International Railroad Discussion > EF65 Electric Locomotive (Japan)

E = Electric.
F = 6 axles. (3x 2 axle bogies (trucks))
65 = Manufacturing started in 1965.

It's a traditional 1500V DC powered locomotive running on Cape Gauge (1067 mm).

EF65 has been the mainstay locomotive for Japan's national network, in both JNR (Japan National Railway) and JR (post-1987 privatization) eras. It has spanned the Showa (until 1989), Heisei (1989-2019), and Reiwa (2019 - current) Eras.

The dependable locomotive has been holding regular assignments for 60 years, but finally this year (2025), all its regular assignments were taken over by the newer EF210 locomotive. Remaining EF65s run as extras. They can still be assigned to MOW-related and "Koshu" or towing duties.

A loose equivalent in the U.S. might be EMD's SD40-2s. SD40-2 has the traditional standard cab look, and the EF65 has the traditional "modern boxcab" look. Both dependable, and SD40-2s still work the yards, even if rarely seen on the mainlines anymore.

EF65 can be divided into 4 series: 0 Series (1-135), 500 Series (501-542), 1000 Series (1001-1139), and 2000 Series. 0 and 500 Series lack the center cab doors on the front and rear, while the newer 1000 and 2000 Series have them - easiest way to distinguish the older series from the newer ones.

Within the 500 Series, there was a "P" type (Passenger) and "F" type (Freight), with design differences for the assigned duties. Allowance for MU operation (Multiple Unit) was the key feature of F type, for example. From 1000 Series on, they were "PF" which meant dual-purpose.

2000 Series is a minor update, having event recorder for faster-than-100 km/h operation (62 mph). Otherwise, it's basically a 1000 Series.

Oldest photo of EF65 I have is from 2005, when I rode the Sleeper Express Ginga for travelling while sleeping. This service departed just before the Shinkansen trains stopped running (10 pm to 11 pm hour) and arrived on the opposite end at the 7 am hour. Ran between Tokyo and Osaka. Service ended in 2008.

Unlike the Sleeper Limited Express Sunrise (still in service), reservations on Ginga (translated: Milky Way) was not difficult. Less expensive, slower (8+ hours instead of 6.5 hours between Osaka and Tokyo), and great way to "bridge" Shinkansen travel by moving at night while the Shinkansen trains were on curfew. It was popular with business travellers. Japan's successful version of Amtrak's "Spirit of California."

- From 2005: EF65-1114 pulling Sleeper Express Ginga.
- Destination: Osaka (where I took the photos).
- Video from 2019, chasing EF65-2070.

(more next)

---

---

You must be a registered subscriber to watch videos. Join Today!

I'd stumble upon EF65 many times while doing railfan trips in Japan the last 11 years. Most of them were in light blue + blue JRF (JR Freight) paint scheme, and I've posted videos of them several times already.

The beige/darker blue scheme was used for passenger-assigned EF65s, nicknamed Tokkyu Color or for Limited Express trains in the JNR era, including the Ginga mentioned above. When JR Freight started to repaint the EF65s from JRF to nostalgic JNR "Tokkyu" colors, I started to document them, hence the chase along the Musashino Line in the first video above.

Railroads in Japan tend to repaint locomotives, EMUs, and DMUs into nostalgic colors when they anticipate their retirement. A recent example is a repainting of a Shinkansen E2 set into nostalgic Class 200 era beige/green.

Another sleeper train I rode behind EF65 in 2006 was the Sleeper Rapid "Moonlight Matsuyama." "Moonlight" trains ran between Kyoto and one of the major cities on the island of Shikoku (Matsuyama, Takamatsu, others), crossing Seto Ohashi, series of bridges crossing the Seto Inland Sea. Discontinued in 2009.

Here are more semi-random videos of EF65s, first one in JRF scheme, and the rest in JNR scheme. Locations are at Nambu and Musashino Lines. Nambu Line shots (2) have the light engine and the train curving clockwise, at Shitte Station.

- EF65-1132 pulling Sleeper Rapid "Moonlight Matsuyama" in 2006.
- More videos of "modern" EF65s: 2063, 2092, 2070, 2065, 2081, and 2101.
 

---

You must be a registered subscriber to watch videos. Join Today!

No grade crossings I assume.
Interesting stuff.
Regards, Jim Evans

Interesting and distictive locos. I also like the EF66s and their Spanish descendents, the class 251s, all Bo-Bo-Bos.

Sadly only saw one of these on our last trip (Dec 2024-Jan 2025) at Omiya, but I was way out of position for a reasonable photo.    I was just coming back to the platform after a tasty yakisoba lunch break in the station and it snuck up on me!

FiveChime Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No grade crossings I assume.
> Interesting stuff.
> Regards, Jim Evans

Musashino Line has no grade crossings, as that's how it was designed and built - viaducts, tunnels, trenches... Relatively new line, started service in 1973.

Nambu Line definitely has crossings. The two Nambu Line trains in the video went through couple of crossings already, and about to go through couple of more. I say that because they are in my previous reports. (In the past, I refer to the line as Nanbu (n instead of m) in case people want to use the TO search)

Many railroads in Japan (not just the JR Groups) are incrementally eliminating crossings by elevating the ROWs. That's been ongoing for several generations already.

dwatry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sadly only saw one of these on our last trip (Dec
> 2024-Jan 2025) at Omiya, but I was way out of
> position for a reasonable photo.    I was just
> coming back to the platform after a tasty yakisoba
> lunch break in the station and it snuck up on me!

You should get more chances, if you are going back to Japan soon. I saw several 1000 Series parked in the yard west of Okayama. On my recent visit, one 2000 Series was wandering around light engines on the Keiyo Line, possibly for testing after mechanical inspection.

Some photos from 2017 I almost forgot about, from Omiya's shops adjacent to the Railroad Museum. I attended their Open House that year:

- EF65 2000 Series and 500 Series (501) side-by-side.
- Unobstructed look at their faces (with DD51 diesel loco)
- Inside the shops, trucks removed for inspection - JRF paint scheme.

---

---

---

Great stuff Charles!  I remember seeing an EF65 roll by outside the Omiya Railway Museum alone "light engine" on its way somewhere as a Ueno-Tokyo train met it right in front of me from the observation deck of the museum.  Wish I had a closer look like you guys!   If anything, the day before, I picked up a Kato N scale EF65 from the used equipment aisle at Tam Tam Hobbies in Akihabara.. How serendipitous.. =) Good times!

Cheers,
Harry

Hi, Question for you, Why is there 2 penagrafs up please? is there 2 Motors in a loco 
as all the electric loco I have seen only have 1 up at a time? Thanks in advance,
Great Photos also..
Brian.in New Zealand..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/25 11:41 by RogersPass.

tracktime Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If anything, the day before, I picked up a Kato N scale
> EF65 from the used equipment aisle at Tam Tam Hobbies in
> Akihabara.. How serendipitous.. =) Good times!

Yeah, good times!

I usually visit Tam Tam when there's no chase targets and I'm loitering around Tokyo. I've bought some items there relevant to future reports.

RogersPass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is there 2 penagrafs up please? is there
> 2 Motors in a loco  as all the electric loco
> I have seen only have 1 up at a time?

The answer isn't simple, but here's a question you should be asking to understand the issue better:

Why don't AC locomotives use 2 pantographs?

FYI, EF65s have 6 traction motors. With the exception of ED76 (future report), each axle has a traction motor for Japanese locomotives.

I didn't quite know the real answer, especially since most "answers" found on the Internet are not correct. You have to understand the different electrical behavior of AC (waves) and DC (one way current flow). In a nutshell, 2 pantographs straddling a substation boundary can cause AC frequency problems (out of phase) for AC locomotives, if the 2 pantographs are part of a unit (locomotive).

On DC locomotives like the EF65 (and EF66, EF210, EH200, others), electricity from the catenary "simply" flows to ground. Since there's no phases (50 Hz or 60 Hz) to worry about, 2 pantographs can straddle between substation boundaries without causing electrical problems. And for DC locomotives, whatever available pantographs (2 in this case) is used for maximum possible usable current.

1,500 DC will need far more current to produce the same power as 25,000 AC, so using all pantographs is more critical for DC locomotives.

I looked at my videos of EH500, which is a dual mode (AC or DC) locomotive. When running in DC territory (near Tokyo), both pantographs are up. When running in AC territory (Tohoku, Kyushu), only one pantograph is up. Haven't found an exception yet.

Shinkansens use AC (25,000 volts, 50 or 60 Hz), and use more than one pantograph. Each pantograph represents a unit (of several cars), so the oversimplified explanation is that pantographs are electrically isolated from each other, so there are no phase problems at substation boundaries. Same goes for EMUs operating in AC territories. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/17/25 06:56 by cchan006.

I had previously posted photos [ 4 years ago, just do a search for EF65 ] of some freight EF65 500's, so here's photos of three of the passenger versions when they were still in first-line service in 1971-72;  the first two are at Yokohama, (3) is at Tokyo.

At the time I was not aware that there were two distinct subgroups, Passenger vs Freight -- only that some had the coupler-mounted trainline air connections.  What was the purpose of that anyway ?

It does seem unusual, at least to me, that JNR did not have distinct number groups for the two variants.  I realize changing numbers costs money, but most units were type specific when they left the factory, only the last group being subsequently changed.

Best regards, SZ

---

---

---

Steinzeit2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I had previously posted photos [ 4 years ago, just
> do a search for EF65 ] of some freight EF65 500's...

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?6,5183800

> At the time I was not aware that there were two
> distinct subgroups, Passenger vs Freight -- only
> that some had the coupler-mounted trainline air
> connections.  What was the purpose of that anyway?

I couldn't find a direct answer, but JNR had an initiative in the 1960s to compete with trucking, to speed up revenue speeds of freight trains. EF65 and EF66 were results of that initiative, 100 km/h (62 mph) capable freight trains being the goal. I mentioned before that EF66's goal was even more ambitious, to pull 1000 ton trains at 100 km/h without MU'ing. EF65s had to be MU'd for heavier trains approaching 1000 tons to sustain 100 km/h.

In the process of that initiative, JNR designed Class 10000 freight cars. Boxcars (Waki), reefers (Resa), container flats (Koki), etc. The Class 10000 implemented the coupler-mounted trainline air connections, hence the EF65 500 Series "F" type having them, too.

As to why just freights, I suspect JNR theorized that switching times would be quicker? These were not implemented on passenger cars (and "P" types lacking them). Some comments I found on the Internet said the coupler-mounted air connections were leaky, and cumbersome to maintain. The design died with the Class 10000 freight cars - by the mid-1990s.

> It does seem unusual, at least to me, that JNR did
> not have distinct number groups for the two
> variants.

I agree. I can only speculate why not, but JNR was in a rush to meet demands for limited express trains and faster freights, so they didn't focus on organizing by numbers? F types were 513-526, and 532-534. It's safe to speculate that JNR was more focused on meeting P type demand?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/20/25 19:46 by cchan006.

cchan006 Wrote:

> 1,500 DC will need far more current to produce the
> same power as 25,000 AC, so using all pantographs
> is more critical for DC locomotives.
>
Yes, that's the usual reason.  For example, SNCF had a wide range of AC/DC locomotives with two pantographs, one for operation under AC and the other under DC, but both were connected to a common rooftop bus.  The need for two different pans was due to the differences in the characteristics of the catenary:  pressure, contact strip type and width, etc.  There was a chart for the drivers indicating under what conditions, such as speed and amperage, both pantographs, or the 'wrong' one, could or should be used.  Both pans were to be used under DC with high current draw and at lower speeds, such as starting a heavy train.  Pure DC locos could operate at the higher speeds with both pans raised;  to enable a high power AC/DC machine, such as a CC21000, to operate under DC at high speeds, three pans were fitted, one AC and two DC.

Best, SZ

cchan006 Wrote:
>
> In the process of that initiative, JNR designed
> Class 10000 freight cars. Boxcars (Waki), reefers
> (Resa), container flats (Koki), etc. The Class
> 10000 implemented the coupler-mounted trainline
> air connections, hence the EF65 500 Series "F"
> type having them, too.
>
> As to why just freights, I suspect JNR theorized
> that switching times would be quicker? These were
> not implemented on passenger cars (and "P" types
> lacking them). Some comments I found on the
> Internet said the coupler-mounted air connections
> were leaky, and cumbersome to maintain. The design
> died with the Class 10000 freight cars - by the
> mid-1990s.
>
I was having difficulty understanding the logic of eliminating the air hose [ BP + MR ] connections between cars when you still, if you were switching "under air", had to manually isolate one or both sides to prevent pipes going to 0.  [  One typically doesn't have the coupler itself do that, since how would the system distinguish between a commanded uncoupling vs a "break-in-two"...]   Coupler air connections like this are typically found on MU cars, where 'trainline air management ' is part of the uncoupling process.  Even just an engine change would require intervention on the train side.

Further research found that the 10000 class cars and their contemporaries also were fitted with EP [ electropneumatic ] brakes.  This required a trainline, so perhaps there was electrical supply to permit electric shutoff valves + push buttons at each car end -- but this seems like an extraordinary complication, and JNR typically and wisely avoided such approaches.  So the "why, and how" remains unanswered.

I did discover that the Class 20 sleeper trains were also fitted with the EP brake [ but not the coupler ], so the connections + cab controls for that would have been fitted to the appropriate locos [ = both P and F 500's for example ].  There was also a [ voice ? ] communication cable + connections between the Class 20 trainset and the loco -- which make me wonder if a similar system existed between the guard and the loco on the container etc trains.  This was pre-radio, right ?

The more you know.....

Best, SZ