Trains.com

Downfall of EMD and GE ascending

15898 views
71 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 7:17 AM

zugmann

bcrnfan

Thank you for calling them 'safety cabs' and not 'wide cabs', which never existed and still don't.

 We use the term widebodies where I work.
 

We did too.

.

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:30 AM

SD70M-2Dude
We call it a doghouse.

I thought they were 'Red Barns'.  Is that a railfan name?

Complete with Draper Taper, I believe.  Thins the thing in a critical respect, compared to 'widebodies' like the typical US cowl units...

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 711 posts
Posted by SD70M-2Dude on Tuesday, March 14, 2017 12:51 AM

zugmann
bcrnfan

Thank you for calling them 'safety cabs' and not 'wide cabs', which never existed and still don't.

We use the term widebodies where I work.

You must not have any of these then:

http://railpictures.net/photo/250257/

A real widebody, not just the cab.  We call it a doghouse.  Everyone hates them because you have to walk through the engine room to get from unit to unit in a consist, and the handbrake is in there too. 

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, March 13, 2017 10:04 PM

bcrnfan

Thank you for calling them 'safety cabs' and not 'wide cabs', which never existed and still don't.

 

We use the term widebodies where I work.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Monday, March 13, 2017 7:59 PM

bcrnfan

Thank you for calling them 'safety cabs' and not 'wide cabs', which never existed and still don't.

 

 

They are wide nosed. The cab itself is the same width.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • 42 posts
Posted by HERBYD on Monday, March 13, 2017 4:15 PM

AS AN EMD MECH I ALWAYS  LIKED THEM THEN  THE GOVT. TIER 2 3&4WAS DOABLE

THEY KEEP JUSTIFIENG THER EXISTENCE NOW TIER 5 & THEY ARE DREAMING UP  6   FUEL & MAINT COST IS OF NO CONCERN TO THEM.THE GEVO 250 SEEMS GOOD BUT HOW ARE THEY TO WORK ON WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS  HERBYGD@AOL.COM

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2009
  • 12 posts
Posted by bcrnfan on Monday, March 13, 2017 3:53 PM

Thank you for calling them 'safety cabs' and not 'wide cabs', which never existed and still don't.

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • 48 posts
Posted by CMQ_9017 on Sunday, March 12, 2017 10:20 AM

Also -- sorry on the double post but I found this article to be relevant:

 

http://www.goerie.com/news/20170219/ge-transportation-focuses-on-service-as-locomotive-sales-remain-slow

  • Member since
    January 2017
  • 48 posts
Posted by CMQ_9017 on Sunday, March 12, 2017 10:16 AM

The ownership woes of EMD didn't help the quality of the product at key times. Basically, it was cast off by GM and didn't really get much attention from other owners. Cat is the first owner that really gives EMD its due which is good but they lost a healthy 20 years of having adequate resources, so I have to give it to the EMD guys for doing more with less.

With GE, remember making sales isn't always about the product but also about the deal itself. GE Capital is one of the largest essentially banks in the world and GE was able to agressively finance locomotive purchases and make very attractive deals. EMD never really had a financing arm that could compete with the likes of GE Capital, but now with Cat they are able to do some more deals. 

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Saturday, March 11, 2017 10:42 PM

UP was also using SD70ACes as helpers out of SLO on the Cuesta Grade same time as that crash. They'd replaced the Tunnel motors. They come through Roseville all day every day. As do SD70Ms. Which probably do creek considering their age. You know what doesn't EVER come through roseville except to sit in a dead line? Dash 9s. They've been banned from the UP in California. UP rebuilt some of their SD60s though...and a bunch of the rest were still being used until the new T4 units started to push SD70Ms to locals. BNSF is rebuilding their SD70MACs AND their SD75Ms. Why would they do that, especially the SD75Ms which are a relatively small group, if they were crap?

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, March 11, 2017 10:08 AM

M636C (3-11):

South of the equator operations with Alco’s tells me that you are talking about niche operations, that became adept at doing what the majority was unable to do.  But, BNSF, CSX, and FEC’s track record with contemporary EMD’s is for all to see.

Personally, I am an EMD man.  But when sources tell me EMD’s are junk, it has to make one wonder.  One source has repeatedly said UP’s SD70M’s (all 1400 plus of them) “creek” and that kind of burst’s an EMD man’s bubble.  In 2008 the famous UP-Metrolink Chatsworth head-on took place.  The UP was a local, with SD70ACe’s!  At the time they had been regulated off hotshots.  Apparently, whatever issues UP had with them has been resolved, because they again are seen on hotshots system wide.

That was just an interesting perspective, M636C.  One has to accept what those that run the power have to say about that power!

Best,

K.P.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Saturday, March 11, 2017 8:47 AM

M636C
 

Two units haul a load of 110 cars each of 308 000 lbs gross, so 16 940 tons over a route of around 250 miles to the most distant mine. Trains have ECP brakes and are run in distributed power sets of six locomotives and 330 cars.

 

 

330 cars?  Distributed power?  ECP brakes? 

 

I was going to say John G Kneiling's vision of his Integral Train, but someone beat me to it: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21415

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
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Saturday, March 11, 2017 4:22 AM

K. P. Harrier

The SD40-2 was the last great locomotive EMD built.  General Motors, parent of EMD, started having major problems in the 1970’s selling cars (junkmobiles), and because of stupidity lost market share bigtime.  Everybody had to tighten their belts, and EMD was no exception.  They started selling junk and they lost market share with diesels too.

The thought that EMD units are great is a pipedream.  A contact recently was the engineer of a new SD70ACe (NOT the “-T4”). He said it was junk!  Can you image a new locomotive being junk?

I find it hard to believe that the SD70 ACe is junk.

The BHP Billiton system in Western Australia is operated exclusively by 180 SD70 ACe units.

I worked on this line in the 1970s, and I've visited it from time to time since then.

Two units haul a load of 110 cars each of 308 000 lbs gross, so 16 940 tons over a route of around 250 miles to the most distant mine. Trains have ECP brakes and are run in distributed power sets of six locomotives and 330 cars.

Most of these units are a slightly modified design, but eleven were standard units built for BNSF that became available when the GFC coincided with a peak in iron ore demand.

Previously the line had used Alco C636 and MLW M636 locomotives, GE C36-7s and had standardised on GE C40-8s although they had eight AC 6000s as well.

Their competitor Rio Tinto went for C44-9Ws followed by ES44DCi units.

The ES44DCi was built on the AC 6000 frame with AC6000 radiators (as well as the air to air intercooling) in order to operate in the temperatures up to 45 degrees Celcius in summer. These can't have been cheap to buy, almost certainly much more than an SD70M-2.

Strangely, the SD70 ACes were completely standard regarding cooling and operated without problems in the high temperatures.

It is fairly obvious that the AC 6000 was GE's equivalent of the EMD's SD50 and even re-engining with 16 cylinder GEVO engines in 2006 didn't stop the changeover to EMD.

The fairly frequent turbocharger failures on the Rio Tinto ES44DCi units didn't help GE's reputation either.

Fortescue metals started with GE Dash 9s, but picked up a few SD90MACs, some rebuilt as SD9043MACs and went with SD70ACes for all new purchases.

If the SD70 ACe was junk, it wouldn't be selected by very cost consciuous mining companies for critical operations in a very remote area, much of which is desert.

Peter

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, March 10, 2017 10:16 PM

NorthWest

The GP60Ms and Dash 8-40BWs ride rough because they are very heavy for four axles, and have the heavy cab on one end. Santa Fe might not have asked for a rough riding unit, but that is what they recieved after specifying those parameters.

The GP60Ms are being rebuilt for use as local power, where they have been for years, as they are cleaner burning than BNSF's other four-axles which keeps CARB happy.

A lot of the 4-axle Dash-8s are still around on BNSF, though dwindling slowly.

 

 

The locos were still balanced, they had to be or it would have been worse than a rough ride. So there was plate in the back and fuel tanks were shifted.

 

in the case of the GP40-2L, the L was for light in that the frame was lighter than standard. 

 

I agree, I'm not saying that ATSF asked for units that ride rough, I'm saying ATSF asked for a GP60 with a safety cab and they had to have known the engineering issues that that design was going to present. 

 

Did the 60Ms and 40BWs ride appreciably different on a full tank of gas vs. empty?

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 237 posts
Posted by JEREMY CENTANNI on Friday, March 10, 2017 4:33 PM

YoHo1975

 

 
JEREMY CENTANNI

Good stuff to all, please keep sharing.

I'm not completely sold on the financing side as being a sole reason.  I can see it being part of the bigger picture.

Everyone has said EMD has been the superior product minus the 50 series missteps.   Maintenance costs are huge to railroads.  Ask UP why they never bought more Alco diesels.  Just seems odd unless GE was pushing it with the finance side to the point of next to no profit to get makret share?

 

 

 

 

Who said anything about GE not making any money?

For one, it's not like they sold them at a loss. I believe the GE locomotives were cheaper to make and they may have sacraficed some margin, but Financing is extremely profitable. And remember, we're talking about the 80s and 90s when interest rates were high, not 2008. 

Self financing was a bit of a revolution. GE got into it at all levels. I have a mattress I bought via GE's financing back before the got rid of that division. 

The Automotive companies got into it with GMAC and Ford Motor Credit, but GMAC wasn't focused on Loco leasing to the best of my knowledge.

 

 

I never said they didn't make a profit.

They could make the locomotive "x" price and be a very low margin on the actual locomotive price tag.

Then the usual bait and switch and make it up on the backend with financing, just like buying a car....

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Friday, March 10, 2017 3:13 PM

The GP60Ms and Dash 8-40BWs ride rough because they are very heavy for four axles, and have the heavy cab on one end. Santa Fe might not have asked for a rough riding unit, but that is what they recieved after specifying those parameters.

The GP60Ms are being rebuilt for use as local power, where they have been for years, as they are cleaner burning than BNSF's other four-axles which keeps CARB happy.

A lot of the 4-axle Dash-8s are still around on BNSF, though dwindling slowly.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Friday, March 10, 2017 1:46 PM

YoHo1975
ATSF asked for a design that was going to bounce a lot.

??? They wanted this???

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, March 10, 2017 1:34 PM

Well, in the case of the GP60Ms, I'm pretty sure the answer is CARB. The California Air Resources Board and BNSF/UP's voluntary agreement with them on fleet emissions.

  • Member since
    June 2016
  • 13 posts
Posted by Michigan on Friday, March 10, 2017 12:41 PM

YoHo1975
Further, ATSF bought 83 Dash 8-40BWs and 63 GP60Ms+23 GP60Bs. So roughly equivalent 152 Dash 8-40CW The SD60M was lower HP. which would mean for ATSF, slower train speed. They bought 76 SD75I/Ms A unit designed specifically for them that upped the HP of the SD70M ATSF wanted EMD to match the Dash 9. They clearly WANTED a unit from EMD and it would seem to me that it was the SD75 that soured ATSF on EMD, not the GP60M. I don't know why they didn't like them. Clearly they were good enough to be kept working when needed. until their leases ended. LUGO when traffic was down, because they're snowflakes. The GP60Ms are STILL on the roster. The Dash 8s, all flavors are mostly not.
 

I wonder why all the GP60/M's and SD70I/M's are getting rebuilt if their so bad?

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, March 10, 2017 12:22 PM

Further, ATSF bought 83 Dash 8-40BWs and 63 GP60Ms+23 GP60Bs. So roughly equivalent 152 Dash 8-40CW The SD60M was lower HP. which would mean for ATSF, slower train speed. They bought 102 SD75I/Ms. A unit designed specifically for them that upped the HP of the SD70M ATSF wanted EMD to match the Dash 9. They clearly WANTED a unit from EMD and it would seem to me that it was the SD75 that soured ATSF on EMD, not the GP60M. I don't know why they didn't like them. Clearly they were good enough to be kept working when needed. until their leases ended. LUGO when traffic was down, because they're snowflakes. The GP60Ms are STILL on the roster. The Dash 8s, all flavors are mostly not.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, March 10, 2017 12:11 PM

Yeah, everything I've read says the Dash 8s were AT BEST marginally better behaved than the 60Ms. And both were horrible. Also, Everything I've read about the GP40-2Ls and especially the GP40-2Ws was that they were close to if not as bad as the GP60Ms. ATSF asked for a design that was going to bounce a lot. They knew that up front, because the CN units rode rough. EMD and GE both did their best to account for that. They were still rough as hell. but again, they were what ATSF asked for and both companies built rough riding units. So that's not an indicator of the problem.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 9 posts
Posted by My Shadow on Friday, March 10, 2017 12:01 PM

Shadow the Cats owner

Santa Fe was upset by how rough riding the GP60M turned out to be.  How could EMD that had been turning out widecab locomotives for CN in 4 axle and 6 axle models screw up so freaking badly on that one.  Crews said riding that one was like getting on a bucking bronco for a trip per a retired railroader I am friends with.


To be fair, GE's B40-8Ws rode about as bad as the GP60Ms (both were exceptionally rough).  Both the GP60Ms and B40-8Ws were renowned for their rough riding characteristics, truck hunting, and bouncing at grade crossings, crossovers, etc.

  • Member since
    April 2016
  • 1,447 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Friday, March 10, 2017 10:25 AM

Santa Fe was upset by how rough riding the GP60M turned out to be.  How could EMD that had been turning out widecab locomotives for CN in 4 axle and 6 axle models screw up so freaking badly on that one.  Crews said riding that one was like getting on a bucking bronco for a trip per a retired railroader I am friends with.  Then throw in EMD insisting for years staying with a 1 inverter per truck while GE was offering 1 per axle.  The simple fact was GE just started offering a better product.  Except for BN and UP's major orders can you think of any major EMD orders in the last 25 years of more than 300 units at one time.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Friday, March 10, 2017 1:00 AM

jeffhergert

 

 
BaltACD

Let's remember who controls the decisions of which locomotives to buy - and it is not the people that actually use them.  Bean Counters - those that keep track of historical costs of all forms of locomotives that the carriers operate, as well as understanding the company's financial situation and all the in's and out's of the various financial packages that are available.

GE's lead in financing led to their conquest of market share.

 

 

 

GE has had a better product for quite a while now.  EMD isn't your father's EMD, for many reasons already mentioned.

Jeff

 

 

That may or may not be true, but that has nothing to do with what made GE number 1. The Dash 8 was not any better than the SD60. And perhaps I'm misremembering, but BN sure bought enough SD70MACs, so they must have gotten something write on that machine. 

  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 1,881 posts
Posted by Leo_Ames on Friday, March 10, 2017 12:07 AM

NorthWest
I can't explain what happened with CSX. They bought one small order of SD60s and then GEs thereafter. Price again?

The SD50 was the one with vibration issues as they were set at 950 RPM, though later most were derated to 930 RPM and lately 900 RPM as SD40-2 equivilents.

Buying only 10 SD60's in 1989 while placing an order for their first 94 C40-8's, must mean they were less than pleased with the SD50 and felt like the SD60 wasn't improved enough over it.

I've always seen it attributed to their displeasure with the SD60, but that wouldn't explain such a small order being placed. 

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, March 9, 2017 11:26 PM

BaltACD

Let's remember who controls the decisions of which locomotives to buy - and it is not the people that actually use them.  Bean Counters - those that keep track of historical costs of all forms of locomotives that the carriers operate, as well as understanding the company's financial situation and all the in's and out's of the various financial packages that are available.

GE's lead in financing led to their conquest of market share.

 

GE has had a better product for quite a while now.  EMD isn't your father's EMD, for many reasons already mentioned.

Jeff

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, March 9, 2017 10:08 PM

Let's remember who controls the decisions of which locomotives to buy - and it is not the people that actually use them.  Bean Counters - those that keep track of historical costs of all forms of locomotives that the carriers operate, as well as understanding the company's financial situation and all the in's and out's of the various financial packages that are available.

GE's lead in financing led to their conquest of market share.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 1,879 posts
Posted by YoHo1975 on Thursday, March 9, 2017 9:56 PM

JEREMY CENTANNI

Good stuff to all, please keep sharing.

I'm not completely sold on the financing side as being a sole reason.  I can see it being part of the bigger picture.

Everyone has said EMD has been the superior product minus the 50 series missteps.   Maintenance costs are huge to railroads.  Ask UP why they never bought more Alco diesels.  Just seems odd unless GE was pushing it with the finance side to the point of next to no profit to get makret share?

 

 

Who said anything about GE not making any money?

For one, it's not like they sold them at a loss. I believe the GE locomotives were cheaper to make and they may have sacraficed some margin, but Financing is extremely profitable. And remember, we're talking about the 80s and 90s when interest rates were high, not 2008. 

Self financing was a bit of a revolution. GE got into it at all levels. I have a mattress I bought via GE's financing back before the got rid of that division. 

The Automotive companies got into it with GMAC and Ford Motor Credit, but GMAC wasn't focused on Loco leasing to the best of my knowledge.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Thursday, March 9, 2017 3:04 PM

JEREMY CENTANNI
Maintenance costs are huge to railroads.  Ask UP why they never bought more Alco diesels.  Just seems odd unless GE was pushing it with the finance side to the point of next to no profit to get makret share?


Have you ever tried replacing the power assemblies on an ALCO or GE? I did five on an SD45 in much less than an eight hour shift. Try that on a GE!

.

  • Member since
    September 2014
  • 237 posts
Posted by JEREMY CENTANNI on Thursday, March 9, 2017 1:59 PM

Good stuff to all, please keep sharing.

I'm not completely sold on the financing side as being a sole reason.  I can see it being part of the bigger picture.

Everyone has said EMD has been the superior product minus the 50 series missteps.   Maintenance costs are huge to railroads.  Ask UP why they never bought more Alco diesels.  Just seems odd unless GE was pushing it with the finance side to the point of next to no profit to get makret share?

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