Difference between 773 & 783 Hudson

I have both and for me the 783 is the stronger runner, I would never pay that much for a 773 unless I really wanted it, held it in my hands ,ran it and loooked it over to be very sure it wasn "t a worked over model. Be aware there are fakes out there and they are priced out of sight.

Whichever, run it and enjoy.

Rod

If you are an operator, I'd say go for the 8406 (783). If you are a collector, I'd say both a collectable, buy whichever you prefer.

The price on the 783 seems high to me. Shop around, and I think you could find a mint 783 in the $350 range.

Only you know what is best for you.

Some questions to ask yourself though...

What is your plan for the engine?

Do you plan on running it or letting it sit on a shelf?

If you plan on running the engine, a tumble off the layout will hurt more with a $1200 engine rather than a $450 one. 

Also, NROD is absolutely on-point on fake 773's. They are out there and in great numbers.

The 783 is a great engine, albeit sometimes a noisy runner.

My 783 noise was eliminated when I reseated the magne traction magnet to not rub against the wheel. 

Good point...I've have seen them as low as $250 - $300 in L/N condition at local swap meets.

I'd say the 783 is more worth purchasing if you intend to play with it. The 773 runs good, but the 783 is a far better puller, and features steamchest smoke.

The only things that may shift to the 773 is that the 783 has the Mighty Sound of Steam and electronic whistle instead of the air whistle, and that it doesn't have the valve guides on the steamchest like the 773. The 783 is also lettered for New York Central instead of Lionel Lines.

A key difference between the '64 to '66 773 and the 783 is the tender.

The 783 has a beautifully detailed tender with 6 wheel metal trucks, and includes the Mighty Sound of Steam &  Whistle electronics.  The electronic whistle has the benefit of being re-worked by MPC so it engages from your transformers whistle control.

The smoke unit on the 783 functions well (puffing effect), and as noted it also has steamchest smoke.

I also like the 783 as it maintains a steady speed, almost like modern speed control.

Ken

The 783 has more magnets for the magnetraction and a higher stack of laminations on the motor as compared to the 1950 model. I run my 1950 773 and am keeping my 783 mint. CTT did an article many years ago on the 783 - they wrote that it was a great engine but it needed a lot of adjustment out of the box to get it running well. I do have a 785 and run it, but it needed a lot of work before it would run well. I did try to power up my mint 783 and it has a dead short in it somewhere. So my experience tends to show CTT may be correct. BTW My 785 without magnetraction runs better than my 773.

I have the 784 B&A Hudson (basically same as 783). It also had the magnet rubbing problem (postwar Hudsons and GG1s also had the problem). Lionel repositioned it for me, under warranty, years ago. Mine is a very smooooth runner and does maintain a nice steady speed, hour after hour of constant running. 

The real 773's are expensive, if you are an operator/collector, why not consider the WBB 773 remake? Incidentally, they are getting dropped by Bachmann, and may eventually become collectable  as well.

To all of you, thank you for the advise!  After reading all these great posts, I will go with the 783 for play value. I do have the 784 B&A Hudson and it is a great runner, I bought it mint last year and only had the clean the drum on the reverse unit, from then on, it runs awesome. I also have the 1-700E that sits in it's display case and only run it once every few years, when it runs it's also a great runner.

I have held the 773 in my hands and it's a fine peice of work for the time. One day when I have a lot of money to spend, I'll buy a nice 773 (1950), or become very rich buy a 700E with display stand on T-Rail.

Thanks for the info BIGO426, I did not know the difference in motors from the postwar scale hudson's. The only one comment to Dave Allen on the Bachman 773 is I never see it becomming a collector item as it's made in China. Our beloved Lionel scale Hudson are made in USA! But then again, some recent MTH and Lionel Chinese/South Korean die-cast steamers have collector value as well.

Thanks again guy's!

I'm having the same problem, but I don't know how to get the magnet out to reseat it.  It's held in place by some kind of hard white cement that hasn't budged.  How did you get your magnet free?

Seeing that you already have two Lionel Hudsons, I would second Dave Allen's suggestion for the Williams as they are great runners and have the spoked drivers.

Personally, I would add the K-Line Scale Hudson to your group. Best 'scale' Hudson available and can be had with or w/out TMCC from the factory. There was one on the FS board a few days ago and they come up often right in your 783's price range.

I remember there was a poster in my local hobby shop before the 84 783 came out for $550 or close to that and I thought I would never pay that much for a locomotive. At the time I didn't really know what it was.

A few years later I paid $750 for mine and that was a good deal at that time.

I gave up on buying my beloved vintage lionel postwar trains, when I realized I was buying broken, beat up, poor running locomotives that required even more money spent on parts and maintenance for what I could buy new ones for.

[quote]I gave up on buying my beloved vintage lionel postwar trains, when I realized I was buying broken, beat up, poor running locomotives that required even more money spent on parts and maintenance for what I could buy new ones for [/quolte]

I find that it often cost more to buy a fixer-upper and parts, rather than buying a nice one (even a postwar sample) in the first place. But I enjoy the projects, so I do it anyway.

Big O: I got the dragging-magnet problem fixed on my 783, but now I'm running into the dead-short problem, too.  It's driving me nuts trying to track it down.  Did you ever manage to fix yours?  If so, where was the short?

Yes- Gerald I have a 784 with the magnet problem.  I would like to know how to (1) remove the magnet without destroying it, and (2) reattach it so that it doesn't rub.  Did you have to pull the wheels off of the axles?  Did you grind the magnet down to give yourself a greater margin for error?  What kind of glue did you use, and how did you keep the magnet centered?

To the original poster--A few years ago I was hot for an original 773.  I looked carefully and a lot of them showed signs that at some time the main (center) driving wheel had been removed from its axle.  In other cases there was no evidence of prior repair, but the driving wheel didn't appear to be fully seated on its axle from the factory assembly.  The last thing I wanted was a $1200 loco with a wheel about to come off, that would require special equipment to repair!

My uncle had a 773 and it was a great runner.  However it had a lot of mileage and I'm pretty sure his had been gone over by a Lionel service center in the '50s when he first got into the hobby.  FYI, FWIW.   -Ted

Okay, I finally got the problem solved.  And I can now share the results with anyone else who has a 783 or similar locomotive.

First, the magnet problem.  What I discovered was that the magnets aren't seated nearly as solidly as they look.  I found that if I pushed the axle all the way to the side (away from the wheel on which the magnet is dragging), there's enough axle side play to leave a small gap between wheel and magnet.  I slipped a small (I emphasize small) screwdriver into that gap and gently but firmly twisted the screwdriver blade until the magnet started to creep into proper alignment.  I did it carefully, a little at a time, to avoid bending the axle or damaging the wheel.  You don't need a lot of clearance, just enough to keep the magnet from touching the wheel at any point.  No need to actually remove the magnets at all.

Using this method, I was able to free up the front and rear wheelsets (the center wheels are magnetized by a slightly different method that doesn't get the magnets close to them).  After I did this to all applicable magnets, there was no more drag, and all the wheels turned freely.  Success at last!

Unfortunately, when I put the locomotive on the track, another problem raised its ugly head -- namely the dead short referred to above.  The locomotive would jerk and twitch a short distance down the track, sparks flashing from the valve rods, then come to a quiet stop.  Sparks from the running gear?  Yep.  It baffled me, too.  Never saw anything like it.

I spent the better part of an afternoon tracking down this one, tracing wires, testing the collector assemblies, putting the E-unit through its paces, methodically checking every possibility I could think of. 

To make a very long story short, while I was pondering, I noticed a long (about 1 1/4") black machine screw on my workbench.  I looked it over.  It had the look of a Lionel screw about it, but I was sure the locomotive was solidly back together.  And besides, what could that screw have to do with an electrical short?  Just to make sure, I referred to one of Olsen's diagrams for the 783.  Comparing every similar screw with the ones in the diagram, I finally found that it did belong in the locomotive.  It was an 8306-538, the main screw for the Valve Hanger Assembly.  I'd failed to replace it when I'd had the engine apart to fix the magnet problem.

It didn't look like it could possibly have anything to do with electrical continuity -- and in fact, it didn't even seem to have anything to do with the locomotive's structural integrity.  But I don't like missing parts when I reassemble something, so I removed everything that was in the way and put the screw back where the diagram said it should be.

To my surprise and relief, the locomotive took off at once, faster and smoother than I'd ever seen it run, and with no more sparks.  In addition to holding the valve hanger assembly in place, that screw had also been completing an electrical path.  The top-end speed was now everything I could have hoped for in a model of a fast express NYC Hudson, and the low speeds were smooth, with no more jump starts or limping hitches.  I reassembled the locomotive and it's been running like a fine watch ever since.

Based on my experiences slogging through all these problems (and a couple I haven't even mentioned), I conclude that although 783s are only fair runners out of the box, they can be made good performers by addressing several key points:

1: There was too much worm shaft play in my locomotive.  Adding a single extra thrust washer to one end of the shaft removed it.  Previously, it had run much better in reverse than in forward.  (The thrust washers can be had from The Train Tender.)

Note that whether or not your locomotive needs an extra thrust washer on both ends (as Lionel suggested for the 773) probably varies with the individual mechanism.  By observing my 783 with the shell off as I switched it back and forth between forward and reverse, I could see that in the forward direction, the shaft was shifting too far forward.  So I put a washer on that end only.

2: While trying to run down the other problems, I took all the rods off and filed away all the tiny burrs that had been adding friction to the rod motion.  Then I sparingly lubed the pivot points before reattaching them.

3: As already described, I looked at each wheelset that had MagneTraction magnets rubbing against them, and carefully pried the magnets back from the wheels.  This made a huge difference in running at all speeds.

4: Don't make my mistake!  Always keep careful inventory of screws, and put them back where they came from when reassembling.  If I'd paid more attention to the Olsen diagram in the first place, it would have saved me an afternoon of exasperating and needless labor.

I hope all this saves someone the trial-and-error labor I had to undergo.  Some things just aren't in the manual!

one problem with the 783 stack motor is the armature is not locked in the motor housing in both directions which allows it to ratchet back and forth as it runs and allows the brush plate to wear out quite fast.  Lionel changed this in the grey 785 Hudson with two grooves on the shaft to lock the armature in the bearing so it cant go back and forth and you get longer brush life and comutator life.  If you are replacing brushes quite often order the new armature from lionel.

Just like to add a tidbit. 

These Hudsons (773, 783, 785, 704, and so on....) all take 20V to achieve full power and speed. Unfortunately, the modern transformers only have 18V output.  

They also take many hours of operation to fully break in and run smoothly. My Santa Fe War Horse took a good couple of years of occasional operation to break in. Now, no can motored locomotive even comes close to coasting ability. 

Agreed! Those big, heavy, open frame armatures had more rotational inertia than any of the more "modern" flywheel-equipped can motors.

Jim