No, the molds survived till atleast the Dick Kuhn era as test shots were made from the Hudson boiler mold as Mr Kuhn wanted to rerelease the OO line again as it was a favorite of his. Those test shots were sold just a few months ago on ebay, so they do exist! Those molds had to be very expensive, you dont just scrap them after they have barely been used. But, with such a small market, we will never see much new stuff, other that 3d printed items we are seeing now. What IS needed is switches in 2 and 3 rail to match Gargraves track. A OO version of the Ross Custom switches. I would bespoke order 2 pairs right now if someone wants to step up and make them.
Oh I suspect several factors weighed very heavy on Lionel's decision makers. 1. OO didn't sell as well as they would have liked so they threw everything into making the O Gauge line supreme. 2. Nuckle couplers were going to debut at war's end and they probably didn't have a viable OO Gauge version. 3. They knew A. C. Gilbert had a lot of things up his sleeve and competing with him was going to be their biggest challenge since Ives. 4. The electronics set was likely expected to be more lucrative than OO investments.
Just a few possibilities. Plus they may have melted the molds towards war's end to save money.
Same me, different spelling!
What really makes the OO1 and other Lionel Hudsons run better is a slightly better quality motor. I have one, a 002 with a 7 pole L&S AC motor in it. Much smoother and powerful over the 3 pole Lionel motor. Had Lionel pushed OO after the war like they had with Standard gauge, which all but eliminated tinplate gauge 1 in the USA, we might seen stuff like the F3's, a proper K4 and other postwar classics but smaller, maybe a bit more scale like and less of the underscale style. I would have been interesting if they had done that. Fun to dream. So we enjoy what was made, in proper tune, the OO Hudsons run as good as any other Lionel locomotive. Having unwarped track helps as well, so much of the original stuff is warped so you get raised ends leading to poor running and derailments. The build quality of the OO line was much better in my opinion than any of the HO stuff period. Not that the Rivarossi stuff was poor, but with a company that pushed the heavy diecast steamers for so many years, the all plastic stuff just feels cheap. Maybe they should have went with Mantua and their diecast metal steamers for the HO line. I read someplace that one of the big reasons that the scale O and OO lines did not return was the cost of mfg and assembly. Which rose sharply after WWII. Lots of hand assembly work in a 700e or 001 scale Hudson. The whole postwar period showed us Lionel trying to save a penny here and there as things got "cheapened" to simplify assembly time or overall parts cost. All of the stuff Lionel made is neat in its own way and a fascinating part of the history of toy trains in the USA.
I don’t think it's entirely fair to criticize modelers these days for not having to work so hard for detailed models- the quality and detail does come at a price, and also, I think many people appreciate having to hand-make less things, so there's more time to work on other things. And it can widen the horizon of items you can kitbash into specific prototypes. That's heading far out of the toy train realm. Personally, I really do enjoy the personal and unique connection that comes with having built, repaired, or modified something to your satisfaction. But it's nice that there are more choices now, and to a degree, there's an easier entry level for those who's focus is realism. The only unfortunate side I can see, is perhaps less kits being marketed if there is less demand- but did demand decline because of better rtr models, or because of a change in the model railroading demographic? Who can say.When I started this thread, it was because I had recently been introduced to HO models that were marketed by 'the big three' of the postwar era. These models were largely not perfectly scale, high detail models- nor could they crawl slowly and silently like modern HO- but all us O and S gaugers who collect vintage toy trains, are used to models that aren't exactly scale, or super detailed- and we're used to models that can't crawl at even a scale 10 mph. We collect them, because they are fun. Extremely good fun. And that is how I view most of the HO made by Lionel, Gilbert, and Marx- fun!The reason I included OO in this thread, despite not owning any, was because it too is a smaller scale- only slightly (but not insignificantly) larger than HO. I figured it deserved a place here too.All of Lionel's product lines experienced a decline in quality over the course of time. It's easy to scoff at HO compared to OO, but look at the O gauge line- even the 773 was a step down from the 700E (especially the later version), and that was Lionel's top end of their O gauge product line.If Lionel was making OO throughout the postwar era, the full quality of the 001 would almost certainly not have lasted.I absolutely agree that the quality of Lionel's late prewar products is phenominal, and that there is merit in the modeler who creates the realism and the detail they want to see in their models. But I'd prefer this to NOT turn into a thread of throwing shade at anybody.I'll have to scan my c. 1945 Lionel model railroad planning booklet- it has a very attractive ad for OO. It feels very ironic to me, advertising a product during the war that ultimately was never re-introduced. They must have had a change of plans some time between when the book was published, and when production went back into full swing after the war.I also wonder if they still have any of the old tooling for it still.-Ellie
"Unless bought from a known and trusted dealer who can vouch otherwise, assume every train for sale requires servicing before use"
I most definately thing modern modelers in a few scales are totally spoiled rotten. I am just old enough to remember when most all the freight and passenger cars came as kits. Granted many were "shake the box" kits like Athearn blue box kits. MDC/Roundhouse being just a bit more involved but not to bad. Then you got into the true craftsman kits. Thats how OO was back in the day. Only Lionel's line up was truely RTR and amazing they pulled off such a highly detailed locomotive in the 1930's. It truely is a mini 700e Hudson. Now most everything is RTR. Just take it out of the box and away you go, be it a locomotive, rolling stock or even buildings. To me that isn't very satisfiying. There is a level of satisfaction and pride once a model that your building is done, or that vintage brass/diecast model is smoothly running on your railway. Where is the pride when you take a model made in the far east and just set it on the railway and its done? Yes you have a nice looking railway, but you didnt make it when it comes down to brass tacks in my eyes. I spend those fall train shows hunting down OO craftsman kits to keep me busy thru the long and cold winter days when my garden railway is put to bed till spring.
Now back to the topic, lets see more OO since this is a HO/OO thread and all I see is HO. Here is my OO layout under construction, a Lionel Hudson and a Scale Craft passenger car sitting there. Then in in the next pic is a pair of Hallmark(the card company) 2333 F3's in OO that will be transformed from unpowered to powered. Even their bodies are diecast in true Lionel OO style.
Vintagesteamer The current HO folks just dont realize how well they have it.
They're probably getting to the point they're spoiled rotten! I'm not into HO and have no plan to be but I'm amazed at what they're getting into those engines nowadays. I'm old enough to remember HO engines doing nothing but pull trains, no smoke, no sound, no nuthin'. Hells bells, I'm amazed at what they're getting into N gauge engines now! Just amazing!
I have experience with the Athean 'blue box' mechanisms. As a friend of mine puts it, "they run as smooth as butter".I haven't gotten into Lionel OO... yet. But that's mainly because of the cost. Knowing me, at some point in my life a set will fall into my lap, but until then I'll hold off.If a whistle isn't essential, I highly reccomend checking out the Gilbert HO steamers... diecast and everything- smoke and choo-choo too! And whitewalls on the earlier versions. Granted they can't win against a Lionel exact scale model from the late '30s/early '40s, but the quality is absolutely there.-Ellie
Athearn eventually had a far better gear drive in the "blue box" era diesels that Rivarossi ever had. Only problems I ever had with the Rivarossi stuff was the gear ratio was not the best for scale speed running. Most of them I owned thru the years all got NWSL regearing kits put in them. Only engine I still have is my HO scale Casey Jones 4-6-0, with NWSL regear in it. Runs very nice once that gearing is changed out. The current HO folks just dont realize how well they have it. Take them back to the 60's and 70's and they would panic with how models ran back then compared to what we have today. I myself still prefer the prewar OO over the HO offerings. Just wish it would have carried on after the war. At least with more track, finding and affording enough of the original 3 rail track and switches is the hardest part of building a Lionel OO layout.
The Rivarossi-made stuff was actually very high quality for the time- and historically, throughout the '60s, '70s, and '80s, Rivarossi models were some of the most highly detailed, quality HO models you could buy aside from brass imports. However, unlike the OO models of the prewar era, these were models that couldn't survive a bit of misuse or abuse- they have lots of fragile details that could be easily broken or lost. The main mistake I think Lionel made, was letting the Rivarossi deal come to a close, and moving towards cheaper Athearn products, and then shifting to the 'toy' quality trains. Don't get me wrong- I absolutey love the 1959-1966 era, and the models are a lot of fun, in spite of the design flaws. But Lionel made a big mistake, in switching from marketing to the 'scale modeler', to simply trying to market HO trains like their O gauge toy trains. They might well have had a more successful line if they stayed focused on producing detailed scale models made of quality materials, and with reliable mechanisms.As-is, Lionel HO isn't really that bad. It is, and it isn't, as I've been finding. And to a degree, they did resolve most of the design flaws that plauged the earlier designs- it was just too little too late.To date, I think the only design I actively despise is the drive they devised for the 0642. Extremely finicky, and requires (as I have discovered) a very specialized belt, compared to the diesels which aren't nearly as picky about what you put in them. I really should make a post dedicated to my 0642 at some point, but I'm waiting to see if I can get it running, I ordered some O rings that I'm hoping are about the right size.-Ellie
Its a shame that Lionel's postwar HO line did not have the same level of quality of the prewar OO line. Which consisted of a mini 700e Hudson for both 3 and 2 rail track. Its fun to dream what could have been if Lionel had came back after the war with a fully developed 2 rail line up in OO with new engines, more track selection with switches along with freight cars and proper passenger cars for the Hudson. The sub contrated stuff in HO was very sub par when compared to Lionel's effort in a smaller scale prior to WWII. One can tell that there was a major change in management from the JLC days to who was at the reins when the HO line was unveiled. Still a neat part of early HO history and Lionels slow degrading that was happening at that time as a company in general.
Here's another paper scan for today- wow! Two documents in one day??? Absolutely nuts, I know. And yet, here we are, eh?I promised this one a while ago, but didn't get it done until today. Presenting: an operator's manual for Lionel HO remote control switches!Note that this sheet is dated 9-57, and the advert on the back. From what I remember finding in my searches on the web, Lionel HO track was supplied by Atlas in 1957, and also maybe 1958. It wasn't until 1959 that Lionel came out with the "jumbo curve" sections that were included in sets, and presumably any other Lionel made track. Note also that the Recti-volt was only cataloged 1957-1958. This gives me reason to suggest that the manual dates to somewhere between fall of 1957 and summer or fall of 1959. Considering when Lionel announced the '59 catalog, they were certainly still selling '58 stock well into '59. I assume this is generally how Lionel worked. I am curious to see if there are other versions of this manual with different dates, and if the content is any different.Forthcoming will eventually be several Gilbert HO full-page ads, an odd Lionel full page ad or two, and a good few KMT/Kusan Auburn full-page ads. I'll also be sure to share some odd others, including an assortment of Madison Hardware ads. There should still be more 'zines to go through, if I can get to them before somebody decides to throw them out.Edit: I've put these scans up on Archive.org, where you can also view them, or choose to download the scans in FULL RESOLUTION as a searchable PDF or as TIFF files. Don't have too much fun -Ellie
Here's another ad to share, this time a small one. I forget which issue of MRR this was, but I think it was from 1959. This was part of a larger, 3-page spread of advertising from AHC. It's definitely worth noting that the price of Marx's switcher was something like $1 less than the Athearn hustler was at the time. And the Marx model has a geared drive! I think the only other company selling an HO scale hudson with working smoke was AC Gilbert, and I'd wager that their 'smoke and choo choo' equipped hudson was a far bit more than Marx's price. Note that while the illustration is reasonably accurate for the switcher, the illustration for the hudson is definitely not a picture of the actual Marx product.-ElliePS: those 6096 Marx hudsons are supposed to be quite nice, keep an eye out for one! The tender rides on diesel locomotive trucks, making for an odd look.
I had mentioned in the 'coffee pot' that I had saved clippings from some magazines that had to get thrown out.I threw most of them away without looking, but found a few stacks of Model Railroader, organized by year. I manged to look through all of 1957, all of 1958, and almost all of 1959. It seems like Lionel consistently advertised in MRR at this time, however usually limited themselves to a TINY little add telling the reader to refer to their catalog for the full product line. By contrast, Madison Hardware advertisements in MRR listed a pretty good selection. And Gilbert was advertising HO in MRR up until some point later in 1958, and mostly had attractive, full page adds. A few times though, Lionel bothered to put in a full-page ad. This one was in the August, 1957 issue of Model Railroader:I forget if I knew they were advertising their new in-house produced HO this way, but however easy it may or may not be to find that original catalog, I wonder how many people have seen this advertisement for it?As soon as I saw the add, I wasted no time checking the 'stack' to see if the October issue was around. It sure was. And not only that, but as promised, the 8-page, full-color Lionel HO catalog was smack dab in the middle of the issue. And cosmetically in quite excellent shape! Rest assured, I intend to scan it as well and put the scans on Archive.org where anyone can view them in decent quality.Even if you have no intention of ever collecting Lionel HO, the lovely illustrations make it well worth keeping an eye out for the October 1959 issue of Model Railroader, if you ask me!-Ellie
Thought I should give an update, though I'm not doing anything at the moment about it- the 'road test' for the 0594 was... unsuccessful. I got it running, but not running well. It's clearly drawing way too much current. It also appears that I installed the worm shaft backwards. It doesn't hurt the running quality as far as I can tell, but it causes the engine to run backwards to how it should.Currently I'm thinking about purchasing the neccesary tap and screws to make it easy to take apart and reassemble the geared truck, so I don't have to break the truck in order to disassemble it.As far as the motor, I have my concerns it's not strong enough for the job it was given. I think eventually I'll be trying out something I did for my 0055- adding some neodymium magnets in addition to the already existing alnico magnet. Not yet sure how, since I have less clearence to work with, but that's a problem for when I return home from Maine. The rubber coupling I improvised (insulation removed from an appliance power cord) is causing issues but I think I can resolve them by making one of the shafts longer somehow- the flexibility of the rubber is unhelpful if the 'gap' between the shafts is significant.That's all to report for now. More news as this story develops.-Ellie
You know, I remember Jim and Debbie Flynn's Marx revival and while I have to say the trains didn't interest me I will say they were positively elegant.
Louis Marx would have been proud!
Oh yes! I always wanted that Century Dreyfuss!
Speaking of Marx, anyone remember James Flynn and his revival of the Marx line back in the 1990's? Well he's got a YouTube channel which is going to be my latest binge-watch! I've watched his "Variations On A Class J" (my title) and it's very enjoyable! Here's the link:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUfhIqTj6nbDLmY3rXzvn7g/videos
If anyone owns the most recent edition of the Greenburg HO guide, I'm looking for more information on my latest addition to the Lionel HO collection. I took a gamble on a listing with only one picture, and hoped what showed up would be in ok shape: The locomotive is an 0594 Santa Fe GP9, cataloged from 1963 to 1965. It originally was equipped with Lionel's Helic Drive, and in its final year of production it was entirely gear driven. The old Greenburg guide shows images of the '63 frame, and the '65 frame, and talks about the design changes. The geared version was given a much bigger motor than any other version, and the frame had to be altered to accommodate the geared truck. Looking at pictures on the web, you can cleary see that another change had to be made to the frame- the larger motor size meant the location of the screw for the motor had to move. So instead of one screw hole in the underside of the fuel tank, there's two.You can see it, in this auction image I found-On the bottom row are two Lionel Geeps, the lefthand one is a geared drive, and the righthand one is helic drive. Note that the geared drive loco has two screw holes in the fuel tank.I was personally hoping for the geared drive loco, but when I turned mine upside down I initally was saddened to see just one screw. But then I looked at the power truck and saw it was clearly a geared drive!Opening it up, and looking it over... I'm not entirely sure what the heck is up with my 0594. It looks like some sort of weird transition-era piece somehow? It only has one screw through the fuel tank, and the motor inside it is the dual-shaft motor introduced in 1960, not the bigger 1965 motor it "should" have. But clearly the frame never could have had a bigger motor installed in it. And yet, in every other respect, it's clearly a 1965 type frame designed to accomodate the geared truck. You'll note that someone had installed a strange flexible transmission between the motor and the gearbox- a mix of rubber couplings, and brass tubes of some sort with two cotter pins interlocked.The reason for this weird linkage is likely somewhat down to the motor shaft just not being long enough to reach the geared truck... but it can't possibly be factory original, can it?I'm confused. I really am.I've been working on servicing it, the motor's bearings are a little worn but it still works. I learned the hard way, that the geared truck is not designed to be disassembled. It's back in one piece again, the normal zap didn't hold so I tried the Polyzap which I've used with success to glue nylon parts, I think it's holding.Tomorrow, if I have time before I leave on my vacation trip, I'll see about giving it a road test. I have a temporary new rubber coupling sorted for the shaft, I think it needs revising though.By the way- it also appears as though it was assembled without a front coupler- there's no trace of even a broken one up front, and it doesn't look like the coupler cover was ever removed (the tabs don't look bent or scratched up). I'm pretty sure it should have come with a coupler at both ends when new. How odd.-Ellie
As promised an eternity ago... scans of the 0150 Recti-Volt operator's manual!Front:Back:I'll be uploading the full resolution scans to Archive.org soon, you can already view the ones for the brochure here. I had previously used the full-res images embedded here, but... they took a while to load, so I switched them out for lower resolution versions.I hope to get my other HO manuals scanned in the near future- the manual for the 0366 Milk Can Unloading Car (operating milk car) and 0922/0923 remote control switches. Stay tuned. Another locomotive is also joining the ranks, and I'm looking forwards to sharing pictures when it arrives. I also have multiple pieces of rollingstock I have yet to post pictures of... it seems I have no shortage of material for this thread! I just have to get around to it. -Ellie
Wayne, I still want to save the original drive- especially since it's the harder to find version with a sheet brass frame. I can order all the parts I'd need, in theory, to bring it back... but without being able to re-magnetize the motor properly it feels a little pointless. Also it wouldn't be cheap to buy and import all the replacement parts I need. One disadvantage of the AHM chassis is that because my shells are for the brass chassis version, the plastic 'bathtub' style chassis needed to have grooves cut in it where supporting 'ribs' are situated inside the shell, and which normally rest on the original chassis. I'll post pictures at some point to show what I'm talking about. I imagine that for the later Lionel/Rivarossi chassis, it's closer to a drop-in, no mods neccesary project. Another issue is that the AHM's front coupler will not clear the Lionel/Rivarossi shell, so you have to remove it- or come up with a new coupler mounting solution.I hear you on plastic gears... some companies have done them well, and some haven't. Don't blame you for going an alternative route, I have no idea what the quality is of replacements for those gears.Large scale rectifier... that explains it! Thanks so much for filling me in. I totally forgot Lionel dipped their toes into G. "If going smaller didn't work, maybe going bigger will..." If I see one for dirt cheap I may pick it up, but honestly I was thinking about creating my own custom rectifier unit. The one thing I dislike about the 0150 is the low rating... 1.5 amps can only run so much. I figure if I buy a breaker and full wave bridge rectifier for my desired ratings, plus a DPDT switch, I can have myself a reasonably handy device that will be able to run the HO. The one thing I really dislike about Lionel's HO transformers is that, like many vintage HO transformers, they achieve speed regulation by means of a sweeping contact along coils of resistance wire, instead of the secondary winding of the transformer. I don't like the idea that part of the normal function of the transformer involves something inside it getting very hot.Something I'm looking forwards to posting is my very first Lionel HO transformer, purchased while I was on vacation. It's the most basic model, the 0103. I've been through it, and it's quite sturdily built... but holy moley does it get WARM. You can tell it's the resistance wire's fault since the 0103 has two resistance wire coils- one for forward, one for reverse- one on each side of the transformer- and whichever direction you select, that's the side of the thing that gets toasty after running something for a short period.
I want to have some authentic equipment that was built to power these trains, but also I want something that can run them for longer periods of time without making me nervous something's gonna overheat.-Ellie
Leverettrailfan I bought myself an AHM C-Liner and modified the chassis so that the Lionel Rivarossi shell would fit on it, and that's my current solution until I can eventually fix the original motor chassis properly.
Very understandable! When the plastic gears (which I HATE ) went bad on my Lionel Jersey Transit U34CH I had two choices, replace the gears knowing they'd go bad again or try something else.
The something else I tried was a Williams GP7 which I got cheap at a train show. A little chopping and channeling and the Lionel shell fit perfectly on the Williams frame. All-metal gears and solid Williams quality, that Jersey Transit engine's good for the ages now.
I ran out to the Chugger Barn (thumpity-thumpity-thump) and got the information on the Lionel rectifier I bought at Sidetrack Hobbies. It was called "The Lionel Large Scale DC Converter Box." Made in 1991 (Lionel was doing G Gauge at the time) the catalog number was 8-82116. It retailed for $38.
It might be something for you to look out for. If it worked for G it should work for HO.
Wayne, The C liners have been out of comission for a while. I forgot to provide an update but it turns out most of those ball bearings went completely missing, never to be seen again... I bought myself an AHM C-Liner and modified the chassis so that the Lionel Rivarossi shell would fit on it, and that's my current solution until I can eventually fix the original motor chassis properly.I had no idea Lionel made a more modern rectifier! The recti-volt seems like it must have been a poor seller, since they only kept it around for 2 years. Or maybe it had more to do with expanding the line of HO transformers, and the 0150 no longer seemed like a neccesary part of the line. I'm honestly hoping at some point to get a working example of every Lionel HO transformer, since there's not that many of them, and they all seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. I really like the 0104. I definitely want an 0102, but you need an 0181 cab controller to use it and those are apparently tough to find.Paul, it's just as well you didn't pick up an 0100. They're not designed to handle the current draw of O or S gauge trains, so that alone would cause troubles.I own a TW, mine is the early version that has an additional binding post. It's a perfectly capable transformer for running a single train, and the accessory terminals are handy. I wouldn't say the 0100 and the TW look similar- maybe you're thinking of the 0104? It looks just like an SW (same case as the TW) except the speed/direction control handles are gray instead of black, there is no whistle control button, and the nameplate is different.The 0100 looks just like the 1044- both came out in 1957, I wonder if it was a coincidence or not.The 0102 was the ZW of the HO line more or less, it was the beefiest HO transformer Lionel offered- but it was more of a power supply. Seperate 0181 cab controllers were used to actually operate trains. None of the HO transformers had built in whistle controllers, you needed the seperate 0147 whistle controller. iirc the only diesel with an operating horn is the 0535 Santa Fe ALCo B-unit. multiple steamers were offered with a whistle, all of them pacifics. They needed a comically huge tender (compared to the size of the locomotive) to be able to cram the whistle mechanism into it. Keep an eye out for the 0645, 0646, and 0647, these were the pacifics that had whistling tenders.-Ellie
I really like those old transformers.... so different from what is available today. Fun running trains with levers! Last year when I was looking for a better transformer to run my Flyer display loop, I believe I saw 2 of these 0100 transformers at my local train store. I almost bought one until they mentioned it was a DC transformer. I finally wound a buying a TW, which looks like a Big Daddy version of this transformer! Everything runs better with the right transformer!
Paul
Great job on those C-Liners Ellie!
Interesting, that Lionel "Recti-Volt" unit. I've got a Lionel rectifier unit made in the 90's that I picked up at Sidetrack Hobbies in MD several years ago, a "Just in case I might need one" thing. Haven't used it yet but you never know, do you?
Hey, I don't have to feed and water it. It'll keep.
Finally got around to scanning something with my brother's nice scanner. Here's a c.1957 advertising brochure for Lionel's 0100 HO transformer and 0150 Recti-Volt:The reverse side shows a lovely diagram of what the 0100 looks like "under the hood". An interesting and unnerving thing I learned when looking up information on the 0100, is that the "built in circuit breaker" for the 0100 only protects the AC side of the transformer. Lionel justifies this in the 0100's manual by stating that the selenium rectifier will stop conducting electricity when too much current passes through it, thus protecting the track circuit. Personally, this feels like a sketchy design choice and if I can locate an 0100 of my own I will probably see about purchasing and installing a breaker for the DC circuit. Lionel did have the sense to suggest the purchase of a 91 Circuit Breaker for protecting equipment against short circuits and to show indication of a short.-Ellie
I tried moving around the magnets, using less... the thing stopped working in forwards during my testing, it'd get stuck. Eventually I looked inside and found that somehow the top bearing had failed? I need to take it apart at some point, but whatever happened the cup that holds the upper ball bearings was NOT in sight, and I have no idea how it could have gone anywhere. My hope is all the escaped ball bearings got stuck to the field magnet, and I haven't lost any.I wish I could replace the original field magnet with a new neodymium one but I can't find anything that feels quite close enough to the original dimensions. A pain! I'm sidelining the project for now, at some point I'll try again to get the motor running properly. I'd rather take a break from it right now, and then come back to it with a clearer head when I'm feeling ready.-Ellie
Ellie, the overheating could be caused by binding, or even the position of the magnets. If the magnets are not positioned in the exact spot, the motor will have to work much harder. Could be other things too....
As promised, pictures of the Lionel/Rivarossi Fairbanks Morse C-Liner A-B-A:The 0503 powered A (with operating headlight):The 0523 dummy B:The 0513 dummy A (with operating headlight):The 0503 only has truck frames on one side. I think the reason for the cracks in the plastic frames is an error in the dimensions of the screw holes- the discrepancy puts a lot of stress on the plastic, causing cracking that could lead to the truck frame breaking off entirely. Here's the other sides of the 0523 and 0513:And all together again:Note the 'jumper wires' between units. These are used to power the headlight in the dummy A unit, instead of giving it a set of its own pickups. My set was missing the originals, so I created some improvised replacements using some shortened cotter pins and flexible 22 gauge wire. I had to come up with a modified Athearn coupler and Kadee draft gear box mounting configuration to give the 0503 a new rear coupler. Looks like I need to repeat the procedure for the front one, too.I'm displeased with how hot the motor of the 0503 gets, so I'm not inclined to run it frequently. I'm considering buying some cheap AHM C-Liners at some point, for the drives. That way if I want to run the Lionel/Rivarossi models for an extended period of time, I can swap an AHM drive into both the A units (ideally I want the 5-pole version). All I need to do is spray paint the truck frames light gray so they'll match. But I don't plan to get rid of the original chassis for either unit since they're rare and part of the value of the locomotives. The gearing all looks to be fine and turning freely, and the magnets I installed are very powerful, so I'm not sure what's causing the loco to overheat but it gets way, way way too hot with just 5 minutes of run time, and no train in tow (besides the dummies).Anyhow, aside from the missing truck frames, front coupler, and motor overheating situations, I think the project is done. I'll get the coupler done soon enough I'm sure, the other things are back-burner projects.-Ellie
The Lionel/Rivarossi C-Liners came earlier than expected! I'll have a photo soon. Everything arrived ok, except one of the truck frames on the powered unit that was still intact is broken- I think it's not impossible it was already cracked though. Should be an easy enough fix, so I'm not worried.I spent a couple hours today getting the thing working again. the original magnet had dislodged itself from the motor, something it shouldn't have been able to do unless it had lost virtually all its strength, so I figured out a way to stick some of my neodymium magnets in there.A word of warning, Rivarossi ball-bearing motors are not for the faint of heart, as I soon discovered. It's a miracle I only lost one of the little ball bearings... I assumed it would maybe have a single ball bearing at the top and bottom of the shaft, but no- it has little cups that hold a set of loose ball bearings, like on the early Lionel worm drive steam locos, except that the bearings are so tiny they make Lionel ball bearings look HUGE. I'd gladly never have to service one again, but I get the feeling I probably will. It was very hard to get them all back in again!
thankfully no signs of zinc pest on the diecast trucks for the power unit. I think that I may need to add more lubricant to the power truck, or see what else I can do to smooth the operation, I'm a little concerned that the motor is having a hard time moving the drive due to something in that truck being stiff. The thing does run, though. It's noisy as heck, but it runs. I feel like it's not going as fast as it should, and warming up too fast, another reason to check up on the gearing. BUT it's operational. Next step is sorting out the couper situation. I think I have a plan, which involves some modified Athearn couplers I glued yesterday. More news as things develop, but that's all for this update-Ellie
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