I noticed in the 2015 catalog the missile launching engine has listed is a "can motor" in the description of the engine features. Can anyone confirm that? The older TMCC versions had an AC motor. I think a can would be a good thing but I'm not sure if it is a typo in the catalog?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Chris.......I would hope it's a can motor....and they mention traction tires.....I have the remake on the 1959 Army Mobile Launcher set......it has a Pullmor and magne traction. It struggles to pull 6 cars ( I added PWC radar car and got the blue TMCC sound car).
Peter
I've avoided buying one, even though it looks like fun, because I was told they are very poor locos. Is there room to add much weight to improve traction in the older models? it looks like there might not be much space to add weights, etc., given everything and the shape of the body, etc.
The catalog has a can motor and magna traction, not traction tires.
If the catalog is correct, that engine is the first time a can motor
engine had magna traction.
As with anything Lionel does, there will be those who are pleased with the change to a can motor, and those who will be unhappy.
$350 for the those engines with a can motor seems a bit pricey to me.
Yet I think they will sell well.
I love my repo set from a few years back. Never had a pulling issue but then again never loaded it up. It came as a set and it pull those cars well so I can't complain.
quote:I've avoided buying one, even though it looks like fun, because I was told they are very poor locos. Is there room to add much weight to improve traction in the older models? it looks like there might not be much space to add weights, etc., given everything and the shape of the body, etc.
Poor runners by what standard?
I have owned a number of the Postwar ones.
The postwar ones have a standard Alco/switcher motor with magnetraction, a three position e-unit and a dummy coupler (no front coupler). They run as well as any of the switchers / ALCOs of the period.
IMHO, the biggest downside is that the shells are fragile. It is very common for some of the steps to be broken off, and for the front bumper to be broken off.
I also have both of the Modern era sets. I never got around to running the modern era ones.
I run the Army 44 remake with additional cars. I swapped out the Magnetraction only truck for a truck with both Magnetraction and traction tire (used on some of the Geeps). It pulls eveything now.
This was discussed several years ago on the forum, when the remakes first came out.
If the 2015 ones have a can motor they are going to need some added weight, in addition to the traction tire.
I would like to upgrade to new one with can motor but it isn't in the budget.
I noticed in the 2015 catalog the missile launching engine has listed is a "can motor" in the description of the engine features. Can anyone confirm that? The older TMCC versions had an AC motor. I think a can would be a good thing but I'm not sure if it is a typo in the catalog?
I'd check with Lionel but I cannot imagine that after all these years they have changed this model to a can motor. For one thing, there isn't the space in the motor location (under the cab) for a can motor either mounted upright or horizontally - I looked into converting my US Army TMCC version of this to can motor power and decided it could not be done.
I think that the catalog description of the motor is definitely a typo.
Anyway, I am a great fan of the current version of this engine even if the AC motor is prone to jackrabbit starts and the missile firing mechanism needs to be sitting on or near a terminal track section to work reliably. I can live with these things and the rocket firing sound effects sure do please the visitors.
Is this it (also 6-82330)? I kept looking for 'engine' in the catalog and website, but they are actually called cars.
Were previous versions called cars or engines?
Just wondering . . .
Alex
Attachments
-Greg
I had the TMCC version and pulling power was not a problem and I really didn't expect it to send a missile across the room but it was a fun piece. If the new one does come with a can motor I may be down for one.
I also have the TMCC version. I had to take the missile firing platform apart and do some creative filing to get reliable operation. I get 5-6 feet out of the missiles, we set up targets and do drive-by firings with my grandson. It's a lot more fun if you have the sound car as well, the sound effects add to the play value.
Poor runners by what standard?
I was told that they will only pull five or six cars, that they tend to spin their wheels - lots of power, no traction. I have several military trains with some heavy (diecast armor) I'd like to pull: about 10-12 cars.
They look really cool - very "I'm eight-years-old-and-will-die-if-I-don't-get-one"
I have the old ones in ARMY and Marines lines. They pulled the light weight cars they came with and the Marine flats with the light weight plastic battle vehicles.
The firing mechanisms were not all that reliable but they did shoot farther that a few feet.
Ya could take out an eye!!
Chris
I have not run either of mine so I can't comment on that. But, I love the old toy look and they look great to me. I will be ordering the two new complete sets . Air Force and the other that matches my Operation Eagle Justice Set.
I don't think I have missed getting any of the Lionel military sets or cars in the modern era. I'm a sucker for them.
Besides, Charlie has already made a good dent in the MSRP pre orders on these, just FYI.
Larry