Why are the WC SD45s hated by CN. Almost all of them are scrapped. Is it because of the 20 cylinders, the turbo-charging, or is it because it doesn’t fit in with CN standards? I heard that most railroads didn’t want the SD45s, because they where running into problums. Is this true? Why are the SD45s so hated by other railroads?(Or am I wrong, and the Railroads loved them)
I believe that it was because the crankshafts in the long 20 cyclinder engines were subject to failure. Obviously that would be a big fix even if all the other parts were still usable. The flared and tilted radiators were also subject to leaking according to something I read.
Production began in 1965 with the -2 version coming on the scene in 1972. These locos are old.
Electronic controls in the modern locomotive allow it to perform better in terms of adhesion, fuel consumption, distributed locomotives, etc. At least the new ones are going back to the flared radiators…
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
Mostly the problem is the 20-cylinder engine. Many have been rebuilt with 16-cylinder engines. Many WC SD45 were rebuilt with the Q-tron or similar wheelslip control, so they should pull similarly to newer engines. Fuel ecomomy would be less, but sometimes simplicty and availabilty overrule that. CN has older SD40 types running around, also rebuilt over the years.
Forgot to mention that the SD45s will never meet the new EPA emissions standards.
LC
I am sure that Wisconsin Central bought the SD45’s because they were cheap and they had good mechanical men to look at them when they were purchased and to keep them running.
the WC did have good mechanical workers that worked in the shops in fond du lac where all them wc loco’s & cars were all refurbrished & painted & the whole works. i liked the sd 45’s bacuse of its looks i could reconize it by the back end of it & the first one i ever met personaly was 7515 the closest i ever got to one when i was at stevens point abt 10 yds. any way i dont think 7525 will be around much longer. when they broguth them abck CN said they were gonna be around til next year but i guess CN changed thier mind on us.
Yea they where cheap. I heard that WC got 10 for a million dollors, not a millon dollers each, but for all ten! WC had very good mechanical men, They took a CSX GP40 and put parts from 3 diffrent railroads on it to get it running again. Amazing! They also resurrected the GP7s, SDL39s, FP45, F45s and, SD24s. WC adopted all of the equpiment other railroads didn’t want because they where cheap.
Not really. Most parts are interchangeable.
Key word to the above post is that most parts are interchangeable. A crankshaft for a V-20 isn’t exactly usable in any other engine. I can remember the speed with which the major railroads unloaded their SW1’s when EMD announced it would stop making parts unique to the V-6 engine.
We got more than 10 for a million dollars , on average (after the initial BN purchase) we paid around 40K -70K for an SD-45 … you do the math…
It has nothing to do with “hate”. It’s just plain economics. CN wants to own as few locomotives as possible at the least possible cost.
Newer locomotives burn less fuel per HP/hr of work done and they burn less at idle. Compared to and SD40-2, and SD45 burns more idle fuel and, even though the power generating efficiency is about the same, they burn more fuel hauling a train because they provide more HP/ton.
The SD45s also lose when it comes to availability and/or cost to stock replacement parts. There are just enough SD45-only parts that, if you have a small, free running fleet, are an expensive luxury to stock or would keep the locomotive out of service waiting on parts. The turbo and radiator cores are the first two that come to mind.
The WC SD45s probably perform as well as any 40 series, but, in CN’s fleet, they are orphans, so are the first to go when new power is delivered.
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.
i don’t know about any body else out there who is a railfan opinion is but i happen to like diesel locomotives of all shapes and sizes.the sd-45 is no exception,only if cn would be kind enough to keep at least one and donate it to a railroad museum would of have been a nice gesture on thier part.shame on cn for scrapping them all.(p.s.as a side note i don’t like canadian national railroad,even though i’m from canada.)cp rules cn drools.
i bet you wouldn’t think that way if you owned their stock or worked for them and made ***loads of cash. then again you’d never be at home, either…it’s a trade-off, obviously. i’d go work for them and make 5k/half but then again i’m young and the g/f would love the money. The darker side is either she/i would probably end up cheating because of all the time away from home. i’ve seen it and heard stories of it and it’ll always be that way. romance of the rails, baby!
still beats a 9-5 for me. can’t imagine doing anything else.
Its not that they are hated more so being the fact that they dont fit into the thread of any class 1 anymore. WC had great mechanics, and those SD45s were easily some of the best units on the rails (and Im talking all engines in the 90s) and it was because all of the money that the WC put into them. After a while it wasnt a huge deal repairing them because they were cared for a long time, thats besides the few that had major troubles (all locos do), most ran like a swiss watch. Ask anyone who ran the WC SD45s (and who isnt a whiner when it comes to the noise) and they will tell you they were comfortable and pulled just as well as most new units. Course, during the later years CN didnt repair of give them routine maintenance so they went in the hole pretty fast. But, a few WC engineers were telling me that up and till’ the end they still rode like beauty.
Alec
Who’s whining about the SD45’s noise? I love it[:D]. 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[;)].
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!
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 !
Well you could compare the sd45 to a '73 chevy with a 454 under the hood.Sure it has horsepower but sucks gas at an alarming rate.