J3a Hudson #5416

Wow. These still haven't been sent out. Glad i didn't order one.

Hey, Guys

I have a call into Lionel today to get the status of my Boiler Fronts and I will Post the response as soon as they get back to me. In reply to the above comments I have not received a phone call from NYC Fan and we do not have an answering machine so there is no way to leave a message. Lionel owes these parts to me and I hope they make it good. If by any chance that you are not satisfied with this Hudson Please return the engine to my store for a refund.

Thanks

Best Regards

Pat

PATRICK'S TRAINS

142 29TH STREET

WHEELING WV 26003

304-232-0714

Pat, even more of us would be interested in the fronts w/o class lights that came with your engine. Should Lionel offer you replacement parts for your engine, please let us know. Currently I see no replacement parts for the Hudsons other that a few electronic boards.

Pete

@feet posted:

Wow. These still haven't been sent out. Glad i didn't order one.

I'm curious to see if Lionel will address the 5 chuffs per revolution problem. I dumped my preorder of one of the standard models early on, and I'm glad as well.

@Norton posted:

Pat, even more of us would be interested in the fronts w/o class lights that came with your engine. Should Lionel offer you replacement parts for your engine, please let us know. Currently I see no replacement parts for the Hudsons other that a few electronic boards.

Pete

I will ask Lionel about the boiler fronts w/o lights also.

@PATSTRAINS posted:

I will ask Lionel about the boiler fronts w/o lights also.

I’d be in this group.....😁

Pat

@NYC Fan posted:

I purchased a special run J3a Hudson #5416 from Pat's Trains. It was advertised to come with classification lamps and was supposed to include a second boiler front without classification lamps. It was, in fact, supposed to be identical to the J3a #5410 in the Pacemaker Set.  It was delivered in November 2019 without classification lamps and without a second boiler front. We were told that a second boiler front with classification lamps would be sent later. I have called Pat's and left messages and got no response. I have emailed Pat's and got no response. The list price was $100 more than other J3a's with the standard tender so I feel we have paid for the second boiler front. First, when can we expect to receive these boiler fronts? It is now 10 months later and cannot even get a response.

Will there be directions for installation?

Attached is the original advertisement that Pat put out for your reference.

Skip, your smoke box door is black?...correct?....I have extra boiler fronts with class lights, and the harness...if Lionel disses Pat’s Trains, we can fix this problem amongst ourselves......some of us don’t want class lights period....as a lot of J3’s after shopping  ( especially on the 4 track side) really had no need for class lights....that’s why you see so many pics of them without class lights....( there were a few exceptions, but not many) ......I can match your black to a tee, and we can swap if you like....up to you, just offering a solution.......

Pat

@Norton posted:

Pat, even more of us would be interested in the fronts w/o class lights that came with your engine. Should Lionel offer you replacement parts for your engine, please let us know. Currently I see no replacement parts for the Hudsons other that a few electronic boards.

Pete

I've been waiting for the parts list to go up also.  I received a new boiler front for my broken one with the help of Dave Olson way back last winter, so they must have some.

I don't usually jump into the fray on the forum for many reasons but I Just want to add my $.02.

I understand NYC Fan's frustration since I too ordered the engine because of the option to use either boiler front. The no classification light was my preference but I still wanted the option. And yes, it is a beautiful model of that engine. I called at least twice, left my contact information with someone but never heard back from anyone.

Before anyone jumps all over me and tells me how unfair I am being and how Pat is a great guy, yes there are more important things in life, I could have returned it for a full refund (and apparently still can) and I'm sure he is, but that is not the point. The subject has come up here a few times and while NYC Fan has been the only one to post about it, others have expressed their disappointment. So Pat is aware customers are dissatisfied. The only response was "Lionel said they will ship them (sic)".

Only 25 were sold, so why not create a group e-mail to those who bought them and communicate with them? A simple, "Hey, I know you're disappointed but I've reached out to Lionel in November when I received the engines without the second boiler front and again in (fill in the month) when I asked for an update. They insist I will receive them but unfortunately they still have not arrived. I know it may not replace the front you expected but I will offer you ($xxx or whatever) since you did not get what you ordered." This also would allow customers to communicate with Pat instead of posting it here.

Instead, only when the subject comes up on this forum we are told he checked, they are on their way and you can return them if you want. While offering a full refund at this point is very generous, however, in my opinion from a customer satisfaction point of view, not how it should be handled.

In this post, he basically calls NYC Fan a liar. Why would he say he called when he didn't?  If you know NYC Fan, you know this is not remotely true. He obviously wants the second boiler front and why wouldn't he reach out for an update to avoid posting here after the roasting he got the last time he posted his frustration on the forum. Whether or not he has voicemail at the shop is not point. I have called at least twice, spoke with someone and still did not receive a return call. 

Like I said, just my $.02.

Let the onslaught begin...

Mike

Hi Mike,

I actually called Pat's three times dating back to January. The first time I talked to Pat himself and he said we would get them when we get them and he would get back to me. Never did. Another time, about a month later I left a message with someone (thought it might have been Pat) said his name was Billy, who said Pat would get back to me. Third time a couple of months later, same thing.  I never said anything about an answering machine. I also left 3 email messages on his web site contact page, to which I got no response. 

Some guys ordered Pat's Hudson specifically because they really wanted the extra boiler front without the classification lamps. When the Hudson came that way, they were happy and we haven't heard from them. That's okay.

Me, on the other hand, ordered Pat's Hudson because in looking at the variations offered in the catalog the one in the Pacemaker set #5410 with class lights was the one I liked the best. Pat's Hudson was supposed to be a copy #5410 except numbered #5416.  Read his advertisement that I posted above. This allowed me to get the locomotive I wanted without having to buy the whole set.

I may have been a very small minority of the 25 who ordered Pat's Hudson, who really wanted the class lights. Interestingly, "TALK TO US" AT LIONEL KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT A SECOND BOILER FRONT, which raised my suspicion. Perhaps Pat felt that because a majority of the guys who ordered his Hudson didn't really want the classification lights, he wouldn't bother to order them. Seemed funny that the locomotive was supposed to come with the class lights installed, and the boiler front without the class lights was supposed to be the extra. Sending the locomotive the way they did made no sense as changing the boiler front will require opening the engine body to plug in the harness. If it had been made as described in the advertisement above, the extra boiler front could have been installed without having to open the engine. This being the "Lionel Forum" I thought there was an outside chance I might get some answers.

Mike, we'll see if we get a response from Pat. Maybe there is a reasonable explanation. Maybe we'll get the second boiler front. Like you said, there are more important things in life.

@NYC Fan posted:

 

[snip]        This allowed me to get the locomotive I wanted without having to buy the whole set.

I may have been a very small minority of the 25 who ordered Pat's Hudson, who really wanted the class lights.

[snip]

Skip,  the two sentences that I have quoted from your post describe my situation exactly, so you are in the minority, but it is not a minority of one.   

Just as a reference, in this thread where Pat announced his uncatalogued custom run, there are two pictures (.png files, these are in the attachments section, not in the body of the post), screen shots of a PDF file illustrating what his custom run Hudson would look like.  The first picture clearly shows that the engine is to be built with classification lights on the engine's boiler front and that a second boiler front was to be included that did not have classification lights.  (I did not repost the pictures here to avoid any copyright issues.)

Lionel did not produce the engine as illustrated. They did not produce J3A Hudson #5413 as catalogued either.  Documented here.  

[ETA]  Since 5413 was catalogued with mixed drivers, I did not want it at that time.  

Guys,

The engines were shown in the drawings I posted with the lights on the boiler front and the extra boiler front was supposed to be without them.  It was a Lionel decision that resulted in what arrived (no markers on boiler front included with engine, extra boiler front with markers) and I was not consulted for this change.  The extra boiler fronts were indeed ordered at the time the engines were ordered from Lionel and was acknowledged by them at the time as they are shown in the CAD drawings that Lionel provided and I posted in the thread referenced above.  They have not come through with them up to this point and still have not responded to my request for more information regarding them from a few days ago.  As soon as I get a response from them, I will post it here.

Pat

@PATSTRAINS posted:

Guys,

The engines were shown in the drawings I posted with the lights on the boiler front and the extra boiler front was supposed to be without them.  It was a Lionel decision that resulted in what arrived (no markers on boiler front included with engine, extra boiler front with markers) and I was not consulted for this change.  The extra boiler fronts were indeed ordered at the time the engines were ordered from Lionel and was acknowledged by them at the time as they are shown in the CAD drawings that Lionel provided and I posted in the thread referenced above.  They have not come through with them up to this point and still have not responded to my request for more information regarding them from a few days ago.  As soon as I get a response from them, I will post it here.

Pat

Thank you Pat. That's really all I've been asking for is for you to keep us updated.

Hello, Guys

I talked to John Bickford Jr. Director of Wholesale/ Dealer Sales today and he said that he forwarded my E-mails about the boiler fronts to production and was sorry that these boiler fronts were not delivered with the product.  I asked him to have someone from production respond to this post and give some time frame for delivery of these boiler fronts.

Thanks

Best Regards

Pat

Those who want the five chuffs fixed.  Lionel finally got back to me and said they would gladly take the engines back to fix the issue.  I have decided not to send it back and I'm swapping out the RCMC board.  Doing an exchange with Bruk.

@superwarp1 posted:

Those who want the five chuffs fixed.  Lionel finally got back to me and said they would gladly take the engines back to fix the issue.  I have decided not to send it back and I'm swapping out the RCMC board.  Doing an exchange with Bruk.

Why on earth they haven't come up with a way to reprogram them in the field is beyond me.  It would save sooooo much customer dissatisfaction, needless shipping of expensive locomotives, and have to be cheaper in the long run.

@rplst8 posted:

Why on earth they haven't come up with a way to reprogram them in the field is beyond me.  It would save sooooo much customer dissatisfaction, needless shipping of expensive locomotives, and have to be cheaper in the long run.

Because the average customer inside a locomotive would most certainly cause issues that Lionel would just have to repair anyways.  Now a qualified service staion would be a good place for Lionel to allow this to be done.

@MartyE posted:

Because the average customer inside a locomotive would most certainly cause issues that Lionel would just have to repair anyways.  Now a qualified service staion would be a good place for Lionel to allow this to be done.

Why should it require the customer to get inside the locomotive?  Haven't you ever used MTH's capability to change the sound and chain files?

It's just software.  Most of these Lionel engines have a Bluetooth connection for Pete's sake.  Just engineer it to be reprogrammed wirelessly.

@rplst8 posted:

Why should it require the customer to get inside the locomotive?  Haven't you ever used MTH's capability to change the sound and chain files?

It's just software.  Most of these Lionel engines have a Bluetooth connection for Pete's sake.  Just engineer it to be reprogrammed wirelessly.

You are preaching to what I have for years.

These boards require to be hard wired into a programing fixture. Not like DCS or DCC where you can send data through the track. 

The Bluetooth is just another form of a receiver. 

Also, they don’t do it because they don’t want people to steal there tech. (Even though its not that special) Its their way of holding the market. Which the completely control now. 

@rplst8 posted:

Why should it require the customer to get inside the locomotive?  Haven't you ever used MTH's capability to change the sound and chain files?

It's just software.  Most of these Lionel engines have a Bluetooth connection for Pete's sake.  Just engineer it to be reprogrammed wirelessly.

Yes I have changed files on DCS but as Bruk noted that isn’t the way Lionel’s system works so it is what it is.

I’m pretty sure if someone wanted to get into the tech they could. Not sure stealing the tech is a reason but since you’ve been intimately involved with the boards I will yield to your conclusion Bruk. 

@Bruk posted:

You are preaching to what I have for years.

These boards require to be hard wired into a programing fixture. Not like DCS or DCC where you can send data through the track. 

The Bluetooth is just another form of a receiver. 

Also, they don’t do it because they don’t want people to steal there tech. (Even though its not that special) Its their way of holding the market. Which the completely control now. 

Let's also not forget that Lionel's boards are huge and bulky vs anything in DCC or DCS. 

Everyone seems to love the "simplicity" of TMCC/Legacy, but the hardware is not nearly as good for end user use/modification as DCS or DCC. Both are more complicated but the both have much more potential for the end user than Lionel's system.

I'll end my rant .

@Lou1985 posted:

Let's also not forget that Lionel's boards are huge and bulky vs anything in DCC or DCS. 

Everyone seems to love the "simplicity" of TMCC/Legacy, but the hardware is not nearly as good for end user use/modification as DCS or DCC. Both are more complicated but the both have much more potential for the end user than Lionel's system.

I'll end my rant .

“May The Train Gods shine down on the company opening their eyes to the rest of the industries” - Amen. 

The chuff issue with DCC or DCS would be non existent as well. In DCS I just click menu, engine, sound, chuff, and pick any chuff rate from 1-16 per revolution. Done. Can do something similar in DCC.  

/end rant. For real this time .

@Bruk posted:

“May The Train Gods shine down on the company opening their eyes to the rest of the industries” - Amen. 

Tru dat.

Hopefully they wake up to this.  I have just about all the model trains I’d ever need, and if/when the electronics start to give out I fully intend on either switching to DCC or developing my own system based on Arduino boards.  

If Lionel wants my money, they have to do better for $1500+ a pop. 

@Lou1985 posted:

The chuff issue with DCC or DCS would be non existent as well. In DCS I just click menu, engine, sound, chuff, and pick any chuff rate from 1-16 per revolution. Done. Can do something similar in DCC.  

/end rant. For real this time .

Thank you for ending the rant....we’ll see how much you praise DCS when the barrel of boards runs dry!....😁😁😁😁

I’m just picking on ya, ol buddy....

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

Thank you for ending the rant....we’ll see how much you praise DCS when the barrel of boards runs dry!....😁😁😁😁

I’m just picking on ya, ol buddy....

Pat

When the bulk of my TMCC and DCS boards start dying off I'd probably switch electronics over to DCC, or whatever the latest and greatest thing is. I'm not afraid of electronics swaps .

Two weeks since Pat’s last post, no update from Lionel.  

@Lou1985 posted:

Everyone seems to love the "simplicity" of TMCC/Legacy, but the hardware is not nearly as good for end user use/modification as DCS or DCC. Both are more complicated but the both have much more potential for the end user than Lionel's system.

Not an expert by any means, but I suspect Lionel feels the market is far stronger for straight-forward, understandable operation than it is for more complicated systems that may allow complex end user electronic modifications. The number of operators who are into that is quite small, I'd guess. I would think for most customers just learning (and remembering) all the different things that can be done operationally with a Cab 2 and Legacy is plenty much!  

@breezinup posted:

Not an expert by any means, but I suspect Lionel feels the market is far stronger for straight-forward, understandable operation than it is for more complicated systems that may allow complex end user electronic modifications. The number of operators who are into that is quite small, I'd guess. I would think for most customers just learning (and remembering) all the different things that can be done operationally with a Cab 2 and Legacy is plenty much!  

Comparing the HO market with the state of O, I’d say Lionel is wrong.

Edit:

Since someone posted about the topic veering off course, I'd like to add that I think it's understood that we all support the OP in his quest to get the extra boiler front he paid for.  I think it's rotten that it's taken 10 months, sure current events have thrown us for a loop but there several months before that where it should have been remedied.  In fact - the boiler fronts should have been delivered with the engine when it arrived.

I think the comments about the 5-chuff and the inane system whereby to modify things like this you must ship a $1000+ item back to the manufacturer are fair game.  Customers are not happy with the current state of affairs when the technology exists to have such a simple thing fixed by the user in the field.  If the user wants to ship it back, that's their prerogative.  I think most people complain because A) it should be right to begin with and B) it should not cost so much nor be such a waste of resources and time to get it fixed

How in the heck did we get from missing boiler front to chuff issue to what's better in terms of electronic control..

Oh yeah, this is OGR Forum where the same few people don't give a **** about the requests from the owners.

@PATSTRAINS posted:

Hello, Guys

I talked to John Bickford Jr. Director of Wholesale/ Dealer Sales today and he said that he forwarded my E-mails about the boiler fronts to production and was sorry that these boiler fronts were not delivered with the product.  I asked him to have someone from production respond to this post and give some time frame for delivery of these boiler fronts.

Thanks

Best Regards

Pat

Hello, Guys

John Bickford from Lionel said he sent the order for the boiler fronts to production but I have not seen anything from them at this point.

Thanks

Pat

Any update???  A little confused on who is supposed to be responding to this thread from Lionel.