Railroad Forums 

  • Marketed but never sold EMD types

  • Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.
Discussion of Electro-Motive locomotive products and technology, past and present. Official web site can be found here: http://www.emdiesels.com/.

Moderator: GOLDEN-ARM

 #276356  by U-Haul
 
The SD59 is one. A freight version of the F40PH seems unlikely.

 #276363  by DutchRailnut
 
The Freight version of F40 is GP40, same trucks, same engine same electricals, just no HEP and different gearing.

 #276404  by byte
 
Those two monstrous electric locomtives they built in the late 70s - the GM6 and GM10, I think they were called. The demonstrators were built but no buyers (Hint: Conrail) came forward to purchase.
Last edited by byte on Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

 #276431  by rdganthracite
 
I don't know if the SD45X qualifies. There were no orderes, but SP leased all but one of them for quite a number of years.

 #276442  by USRailFan
 
U-Haul wrote:The SD59 is one.
So EMD actually marketed an SD59? Wonder if that means that they also marketed an SD39-2? After all there was an SD39...

 #276561  by Leo_Ames
 
Wasn't there a 12 cylinder H engine locomotive that was marketed and a prototype constructed of? Think it had similar horsepower to something such as a SD70MAC.

 #276725  by Steve F45
 
what does the H engine look like compared to the regular engine?

 #276757  by Allen Hazen
 
Re: models
One I remember was a treamlined, low-profile, "power car" proposed (and depicted in a booklet distributed to a high-speed rail conference in Pittsburgh) in the mid-1970s: possibly called "AMT-125". Not sure how much detailed engineering was done: the booklet suggested an as-yet-undesigned B truck or E-unit-style A1A truck as options, and mentioned possibility of 3rd rail pick-up for use into Grand Central Terminal (NY). Envisioned train configuration mimicked the British Rail HST: "power car" (a.k.a. locomotive) at each end with maybe seven cars in between-- booklet depicted cars similar to Amtrak's then-new "Amfleet" cars. Proposal was for 125 mph operation (again, like the BR trains); booklet had estimated times for New York City - Buffalo run.
----
Picture of H engine: the current Kalmbach Publishing successor to the "Diesel Spotters Guide" (I forget the exact title; Greg McDonnell is the author) has photos of 710 and H in the introduction to its EMD section and of the FDL and HDL in the intro to its GE section.

 #276766  by LCJ
 
Regarding the AMT-125, I believe Amtrak balked at the cost and instead went with "proven" technology in the ill-fated SDP40F -- with the thought in mind that if Amtrak stumbled, freight railroads might be able to use them.

 #277181  by Allen Hazen
 
LCJ--
Amtrak balked at something, anyway! ... I don't remember exactly when the conference in Pittsburgh was (I went, sneaking in the back, so it was while I lived in Pittsburgh, but I took a LONG time getting through grad school at Pitt!): I think it was a few months after one of GE's new E60CP derailed on a test train: the GE rep at the conference minimized the significance of this, and had the good grace to look embarrassed when his company-supplied video claimed the E60CP was a "worthy successor" to the GG-1. ... The AMT-125 probably would have cost a bucket: EMD doesn't do engineering work for free, and it was clear that this would have to be an entirely new design.
---
On the general topic of "marketed but not sold" models: EMD's 1966 catalogue contained a "DD40" that would have looked like UP's second (cab-equipped) order of DD35 rather than the later DD40X.

 #277221  by LCJ
 
GG1s were a tough act to follow with respect to longevity and utility. No doubt (for me anyway) a 1970-ish "modernized" GG1 would have been prohibitively expensive to develop and build -- but it would probably still be operating today! (We'll never know.)

DD40 probably = double prime mover "bait" that UP resisted for once. Obviously no one else wanted them, either.

 #278137  by scharnhorst
 
How about these odd ball units that were only built in a small number but neveer grew to anything higher in the locomotive markit? Were these just expairaments befor the next stage of locomotives came out or were they a spicific model requested by that railroad at that time?

BL20-2 1 built
SD40-2SS 5 built
SD45X 7 built
SD60MAC 4 built
F69PH-AC 2 built
GM6 1 built
GM10 1 built

 #278352  by Steve F45
 
scharnhorst wrote:How about these odd ball units that were only built in a small number but neveer grew to anything higher in the locomotive markit? Were these just expairaments befor the next stage of locomotives came out or were they a spicific model requested by that railroad at that time?

BL20-2 1 built
SD40-2SS 5 built
SD45X 7 built
SD60MAC 4 built
F69PH-AC 2 built
GM6 1 built
GM10 1 built
any pics of the sd40-2ss,sd45x, and f69ph-ac?? I tried railpics.net and found neither. what were the differences between a regular sd4-2 and sd40-2ss and the sd45x?