A Lionel legacy General?

I would really enjoy that. In fact I was thinking about one the other day. Great minds thinking a like I guess

I think an updated more to scale 4-4-0 General type is long overdue! 

I'd love a scale Legacy "General" as it looks today, but I don't know if the Legacy electronics could be made to fit.  I have the SMR "General" and it is scale and it is *tiny*.

 

Andy

I would love to own a Scale Legacy "General", that actually sounds like it belongs in the 1860's.   I briefly owned the MTH General with Proto 1, but it didn't have a very long lifespan on my roster, mostly because its sounds were terrible.

The Lionel version of "The General" is very close to scale.  It's actually a bit oversized.  You rarely see photo's of these loco's next to anything modern and its hard to appreciate the size difference.  There are some photo's floating around the net from the Erie Railroad Centennial train where you can see one of these standing next to an F unit.  If you google search "Erie Centennial Train" under images you can find some links.  They are low bandwidth which is why I didn't post then here.

 

This is a picture of "the General" making it's way to the 1964 Worlds Fair in New York (high bandwidth site).  Note the platform height and where most of the train sits relative to this:

 

 

There isn't a lot of room for electronics in a model this small.

I would think that in order to fit Legacy hardware into this model, that you would need to fit the electronics into the tender, and have a permanently attached drawbar to the locomotive for the wiring involved.

Legacy General, I'll buy one!

 

Doug

Um, no, it's not even close.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "close."  The prototype is truly a tiny little locomotive.  Not only could you not fit a lot of electronics into a scale model (even using its tender) but you'd pretty much have to use an "HO size" speaker or only a bit larger, so I think the sound would be disappointing.  And even with a thick casting, it would not weigh alot, nor would it have room for a large motor, so it might not pull well. 

Still, if it were very detailed and well painted, I'd probably buy a Legacy General. But  I'd much rather have a Legacy loco of something a decade or decade and a half later-  - say the type of loco in the Lone Ranger movie trailers, etc.  they were bigger and, to me, more romantic with their association with the old west and cowboys, etc.

I believe all the above comments relating to Legacy electronics not fitting into confines of the Lionel General as it is designed now are true.  But in today's electronic world, with boards, chips, etc. getting ever smaller, re-designed electronics could be accomplished.  If smaller electronics could be designed, Lionel could incorporate the smaller boards into many other future trains.

 

The other factor in a Legacy General locomotive is sound.  Legacy engines are known for their quality sound systems.  Here is where the limited space in the present General design is a big factor.  I have one of the Railsounds or Trainsounds Generals and with the speaker and electronics the tender is crammed full. 

 

Since you can't make the Lionel General any larger (complaints) then reducing size of Legacy sound and operating systems have to be accomplished.  Maybe some day.

What if they put the electronics in a coach and speaker in the tender.

One solution to the electronics/sound space problem would be to put it into a trailing boxcar that would be tethered to the tender.  The only downside to this is that it would require that the train always run with the boxcar, and it would increase the price of the engine, but I think it would be a small price to pay.

 

Later tonight, I'll take some comparison photos of one of my Lionel Generals and the scale SMR "General" to show the difference in size.

 

Andy

The Lionel General is certainly a scale model, and within its parameters, a very good one.

 

....Problem is, it is NOT US O scale (1/4" = 1 foot). My understanding is that it was modeled to 1/2" = 1 foot - twice US O. I have not measured it; I don't have one.

 

I do, however have an MTH ESE 4-4-0 #999 - and it is tiny when compared to the

General. Also, I believe that the real 999 is larger than the real General - plus,

we can know that absolutely, as both locos, amazingly, still exist.

 

I recently saw the Lionel loco at a train show that had been painted black and re-decaled for (something), and it looked very good.

 

A can-motored, scale Eight-Wheeler (4-4-0) in the "General" mold would be bought by me,

if the price was not stupid.

The unofficial museum site for the locomotive has a line drawing with an overall length of the loco and tender of around 58 feet.  The archive site for postwar lionel locos has the combine length of the model loco and tender of around 16" which scales out to around 64'.  The toy train version has a larger gap between the loco and tender but this puts the length of the model in the correct ball bark for 1/48 scale.  I don't know if the model's drivers are 1 1/4" in diameter which is what they should be if the model is scale or if some other selective compression was done for mechanical reasons.

The engine/tender length is slightly more than 50 feet, over the coupler face. See specification sheet below:

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~khs.../general/general.pdf

 

So, a true 1:48 scale model would only be about 12 inches long, with tender. Meaning the Lionel version is 25% larger than scale--that's not "in the ballpark" to me.

I find it hard to believe a Legacy version could not be produced when lionel has made command versions of the Trackmobile and Executive car. The motor, smoke unit would be in the Engine and the tender would house the sound board, speaker and command control, a high wood pile adds extra space to the tender chamber for layering electronics. And the sound needs to reflect the size engine which some people overlook when saying its.... It shouldn't sound like say a Hudson or Mallet. And this engine should not be expected to pull long Trains, the prototype didn't.

Well, that's HIGHLY debateable. Just about every detail about the model is incorrect for the General as she appears today, from the mis-shapen smokestack to the pancake drivers to the molded blob of a pilot to the completely incorrect and unflattering "bay window" treatment of the front cab wall to the ungainly boiler design to the incorrect handrail stanchion placement to the incorrect siderod placements.

 

As a toy, however, it may well indeed be a good one.

Just wondering . . .

 

If MTH can fit DCS electronics in HO trains, wouldn't Lionel be capable of Legacy in a scale "General"?

 

BTW, I would also buy a 1:48 scale Legacy "General"

 

Alex

FWIW, I just converted my MTH General to PS/2 using my recently received steam PS2 kit.  It was a tight fit, and I had to do some compromises to make it all fit.  The charging port is half hidden by the trucks, but I don't normally use it anyway.  I also couldn't fit the standard PS/2 kit speaker in, too tall, so I had to use a slightly smaller one.  It's cramped in the tender, but it's all in there.

 

The sounds are pretty decent, probably not up to some of the bigger Legacy or PS/2 stuff that has more room, but not bad.

 

I don't think they planned the kit for a locomotive this size, the tether connector in the locomotive had to be hacked and I had to move the diodes in-line and off the connector board.  I also couldn't fit the encoder holder around the motor, no room under the shell.  After hacking off some of the rear weight, part of one of the shell mounting posts, I finally got it all inside.

Here are some pix comparing the 1:48 scale SMR "General" with Lionel's 70's era "General."  The size difference is quite noticeable.  I also put the SMR "General" next to a Lionel Standard O (scale) PS-1 boxcar to get a sense of how small it is next to modern rolling stock.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I said above, the scale SMR "General" is so small, the motor and drive mechanism are in the tender.

 

Andy

Thanks Andy for the pictures. I still think that Lionel could reduce the size of the general, not to the size of SMR's but close. They also could use a larger prototype like a 4-6-0? That could use the legacy electronics. It would really be cool to have some 1800's   Type of locomotives But not at the cost of SMR as nice as they are. 

The 1997 MTH model which I have is a total of 17" long from the pilot to the end of the tender.  That's 68 scale feet, as you say, quite a bit larger than the prototype.

 

I'm glad it was bigger, if it was scale sized, I'd have never gotten the PS2 kit installed!

Lionel has already made a scale General it is the 11183 Lincoln Funeral train and it is very small compared to regular Lionel General. It is brass and only has a simple manual switch forward-off-reverse. It was available to LRRC members and it is not cheap, $800. Mine came before the end of last year and I just noticed that the set is listed again on Lionel's LRRC page.

 

I do not believe that the Legacy system could fit in just the engine and tender. Maybe TMCC that is in the Trackmobile might be to fit in it and that maybe pushing it. The Legacy system may work if it would fit into a add on car. But to be realistic the engine would require all new 'scale' rolling stock.

 

Personally I don't think a Scale General with Legacy will happen, but I've been wrong before.

 

 

Above is Lionel's video of the scale General.

While Lionel made a similar sized scale mid-1800's locomotive for the Lincoln funeral train, it's NOT the General.

 

The "Nashville" was built by the Cuyahoga Steam Furnace Company for the Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati Railroad in 1850.

 

The "General" was built by Rogers in 1855 for the Western and Atlantic Railroad.

 

The only thing they have in common is they are both 4-4-0's.  They are two entirely different locomotives and should not be confused with each other.

 

Rusty

Rusty,

 

While you are certainly correct with your point, I think Paul's point is also correct.  Fitting the Legacy electronics package into the scale sized General would be a real squeeze.

Just clarifying the locomotives for the record.

 

It's important, particularly with reference to historical models to properly identify them, otherwise everyone will tend to identify all "old time" 4-4-0's as the "General."

 

After all, we don't go calling the streamlined Santa Fe "Blue Goose" Hudson a "Dreyfuss" Hudson, do we?

 

Rusty

Good point Rusty.  

 

I once thought that all the locomotives of the same type were a "General", so that is a misunderstood point.  I didn't realize that there was only one of them.  It wasn't until I did some research a year or so ago that I found out that there was only one General.

 

 

But I don't think the Legacy package will fit in either a scale General or a scale Nashville.

Lionel has been calling all of the 4-4-0's it has been making from this tool set "Generals" for some time, so it is not that unusual, even if it is not correct.

 

I just chalk it up to the fact that the real "General" has become so iconic that it is taking over the 4-4-0 class designation the same way that facial tissues are often called Kleenex, even when not of that brand, or Xerox is used to refer to any photocopier, or Q-Tip as any cotton swab.  If you say "General" to most train people, they know you are referring to a 4-4-0 of the period around the Civil War, just the same way you would know what they were talking about if they used the terms Kleenex, Xerox, or Q-Tip.  It is human nature, I guess.

 

I try to use the correct terminology (although I make no claim to perfection in this matter), but it no longer really bothers me when someone else uses the term "General" to refer to any old time 4-4-0, since I know what they mean.

 

Andy

Just for the record, a 4-4-0 is usually referred to as an "American."

 

Rusty

 

I know about 4-4-0's being called "Americans," but does anyone really use this designation without using the 4-4-0 as an additional description?  Any time I've seen "American" used, it has always been used as "4-4-0 American."

 

Other name types such as "Berkshire" or "Hudson" can stand alone as a description, but I don't recall ever seeing "American" used by itself as a locomotive description, so I rarely use it myself and either stick to the Whyte notation when referring to the real deal or models, and sometimes using "General-type" when referring to the Lionel 4-4-0's (and on rare occasion, I get lazy and use "General" incorrectly).

 

In any case, I still want a scale Legacy model of the actual "General" as it looks today (even if the electronics and sound system are in a tethered, period-appropriate boxcar or baggage car), and perhaps some scale passenger cars like those in the photo above.

 

Andy

Andy, I agree, I'd love to se a model of the engine as she looks today. I also agree that I don't often see the term "American" used without the wheel arangement to designate a 4-4-0

Steve,

 

This isn't a forum for historians or serious railroad folks.  So of course whatever Lionel names a loco is the correct name!  General = American.  What could be simpler?

I wouldn't excactly call this a "General."

 

 

Rusty

I was looking at the Lincoln funeral train on a wbsite last night.  Expensive, and it is soooooo small.  Wow.  Can't decide.  Probably not: that that loco is separated from the period I model (1955ish) by more decades than today's modern locos are.  Quite amazing, that fact, when I stopped to think about it. 

There's a distant relative to the General at the Henry Ford Museum.  An 1858 Rogers from the Atlantic & Gulf RR which I believe was tied in to the W&A at some point

 

http://collections.thehenryfor...spx?objectKey=137952

 

 

According to my century old railway 'Bible', 4-4-0 locomotives should be classified as being an 'American'  (See the paragraph starting at the bottom of page 56, and continuing  on page 57 below.) 

 

Here is a nice shot of the Sam Hill inside the Henry Ford Museum (not my photo).  Based on the angle, I suspect the photographer was standing in the cab of the Allegheny.  That's the tender for the Allegheny on the right and a wood side refer behind that tender.  Note the height (or lack thereof) of the Sam Hill and the it's trailing passenger car. 

 

Civil war era steam was small by todays standards.  There is a photo of the George Mason that was used in the Erie Centennial celebration.  She's parked next to an F unit.  The engineer in the F unit's cab could lean over and knock on the roof of the cab of the 4-4-0, if he bent down a little.

I suspect that people thought that the Lionel engine was "compressed" as was typical for most of the engines and rolling stock issued at that time.  This was further aggravated by the later RailKing units being even larger (and the assumption that the MTH product's are always to scale).  Lionel tried to make the unit as small as possible with late 50's technology.  There is an open frame motor, a smoke unit and a three position E unit in the deluxe edition.  The wiring was so tight that the engineering staff used the hand rails on the loco to provide power for the headlight.

Until you can see something like the beautiful SMR SCALE replica's or a real world setting with the 4-4-0 next to a 20th century piece of equipment like the display at Henry Ford, you can't appreciate how small those trains were.

I think the folks here tend to think of any "old west" style engine as a "General." Which, as Rusty points out, is why they might not think a 4-4-0 built in 1920 is a "General."

 

Certainly they may not have intended it, but Lionel has done the hobby a disservice by calling every version of their 4-4-0 a "General" or "General style."

 

If anyone wants to get an idea of just how diverse the locomotives were in early railroading, get a copy of anything written by George Abdil.

 Lee's comment is one of the reasons its so difficult to get really nice models of small engines... if I didn't know better, I'd think he buys them by the pound.  But that can't be the case... zamac is darned cheap, a lot cheaper than hand-assembled brass.  Right?