Going through my old equipment, surfacing what can be used and what doesn’t fit. Of course, the decider is whether or not the engines run, but I have a small collection unitentionally started of Athearn and others 45 models. None of them in schemes I model, or even roads. Would a regional railroad in the Midwest in the modern era likely have some, should I send one or two to a leaser engine, or are they just engiens that don’t fit my later needs?Since the 45s all seem to be gone now, what did in the 45s? ’ Given the preference, I’d rather use the models, than scatter them to the fates of flea markets and yardsales if at all possible.
Someone else on this board would know in much better detail, but here’s what I understand about EMD’s 3600-hp 645-engined 45s:
What seems to have shortened the lifespan on the typical 45 is that the 20-cylinder 645 engine was subject to a much higher rate of failure (especially crankshaft breakage, I think) than the 16-cylinder units like the 3000-hp SD40s. Perhaps the longer engine block introduced levels of stress (flexing maybe?) not present in the 16-cylinder configuration. Whatever the case, those V-20s just did not last like the V-16s.
Some of the survivng 45s running around today have had their prime movers replaced with 16-cylinder engines, and have lower horsepower ratings.
Most SD45/F45 locomotive ran for 15-20 years on their original buyers track. A good second hand market(WC Ltd bought something like 100 used SD45’s through the years) let them live on another 10-15 years… The fuel economy was not as good as the 40 line, but you did have 600 more hp to work with and IDAC was standard on the SD45’s. The fuel economy issue was really only an issue when it came to buying habits in the 70’s as the oil embargoes/poor economy surfaced. Most railroads went to the SD40-2 in the 70’s as it provided the best ‘bang for the buck’. I remember a friend who was involved in the Soo Line motive power department mentioning that they really would like to buy GP38-2 engines, but the first cost and fuel costs of 3 GP38-2’s vs 2 SD40-2’s was weight in favor of the SD40-2’s. They did start buying GP38-2’s around 1977 as they needed smaller locomotives to work their network of grain lines.
As mentioned, SP had a lot of older SD45’s ‘upgraded’ with 16-645 power plants. The vendor used a jig to take a 4 cylinder section out of a 20-645 block and weld it back together! While they were at it, a ‘-2’ comparable electrical system was installed. A very neat upgrade on a 20+ year old engine.
The big problem with locomotives over 3000 hp in the 60’s & 70’s was that the control systems could not handle all of that hp. Innovative things like the EMD ‘SS’ radar wheel slip system and GE’s power loading/limiting controls allowed the 4000+ hp engines we see today. The SD40-2 was a landmark engine in the early 70’s. The GE C40-8 was the next landmark engine. This is where GE overtook EMD in sales.
Jim
I caught these last year at West Kittanning PA (the 453 is an ex-SP SD45-2, I believe):
Wayne
Wisconsnin Central engines were painted maroon with yellow graphics and always kept glossy and spotlessly clean.and yes they used both SD and F(P) 45 engines.
The 45s had just enough differences in them to be non-compatible with other EMDs. My employer was thinking of getting some, but a guy that had worked on the WC talked them out of it. SD40-2s were acquired instead. They did have some F45s a while ago, but they weren’t used much account track condition at the time. More notes on the former WSOR roster here, towards the bottom of the page.
The MILW FP45s were retired in 1979 or 1981, scrapped by 1985.
Horsepower being higher? Or what?
I think it had to do with the smaller parts. Ones that wear out and get changed regularly. The '45s were just different enough that they required their own parts. Maybe things like fuel pumps, radiators, water pumps, some electrical components, etc. Enough to be a deal-breaker.
Ah ha. Good to know for a fictitious regional. Thanks.
The only parts that were significantly different (iirc…) were the bigger rads and the cooling water expansion tank; and not all of those were bigger. The later model 45’s had the same tanks as early -2’s and straight 40’s. One of the only reasons they were dumped was that they were pretty close to the end of their economic lifespan. and the 20 cyl engine had 4 extra pistons going up and down causing wear. and the extra legnth of the crankcase was just long enough to cause torsional (sp)issues with the crank. I worked on a ship with 2 of the 20 cyls in it and they were GREAT runners… but they were much more isolated from movement.