Astounding no one has brought this up, even though covered (in open access) by the Newswire: I actually had to find out about it from a post to a Mark Twain literary list!
The Mark Twain Zephyr consist, plus the car from the Pioneer Zephyr taken out for reasons if limited space at the Museum of Science and Industry (how many of you knew that?), have been purchased by an operating railroad, and effective restoration is being started.
Current plan is to re-engine with a 6-567, which could be interesting; somewhere I picked up the impression that the early Wintons in at least some of these motor trains were inline 6s and 8s? (Anyway, the story says they have checked and the transplant engine will fit, so the issue is not severe.)
I confess Iād have gone straight to a modular Tier 4 plus engine and generator on a āskidā designed to fit the legacy Winton footprint, but I think part of the decision is that they already have the 567 and electrical gear on hand āfreeā. And Iām among the LAST people to complain about putting a running 567 in anythingā¦
May the restoration live long and prosper! (And may media and public interest in it result in resumption and successful completion of work on the Flying Yankeeā¦)
Ordinarily I am not a preservationist, but breaking up the articulated trainset of the Pioneer Zephyr?
I am as much of a steam enthusiast these days as anyone, but the Pioneer Zephyr is to diesel locomotion as Stephensonās Rocket is to steam. Yes, there were earlier diesels and other diesel/distillate engined articulated trains just as the Rocket was not the first steam locomotive. But the Pioneer Zephyr is iconic in the way it captured the public imagination.
I am OK operating the Pioneer Zephyr with a 567 engine, but are they talking about tacking the Pioneer Zephyr cars on the back of the Mark Twain Zephyr power car?
Let me assure you that the train in the Museum of Science and Industry will remain safe and intact ā not that I would mind it getting a full operational overhaul even if, as Preston Cook and some others note, even a few minutes operating a Winton 201 is like repeatedly ringing the Liberty Bell in asking for catastrophic consequences.
The thing I did not know is that a car was removed from the Pioneer Zephyr BEFORE that train was put on display. Think of it as an analogue to Overland Trail in the M10000 consist. This extra car (and presumably its associated truck) will go into the Mark Twain consist easily, and enhance the available space in the train as well as represent a good use of the historic fabric (at any rate a better use than as an orphan car sitting in some dealerās yard or other for nearly 60 yearsā¦)
Perhaps that would be ātoo much trainā for a 6-567 to accelerate to 100+mph with a full passenger load. However I expect actual service peak speed to be much lessā¦
I hope they have been and will continue to exchange tips with the Flying Yankee group.
Short of an actual operating Winton or Cleveland (very, very rare these days, and not a single 201A is left running), a 6-567C is the best possible choice. It will sound very similar, will produce the right amount of power, is low-tech and from the same general era, and can be rebuilt with many 645 series parts, which are still in production and should continue to be for many years to come.
Overmod is correct that the 8 cylinder Winton 201 and 201Aās were inline engines (was there ever a 6 cylinder version?). But the narrow V angle of the 567 was specifically chosen so it would fit into locomotives, and even without looking at the measurements I see no reason why it shouldnāt fit, as a Zephyr power car should have the same interior width as an E or F-unit.
Only a few purists will even note the difference. I am one but in this case it is more important to guarantee that this restortion will run most of the time. A couple well place rescue engines might be well worth the effort. We want the general public to pass the word around that this is a good lesson in history.
The previous post about low tech has many advanages for the volunteers.
Lateral fit in the carbody isnāt the issue ā matching the new engine up with the legacy bedplate or bearers, while carefully preserving the āhistoric fabricā of what is there, is the issue. If the conversion āsledā has to be of any particular height, you may start to run into vertical clearance issues as even short 567s are ājust as tallā as longer onesā¦ plus the required manifolding. I donāt think the prospect of needing a height āblisterā or hatch bulge is attractive to contemplateā¦
Incidentally anyone who thinks a 567 is ālow techā evidently hasnāt had much to do with one. The design and metallurgy of many of the pieces is critical, and as Cook has noted may not be even reproduceable today at any sane price. When I was in high school, a friendās father who had maintained the Navy 567s pointed out that a fingerprint on part of the injector would prevent its assembly ā this just as critical a detail as ensuring DLC coating integrity in somewhat more modern injectors. Wear or breakage in the geartrains can become its own need for unobtanium ā no one remembers how to replicate the combination of tooth facing and overall hardening/case in making those gears.
Now with luck the source of spare takeoffs at places like LTE that have large numbers of SWs in their deadlines will remain reasonable. But that may not last indefinitely.
The real horror is in engines from the '80s, heavily dependent on fragile, obsolescent proprietary hardware with firmware and software often imperfectly documented and with repair information effectively lost. As the last factory FRUs disappear or are scrapped for their valuable elements you may easily wind up with something that canāt be low-tech kludged but is far too complex to rewire with emula
Iāve never seen measurements, but from photos it looks like the Winton engines arenāt exactly short either.
I was referencing the lack of computerized or electronic controls of any kind on the engine. And no expensive, complex and sensitive high pressure injection pump, as found on so many other diesels.
This is a 6-567C engine out of a SW600 (a rare unit in its own right)
It was my impression that any 645 conversions on C-blocks were done predominantly for parts compatibility and not power-adding; youād either need to go to the E-block or duplicate the structural improvements in it to make the effort of improving to a ārealā 645 worthwhile. Now Iād invite Peter Clark to comment specifically because I think he is familiar with the export 8-cylinder ā645-Cā engines that I think made more (but not too much more) horsepower.
Of course with the very short crank, if any engine would tolerate a little rack advance with a C block the 6 would be it; I certainly donāt have the experience you guys have with the physical engines to say yes or no. But everyone I trust has said not to try for higher horsepower with the 645 power-assembly swap and rebalance.
Iād like to think there are enough cranks āaroundā (isnāt the blower one-half of the pair on a 12-567?) that there will be no difficulties with the occasional spun bearing or other āissueā.
On the subject of engines for the Budd shovel-nosed power cars, there appeared to be a skeleton-frame along with its accompanying engine in the Lot 17 parking lot being treated as junk during the renovation of the Mechanical Engineering building at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
I believe I took some photos, but that was around the time film became obsolete with the switch to digital cameras, and I must have the exposed film either in the camera or in a 35 mm film canister, someplace. I know one shouldnāt leave exposed film without developing it that long, but maybe it can be salvaged.
As far as salvage value, the buildings on the Engineering Campus have collected various study-discipline related artifacts. Engineering Hall has an original-style Edison DC generator, and at least the Electrical and Computer Engineering put some effort into its preservation in a glass case in a prominent location in the building. In the case of the Mechanical Engineering Department and that Burlington Zephyr artifact, not so much ā I am thinking it was unceremoniously junked, the powers-that-be hnot knowing anything about where it came from.
If this is of any help narrowing it down to which generation of shovel-nosed power car, memory indicates that it was an inline 8-cylinder engine.
That is my understanding as well. Many 645C engined locomotives do see a slight horsepower increase but it is not absolutely required.
I suspect most 645 series parts will continue to be produced for many years to come, due to the sheer number of engines still running all over the world.
From the photos on the ad for the other 6-567C, the single blower appeared to be the standard EMD one. It simply had a plate covering the space where the other blower would have been mounted on a larger engine.
Something else to keep in mind when rebuilding a 567 is that it is possible to have
The Pioneer Zephyr car is an articulated car with only one bogie (which it shares with the next car); at the other end, it sits on the bogie from the adjacent car at that end. It wasnāt originally part of the Pioneer Zephyr set, but was added later to increase passenger capacity. As the Mark Twain Zephyr set is also an articulated set, that additional Pioneer Zephyr car could simply be added into the consist and wouldnāt be an end car. It actually spent part of its life as part of the other three articulated Zephyr sets powered by Winton 201 8-cylinder engines.
Some years ago, one of our machinists was changing a power assembly in sections. After inserting the liner, he proceeded with the piston and rod, but they simply fell into the hole. The 645 liner had to come back out and a 567 liner put back, for which he was ribbed for several daysā¦
Burlington did that regularly, the Museum of Science and Industry have the Zephyr as built in part because they only had space for a three-car train! The 500 coach-diner was added later, and it went from one of the articulated sets to another (much the same thing happened with the Mark Twain set over the years) and some of the inner cars in other formations went for scrap over the years, which is why the Train of the Goddesses at Illinois Railway Museum comprises five cars, rather than the longest formation of seven cars.
This may be the right Thread to ask this on?? Some time back, there was a 'Zephyr-Type train that was in a park in the Southern area of Kansas City; it seemed to be āon-displayā (?). I knoticed over several years(?), but was never able to get down to visit it. [banghead] By the time I had timeā¦It was goneā¦[sigh]
Is the Mark Twain Zephyr that Train? Thanks, for any info!