Eastern Railroad Discussion > 20 Pan Am Repainted ex-CSX C40-8 due in next Few Weeks?

Just read this in post from Kevin Burkholder on Loconotes. Anyone have any more news on this? Are the purchased or leased? Good to see more standard cabs going to Pan Am. These c things could pull good bu the cabs are like dungeons compared to the newer stuff.

Posted from Android

Leased, supposed to be painted at Lordstown, Ohio

Posted from Android

Strange choice . . . AFAIK Pan Am is all EMD.

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Strange choice . . . AFAIK Pan Am is all EMD.

Yes, has been more for than a decade, when the last U-boats were retired. But it doesn't surprise me, given that old early Dash-8s are cheap.
 

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CPR_4000 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Strange choice . . . AFAIK Pan Am is all EMD.
>
> Yes, has been more for than a decade, when the
> last U-boats were retired. But it doesn't surprise
> me, given that old early Dash-8s are cheap.

Worn out and the fact they are GE's = Cheap! Good luck Pan Am....
>  

The CSX C40-8's worked very well for CSX and were well maintained. They were very relaible right up to retirement. They are excellent engines and have excellent service support and parts availability from GE.  I am sure they will serve Pan Am well. You are clueless.  Bruce

EL-SD45-3632 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> toledopatch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CPR_4000 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Strange choice . . . AFAIK Pan Am is all EMD.
> >
> > Yes, has been more for than a decade, when the
> > last U-boats were retired. But it doesn't
> surprise
> > me, given that old early Dash-8s are cheap.
>
> Worn out and the fact they are GE's = Cheap! Good
> luck Pan Am....
> >  

NYSW under Walter Rich did well with an oddball roster of locomotives, and several very talented mechanics.  Bought horsepower for pennies, worked it out, bought more, etc.

CF-7, C-430, GP-7, M-636, SD45, F45, and much more in the early days.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NYSW under Walter Rich did well with an oddball
> roster of locomotives, and several very talented
> mechanics.  Bought horsepower for pennies, worked
> it out, bought more, etc.
>
> CF-7, C-430, GP-7, M-636, SD45, F45, and much more
> in the early days.

Guilford/Pan Am has a long history of buying second-hand horsepower for pennies, too, but for the most part those engines haven't had the longevity that Walt's SD45s did. If I recall correctly, more than half the 30-or-so SD26s that Guilford got from ATSF in the mid-80s were retired by the early 1990s, and that pattern has repeated itself with various other fleets since then. I wouldn't be surprised if half these ex-CSX units end up being parts sources within six years, but only time will tell.
 

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guilford/Pan Am has a long history of buying
> second-hand horsepower for pennies, too, but for
> the most part those engines haven't had the
> longevity that Walt's SD45s did. If I recall
> correctly, more than half the 30-or-so SD26s that
> Guilford got from ATSF in the mid-80s were retired
> by the early 1990s, and that pattern has repeated
> itself with various other fleets since then. I
> wouldn't be surprised if half these ex-CSX units
> end up being parts sources within six years, but
> only time will tell.

​First off, the C-40-8s are leased, so without knowing the terms it's hard to say whether PanAm or the lessor is going to "make out" on this. Depends on who is responsible for maintenance, is a minimum availability rate guaranteed, etc.

​As for buying secondhand locomotives, based on what a friend in the business has told me in the used loco game if you're a shrewd-enough buyer half of your fleet can become organ donors behind the shops and you STILL come out money ahead. A certain level of attrition is anticipated and figured into the budget. If a few units exceed expectations and don't fail within the anticiapated time line, so much the better. Every horsepower-hour above your projections is gravy.

​Even a cannibalized unit still contributes a little something to the bottom line...every part you take off it is one less part you have to buy from a vendor.

​NZ



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/16 11:25 by NebraskaZephyr.

brfriedm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The CSX C40-8's worked very well for CSX and were
> well maintained. They were very relaible right up
> to retirement. They are excellent engines and have
> excellent service support and parts availability
> from GE.  I am sure they will serve Pan Am well.
> You are clueless.  Bruce
>
> EL-SD45-3632 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > toledopatch Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > CPR_4000 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Strange choice . . . AFAIK Pan Am is all
> EMD.
> > >
> > > Yes, has been more for than a decade, when
> the
> > > last U-boats were retired. But it doesn't
> > surprise
> > > me, given that old early Dash-8s are cheap.
> >
> > Worn out and the fact they are GE's = Cheap!
> Good
> > luck Pan Am....
> > >  

So are you.  Pan Am is a third world operation, at best.

GE's are known to basically be throw away locomotives, historically. With the amount of the -8 fleet being retired and sent out to pasture by the major railroads, it most likely is a good move.

The good thing, as stated is that parts supply and interchangability with many models/years is about that of EMD's legacy products. As prevsiously stated as well, the devil is in the lease terms.

The motors, in general are pretty well worn. They are not exactly known as smooth running/vibration free units. Not crew friendly, but will be better than a drafty standard cab. Running LHF as they do at times is a pain in the butt, but as road locomotives it will most likely work well for time.

For fuel effeciently compared to tractive effort - that will depend on fuel prices and their actual use.

A C40-8 is rated at 193 Gal/Hr in N8, 4000HP, whereas a GP/SD40-2 is rated at 164 Gal/Hr in N8 at 3000HP. But the effort you are getting out between to (78,000lbs on the -8) and 71,000lbs on a SD40-2 isn't all that much different.

In the Walter Rich era, there was a formula for horsepower purchases.  As I recall he was buying horsepower via  his C-430, M-636 at about 15-20% of the cost for new equipment. Add in high quality mechanics, and he did OK.

Late in the game, he leased several GE B40-8 and EMD SD-70 units on very favorable terms.

 

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the Walter Rich era, there was a formula for
> horsepower purchases.  As I recall he was buying
> horsepower via  his C-430, M-636 at about 15-20%
> of the cost for new equipment. Add in high quality
> mechanics, and he did OK.
>
> Late in the game, he leased several GE B40-8 and
> EMD SD-70 units on very favorable terms.

Just to keep the timeline straight -- the M636s arrived VERY late in the game. Well after the new B40-8 (NYSW4002-4008) and SD70M (4050-4054) units were let go at the end of their leases or, in the case of the SD70Ms, subleased to RailAmerica.

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In the Walter Rich era, there was a formula for
> > horsepower purchases.  As I recall he was
> buying
> > horsepower via  his C-430, M-636 at about
> 15-20%
> > of the cost for new equipment. Add in high
> quality
> > mechanics, and he did OK.
> >
> > Late in the game, he leased several GE B40-8
> and
> > EMD SD-70 units on very favorable terms.
>
> Just to keep the timeline straight -- the M636s
> arrived VERY late in the game. Well after the new
> B40-8 (NYSW4002-4008) and SD70M (4050-4054) units
> were let go at the end of their leases or, in the
> case of the SD70Ms, subleased to RailAmerica.

Thanks.  But the premise still held that he would buy horsepower a lot cheaper than the big boys, given the requirements of his business and the quality of his staff.

My understanding is that GE will be handling the maintenance responsibilities. I'm sure that played a role in Pan Am selecting the program.  Something else to consider,  how many clapped out/former leaser SD40-2 types are out there at a decent price these days?