Discussion related to New Jersey Transit rail and light rail operations.

Moderators: lensovet, Kaback9, nick11a

  by ConstanceR46
 
Considering NJT had a sizable fleet of non-cowled GP40s, why did they bother getting special cowl jobs done on the FHs as opposed to just rebuilding them normally? Was it an aesthetic thing solely?
  by RandallW
 
The bodies of the GP40FHs were built from ex-BN F45 bodies.

Although, now that I think about it, that would only answer your question if they used the space to place equipment where a walkway would be on a standard GP40 body.
  by R36 Combine Coach
 
The GP40FHs were delivered on short order to replace the E8s. These were rushed kitbash jobs by MK to fill the
need.
  by chrisf
 
I find it funny as well that MARC's GP40s were rebuilt with what were probably the very same F45 cabs that came off the carbodies that went onto NJT's FH units. IMO, the F45 cab on the GP40 looks significantly better than the reverse. I still don't really understand why the FHs weren't built with the F45 cabs or just a full hood carbody like all the rest of NJT's GP40s.
  by ConstanceR46
 
If they were a rush job, why not just alter the existing carbody or modify it, as happened with virtually every other GP passenger rebuild? Why go through all the trouble of chopping up FP45 carbodies for them, especially if they retained the GP40 cabs?
  by jamoldover
 
There's a key difference between the MARC GP40WH-2's and the NJT GP40FH-2's. The MARC units have extended frames to provide the additional room for the HEP equipment. The NJT units are built on a standard GP40 frame, with the additional equipment space provided by having the cowl hood.
  by ConstanceR46
 
I really do not mean this in a smug or rude way, but does this translate into every GP40 passenger engine having an extended frame? Would track and provide a reasonable answer - i presume cutting in new frame sections takes longer than bolting on a cowl