9000-series - Procurement & Updates

[Jstange059]

Currently procuring 300 cars with 146 optional for a max of 446 cars

Currently expected to have production delivery starting Q1 2032 to 2034. Is this an absurdly long timeline because it seems quite slow to me

[wayfaringrob]

46 minutes ago, Jstange059 said:

Currently procuring 300 cars with 146 optional for a max of 446 cars

Currently expected to have production delivery starting Q1 2032 to 2034. Is this an absurdly long timeline because it seems quite slow to me

Sounds on par with reality (5000s, 7000s).

46 minutes ago, Jstange059 said:

Currently procuring 300 cars with 146 optional for a max of 446 cars

Reading between the lines of the 2024 vs. 2025 budget book and this LIQ: sounds like the outlook on the 7000s improved, and that they may be anticipating at least one option order of them, accounting for the reduction in the total number of 9000 options.

2024 budget book: only base order 7000 mentioned, but 546 9000s mentioned.

(PDF page 83: https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/FY_2024_Budget_Book_(Web_Version).pdf)

2025 budget book: mentions 7000 option cars expected to enter production in 2027 pending agreements; details on 9000 minimized (and perhaps erroneously referred to as 7400 series).

(PDF page 86: https://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/6/FY2025_CTA_Budget_Book.pdf)

[Jstange059]

So with the options of the 7000 series, how much of the 3200 series would that be able to replace and would the 9000s be likely to start replacing 5000 series vehicles?

[Sam92]

12 minutes ago, Jstange059 said:

So with the options of the 7000 series, how much of the 3200 series would that be able to replace and would the 9000s be likely to start replacing 5000 series vehicles?

5000s wouldn't be retirement age till 2035. These orders are pretty much to get rid of the 2600s, 3200s and whatever extras after that for new/expanded services (red extension, more north side service etc)

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, Sam92 said:

5000s wouldn't be retirement age till 2035. These orders are pretty much to get rid of the 2600s, 3200s and whatever extras after that for new/expanded services (red extension, more north side service etc)

The only thing I can figure out is that the Budget Office doesn't confer with the Chief Engineer or Procurement Office. The 2025 Budget had 7400s, but the grant and now this solicitation for engineering services is for 9000s, which is at least consistent with the announcement of the federal grant. Only consistency is that there is a total of 846 between 7000s and 7400s or 9000s. The announcement for the grant said to replace  2600s, but 700 cars would be too much, but clearly the federal program for the grant is for replacements.

I figure there must be something with which CTA is dissatisfied with the 7000s to start off the 9000s with engineering and to say that the cars need not be compatible with prior series, but not enough to terminate the current contract with CRRC (as SEPTA has done). Note also, this document says:

Also, from the following schedule, this won't be quicker than exercising the options on 7000s if production deliveries won't start until 2032:

I base that on if there are  <250 7000s to go, at 10/month that should be 2 years. not 7. But considering that one way or another, 446 cars are not under contract, I don't see CTA needing 1292 new cars (7000s, 7400s, and 9000s). So, all I can do is assume inconsistencies..

[Sam92]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

The only thing I can figure out is that the Budget Office doesn't confer with the Chief Engineer or Procurement Office. The 2025 Budget had 7400s, but the grant and now this solicitation for engineering services is for 9000s, which is at least consistent with the announcement of the federal grant. Only consistency is that there is a total of 846 between 7000s and 7400s or 9000s. The announcement for the grant said to replace  2600s, but 700 cars would be too much, but clearly the federal program for the grant is for replacements.

I figure there must be something with which CTA is dissatisfied with the 7000s to start off the 9000s with engineering and to say that the cars need not be compatible with prior series, but not enough to terminate the current contract with CRRC (as SEPTA has done). Note also, this document says:

Also, from the following schedule, this won't be quicker than exercising the options on 7000s if production deliveries won't start until 2032:

I base that on if there are  <250 7000s to go, at 10/month that should be 2 years. not 7. But considering that one way or another, 446 cars are not under contract, I don't see CTA needing 1292 new cars (7000s, 7400s, and 9000s). So, all I can do is assume inconsistencies..

Maybe cta might be trying to give CRRC a chance but set up a back up plan if something goes wrong without making a bing production like the 4000s secretly replaced the NABI

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Maybe cta might be trying to give CRRC a chance but set up a back up plan if something goes wrong without making a bing production like the 4000s secretly replaced the NABI

CRRC has the chance to finish the 400, and maybe the chance for either an otion order or to bid on this, but if this is the signal that the options are not being exercised on the CRRC contract, it looks like this doesn't get expansion cars in time for RLE, unless CTA plans to run 2600s/3200s on the Blue Line a lot longer than thought.

[artthouwill]

42 minutes ago, Busjack said:

CRRC has the chance to finish the 400, and maybe the chance for either an otion order or to bid on this, but if this is the signal that the options are not being exercised on the CRRC contract, it looks like this doesn't get expansion cars in time for RLE, unless CTA plans to run 2600s/3200s on the Blue Line a lot longer than thought.

I agree that the 3200s will be around for s while longer.  I think CTA Will exercise one option with CRRC so those cars can move to the Green Line and those Green Line 5000 series cars can be used for RLE.  The 9000s can be used to retire the 3200s  which i think would be back to the Brown and Orange Lines before being retired.  Those 3200s will be at least 40 yrs years old by then, which is consistent with the amount of time other series have been in service before being retired.

[wayfaringrob]

On 2/24/2025 at 10:12 AM, Jstange059 said:

https://transitchicago.bonfirehub.com/opportunities/174657

Just got an email about this, they're starting the procuring process for the 9000 series

C25FT102850277 Engineering Consulting Services 9000s Series Rail Cars LIQ.pdf 2.68 MB · 246 downloads

This contract was awarded at the February board meeting to STV Incorporated. STV has been assisting Metra with the design and procurement of its Alstom cars as well as procurement-related engineering, quality assurance, and administration for its Stadler cars. CTA has also been a client of STV, but only for construction projects. Not sure if CTA has ever had a consultant help manage railcar procurement, but it is not difficult to speculate why they may want to call in professionals this time around.

Download PDF of this ordinance: https://www.transitchicago.com/file.aspx?DocumentId=10120

[Busjack]

I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes here. There was the intervening request by the Law Department (Ordinance 025-068, June 26, 2025) "to replace the material escalation indices for the four options," supposedly because a new procurement would cost $4 million a car. However, since then CRRC hasn't delivered anything and the contract was authorized as indicated in @wayfaringrob's post. As indicated in the document @Jstange059  posted, the 9000 series cars wouldn't be delivered until 2034-2035. Maybe CTA is working dual tracks, but $20 million is expensive insurance. Of couse,there are the questions of the 150 cars still owed under the current contract,  whether CTA intends to dump CRRC, either by declaring a default now or not exercising options after the base order is completed, and whether this means there will be a car shortage when RLE is opened.

[Javi75]

At this point in the procurement process should cta propose additional options for 9000s like 150 more cars on top of the 546? With the current standoff with CRRC there’s a chance the base order for 7000s won’t be completed at all and the 7000s will be capped at 252 cars. Is cta at the point that they don’t think they’re getting the remaining 148 7000s?

[Busjack]

44 minutes ago, Javi75 said:

At this point in the procurement process should cta propose additional options for 9000s like 150 more cars on top of the 546? With the current standoff with CRRC there’s a chance the base order for 7000s won’t be completed at all and the 7000s will be capped at 252 cars. Is cta at the point that they don’t think they’re getting the remaining 148 7000s?

That's a good question. My opinion is that defaults should be declared against CRRC (as SEPTA did), and for that matter PhoenixEV. But the question then becomes (as I raised with respect to canning Carter), what's the alternative? See my post of March 9, 2026, above,  where I laid out the issues. If a default is declared at this point, not only would the 3200s be around through 2035, the remaining 2600s (I assume about 250, but others of you keep track) would too. That means CTA would be running 50-year-old cars. In the meantime, this would be at double the cost.

My guess (since CTA won't admit that the transition is underway) is that this gets punted over to NITA.

[Rhys Pate]

41 minutes ago, Busjack said:

That's a good question. My opinion is that defaults should be declared against CRRC (as SEPTA did), and for that matter PhoenixEV. But the question then becomes (as I raised with respect to canning Carter), what's the alternative? See my post of March 9, 2026, above,  where I laid out the issues. If a default is declared at this point, not only would the 3200s be around through 2035, the remaining 2600s (I assume about 250, but others of you keep track) would too. That means CTA would be running 50-year-old cars. In the meantime, this would be at double the cost.

My guess (since CTA won't admit that the transition is underway) is that this gets punted over to NITA.

Would a default happen if the manufacturer does not meet the terms of the contract? How high is the chance of a default occurring, resulting in the base order of 7000s not being completed, in addition to no options for additional cars?

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Rhys Pate said:

Would a default happen if the manufacturer does not meet the terms of the contract? How high is the chance of a default occurring, resulting in the base order of 7000s not being completed, in addition to no options for additional cars?

That's the definition of a default; the only issue is whether the CT Board declares a breach and terminates it. There have been amendments to the contract, but I can't conceive that they encompassed 2 cars in the past year. But relevant to this topic, the back up of 9000s is about 6 years away.

[Rhys Pate]

On 5/24/2026 at 3:04 PM, Busjack said:

That's the definition of a default; the only issue is whether the CT Board declares a breach and terminates it. There have been amendments to the contract, but I can't conceive that they encompassed 2 cars in the past year. But relevant to this topic, the back up of 9000s is about 6 years away.

Interesting.

[Transcend_dayo]

I’m not exactly fully versed on this, but I believe the reason that the 7000s options weren’t picked up was because of the National Defense Authorization Act which prevented more contracts being signed with Chinese companies for infrastructure (paraphrasing here.) This was of course made into law after the base order of 7000s were signed. Even if the CTA wanted to, they couldn’t sign on for the options for more cars. 
 

Their (the CTAs) hand was forced with the procurement of the 9000s. I personally don’t like it, though. As far back as I can remember, the brown line has been operating with a hybrid of 2600s and 3200s even when Kimball had all of the 3200s in the fleet assigned to it. If the 9000s series contract get signed, it’ll only be enough to cover the replacement of the 2600s, leaving not enough cars for the brown line to operate. Unless, of course, the CTA does some fleet management shenanigans and is willing to operate a yard with a hybrid of cars. 
 

I personally think that the CTA [made a strategic error] by not making the 5000s and 7000s compatible. It’ll be an even bigger [error] if they don’t make the 7000s and 9000s compatible. They could probably try to make some software modifications to the 5000 and 7000 right now to make them compatible, but who knows what that’ll do to the maintenance and procurement contracts. Probably some clause that it makes software modifications illegal by the CTA, along with some other IP legalese that prevents them from doing anything. 

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, Transcend_dayo said:

I’m not exactly fully versed on this

I replied to this misinformation here in the 7000s thread, since most of the prior post refers to them, but added this cross reference because I also mentioned 9000s.

[Transcend_dayo]

12 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I replied to this misinformation here in the 7000s thread, since most of the prior post refers to them, but added this cross reference because I also mentioned 9000s.

Paragraph 1 is the only one I stated could be fact, and I specifically stated that _I could be wrong._ Everything else (para. 2-3) is opinion, to the best of my recollection, as best as I could figure, or a combination of the three. It’s pretty clearly stated as such. 

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, Transcend_dayo said:

Paragraph 1 is the only one I stated could be fact, and I specifically stated that _I could be wrong._ Everything else (para. 2-3) is opinion, to the best of my recollection, as best as I could figure, or a combination of the three. It’s pretty clearly stated as such. 

Maybe I went to school too long ago, but I was taught that opinion was to be credited only if it was based on fact.

[Bus1883]

11 hours ago, Transcend_dayo said:

I’m not exactly fully versed on this, but I believe the reason that the 7000s options weren’t picked up was because of the National Defense Authorization Act which prevented more contracts being signed with Chinese companies for infrastructure (paraphrasing here.) This was of course made into law after the base order of 7000s were signed. Even if the CTA wanted to, they couldn’t sign on for the options for more cars. 
 

Their (the CTAs) hand was forced with the procurement of the 9000s. I personally don’t like it, though. As far back as I can remember, the brown line has been operating with a hybrid of 2600s and 3200s even when Kimball had all of the 3200s in the fleet assigned to it. If the 9000s series contract get signed, it’ll only be enough to cover the replacement of the 2600s, leaving not enough cars for the brown line to operate. Unless, of course, the CTA does some fleet management shenanigans and is willing to operate a yard with a hybrid of cars. 
 

I personally think that the CTA [made a strategic error] by not making the 5000s and 7000s compatible. It’ll be an even bigger [error] if they don’t make the 7000s and 9000s compatible. They could probably try to make some software modifications to the 5000 and 7000 right now to make them compatible, but who knows what that’ll do to the maintenance and procurement contracts. Probably some clause that it makes software modifications illegal by the CTA, along with some other IP legalese that prevents them from doing anything. 

I wouldn’t think they’d update the software on the 5000s I doubt that. If that was to happen, I believe they’ll have to redo the announcements over again or copy and paste the recordings of what was used for the 7000s. 

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, Bus1883 said:

I wouldn’t think they’d update the software on the 5000s I doubt that. If that was to happen, I believe they’ll have to redo the announcements over again or copy and paste the recordings of what was used for the 7000s. 

If it is proprietary software, they aren't legally allowed to do so.

Added: It may also be similar to asking for Siri on an Android phone, although there probably is some geek bot on YouTube saying to do it. (There's an article on this problem.) In short, that software may be incompatible with current hardware. For instance, at the Board meeting, they said the leveling system was different.