The 1010 is basically the 265H series just rebranded and now it doesn’t require antifreeze also.
Just looking into that it seems to be a fair point.
I don’t think so. What the two engines, 265H and 1010, have in common is a cylinder volume of 1010 cubic inches. The 265H reached Tier 2, the 1010 Tier 4. This difference alone requires changes to the engine: the 1010 has EGR, common rail injection instead of unit injector activated by the crankshaft, two-stage turbocharging with one high-pressure and two low-pressure turbochargers instead of two low inertia turbochargers. The 1010 needed different intercoolers and atercoolers. The 1010 has a different heavier engine block.
Quote from a Dezember 2015 Railway Gazette International article titled Tier 4 locomotives take to the tracks: This time it would be a collaborative
effort between EMD, Progress Rail and Caterpillar. The result is a new fourstroke
engine; the 12-cylinder 1010 series. This has the same bore and stroke
as EMD’s earlier 265H engine, but company engineers deny any suggestion that it is a retread. The 1010 is heavier than the 710 engine, which is partly due to the extra intercoolers, aftercoolers, and other EGR components.
2 Likes
There’s an engine called LT4 made by GM however the bore and stroke on it are the same as the original 350 chevy of over 70 years ago.
Yes it’s been modified for current emissions standards but the block design is still the same basic shape and dimensions of that original design.
What Caterpillar and EMD did with the 1010 series was fixed the issues with the 265 engine. It was known for having a weaker block casting was to thin in places. The emissions requirements took care of the fuel system and the rest of the changes.
1 Like
They have enough problems keeping the engines from running out of fuel the way it is. All they need is another fluid to keep track of.
Running out of fuel does happen more than one would think. It’s usually due to faulty gauges, digital or analog. The sight glass on most fuel tanks bottom out around 3000 gallons. There’s still a lot of fuel left, but without the other gauges.
Jeff
1 Like
I’ve been playing with a Texas Instruments chip that uses capacitance for measuring fluid levels and it seems to do a very nice job. One issue is that it requires the fluid being measured to be reasonably homogeneous, which may not be the case for fuel in a locomotive fuel tank.
1 Like
Just for the record: the ‘J’ in 1010J is significant, just as the letter in 567D or 645E3 … or 265H… is: it denotes the block construction.
I would like to know the specific changes in the J-block engine that deal with the cavitation concerns, including whether the 1010J as marketed is horsepower-restricted.
2 Likes
Use a DEF tank large enough that DEF lasts longer than fuel. Then fill up the DEF tank everytime you refuel. You might run out of fuel but not out of DEF.
2 Likes
Photos of both engines seem rare on the internet.
Both sides of the 1010J and details:
https://www.facebook.com/furyloco/posts/emd-1010-enginedeveloped-using-the-combined-engineering-expertise-of-progress-ra/258752982153606/
Both sides of the 265H:
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/d2/fd/7c/d2fd7cb6a2e5ca149dac71b022cae1e5.jpg
https://lens.usercontent.google.com/image?vsrid=CMqerZeH3qn9UBACGAEiJDA0YzA1MzFhLTZkOGQtNDVmMS1iMGZlLTI0M2FlMjFmMTM0OQ&gsessionid=vXpxmBapRGjznVZSw5KnzGYzdi8gWW1IU7rkYMhFh4jtv-SL-lQEsw
https://internationaldieselenginesltd.com/2008-06-23/products.php?c=10&p=0&i=3293
Perhaps our experts can point out differences.
2 Likes
As noted above, the J denotes the block design, in this case it is entirely new as at the rear it incorporates the mounting for the alternator directly, allowing for isolation of the engine-alternator assembly, and at the front includes all the mountings for intercooling and aftercooling of the compound turbocharger system and the exhaust gas cooling system.
Dave
2 Likes
Thanks for that info, Dave, I honestly didn’t know that’s what the J stood for, I thought it was for the Joule thing that Progress is developing, but that’s a Battery-Electric series of locomotives 
It would be interesting to know how the 710 performed at the point where Progress/EMD gave up .
I understand that they got close to T4 but even then swallowing so much exhaust really hurt fuel consumption .
Did I read somewhere that a marine version (unlimited intercooling capacity) 710 got to T4 without DEF ?
1 Like
According to Progress Rail’s website there is a Tier 4 certified 710 marine engine (E 23 B 710), but it uses DEF and SCR.
1 Like
EMD initially tested the 710 against the Tier 4 NOx limit of 3.0 g/bhp-h for off-road vehicles. The 710 had no problems meeting the limit.
However, the EPA then selected 1.3 g/bhp-h as the Tier 4 NOx limit.
Quote from Railway Gazette International, December 2015 article titled Tier 4 locomotives take to the tracks:
Not to be defeated, the engineers looked at adding more EGR and installing giant particulate matter filters on existing locomotives. Using a pair of borrowed Union Pacific SD70ACes fitted with large roof boxes for emissions testing, Lenz says**EMD successfully got the 710 engine up to Tier 4 requirements. But while the tests were successful, the resulting design was too heavy, too cumbersome and not cost competitive enough to be marketable. In particular, the fuel economy was worse than for Tier 3.
The interviewed Marti Lenz was EMD’s Director of Engine Systems at LaGrange, Illinois.
PS: The Railway Gazette Int. article was once linked on the GE website. I found it on the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20160616053215/http://media.getransportation.com/sites/default/files/RGI-Dec-00-15-p28-31.pdf
1 Like
And why exactly do we need SCR or DEF in the first place? Or the “Tier” System? I can’t think of any good reason.
2 Likes
@Engine_1988, Global Warming is one but I cant think of any either you you technically have a point with why do we even have the Tier system in place or having SCR or DEF.
I should probably get out of this conversation though or I think that it would likely devolve into me grumbling about politics.
1 Like
Fair I should do the same too.
The locomotive emission regs exist to address areas of the country that don’t meet the ozone and fine particulate national ambient air quality standards. Here’s a link to a map of the current 2015 Ozone nonattainment areas: https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/map8hr_2015.html
Thanks @ns145, Ill look in to it