Comments on: The scrapper’s torch has plenty of fuel cylinders to continue working on SD40-2 CP 5824. There has been a “break” in the action for a couple of weeks though, perhaps to deal with the CN SD60F’s?

By: Driver8666

Driver8666 — Thu, 01 Mar 2018 20:00:25 +0000

I wonder if GMD, MLW and GE noticed it was “top heavy” on the test track? Rolling side to side got me to thinking about ships, was it that bad?

Noise inside the engine room ridiculously loud? I believe that.

I guess that’s why you wanted to get rid of them all. I wouldn’t blame you. I’m sure at some point the C40-8M’s will follow.

Regarding the desktop design, I’m sure you either had to do it blind or no offense visited the chiropractor on your days off.

Thank you for your explanation on it.

By: Dave Brook

Dave Brook — Thu, 01 Mar 2018 19:58:37 +0000

Nnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

By: ngineered4u

ngineered4u — Thu, 01 Mar 2018 18:20:07 +0000

The SD50/60F’s and C40-8M’s and HR616′s have never been popular with the train crews. The Draper Taper design was ill conceived and was supposed to be better as there was no snow build up on the walk ways like conventional units.
The problem with all these units were the “taper” did not help with better visibility and the desktop design was difficult when switching. The units seemed to be “top heavy” and have a tendency to roll side to side when not on perfect tracks. Having to walk inside the engine compartment was ear piercing even when in idle as the noise was ridiculously loud. Every time I had one leading in my consist it made for a bad trip.

By: Driver8666

Driver8666 — Thu, 01 Mar 2018 06:20:30 +0000

The scrapping of the SD60F’s? Someone here has to document that. Is it the same contractor?

I still find it funny CN is keeping the C40-8M’s, and all but scrapped the SD50F and SD60F. I heard that crews don’t like them, but someone on here could correct me.