I am asking Lionel for a Recall

[BigJim]

After closely examining the new Lionel passenger cars, I am writing them today and asking them to recall and fix the windows that are mounted onto the sides of the cars.

In an attempt to get to the root of the window problem I found that the ends are separate pieces. The windows that are mounted in these ends are mounted from the inside. They are thick enough to be flush with the outside of the car. They have a lip inside to keep them from sliding through and for a place to place some glue.

The windows that are mounted to the car body extrusion are the exact opposite. They are mounted from the outside. They also have a lip that keeps them from sliding through. This lip is what is so thick as to make the window stand out from the side of the car body and when viewed at an angle appear green in color.

These windows should have been installed from the inside where they would fit flush with the outside of the car when installed.

It would be easy enough to say that Lionel painted and installed the windows backward, but that wouldn't go for the Observation car curved end windows.

I don't understand why the progject manager at Lionel would allow this to happen!

I invite you to join me in an effort to rectify a flaw that shouldn't have happened to begin with.

ACELA buyers beware!

[eZAK]

It will never happen Jim!

They won't even fix the the missed wired smoke units!

Have you talked to Lionel?

[brianel027]

I understand your frustration Jim, although from a different end of the product spectrum. Seems everytime Lionel has made a lower-end loco that I really liked, something was always done to cheapen it so I just couldn't bring myself to buy it.

My last frustration came with the Conrail U36B from a couple years ago. I had the money then, I really wanted that loco. Unlike the Railking locos, the floorwalk was not part of the shell casting. So I could shorten the U-Boat shell to get it to the height I like, plus the paint job would have allowed it. But the loco only had one motor. I held one in my hands. It was very light weight. I asked the dealer if he'd run it on his diaplay layout to see how well it ran and pulled. He told me in so many words the only reason he stocked it was because it was Conrail and that it pulled like crap, and was overpriced.... this from a Lionel dealer. Unfortunately dealers told me, despite the poor quality and high price of that engine, it was selling well (because Lionel hadn't done the CR road name in almost 25 years on an affordable separate sale engine) and probably wouldn't become a blowout... which is the ONLY way buying that engine and having to add the second motorized truck at my cost was going to be worthwhile.

Add insult to injury when the UP GP-20 the next year along with the Ontario Northland RS-2 both had dual motors. Both the subsequent U-Boat releases have both had. I'd have to get the WP U36B for super super cheap to make it worthwhile to strip everything (frame included) to repaint to Conrail, or Norfolk Southern. And though I like the CSX one, the placement of the paint scheme would make my shell shortening move impossible without having to custom repaint again to CSX myself.... why bother? So I made a vow back then not to buy one more brand new Lionel loco until they re-release another Conrail U36B with an identical logo placement and DUAL motors. Of course, my decreased finances have made this easier, but I'm still sticking to my guns.

Knowing Lionel, we'll probably see this U-Boat in NYC, PRR, NKP, B&O, Wabash, Santa Fe and several other long dead postwar roadnames before they do another current road name. By that time, Conrail will mean as much as the PRR does today.

[Anonymous]

I saw closeup photos of the car windows posted elsewhere, and I really must say that Lionel screwed-up royally on this one, assuming that all cars released have the same flaw. I can't imagine that they allowed the cars to go through the production cycle with such an obvious error. I guess this is the kind of thing that is inevitably going to happen when you have a new and less-experienced team producing this stuff, and when the maker itself is in deep financial trouble for other reasons and likely looking to trim costs wherever possible.

I'm afraid, though, that your demand for a recall will likely go unheeded. I can't imagine that their financial situation today would permit them to seriously consider such a measure. For your sake, and for the sake of others who purchased these items, I hope they will do something to rectify the situation, but I strongly doubt that they will.

[okiechoochoo]

Saw the photos myself. The look funny, like they are glued on from the outside or something. This is a major Lionel boo boo.

[BigJim]

QUOTE: that your demand for a recall will likely go unheeded

Just to make things clear, I did not demand anything. Yes, I have written to Mr. Calabrese and Mr. Kawala and I asked for a recall and a fix.

They have not responded yet, though in all fairness, they may not have had time to.

I expressed concerns about these cars when I first saw pictures of the SP cars. I also expressed concerns about the PRR cars after seeing their pictures.

I am sorry that I had to wait so long before I could actually see the cars in person before I could voice an opinion as to the cause of the problem. This is not just an N&W problem, but effects the entire run, SP, PRR, etc.

Maybe, just maybe at least one of the major publications will review these cars and shame Lionel in print. Especially since this problem could have been avoided so easily.

It is very frustrating the amount of mediocrity that permeates the hobby at this time. Just look at the new K-Line SD70 fuel tank. Tsk...Tsk...Tsk!

[brianel027]

BigJim, I can't believe I'm defending a piece of scale equipment, but that new SD70M is cheaper as a KCC premium than the Conrail U-Boat I referred to above. The SD70M is still a pretty darn good looking locomotive... the dual verticle flywheel motors already makes it a better deal than the engine I'd like, never mind the additonal detailing.

I wish K-Line had shrunk the engine to an 027 loco with a top 14 inch length and a top 3-1/2 inch height.

But back to reality... I'm certain knowing K-Line that the fuel tank decision was made so that the loco would negotiate 031 curves, thus appealing to many more modelers - Ia decision I fully agree with. For the dirt cheap price of that loco, those who want a more scale proportioned fuel tank could make one themselves (as I find I have to do inorder to have some shrunk down modern-looking trains in current roadnames) or look around from one of the 0-scale detail parts places.

Think of this way... other than the Lionel Waffle Box Car, e Lionel plastic spine cars and the K-Line MP-15, there has not been one single bit of new tooling for the traditional 027 market in almost 25 years. Most MTH Railking items don't count as they are really too big for traditional operators. On the other hand, it would take me several hours of constant typing (and I'm fairly fast 40wpm) to list all the new scale items that have been introduced in the same period. Scale modelers have NEVER had it so good (despite some minor oversights).

The starter set cars from Lionel have increased in price almost 60% in the past 10 years, despite no real improvements in them and dramatically lower production costs in China. It's absolutely fair to say the traditional train buyers are helping to subsidize all the new tooling in the scale direction.

The fuel tank may not be right on the SD70M, but be thankful K-Line introduced such a beautiful model at such a dirt cheap price... that is if it now even comes out in whatever form.

[Bob Bubeck]

QUOTE: I saw closeup photos of the car windows posted elsewhere, and ....

Allan, you have been around long enough to know that one should not comment on a piece's appearance until one has actually seen it. These cars, by the way, were designed by the "old team" that both you and I (I believe) sorely miss.

BJ has a point, but these cars look strikingly handsome to most of us who own them. Every streamlined passenger car made in 0 gauge has shortcomings of one kind or another, so one picks what suits their own tastes best. All of the manufacturers make choices and compromises. Recalls are not normally doable in these matters -- refunds are.

Bob Bubeck

[Anonymous]

Bob:

I do agree that there's no substitute for seeing the cars in person, but I assume the photos I viewed were accurate depictions and not doctored-up electronic images. If that assumption is correct, I, too, would have been disappointed with how Lionel handled the window treatment. Just looks like. . . well. . . ill-fitted windows that were treated as something of an after-thought on an otherwise-fine product.

Yes, I do miss the "old team" that may or may not have been involved with the decision making in this regard (many production changes occur at the last minute). Talked with one of those old team members at length just a couple of days ago. He's doing well, and he tells me that most other survivors of the coup are doing well enough themselves--good news in every respect because there were some fine folks on that team.

But you're absolutely correct about Lionel not recalling these cars. That simply will not happen. The best any dissatisfied customer can do is to return them for a refund; place the money in some sort of interest-bearing account if they care to; and hope that Lionel or one of its competitors does them right at some point in the future.