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
Oh yes! I always wanted that Century Dreyfuss!
Same me, different spelling!
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!
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
"Unless bought from a known and trusted dealer who can vouch otherwise, assume every train for sale requires servicing before use"
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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 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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Just found this ad while surfin' the web- taking the theme of the "Father and Son" set to the next level, a whole page of "side by side" offerings:It's interesting how the prices of the O gauge items are almost all very close in price to the HO items- there's less of a price difference than you'd expect. And the banjo signals are exactly the same regardless of which size you bought.The biggest outlier is clearly the Minuteman switcher... half the size, less than half the price!It would be fun to try and create an alternative Father and Son outfit, following the example of the ad. Personally I don't think I'm anywhere near close to having all the components of either consist, in either scale.-Ellie
Here are some pics of a OO mailer that Lionel sent out to folks on their mailing list. Also a short pic of my 1938 first year 0080 starter set running around my big loop. I have its small loop of original Lionel track on the upper level but its not operational yet.
Trying to get back to doing a little scanning... here is Lionel's full-page HO ad from the October 1957 issue of Model Railroader Magazine. The original scan I made is way too big for posting here, so here is a 'reduced size' scan:Additionally, I decided to see if I could put my rudimentary image editing skills to use and clean the image up in gimp. It honestly didn't turn out all that bad:I'll leave you to decide which version you like better.Of course, the illustration at the top of the page was one that Lionel got a fair bit of use out of, even after they stopped marketing items made by Rivarossi.-Ellie
Here is a OO sales ad.
Vintagesteamer Here is a OO sales ad.
It appears that the two "scale" locomotives are equivalent to the O Gauge 700E and the other two have been simplified in the same way as the 763, in that the valve rod and combination lever have been deleted. At least the 002 and 004 had the same scale tender unlike the 763 which had a toylike Vanderbilt tender.
Peter
Fun seeing the whole page spread of OO. My 1945 Model Railroad Planning book only has a half hearted attempt at selling the new model railroader on OO- there is an attractive two page spread showing the O and OO scale hudsons side by side, but other than that and the odd mention, OO has no presence in the book- it sends a very mixed message. They must have already been thinking about dropping the line after the war, with the lack of effort made to show the new hobbyist exactly what they could do with OO. I don't think the booklet has a single OO track plan, or even a picture of an OO layout.I scanned these today. Two full-page ads featured in Model Railroader Magazine. I opted to go with cleaning up the images like the previous scan, if anyone thinks I should go back to untouched scans, let me know.The first is an ad from December of 1958- just 2 months after the Lionel HO line debuted. You would think Lionel would be working hard to promote their highly detailed, scale models that Rivarossi was supplying... and yet, not even a fifth of the page is devoted to advertising the HO line.None the less, it was a lot better than the tiny little boxes that Lionel usually used to advertise their trains in MRR at this time.The last full-page Lionel ad I saved from an MRR issue is from January of 1959. By this point, the latest and greatest was Lionel's 1958 line, which was made up of some left over 1957 Rivarossi inventory, and new items from Athearn. So of course, wouldn't Lionel want to promote the classy new models they were selling, many of which were perfect mini-versions of their popular O and O-27 products?It seems once again, the Lionel marketing department decided that what the readers of Model Railroader needed to see, wasn't HO- no, what those readers really wanted was an O gauge 54 Ballast Tamper or a 175 Rocket Launcher.Don't get me wrong, I'd treasure a 54 or a 175 just as much as the next toy train collector. But gee, no wonder Lionel was having a hard time selling their HO. Companies like Mantua/Tyco, Athearn, Gilbert, and Fleichmann were putting full page ads in every issue. And where was Lionel? In a little tiny square, usually, and if you didn't blink and miss it, the square would encourage you to go check out the complete Lionel HO product line. Perhaps I'm being a little harsh, but it feels like they weren't even trying to sell HO on the scale modeling community, which should have been the whole reason they started selling HO.But it was also far from the only marketing disaster Lionel was making in the late '50s!-Ellie
Did you notice how they elongated the #68 inspection car to make it look long and rakish when the actual model was not even close!
You wouldn't see much after WWII as Lionel had dropped OO from the line and was only concentrating on O gauge. Shame, it would have been really neat to see what came out in O gauge during the postwar era in OO. It fun to dream what could have been. Lionel sold the world on std gauge which was anything BUT standard. It was a marketing ploy to lock out the gauge one builders in Germany and such and it worked. Had they put the full might of the company behind OO early on, even before the war, they might have changed the fabric of model railroading we know today.
philo426Did you notice how they elongated the #68 inspection car to make it look long and rakish when the actual model was not even close!
Yeah- that illustration always looks funny to me. The catalog illustration for the HO executive Inspection care is a lot more accurate in terms of proportions. In my 1963 accessories catalog, there's a very fun, highly innacurate depiction of the 65 handcar. I assme the illustration depicts a prototype for the model.Ok, I implied I was done- but I'm not done! This isn't directly liked to Lionel, but also it kind of is. The era of Lionel HO I'm most interested in, where Lionel actually made their own stuff, was kicked off by adapting tooling originally belonging to John English, aka HObbyline. I happened to find a 1957 ad for John English kits, which is worth sharing I think.The thing that makes this ad interesting, is that many of the depicted items are models that Lionel incorperated into its in-house HO production for 1959. The hopper, gondola, boxcar, and tank car were all eventually added to the HO line. The hopper cars seem to have exclusively been offered lettered for the Alaska RR, and the gondolas exclusively for the Michigan Central. The boxcar would be the base for the 0864 series from 1959 onwards, as well as the 0847 exploding boxcar. The tank car also recieved a few liveries. As far as locomotives, the 'steam switcher with tender' was the basis for Lionel's 0602, 0642, and 0643 switchers. The 'tank locomotive' was adapted into Lionel's 0605 switcher.Unfortunately, Lionel didn't see enough of a need for a mighty HO scale berkshire in their product line, but the HObbyline Berkshire's tender became the basis for Lionel's HO whistle tenders.Just imagine how cool it would have been if they did make an HO Lionel berkshire in the postwar years. It would no doubt have come with all the features of the highest-end steamers, and had enough weight to pull a few stumps if they fitted it with the same super-sized motor used in the Helic drive diesels.Of course, now you can buy a modern HO scale Lionel berkshire, but me? I'm a pre and postwar person. A little MPC here and there. But I just don't really do the modern stuff. Plus, have you seen the price tag? I'll stick to vintage.-Ellie
Vintagesteamer Lionel sold the world on std gauge which was anything BUT standard. It was a marketing ploy to lock out the gauge one builders in Germany and such and it worked.
Well, the Royal Navy's blockade of the North Sea during World War One helped a bit too, nothing was getting out of Kaiser Bill's Germany! Or getting in for that matter.
It was really more of a "don't buy German made products" thing than anything else. (Kauft nichts bei Deutscher!)
However, Standard Gauge was really created entirely by accident. Lionel was trying to break into the 1 Gauge market to compete with Ives and measured the Gauge the wrong way. To save face Cowen started marketing his track as Standard to make competitor's products sound inferior. Flyer and Dorfan made compatible equipment in "Wide Gauge" and Ives used "2 1/4 inch Gauge" instead of infringing on Lionel's now copyrighted term.
I downloaded a track planning program called XTrackCAD to try and do some layout planning. I went with it because it seemed to be the only free program that I could run with my laptop. I'm still figuring it out slowly, and I decided that it would be a great idea to try to draw out a Lionel postwar HO dealer display layout- I'd like draw one of the combined HO and O dealer layouts, but I'm not sure you can do multiple scales with XTrackCAD. Anyhow, I opted to try the D-0200 since I found images of a flyer for it, which shows a track plan, and lists the components. Problem is, it doesn't tell you where each kind of sectional track goes on the plan, so I've had to guess. And it's become increasingly clear that some aspects of the track plan simply don't match up with what's shown in the picture of the D-0200:You can't clearly tell the lengths of partial segments, and if you assume that all the curves of the outer loop are normal 18" radius curves, partial segments are all 6", and full straights are all 9", well... it simply doesn't line up, or even fit within the confines of a 4' by 6' layout.It appears unlikely I can accurately portray the layout accurately by following the track plan and sticking to the specified quantities of sectional track, so I think what I'll do is play around with various ways to at least get the outer loop looking like it does in the picture.-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