I just bought this engine- now I am wondering if it is TMCC?

Hi William I think it's conventional here's the service manual link

http://www.lionel.com/media/se...ents/72-8848-250.pdf

Alex

William 1,

If it is a TMCC equipped loco the die-cast fuel tank will have two switches labeled "Prog/Run" and "RS/SS". If memory serves me correctly the JCP blue and yellow geep was a conventional only unit.

It is also possible someone along the line swapped the shells or frame with a TMCC equipped unit. There are two ways to tell; 1.) put the switch in program (if it has a program switch) and power it up to program it. 2.) Pop the shell off and take a peak inside!

(Now that I look at my response, I am not very much help, sorry!)

Thanks,

Mike

But the effort goes a long way, Mike.

--Greg

JUST AWESOME MIKE

ALEX

I believe that TMCC engines need to operate in command to access the tower comm and crew talk.

Conventional items offered with tower comm and crew talk can access it via the transformer.

Thanks Alex.  Following your cue, I found it listed in Lionel's parts guide.  I believe it's conventional with 4.0 railsounds, etc.  Oh well, not as great a deal as I thought.  Let the buyer beware.  But, I do need a conv. engine and it will be interesting to see just what this beautiful girl can do. (It also lists 'wheel flange squeal' as a sound feature, which I've never heard of).  And maybe answer some other questions.  As always, Cheers.

William

    It should have directional lighting, if not you can add a rear light. On your DREU reverse board, the front light is J3 and rear is J4.

Bill

Hi Bill, your ears must be ringing because I was just going to send you an email for a parts order for something else.  Take it easy,       WK

Was this the one with the infamous missing pilot?

So how do the new conventional RS set ups work?  Under the earlier versions, the RS required a R2LC to get all the features to work.

There was Conventional RS that did not have TMCC but did have access to RS like features via the bell and whistle button.

Are the new conventional RS units different?  

Usually "2 maintenance free can motors" means the cheaper motors embedded in the trucks.  I don't think any sets up like that have TMCC.  G

G- This engine is circa 2004, so it's probably not the latest conv. railsounds package.  

A missing pilot?  Are you suggesting this engine was hijacked?  Yikes, I did open a can of worms.

2004,Did'nt Lionel offer Command ready locomotives back then? They came with railsounds and you could purchase a R2LC to replace a board that allowed the sounds to work conventional.

I know I bought an SD-70 that was that way. What you get is prime mover sounds and bell and whistle, maybe I'm wrong I'v been known to be

Doug

Back then Lionel made a loco for JC Penny around Christman time and all were conventional with railsounds.  They were even offered with a display case.  I bought a B&O berk with display case.   Sure is a keeper.

Be happy and enjoy it. Although you didn't make a killing and snag the steal you thought you did, you still came away with a good deal.

Yes, it's conventional but you'll be be able to activate the crew talk with your transformer's bell and whistle buttons. However, be aware that Lionel Railsounds from the early 2000's don't match up qualitywise to today's Railsounds 4.0 found in newer conventional Lionel locomotives.

trnluver- I like the way you think.  I was just going to look at the 2004 catalogs to see if 'command upgradeable' was in vogue back then.  But, looking at the manual Alex provided, I don't think so.  It looks like conventional with railsounds.  With crewtalk, tower com and something that squeals.  Which brings me back to that other post... 

Unfortunately this was the pilotless GP that JC Penney offered. Wonder if anyone

out there found a way to add a a front pilot ?

Then I doubt this was command ready.

Sorry, but maybe it was pilot ready!

Let us know what you end up with William.

Doug

How can anybody buy a engine and not know what it is. These are the kind of buyers that eBay and other sellers just love. Do your home work before you buy anything. 

Wonder if anyone

out there found a way to add a a front pilot ?

I always wondered how that loco got out of Lionel's warehouse and why did the JCP buyer ever accept it.

There was a reason why the pilot was ommitted. If memory serves, due to the type of trucks used and the frame, installing a pilot will limit the swing available. I.E. the engine will not be able to go through certain curves w/o derailing. The was a thread quite awhile back on this topic, but I have not found it yet. Perhaps one of our "regulars" saved it.

Bill, I will agree: No self respecting buyer should have approved the specs for that unit!

Chris

LVHR

I remember that one.  It was from 2004 or thereabouts, as I recall.  The lack of a pilot was the first thing that struck me, and lots of others as well, and I recall it being much discussed (and dissed) online...perhaps on the AOL boards.

It is NOT a TMCC locomotive.

Could well be, but for the life of me I can't see how adding a pilot to the movable truck would have inhibited the truck movement in any way.  There's plenty of clearance between the top of the truck and the bottom of the frame, with nothing in the way to inhibit movement left and right.

If I recall correctly, the front truck is some form of a F3 rear truck. On the front axle there is a lobe for the Railsounds speed sensor.  Adding a pilot doesnt seem like it would be all that hard, the problem is the short front coupler, as the front coupler sticks out noticeably less than the rear one.

Thanks for posting that photo, Ed.  It helps to explain the problem, which could have been avoided altogether if the designers had paid attention to what they were doing.  Looks like someone was trying to do something on the cheap.  They succeeded, and made a product that became the object of a lot of derisive comments and jokes when it was released.

One thing's certain:  The front end of that locomotive looks pretty darn bad as is.

Well I didn't buy it.  I almost did, but I bailed out in time.  I'm not looking for a project right now.  Thanks guys for the feedback.

ed h:  Any chance to see a picture or two of the chassis with the shell removed to show the type of motor arrangement used ?

         From the looks of what I can see, they (LIONEL) used a pullmore motor frame set-up for a geep with different handrails. The front (?) truck as stated, looks to have been a type that was used in the FT's that had RailSounds, using the  "Hall effect sensor" (Magnetic wheel on the axle of the truck).  The truck design used could take a vertical pullmore motor, but my experience in this cab arrangement says that the motor will not have enough room to rotate due to the cab windshield and brushplate interference. I would guess that a can  or pair of can motors were used in this unit with an adaptor to mount it into the pullmore style truck.

          The question is: why did they not use a geep power truck top frame for the front truck? It would have had the pilot on it and should have fit under the frame properly???

          I just reviewed the photo of the truck that is posted and I see that they did use an FT style rear truck. The  "sensor" is mounted in the rear coupler bracket like on the FT's, where as the Geeps pilot, would not have an area to mount the sensor without a tooling change ( they did do this for the later versions of the cheaper can motor trucks to accomodate the  "TrainSounds " venue. A small bracket was made to mount the sensor to be next to the wheel that had the magnet in the form of a washer behind the wheel and was hence able to trigger the  the sounds as the wheel rotated).

          If you are still able to show a photo of the shell removed, I would appreciate it to see just what motor set-up was used.   "Thanks"  Dennis M..

Dennis - Looking thru the cab window I can see a vertical can motor. lionel.com has the parts list with small photos, just search 28848 on their replacement parts.

How much time do you have to "bail out" on a winning bid?

Well, I guess I'm now the proud owner of this amorphodite.  I'm a tad inexperienced with EBay as you can probably tell.  I'm not sure if this will serve as an excuse, but to explain, I had just gotten a new job that morning and after I donated some urine to the local collection place for inspection, I decided to have a beer with my morning crossword puzzle instead of coffee.  Celebrate a little and relieve some pressure.  After 4 beers, my judgement may have been impaired, but the crossword puzzle was impeccable.  Kind of a tradeoff I guess.  Lessons learned.  For $100, I now have my travel engine for conventional layout testing.  I'm sure she'll be a doozy. 

And as a happy footnote, my urine was deemed acceptable by the powers that be, (I thought it exceptional), and I'm starting my new gig tomorrow.  And now that I'm on a roll, I'm quite sure this engine will someday be deemed a classic collectible by some other powers that will be, and be worth ten grand or so.  I will settle for a good runner and reminder of something positive.  So, overall, it's all good.  Cheers

ed h:  "Thanks" for posting the motor/truck photo's. The can motor clears the inside of the cab where as the pulmore would not due to the low front hood body. In a Geep, it has more room to move around.

          Actually, the motor used is a step up from the  "traction motor" used in the cheaper can/motor truck.  I would even  bet that it has "Magnetraction" on one of its axles (the one without the magnet wheel). I see that it has traction tires also, but the Asian Manufacturer's have been known to use the magnetraction truck along with the traction tires.

          For those who are entrigued by a challenge, The sensor could be moved to the rear truck (the one with the pilot). That type of arrangement was used on the  F-3b's that had  RailSounds. A small bracket is used that mounts to the edge of the truck, just over the axle and the sensor is glued in place. With care, the current axle can be removed and remounted on the rear of the dummy truck with the sensor above it and it would function the same way as it does now. You may have to extend some wires, but that is a small price to pay to enhance this unit.

          The old top plate for the front motor truck can be cut shorter and two rivet mounting holes can be drilled for a plastic pilot.  A pilot and operating coupler assembly, like on a Geep can now be installed and the unit will look great!  Actually, that dummy truck's pilot looks very nice painted and trimmed and would greatly add to the appearance of the unit.  So who's up for the challenge?   Dennis M.

Count me in!

See below

Actually I could use a project.  Everything is fixed or upgraded but a PWC C&O switcher that needs attention and that is going to LHS guys.  

I actually become more endeared to an engine the more I work on it.  And I watched a lot of American Chopper this weekend.  It's going to be cool. 

William:  Above I posted about a challenge to retro fit the S.F. Loco for the RailSounds sensor and add the pilot to the front motor truck.   I had asked for a photo of the loco's chassis with  shell removed to see the insides; this would have shown the two motors and I would have thought otherwise.  Ed h, was kind enough to supply photos of the loco's component parts and a direction to the Lionel parts list.  I should have gone there first before I suggested that the re-arrangement would be only a minor change.

          The reality is that this is a dual motor loco, and hence, the other truck is also a powered truck and is not the dummy type that I had pictured in my mind. The way I described to do the change would not work easily.

          I do believe that the RS-3 units that are made now will lend info to help in the conversion.   Let me look into it a bit further to see if that route would pan out better.  Dennis M.