For me the best product so far is the great PRR Y-3. I've got all the Postwar PRR items but this Y-3 is spectacular. The J-1 had topped the list but the Y beats it out. All the great GG1s (both shortened and scale) are not far behind.
The poorest item has to be the Handcars (operationally), not appearance. They just don't run reliably on anything but the cleanest track. For the price, they could use an upgrade.
It is not just Fastrac but any track system with a plastic roadbed added in that is extremely difficult to almost impossible to custom fit to a layout. That is why tubular track won't die! Tubular track can be custom fitted even on curves!
Lee F.
rtraincollector wrote: Joe Hohmann wrote: RR Redneck wrote: The worst Lionel product has to be FasTrack (at one time it was the CW-80, but it takes back seat to FasTrack).You get my vote as the biggest *** on this forum. JoeMy view you need to look in a mirror don't get me wrong fast track is fine for those who don't want the art of cutting track to size and don't mind being limited to what you can do. But to really model I prefer to use gargraves so I can cut to the size I want and not have to go out and buy another $6.00 + piece to make it work or maybe 2 and 2 different sizes. It just depends on which you prefer to do but before you call someone the biggest *** think where they maybe coming from I see your point and I see his.
Joe Hohmann wrote: RR Redneck wrote: The worst Lionel product has to be FasTrack (at one time it was the CW-80, but it takes back seat to FasTrack).You get my vote as the biggest *** on this forum. Joe
RR Redneck wrote: The worst Lionel product has to be FasTrack (at one time it was the CW-80, but it takes back seat to FasTrack).
The worst Lionel product has to be FasTrack (at one time it was the CW-80, but it takes back seat to FasTrack).
You get my vote as the biggest *** on this forum. Joe
My view you need to look in a mirror don't get me wrong fast track is fine for those who don't want the art of cutting track to size and don't mind being limited to what you can do. But to really model I prefer to use gargraves so I can cut to the size I want and not have to go out and buy another $6.00 + piece to make it work or maybe 2 and 2 different sizes. It just depends on which you prefer to do but before you call someone the biggest *** think where they maybe coming from I see your point and I see his.
I agree with rtraincollector.
While I am trying to like FasTrack, the geometric (or lack thereof) considerations of it's design leave something to be desired IMHO. It would seem from all the praise FT gets though, that those of us with these concerns are certainly in the minority.
Agreed, FT is excellent for making temporary floor layouts, and it's not bad if you have no problem with just fidgeting to get your track plan to work. (meaning either: a) using many of the small fitter sections, or b) fudging it by forcing something not geometrically correct to fit together) I try to make layouts that have as little tension in the track as possible. I do not like to "fudge" the alignment, as that causes (small, mind you, but not insignificant) anomalies in the connections
Cutting
I know some people claim that cutting FT is no big deal, but I respectfully disagree. Perhaps I expect too much from my finished product. I always attempt for a cut piece of track to have as much structural integrity as a fresh piece. With tubular, this is doable, if you don't crush the track in a vice, or mangle the rail when trying to crimp a detent to hold the pin.
FT either forces you to bend the tabs under the roadbed to release the pins you will need after cutting(and of course bending them back so that the rail is still solid to the balast - and of course new holes in the balast too if you go this route), or you must cut out a middle section and then glue the 2 pieces back together somehow. To me, this leaves way too much room for anomalies in the resultant product, leading to chewing up of traction tires, or at the very least, more likely derailments.
Geometry
For all the good points of FT, the geometry issues make it harder to say that choosing FT is the best option.
The O72 and O60 switch "fitters" are on top of the list. Any switch that is labeled as a "O-xx" switch should be a direct drop in replacement for an "O-xx" curve section. The addition of the straight section makes the curve less "pure".
Example: Lets build an O84 loop with an O72 passing loop inside it. I started with a circle of O84, put a switch on each side at the mid points of the circle, then tried to figure out the straight track combinations to get it to connect in the middle. (half a circle of O72, less the 2 pieces that the switches contribute was also used, or course)
I ended up with an O84 circle with (2) 4.5" straight sections (on the edges of the loop perpindicular to the O72 switches) on each edge, and the O72 part of the loop had a 10", 5", 1.75" (2) and 1.375" (at the time only available with the switches!) to finish out the loop. Way too many straight pieces, IMO to create this simple plan. Perhaps if I made some trigonometry Excel spreadsheets, I might find better solutions by using straights in between the curves, but I have not yet gone down that path. (ie, at say 22 1/2 degrees, 45 or 67 1/2 for an O72 quarter circle, rather than only on the pieces at 0 or 90 degrees)
I am even OK with cutting the balast on a curve section to correct this, but it certainly won't help the straight section problem, as Lionel certainly did not plan for people to do this.
This is without even going into what an O72 wye might actually be. It may start as O72, but it is 1) not a full section, 2) not even necessarily a true curve if you don't use the straight fitter pieces, as it looks like a good portion of the end of the wye is very straight. (Looks to be maybe 7 ties worth of straight, counting on the outside rail, no fitter included)
I would call FT both the best and worst product, depending on which side you look at.
In fairness, I have not tried to analyze the geometry of other similar track fomr other companies, perhaps they may have such problems (even if not identical ones) as well.
-Dave
Kooljock1 wrote:Lee,It gets curiouser and curiouser! Certainly sounds like a modern era unit with those switches. Was it black or orange? Can motor or PullMor?Jon
Jon,
It was orange with black lettering, and had 6- another five numbers on the box it came in, don't know about can motor or pullmor but it must have been a can motor as it didn't pull that much maybe four quad hoppers at full open throttle on my ZW. In my estimate you would have to put three together to pull ten empty quad hoppers Lionel post war # 6436 or 643625.
And what was its number (if you can remember)?
Life's hard, even harder if your stupid John Wayne
http://rtssite.shutterfly.com/
Warburton wrote: I beliebve the common problem with the CW-80 is that a circuit breaker (or some such), er, "breaks" permanently and fixing it requires disassembling the entire transformer. My dealer said that inside, the transformer is well built except for this one often-defective part which can ruin it. So, I suspect that Lionel has already fixed the problem and newer models SHOULD perform OK. Anyone have experience with older vs. newer CW-80's so we can compare them??
I beliebve the common problem with the CW-80 is that a circuit breaker (or some such), er, "breaks" permanently and fixing it requires disassembling the entire transformer. My dealer said that inside, the transformer is well built except for this one often-defective part which can ruin it.
So, I suspect that Lionel has already fixed the problem and newer models SHOULD perform OK. Anyone have experience with older vs. newer CW-80's so we can compare them??
From what I know about the CW-80 either it works or it don't work. For the CW-80 that don't work I would cut the cord off and use it as a paper weight. a.k.a. Can't Work-80.
I don't know for sure if it was uncataloged or what but I bought the GP-7 in Stuart FL at a small hobby shop, so it was not a department store special but it sure performed like a "D" store special!
A little more info about the GP-7 Illinois Central, I bought it when I lived in Stuart FL between Sept. 95 and March 02. On the bottom where two switches, one for direction and the other for the horn to be turned on or off, it was a single motor unit, not sure if it had tire drive or not. Sold the GP-7 on ebay and used the money, plus a few dollars, to buy a new Williams GP-9 and I am very happy with that sale and purchase, may have lost a few dollars but gained a lot of experiance in the new locomotive purchasing department.
To power it I was using a post war 275 watt ZW, control handle A, so I had enough power to the loco to make it move but it just did not pull much of anything.
No I am not referring to the 8030! Like you said it was made 37 years ago, the one I am referring to was made in the 1990's and is not an MPC make loco.
Please READ the year made!!!
Best...the full scale S2 turbines with all the electronic goodies on them. No surprise there for anyone that knows how much I like the S2
Worst...I don't really have a specific item I don't like. I don't buy MPC locos, but other stuff like boxcars is pretty decent.
Dep
Virginian Railroad
Not to sound like a broken record, but...
The "Moreau Era" O-31 switches were designed, tooled, and built in the late Kughn Era. They were mostly delivered in the early Moreau Era. Why Gary gets the heat for this when he was still making knives and spoons at the time is really quite beyond me!
Jon
ben10ben wrote: The pre-Korean war 675 is probably the smoothest running steam engine I've ever seen. Turn the E-unit off and it's dead silent save for the smoke unit plunger and the occasional clank from the side rods. All of the worm-driven engines, steam or diesel, sound like coffee grinders in comparison.That of course isn't to imply that worm-driven engines aren't good runners, because they are, but the 675 is just in a completely different class as far smooth, silent running. For worst, I'd probably have to go with the Gary Moreau era O-31 switches. They were a great concept, with the detachable straight or curves, but horribly executed with poor part quality and cheap construction. O22s, postwar or new production, beat them any day.
The pre-Korean war 675 is probably the smoothest running steam engine I've ever seen. Turn the E-unit off and it's dead silent save for the smoke unit plunger and the occasional clank from the side rods. All of the worm-driven engines, steam or diesel, sound like coffee grinders in comparison.
That of course isn't to imply that worm-driven engines aren't good runners, because they are, but the 675 is just in a completely different class as far smooth, silent running.
For worst, I'd probably have to go with the Gary Moreau era O-31 switches. They were a great concept, with the detachable straight or curves, but horribly executed with poor part quality and cheap construction. O22s, postwar or new production, beat them any day.
Yes Ben, I mentioned earlier here that I love my early 2025 (same engine). They are so smooth and silent.
Mike S
trainsandmusic wrote: Phillyreading wrote: Worst locomotive : the Illinois Central GP-7(made about 12 years ago, single motor), won't pull more than two cars Are you refering to the 8030? If so it is actually going on 37 years old, (made in 1970-71) I rather like this engine. It was a good attempt to keep the Lionel line going.
Phillyreading wrote: Worst locomotive : the Illinois Central GP-7(made about 12 years ago, single motor), won't pull more than two cars
Are you refering to the 8030? If so it is actually going on 37 years old, (made in 1970-71) I rather like this engine. It was a good attempt to keep the Lionel line going.
It will also pull more than two cars (or at least my son's will).
Best transformer: post war ZW's
Best locomotive:pre war 226E
Worst transformer: CW-80 a.k.a. the can't work 80!
Worst switchs of all time: 6-23011 & 23010, defectiveness built in!!! The thing finds new ways to go bonkers on you!
Worst locomotive : the Illinois Central GP-7(made about 12 years ago, single motor), won't pull more than two cars.
In my opinion:
Best? Tie between the prewar scale hudson and the first postwar F-3s.
Worst? There was a dog of a 4-8-4 that Lionel made back about 1990. The MPC era was a mixed bag. Some real jewels and some junk too.
Some interesting choices here. I don't understand the fierce reactions to Fastrack. I really liked having a loop of that around my Christmas tree this past year. I like tubular on my layout and it's what I'll probably always use, but Fastrack has its uses.
My vote for the best... The Blue Comet. It's an icon. It's so iconic that Lionel's archrival uses it on its logo.
Worst... Take your pick of any one of Lionel's lemon switches over the years. I can't think of anything that's more maddening than a switch that always derails your favorite train. Except maybe a switch that derails your favorite train sometimes but not quite always--nobody likes a tease.
Best: Prewar Standard Gauge. You can select just about any train you want: They were all great. (Second favorite: MPC. Everything O27 should be.)
Worst: Command Control. Yep, Command Control. The reason is simple: Vast addition to expense and complexity. The control system should not cost more than the trains, and one should not have to be a EE or a Computer Scientist to operate toy trains. Trans should respond to throttle levers, not computer keyboards and (Yuk!!) remotes! (Extra to MTH for making another control system that's even more expensive and complex.)
I realize these sentiments immediately classify me as some kind of Neanderthal, but I didn't come back to O gauge for sophistication but for relaxation.
My best Lionel product - Modern, Scale size Cab Forward, 4094. Love the quality, features, sound, appearance everything.
My worst Lionel product - Modern, Scale size Cab Forward, 4094. Hate relationship due to the O72, as a result new train room, new layout. AND LOTS of COSTS.
Whose fault - Mine ! So anxious to get "back" in the hobby didn't check track size prior to purchase just had to have it. Long term will be a great turning point.
Don
BEST= TMCC. Love it matched up with the newer ZW with 180 watt blocks it great to run conventional as well as Command engines with the Cab1.
WORST= Smoke units in all there starter set engines, simply burn out way to early.
laz57
Best: the original 027 GG1.
Worst: The CW-80 transformer - trying to get the thing to work in my first train set almost drove me out of the hobby - it never dawned on me that it might be defective...
I love the MPC-era stuff too - reminders of my childhood I guess just like my slightly-more-mature fellow forumites who love the post-war stuff.
Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.
USNRol wrote: Worst: all that plastic crap from the late '70's. Hard to cite a bad Lionel product tho.Roland
Worst: all that plastic crap from the late '70's. Hard to cite a bad Lionel product tho.
Roland
I like that plastic "crap" from the 70's! Lionel created "sound of steam", and the first model ever (not a reissue) of the U36B!!
Alot of good things came from lionel during the 70's. Helping make up for the 60's.
P.S. The 70's era trains are from my childhood, so I can connect with that "crap".
Anyway...
Best product in my oppinion is the Polar Express only because I saw it in their catalog and LOVED it. I got it for my birthday and now I'm train crazy!!
There is no bad Lionel product!!
Best product: '50, '51 and 52 Anniversary ALCo's 2023. Unbelievable runners. I've almost worn the wheels off my set and they run like the best new stuff after a good lube and warm-up. Extremely low voltage response and "creepability" and magnetraction drive truck offers excellent pulling power. very fast too if needed.
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