Talk:EMD 645

Fuel flow

I have a gallons-per-hour chart for various throttle notches for the 8-645E, the 16-645E, 16-645E3 and 12-645F (MP15DC, GP38-2, GP40-2, and GP49, respectively) out of my Air Brake and Train Handling manual. Does anyone think that fuel usage info might be interesting? The entire table might be overkill, but the idle and Notch 8 (full power) figures might be worth posting.

Speaking of the 12-645F and the GP49, this info is missing from the table (and the EMD GP49 article is red-linked at this time). My source on this (look for the 2800-series engines) mentions that these are GP49s and that they have a 12-cylinder 645F engine; however, I have not found any other confirmation of this data. I'm not sure what the power rating on this variant is, except to say that I've heard a few of my engineers complain about having to use one of these in the consist (i.e. "Well, I'd rather have one of the 2000s than the 2800s--those suck!"). Anyone with inside knowledge or contacts at EMD want to add it?

Comment:

The 950 rpm specification is what really killed certain 645Fs.

However, the lessons learned with the 950 rpm 645F were employed in the 900 rpm 710G.

The 950 rpm was simply "a bridge too far".

My ABTH table also includes the usage rate for SD70MACs; however, the EMD 710 article is still a stub, and as such, I don't feel comfortable expanding it. I don't know enough about the 710 engine to expand it authoritatively--all I know is that the SD70MAC uses it and that that variant is rated for 4,000 horsepower. (Our later-model SD70MACs use engines rated for 4,300 horsepower, and the new SD70ACes are also rated at 4,300 horsepower--though I don't know that they use the same engine.)

Comment:

After the 950 rpm 645F debacle, EMD must have been a little gun-shy.

After all, it started development of the 265H, having apparently given up on the 710G concept, only to discover that the 710G was FAR EASIER to modify to meet the forthcoming emissions tiers than the 265H ever was.

So, like a good Chevy hot-rodder, it (EMD, then still a GM division) "stroked" the 645F by one inch, and made subtle, but relatively inexpensive modifications to the fabricated block and the forged crankshaft, and presto, a new, very reliable engine, the 710G. Alas, the 265H proved to be much more difficult than originally believed, and it, too, now lies on the scrap-heap of domestically-abandoned engine designs, although the Chinese certainly seem to like them.

Upon returning to 900 rpm, the first 710Gs were rated 3,800 HP net for traction.

This rating was slowly raised: 4,000 HP net for traction and 4,300 HP net for traction.

With the 4,500 HP net for traction, a new model was introduced, the SD75.

4,300 HP net for traction seems to be a very "happy place" for the 710G ... thousands are running nearly everywhere (nearly 2,000 for UP alone), and we may not see another 710G HP upgrade any time soon.

cluth 16:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

More info on the GP49. John (or his source) says that the ARR has the only true GP49s in the country. Not sure if it's true, but I'll see if I can at least make a stub on it. cluth 03:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

US Bias

it seems to me that there is a heavy US bias towards this article, could some mention be made of Exprot locos? http://locopage.railpage.org.au/

that has details of some Australian locos

Alexander101010 15:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been progressively adding Aussie locos to the tables - the AN, BL, DL, A, and G classes just recently.

Jb17kx 10:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Last 645 use.

I removed this line. "The last locomotives the 645 were installed in were the export models G22CU-2 and G26MC-2 for Taiwan and Indonesia in 2001. " As new production 645 engines are used in the MPI MP36PH line of locomotives and Saudi Arabia received 645 powered SDL50's from EMD as recently as 2005.

--Chesapeake (talk) 01:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The last notable locomotive with the 645 was the F40PH! Metroliner 860 (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

First 645 use.

The first use of a 16V-645E was in EMD demonstrator 434 outshopped in July 1964. Diesel production data from A J Kristopans website. --SSW9389 (talk) 18:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Because of the introduction date of the EMD 434 demonstrator, developmental work on the 645 engine would have begun earlier, say in 1963 or maybe even earlier. Does anyone have a source on 645 engine development work? I do, but he isn't talking about it yet, so I suspect a book is in the works.--SSW9389 14:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SSW9389 (talk • contribs)

Connection Rod arrangement versus compression/tension

The comment that the EMD uses a forked rod because the rods are always in compression implies a causality that ain't there. Lots of four-stroke engines use forked rods, including Harley Davidson and the Merlin. Likewise, GE's decision to use an articulated rod was not based on the fact that it is a four-stroke engine.

I suggest the text be edited to clarify this. Comments, anyone?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.124.25.84 (talk) 00:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC) 

Comment:

EMD could have used an articulated rod, but it chose a fork/blade combination because of production cost (capital cost), purchase cost (also a capital cost) and ongoing maintenance cost (expense cost).

This selection also greatly facilitated the implementation of its "power assembly" concept.

Of course, the "basket" DOES seem a little weird at first glance. But upon further examination it DOES make sense.

23 July 2013 natural vs forced aspiration

All EMC/EMD hkhnkn2-strokes require forced induction to run. Air is blown thru the intake ports on the bottom of the bore, forcing exhaust out the exhaust valves in the head. Natural aspiration sucks the air in, as in non-turbo 4-stroke auto engines and some small 2-strokes (motorcycles and yard equipment such as weed-wackers and snow-blowers). I used "induction" simply because I have never heard "forced aspiration" used, unlike "natural aspiration", which is common.Sammy D III (talk) 20:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Roots supercharger and turbocharger are both forced induction

Please read the fourth and fifth sentence of Two-stroke diesel engine. There is more information at:Naturally aspirated, Forced induction, Roots-type supercharger, Turbocharger, and HowStuffWorks.Sammy D III (talk) 15:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on EMD 645. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6DtUGMiV1?url=http://pdfcast.org/pdf/terex-33-19-titan-brochure-gmd-1946 to http://pdfcast.org/pdf/terex-33-19-titan-brochure-gmd-1946

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)