We are just about to get the first of the Australian built ES44ACs , on the national standard gauge , and I’m interested to hear what drivers thought when the Evos first turned up in the US .
I mean this as in Dash 9 vs ES44DC and AC4400 vs ES44AC .
It would be interesting to know if fuel consumption is any better real world .
I have noticed that these new Evos pick up faster than our locally built Dash 9s , but these D9s are extra s l o w to load when fitted with Trip Optimiser software .
So far I’ve only had an Evo as a trailing unit .
I have previously run US domestic CW44-9 and our locally built 134 tonne AC4400s .
So no feedback of Evos vs Dash 9/AC4400 real world fuel consumption ?
I too was waiting with interest to hear opinions…
I can’t say that I’ve noticed any difference between the two. The only engines that I normally get in an all home road consist are AC4400 variants, SD70 Ace and variants and SD70m. Other than being a GE or EMD type product. The type of train, the make up of trains, the number of engines online varies so much that I don’t know the difference in operation could really be noticeable.
The same with fuel consumption. I will note fuel levels getting on the power, if the fuel gauges are working, and report low levels to allow those in charge to decide if a fuel truck will be needed. If fuel is low enough, I will try to attempt to figure how much fuel we’re using in case I need to update those in charge.
Even then, the digital gauges probably aren’t refined enough to give exact fuel burns. Some engines show changes every 10 gallons, some every 50 gallons. The on board computer may have a function that monitors and records fuel usage, but I’ve never seen it in the maintenance levels I can access.
Sorry I can’t be of help.
Jeff
Fair enough . We read that Evo 12 fuel consumption is supposed to be around 6% better than the Dash 9s 16 cylinder FDL locos .
People have said that Evo ACs pick up faster than Dash 9 DCs , but then our C44ACis do too . Possibly the AC control system doing this .
Have the Evos proved any more reliable than D9/AC4400s .
CSX purchased about 200 GEVO DC engines around 2010 or so. I never got complaints or congratulation about the engines from the crews that ran them. While the engines had 4400 HP prime mover, the software installed derated them to 4000 HP.
From my position as an ACD I was wondering why CSX would purchase the GEVO DC’s when everything they had been buying before were AC’s with the Heavy software and added weight. Subsequent to the GEVO DC purchase they returned to buying AC Heavies from GE which I believe were powered by the 4400 HP GEVO engine.
Two operators in isolated iron ore systems run your full sized Evos in Australia , the first were DCs and ACs followed .
The first of the smaller lighter locally built ones are just about to enter service after testing .