• 44ton vs 45 ton

  • Discussion of General Electric locomotive technology. Current official information can be found here: www.getransportation.com.
Discussion of General Electric locomotive technology. Current official information can be found here: www.getransportation.com.

Moderators: AMTK84, MEC407

  by dansapo
 
My question is..
Since the 44 ton has 4 traction motors and 380hp and the 45 ton has 2 and 150hp.Other than price what is the advantage for the 45 ton model? Do both have the same pulling power.The obvious answer would say the 44 tonner would out preform the 45 ton by a long shot. Can someone fill me in on this.
Thanks

  by GOLDEN-ARM
 
The 44 tonners have/had Caterpillar D-17000 diesels, usually rated at 200hp each. The 45 tonners were Cummins (NH-150) powered, at a hp rating of around 150 per diesel. I have seen both chain drives, and side rods, on the 45 tonners, as well as side rods on 44 tonners. I can't say for sure, if the 44 tonners were originally equipped that way, or had been re-trucked.
Union agreements of the era, mandated an engineer, and fireman, on all locos over 45 tons and heavier. The 44 tonner was an attempt, by certain carriers, to circumvent the agreements, by creating a "one man" loco. Great concept, but as anyone who has run one (or most locos under 100 tons) knows that being able to move around 6-10 cars at a time, not the fastest way to get the switching done. Cool little locos, I am still searching for an early version, to purchase, as a restoration project. Those little Cat D-17000 series diesels, were okay engines, and the ability to move about with just one running, was another "bonus" for a loco that had a hard time earning it's keep, on the rosters of the class ones. Know of a blunt-nosed version sitting in the weeds somewhere? The earliest ones have the intakes for the radiators, on the sides of the noses, instead of on the front of the noses. Have been trying to chase one down, for the last 5 years.....

  by dansapo
 
Where I grew up.Skaneateles Shortline had both models.From what I read,the 45 tonner was the problem child.They had to alot to make it work on the RR.On to the PH 1 44 tonner. Good luck.I only 2 that I know about is NYO&W 10*&105.One of them ended up on SNJ RR. I' m not sure where the other went.

  by GOLDEN-ARM
 
There was a LV unit in Morristown, NJ, as late as 1985/86. It was sold (without consent of it's legal owner) and was part of a giant lawsuit, that ended the operations of National Locomotive Works, on the M&E Railroad (not Railway) This is the unit, I have been trying to find, along with many others. Last seen in a funky green paint job, nobody has been able to say, where it was shipped to. Having personally seen many little locos tucked away, unused or rotting in the bushes, in places not accessible by the general public, it could still be around, rusting away behind a warehouse, grain silo or sitting in plain sight. I have shot many abandonded, derelict or unneeded locos, in places like I mentioned above, all across the country. Haven't seen a green, blunt nosed 44 tonner. Yet. :(

  by dansapo
 
GOLDEN-ARM wrote:There was a LV unit in Morristown, NJ, as late as 1985/86. It was sold (without consent of it's legal owner) and was part of a giant lawsuit, that ended the operations of National Locomotive Works, on the M&E Railroad (not Railway) This is the unit, I have been trying to find, along with many others. Last seen in a funky green paint job, nobody has been able to say, where it was shipped to. Having personally seen many little locos tucked away, unused or rotting in the bushes, in places not accessible by the general public, it could still be around, rusting away behind a warehouse, grain silo or sitting in plain sight. I have shot many abandonded, derelict or unneeded locos, in places like I mentioned above, all across the country. Haven't seen a green, blunt nosed 44 tonner. Yet. :(
I'll post it on the railcritters list on yahoo.
:-D

  by Tadman
 
Sugar Steel has some little GE critter laying around that is used somewhat, whenever the trackmobile isn't working. www.sugarsteel.com Offer Bob Sugar enough money and he will sell it to you for sure. He already sold his caboose to a priest, of all people. Not that priests shouldn't be allowed to own cabooses, just kind of not what I would expect...
  by H.F.Malone
 
The 45 ton locos were considered an industrial unit rather than a "railroad duty" unit. The duty cycle (length of time loco can be used at full output) for a 45 tonner is 50%-- that is, it can operate at full rating for 30 minutes out of each hour, without damage to the electrical gear. The two traction motors vs the four motors on the 44-tonner are also an indication of GE's design. The 44-tonner also has a more robust frame and a higher cab, both useful for shortline railroad service. The 44 tonners have greater air compressor capacity, and a higher top speed (30 mph vs 20 for the 45 tonner). The 14EL automatic brake was an option on the 45 tonners (std was straight air only), and was standard on the 44 tonner.

There were a few 44-tonners built for US Army service during WW2 that had a low cab for clearance reasons; they were otherwise identical to the standard 44-tonners, except for the air compressor being located in a box on the running board instead of under the cab.

Having run and maintained both loco designs, it is very obvious that the 45 tonner is a lighter duty unit. But, the diesel engine (Cummins H-series) is much more supportable nowadays than the Cat D-17000. The Cat engine's heads are very prone to cracking across the valve seats, and replacement heads are just about impossible to get.

I suspect that any 44-tonner with side rod or chain drive trucks was retrofitted with 45-tonner trucks.

G-A, that whole M&E-National Loco thing was quite the mess as I recall. There was a fellow named Ed Sinclair involved in that situation, yes?
  by dansapo
 
H.F.Malone wrote:The 45 ton locos were considered an industrial unit rather than a "railroad duty" unit. The duty cycle (length of time loco can be used at full output) for a 45 tonner is 50%-- that is, it can operate at full rating for 30 minutes out of each hour, without damage to the electrical gear. The two traction motors vs the four motors on the 44-tonner are also an indication of GE's design. The 44-tonner also has a more robust frame and a higher cab, both useful for shortline railroad service. The 44 tonners have greater air compressor capacity, and a higher top speed (30 mph vs 20 for the 45 tonner). The 14EL automatic brake was an option on the 45 tonners (std was straight air only), and was standard on the 44 tonner.

There were a few 44-tonners built for US Army service during WW2 that had a low cab for clearance reasons; they were otherwise identical to the standard 44-tonners, except for the air compressor being located in a box on the running board instead of under the cab.

Having run and maintained both loco designs, it is very obvious that the 45 tonner is a lighter duty unit. But, the diesel engine (Cummins H-series) is much more supportable nowadays than the Cat D-17000. The Cat engine's heads are very prone to cracking across the valve seats, and replacement heads are just about impossible to get.

I suspect that any 44-tonner with side rod or chain drive trucks was retrofitted with 45-tonner trucks.

G-A, that whole M&E-National Loco thing was quite the mess as I recall. There was a fellow named Ed Sinclair involved in that situation, yes?
H.F
The question now is..
Are on the 45 tons trucks.I thought that they had some type of transmission/gear box.You also mentioned that they could also have a chain drive,did they also have side rods too?
Thanks for the info
  by H.F.Malone
 
OK, the 45 tonners started out just pre-WW2 using one GE 733 traction motor per truck, with a double reduction gearbox. The outer axle on each truck was powered by the side rods connected to outside crank/counterweights on the end of each axle.

The post war 45 tonner design had a more rounded cab contour, and used a different truck design-- an adjustable chain drive in-line with the axles (and between the wheels) was used to transmit the single 733 motor's power to the outer axle. This was the same transmission arrangement used on the 25 and 35 ton two-axle locos, which are basically half of a 45 tonner (same Cummins H-series engine).

Both the side rod and chain drive trucks used roller bearings for the axle journals, where the 44-tonner trucks (two 733 motors per truck) used plain bearing journals.

I do not think the 45-tonner trucks (either version) are physically interchangeable with the 44-tonner trucks. And there is the matter of one motor vs two motors per truck, too.
  by CassFireman
 
We have them both and a 66 ton as well. The Cummins in the 45 and the 66 (HBI and HBIS respectively) are totally unsupported at this time. There are NO new parts of any kind available. The D17000's parts supply is drying up... I got the last 10 cork block base seals in Caterpillar's system. I just did a full in-frame on the #2 engine and only had to make 1 gasket. The sleeves are getting scarce... I agree that the 44 is more like a "real" locomotive.

Heavy duty!

But with the lack of prime mover parts for this series of locomotives they have short lifespans without re-powers. The problem with repowering them is finding a modern diesel that will run slow enough. Redline at 900RPM! The Cumbres and Toltec repowered their 44 tonner using reduction gearboxes on modern Cats. There are rumored to be problems with the reduction units, but i saw it running around recently...

So there you go. More .02
  by Andrew Durden
 
CassFireman wrote:
But with the lack of prime mover parts for this series of locomotives they have short lifespans without re-powers. The problem with repowering them is finding a modern diesel that will run slow enough. Redline at 900RPM! The Cumbres and Toltec repowered their 44 tonner using reduction gearboxes on modern Cats. There are rumored to be problems with the reduction units, but i saw it running around recently...

So there you go. More .02

From what I've been told, the Military got around the RPM issue by replacing the main generators (along with just about everything else) on their 44 tonners when they repowered them with CAT 3306's. I've been trying to get the specs on these rebuilds, but haven't had much luck. I tried to buy the one that the Modoc Rail Institute had on OMR a couple of years ago, but they wanted a mint for it. Anyone know where I can get a hold of the specs on the military rebuilds?

We are in the process of doing major work on the newer of our two 44 ton engines. We did a head job on both prime movers and are doing radiator and electrical work as well. The older unit is out of service. We did heads on its front engine a few years ago, but the bottom end is worn out and we also suspect that there is a fissure in one of the liners. If anyone knows of a good running take out CAT D17000, let me know. We have also looked at doing the bottom end, and were able to locate everything but the lower liner seal. This could be made, but the liners, pistons, and rings add up to major $$$. I am debating trying to acquire all of these materials now before they completely cease to be available.

Andrew Durden
Operations Manager
Southeastern Railway Museum
  by RCTrego
 
Does anyone know where to find the Serial number or any other identification on a 45 tonner?
Have one we are moving for a customer and would like to find records of build and more.

Thanks
Russ Trego
615-843-0559