e-unit or ps-2 conversion of conventional steamer?

You can't put PS/2 in that, it's an AC motor and it has no flywheel for the tach tape.  Trying to put a DC motor into that would be challenging, to say the least!  If you're running conventional, there are much cheaper alternatives in any case, the Dallee #400 Reverse Unit is one option for replacing the E-Unit.

I was considering a pittman motor for the replacement as it was always a little underpowered anyway - I just wasn't sure about finding a way to mount a flywheel for the tachometer.  I know its far fetched but sometimes these thing just pop up in the ol' brain-pan and need to be bounced off of others for a reality check.

What this project started out as was a simply e-unit upgrade.  It turned out that the modern e-unit doesn't fit where the old electro-mechanical on was out without being visible.  And actually the new one is a Dallee unit.  So is there a replacement e-unit circuit out there packaged as a drop in replacement for the actual dimensions of the original?

If I need to put it in the tender I might as well get a speaker and whistle package as the sound of steam system died a long time ago.  But then how do i handle the number of wires I would need to go between the engine and tender?  Since all this would need done that's why I was wondering about a ps-2 package (again if I could get the motor/flywheel problem tackled.)

Or maybe put in an Electric RR TMCC board in the tender? No flywheel required.

---PCJ

Given that this is a $50-75 locomotive, I guess I'd be looking to just buy something with all of that installed.  It'll probably be less money, and it'll be a lot more likely to run well.  I suspect most folks will recommend against this upgrade unless there's a particular attachment to this specific locomotive.

The wires between engine and tender are a tether, I use MTH tethers, they're 10 pins and accommodate most things when I upgrade.

Do you run DCS now?  If not, why put PS/2 into it?

Do you run DCS now?  If not, why put PS/2 into it?

It was just a wild idea - I don't think its the least bit practical.  I do have some attachment to the engine as it has made several trips round the tree at Christmas time.  It was also one my Dad's favorites from my collection and he is no longer around to share with. 

Also I have several ps2 and on ps3 engine.  I just got a dcs system but have not had time to set it up yet.  I do use dcs at club functions.

Anyway I tried mounting the board so it slid down between the motor frame but it hits the motor before I have enough clearance to get the shell back on.  I'm open to ideas but it seems like I'll have to mount it in the tender and get some control wires to the motor mounted.  I've done this before on a formerly dc only engine and ended up with four wires, which look enough like hoses to me.  (two wires for power/ground pickup, tow wires to actually power the motor.)  No smoke unit on that loco and the light still runs off track power.  I like to make it simpler this time around but I don't want to go back to a mechanical reverse unit and I can't seem to get this board to fit. 

You could go this route,

Bill

 Bill - looks like a conversion kit - Hallelujah!

I am assuming those are lionel part #'s.  If so would I be able to get those while lionel is moving?

JZ.

Since this is an AC motor, I don't think that DC E-Unit will work all that well.  You need to do more than swap the armature polarity to get the reverse function to work.  You'll have to power the field separately so it always has the same polarity.

If the part Bill is showing is a reverse circuit for a DC motor and it actually fits inside the frame, I am not against trying to replace the motor.  It would still make the project simpler in general.  ( I.e. I would not have to worry about running control wires from the tender.)

Well, I can tell you that wouldn't be my first thought!  Getting a DC motor in there will be a trick!  You need to match up the gears so it'll run at all.  Running a 4-pin tether from the tender sure sounds a lot easier to me.

The difference between us here is an easy one to figure out --

gunrunnerjohn = electrical and controls engineer

jhz563 = mechanical engineer

We all fall back onto our own strengths.

I guess I can see the logic in that.

I was looking at the 8403 when I should have looked at the 8304. 

Bill