wctransfer wrote: I can finally put the Myth to sleep! Last night at a slide show, we were looking at a bunch of WC SD45 slides, and we got on a discussion about fuel. My uncle, who worked for the WC, was telling me the numbers on fuel consumption in idle, and in notch 8 etc. If you look at the numbers, the SD45s dont eat anymore fuel than a 16 cylinder SD40! For the Horsepower that they gave you, you were actually using fuel more efficiently. I had a feeling this was more a myth than anything, and It was cool to hear the numbers stack up against other units. So please, no more talk about fuel.Alec
I can finally put the Myth to sleep! Last night at a slide show, we were looking at a bunch of WC SD45 slides, and we got on a discussion about fuel. My uncle, who worked for the WC, was telling me the numbers on fuel consumption in idle, and in notch 8 etc. If you look at the numbers, the SD45s dont eat anymore fuel than a 16 cylinder SD40! For the Horsepower that they gave you, you were actually using fuel more efficiently. I had a feeling this was more a myth than anything, and It was cool to hear the numbers stack up against other units. So please, no more talk about fuel.
Alec
Nice! You should be on Myth Busters. But they did have other problums from what I've read. Plus they where a odd locomotive and didn't fit in with standards of modern day railroading. But was this when WC rebuilt them? I'm sure the WC made them more fuel effeciant.
My Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/JR7582 My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wcfan/
Kathi Kube wrote:My locomotive first love is an SD45 — WC7501, to be exact. And I'll never be able to thank you enough for that, Randy. Beautiful engines.Beyond that, though, I've got a friend who's a WC/CN hogger who loved running them, too. I do hope at least one gets preserved.Kathi
So if we DO end up getting the WC #7495 like we are supposed to, youd come up here and do an article on us?
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Getting back to the original question, let's look at the time line. Back when the SD45 was introduced, it was the best thing going. It was powerful, the train crews loved them and they were NEW. They were the cutting edge, for their time.
On our district, all SD type locos, from the 35 on up, were rated at 2000 tons each. Three six axle units were the norm for a 6000 ton train. The SD35's would get the train over the mountain, just barely. The SD40's would get you over the mountain comfortably. The SD45's would get you over the mountain in fine style. We loved to get an all SD45 consist as we knew we wouldn't be down to a dead crawl going uphill.
Now look at what you have to work with today. They are the cutting edge. For the most part, almost forty years newer than an SD45. Now why would I rather have the SD45 back in the consist and not on the head end?
First you have Air Conditioned Cabs! Quieter cabs. And depending on how big of a pig rode the units before your tour of duty, cleaner cabs. And that's about the gist of it.
The newer units, while they can pull more tonnage up a hill than an SD45, they CANNOT pull it with the same elan as the pre Hi-Ad could!!! Given equal trains, you can have the GE power and I'll take the SD45's (or even SD40's, for that matter) and I'll be waiting for you at the other end of the road while I finish off my seven course meal.
.
They are fuel hogs and have a number of non-standard features making maintenance more difficult and non-standard.
I worked in the RH for a year before going out on the road. One day we had a SD45 in the house for some power assembly changes. In the next bay was an ALCO RS11, also in for a power assembly change.
I changed out five complete P/A's on that SD45. The Mac in the next bay only just finished the one P/A on the ALCO!
Well, I have to say that I loved the SD 45-t2's. The SD 45-t2's where the first 6 axle locomotives that I ever operated and I love how they ran. They were very smooth and very quite on the inside. The worst thing about them was the bell being right over the cab. Working for a shortline and having a conductor trying to sleep a little and then coming up on a crossing and ringing the bell was not that good.
I know most of the folks reading this are saying, The Conductor trying to sleep while the train is moving. That not Safe. Well, you are right, but sometimes you just got to break the rules to do your job. Especially when someone is telling you to do 14 hours worth of work and you die at 12 hours. 14 hours worth of work not including the running time from point to point.
I found a site that modeled a Morris-Knudsen locomotives, They look alittle diffrent than the SD45s. Surplus means that there's extra equpiment that isn't need at the moment. Kinda like the miltary surplus stores.
Wow, I read this thread again and it's really gave me alot of info. I like your stories and your info cleared the confusion I had about the SD45. Thanks alot!
(here's the Morris-Knusen SD40M-2 http://www.dakotabranch.com/index.php?content=showmdlloco&n_stk_id=175 )
well, since you're talking about SD45's...
CP Rail owns a few Morris-Knudsen rebuilds that are SD45's on the outside, yet have SD40-2 prime movers inside. these are classified as SD40M-2. as of today, all 6 are still in service (better get your cameras) and #5498 has been declared surplus. does anyone know what that means? the surplus thing was started in 2007. the other units are #5493-5498. i think CP Rail owns these because they are basically identical in power to their massive fleet of SD40-2's.
P.S. the units are all US styled and built.
Your friendly neighborhood CNW fan.
Limitedclear wrote: They are fuel hogs and have a number of non-standard features making maintenance more difficult and non-standard. They are also old and suffering from being run hard and put up wet for a lot of years...LC
They are fuel hogs and have a number of non-standard features making maintenance more difficult and non-standard. They are also old and suffering from being run hard and put up wet for a lot of years...
LC
WCfan wrote:Where the SD-45s a Expermental loco when they came out? From the info you guys gave me it sounds like it. The angled radiators, odd motor configuration, low mpg, noise, and in-efficiency.(Sorry guys I asked this before but no one answered)
No they weren't an experiment. They were part of the "horsepower race" going on at the time. The radiators were flared to be able to sucessfully cool the large motor. They received a bad rap when some of the early production locos were experiencing main bearing failures and other small defects. Despite changes that fixed the problems, the fuel comsumption and extra maintenance costs (4-cyl more than that SD40) caused them to drop out of favor with many roads who then switched to buying the SD40. The difference in fuel usage is very apparent when considering that it was enough for the Montana Rail Link to pony the millions of dollars to purchase 16 brand-new SD70ACes. The fact that most RRs who bought the SD45s got them for the heaviest trains in the most demanding territory tends to wear them out more quickly.
BigJim wrote: What I loved about them was that most RRs put tonage on them based on 3,600 HP in freight service and while not turning the HEP gen. they would flat fly.The absolute best consist I ever had was two SD45's and two GP40's. Now that consist would flat haul a train!
What I loved about them was that most RRs put tonage on them based on 3,600 HP in freight service and while not turning the HEP gen. they would flat fly.
The absolute best consist I ever had was two SD45's and two GP40's. Now that consist would flat haul a train!
Saw alot of that on WC. (Of my knowage) Except they had a GP40 in the lead with 2 SD45's behind it, now that would be something to model! Especally with sound! But I'll save that for the MR fourms.
When I was in Temple, TEXAS last November the diesel house was thick with SD45-2s. There were at least 7 cabbed and one booster unit at Temple. One of the units was getting a new headlight the morning I stopped by to work at the Museum.
Ed
Gribble Siding wrote: beaulieu wrote: It should be noted that BNSF is still running a small number of ex-Santa Fe SD45-2s. To minimize maintenance problems they are all in Rock train service in North Texas- South Oklahoma, so only one facility needs to stock any parts, also if any major part fails the locomotive is retired. Actually, the SD45-2s up here in North Texas are on locals that switch grain elevators in Saginaw, TX. They originate out out of BNSF North and Saginaw Yards. There are usually a couple up in Haslet at the BNSF Alliance Yard which are used for trnasfers between BNSF yards in the area and the daily BNSF Alliance yard to UP Centenial(I will not call it Davison Yard) Yard.The SD45-2s on rock trains are down in Central Texas(CenTex) and South Texas. You can find A-B-B-A sets of SD45-2 power down there. Up here in North Texas, are rock trains are pwered by ES44DCs, Trash 9-44CWs, and the occasional 8-40CW. My namesake, Gribble Siding gets up to six to 8 rock trains a day when business is booming and everything is gelling.The only SD45-series locomotives on rock trains in North Texas are two wonderful CEFX SD45T-2s and an SD45R leasors, and are run by Dallas Garland and Northeastern(DGNO). All are former SSW or SP, and all still in SP "speed lettering" scheme. All have about inch high CEFX lettering, and cant really be seen if one is beyond say 25 meters.
beaulieu wrote: It should be noted that BNSF is still running a small number of ex-Santa Fe SD45-2s. To minimize maintenance problems they are all in Rock train service in North Texas- South Oklahoma, so only one facility needs to stock any parts, also if any major part fails the locomotive is retired.
It should be noted that BNSF is still running a small number of ex-Santa Fe SD45-2s. To minimize maintenance problems they are all in Rock train service in North Texas- South Oklahoma, so only one facility needs to stock any parts, also if any major part fails the locomotive is retired.
beaulieu wrote:It should be noted that BNSF is still running a small number of ex-Santa Fe SD45-2s. To minimize maintenance problems they are all in Rock train service in North Texas- South Oklahoma, so only one facility needs to stock any parts, also if any major part fails the locomotive is retired.
WCfan wrote: Randy Stahl wrote: Underw8 wrote: The only place which may have need of the SD-45 would be lines with a 3% grade AND 40-50 carload consist!Underw8PROUD father of an American SoldierPretty much , the SD-45 was very good in notch 8 ! but WC did find use for them on the mains, But they only used them because thats what there main power was. (and the GP40/GP38-2s)
Randy Stahl wrote: Underw8 wrote: The only place which may have need of the SD-45 would be lines with a 3% grade AND 40-50 carload consist!Underw8PROUD father of an American SoldierPretty much , the SD-45 was very good in notch 8 !
Underw8 wrote: The only place which may have need of the SD-45 would be lines with a 3% grade AND 40-50 carload consist!Underw8PROUD father of an American Soldier
The only place which may have need of the SD-45 would be lines with a 3% grade AND 40-50 carload consist!
Underw8
PROUD father of an American Soldier
Pretty much , the SD-45 was very good in notch 8 !
but WC did find use for them on the mains, But they only used them because thats what there main power was. (and the GP40/GP38-2s)
The SD-45, FP-45 was designed to produce 4,000 HP & the original idea was that it would produce at least 3,600 HP for tractive effort while turning a HEP generator for passenger service. What I loved about them was that most RRs put tonage on them based on 3,600 HP in freight service and while not turning the HEP gen. they would flat fly.
42 yrs pulling the throttle I do know what works.
TNX
Paul, 73, KC9JKR
Hypothetically,
You are purchasing a new car. The cost of gasoline/petrol in your area is now up to $3.50 / gal. (or comparable litre-rate). Would YOU go out and buy a 20-cylinder car so you had the biggest engine in town? OR would you puchase a 4-cyl car which got 45-50 mpg??
While the average railroad has more money than the average person, is this not throwing good money after bad?? SURE they can purchase the SD-45 (with 20 cyls) cheaper'n the U-23B (with 12). Which is gonna cost more in operation? 20 cylinders or 12? ESPECIALLY if the trains never exceed a length which twelve cylinders could pull at Timetable Speed, with no difficulty!
Which will cost more in maintenance? Replacing 12 gaskets or 20? The more cylinders, the greater the risk of *one* cylinder becoming useless, and returning the unit to the shop for tie-up, during which time it cannot be used *in revenue service*!
Who's whining about the SD45's noise? I love it. I can tell a turbocharged SD-45 from any Locomotive.(Probably because I grew up aroung them and can't tell the diffrence) I guss they aren't hated as more of don'f fit in any more. I never realized that those locos where that old! I thought they where from the late 70s to early 80s. But they where pretty bad. (Correct me if I'm wrong) The SD45 from Santa Fe and BN where pretty beat up. The link is at the bottom of a pic I found. And yes they wouldn't fit into the EPA.
Another question, where the SD45s a experment loco? From the info you guys gave me it sounds like it. The angled radiators, the odd prime mover, and the low MPG(Miles Per Gallon). I have to say those where some of the most beautiful locos out there(in my opinion). Especally when there run High Hood forward, but that's another story.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=182264
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.