Lionel cab/rolling stock numbers

[kld3169]

My curiosity has gotten the best of me today, so we need an answer. We have
speculated on how Lionel (and others) determine engine cab numbers as well as
numbers on various pieces of rolling stock. Are they based on prototypical
engine and car numbers? Or is there just some guy in a cubicle thinking this
stuff up? Some are fairly obvious like our Lionel Spirit of '76, but, for
example, we have a Boston and Maine switcher (8918) and a Western Maryland AA
set that are 8915 and 8916. Just coincidence that they're so close? After all,
they are 2 different styles and different railways. We're curious about
steamers, too. Our 681 has that as a cab number, but the Keystone has the number
6200. This is the type of useless information we need to believe we are smarter
than we really are!

 

Thanks,

 

Ken Deardorff

[Stourbridge Lion]

Ken - Welcome to trains.com!

[kld3169]

Thank you for the welcome. I'm looking forward to more Q and A like this!

[cuyama]

You'll probably receive more knowledgeable responses at the sister forum dedicated to Lionel and similar trains:
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/95.aspx  

[train18393]

I am not a Lionel expert as the people on the other  forum are, but it seems as if the answer to your question is all of the possibilities you said. I have a Scals 700E Hudson #5344 and that is the engine that J.C. Lionel had used as the prototype for his famout model. The Semi-Scale version of the same engine has 618 (IIRC) on the cab side. Same boiler, different details, wheels, valve gear, tender etc. I also have a scale E-7 set and it has the correrct NYC numbers on the units. The scale stuff seems to always have numbers that are at least in the series for that type of engine on prototype railroad if they even had such an engine. No matter what era The 0-36, O27 etc seem to be just dreamed up by who knows?

Paul

Dayton and Mad River RR

[mobilman44]

Hi,

Welcome to the Trains Forums!

As indicated, you will be much better served going to the Toy Trains section - as they are mostly Lionel and Flyer enthusiasts.  The folks here are more HO and N "nuts".

However, I am also a Lionel postwar collector and can help you somewhat.  For the majority of Lionels locos and rolling stock prior to the '70s (my area of "expertise"), the numbers on the cars/locos were of no relation to the prototypes.   Instead, they were related to Lionel's product codes.  There was even a reason for freight cars beginning with a certain digit (i.e. 6xxx, 2xxx) and so on.  Classic Toy Trains mag did an article on this several years ago.

Hey, enjoy your stay here!

[cv_acr]

I don't really know too much about particular Lionel models; I'm mostly familiar with Lionel as a maker of very toy-looking O-"scale" cars whereas I'm an HO-scaler and much more particular about the detailing and accuracy of my rolling stock.

I did a quick search for CP Rail Lionel cars, since I'm pretty familiar with CP's roster, and flipping through a bunch of Lionel CP Rail cars on eBay, not a single one of them has a car number rooted in anything remotely similar to reality. Not a good sign there.

[Andrew Falconer]

The LIONEL MPC 1970's numbers used on the locomotives, cars, and cabooses were usually the same as the product numbers used for lisitng in the catalogs and on the boxes they were packed inside.

Eventually during the Lionel Train Inc period they begin to use actual railroad numbers on the items produced. .

Andrew Falconer

[Eriediamond]

cv_acr

I don't really know too much about particular Lionel models; I'm mostly familiar with Lionel as a maker of very toy-looking O-"scale" cars whereas I'm an HO-scaler and much more particular about the detailing and accuracy of my rolling stock.

I did a quick search for CP Rail Lionel cars, since I'm pretty familiar with CP's roster, and flipping through a bunch of Lionel CP Rail cars on eBay, not a single one of them has a car number rooted in anything remotely similar to reality. Not a good sign there.

Not  good sign ? I don't understand and wish to comment, but please don't take this as a dig to anyone. Just a reminder that Lionel and others produced electric trains as toys not scale model trains. However I think that Lionel is leaning more and more toward scale and collectors as the younger population steers more toward other things then trains like we did in the old days. They were produced to be played with by kids, induce imagination and give kids the feeling of control of the toy. Yes some of us just never grew up lol. Having said this if your looking for exact scale trains with exact prototype numbering then I don't think you will find it in Lionel or other high rail makers. This is just my opinion and nothing else.

 

[rtraincollector]

To get back to the original question as a whole Lionel to my knowledge ( which isn't great but fairly good) didn't use actual number that railroads did. I'm not sure any maker really uses actual numbers on there trains as a whole. now sometimes for some special reason they do. I'm presently trying to obtain actual numbers for NYC PA'1's and PB-1's to renumber mine. I know the numbers looking them up on line. ( And NYC didn't number any of them 2000 as they are and 2000B for the B's lol

[fifedog]

The Big L has been hit or miss (overwhelmingly miss) over time with prototypical numbering.  It has steadily gotten better, especially with locomotive and caboose numerals.  Weaver and Williams seemed to lead the charge to proper numbering, and MTH "usually" gets it right.

If you are interested in a certain road, you might be able to locate an old engine/freight car roster at a railroadiana table.  I carry a Chessie System guide dated 1980 to try and keep my purchases "honest".  But heck, in the land of O, if you like it, get it.

[arkady]

As others have said, sometimes Lionel used prototype numbers, but more often they didn't.  More recent locomotives are more likely to use prototype numbers than older models.  My GG1 8150 (made in 1981) is numbered 4935, which was a prototype number.  But the original Lionel GG1 (made in 1947) was numbered a very un-prototypical 2332.

Personally, I've never cared much one way or the other.