7000-series - Delivery & Updates

[garmon757]

#7165-66, #7203-06, and #7209-10 are currently in service. 

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

8 hours ago, garmon757 said:

#7165-66, #7203-06, and #7209-10 are currently in service. 

#7167-68*

[chgofan78]

Just spotted a train making the voyage from Skokie Shops to the Blue Line.  The only cars numbers I was able to make out were 7213-7214.

[renardo870]

7207-7208, 7211-7212 and 7213-7214 is enroute to Rosemont Yard from Skokie Shops.

[wayfaringrob]

On 5/23/2025 at 11:36 PM, renardo870 said:

7207-7208, 7211-7212 and 7213-7214 is enroute to Rosemont Yard from Skokie Shops.

7213, 7214 in service yesterday

[wayfaringrob]

An ordinance relating to option orders was discussed in today's Committee on Finance, Audit, and Budget. The committee voted to approve an ordinance authorizing the replacement of a discontinued federal cost escalation index for additional railcars with comparable indices, and General Counsel Kent Ray mentioned option orders and pricing explicitly.

"...[the ordinance] recognizes significant savings over having to seek new contracts to procure these railcars. Funding for the option orders will be approved by the board separately prior to production. We anticipate the first option to go into production somewhere two years out."

In responding to a question, Ray mentioned that the current cost for the base order is $1.5M per car. As part of the ordinance, the cost escalation is capped at an additional $1.2M on top of that. In addition, he stated that "if we were to go out on the street to buy railcars today, we had an independent cost estimate done, and it was looking as though, uh, we would be paying somewhere in excess of $4.25M per railcar."

Yikes! So, it sounds like we're getting 7000 option orders in large part due to sticker shock on the 9000s (?)

Committee recommended the ordinance for board approval. Discussion occurs about 2 hours and 12 minutes into the video. Board meeting itself happening now; should resume and vote on approval after executive session.

 

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, wayfaringrob said:

Yikes! So, it sounds like we're getting 7000 option orders in large part due to sticker shock on the 9000s (?)

Sure sounds like it. It seemed like CTA was going back and forth on this (the budget said 7400s but there was an engineering solicitation for 9000s). One would have to figure (1) how much time and money they want to sink into 3200s, and (2) whether CTA wants to get a contract out before the NITA Act deadline.

CTA does have the money for 300 cars; the question is how many for RLE, which they  will need by 2030 and how many to replace 3200s.

[wayfaringrob]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

the budget said 7400s but there was an engineering solicitation for 9000s

The fact that someone put “7400” in a document at all has made me wonder if we will see any minor tweaks (that don’t require going entirely back to the drawing board) for 7401 and above. Like, a subseries of or series largely identical to 7000s.

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, wayfaringrob said:

The fact that someone put “7400” in a document at all has made me wonder if we will see any minor tweaks (that don’t require going entirely back to the drawing board) for 7401 and above. Like, a subseries of or series largely identical to 7000s.

I don't think so. It looks like someone just took the project number for 9000s and substituted 7400 except in one instance. Other than the type of the incremental changes like were made during the course of the 5000s, that is; otherwise CRRC couldn't start production in 2 years, when I assume the base order of 400 will be completed.

[Erin Mishkin Jr.]

7215-7218 in service

[wayfaringrob]

9 hours ago, Erin Mishkin Jr. said:

7215-7218 in service

7219 - 7220 as well

[Busjack]

On 6/11/2025 at 7:07 PM, Busjack said:

I don't think so. It looks like someone just took the project number for 9000s and substituted 7400 except in one instance.

To document this (please note inconsistencies in both entries):

2024 Budget

2025 Budget

[Javi75]

5 hours ago, Busjack said:

To document this (please note inconsistencies in both entries):

2024 Budget

2025 Budget

Which order is going to get the 2600s off the rails the fastest, picking up all options for the 7000s or getting 9000s? How urgent is it for cta eliminate the remaining 2600s while also fulfilling rail car demand for the RLE? Is CTA in a situation where it’s desperate for new railcars and is the agency behind in terms of railcar age, there’s almost a two decade gap between the 3200s and 5000s. To add to that gap is the fact that both 5000s and 7000s had production delays. Then again New Yorks MTA is still operating railcars around the same age as the 2400s. 

[Busjack]

39 minutes ago, Javi75 said:

Which order is going to get the 2600s off the rails the fastest, picking up all options for the 7000s or getting 9000s? How urgent is it for cta eliminate the remaining 2600s while also fulfilling rail car demand for the RLE? Is CTA in a situation where it’s desperate for new railcars and is the agency behind in terms of railcar age, there’s almost a two decade gap between the 3200s and 5000s. To add to that gap is the fact that both 5000s and 7000s had production delays. Then again New Yorks MTA is still operating railcars around the same age as the 2400s. 

1. "7400s" or "9000s" are basically irrelvant to when 2600s should be retired, because the base order of 400 7000s should take care of it. As I said both clips are inconsistent, and, in the case of the 2024 clip, the 491 2600s probably includes those converted to work motors (hence not to be replaced) and bloat.
2. On how urgent it is to replace the 2600s, it was mentioned at the Board meeting that they were last rehabbed about 20 years ago, it costs money to maintain them, and, due to Covid delays and the like, it's been 10 years since the contract was let. The prototypes were delivered in 2019, the first production cars were delivered in 6/2022, meaning that at 10 cars/month, we should have been at least at 7336 instead of approximately 7230.
3. I mentioned before that's it's unclear how many cars in the grant for the 300 are for RLE and to replace 3200s, but the grant was for "replacement cars" (implying for 3200s) but RLE is supposed to be done in 2030. If the options can enter production in 2027, they'll be done in about 2030. But, if the old statement that RLE will need 84 expansion cars is still correct, 300 options would leave CTA 40 cars short, so CTA would have to dip into some of the "expansion" options. On the other hand, if CTA went through with a new procurement of 9000s, the time needed for solicitation of an engineer, engineering, procurement, and a year of testing might set back delivery something like 2 to 4 years. 

[garmon757]

#7221-25 are now currently on hold for service at Rosemont Yard pending clearance from Rail Maintenance Management. They were released and transferred from Skokie Shops last night. Here’s the fun part; management told the transfer crew to display the Red Line signs on the line of road instead of Not In Service while I was operating my train spotting them at Wilson.