Here’s a pic of EMD SD45 Demonstrator #4202. This engine was in the Fort Madison, IA area when this pic was taken in Oct, 1971.
http://www.mugii.com/Pictures/SE_Iowa_1970s/EMD%20SD45%204202.jpg
Judging by the 4 cooling fans above the radiators, this loco has to be one of seven SD45X demonstrators. EMD did have 3 standard SD45 demonstrators in the mid-60s, but were sold to D&H and later traded to Erie-Lackawanna. EMD managed to get 4,200hp out of the 20-645E for the SD45X, a hp rating almost identical to modern SD70s/Dash9s, but only 7 were built and most of these ended up on SP. Supposedly EMD wanted to market the SD45X as the SD55, but I guess the extra 600hp was just too much. Even sales of the standard 3,600hp SD45/SD45-2 were drying up in the early 70s due to the rising cost of diesel fuel. My nickname for the SD45X is the SD45 Extreme Edition.
Lyon_WonderHere’s a pic of EMD SD45 Demonstrator #4202. This engine was in the Fort Madison, IA area when this pic was taken in Oct, 1971. http://www.mugii.com/Pictures/SE_Iowa_1970s/EMD%20SD45%204202.jpg Judging by the 4 cooling fans above the radiators, this loco has to be one of seven SD45X demonstrators. EMD did have 3 standard SD45 demonstrators in the mid-60s, but were sold to D&H and later traded to Erie-Lackawanna. EMD managed to get 4,200hp out of the 20-645E for the SD45X, a hp rating almost identical to modern SD70s/Dash9s, but only 7 were built and most of these ended up on SP. Supposedly EMD wanted to market the SD45X as the SD55, but I guess the extra 600hp was just too much. Even sales of the standard 3,600hp SD45/SD45-2 were drying up in the early 70s due to the rising cost of diesel fuel. My nickname for the SD45X is the SD45 Extreme Edition.
The SD45 sales slowed because of high fuel consumption and broken crank shafts. The SD40-2 on the other hand really took off in the early seventies since they were very reliable and used less fuel.
CZ
To Lyon:
The SD45X was supposedly a test unit for the Southern Pacific to have use on the tunnels. When they were sold later on to the SP, the units had tough times of maintenance since they were different than a SD45 or SD45T-2. They were also the FIRST units to have the new HTC Trucks installed. One of the SD45X's (EMDX 5740) survives in parts in Paducah, KY. The SD45X was suppose to be the somewhat of a predecessor to the SD50, but that didn't occur until the SD40X was introduced to the KCS in 1979 and then the SD50S for the N&W in 1980. The UP's/EMD's "SD40X" units were really SD35X's, they're often mistaken.
"Look away...look south"
A second SP SD45X survives (sort of)... Iff you have ever seen AAR 110, the gage restraint vehicle...you are looking at the frame of the SD45X, now with two axle Blomberg trucks, the fuel tank gone and the cab, prime mover and long hood gone, replaced with a new body above the frame.
EMD built three SD45X's for the SP as their 9500-9502, and built three more to SP specs as EMD 4201-4203. If you look closely at the photo of 4202, you can see the SP nose lights and Nathan P3 horn along with the roof mounted bell. These three became SP 9503-9505, and ran around in the demo colors with SP numbers for a while. The 4202 became SP 9504. They were out of service by 1980 or so. EMD retained the 5740, the only other SD45X built, (without the SP appliances). It was not sold to the SP. The SP tried them out on Donner, but they still ran hot in the tunnels and snowsheds despite the extra cooling fan. They fitted some with elephant ears, which had also been tried on some standard SD45's, and it helped the cooling problem, by drawing cooler cleaner air from the walkway level. Ultimately, the SD45T-2 was developed for the SP, the elephant ears came off, and the "X's" lived out their remaining years in the Roseville freight pool.
...roll on, Southern Pacific, roll on...on your silver rails, roll on. -Neil Young
What do you mean 5740 doesn't survive?
Thats one impresive model !
As the saying goes, That's one sweet ride!
hollahanWhat do you mean 5740 doesn't survive?
Was this pic taken at Tradewinds Park in South Florida?
Dennis Blank Jr.
CEO,COO,CFO,CMO,Bossman,Slavedriver,Engineer,Trackforeman,Grunt. Birdsboro & Reading Railroad
CAZEPHYRThe SD45 sales slowed because of high fuel consumption and broken crank shafts. The SD40-2 on the other hand really took off in the early seventies since they were very reliable and used less fuel. CZ
If the SD45/45-2 was more fuel efficient, then that didn't seem to play along with the railroads. And if you look at it this way, the 45/45-2 had it's interior crammed up compared to the 40/40-2. And I'm guessing that the railroads of then went for the 40/40-2 since it possibly had a lower price and by customer inputs of what they wanted. But...it varies where your railroad was located and what were the best options at the time (Besides GE's U30C & U36C).
I don't know what you mean by crammed up. I've worked on them both, and the access is essentially identical.
The SD45 and SD45-2 were very good locomotives. The choice between a new SD40 and a new SD45, and their Dash-2 successors, mostly had to do with the operating paradigm of the railway. Some railways had an operating paradigm that made the SD40 a better fit. Others had an operating paradigm that favored the SD45.
Broad generalizations are a poor tool to sharpshoot fine-grained distinctions. Railways study these distinctions in great detail but they have tools and information we don't have available to us to make these decisions. Absent participating in the industry for a career, and while in that career participating in locomotive fleet management for several years, it's not possible to understand locomotive acquisition decisions in anything than the very broadest terms. I haven't been in locomotives in 18 years, so when I come up against a locomotive question in my rail job, I go engage experts.
But that doesn't sell magazines and generate heated discussions ...
RWM
Railway ManThe choice between a new SD40 and a new SD45, and their Dash-2 successors, mostly had to do with the operating paradigm of the railway. Some railways had an operating paradigm that made the SD40 a better fit. Others had an operating paradigm that favored the SD45.
Bingo! (although, never underestimate the power of a CMO with a bug up his.....er..."bee in his bonnet")
Railway ManBut that doesn't sell magazines and generate heated discussions ...
Spoilsport!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
GP40-2 The SD45/45-2 was actually MORE fuel efficient than the SD40/40-2 in terms of HP produced per pound of fuel burned.
Right! But they produced not an ounce more TE at MCS, so if you powered to just make the ruling grade, you wind up with more HP/ton with the SD45s, which reduces your train fuel economy (ton-miles per gallon). So, you may be making HP-hrs a little bit cheaper, but you are spending them even faster.
Well that explains why the Wisconsin Central had plenty of those units on their roster...'til CNR begain retiring them, and the EL buying their's as SDP45's.
What I meant of the units being cramped up on the inside was misreferred to the EMD SD50S and SD40X, not the SD45's as I've been in one myself.
Evergreen24Well that explains why the Wisconsin Central had plenty of those units on their roster...'til CNR begain retiring them, and the EL buying their's as SDP45's. What I meant of the units being cramped up on the inside was misreferred to the EMD SD50S and SD40X, not the SD45's as I've been in one myself.
WC is a different case. I thought you were asking about new locomotive purchasing decisions. If we're talking used locomotive, that's a whole different set of considerations. In the used-locomotive case, the rationale driving the purchase of SD45s is that in effect they're cheap SD40s that will deliver very similar results for a much lower purchase price. Had SD40s been available on the used market for the same price and the same condition (they weren't at that time), then there would have been little reason to purchase used SD45s. Used SD40s weren't available because fleet standardization goals shoved out the SD45s from the "second-rung" jobs at the big Class 1s before the SD40s were themselves shoved out. It's a timing thing. Had WC appeared circa 2000, and followed identical managerial strategy, presumably they would have bought SD40-2s being shoved out of the second-rung jobs by SD60s and C40-8s. That wouldn't any more prove that the SD40-2 was a significantly better locomotive than the SD45-2 than it proves the SD40 was significantly better than the SD45.
We had some of the SD50Ss or SD40Xs, too, and I don't recall them being any more awful for maintenance access than any six-axle EMD. What did you have in mind specifically that was bad about them?
To RailwayMan,
Well what I meant of the SD50S and SD40X's was the location of the blower duct. When it came to the N&W SD50S units, they were sent back to EMD or to a specific shop to recieve a larger 'laundry chute' blower duct. Now when it came to the KCS SD40X units, they were "oddballs" since there wasn't a general production (somewhat like the SD90MAC).
My retired UP engineer friend once told my that a SD20-2 could pull up Cajon Pass just as good as a SD45.
I may be mistaken, but doesn't BNSF still have one or more SD45X on the roster in new paint? I seem to recall seeing one at Eola last fall.
espeefoamerMy retired UP engineer friend once told my that a SD20-2 could pull up Cajon Pass just as good as a SD45.
I would hope so, as their tractive effort at MCS was identical.
Railway Man espeefoamer My retired UP engineer friend once told my that a SD20-2 could pull up Cajon Pass just as good as a SD45. I would hope so, as their tractive effort at MCS was identical. RWM
espeefoamer My retired UP engineer friend once told my that a SD20-2 could pull up Cajon Pass just as good as a SD45.
Which is why the 3600 HP SD45 didn't much in it's Dash 2 form, but the subsequent SD50 sold a ton.
The SD50 balanced the increased HP with an increase in TE. (D87 TMs = more amps, Super Series = more adhesion)
eolafan I may be mistaken, but doesn't BNSF still have one or more SD45X on the roster in new paint? I seem to recall seeing one at Eola last fall.
There were seven SD45Xs built between June, 1970 and February, 1971. Six were sold to Southern Pacific while one (4202) was retained by EMD. All of SP's units had been disposed of prior to 1980.
Santa Fe never owned a SD45X.
Mike
It was EMD #5740, the first built that was retained by EMD. The SD45X Demonstrator EMD #4202 became Espee #9504.
MJChittick eolafan I may be mistaken, but doesn't BNSF still have one or more SD45X on the roster in new paint? I seem to recall seeing one at Eola last fall. There were seven SD45Xs built between June, 1970 and February, 1971. Six were sold to Southern Pacific while one (4202) was retained by EMD. All of SP's units had been disposed of prior to 1980. Santa Fe never owned a SD45X.
You must be thinking of the former ATSF-SD45-2s that have been rebuilt as SD40-2Rs and repainted into the new BNSF paint scheme.
A third SD45X (9500) survives in its rebuilt form still in SP paint.
Blue Alert! We're at Blue Alert! Aw crap, it's a nondescript GEVO... Cancel Blue Alert!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.