Lionel AF HUDSON NEED RESPONSE

At minimum, it would have to be as well detailed as the old Gilbert Hudson, less clunky rods, better bell and headlight castings, thinner handrails.  Standard NYC tender.

 

Myself, I would prefer scale wheels, Kadee mounting pad and straight DC (w/DCC socket.)  Black and graphite paint.

 

Rusty

I'm sensing that the engine will be utilising the original tooling as it exists now to some degree. My concerns here as I have mentioned elsewhere in another thread is that at the end of Hudson production, the tender shell was made of plastic, not die-cast as for most of time which was from '46' to I think '58'. If the Hudson is done, will a new die-cast tender shell be made?

 

If you consider making it to reflect a conventional only model then it would need to cost in at not too much more than an EX+ current 326 otherwise it may end up not being attractive to consider. I personally would rather put my money into a really nice original.

Now if it has Legacy etc then that makes it different and depending on cost is worth considering.

 

Regards,

 

Neil

i'm certain it wont be cheap. it will be new tooling and would look much better than the original. i would only produce it with a diecast tender too

OK, now it sounds interesting, new tooling, which I presume means it is potentially going to be aimed at both the hi-rail and scale groupings and the associated detail say to semi scale appearance?

 

Regards,

 

Neil

I own five various Flyer Hudson's now and an American Models streamlined version, but would definitely be interested in a Hudson with the features you noted. A centipede tender would be an added bonus.

Let's hope that if the decision is made to go ahead that they will do as nice a model with as much detail as possible to set it completely apart from the Gilbert Hudson. The older model was/is a very nice rendition of the NYC Steamer but why not create something on par with current technology for S scale fans? Seems that any really good Hudson will be a sure winner!

I wish to see cataloged and built an all new accurate scale-sized detailed NYC Hudson (J1a or J3a) with all of the features (RS, Legacy, smoke, electrocoupler, speed control, etc.) as done the new AF Challengers. All die-cast. A centipede tender version would be very attractive. Just as the prewar OO version was the 700EW's little brother in about every way, so should be a new S gauge Hudson relative to modern 0 gauge versions, within reason. I would opt for the hi-rail version, but Lionel may profit from a scale flange version, too. Prototypical schemes and configurations only. No gray ones or other fantasy schemes desired here.

 

A complementary set of prewar scheme NYC heavyweights also being made available is an obvious 'lay down'. 

 

And, let the old chestnuts (and their old tooling) be. There are plenty of nice vintage Gilbert Hudsons out there for reasonable prices.

 

Bob

As I have said before, in my opinion, the Hudson is the most pleasing steam locomotive ever produced, both in proportion and size.  Personally, I would like a "modernized" hi=rail version, that is, a more detailed version of the Gilbert issue.  There are many originals out there, but frankly, I'd prefer a "runner" to a "collector".  Not that I don't run my originals, however.  Sticky reverse units and open frame motors of the originals, although "period", aren't what you expect any more.  Modern electronics is preferable, (can motors and modern reverse units) but offered without the RailSounds and Legacy, to keep costs down.  Perhaps later on the full boat electronics can be offered. 

 

Just my dos centavos....

 

Jerry

Roasting in Wayne, MI

I wish to see cataloged and built an all new accurate scale-sized detailed NYC Hudson (J1a or J3a) with all of the features (RS, Legacy, smoke, electrocoupler, speed control, etc.) as done the new AF Challengers. All die-cast. A centipede tender version would be very attractive. Just as the prewar OO version was the 700EW's little brother in about every way, so should be a new S gauge Hudson relative to modern 0 gauge versions, within reason. I would opt for the hi-rail version, but Lionel may profit from a scale flange version, too. Prototypical schemes and configurations only. No gray ones or other fantasy schemes desired here.

 

Ditto.....I would buy

 

Rich

 

 

This, as they say, is a no-brainer...

I love the Hudson and would be interested.... I would trade a few of the Legacy bells and whistles for dependability.   No "China" drive, please.  

In fact,  my suggestion would be to use the American Models Northern as a benchmark.   Offer me a newly tooled Hudson die cast shell on top of a mechanism that well-made and I'll buy it.

Nick C.

For me the first thing is scale wheels are a must. I don't mind AF couplers if I can put kadee couplers on myself. I would like full Legacy control and sound or DC/DCC socket. I would Prefer as scale as possible, but an S version of the 700E is fine with me. I am also of the mindset that it must be a "runner". My Mikado is a horrible runner. I don't need another shelf queen. I would also really prefer a fan driven smoke unit if possible and I like black steam engines.

 

If Lionel can make something along those lines I will gladly pre-order in a set or alone.

Not the case in my experience if one uses TMCC or, better still, Legacy to control them as intended. The only real weakness of the Mikes is the Seuthe smoke unit, which goes through smoke fluid too quickly.

 

Bob

My observation is almost anything with TMCC or Legacy electronics run poorly on conventional AC, but it's not a fault of the drives.  The inherent delays in deciding whether a command signal is there affects the overall running.

 

I've noticed that even with so called "dual mode" DCC decoders, a loco dosen't run as well on straight DC as it does without a decoder.

 

Even with a basic early TMCC rig, the new Flyer runs pretty well.

 

Rusty

Guys, if you think the Mikes and Pacifics run well then you haven't seen what a modern HO engine runs like. I don't mean that to come off wrong but Those two have horrible low speed performance. Their min speed is like 15 scale mph. Check out my YouTube channel and watch the video of my MTH HO Mikado going at 1 scale mph. If you can get a Flyonel Mike to do that I'll eat my hat. And yes I ran them on TMCC, lubed them, and broke them in four hours.

 

The Hudson would need to be a good slow speed operator for me to keep it. Obviously, we won't know before we would have to pre-order which is risky to me but I'd give it a try.

Well, we're drifting away from Lou's question somewhat. 

 

It kinda sounds like the boys at the ol' Circle L Ranch are looking to make a mid-range steam locomotive.

 

Rusty

IF LIONEL will allow me to work with their head engineer as they have now started too with all his hard work its paying off. first improvement was the burlington 216 with front wheel drive, folled by a super flywheel powered texas tommy sample, the 2 new generals and the LCCA vulcan switchers. they will run great. most of the time its not the 2 engineers but the chinese assemblers.

thes lionel folks are at their mercy no matter how hard they try.

regards

louie

 

Lou, I agree with Bob and this would be my preference as well.

Well, to be a bit fair, a comparison is being made of an engine w/o speed control vs. one with speed control, which (to stay on topic) is included in the suggested list of spec's for our hypothetical L-AF Hudson. I suspect that most of us wish for excellent low speed performance which is doable (i.e., the "Roll" speed step) within the Legacy system as part of 'the total package'.

 

Bob

The biggest reason the Mikes and Pacifics don't run at 1 smph is that they're just geared too high for that. I mentioned this to Jon Z. after receipt of my U-33C and he agreed-he's trying to get a better gear ratio on the new SD70's announced for this fall to combat that issue.

Any new Hudson should also be geared lower than the above steamers. in their defense, I still enjoy running them with Legacy or TMCC-it's mostly the start-up that is hard to do well although the newer Legacy Blue Comet does well in this regard.

Like Bob, we need a better smoke unit than the Seuthe unit as they spit fluid all over the boiler and run out of fluid after about 5 minutes of running. Railsounds and Legacy are also desireable as is an electrocoupler. 

Lou,

 

I was curious as to inquire about what sort of consensus you had reached concerning this project.  I noticed in one of your posts above that new tooling would be used, but IIRC, in another post I thought you mentioned that Lionel was not willing to produce a scale detailed hudson.  Correct me if I am mistaken in that regard and I would enjoy an udate if you have any progress to report.

 

Thanks!

Well, the recently-reissued Northerns used new tooling after the classic Gilbert original.  So a reissue -- with tweaking -- of the classic Hudson would likely use "new tooling" but not be "scale detailed" as were the Flyonel Mikados & Pacifics.

Gilbert,

 

Now that you mention it, I do recall that the FLionel Northerns fit that description.  I would still enjoy getting an update from Lou if a consensus descision had been made, given all the feedback generated from the various forum posts regarding this particualr locomotive.

Well, Lionel did clean up the Northern considerably and for some reason, the Milwaukee Road version looks the best. 

 

It there is a Gilbert-based Hudson in the future, it would be nice if the mass of the clunky valve gear and handrails could be reduced a little.  It would make a good looking locomotive even better.

 

Rusty

My "vote" is to eventually produce two versions: Classic Gilbert with modest improvements for simple operation and a "Vision-Line" type with all the electronics and computerization that can be crammed in for the "scale" crowd.  Very different price points, though.

A cleaned up "classic" Hudson boiler with more added on details, prototypical drivers, improved valvegear. It was a good looking engine then and will be even better with more details and a  paint job using current technology. I would vote for a new, longer centipede tender to be different as there are still many, many AF Hudsons around and available. I would also vote for a railsounds, smoke and Legacy version. There is no comparison between Legacy and conventional operation.

 

Rich

Paint it black!

 

John

Something along the lines of the Lionmaster Hudson, perhaps?

 

 

 

Rusty

In terms of detailing?  I don't have one, but I understand this Hudson to be a latter-day 646 rather than 773.  Which is to say, not "scale."

I brought it up in terms of detailing, not to suggest an undersized Flyer offering.  Yes, it's not scale sized, but it is a better detailed and proportioned locomotive than the 646/2046 and is overall better detailed than the Flyer Hudson.

 

But, it's a moot point now for the next six of months or so according to Lou.

 

Rusty