Lionel's New SP Consolidation

Looks like no builders plates on any of the versions either, odd considering the TMCC versions had builders plates

I guess you trade detail for whistle steam  A few added things like the builders plates, front boiler supports( not on the TMCC version either), headlight visor etc would have really made these great. 

Kind of a shame as the sound package sounds good. It seems the brunt of Lionels effort goes to the "big ticket" items, FEF vision line bigboy etc. Its like the rest of the offerings are just filler that gets pushed out the door.

Maybe those added things would have resulted in a $1000 locomotive??????

If a NYC version is offered in the future I'll definitely be waiting until I see one in person.

Not alot of "hoopla" over these, I sense a sub $600 price on remaining stock from dealers in the future.

I'd just unpacked the engine and posted that quick review above. Hadn't had time to actually get it running. Hopefully on Tuesday.

RickO posted:

Maybe those added things would have resulted in a $1000 locomotive??????

If a NYC version is offered in the future I'll definitely be waiting until I see one in person.

Not alot of "hoopla" over these, I sense a sub $600 price on remaining stock from dealers in the future.

The previous NYC 2-8-0 came with cruise but one chuff and also had the train number boards. I upgraded mine to 4 chuffs and plan to remove the number boards. They can be had for 1/3-1/2 what the current ones are going for.

Pete

Maybe Lionel forgot the builder's plates.  Is there an indention where they belong?

I'll have to see a photo, but correct me if I'm wrong, is Lionel using the same consolidation boiler as they have on past S.P. and U.P. engines? I was thinking about buying a used S.P. 2-8-0 with TMCC  a while ago but the boiler was too long for an S.P. consolidation.   

MTNHI7, Can you take a short video of it running. Might buy one in the future, and probably posting  a pic of the missing builder's plate might help some of us help you with the problem

Thanks

Paul

If the boiler is too long for it to be a SP model then it appears that perhaps the UP version is more correct  Maybe if someone posts full sideway photos one can get a better idea as to the engines proportions  I would like to compare the Vanderbilt tender that the SP and UP models come equipped with wiyh photos of the prototype ones

Steve

The cab number indicates its an SP C-9 class. There were hundreds of them in this class. I would say without measuring it (I don't have one to measure) the body length is pretty close. But as has been pointed out the class lights and headlight are wrong for SP? 

Judge for yourself.

http://espee.railfan.net/sp_steam_c-09-1.html

http://espee.railfan.net/sp_steam_c-09-3.html

Pete

Someone post a video please. Thank you

I compared the Lionel boiler to a Sunset/ 3rd Rail S.P. C-9 and it was smaller. Not sure if it is correct for a U.P. engine but I doubt it. The S.P. and U.P. 2-8-0s and other classes, at that time, were built to "Harriman Standards" which meant they were pretty much the same size.   

https://youtu.be/PjurrPncFB0

This is the Southern Version 630. the builders plates are just under the first step. at least on this one.

sinclair posted:

Maybe Lionel forgot the builder's plates.  Is there an indention where they belong?

The UP version has builders plates and the indentations.  No idea why its missing on the others.

Joe

Not sure where the idea is coming from that there are no builder's plates. My Southern has them and from the picture above so does the UP version.

I also think getting angry over the class lights/headlight/etc is a little ridiculous. The engines match the catalog images. Plus changing the tooling to get the details correct on every road name would be impractical and too expensive. It would seem the model matches the UP engine and Lionel used it to offer us a "close" model of the other road names. I'd rather have this than nothing at all.

I think it is a fun and fantastic engine. Just typical guys getting angry over small details. Always laughable. In the meantime I'll be over here modifying the details as that's what you do in "model railroading".

TrainingDave posted:

Not sure where the idea is coming from that there are no builder's plates. My Southern has them and from the picture above so does the UP version.

I also think getting angry over the class lights/headlight/etc is a little ridiculous. The engines match the catalog images. Plus changing the tooling to get the details correct on every road name would be impractical and too expensive. It would seem the model matches the UP engine and Lionel used it to offer us a "close" model of the other road names. I'd rather have this than nothing at all.

I think it is a fun and fantastic engine. Just typical guys getting angry over small details. Always laughable. In the meantime I'll be over here modifying the details as that's what you do in "model railroading".

I don't plan on getting one because I have an older version lettered for NYC. I will be changing out the details to make it a better match for my road but it still won't be close.

That said, this is described as a Harriman Consolidation so it should at least be close UP and SP. Changing out the headlight won't be a big deal but the class lights will take a bit more surgery.

I no longer expect Lionel to make any significant cosmetic changes to engines they rerun so don't consider them anymore if they were wrong in the past. The fact that they have Legacy and/or whistle smoke doesn't affect the desirability for me. It would be more attractive if it had added on details instead of the same old cast on details comparable to a Railking engine.

Pete

Newer pictures of 2521 show no class lights at all. So I suppose it depends on the era.

Still much closer than my Southern. The boiler is too long, the bell and headlight are wrong, and so on. But I'm still happy with my model.

I have the TMCC version in SP and the electronics and sounds are horrid. But I would have to say that both are way heavier in detail than Railking engines. At this point you're just witch hunting.

I look forward to getting my SP.  I'm not a detail nitpicker, they are just toys after all for me.  I'll be running it a lot with my ten wheeler I bet.  My ten wheeler gets lots of run time right now, probably helps I have a prototype one within walking distance from me that I used to play all over as a kid.

Here is the builders plate on the 630

SRChris posted:

Here is the builders plate on the 630

An notice where the builders plate is supposed to be...

Rusty

Rusty Traque posted:

SRChris posted:

Here is the builders plate on the 630

An notice where the builders plate is supposed to be...

Rusty

Yes yes, we all know the Lionel 630 isn't prototypical. I will enjoy it just the same.

No one is trying to detract from your enjoyment of the Loco Chris.

It's just that Lionel has done the Loco previously in tmcc as well as many other steamers with the builders plates in the correct location. On the side of the smokebox.

The fact that it's a " minor" error almost makes it more rediculous.

Imo it's probably much more difficult to affix the builders plate in that lower corner between the steam chest and that step to boot.

Just because it may not be completely accurate doesn't mean Lionel shouldn't make sure whatever details,pertaining to, whatever prototype ,could at least be in the proper location. Would it be OK if the brass whistle was inside the cab???

It's not a $1400 fef but $700 can buy lots of other things. The guys buying the fef wouldnt be happy. Why should it be anything goes for the $700 Loco market folks?

BTW it doesn't sound like anyone has found the missing cab light yet either.

RickO posted:

No one is trying to detract from your enjoyment of the Loco Chris.

It's just that Lionel has done the Loco previously in tmcc as well as many other steamers with the builders plates in the correct location. On the side of the smokebox.

The fact that it's a " minor" error almost makes it more rediculous.

Imo it's probably much more difficult to affix the builders plate in that lower corner between the steam chest and that step to boot.

Just because it may not be completely accurate doesn't mean Lionel shouldn't make sure whatever details,pertaining to, whatever prototype ,could at least be in the proper location. Would it be OK if the brass whistle was inside the cab???

It's not a $1400 fef but $700 can buy lots of other things. The guys buying the fef wouldnt be happy. Why should it be anything goes for the $700 Loco market folks?

BTW it doesn't sound like anyone has found the missing cab light yet either.

 

That's funny. Then why bring up a point if its already known. It's astablished that these loco aren't prototypical. Then why keep bring up the fact that it's not prototypical? I was just posting a pic of what Lionel has produced. Right a way someone has to point out the obvious. (Rivet Counters). Yes there is no Cab light and Cab "glass"Windows or authenticity detailed cab interior. They do this all the time. I have no control over it. If there's a road name I like or style of loco I buy it and enjoy it.

a few year back I got the Mikado 4501. One of my favorite steam locos. When I got it. There wasn't any Builder plates. I was sent Round Baldwin plates. For a retangle recess. I did at first loose sleep about it. But came to the realization that it was keeping me from enjoying the loco.

After 4 hours of run time over 6 day period –

Both fan motors now buzz when running, sounds like bees.

Whistle smoke continuously leaks from the holes at whistle/safety valve (probably prototypical), but whistle smoke leak pulses with stack exhaust, which means the exhaust fan pulses are getting to the whistle steam side of the smoke unit.

Whistle smoke tube is a press fit at both ends, not tight, thus leaks smoke and smoke condensate inside boiler shell and on top of the smoke unit. I disconnected the whistle steam tube, plugged its outlet on the smoke unit, and disconnected the hot wire from the whistle steam fan. I can do without the whistle steam.

Smoke unit top screws were not tight, resulting in smoke leak inside boiler shell from the smoke unit.

Front truck pivot hole too far back causing wheel flanges to jam on the inner pilot struts on curves, making front truck derail. Same on the previous TMCC engine. I elongated the truck hole so the truck moved back a tiny bit, and used the brass, tabbed washer from the TMCC 2-8-0 to hold the truck rearward. This exact condition occurred on the TMCC SP 2-8-0, which is why Lionel used a  washer with a tab on it to keep the front truck a bit to the rear.

This new SP 2-8-0 has builder's plates.

I made headlight and tender backup light visors from thin styrene.

Lionel did put correct number boards and class lights on the TMCC 4-4-2 Atlantic made 10-12 years ago. Too bad it didn't happen on this engine.

Overall, it's a nice engine and the sounds are excellent. Legacy slow speed operation is excellent.

MTNHI7, do you have a part # for the tabbed washer you describe, and a picture of the modification you made to the front truck pivot hole?

I think I am having the same problem with the pilot, when it rides up a little on the frog of a Ross switch.