New Challengers...What do you think?

I have noticed that the smoke deflectors on my Greyhound version do not work
All kidding aside, I hope everyone gets theirs working like they are supposed to. I have had my lemons in the past and it can be dissapointing. Al

I pulled my BB out this morning to have a look at the motor I put in on the smoke unit.

As Sgaugian said, the motor I used does have diagonal screw holes and it does fit as does the original motor. I guess at the time I didn't take much notice of it being at a 45 degree angle to the original.

While I was looking at it this morning I also noted that the black wire is on the motor brush that has a grey spot next to it, this is for info when you do one.

I also remember that after I assembled the motor casting assembly to the top board, I then screwed the top board to front casting with the wick in so that there was a small gap of about 1-2mm and then pushed the rubber gasket that sits between the two castings so it was touching the top board. As you now screw the top board down it then pushes the gasket down and you get it in the correct position.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Neil

Sgaugian,

I checked my emails and I asked Mike Regan if he could advise me of a replacement motor for the smoke unit. He sent me a link to a page which had the smaller motor. This was back in June, longer than I thought. The original motor was discontinued by Mabuchi for some reason which is why they went to the replacement I now have. He said it is the same spec, just smaller.



Regards,

Neil

quote:

Originally posted by albertstrains:
I have noticed that the smoke deflectors on my Greyhound version do not work
All kidding aside, I hope everyone gets theirs working like they are supposed to. I have had my lemons in the past and it can be dissapointing. Al

I've put about an hour's total runtime on mine, though admittedly on just an oval on the carpet,(SHS track, 25" radius curves) no problems to report.

Did lube the axles and rods before running.

Update: I'm running straight TMCC using an old Trainmaster TMCC base, an MTH DCS TIU and DCS controller, so I can't comment on the Legacy issues.

Added about another 90 minutes run time under these conditions with no troubles found. I did note, my Challenger seems to have slower starts with the Odyssey switch OFF.

Rusty

I received my two challengers and one unit I cannot down load it's ID with the orange module. when I insert the module it displays insert the module. cannot get pass this screen. The other unit worked fine.Both unit seem to run ok.
any thoughts?

The new AF Challenger – a Tale of Woe:

There is no denying that as a model the new AF Challengers look and sound great, however, there is a serious electronic issue in them.

My sample was the very first to land on the door step of Lionel Ohio because of several problems. But importantly, several samples with which I have some experience, including my own, run too fast beyond the lowest speed step with Odyssey “on”. Using Cab-2 “Roll” the speed is correct, but “Restricted” and above are much more rapid than they should be. The speed is usually correct at the very lowest step using Cab-1, as well, but velocity is much too high at steps above the lowest setting. With Odyssey "on", the selected speed steps ("Roll", "Restricted", etc.) in Legacy Cab-2 are supposed to match between any two Legacy engines. They most certainly do within my fleet of O gauge Legacy diesel and steam locomotives. This scheme was intentionally settled upon several years ago to: (1) get around MTH’s patent claim on using and specifying SMPH for toy train control, and (2) so that one can use Train Builder within Legacy to assemble well operating lash ups (among other reasons). In short, the AF Big Boy and the new Challenger should pace together precisely for each train speed setting under Legacy control, all other settings being identical. In any case, the upper speeds under TMCC or Legacy with Odyssey "on" for the Challenger are far too fast.

If one runs the Challenger conventionally (or with Odyssey turned off) can usually obtain a reasonably pleasing operational experience, because in doing so one bypasses much or all of the encoding errors, but not up to the level that one should be obtaining under full TMCC/Legacy control. To add insult to injury, the break squeal sound was not encoded into the RS chip and the two figures promised on the box are not included in the cab (It would seem that nobody here noticed the lack of the brake squeal sound).

During a very helpful, friendly, and lengthy phone discussion with a Lionel tech of three years standing on Friday afternoon, November 18, it was revealed that the code the for the Challenger, which has several new boards first used in the Challenger, was incorrectly written and, consequently, encoded. He offered: (1) to send back my engine with the other lesser problems repaired, or (2) a refund. Because the control defect can not be repaired at this time due to the lack of correctly encoded boards, I elected for the refund. When Lionel resolves the issues, I’d very much like to try an improved example.

Again, if one intends to run the Challenger conventionally, the problems will go virtually unnoticed. If one intends to use TMCC or Legacy to their fullest intended extent, the new Challengers at this time have an uncorrectable problem.

Bob Bubeck

Note added in postscript:

It turns out that the well-intentioned bench technician at Lionel Ohio was initially as nonplussed as I was about the speed control. Although the Challenger had been originally cataloged as having Odyssey II speed control (see 2011 Signature Edition catalog), the specification for the engine was later changed to 'AF speed control' in the 2011 Vol. 2. catalog. The alternative AF speed (back emf) control behaves differently than Odyssey II and requires higher momentum settings (and greater use of the train brake on the left side of Cab-2) in order to obtain a useable range of speed control. One does not obtain as finely graduated span of train speeds with Cab-2 with the AF Challenger (and AF U33C) as one achieves with the typical Legacy O gauge engine or the AF Big Boy with Odyssey II. So, the encoding is nominally correct, as finally executed, but the two speed control systems are quite different in their responses with Odyssey II being clearly the better of the two.

At times like this, the conventional crowd seems to be the wisest of model railroaders...

Bob, seems you've done your homework. I trust this information's being passed on to Lionel? If this happened on the O-Gauge side, it would be pitchfork and torch time.

With the issues you've brought up, the lack of crew figures and oil bunker on the UP greyhounds, it's beginning to look more and more like the Challengers were being rushed out the door to compensate for the long delays.

Even Bob Keller at CTT mentioned he had to send back his Challenger sample because of mechanical issues. That's sad when a sample sent for review doesn't cut the muster.

I don't have a Legacy controller, so my Challenger seems fine under straight TMCC, but I can understand the disappointment Legacy users have.

Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself with the U33C.

Rusty

quote:

Bob, seems you've done your homework. I trust this information's being passed on to Lionel? If this happened on the O-Gauge side, it would be pitchfork and torch time.

With the issues you've brought up, the lack of crew figures and oil bunker on the UP greyhounds, it's beginning to look more and more like the Challengers were being rushed out the door to compensate for the long delays.

Even Bob Keller at CTT mentioned he had to send back his Challenger sample because of mechanical issues. That's sad when a sample sent for review doesn't cut the muster.

I don't have a Legacy controller, so my Challenger seems fine under straight TMCC, but I can understand the disappointment Legacy users have.

Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself with the U33C.

Rusty

I passed along my findings and those of Lionel Ohio to Lionel Marketing and Product Development on November 18, partly out of concern for the U33C. My note was read and kindly acknowledged on November 21. By the way, straight TMCC Cab-1 users are not out of the woods either. If one owns a properly functioning AF Big Boy (or Legacy O gauge locomotives) and is aware of how they should properly function, the symptoms of the control problem with the Challenger are immediately obvious. A good friend's Challenger sample also evidenced elevated rates of speed using Cab-1 with Odyssey "on". This was observed on two different layouts with perfectly fine TMCC/Legacy setups and two properly functioning Legacy BB's.

Both Ohio and I agree on the symptoms. They were able to observe the same problems I noticed. The explanation for them is from the good folks in Ohio.

Bob Bubeck

Wow that is amazing that these types of mistakes can make it past quality control. Lionel does receive an operating sample they must opprove before the production run right?

I have not received my two challengers from Just Trains yet. If Lionel doesn't come up with a fix for these issues, I may be in line asking for a refund.

I am also done preordering engines. I'm not going to commit spending almost one grand on an engine sight unseen when it can arrive with these kinds of problems.

Ordered one and cancelled all in one day! The Big Boy has never looked so good.

This topic has produce very interesting responses. I appreciate all of the information presented. I have over 6 hours of run time on the Challenger. I only have TMCC so I cannot comment on all of the chip encoding problems. However all problems aside the Challenger's operation has been completely satisfactory to me. While the speed control is not quite as smooth as the Big Boy, it is completely acceptable. I did not notice the lack of brake squeal because I seldom use the brake on the TMCC controler. I already corrected the lack of crew as I installed Arttista figures in the cab.

It would be interesting to see if Lionel will replace the defective boards free of charge when new corrrectly coded ones become available.

If the "ears" are not lifting the smoke, take heart. The ones on the real locos didn't work that well either, from what I have understood. At least you don't have Hanna coal cinders to sweep up.

Bob Bubeck,
Thank you for your in-depth research. As sad/bad as the news might be. Unfortunately I have another Gray UP Challenger on its way to me after the first one was a total mess and went back to the dealer from whom I advance ordered it so they could get a refund. That one I didn't have any money down on. This one I've paid for, but now it sounds as though I wish I had not. Very bad work by Lionel. I love the way my BB operates -- on Legacy at any speed including all Standard Speeds, even 1-Step. Thanks again for sharing with us your findings. Let us know which path you decide to take with it and if you get restitution and satisfaction somehow.

Carl,
How are you operating yours? Legacy or TMCC? It seemed to work pretty well.

Hate to read about these problems even if I won't own or operate either the BB or the Challenger. S gauge/scale doesn't need any more snafu's at this time. There's a market ripe for the picking if they do it right.

Lionel really needs to get these problems corrected (for free) and gain/regain the confidence of the S market. It's true, we're starving for new locos in S, but problematic locos will only kill the market and then Lionel goes away.

Butch

Operational issues aside that folks are experiencing, I asked Lionel the following musical question about the lack of engineer and fireman figures:

Question:
Re: American Flyer Challenger, UP Grey, 6-48084

I (and others) have noted that the features for this locomotive listed on the product box indicate that Engineer and Fireman figures were to be included. They are not.

Is there any plan to make the Engineer and Fireman figures available for this locomotive?

While mildly disappointed the oil tender didn't make the cut and the dark gray stripe didn't extend to the cab per the prototype, I am generally pleased with this locomotive and look forward to future offerings.

Thank you.

Here was their response:

Hello, they decided to not make the figures for the American Flyer Challenger. Sorry for the inconvenience we can refund the train if you don't want it without the figures.

Thank you
Talk To Us

Now, I can put in a pair of Arttista figures no problem, I just wanted to see how they handled a softball question and if maybe the figures would be available later.

I detect a whiff of customer support fatigue in their response.

Rusty

I blew out the settings that the Challenger orange module programmed and programmed manually. Now features seem to all be A-OK. My Speed steps now work as they should.

Carl

quote:

Originally posted by up148:
Hate to read about these problems even if I won't own or operate either the BB or the Challenger. S gauge/scale doesn't need any more snafu's at this time. There's a market ripe for the picking if they do it right.

Lionel really needs to get these problems corrected (for free) and gain/regain the confidence of the S market. It's true, we're starving for new locos in S, but problematic locos will only kill the market and then Lionel goes away.

Butch

Too true...on all counts.

Mark in Oregon

I have some good Legacy run time on both of mine and I have not noticed a problem with them while running. I am not sure if I would have noticed the speed step issue because I have never had a legacy loco. The Big Boy I had was full of problems and I got rid of it.

The only issue I have had with the challenger is that the smoke deflectors on both engines have come loose and wobble. It could be an easy fix but it looks as if some of the screws holding them in place are cross threaded.

Ben

Carl,
Does that mean that you first loaded the orange module, then cleared it, and manually entered in its profile elements and information? Thanks. I'm either going to try a second one that's on it way here or send it back unopened without first giving it a try. Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by Sgaugian:
Carl,
Does that mean that you first loaded the orange module, then cleared it, and manually entered in its profile elements and information? Thanks. I'm either going to try a second one that's on it way here or send it back unopened without first giving it a try. Thanks.

Yeah, I'd also like more details on this.

These issues are a bit disturbing to those of us without a full-time operating layout. I've only taken my Big Boy out of the box to look at, but never to run. This is true of most of the Flyonel stuff I've purchased in the past few years. My pre-ordered Challenger is at my supplier, but I won't pick it up until next week. I'm somewhat concerned that I've laid out a fairly substantial amount of money for an item that may arrive in a "compromised" condition.

Until just a few years ago I was purchasing every locomotive that Lionel produced. After a test run I had to exchange a few of them due to operating issues. In recent years I've not been testing everything I purchased. Perhaps I better start checking everything I get as soon as it arrives.

Any tips that will help correct potential operating issues with the new Challengers are appreciated.

Craig

Sgaugian,

Yes that is what I did. I cleared all information. Each loco uses a different module since they are personalized for each roadname and number etc., so some may be programmed OK?
Mine was the UP with the Smoke Deflectors.
I programmed it Steam, Legacy, Legacy Railsounds.

According to Jon Z., He says:
The Correct Mem Module setting is Legacy Pullmor Steam. The reason is the Pullmor setting is non-legacy speed control. Basically the Motor driver in the Challenger is Back-EMF, and as such, does not fit the Legacy Steam setting. In the Leg Stm setting, the lashup in the train builder will impose restrictions. When set as Leg Pullmor Stm; the restrictions are removed.

The Smoke controls are not correct on the Cab-2 v1.3 code for the "Pullmor" settings. We will fix this in the cab-2 code in the future. Shortly the new code will be downloadable; so tweaks of this nature are easy to fix.


This due to the fact that this is the first Legacy loco to use the "Back EMF Cruise" technology.


I can not find a "Pulmore Steam" setting on my Cab-2. I assume the upgrade to the Cab-2 will fix that too. Some Challenger orange modules do load "Pulmore Steam" but mine did not?

I set to Steam and it works for me for now?

Carl

Carl,
Thanks. Sounds as though the Legacy Pulmor Steam designation helps lash-up performance, but at the cost of proper smoke control - correct? Since I don't plan to run lash ups of the Challenger with anything else I would go with your settings as well until corrections are available.

The comments from Jon Zahornachy via Carl is encouraging. It would appear that the folks at Lionel are starting to get to the bottom of the issues. Good!

To repeat one of my points, however, both a friend's Challenger and mine had speed issues when Odyssey was engaged when using Cab-1 TMCC entirely isolated from Legacy -- not just with Legacy. Obviously, the orange Legacy module does not enter into such a situation, nor is the module related to the missing brake squeal. All other TMCC engines in both of our possessions and respective environments (one with a Legacy command base and one without) functioned perfectly. The symptoms were not typical of antenna or ground faults. It may turn out that some of the symptoms/issues may not be universal to all units. We'll see.

My refund check arrived promptly from Lionel on Monday (Thank you!). In the meantime, I (and my friend) intend to sit tight until the issues are clearly resolved. Hopefully, this shall occur very soon.

Bob Bubeck

Carl,
Pulmor Steam and other options are available on the Cab2 if you click "more" at the right of the intial selection menu. There are actually a few deeper levels beyond that initial one with Railcar, Accessory, etc to choose from.

Bob,
Maybe those who did not get theirs this time will be glad they didn't. A friend of mine did not receive his Challenger yet because it was not in this part of the partial shipment.

Well, maybe I'm too stupid, but I ran my Challenger over Thanksgiving weekend for a total of a couple of hours with no real problem. (TMCC w/MTH TIU and DCS controller, loop of SHS track.)

About the only thing I noticed that with the Oddessy switch on, it kind of lept to a start. With the switch off, starting was much smoother. So I leave the switch off.

I'm not worried about brake squeal, in fact I find it annoying. I don't do smoke, most of the Legacy features I think I can live without and have no use for tower comm/crew talk.

Now, the one thing I don't understand is: Is the coding problem in the orange tiddlywink, in the processor in the locomotive, or both?

Maybe when Lionel gets the code issues worked out, I'll take it in and get upgraded, but until then I'm happy with mine.

Rusty

Sgaugian,

I do not have that in my list of types.

I see DSL,STM,DSW,SSW,ELC,SUB,ACC,PAS,BDU,ACLA,CRN,TBRK

What are the version numbers on your base and remote?
V1.3x?

Carl

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty Traque:

..About the only thing I noticed that with the Oddessy switch on, it kind of lept to a start. With the switch off, starting was much smoother. So I leave the switch off.

Rusty

Well, sorry, but that is one of the symptoms. Starts should be very smooth with Odyssey 'on'. The AF Legacy Big Boy and any recent Lionel Legacy O gauge engine manage this seemlessly with Cab-1, and even more so Legacy.

Bob Bubeck

After reading all these negative post about this new "S" Gauge steam engine, it tells me that Lionel just cannot make a good reliable "S" Gauge train. Lionel, maybe it’s time for you to get out of the "S" Gauge business. I think you should sell all your "S" Gauge tooling to another company. These poor folks in "S" Gauge deserves a lot better product than what you are giving them.

I'm still curious:

Is it just the orange Legacy module that needs upgrading, the boards in the locomotive or both?

If one doesn't have a Legacy control unit, is this something the LHS service station can deal with or does the locomotive have to back to Lionel?

Rusty

quote:

Originally posted by jim sutter:
After reading all these negative post about this new "S" Gauge steam engine, it tells me that Lionel just cannot make a good reliable "S" Gauge train. Lionel, maybe it’s time for you to get out of the "S" Gauge business. I think you should sell all your "S" Gauge tooling to another company. These poor folks in "S" Gauge deserves a lot better product than what you are giving them.

Sorry, Jim. Your comment seems a bit premature.

Before we call on Lionel to give up, the previous Pacific's and Mikado's are superb locomotives. And, I would add that when I turned the sound off on the Challenger, the mechanism was smooth and quiet. The only sound I heard was the sound of the wheels rolling (SHS and AM cars) and clicking on the rail joints.

Now, if the U33C has similar issues, it may be time for concern.

I've brought up a couple of cosmetic issues in past posts, but none of them are serious enough in my opinion to send it back for a refund.

And, quite frankly, I believe that some folks here were a little to quick to send their Challengers back for a refund. Although that is a personal observation about a personal decision. If nothing else, a substantial return of locomotives should encourage Lionel to do better next time.

I don't have Legacy and I'm told some of the quirks I've noticed under TMCC are part of the code issue. Maybe so. For my purposes, the Challenger runs fine. That's not to say that I wouldn't like the code issue straighted out in my locomotive.

It also seems that by information presented here is that Lionel IS on the case. Hopefully, when an upgrade is offered, the info will be shared here.

In my opinion overall, the new American Flyer that Lionel has been turning out has been superior to anything based on old Flyer tooling. (This from a person highly critical of Lionel rehashing the same old stuff all these years with different paint.)

Generally speaking, in detail, decoration and operation, the newly tooled stuff compares favorably to AM and SHS products, even if Lionel only offers them with deep flanges.

Rusty

I have to concur with what Rusty has stated. I only have TMCC and may never get Legacy for the extra options right now don't justify the cost. However I now have almost 8 hours of run time on the Challenger and I am completely satisfied with the performance. I have even operated the locomotive in convential mode. Rusty is correct when he stated that this is a fine smooth running locomotive with the rail sound chugging turned off.

This locomotive is far beyond any of my AC Gilbert locomotives and Frankly it's better than the other manufactures in my opinion. I understand it has issues but those issues are not game stoppers for me. I have the Mikaido and Pacific locomotives by Lionel and they are great performers. Yes one of my Challengers is still in the shop but that issue will be corrected. At one time or another I have probably done repair work an everyone of my original A.C, Gilbert locomotives, but I do not write them off. Think about all of the tender taps we do to loosen a sticky mechanical reverse unit. As we all become more familliar with new technology these thing will work themselves out.

quote:

And, quite frankly, I believe that some folks here were a little to (sp) quick to send their Challengers back for a refund. Rusty

Well,.. when a tech of 3 years standing at the bench at Lionel Ohio tells you over the phone as part of a 25 minute conversation that either: (a) they can send the engine back with its control problems not repaired because of uncorrectable encoding errors in the boards, or (b) send an offered refund, that's hardly "a little too quick". Lionel, by the way, reproduced the same issues I noted to them in my RA letter. You might reread my lengthy post again. One can spend a lot less than $850 to obtain an engine with the operating finese of a 'Casey Jones'.

Rather, it is a pretty face that has some of you in denial.

Bob Bubeck

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Bubeck:

quote:

And, quite frankly, I believe that some folks here were a little to (sp) quick to send their Challengers back for a refund. Rusty

Well,.. when a tech of 3 years standing at the bench at Lionel Ohio tells you over the phone as part of a 25 minute conversation that either: (a) they can send the engine back with its control problems not repaired because of uncorrectable encoding errors in the boards, or (b) send an offered refund, that's hardly "a little too quick". Lionel, by the way, reproduced the same issues I noted to them in my RA letter. You might reread my lengthy post again. One can spend a lot less than $850 to obtain an engine with the operating finese of a 'Casey Jones'.

Rather, it is a pretty face that has some of you in denial.

Bob Bubeck

I'm not in denial, never been to Egypt. How can I get upset about not being able to use features I can't access anyway because of the control system I use? That's like getting upset because my cable-ready TV doesn't get cable reception because I don't have cable.

As I've stated, the locomotive runs fine in my opinion. I don't see a "Casey Jones" operating finese with my locomotive. My locomotive goes forward or backwards smoothly when I ask it to go, the whistle and bell sound off when I want them to. I can control the chuff volume remotely. I can reprogram the address if I desire. That's pretty much all I expect out of a command control sound-equipped locomotive. Everything else is just frosting.

Smoke I don't give two shakes about, the first thing I do is turn the smoke units off on my locomotives anyway.

Maybe it's because of my superior MTH DCS TIU and Controller is compensating for the Legacy flaws... However, I would like to get the coding issue corrected when the opportunity arises, if for no reason other than "ghosts in the machine."

It seems like Carl's got the problem solved by doing some voodoo with the Legacy module, which even if I knew what he was talking about, I don't have a Legacy system to duplicate his efforts and therefore unable to correct anything with my locomotive.

So, I ask again... Is this a module issue, the locomotive boards or both? Carl's posts seem to indicate it is, at least partially, in the module.

AND... is Lionel working to correct the problem, or is their business plan simply to sell, then refund? (Which sorta seems counter-productive.)

I can see all the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the O Gauge side if something like this happens with the Milwaukee Road Northern....

Rusty

Well, I'm saddened and disappointed for you guys that were really hoping Lionel was going to get it right and deliver a fine product. The Challenger is a good looker, if you're into huge steam.

Hopefully it will get sorted.

Andre

Guys I owe you all an apology.

I DISCOVERED I NEVER LOADED THE FINAL VERSION OF V1.3 IN MY LEGACY SYSTEM
I WAS USING A BETA VERSION AND THAT IS WHY MY CHALLENGER'S MODULE LOADED AS A DIESEL.

SO AS FAR AS I KNOW ALL CHALLENGER MODULES ARE PROGRAMMED CORRECTLY.

SO THE ONLY SOFTWARE ISSUE I AM AWARE OF IS THAT THE CHALLENGER MODULE WILL LOAD AS A "PULMORE STEAM" AND THE SMOKE BUTTONS WILL NOT DO A LOW MED AND HIGH.
IF YOU PROGRAM THE LOCO TYPE BACK TO STEAM THE SMOKE WILL BE CORRECT BUT LASHUPS MAY NOT WORK CORRECTLY FOR NOW.

BUT THIS WILL BE CORRECTED IN THE NEXT RELEASE OF THE LEGACY BASE AND CAB-2 FIRMWARE UPGRADE DUE OUT SOON.

AGAIN VERY SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION I MAY HAVE CAUSED.

MY BAD,

CARL

My second gray Challenger arrived. The dealer was very gracious and said I could test it and return it if didn't work. I would have loved to test it, but the trailing truck stud, spring, and spacer were broken off. It is on its way back for a refund. That's it for me and trying the Challenger for now. Oh sure, maybe I could have asked Lionel to send me the part when and if they get them, eventually been able to finesse the stud's stub out of the from its base, and tried it. Or sent it back to Lionel with an RA, waited until they have parts to fix it, got it back and then tried it. But people come on. That was my second try and you'd never expect an $800 TV, for example, to be something that doesn't work or that you'd have to jump through hoops of fire to see if it does. I simply don't think this engine was tested enough before getting shipped out. I bought a seven car set of UP streamlined passenger cars to go with it the minute I got the chance to place an early order (October 2010), so maybe when it sounds as though the kinks are worked out I'll look for another Gray UP Challenger and give it go once more. I hope in the meantime your Challenger or Challengers work great and serve you well.

My Challenger only runs backward. Back to the dealer it goes

Wow... this is turning out to be a disaster.



Andre

Wow, it seems that are more problem locomotives than working ones out there. If I've insulted anyone, mea culpa...

I also want to see if I have things straight now about the coding issue. As I now understand it, the Legacy Module is OK and there is a software bug in the locomotive's electronics. I assume that means the boards in the locomotive will have to be replaced by Lionel, as the board CPU is not reprogrammable.

I would also guess this is becoming a cautionary tale about...
1: Opening up the box at the dealer and looking over the locomotive.
2: Test running it at the dealer. (Both of which I did, BTW. If there would have been any obvious problems, I would have had my dealer send it back then and there.)
3: Finding out in advance if the coding problems are fixed.

Now, I realize those that bought the Challenger via internet or mail order will have to deal with things differently, which can only add to the frustration they're feeling. Does Lionel pick up the freight on an RA?

This is certainly turning out to be a black eye for Lionel.

Rusty