This past week I have been trying to clear up a few remaining issues with the CW-80. To this end I spoke with Lionel Technical Services and received the latest Manual for the CW. The tech was very polite, even sweet, but not terribly forthcoming.
For example, I could not get a definitive answer to the question of how to distinguish a newly revised CW from one of the old ones. Not date of manufacture, not "G" prefix, nada. The tech wouldn't commit to a direct answer. She did send me the latest Owner's Manual, which is not yet onlline. (The part number is 71-4198-250, Rev. 1/04.*) As nearly as I can figure, it makes no distinction between the old and the newly revised CW's.
Worse yet, it repeats the error on page 5 that purports to illustrate the most fundamental information -- how to hook the CW up to tubular track -- and gets it backwards! This error has now been carried through three versions! (Note: I believe the hook-up instructions for FasTrack are correct relative to the revised CW-80.) One thing I was told unequivocally: the "cautions" in the old instructions relative to the common-ground problem are now void. The good news is that the newly revised CW-80 now works as originally intended, and you can use it with any accessory, using a common-ground or not, as you choose. (The cautions remain for the older, non-revised CW's, of course.)
Perhaps you can share my chagrin in the knowledge that they have now fixed the transformer, but if you hook it up according to their instructions you negate the fix. How dumb is that?
One can, of course, distinguish a new CW from an old one simply by placing an ohmmeter across the U terminals: if its a new one the meter should read zero ohms. That is, on the new ones only, the two U posts are common, as in the postwar ZW, for example. Less than ideal, but it works. And, with the revised ones only, the well-publicized "workaround" that reversed the whistle and bell buttons is finally no longer needed.
Today, I called Customer Service, which is not the same as Tech Service, but Tech Service is not open on Monday or Tuesday. In the end of an unproductive conversation this latest representative advised me to send a letter and gave me Jerry's address. Well, maybe.
In addition to the manual for the CW-80 itself, there are also manuals for various pieces of FasTrack including the Operating Track Section, Terminal Section, Accessory Activator Pack, Uncoupling Track, Siding Track Add-on Pack, the operating cars and accessories themselves, and who knows how many others, all or most of which contain serious hook-up errors and need revision. However, even when they do get corrected, unless there is a reliable way to distinguish whether a given instruction applies to the new or to the old CW-80, the manuals will remain confusing at best.
Anyhow, except for the ongoing screw-up with the manuals, and the fact that it is 'way too early to know whether quality and reliability have reached acceptable standards, I am now prepared, for the first time in the course of all my posts on two forums, to state that I recommend the REVISED CW-80 as a good choice for small to medium sized (5 amps max.) layouts. I want one, and I intend to buy one -- from an authorized dealer, of course -- and will certainly keep the receipt. Note added January 23: this "endorsement" of the CW-80 applies to its use with Lionel equipment only. I have no experience with the newly revised transformer and the equipment of other manufacturers. Be advised that even if you confine yourself to Lionel equipment and accessories, the official instructions, online and elsewhere, remain a gigantic confusing mess as of this date.
--------------------
One might well ask why I have flogged this horse for so long. The answer is simply that I hate to see folks disappointed at Christmas -- especially children. As the principal power source for many starter sets, the CW-80 has assumed the role of primary "user interface" between the Lionel corporation and its customers. This relationship has stunk for far too long, and although they seem to have greatly improved the product, their PR, as reflected in the instructions, still leaves a lot to be desired.
On a personal note, I have "resigned" from the OGR Forum and herewith "resign" from this one. For a while it was fun, and I still enjoy a spirited discussion -- as long as everyone keeps an open mind. But the plethora of non-objectivity, closed-mindedness and pettiness that I have observed among certain members of each forum has repeatedly disappointed me.
It just isn't fun any more -- and the pay stinks! Keep this in mind when you ask a question on an issue of some complexity and get one-line "answers" from members who apparently believe that they speak ex-cathedra. Nobody knows it all --trust me on this.
As for the vast majority of you, I have profited from your contributions and learned a lot. Good luck; keep them on the tracks; and, above all, have fun! Don't forget to let the kids play with them once in a while.
Oh, yes. Almost forgot: 42
* Admission dated 1/24/07 : I totally blew this. The nice lady at Lionel promised the "latest version" and when I received it I saw 1/04 I read it as 1/07. Then, even when I wrote it here, I retained the three-year old date -- and still didn't notice it. Evidently there isn't any 1/07 revision (we really need one) but this kind of "senior moment" is just one more example of why I need to get away from it all. Sorry about the glaring error.
Wolverine:
First, thanks for your insight into the CW-80 problems. Remember when Lionel had just that simple little transformer in their starter sets? Well, take this with a grain of salt: Perhaps the outsourcing of their assembly to China has something to do with the a. quality issues, and b. the problem with the manuals. Don't Chinese read from right to left? That could be why all the manuals are backwards! (This is a joke...abeit maybe with a grain of truth)
Second, I hate to see you run off from this forum! I, too, have been on a forum where several people's opinions forced me to consider leaving. However, after several others responded both publically and privately, I stayed with the particular forum. Just remember, like *** orifices, everyone has an opinion, whether good or bad :) You have to learn to weed out the good from the bad. If you see some of my postings, I made a posting within the past couple weeks, only to get a quick cheap shot from someone asking why I posted the question if I didn't like the answer. Instead of keeping his mouth (and fingers) shut, he had to feel good about taking a quick shot at me. I was trying to just vent a personal thought but agreed with the replies, and I got the cheap shot.
Just blow it off! There is a LOT of good information here. There are a couple people on every forum that KNOW it ALL...they must work at that Lionel Hard Rock Cafe (Love All, Serve All..Know it ALL lol) Don't let a couple people run you off. Just skip their replies if you don't agree!
Knowledge is power...strength is in the numbers..the more people on the list, the stronger we get as there is more knowledge! Stick around!
Wolverine,
Please don't hang up your forum hat because of a few.
Your informative posts have helped the many (myself included)!
I too seek out your posts for the invaluable info.
There'll always be some troublesome trucks.
Variety is the spice of life.
Hope you reconsider.
Bobby
I have considered your posts to be informative and helpful. Your decision to end participation on both forums doesn't sit well with me. I'd urge you to reconsider. It's people like you that we all learn and benefit from. Your selfless attitude and dilligenge with the CW-80 issues have helped many of us to understand the quirks of this transformer. Shake it off and loosen up a bit. Post on the coffee pot thread and let us get to know you. Then when we harrass you, you'll know it is meant in a freindly sort of way!
Yallaen,
I'm the guy who replied to you about your wire question. My reply was NOT meant as a cheap shot. It was a legit question. You asked about what gauge wire you should use on your layout. The vast majority told you to use 14 gauge wire. Period, end. You then wrote back that you thought it was overkill. The reply posters have a lot of knowledge and experience with toy trains. Some of them are geniuses when it comes to electrical matters. I was a little taken back by your remark is all. It seemed as though you were bent on doing it your own way, which is fine. We took the time to answer your question and your reply seemed to me to just blow all that experience off. Sorry if I was wrong. We were all just trying to answer your question the best we could. Speaking for myself, I'd much rather see you use a wire that is large enough to accomodate your needs rather than one that is too small and would cause you grief.
Jim
Modeling the Baltimore waterfront in HO scale
wolverine49 wrote: One might well ask why I have flogged this horse for so long. The answer is simply that I hate to see folks disappointed at Christmas -- especially children. As the principal power source for many starter sets, the CW-80 has assumed the role of primary "user interface" between the Lionel corporation and its customers. On a personal note, I have "resigned" from the OGR Forum and herewith "resign" from this one. For a while it was fun, and I still enjoy a spirited discussion -- as long as everyone keeps an open mind. But the plethora of non-objectivity, closed-mindedness and pettiness that I have observed among certain members of each forum has repeatedly disappointed me.
One might well ask why I have flogged this horse for so long. The answer is simply that I hate to see folks disappointed at Christmas -- especially children. As the principal power source for many starter sets, the CW-80 has assumed the role of primary "user interface" between the Lionel corporation and its customers.
Wolverine, I have been reading and enjoying your thoughtful analysis of the CW-80 issues and I haven't posted because I don't have one! However forewarned is forearmed thanks to you. The CW-80 issues have been flogged to death on both forums but the majority of posts have been of the "what's wrong?" - "This thing stinks" - "No it doesnt" variety which havent really been very useful in sharp contrast to your detective approach.
As for 'resigning' I certainly hope I havent said anything to contribute towards that feeling because I know it well and recognize exactly what you refer to. Frankly I consider the behaviour ill mannered but its to be expected - unfortunately - one has only to draw the obvious conclusions but don't let them deny you the pleasure of those posters whose remarks you do enjoy nor deprive us of your insight.
I'd like to say more and be more specific but to do so would earn me the ire of the hosts and only exarcebate the situation. Feel free to contact me via email if you wish and I might then be unwise enough to take the gloves off.
I hope you reconsider. Your posts represent a very good technical in-site on your part. We need more of that type of input on theses forums.
wolverine49 wrote: Oh, yes. Almost forgot: 42
What does that mean?
Hello Wolverine:
Let me echo what others have said, your passion would be sorely missed. I have always been a fan of the CW80's design. However, because of the problems with its operation, I have stayed away. Thanks to your insight and determination, you have made me comfortable in buying one in the future. In addition, you have helped many others with their ongoing issues.
Do not let some negative posts dishearten you. Every forum has snipers, but this one is better than most. Also remember that the majority of visitors never post and, as a result, you may not get a true picture of your contributions.
Regards,
John O
WOLVERINE49: Although not as a prolific contibutor as you have been, I too, have received some, should I be so bold to say, sarcastic and uninformative responses to my posts. I have not agreed, obviously, with their retorts and have taken, as I have learned many years ago while I was working, to 'consider the source'. It makes life a lot more bearable.
The greater number of members, I suspect, have enjoyed your perspective and concern about some issues and would like to to stay aboard.
I am not a real fan of Lionel 'Tech' support and have noticed that their "proof readers" of their catalogs miss things. One thing that comes to mind is a description in (2006-Vol.2) of the items in a "Ready-to-Run" set that says there is an "operating log dump car" and goes on to say that there is included a track section that activates the "coal dump car".
I know that this has been very wordy but bottom-line, please reconsider.
Whoa, whoa, whoa! This is extremely flattering and most unexpected, but it's also awkward and embarrassing -- rather like attending one's own funeral. I really do appreciate it, but it needs to stop. (Besides, as of this writing the score is 11 in my favor, and 195 abstentions. Not really a resounding victory.)
Thanks to each and all of you. A couple of personal notes:
lionroar88: Sincerely hope that Joe Pa is going to be all right and back on the sidelines next season. Don't forget, the Wolverines didn't do it to him....
EIS2: 42 is the response that the greatest-ever supercomputer came up with after calculating for seven years nonstop, as I recall, in Douglas Adams' Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and what followed. Here is an excerpt from www.funtrivia.com "...ultimate answer to Life, the Universe and Everything. Unfortunately, it is not known exactly what the question was, so nobody is the wiser."
I have long felt that Lionel really missed it's chance to call our little friend the CW-42. Of course, there is a major revision out -- perhaps it's not too late....
Thanks again to everybody. The problem really isn't any of you, it's the guys over at OGR! Joke! Joke! Joke!
Seriously, I'm old and tired and not terribly well. It's time to climb down -- at least for a while.
I'm going to contact Lionel and maybe post a line or two before completely bagging it -- if I learn anything.
I will leave you with this thought: Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts. -- Daniel Patrick Moynahan.
Try to stick to the facts and play nice with each other! It's supposed to be fun.
I wouldn't waste my time worrying about the OGR crowd, definitely not worth it. The Lionel docs are about par for the course which is unfortunate, sometimes the mistakes can be funny. The really bad part s how few even examine the "extra packing material" in the box.
I hope you feel better and I really hope you reconsider and keep partcipating.
wolverine49 wrote: Seriously, I'm old and tired and not terribly well. It's time to climb down -- at least for a while.
Wolverine, You may be "old and tired and not terribly well" physically, but your mind is sharp as a tack. Take some well deserved rest and then come on back to the forum.
Earl
Don't let yourself be pushed away.. Just take some time off, and may be we'll meet again on the forum someday. Let's not forget that these trains are just toy's and that toy's are not worth fighting for.
Take care!
Wolverine: Let me add my vote to those that ask that you stay. God knows I've been through similar treatment as you. Some deserved...some NOT. But don't let a select few on the forum chase you away. If you do, THEY win and WE all LOSE. While I don't own the transformer you describe (thank goodness!), I found your posts informative as well as interesting.
Dep
Virginian Railroad
No need to bash the OGR forum. The people there are not any different than the people here. In fact, in many or most cases they're probably the same people.
People who post to discussion forums are going to express their opinions. That's what it's all about. One may think the CW-80 is a terribly problematic transformer (I'm in that group), while the next guy may say he's had one for four years and never had a problem. Both may be absolutely correct, and one person's response in that example is no more valid than the others. Forum visitors--old and new read both points of view and decide for themselves which seems to stand the test as far as their requirements are concerned.
Online forums are not for the feint of heart, especially if one elects to actively participate. Ya gotta develop a pretty thick skin, because there's no question that some bricks are going to be thrown your way no matter what you choose to say. The "safe" and anonymous nature of Internet dialog just about guaranteed that because people feel both empowered and remote, and therefore secure from the consequences of their actions. Bar fights in cyberspace, which are common, are in that respect very different from bar fights at the neighborhood watering hole.
Allan Miller,
Bash the OGR forum? What is it about two "big smiles" and the word "Joke!" three times that you don't understand? I'm surprised, what with your literary background and all. I'll miss you, for sure.
Alan:
Like Wolverine's posts, I find your posts informative and interesting. In addition, you express your thoughts in a very articulate manner. Having said that, why are online forums not for the faint of heart? Why do posters have to submit to the lowest common denominator?
I have found the OGR forums to be very informative. However, many of the spiteful discussions make me uncomfortable. Would these people act the same way in person? I don't think it is too much to ask for a little decorum.
johnandjulie13 wrote:Alan:Like Wolverine's posts, I find your posts informative and interesting. In addition, you express your thoughts in a very articulate manner. Having said that, why are online forums not for the faint of heart? Why do posters have to submit to the lowest common denominator? I have found the OGR forums to be very informative. However, many of the spiteful discussions make me uncomfortable. Would these people act the same way in person? I don't think it is too much to ask for a little decorum.Regards,John O
John:
I guess it's because folks feel free to say anything they want to onlinesince there are no real consequences, and certainly no physical consequences (as there might be in a bar fight).
For all of its advantages, the Internet does tend to bring out the the more base human emotions--not just on toy train forums, but on just about any public forum. Folks know they can get away with it, within limits of course, depending on the degree of moderation, and they'll write things that they would never even consider saying if they were sitting around a table engaged in the same discussion on a face-to-face basis. I've long said that one of the greatest advantages of the Internet--free and open discourse--is also one of its greatest limitations.
I agree with everything you say. As a college football fan, you should see some of the posts on the football boards
My point is that just because the boorish behavior is prevalent does not mean that it should be condoned. I like the CTT boards more than OGR because, for the most part, the forum population is a lot more civil. I just hate to see well meaning posters get chased away by neer do wells, politicos with hidden agendas and other miscreants.
I don't find the need for thick skin on this forum or the OGR forum. For the most part, civility reigns on both forums and everyone plays by the rules. I do prefer this board to OGR because frankly, I think it's friendlier. Not nearly as much grousing, whining, and complaining. I also feel that the OGR board is overwhelmingly anti-Lionel and pro-MTH to a fault.
I give my share of opinions and shots on both forums. The people here know how to take me - with a huge grain of salt. That's how I think everyone should be taken.
Hello Jim:
Well, you New Englander types are naturally pretty tough.
Maybe, being a midwesterner, I am a little more sensitive to some of the diatribes.
In any event, having a dry sense of humor myself, I almost always find your posts entertaining.
I too have benefited from W's posts. Even though he is not looking for more posts, I wanted to transfer to the support from the abstain column.
Jim H
Jon,
You've identified one of the aspects of the hobby which amuses me most. I drift into the 2-rail O world on a regular basis, and their discussion lists are crammed with diatribes about the silliness and lack of realism of 3-rail trains. Driver flanges are derisively called "pizza cutters," and so forth. Yet, when those 2-railers who actually build/modify/run models (a surprisingly small subset of the total) AND actually post pictures of their latest beautiful contest winners (a smaller subset yet), these higly detailed, fragile modles run across bare plywood on unballasted track in front of cinder-block walls in most cases.
It seems to me that more 3-rail layouts get done than 2-rail--even as a percentage of the respective populations. A brief survey of the literature of both 2- and 3-rail O indicates to me that most of the realistic O layouts are Hi-rail 3-rail. Heck, even painted plywood and the automatic gateman look more realistic than playwood and cinder block.
Just recently, the pre-eminent 2-rail O magazine ran an article on a hi-rail layout. Looking at it, one can see well-done scenery, complete and consistent guidance by a theme, and thorough attention to detail. We see these kinds of layouts in CTT fairly often: only the third rail identifies the layout as anything other than pure finescale. Yet the feedback to the magazine howled in outrage about the "pizza cutters" staring the readers in the face, the abandonment of all sacred principles of model railroading, and the cancellation of numerous subscriptions because the erstwhile subscribers felt betrayed by the editor.
I have learned not to take anybody's criticism of what I enjoy very seriously. I almost certainly view their sacred cows with nearly the same bemusement--though I hope without the same contempt too often shown.
Palallin:
Very well said!
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