.

If I remember correctly these SD45's were subject to the General Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (GRIP), which essentially rebuilt them into SD45-2 spec locomotives. Most of the rebuilds were done in the late 1970's to middle 1980's at SP's Sacramento Locomotive Shops.

That is correct. There was only one SD45 rebuilt in 1979, the rest were rebuilt beginning in 1981. Also, only 167 of the SD45s were rebuilt. As for being brought up to -2 specifications, in the August 1990 roster I have SP actually lists them as SD45-2s. SP did the same with its SD40s (1980-1981) and some of its SD45T-2s (1986-1989, of course these were already -2s). I wonder if SP was going to rebuild its SD45s first but decided to do the SD40s first.

SP 7400            1979

SP 7401-7421   1981

SP 7422-7464   1982

SP 7465-7481   1983

SP 7482-7488   1983

SP 7489-7536   1984

SP 7537-7560   1985

SP 7561-7566   1986

[Murphy Siding]

       It appears that SP had no trouble with SD45's and maintenance, if they got that much use out of them

[Anonymous]

By the time the SD45-2 line came out EMD had worked the crankshaft issues out.  All of the SD45s which MRL purchased used had been upgraded by their former owners with the newer prime movers.  If it did not have the -2 engine inside the carbody, MRL would not purchase the unit.

All of the MRL SD45s in service have been racked back up to 3600 hp with the idea if you are going to burn the fuel you might as well get some work out of it.  The fleet provides good service and quite a return to the MRL bottom line. 

Unfortunately not enough because they bought the ACe's because of the mammoth fuel savings and unit reduction because of better traction. (computers and extra weight) 

[Anonymous]

WC SD45s Going with 6s instead of the upgraded 7 numberings. 6495-6499 Ex BN, only 6497 not rebuilt. 6500-6533 Ex BN, all but 6503,6516,6521,6529 rebuilt to 75XXs. 6550-6556 Ex NW, 7551 and 7554 the only rebuilt units 6578-6599 Ex ATSF, units rebuilt were 7580,7581,7585,7592. 6600-6631 Ex ATSF Only 7606 rebuilt. 6632-6642 Ex MKCX, Only rebuilt units were 7637 & 7638. Alec

Saw one of them on a SB passing by the ex-IC yard in Jackson, MS

[Lyon_Wonder]

BNSF also appears to have some SD45-2s still in service.  Now only if they stay on BNSF"s roster long enough for any of them to receive the new paint scheme with the wedge logo.

[beaulieu]

By the time the SD45-2 line came out EMD had worked the crankshaft issues out.  All of the SD45s which MRL purchased used had been upgraded by their former owners with the newer prime movers.  If it did not have the -2 engine inside the carbody, MRL would not purchase the unit.

All of the MRL SD45s in service have been racked back up to 3600 hp with the idea if you are going to burn the fuel you might as well get some work out of it.  The fleet provides good service and quite a return to the MRL bottom line. 

Unfortunately not enough because they bought the ACe's because of the mammoth fuel savings and unit reduction because of better traction. (computers and extra weight) 

You will notice though that the ACes went into helper service. The "Fuel Guzzling" reputation of a SD45 comes from the fact that at slow speeds it can't lug any more tonnage than a SD40. If you compare horsepower to fuel consumption the SD45 is slightly better than a SD40. So an SD45 is better than a SD40 on a fast Intermodal but worse on a heavy bulk train. So if you need about 15000hp on a fast Intermodal 4 SD45s will do better on fuel burn than 5 SD40s. A comparison with a SD70ACe isn't meaningful.

[oltmannd]

By the time the SD45-2 line came out EMD had worked the crankshaft issues out.  All of the SD45s which MRL purchased used had been upgraded by their former owners with the newer prime movers.  If it did not have the -2 engine inside the carbody, MRL would not purchase the unit.

All of the MRL SD45s in service have been racked back up to 3600 hp with the idea if you are going to burn the fuel you might as well get some work out of it.  The fleet provides good service and quite a return to the MRL bottom line. 

Unfortunately not enough because they bought the ACe's because of the mammoth fuel savings and unit reduction because of better traction. (computers and extra weight) 

You will notice though that the ACes went into helper service. The "Fuel Guzzling" reputation of a SD45 comes from the fact that at slow speeds it can't lug any more tonnage than a SD40. If you compare horsepower to fuel consumption the SD45 is slightly better than a SD40. So an SD45 is better than a SD40 on a fast Intermodal but worse on a heavy bulk train. So if you need about 15000hp on a fast Intermodal 4 SD45s will do better on fuel burn than 5 SD40s. A comparison with a SD70ACe isn't meaningful.

Very well put.  I would agree completely.  RRs found that, in general, they didn't need the extra 600 HP per unit for most service.  Once they had enough units on most trains to handle the ruling grade, they were still in good shape with HP/ton to handle their schedules.  Most of the newer units being used in general freight service have roughly the same proportion of HP and TE as an SD40, just more of it in each unit.  The exceptions to this rule are the 4000/4400 HP AC units, which are typically used on unit trains or on routes with very heavy grades.

[wctransfer]

For anyone that cares,3 SD45s have been saved from the scrappers torch at Woodcrest.
7505,7510 and 7517 now belong to the Dakota Missouri Valley & Western.

Also, does anyone know how many SD45s are on the MRL *and not being leased out*

Alec