Based on all the discussion above, I fired up the 1946 726. The spur gear is noisy, but it does seem to run better at slower speeds than the 1950 736, which has a rjr-defying binding issue. So I withdraw all the negative things I've said about it, other than the gear hum.
Originally Posted by RJR:
... it does seem to run better at slower speeds than the 1950 736, which has a rjr-defying binding issue...
The rear(powered) axle bushings are worn on your 736.
Replaced them, and the axle and the gear.
quote:My Greenberg guide says there is an early 46 and later 46 version.
The 1946 726 Berkshire came with two different motors, the difference being the thickness of the field. I cannot think of any other differences.
Do all early 46 versions have red brush plates...mine is red.
quote:Do all early 46 versions have red brush plates...mine is red.
I have seen red, black, and mottled dark green / black.
For some reason, a lot of people put a premium on red brush plates. I cannot understand it.
I know I have some NOS red brush plates, but I am uncertain whether they are for a 1946 loco, or one of the later ones. (I looked, they are for later motors, no mini banana jacks)
Originally Posted by C W Burfle:
quote:Do all early 46 versions have red brush plates...mine is red.
I have seen red, black, and mottled dark green / black.
For some reason, a lot of people put a premium on red brush plates. I cannot understand it.
I know I have some NOS red brush plates, but I am uncertain whether they are for a 1946 loco, or one of the later ones. (I looked, they are for later motors, no mini banana jacks)
I read somewhere that the red ones were supposed to designate the bigger motor.
quote:I read somewhere that the red ones were supposed to designate the bigger motor.
I have a defective 1946 turbine motor with a red brush plate sitting in a parts bin. The spline for the drive gear was cut in the wrong place, to it is actually partially inside the motor bearing. Its a Madison Hardware treasure.
Regardless, after so many years, who knows whether the brush plate is original to the motor.
I did mention that I have several NOS red brush plates for the 1947-49 motors.
As far as I know, there is no difference in value between 1946 Berkshires with large and small motors. I think most folks (myself included) would have to look at them side by side to tell the difference.
I have a 1947 (I think) model. Love it, esp. the wheels. It does make a bit of a thud-thud-thud via the drive rods. Pulls just fine (7-8 post war cars, which is about all I can fit); it has the lead weight and weighs in at a decent ~5.9 lbs.
OK, I have 8 post war cars on my outside loop and consider that a "standard' for engine performance. These are fairly heavy cars that have the wheels lubed. Would that be typical on a flat, tubular rail layout ?? I could probably pull more with some engines but don't want to stress them. Have another consist of 7 early operating car that are pretty heavy. this includes a metal caboose. Another train has all 5-47 cars-my "old" train, I call it.
My first train in 1947 was a Lionel set with the 726 and some freight cars. It had the "Atomic Motor" and smoke bulb. Worked f0r me for 10 years until I moved out of the house and went to work. Sold all my trains ( 726, 671 and Santa Fe F3's) to buy a car.
Those 1946 Atomic motors were works of art in engineering. I cleaned one recently and it was beautiful, ball bearing equipped, no slop at all, and it spun so freely. Puts later motors to shame.
The motors used in 1950 736's were also ball bearing.
726/'46 is a magnificent piece of PW engineering...and waaaay too expensive for Lionel to produce over the long haul. I've had several, and they all ran well after tuning 'em up.
Lube is important here, as has been stated. One of Lionel's all time greats...for good looks and realistic operation!
I'm not familiar with the Berks, but I have my dad's '46 2020 turbine. If the 726 has a die-cast shell, I cannot imagine it needing more weight as the 2020 I have feels like it weighs a ton compared to all of my other locos. I wouldn't be surprised if it weighed as much as all my other O-gauge locos combined! LOL
It runs just fine and will pull anything I hook up to it, but I don't have room for a very long train, probably 8 cars max. It is a growler though. One of these days I should take it down and give it a good cleaning and lube. Have to try some moly grease on the spur gears.
It still has it's original smoke bulb or maybe a replacement my dad would have put in when he was a kid as I've had it since the late '70's and have not had to replace the bulb. I put a few drops of Mega-Steam in the depression in the bulb when it is cold for a little smoke, but I'm afraid the bulb would blow if I dropped cool fluid on it when it's hot.
The 1946 Berkshire and turbine motors did not have ball bearings. I believe it is because they didn't need them. These motors had spur gears at the end of the armature, and didn't have any significant thrusting force for ball bearings to address.
When they went to worm drive in 1947, the motors were subject to significant thrusting force, and ball bearings were added.
The first motors had loose ball bearings. Later the ball bearings came mounted in a ring. I am not certain when they changed(probably 1950). I think 736 motors have the bearing rings.
The 1949 622 motor also had loose ball bearings. The page listed on Olsens web site gives the number of ball bearings as nine. On all these motors, I usually put in as many as will fit without bunching.
You are correct, CW, regarding the 1950 736.
I have an old 726 Berkshire with the smoke bulb unit. While I do not run it often, it still runs smooth and will pull a freight consist 10 cars long (w needle point axles) with no problems. It was made before the trestle sets came out so you just can't use it on grades.
That engine is very high quality and was the top of the line in steam engines for 1946. The molded rail stanchions, nickel rimmed wheels, drive train quality and the detailed scale tender make it a solid running good looking package ( but noisy) . I just wish that someone had come out with a simple smoke unit heater attachment with a bayonet bulb base that can make the engine smoke better. I was thinking that a drop of silicone caulking used to hold a dime size piece of kerosene lamp wick on the bulb might provide a solution. Isn't it nice that Lionel engines made 68 years ago still run perfectly. I am convinced that in the year 3000 they will still be running.
Originally Posted:
It was made before the trestle sets came out so you just can't use it on grades.
Sure you can.
Dennis, don't hold me to it, but I seem to recall that Lionel marketed a conversion kit. If one really wants good smoke, maybe a Seuthe unit could be installed.
To increase traction, back in the '50s I'd take a tiny rubber band on slip it on one set of drivers, up against the flange. Didn't last long but worked great on the Lionel tubular track. I guess a thin diameter o-ring would do the same and last longer.
Rob, you may want to refine the link. It brought up a set of photos, including coffee & bagels.
Edit: Clicking on the top row of photos brings up the smoke unit. Personally, I'd go for the Seuthe, as it really smokes and uses readily available smoke fluid, rether than the old Lionel pills.
That's odd, I don't get any bagels(or coffee).
Attachments
Files (1)
Originally Posted by RJR:
... Personally, I'd go for the Seuthe, as it really smokes and uses readily available smoke fluid, rether than the old Lionel pills.
The pills are still being made, and the post-1946 pellet type smoke units work great with liquids.
As Rob posted, Lionel started offering conversion kits for the Berk (726S) and Turbines (671S) in 1947. They were still on the Lionel parts list as late as 1969. They may have also been in some of the early 1970's parts lists too.
Today collectors want those kits, and they sell for a considerable premium.
The instructions for those kits can be found in all the service manual reprints that I have seen.
I cannot find them in the Olsen's library.
I just bought some linkage for a 1952 726 RR at a train show in Raleigh a month ago, so parts are still available for a lotof these old work horses.
Thank you to CW and Michael for answering my inquiry about the brush plate .
Originally Posted by C W Burfle:
I cannot find them in the Olsen's library.
http://pictures.olsenstoy.com/...coinfo%5Clocsua6.pdf
Thanks rob.
What category do they have the smoke unit stuff under?
Rob, I recall Lionel saying many years ago not to use liquid smoke in the pellet units.
Originally Posted by C W Burfle:
Thanks rob.
What category do they have the smoke unit stuff under?
"Lionel Loco Service Info"
"Smoke Generators"
This is the info on who I got my parts from: Jerry Domenico; P.O. Box 211772; Augusta, GA 30917 Ph 706 831-5663 Website www.ogaugetrainparts.com Email ogaugetrainparts@yahoo.com
Originally Posted by RJR:
Rob, I recall Lionel saying many years ago not to use liquid smoke in the pellet units.
Never heard that, and the norm is now to ignore it anyway if they did. Pellet units actually are liquid type, the material just melts/solidifies at a higher temperature.
I think the pellets give a better smoke effect, but there is much more flexibility with liquids - scents, brands, cost. I rarely use pellets now with the wide selection of fluids I have.
Rob: thanks again! I see it now.
Originally Posted by C W Burfle:
The 1946 Berkshire and turbine motors did not have ball bearings. I believe it is because they didn't need them. These motors had spur gears at the end of the armature, and didn't have any significant thrusting force for ball bearings to address.
When they went to worm drive in 1947, the motors were subject to significant thrusting force, and ball bearings were added.
The first motors had loose ball bearings. Later the ball bearings came mounted in a ring. I am not certain when they changed(probably 1950). I think 736 motors have the bearing rings.
The 1949 622 motor also had loose ball bearings. The page listed on Olsens web site gives the number of ball bearings as nine. On all these motors, I usually put in as many as will fit without bunching.
There are ball bearings in the blocks at the end of the long gear shaft, and yes, it was a 1946 one....had the smoke lamp bulb and double gears on the chassis.
I didn't remove the armature from the housing because of the spur gear, but it rotated more freely than any other armature that I've seen.
Here is a video of my "new" 1946 Lionel 726 with the added weights.
quote:There are ball bearings in the blocks at the end of the long gear shaft, and yes, it was a 1946 one....had the smoke lamp bulb and double gears on the chassis.
My mistake, I was only thinking about the motors.
Hey All,
I am working on one of these for a friend and there is a lot of up and down play in all the axles. I am guessing around 3/32 of an inch. Is that normal? Smoke bulb is blown, but the engine works.
That is a lot of clearance. Original there was just a couple of thousandth. If you take the rods off and remove the four screws from the current collector, the wheel sets will lift out from the bottom. Watch out for the ceramic insulators around the screws. If they are all broken up, nylon replacements are available. With the wheel sets out you can clean them up and get a better feel for the condition of the bearings. With too much clearance there may be mesh issues with the worm and the rods may bind. Replacement bearings may be hard to find and you have to pull the wheels to change them. You need to decide what you can live with. The 1946 726 wheel sets and complete frames do come up on eBay from time to time, but buying on eBay is always a risk. Person you are buying may not have any idea about bearing clearance.
I suggest trying to figure out whether the play is between the axles and the bearing, or the bearing and the die cast chassis. A very experienced Lionel repairman told me that sometimes the bearings needs to be shimmed in the frame. I have had a number of 1946 Berkshires on my desk, but have not run into one that needed these shims. I do not recall how he said this was done.
