Nostalgia & History > SP MK5000's in storage

1.  SP MK5000 502 in storage at East St. Louis, IL 8--99
2. Lineup at Metro East Industries in East St. Louis, IL with the 501  11--30-98



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/18 15:08 by Fireman424.

---

---

Unique images of a unique machine. Thanks!

~ BZ

Sorry, but I vaguely remember reading about these years ago, and forgot the details.
What was the story with these two units #501 and #502?
We're they experimental 5000 horse power units, built by Morrison Knudsen?
What's the details?

(Like how I cleverly snuck in that correction about #501 picture without being rude?) ;-)

Jim Baker
Riverside, CA

Great shots Randy - I didn't know that was part of their history. Were they painted there for Utah Railway? === === = === JLH

This sounds mysterious. Would like to hear more.

Jim
Hatboro, PA

From Pinterest:

(MK5000C). Southern Pacific #502. MK Rail Corp. Built 6 (AAR) C-C, 5000 H.P., sold to(SP (3) & UP (3) ) built 1994-95. All 6 bought by Utah Rwy. and rebuilt using SD50 parts and renamed them MK50-3's.

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

Originally built with Caterpillar 4-stroke engines during the horsepower wars of the 90s. The first three were 2 feet shorter than the last three. I thought they looked really good in the G and W orange/black paint scheme.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/14/18 20:55 by exhaustED.

Love that second shot.

Posted from iPhone

What are the items projecting outward next to each number board?

I dont know unless they were supposed to be class lights,


Randy Allard

CAT has not had a good record with RR locomotives.  Let's see, who owns EMD nowadays..??  



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/13/18 22:52 by coach.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CAT has not had a good record with RR locomotives.
>  Let's see, who owns EMD nowadays..??  

CAT doesn't have a record, they've only just entered the fray as a builder of locos, under the guise of EMD. So wait a while...

Notice how new and clean that unit looks? There's a reason for that!

Out

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CAT has not had a good record with RR locomotives.
>  Let's see, who owns EMD nowadays..??  


With the MK units, Cat only supplied the prime movers. Lots of other components make up a locomotive that they had nothing to do with.

I'd be curious to learn what was lacking with their performance and what the problem components were.

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

The rigid coupling that MK used between the Kato alternator and the Cat diesel was the problem. When the frame of the loco flexed, this caused the diesel to seize or break its crankshaft. Both components were well proven on their own but poorly integrated in these six locomotives.

tbraun Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The rigid coupling that MK used between the Kato
> alternator and the Cat diesel was the problem.
> When the frame of the loco flexed, this caused the
> diesel to seize or break its crankshaft. Both
> components were well proven on their own but
> poorly integrated in these six locomotives.

The locomotives were terrible for reasons well beyond the CAT 3600, but it would be a strectch to call that prime mover a success in rail service.  In fact, it was a large failure in rail applications and an expensive one at that.  EMD found it easier to upgrade the 265H to the 1010 vs working with the 3600.