• EMD SD80MAC and SD90MAC series official thread

  • 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

  • 150 posts
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  by v8interceptor
 
EMDX 92 aka the SD89MAC demonstrator was rated for 4500HP

http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos. ... %20SD89MAC

As far as the failure of the SD90MAC-H and the 265 engine in the North American RR industry, it is worth noting that the initial problems with the prime mover happened at a time when GM was determined to sell off EMD as a "non core"(i.e not a passenger or light commercial highway vehicle builder) asset and I think that limited the amount of resources available to contine developing the 265 engine line. Under Greenbriar/Berkshire Holdings ownership there just was not the same amount of capital available for R&D.

I would note that at least one Class 1 railroad is satisfied enough with it's 6,000 HP units to rebuild them rather than retiring them, I refer to CSX's AC6000CW fleet which have been receiving 16 cylinder GEVO engines to replace their as built HDLs but which retain the full HP rating...
  by TrainManUPRR
 
MEC407 wrote: Yes, the SD9043MAC has a 710. That's why it was called SD9043MAC rather than SD90MAC: the "43" indicates that it has a 4300 HP 710, rather than a 6000 HP 265, and therefore they needed a way of differentiating it from a "real" SD90MAC. They were intended to be upgraded with a 265 at a later date, and were known as "convertibles" because of this, but due to the reliability problems experienced with the real SD90MACs (and possibly also due to the potential expense involved), no SD9043MACs were ever upgraded.
Although the railroads called them SD90MAC and SD9043MAC, I don't think technically EMD ever made a "SD9043MAC". The 710-equipped 4300hp SD90 was called SD90MAC, and the 265-equipped 6000hp SD90 was called the SD90MAC-H. UP started naming the convertibles SD9043MAC to make it less confusing.
  by MBTA1052
 
Does anyone know what will happen with EMDX 92??
  by v8interceptor
 
MBTA1052 wrote:Does anyone know what will happen with EMDX 92??
I would bet that Progress Rail will find some use for it...
  by Mr.S
 
Has anyone seen the current issue of Trains magazine pgs. 16 and part of 17. The article is -Why did the SD90MAC-H Fail?-
1 What became of EMD's 6,000 H.P. 265H where is it and what's its application now?
2 Who holds the rights to this engine?
3 Did EMD go too far ahead of the time in the 1990's with the development of the 265-H?
Or were they attempting to play catch-up?
4 If EMD's 265H series engine were built now would it have a chance?

Any thoughts?

These were some thoughts I had after reading the article.
  by RickRackstop
 
I didn't read the article but I can answer some of your questions.

1. The H engine is being produced for the Chinese order for 300 hundred locomotives. When that will be complete I don't know and there doesn't seem to be any follow up. All these units are assembled in China with EMD sourced parts at the start but up to 80% loco content at the end. After that there will be a 100% Chinese copy I suppose in spite of what MD thinks.
2. EMD owns the "rights" to the design.
3. Dunno.
4. Other than the Chinese order there is no market for this engine. EMD has a single cylinder test engine "just in case" but its not doing well compared with the 710.

Back in the 80's the conventional wisdom was that 2 stroke engines could not meet the pending emission standards and that stampeded EMD and Detroit Diesel into looing at 4 stroke designs pushed mostly by the smug Eurosmoothies on us colonial hillbillys. I think DD has been having second thoughts since then as some company in California is selling tier 2 conversion kits for the 52, 71, and 92 series of Detroit Diesels.
  by dsrc512
 
CP recently listed its fleet of "SD9043MAC" units as available for lease, lease with option to purchase, or buy outright. All but eight are in serviceable condition. A few units have apparently received "mid-life" overhauls. Units range in age from twelve to fourteen years.
Alex Huff
  by Engineer Spike
 
Trains just had an article about the 710 not being able to reach Tier 4. This gives a few options. Obviously EMD/Cat has not given up on the H, since it is being sold to the Chinese. The big question is whether new domestic EMD units might get a 12 H, which would produce about 4000 HP, or a Cat design?
  by MEC407
 
Somewhere on the web I recently saw a picture of one of the SD89MAC locomotives (12-265H) with all sorts of extra stuff added onto it. So they might be working on getting the 265 to meet Tier 4... or maybe the locomotive was being used as a test bed for one of CAT's engines. It was difficult to discern from the photo.

Frankly it's hard to imagine the 265 being any more of a maintenance headache than CAT's own designs.

If GE's Tier 4 solution doesn't have a negative impact on reliability, that's going to be a huge blow to EMD's sales, at least in North America. EMD could still sell 710-powered locos in other parts of the world where the environmental regs aren't as strict, and potentially cut into GE's sales that way.
  by Pensyfan19
 
Quoted from nsdash9.com's facebook page:
SD80MAC's Retired....NS has retired and sold its former Conrail EMD SD80MAC fleet of 29 units (NS 7200-7228). Six of the units, 7206, 7215, 7218, 7225, 7226, and 7227 were sold to Canadian Pacific Railway. The other 23 units were sold to Progress Rail. 
The 6 SD80MACS that are going to CP Rail are being sold for parts by the way. F.
  by MEC407
 
I thought I read somewhere that NS was going to rebuild the SD80MACs to SD70ACe specs. Did they cancel that? Or was it just an unfounded rumor? I can't remember where I saw it.
  by ELSDP45
 
NS was going rebuild them as SD80's, upgrading the prime movers to 5500 horsepower and replacing the inverters amonst other things.
  by MEC407
 
Yes, that sounds familiar. Did they give a reason for canceling that plan?
  by KSmitty
 
Cancelled because of decreased demand for power on account PSR.

SD80s are oddballs. They are trying to standardize on the 70 line and the es/et44 line. Was reading, maybe on NSdash9.com they also have some of their other rebuilds stored, the 90mac rebuilds I think.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10