I've always thought Lionel's #42 Standard Gauge electric was an especially good looker. From what I can tell, they put a NYC S-1 body on two of the motors from their 5, 6, and 7 steam engines. The AC to DC switch seems especially innovative for something created 100 years ago!
I'd like to get one and restore it, but can it take a 42" Standard Gauge curve? Also, what seems like a decent price for one that needs restoration but isn't in especially bad condition? Can a Lionel RW handle such a beast?
_________________________________________________________________
Here's a photo I found of a #42:
http://p2.la-img.com/106/1398/594847_1_l.jpg
Anyone know the answers to any of my questions? I really want to get one, but I need to be sure I can run it and not just display it (and that I can afford it).
Lionel only had one radius of curvature in those days, the S42 as released in 1906. So the #42 will have no problem with the radius, but it's a good idea to use "extra tie" track sections to avoid rail spread. It's not that the 42 is especially heavy, it's just that I've noticed standard gauge track has a tendency to loosen up with use no matter when or by whom it was made.
I have 3 books which might shed light on pricing.
You should also be aware that 42's made between 1913 and 1920 had only one motor, the second was a dummy. If you want the 2 motor version you'll need one manufactured between 1921 and 1923.
The #42 came in these colors:
I don't know enough about the RW Trainmaster or the early motors of the type installed in the #42 to tell you wether it can handle a #42 or not. I have only one operable Standard Gauge loco at this time, a #8 with a Lionel Supermotor manufactured between 1928 and 1930. I use a 150 watt type K to get it moving. I tried using a 100 watt type T but it barely moved.
Hope all this helps! Remember that the pricing info I looked up for you is generally for Very Good condition on the low end to Like New on the high ends. "Very Good" means "Few scratches, exceptionally clean, no major dents or rust" so a "needs restoration" loco could cost you quite a bit less.
Becky
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Thanks a lot for all the info! That's exactly what I wanted to know!
The Lionel RW is 110 watts and drives my American Flyer 4000 easily, and it also ran a friend's Lionel 390E without issue. If I find a 42 with a single motor, it should probably work fine. I haven't seen many and thought they were only dual motor, so I needed to be sure. The pricing you mentioned is lower than I expected, so I think one of these will be within my price range. The 4000 is already huge, but I think it would be fun to pull out the REALLY big engine now and then!
Thanks again!
Well, I ended up with a dual motor unit anyway. My RW handles a dual motored 2343 with E unit unit fine, so hopefully it will also work with the 42. The one I got also has the AC/DC power switch, so it'll be interesting to see how that works! From what I've read, it switches the motor field magnets from parallel for AC to series for DC. The original paint's pretty messed up, so no harm in stripping and restoring this one!
Cool! Have you decided what color to paint it? Just out of curiosity, and you don't have to give the exact dollar amount if you don't want to, but how close were the guidebook values compared with what you actually paid?
I'm thinking either dark gray, maroon, or black. I'll have to see what Krylon can match, because I don't feel like dealing with expensive special formulations again. And oddly enough, when I restored my AF Royal Blue, one of Krylon's royal blue paints was a better match than the special stuff I tried first (Henning's Collector Colors are excellent though)!
If you take the three low prices you listed and average them out, it's pretty close to what I paid! Except for the original paint, everything looks like it's in good shape. No cracking wheels, very little rust, and all parts present (minus a switch lever).
Given the 42's early beginnings it's ability to work on AC and DC made the product useable to a larger market. Before the standardization of household AC current, DC was also a going concern....Edison fed Manhattan's electrical needs with DC back then. DC also allowed those with no piped in electricity to operate trains off of battery power. Pretty smart thinking of old JLC...and far safer than the earlier methods of some manufacturers who used 110V and lightbulbs to vary voltage.
Bruce
uhh....don't forget the wet cell batteries attached to a light bulb arrangement Lionel advocated for voltage reduction or the "pour the magic sand on top of the water" and then slide the zincs in and out of the soup in the open top glass jars apparatus from the early catalogs.
Lectricity was new and excitin' technology back in them days and many toy manufacturers encouraged children to experiment and learn about it. Nothing wrong with that, I believe we make the world a bit "too safe" for modern kids. Lots of kids played with cast iron toys, wet cell batteries and chemistry sets (including one A.C. Gilbert put out with Uranium in it) and survived just fine.
Anyhoo. I have a #33 from 1917 and it has cast iron wheels. I'm not sure when Lionel stopped using them and switched to the zinc alloy, but it's possible your 42 has iron wheels and that's why they're in such good shape.
According to McComas and Tuohy, the round cab #33 made before 1916 with the U-frame had cast iron wheels. Those made in 1916 and after had a straight frame and die cast wheels. Yours might be earlier than you thought, Penny.
Unfortunately I find no mention of when the die cast zinc wheel change over came about on the 42. i assume it would be around if not exactly at the same time as on the #33.
"Universal Current Controller (Patent Applied For) A Unique device is affixed to these locomotives so that by simply moving a lever the windings of the motors are changed to series (which is the best winding when they are operated on the reduced direct current) or to multiple (which is the best connection when operated on reduced alternating current or on dry or storage batteries)."
The UCC used on the 42 indeed operates only on the motors' field windings, not the entire motors as Lionel's description above suggests. But notice that the distinction between its two settings is not strictly AC versus DC. Rather, it is between "reduced direct current", which I take to be that supplied by the Lionel 107 or 170 "direct current reducers", and either "reduced alternating current", which I take to be the output of a transformer, or batteries. I think that the real difference is the voltage, not whether AC or DC, since higher voltage characterizes the reducers, or the even more dangerous series-lamp arrangement mentioned above.
Whether a particular transformer can operate a particular locomotive has as much to do with the transformer's maximum output voltage as with its power rating. For example, a 1000-watt transformer with a maximum of 5 volts out is useless for almost any toy train. If the transformer at full voltage cannot move the locomotive at a satisfactory speed and the circuit breaker does not trip, the problem is voltage. If the transformer's circuit breaker trips, the problem is power. Keep in mind also that both voltage and power from a particular transformer may be inadequate for running a particular locomotive.
Bob Nelson
Good point. My "wobble-wheeled" #8 won't pull more than one car when using a 100 watt type T at 20 volts but pulls half a dozen 500 series freights or 4 lighted coaches using a type K at 24 volts. (I should note that this particular #8, besides being wobbly, had several other problems due to acid exposure sometime in it's past.)
Here is a pic of the one that I have
I am a person with a very active inner child. This is why my wife loves me so. Willoughby, Ohio - the home of the CP & E RR. OTTS Founder www.spankybird.shutterfly.com
Nice! Is the paint original? Looks like a pretty good piece!
I believe it was repainted,
Got it in today, and most everything is in excellent shape! It does have one problem, though. The primary motor works fine, but the second motor has bad windings (broken in multiple places. I can rewind a motor, but getting to it is the problem because I have to pull the wheels. Is the following tool suitable for the cast iron wheels Lionel used way back when?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2122-for-Lionel-8-10-318-380-384-385-392-400-402-408-STD-Wheel-Puller-Tool-parts-/400762511330?pt=Model_RR_Trains&hash=item5d4f4e9fe2
I just need to be able to get them off without damaging them, because the wheels are practically like new. And since they're cast iron, they'll never ever crumble like the zinc wheels they started using in the early-mid 20's.
I can't tell you whether that's a suitable puller. But, if you've never used a puller, you need to know to tighten it moderately, then tap on the end of the screw with a hammer, then tighten again, tap, and so on. Unless the wheel comes off very (too) easily, the puller is not designed to nor strong enough to just pull it straight off using the screw alone.
Thanks for the tip! That would explain why pulling some O gauge wheels a while back was so hard. I think that tool's my best bet, so I'm going to give it a go. $30 is a small price to pay for a specialized tool.
It's funny, I saw one of the O gauge tools up for auction a while ago, and it got into a bidding war that drove it up to over $60! It's only worth $20! Some people could save a lot if they tried studying a little.
Be careful and go s - l - o - w! Cast iron doesn't have the zinc pest but it can still break. Especially along those thin areas like flanges.
Yes, I will definitely move slowly! Replacement cast iron wheels aren't quite as available as the others.
The wiring all needs to be replaced, so I put together a circuit diagram and finally figured out how the UCC switch works. For AC/high current, the field magnets are parallel to each other, and then run in series through the two armatures (magnets - motor - motor). For DC/reduced current, the magnets and motors are in a full series circuit (magnet - magnet - motor - motor). From testing the working motor, setting it to DC/reduced current really does help for lower power transformers. My RW may be able to handle it when it's all finished.
Being cast iron, I wonder if heating the wheel with a torch would help remove it with less effort...maybe even without the need of the wheel puller? Of course if the wheels are painted red then I'd advise against this method unless you're planning to repaint.
That's interesting, that your armatures are in series. The only wiring information that I have been able to find on the Internet has them in parallel: http://www.tinplatetimes.com/Tinplate%20History/Lionel%2042%20Wiring/42.htm Maybe they were made both ways at different times.
I've seen that article before, but looking at the diagram, it's wired different from mine. I wonder if maybe someone messed with the wiring on mine, and that's why only one motor will run? I'm going to check on that, and if it works, I may not even need the puller! (hasn't been shipped yet, so maybe I can cancel if it's not needed? )
It works! Yaaay!
Just finished the wiring today, put it all back together, and it runs smooth! The A-U 21V terminals on the RW have no trouble at all moving it on the AC setting, so I won't be needing a new transformer to run it around. When I've finished the restoration (which shouldn't be difficult, considering the condition), I'll be sure to put up a video.
The center rail pickup shoes are pretty well worn, so I may add some metal shims on the bottom for improved contact. The motor speed isn't perfectly in sync either, but that's to be expected. It's rare for two motors of this age to run at the exact same speed. I only have American Flyer cars in Standard Gauge, so I think I'll put a repro AF coupler on the back.
Overall, I think this was a really good find!
Good find indeed....especially if it works without major repairs. I've had my eye out for a really nice original dual motored 42 at a reasonable price. Black would do...but dark olive green preferred. Also need a matching 19 combine car in comparable condition to complete the 42, 18, 19, 190 set from the mid '20's. Right now the 18 and 190 cars go oddly enough but correctly with my maroon 380E, as shown in the 1927 catalog.
This is all very interesting and useful information!
I like the look of the #42 and the basic simplicity of it's design that uses the two early motors with the sliding shoes and open frame. I think that would make maintenance fairly easy.
Unfortunatly the cost of a funtional #42 and the simple fact that it's too large to clear some of the tunnels and other obstacles on my dual gauge layout (O and STD.) have discouraged me from acquiring one.
However, I am building a smaller dual motor engine, using modified parts from several junker #33s, that will negotiate all the tight spots on my layout, and that will be able to pull a fairly long string of 100 series freight cars.
My question to the forum is: does anyone have a photo, or knowledge of the way the engines on a #42 are mounted so that they will swival on the curved sections of the track-work? Also: any other tips or suggestions for this project?
Thanks!
George Thill
When using Henning's Collector Colors. what did you thin it with? Can one use water?
Thanks,
I find that a lionel "R" transformer runs the early STD engines that I have: #33, 8, 10, 42, and 380. These all have trains of 3 or 4 passenger cars or 6 or 7 freight cars each. I only run one train at a time on this part of my dual STD and O gauge layout, which has several sideings, but I also have about 10 lights connected to the "R''.
I have a couple of questions for the forum about STD engines:
1. In your experience which has more pulling power: single reduction motors, or double reduction motors?
2. What is the maximum % grade (if any!) that a STD engine can pull a normal (3/4 cars) consist up?
I don't think I have ever had an O-gauge locomotive that could not spin its wheels. If that is also the case for standard gauge, as I suspect, the motor doesn't matter: Except for magnetraction, the tractive force available depends only on the product of the friction coefficient and the weight on drivers, just as for a prototype locomotive. For wheels and rails of similar materials, the weight on drivers alone will determine which locomotive can pull more.
I don't know what the coefficients of friction with tin-plated steel rail are for the various wheel materials that have been used, sintered iron, zinc, nickel-plated steel, for example. But the usual assumption is .25 for prototype steel-on-steel (that is, a factor of adhesion of 4).
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month