Any reviews of the 0-6-0 Dockside Switcher with LC+ 2.0?

I haven't yet unpacked my BEDT 0-6-0T LC+ 2.0 switcher, but my conventional Lionel Reading 0-6-0T #1251 die-cast switcher (6-28613), made in 2004, has been running for years without any tracking problems on the Atlas O-54 curves and turnouts on my layout. I believe the new LC+ engine is made from the same tooling and is mechanically similar to the Reading version but, of course, there may be detail differences. This short video shows the Reading engine, which is listed for O-27, smoothly traversing the two O-54 switches on my layout. I hope that the new version will do the same but will watch things closely when I start to run it.

MELGAR

I ordered the Granite Run set a few days ago. Seeing all these issues, I wonder if I made a mistake now. Guess I'll find out when it arrives.  I assume the engine from the set has electro couplers,  correct?

I think it is a wheel gauging issue. I replaced my Atlas O-54 switch with a brand new one and the problem continues. The driver wheel sets are ever so slightly further apart than some of my other engines and rolling stock from Lionel and MTH... there is very little play between the rails with these driving wheel sets. The outside lead driver is pushed toward the middle of the frog point by the driver on the opposite side being snug against the inside rail. I’ve included a short video showing the outside lead driver “stumble” through the switch frog during one of my few successful runs through the switch... I don’t have a video of a full blown derailment because I’ve gotten tired of replacing the blown fuse in my track power line every time it derails

My big question now: Does just my engine have a gauging issue or is this a problem with all of the Lionchief + 2.0 Dockside Switchers? A few years ago, I had a similar problem with a Lionel Legacy GP-9 and my Lionel dealer’s service department fixed it by re-gauging the wheel sets.

Here’s the short video of my Lionchief + 2.0 Docksider Switcher “stumbling through the Atlas 0-54 frog.

These should be easy to regauge as there is a plate on the bottom that holds the wheelsets in place. Remove the rod screws, remove the bottom plate and the wheelsets comes out. Someone mentioned the center wheelset is sprung so be careful of that.

Pete

As near as I can see, this may not be a flaw with the engine.  There's a lack of continuity of that inside rail on the "out" path of the switch, and the little wheel is dropping into that hole.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

As near as I can see, this may not be a flaw with the engine.  There's a lack of continuity of that inside rail on the "out" path of the switch, and the little wheel is dropping into that hole.

Agreed, and with the center wheelset sprung, the back wheel just drops into the gap.

I wonder if you made the center wheelset fixed, would it solve the problem.

(Yes, I know you shouldn't have to tinker with a brand new engine BUT for $225 mine is/was perfect, runs smooth, smokes great, remote couplers, bluetooth, tmcc. I would try to make it work vs sending it back)

For regauging, are those drivers a friction fit on the axles so that I can simply squeeze them slightly closer together?

Here's a fun fact about the Docksider.

The chuffs are not generated on the board as you'd expect, but there is a chuff switch on the drivers with the traction tires!  Since it has no tach reader, I thought they were a bit too precise to be done in an analog fashion, so I went looking.  I can't see without more disassembly, but it appears it's a hall effect sensor, I see a small PCB on the frame.  In order to get to it, it looks like I have to take the PCB off and then remove the PCB carrier that also serves as a speaker enclosure.

I removed the rods from the rear drivers and the locomotive runs and no chuffs, spin those wheels and I get chuffs.

@Peter C posted:

For regauging, are those drivers a friction fit on the axles so that I can simply squeeze them slightly closer together?

Not 100% sure but thats how its done with most of Lionels engines. The axles are knurled so you don't want to twist them, just push or pull. I just use a small 1/4 drive socket and a vise or C clamp. My guess it only has to move maybe a tenth of an inch or less.

Pete

So, I sent an email with my short video to Dave Olson at Lionel asking if it’s just my engine or if all Lionchief + 2.0 Docksiders don’t like Atlas O-54 switches. If it’s just my engine, I am going to ask my Lionel dealer to exchange it.

Make no mistake, this is a really neat little engine and I encourage everyone to buy it! I am determined to see mine negotiate Atlas O-54 switches, either by exchange or squeezing the gauging ever so slightly tighter. Thanks to all forum members who have replied!!!!

@Peter C posted:

So, I sent an email with my short video to Dave Olson at Lionel asking if it’s just my engine or if all Lionchief + 2.0 Docksiders don’t like Atlas O-54 switches. If it’s just my engine, I am going to ask my Lionel dealer to exchange it.

Make no mistake, this is a really neat little engine and I encourage everyone to buy it! I am determined to see mine negotiate Atlas O-54 switches, either by exchange or squeezing the gauging ever so slightly tighter. Thanks to all forum members who have replied!!!!

Hopefully you can get it resolved. Mine definitely seems to be getting better by the day. The smoke still stinks and the brake squeal seems louder than the chuffs but the take off seems to be improved. Or else I got used to the throttle knob.

@MELGAR posted:

I haven't yet unpacked my BEDT 0-6-0T LC+ 2.0 switcher, but my conventional Lionel Reading 0-6-0T #1251 die-cast switcher (6-28613), made in 2004, has been running for years without any tracking problems on the Atlas O-54 curves and turnouts on my layout. I believe the new LC+ engine is made from the same tooling and is mechanically similar to the Reading version but, of course, there may be detail differences. This short video shows the Reading engine, which is listed for O-27, smoothly traversing the two O-54 switches on my layout. I hope that the new version will do the same but will watch things closely when I start to run it.

MELGAR

MELGAR, I am very interested how your new LC+2.0 Dockside Switcher runs through your Atlas O-54 switches after you’ve had a chance to unpack it. Specifically, I’m interested in how it performs when running in the opposite direction through the curved part of your switch... my engine does fine in the direction shown in your video, but derails over half of the time in the opposite direction. I need to determine if just my engine has problems with those switches or if all LC+2.0 Docksiders have that problem. Thank you for your help!

@Peter C posted:

MELGAR, I am very interested how your new LC+2.0 Dockside Switcher runs through your Atlas O-54 switches after you’ve had a chance to unpack it. Specifically, I’m interested in how it performs when running in the opposite direction through the curved part of your switch... my engine does fine in the direction shown in your video, but derails over half of the time in the opposite direction. I need to determine if just my engine has problems with those switches or if all LC+2.0 Docksiders have that problem. Thank you for your help!

I still haven’t unpacked my BEDT 0-6-0T but I checked out my older Reading #1251 running in both directions through my Atlas O-54 turnouts. First, I have never had any problem with this engine derailing, running forward or backward, through the switches on my layout. I tested it yesterday (engine only) and made several videos which revealed no problem. The video below shows the engine smoothly running forward onto the curved leg of the O-54 switch at about 10 Volts (conventional). The small driving wheel diameter may cause this engine to drop slightly as it passes through the frog, but it has not caused any derailments on my layout. This leads me to think that the issue is the new locomotive rather than the Atlas O-54 switches.

A further comment about the connecting rods: The first and third driver axles are rigidly mounted into the frame. The middle axle is sprung. This requires a larger diameter hole in the middle of the connecting rod to permit vertical movement of the middle set of driving wheels and axle. The more relevant issue for the new engine is whether the connecting rod holes for the front and rear drivers are too large and cause unsteady operation.

I will check out the new locomotive and report back.

MELGAR

Has anyone done any switching with them ? Do they couple well with rolling stock (with older couplers - I'm aware of issues with newer rolling stock)?

-Greg

My two have rough coupling, apparently there are burrs inside the coupler.  I suspect I'll have to take them apart and smooth the couplers in order to have reliable slow speed coupling.

@MELGAR posted:

A further comment about the connecting rods: The first and third driver axles are rigidly mounted into the frame. The middle axle is sprung. This requires a larger diameter hole in the middle of the connecting rod to permit vertical movement of the middle set of driving wheels and axle. The more relevant issue for the new engine is the whether the connecting rod holes for the front and rear drivers are too large and cause unsteady operation.

The holes are certainly big enough to cause a problem.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

My two have rough coupling, apparently there are burrs inside the coupler.  I suspect I'll have to take them apart and smooth the couplers in order to have reliable slow speed coupling.

Thanks John.  I appreciate the feedback!

-Greg

@Greg Houser ditto what John said. I have done some switching and the couplers can be finicky. The rear in particular. The front seems to work well. The only other thing is the lurch on take off. If you're trying to bump the cars an extra half inch, you're better off to back up and come in from a roll.

Beyond that, these little guys can pull some weight. Maybe that isn't prototypical operation and maybe I'll fry the motor but I'm pleased with having the extra pulling ability in case I need it.

Thanks for the information @BillYo414 - much appreciated!

-Greg

https://ogrforum.com/...5#153463017560206715

That’s a great depot, Melgar.  Did you scratch build it?

@Bill Welch posted:

https://ogrforum.com/...5#153463017560206715

That’s a great depot, Melgar.  Did you scratch build it?

Thanks Bill,

It is a model of the depot in Phillips, Maine on the two-foot-gauge Sandy River & Rangeley Lakes Railroad (closed 1935) built from a kit by Banta Modelworks.

MELGAR

Finally received mine yesterday.  Late day at work prevented me from running it, but  did examine it closely.  If it wasn’t for the pickup rollers not having any wear, I would have assumed it was used.  Missing paint in a couple of spots and small paint chips on multiple corners of the shell.  Luckily, black sharpies are a perfect match for the PRR version.

compared it to my older conventional version and see the drive rod issue.  Still would like to explore the possibility of swapping the shell with my older C&O version.  

@jstraw124 posted:

If it wasn’t for the pickup rollers not having any wear, I would have assumed it was used.  Missing paint in a couple of spots and small paint chips on multiple corners of the shell. 

Really? That blows my mind. Mine arrived in good shape. I thought the packing was odd because it was just the clear plastic. The last locomotive I bought came packed in foam.

I think Styrofoam is being phased out either for cost or for ecological reasons.

I thought Neil Young was singing about his Lionel trains when he said "we got sytrofoam boxes for the ozone layer"

I guess not haha

@BillYo414 posted:

@Greg Houser ditto what John said. I have done some switching and the couplers can be finicky. The rear in particular. The front seems to work well.

The same is true with my electrocouplers on my BEDT steam switcher. The front electrocoupler works flawlessly at 14 or 15 volts. The rear electrocoupler never works at that voltage, but sometimes (not always) works at 18 or 19 volts.

Otherwise my BEDT looks and operates fine.

I strongly recommend that this diminutive steam switcher with its tiny motor be used to pull relatively light loads (not more than 4 modern train cars with fast angle wheels, and not more than 2 Postwar operating train cars). When operating the Postwar cars, be sure that the wheels are properly lubricated so they glide easily down the rails.

Although the BEDT has good heft for its size and can pull more train cars, by doing so you run the risk of overstressing and damaging the tiny motor.

For heavier loads, run a locomotive with a bigger motor and plenty of heft.

Arnold

Thanks Arnold.   This is really disappointing for me as I intended to use one exclusively as a switcher but I have no desire to worry about pinched coupler wires and having to file couplers so they work properly.   I am also not thrilled about the small motor as even though I won't be pulling a lot of cars it will get a lot of use regularly pulling 6 car cuts in and out of sidings and breaking them down to work industries.

-Greg

@Greg Houser posted:

Thanks Arnold.   This is really disappointing for me as I intended to use one exclusively as a switcher but I have no desire to worry about pinched coupler wires and having to file couplers so they work properly.   I am also not thrilled about the small motor as even though I won't be pulling a lot of cars it will get a lot of use regularly pulling 6 car cuts in and out of sidings and breaking them down to work industries.

-Greg

Your welcome, Greg. Ironically, notwithstanding my criticism of the BEDT, on balance I'm very happy with it, and have no regrets buying it for $233 including tax. I love the appearance, sounds and smoke, and use it for light switching, mainly using the flawless front electrocoupler. Arnold

@Greg Houser posted:

Thanks Arnold.   This is really disappointing for me as I intended to use one exclusively as a switcher but I have no desire to worry about pinched coupler wires and having to file couplers so they work properly.   I am also not thrilled about the small motor as even though I won't be pulling a lot of cars it will get a lot of use regularly pulling 6 car cuts in and out of sidings and breaking them down to work industries.

There is some speculation that the newer version of the small motor "may" be more reliable.  I know the original Docksider motor was pretty easy to cook if you overloaded it.  I've replaced several of those in the past.  I was hoping for a larger motor, but when looking inside it's clear there is no space for a larger motor.

I think for regular switching duties, the couplers will have to be disassembled and the rough edges smoothed to make them work better, I'm planning on that for mine.  On the good side, the unique design with the removable head will make that job easier than with regular couplers.

Well my Granite Quarry set arrived today. Overall I think it's pretty nice. I'm mainly going to run it on my upper level small loop, so the small size works well.  I did try the engine in my yard, which is all Fastrack and 036 switches. It does bounce going through them, but so do a lot of my other engines.  The rear coupler doesn't open and hangs a bit lower than the front one. Volume is OK, but when you have other trains running, you can't hear the chuff ( 2 chuffs would have been better for this guy IMO).  I know the speaker is small, but the recent LC+ 2.0 engines I have bought, you can't hear most of the sounds when trains are running. Not bad for the price I paid, but definitely room for improvement.

I'm working on the couplers of one of mine to see if I can get smooth and reliable operation out of them.  The one I have apart has burrs on the parts that prevent it from operating normally, I'm smoothing all of that, putting in a new spring, and trying to make it smooth to couple easily as well as reliably uncouple.  Sadly, you have to take the coupler rivet out to fix them, so it's a bit of a PITA.

While I have no desire to do that myself (especially seeing as how there are no issues with the 2 other LC+2.0 switchers I own) I hope you are able to get them working to your satisfaction. 

-Greg

I'm pretty sure I can get them working properly.

I finally got my track powered up today after the rewire and put the BEDT on it for a test run. Ran smooth but has a slight hesitation at very low speed. Both couplers work perfect and other than weak sound I can't find any other flaws. No problems through the Ross switches. Its a keeper.

Mine cruises through the Ross switches fine, except for the double-slip switches.  I need to get the relay switching of the center rail working before anything will cruise through those smoothly.

Well, I just passed the 3 week mark on my BEDT switcher and all continues to go well with mine. Runs fine and I even seem to have avoided the jerky motion at slow speeds. Really great smoke!  Both couplers fire nice and crisply. Only issue is trying to re-couple to rolling stock with rear coupler. Doesn't always make a clean connection. But I've had that happen with a variety of locos.

As an aside, from reading these threads sure seems like the BEDT livery was quite popular. Great minds. 

Ran mine for the first time last night.  Little jerky at first, but was better after adding one piece of rolling stock behind it.  Couplers work well.  Smoke was great and TMCC worked flawlessly.

the negatives, I identified a few more paint chips to fix.  In addition, I could not get the LionChief app on my IPhone to find the engine.  I think the way I have my layout wired is impacting it.  I have my power running through a DCS TIU.  TMCC is connected to the TIU also.  If I use TMCC, the engine will not start until addressed. But, if I disconnect TMCC, the lights and sound will start at power up of the power brick.  I think the DCS may be impacting it and plan to direct wire this weekend and see if the App will work.

My test length of track has TMCC/Legacy and DCS on it, and the LC app on my Android phone had no issue finding the engine.  It also runs with the Universal remote, and of course, TMCC.  My normal operating mode will be TMCC/Legacy and DCS for my layout.

I will mainly use TMCC, but I also belong to a train club that has a layout on a trailer that looks like a caboose.  Pre-COVID we took the trailer to events and let kids run the trains with a LionChief remote.  I had hoped to take this engine to events again someday and use the universal remote. So, I want to make sure Bluetooth works.  I only have the app, not a remote to test it with at this time.