Brand New 251's

[Alcoman]

Does anyone know if there has been any Alco locomotives that have had a BRAND NEW 251 installed in recent years? Ones purchased from FM/Alco. Not rebuilt engines.

[Super Seis]

36 locomotives in Pakistan. This was circa 1995.

SS

[Alcoman]

36 locomotives in Pakistan. This was circa 1995.

SS

These came from FM/Alco ? Were these placed in their locomotives here in the U.S or just sent to Pakistan directly?

[FCP503]

251 engines are also available from sources outside of North America.

I know of at least two countries that produced 251 engines under license. Resita in Romania, and Diesel Locomotive Works Varanasi in India.

DLWV still produces new 251 powered locomotives.

http://www.diesellocoworks.com/index.htm

[Alcoman]

What am looking for is to see if FM/Alco has supplied NEW 251's for locomotive use in this country. I am aware of the two countries that produce 251's under license.

[MEC407]

Would any of the Alco-friendly shortlines and regionals in North America be able to afford (or be able to justify the expense) purchasing a brand new 251 direct from FM? There are still enough used/rebuilt 251s to keep these roads satisfied; when/if that supply dries up, you'll probably see some of these roads crossing over to the dark side (EMD or GE, take your pick). I have no idea how much it costs to buy a shiny new 251 from FM, but it really wouldn't surprise me if it's significantly more than you'd pay for running-and-blue-carded Geep or Dash 7.

[FCP503]

That kind of economics applies not only to ALCO's but to EMD's and GE's as well. Most older locomotives are worth more as parts than as a complete locomotive. A parted out locomotive also provides a bonanza of other parts as well.

The idea of parting things out kills me, but it's an economic reality. In fact the alternative is most likely worse. If operators of ALCO's (or any other older locos) had to rely on new parts alone the cost would be so high that operating the older locomotives wouldn't make sense.

Yes, that is a downward spiral, where we can look to some point in the future where there are only a handfull of operating survivors. Lima Hamilton's are a good example. Baldwin's and FM's aren't far from this point.

If we were standing in the year 1968 looking forward four decades to the year 2008 how many would guess that the number of ALCO's operating today would be as high as it is?

[RS-3]

I have no idea how much it costs to buy a shiny new 251 from FM, but it really wouldn't surprise me if it's significantly more than you'd pay for running-and-blue-carded Geep or Dash 7.

True. (I've no idea re cost either.) But would you rather have a worn out geep or Dash 7 or a Alco with a brand new shiny 251 in it? I'd take the 251:-)

RS

[Super Seis]

Please explain why would one would need to purchase a 'brand new engine' for locomotives that may work one shift a day ??

[Alcoman]

Please explain why would one would need to purchase a 'brand new engine' for locomotives that may work one shift a day ??

Heck, there 4 16-251's that were installed brand new in the Nasa crawler that work "only as needed".In Railroad use, only a railroad who uses its Alco 24/7 would buy a new PM. Railroads such as the Apache,A&M,D-L,etc would be the only ones that could justify the expense of a "New" 251 engine.
Regardless, is there any railroad in the U.S. who has done this?

[DutchRailnut]

I believe under current EPA rules it would be impossible to put a new 251 in any locomotive, the 251 engine is not Tier 0-1 or 2 compliant.
Changing out entire engine would be considered a major rebuild, older engines can only be compliant if per year less than 1/4 of power assemblies is changed.
anything more than 1/4 is major rebuild.

[Otto Vondrak]

So FM still sells something they call the 251:

http://www.fairbanksmorse.com/engine_fm_alco_251.php

So say you're restoring an old 251-powered locomotive. Can you just drop this "new" 251 in and call it a day?

Did we talk about this already?

-otto-

[Lehighton_Man]

Yeah, i had the same question a while back. I think its because of clearance issues(?) Like, if you were to put a 251 into a RS3 body, you would have to like raise the hood for the 251 to fit. I think the same principle applies for units with 539's or 538s.
Alcoman would know more about this than i would.
Cheers.
Sean

[Alcoman]

The easiest locomotives to drop a "New" 251 in would be a locomotive that already had one. This is true regardless if it is a 6,8,12 or 16 cylinder.

You can also drop a12 cylinder into a Alco carbody that had a 16 cylinder...with modifications to the location of the engine feet and connections to the air compressor,etc. This has been done many times in the past. The C424m's, the PA's,etc.

The dimensional size of a 251 has been the same since 1951.

[N_DL640A]

Yes, if you were restoring an old 251 engined locomotive, the 251F that F-M ALCO builds today would match up, as long as it's power take off end and the free end are configured to accept the generator/alternator and the compressor drive shafts you want to use. Some engines are configured specifically for other non-rail uses. There always seems to be a need for minor piping changes, minor mounting changes, etc... to get a replacement engine to match up to the locomotive you're putting it in; at least in my experience of locomotive engine changes. That said, if you ordered a brand new 251 engine from F-M ALCO, it would be a direct (and very costly) replacement for an older 251 engine in an ALCO or MLW locomotive. You would specify all the mounting and drive options.