I've got an I-M SD45-2 chassis that doesn't want to 'play well' with my original-run Kato SD45's. Frankly it doesn't pull all that well in comparison, either. The end-axle to end-axle wheelbase is 56' 6", and supposedly that is the same as the SD40-2? Did Kato make an original-run SD-40 with that same wheelbase? Spook's entry on the SD40-2 early production - just can't tell the measurements and I'm looking to see if I can swap mechanisms.... Kato (Japan) EMD SD40-2
I would say no. I have an original run Kato SD40 and the subsequent SD40-2 Kato run and the SD40-2 is a longer mechanism than the SD40.
The chassis is the same for both the SD40 and the SD40-2 (early and Snoot ). The difference in length is in the trucks. If you want to drop the SD45-2 on a Kato mechanism keep in mind that the IM shell is narrower than a Kato and will require some milling of the Kato chassis to get it to fit.
As my '72 era ATSF didn't have but a handful of SD40's (big on SD39's though) I'm remarkably ignorant here, but as long as I admit it openly.... Aren't there two distinct species of SD40-2 with different frame lengths? The SD45-2 is a much longer frame than the SD45, much like comparing an FP45 to an F45. So what I 'think' you're telling me is that the original Kato SD40-2 is essentially the same frame length as the SD45? At one point I think I heard those to mechanisms were nearly interchangeable... but the SD40-2 was also built on the 'long frame' in later prototype production and that's what I'm not sure about. Which SD40-2 length is the Kato... or are there two different models?
Okay, leaving the SD40 out of this. The SD40-2 and SD45-2 are both 68'10" long over the coupler pulling face and both are 43'6" at the truck center. So, yes, theoretically a Kato SD40-2 chassis should fit a IM SD45-2. However, in the modeling world, the Kato SD40-2 chassi has a slight buldge where the motor fits in the frame halfs. The Kato SD40-2 shell is thinner behind the doors below the dynamic brake area extending back partially under the radiators to compensate for that motor buldge. The IM SD45-2 chassi is pretty much flat all the way down the outside of the frame halfs and motor so there is no need for anykind of indent inside the shell to fit anything. The above mentioned is where you will probably run into problems. Simply putting a IM 45-2 shell on a Kato SD40-2 chassi will probably cause a very noticeable buldge or bowing out of the shell in the middle section. The shell of the IM SD45-2 is already very thin along the long hood sides, so I wouldn't think chiseling a space out inside the shell will get you far nor is it a good idea on those. You may be able to grind down the buldge on the Kato chassi but I'm not sure, structurally, how that might effect things.
Is the SD45-2 chassis the same for the SD40T-2? Randy I have a Kato SD40-2 chassis and need an IM SD40T-2 chassis. I would be willing to swap. Clint
I think they are the same..... need photos? Clint, lets see if this works. I'm not particularly afraid of milling. Remember I'm the guy that's put Kato NW2 chassis under LL SW8's.
The reason the IM doesn't pull as well as an original Kato SD45 is because there is a difference of 16 grams of weight. I don't own an original SD40-2 but the newer ones also don't come close to the old Kato SD45s weight, 15 grams less.
I tried to put my SD40T-2 shell on the Kato SD40-2. As others have said the Kato unit has a bulge around the motor which makes the chassis too wide for the IM shell. A little shaving off both the shell and chassis and I would think it would work. Email me again with your address if you want to make the swap. clintgiustra@gmail.com
.6 grams won't explain the difference. With an ounce equaling 28.35 grams, you are talking about a miniscule difference. Perhaps you meant 6 grams, which is almost 1/4th of an ounce? Even at that, I would think there are other problems.
I didn't check the scale is was set to oz, and it was early. You can tell the difference by just picking up the two locos, and yes it does make a huge difference.
Well, Clint and I just swapped mechanisms. I now have a Kato SD40-2 to play with, and two immediate conclusions - yes, it is 20% heavier than the IM, and second, it 'plays well' with all my original-run SD45's. The only reason it is wider is to isolate the motor from the frame and get the wipers clear to the light board. Since I'm DC, that's a non-issue. I contacted Jim Hinds at Richmond Controls to see if I could get the lighting package for these I want (high top headlight, stratolite-pattern strobe) because I don't want to make any frame modifications that prevent me from using his light board. I'm convinced I can grind that 'bulge' narrower as long as I don't need the wiper isolation modification Kato did. But this really does look like it will work. The first SD45-2 order had only been delivered one month before my 'magic date' on the layout of July 1972. The paint was still sticky! This class and the U36C were the 'new kids' - newest power on the railroad - and numerous enough I want them represented.
Well, that took long enough, but it certainly came out well in the end.... It runs silky-smooth, pulls like a moose, and MU's with my other Kato original units. Now equipped with Richmond Controls strobe & headlight package, too.
Very nice Randy! The Dress Blues look so much more "ready to get to work" than the Warbonnet does! No wonder why you were confused, Mark(Spookshow)'s site shows an SD40, not a Dash-2 in the "early" pic! The trucks give that away and the "porches" would be bigger. That's a great site he has. Trevor D.
I solved the problem of modeling 1920's logging railroads and 1972 ATSF easily by simply responding 'YES' and building two completely separate layouts that have nothing to do with each other... The real temptation is now to have something that isn't weathered... The very first revenue trips for these units was the month I'm modeling.
