@gunrunnerjohn posted:However, there was a post about someone measuring the sample at the Big-E show and saying the wheels were not scale sized to the prototype, I think that's the point being made about this particular model.
The question is did they measure the tires or the flanges? All three rail engines will measure smaller than prototype at the tires.
Pete
@Norton posted:2 rail 5 foot gauge wheels do have larger flanges per NMRA standard. Proto 48 are supposed to be scale. Its true a flanged wheel would fit next to an blind wheel in most cases but two flanged wheels won’t.
Currently three railing a two rail engine. The big flanges requiring a lot of modifications to fit and its only because there is a blind driver between them that they do. Here is a picture showing the drivers. I think you can see if the center driver was flanged it would hit the other two.
One reason the middle wheels on Lionel’s Strasburg 90 look so small is the lack of flanges and black frame paint.
Pere
As the number 2,3 and 4 drivers on the model ARE blind, there is space to make the drivers closer to the correct size.
Rusty
So Rusty would you have them make the center drivers larger? Wheel diameter is determined by the flanged driver, not the blind drivers.
Consider this, Its a production sample. Those who are concerned about this should contact Lionel about this. There should be time to change the wheel spec assuming its possible.
Pete
I don't think making the center drivers a different size is a realistic solution! I thought the drivers were indeed measured from the rims and not the flanges. This article seems to suggest my measurement method is correct: Measuring Locomotive Wheel Diameters. What am I missing here?
I think perhaps what is missing here is that the entire Lionel Hybrid concept is based on using a singular drive train with any number of brass shells to allow for a lower number of units to be produced as there is no tooling for the shell. As a result, there is no guarantee expressed or implied that the drive train will be specific to any one locomotive, but instead close to many types for maximum flexibility
The driver sizing seems consistent with what would be found on a Russian Decapod.
For what it is worth, it is a very nice looking locomotive overall. Much nicer than the catalog art implied.
I believe GG1 4877 hit it on the nail head, as his reasoning is very plausible, and most likely used industry wide.
You can't expect them to make whole new drive trains so that it may be a 0.125" closer to the real deal.
Afterall who amongst us has that kind of calibrated eyesight that they can tell the difference from two to three feet away?
I also agree whole heartedly that the catalog art does not do the model any justice. Actually the CAD artwork hurts it as its sooooooo blah looking.
Hi all,
I measured the diameter of the wheel, rim to rim on driver 4, not the flange. I did not have a caliper on me at the time so I used a tape measure that has uncertainty. Also, there is probably some error, so I measured it 2x and I got the same result.
@Allegheny posted:I believe GG1 4877 hit it on the nail head, as his reasoning is very plausible, and most likely used industry wide.
You can't expect them to make whole new drive trains so that it may be a 0.125" closer to the real deal.
Afterall who amongst us has that kind of calibrated eyesight that they can tell the difference from two to three feet away?
This is not industry wide. Today a full brass model of the prototype would be expected to have the correct size drivers. However, with current costs such a model would be north of $2000.00. With the hybrid or die cast locomotives, yes this is a much more common practice.
I also have the eyesight to notice the difference, but I still model in N scale occasionally. 
Looking at the picture of the drivers, I'm not sure if a larger wheel size would fit between the brake shoes. I could be wrong about that. Either way, we need to reach out to Lionel to confirm this.
@Rusty Traque posted:Visually, the drivers look undersized to me. Whether or not that's a deal breaker is up to the individual.
I suspect the slightly undersized drivers will be less noticeable on a painted model.
However, what really draws my eye is the rods, both with the model and catalog renderings. Comparing the model with prototype photo's, the model's rods look "clunky" to me. Even on this old brass HO model, the rods look more delicate.
The rods do look a little chubby and it does look like there is some room to make the wheels a bitter larger. But, no one has mentioned that the Combination Lever is not connected to the cross head in the proper manner.
@GG1 4877 posted:I think perhaps what is missing here is that the entire Lionel Hybrid concept is based on using a singular drive train with any number of brass shells to allow for a lower number of units to be produced as there is no tooling for the shell. As a result, there is no guarantee expressed or implied that the drive train will be specific to any one locomotive, but instead close to many types for maximum flexibility
The driver sizing seems consistent with what would be found on a Russian Decapod.
For what it is worth, it is a very nice looking locomotive overall. Much nicer than the catalog art implied.
Well, a Russian Decapod has 52" drivers while Strasburg's Decapod has 56" drivers. A 4" difference is fairly significant.
I agree, Lionel's model looks pretty nice over all, but there are somethings I can't unsee.
Additionally, I don't recall folks calling out incorrect driver sizes for things like the A, J, GS-4 or Big Boys. Why? Likely because even if those model locomotive drivers are undersized, they look right. The issue becomes that a model of a very well documented locomotive simply doesn't look right.
Rusty
most model locomotives have driver diameter slightly less than the prototype. if they were correct the over size flanges we use even in HO would not allow any clearance between wheels let alone room for track hangers.
Well, it still looks very good to me, even if the drivers may be a little off. It doesn't bother me......but I guess that's what happens when you were raised on prewar tinplate.
I really like this train especially the brass hybrid. But maybe I’m missing something but why are these priced the same as the Vision Line Class A’s.
@Robert Cushman posted:I really like this train especially the brass hybrid. But maybe I’m missing something but why are these priced the same as the Vision Line Class A’s.
Because they can, and they know people people will pay it. Sure, it's all new tooling and Lionel needs to cover those costs and turn a profit. However, many of us have asked for #90 for a long time, so I'm sure there is an element of "I gotta have it" factored into the price.
Makes sense. I made a rule where I only buy a train with a hidden easter egg like feature or something special like the 2-10-10-2 has.
I wish you could do polls on the forum as I'm interested in which versions everyone has ordered.
I've ordered the "modern" SRC version and very excited to receive - this will be my second scale (and legacy) engine.
Has anyone ordered the Osage or Seaboard version? (or even the pilot version?)
@BlueComet400 posted:Because they can, and they know people people will pay it. Sure, it's all new tooling and Lionel needs to cover those costs and turn a profit. However, many of us have asked for #90 for a long time, so I'm sure there is an element of "I gotta have it" factored into the price.
Plus brass locomotive require much more labor than diecast. Throughout model railroading history, brass locomotive cost more than diecast, regardless of scale.
Rusty
@Rusty Traque posted:As the number 2,3 and 4 drivers on the model ARE blind, there is space to make the drivers closer to the correct size.
Rusty
Well we know Lionel likes to reuse tooling to keep manufacturing costs down.. The ATSF hybrid Mikado uses Lionels "run of the mill light" mikado chassis.
Assuming the chassis on #90 is all new, as Lionel has not offered a smaller decapod in the past.
I suspect those drivers made be from tooling of a smaller loco Lionel already has. ( Without actually measuring. Those look suspiciously like their USRA 0-8-0 drivers.) In order to cut "some "cost where they can. Its not out of character to get "thats close enough", from Lionel.
After all, the original idea of the brass hybrid from Lionel. Was to offer unique locomotives for less than a "full brass" locomotive because of a die cast chassis that could be used for other models.
@RickO posted:After all, the original idea of the brass hybrid from Lionel. Was to offer unique locomotives for less than a "full brass" locomotive because of a die cast chassis that could be used for other models.
It's not clear if we achieved that goal, this is priced like 3rd Rail brass. 
@RickO posted:Well we know Lionel likes to reuse tooling to keep manufacturing costs down.. The ATSF hybrid Mikado uses Lionels "run of the mill light" mikado chassis.
Assuming the chassis on #90 is all new, as Lionel has not offered a smaller decapod in the past.
I suspect those drivers made be from tooling of a smaller loco Lionel already has. ( Without actually measuring. Those look suspiciously like their USRA 0-8-0 drivers.) In order to cut "some "cost where they can. Its not out of character to get "thats close enough", from Lionel.
After all, the original idea of the brass hybrid from Lionel. Was to offer unique locomotives for less than a "full brass" locomotive because of a die cast chassis that could be used for other models.
Except the 3160 class Mikado Lionel chose to build has the same size drivers as the USRA Mikados and the locomotive doesn't look like its on a roller skate.
While I know there are certain issues with the Santa Fe Mikado, they aren't obvious at first glance. The drivetrain on the decapod sticks out like a sore thumb.
Lionel has indicated a great amount of access and cooperation with Strasburg (so they say...) so there's really no excuse for visually undersized drivers or chunky side rods. This is supposed to be a "definitive model" according to Ryan.
The hybrid models are supposed to be a cut above your typical diecast model. The brasswork certainly is. The failure is in the running gear. Plus, there's this little tidbit from YouTube:
Rusty
@gunrunnerjohn posted:It's not clear if we achieved that goal, this is priced like 3rd Rail brass.
Thus the use of the word "was" in my post.
@Rusty Traque posted:Lionel has indicated a great amount of access and cooperation with Strasburg (so they say...) so there's really no excuse for visually undersized drivers or chunky side rods. This is supposed to be a "definitive model" according to Ryan.
The hybrid models are supposed to be a cut above your typical diecast model. The brasswork certainly is. The failure is in the running gear. Plus, there's this little tidbit from YouTube:
Rusty
I don't discount anything your saying Rusty. I'm just guessing at an "excuse"poor as it may be, as to why the drivers are undersized.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:It's not clear if we achieved that goal, this is priced like 3rd Rail brass.
With current direct costs, 3rd Rail brass would be over $2k currently. I think the Lionel model is appropriately priced considering the street price vs. the MSRP.
My only complaint is the Strasburg locomotive I want and rode behind was PRR D16 1223 which is now across the street in the Museum. Granted I was 2 at the time
This is the first time I have pre-ordered anything, so please forgive my ignorance. There seems to be a lot of disappointment with the pre-production model with respect to the size of the drivers. If enough people say, "correct the size of the drivers or we will cancel our pre-orders," what is likely to happen?
@BlueComet400 posted:This is the first time I have pre-ordered anything, so please forgive my ignorance. There seems to be a lot of disappointment with the pre-production model with respect to the size of the drivers. If enough people say, "correct the size of the drivers or we will cancel our pre-orders," what is likely to happen?
Best question of the week!!!!!
Can't wait to see how anyone from Lionel responds, if they do respond.
All it takes is sending me a simple email... I'll refrain from commenting further on the snowball of negativity.
We have already increased the size of the wheels in the design after seeing these pre-pros. They're significantly smaller than prototype. We're adding and modifying some other details as well.
@Dave Olson posted:All it takes is sending me a simple email... I'll refrain from commenting further on the snowball of negativity.
We have already increased the size of the wheels in the design after seeing these pre-pros. They're significantly smaller than prototype. We're adding and modifying some other details as well.
Dave,
I find this statement odd considering I sent an email regarding having interest in the Wabash Atlantic but due to the trailing trucks not being correct it's keeping me from pulling the trigger. I have received no response.
"All it takes is sending me a simple email... I'll refrain from commenting further on the snowball of negativity."
That's a little harsh, don't you think? Lionel has customers lined-up and committed to part with thousands of their hard-earned dollars for this product. If Lionel can't take a little criticism after showing the pre-production model, then they should just roll the dice, build it and see if it sells.
I like the fact that Lionel is responding to the driver size issue, that speaks well for what we'll get. I'm looking forward to having this to head my Strasburg train. 
I am too, John, although the mogul you converted for me does a great job! Which paint scheme did you order?
John, I went for the current paint scheme, although I liked several of the choices.
@BlueComet400 posted:I am too, John, although the mogul you converted for me does a great job!
I wish I could get another Strasburg tender shell, I'd convert my Legacy Mogul into a Strasburg model.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:I like the fact that Lionel is responding to the driver size issue, that speaks well for what we'll get. I'm looking forward to having this to head my Strasburg train.
We've added detail to the front of the tender as well.
@Big Jim posted:The rods do look a little chubby and it does look like there is some room to make the wheels a bitter larger. But, no one has mentioned that the Combination Lever is not connected to the cross head in the proper manner.
I'm taking a look at the size of the side rods. They are a little bit wide. I'll look at the combo lever as well.
@Shawn_Chronister posted:Dave,
I find this statement odd considering I sent an email regarding having interest in the Wabash Atlantic but due to the trailing trucks not being correct it's keeping me from pulling the trigger. I have received no response.
I did forward your email to Ryan. Sometimes replies take time. We just got back from the Springfield show.
@Dave Olson posted:I'm taking a look at the size of the side rods. They are a little bit wide. I'll look at the combo lever as well.
That would be great. The do look a little "overweight" when compared to the prototype.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:John, I went for the current paint scheme, although I liked several of the choices.
I wish I could get another Strasburg tender shell, I'd convert my Legacy Mogul into a Strasburg model.
North Lima has CN tender shells which are also correct, maybe more correct given the smokebox front with the number boards.
Pete
@Dave Olson posted:I'm taking a look at the size of the side rods. They are a little bit wide. I'll look at the combo lever as well.
That sounds great. I am glad I reordered this model!
@Norton posted:North Lima has CN shells which are also correct, maybe more correct given the smokebox front with the number boards.
Pete, that would involve painting the tender for Strasburg anyway. I'd also have to mod the boiler shell for the Legacy components. I was looking for the lazy man's way...
@Dave Olson posted:We have already increased the size of the wheels in the design after seeing these pre-pros. They're significantly smaller than prototype. We're adding and modifying some other details as well.
@Dave Olson posted:I'm taking a look at the size of the side rods. They are a little bit wide. I'll look at the combo lever as well.
Dave, I'm glad you guys are listening. This will help make the model even better.
Rusty
John, meant to say tender shell.
With all the changes this one has me thinking though I have nothing in Strasburg yet.
Pete
@BlueComet400 posted:"All it takes is sending me a simple email... I'll refrain from commenting further on the snowball of negativity."
That's a little harsh, don't you think? Lionel has customers lined-up and committed to part with thousands of their hard-earned dollars for this product. If Lionel can't take a little criticism after showing the pre-production model, then they should just roll the dice, build it and see if it sells.
Funny, (to me anyway)
With all due respect to other forum members, I thought Dave exhibited the perfect response.
Paul
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
