Can someone explain to me what the GP9-4 is?

What is the GP9-4? can you maybe explain to me who rebuilt the GP9-4, when they rebuilt it and what was the purpose of the GP9-4?

Did RLK rebuild them in 1996? 1997? or 1998?

From what I found so far, RLK rebuilt five GP9-4 locomotives from five former Southern Pacific GP9E/GP9R locomotives. That’s all I found so far, as there is no information about the GP9-4. Which to me it feels like a GP9 locomotive that is underrated.

Unit Build date Rebuilt date by SP Formerly (prior to becoming GP9-4s)
RLK 4000 Built in April 1959 Rebuilt by SP on December 15, 1976 Formerly SP GP9E 3841
RLK 4001 Built in August 1959 Not rebuilt by SP Formerly SP GP9 3708
RLK 4002 Built in August 1959 Rebuilt by SP in March 1977 Formerly SP GP9R 3880
RLK 4003 Built in September 1959 Rebuilt by SP in October 1977 Formerly SP GP9R 3883
RLK 4004 Built in August 1959 Rebuilt by SP in October 1975 Formerly SP GP9E 3877

Thanks!

The -4 is a designation made by the rebuilder, and is used (by them) to identify the changes/updates they made when they rebuilt it such as engine upgrades, improved electronics, autostart units, etc.

The original use of this was to designate the very important set of changes made by EMD in the ‘dash-2’ line of improved locomotives. It was very significant as such.

Railroads cunningly leaped on the ‘two legs good - four legs better’ analogy with various kinds of ‘dash-3’ things, obviously from the name more ‘advanced’ in some more-or-less-inchoate fashion from the locomotives being modified.

What could be more logical for Republic, in the heady Starship years, to leapfrog the competition with a yet-more-advanced dash-4? Somewhere there are probably marketing materials touting the improvements, and I’d like to see them.

The problem, as with the GP15 whatever its suffixes were, is that there was comparatively little demand for an expensive rebuild of a GP9 into an improved GP9-size locomotive. The CF7 program worked because of all the costed-down F units; the Paducah-style rebuilds worked because of all the costed-down Geeps at IC and elsewhere… and the comparative cheapness of the common-sense changes made. Note in particular that something I thought was a no-brainer, the E10 rebuilding for Amtrak, was ‘not proceeded with’ (I guess related to the SDP40F procurement). And I’ll bet a hat there are still many who bewail spending All That Money on the Starships – delightful as they were to read about and behold!

2 Likes

who was the rebuilder that made the “-4” was it RLK?

Unless if the GP9-4 is not a rebuild, but rather a classification for the GP9 by a specific company.

I don’t know of any use of a dash-number system on early Geeps that followed the EMD scheme. Many of them used a letter – GP9E, GP9M, GP9U, etc. (the letter meaning “what the railroad wanted it to mean”) or changed the number to reflect a supposedly- improved version: GP8, GP10, GP11.

You presently see widespread use of the dash-3 to indicate various modified versions of EMD second-generation and sometimes newer locomotives. I think you’re supposed to assume ‘dash-2 was good, so dash-3 is better’ even though in many cases the dash-3s are deturboed or otherwise modified for lower horsepower.