New Flyer for 2013

Look to the past O Gauge catalogs for inspiration.  Lionel never did an SD45 in O, so that's out.  If they're going to continue the NS Heritage series, then probably a GE ES44AC.  Plus, they could also have complimentary GE's to go with the already announced SD70ACe's.

A possibility for steam is an Allegheny (2-6-6-6.)  The A.C. Gilbert Co. engineers got as far as a wooden mock-up for one way back when.  It could be marketed as part of A.C. Gilbert's dream for the American Flyer line.

Rusty

Good Day,

I agree with Rusty. I’m thinking the ES44AC would be the next presentation for the 21^st Century. There is a great selection of railroads and color schemes to produce. BNSF, KCS, UP, NS, CSX, CN, CP & Iowa Interstate. Plus the Norfolk Southern Heritage ES44AC's. For leasing companies in the railroad industry, the CitiRail ES44AC’s would look great too.

For the Lionel Vision Line in S Scale, I think the spectacular GE Evolution Hybrid ES44AC would be fantastic.

Regards,

Frank

I expect them to exhaust all of the large articulated steam and modern 6 axle diesels for no other reason than the size of the electronics. Having said that they are making some good progress in making the components smaller. I think they disagree with me, but I think a J, Daylight, or Hudson would all be smash hits.

+1 on the Yellowstone!

I'd love to see a Berkshire, preferably in Lima Superpower garb.

I just received the T&P PA's today took out the power unit and powered her up, it appears that the drive train is the same as the u33 I was suprized to see that, I was able to run the unit at a crawl what an improvement from the old drive system  on the PA's. I was able to program the unit very easy, everything works as advertized Horn, bell smoke, tomorrow I will hook up the dummy PA unit. I am assuming this is the first time that this drive system was used on PA's, I have stayed from the PA's due to you have to run them to fast, As I get older I am moving more towards realistic operation I like the slow speed control on the new flyer 

Being that I work at the Henry Ford which has an Allegheny on display, if Lionel came out with one, I'd have to get it!  One of the best looking locomotives ever made.  But for my money, if Lionel made a Hudson, that would take precedence.  Even if they include that new "sparky stuff" that I don't want.  

Imagine how nice a Hudson would look pulling a consist of classic Flyer heavyweights...  Oh heck, even a Berk would look good.

Jerry

You mean PA's have a single horizontal motor in the fuel tank with universals between the motor and trucks?  That's what the U33C has.

Or does it have 2 vertical motors with flywheels mounted above the trucks?

Rusty

I will take some photos tomorrow, The truck assembly has gear train on the side of the truck same as the U33, I have not seeen this on a PA, then again my last PA was many moons ago. So this may be new to me, all I know it runs great at slow speed. 

while it is snowing out I decided to take these photos.

2nd picture

The Rio Grande PA, which has vertical motors, also has gears as shown in the picture.

Rich

thanks for the info, I did not know they changed the design, I just love the look of the PA's, and with this improvement I will keep them top of mind.

For a diesel, I'd like to see them do a GP-9. I want one in SP's Black Widow scheme and another  in Toronto, Hamilton, and Buffalo. Lots of roads used these, so Lionel could make lots of folks happy with different road names...

For steam, I'd like to see them offer an American Flyer style locomotive. Don't really care if it's a Berkshire, Hudson, Northern, or whatever... just something with a cast iron boiler and the same level of detail as their Polar Express locomotive, just in S Scale. Oh, and real piston-driven choo-choo sound is a must, not the electronic crap they put in their O scale locomotives.

Tube rail track (with several curve radii choices) would be nice too...

So why a Lionel GP9?  AM already has one.  SP Black Widow is out of stock at the moment but still listed on thier web page.  Here is thier picture:

http://www.americanmodels.com/_photos/0543-017.jpg

Greg

Guys, alot of good ideas here!  With all the talk about a hudson, what happened to the proposals from the LCCA about doing some type of Hudson? I cannot recall what became of that discussion.

Also, I think Lionel will stick with diesels large enough for all of their electronics and 2 vertical can motors in one unit.  I agree with Rusty in that thye will probably parallel their O scale line and this could include: ES44's, Dash 9's, E units or  SD60/60MAC or even SD 80/90 MAC's.

For steam, I think you sill see them reuse the 4-6-6-4 and 2-8-8-2 chasis' with different boilers to make new versions of articulated steamers.  This could be a 2-6-6-2, 2-6-6-4, 2-8-8-4 or even a 4-8-8-2 cab forward.

I guess I'll address a couple of things from my perch.  These are based solely on my opinions and observations only.

"For steam, I think you sill see them reuse the 4-6-6-4 and 2-8-8-2 chasis' with different boilers to make new versions of articulated steamers.  This could be a 2-6-6-2, 2-6-6-4, 2-8-8-4 or even a 4-8-8-2 cab forward."

Each one of these has different driver sizes and boiler configurations.  The basic design could be used, but new chassis would have to be made.  Of course, common parts like motors, gears, mounting hardware would be reused.

"For a diesel, I'd like to see them do a GP-9. "

As Greg mentioned.  AM's got a perfectly serviceable GP9, selection may be a bit thin, but it's out there. Plus, a GP9 would compete against the traditional Gilbert-based GP.

I'd rather see something like an Alco RS11 or FM H12-44, both of which Lionel also has the data for.  Bear in mind, Jon Z mentioned a couple of months back, that a "smaller" diesel would likely be a single vertical motor, because of space vs. electronics and smoke.

"For steam, I'd like to see them offer an American Flyer style locomotive. Don't really care if it's a Berkshire, Hudson, Northern, or whatever... just something with a cast iron boiler and the same level of detail as their Polar Express locomotive, just in S Scale. Oh, and real piston-driven choo-choo sound is a must, not the electronic crap they put in their O scale locomotives."

I think there might be a place for "classic" versions of steam, AM uses the piston smoke unit and simple electronic reverse unit on their Pacific's, ESE Hudson and Northern and all have a die-cast metal boiler. 

But, the overall market is changing.  Conventional users are out there, but they're becoming a smaller segment.  Fancy electronics, be it TMCC/Legacy, DCS or DCC, like it or not, are here to stay.

"Tube rail track (with several curve radii choices) would be nice too..."

With the exception of having the old K-Line tubular track, Lionel didn't have an extensive S gauge track tooling readily available like they had with O.  Granted, straight and curved tubular track is relatively easy to knock out, the expense comes with switches and crossings. 

With the release of S FasTrak, (which needs expansion badly) I don't think Lionel's going to pursue further tubular track development.

Rusty

I already have one of the American Models' GP-9s (undecorated) but I'd like a version with a higher level of detail, similar to what Lionel puts on their "scale" O scale locomotives and I presume their Flyer SD70ACE will have.

As for classic style steamers, I know the number of people who want to run them is dwindling but that doesn't mean I don't want one (or two or three).

Cheers,

Ken

Guys, I'm sorry, but the AM GP-9s are horrible unless you invest a lot of time and effort to add details and DCC/sound/lighting. Do yourself a favor and look at the Athearn Genesis GP-9s in HO. They are fantastically detailed plastic models that have Tsunami DCC/Sound right out of the box. Either Lionel or MTH could do a run of geeps and blow it out of the water. IMHO the first to bring them out will sell a boatload. I would be onboard for an S scale version of the wonderful Lionel O gauge scale geeps or an MTH version with PS3 and fixed pilots. 

As Rusty said, the market is changing.  However, it is not just electronics.  Everything is RTR now and the level of expectations in regards to detail and performance is MUCH higher. 

Myself, I was just about ready to start on a trio of AM GP9's.  They are good runners and DesPlains Hobbies makes a nice line of detail parts.  But this (AM GP9):

vs. this (Athearn Genesis GP9):

And RTR w/ sound and DCC too! Personally, I don't think I could get an AM GP 9 even close, DPH parts included. I have to say I decided to hold off and let S scale catch up to the rest of the others in terms of what you get strait out of the box. Who knows, mabey I will actually get the opportunity to buy something like this in S someday.

I'd be in for one of those back-up yellowstones:

There have been great strides in model locomotive tooling across all of the scales over the past years.

I think your being a little unfair to the American Models GP9.  We have to remember that AM's GP9 tooling is around 20 years old, whereas the Athearn Genesis GP9 is about a year or two old.

The AM GP9 is a good, solid, basic locomotive.  It's true that it's details pales by comparison to today's models, but it only takes the amount of work one want's to put into it.

As far as command control vs. conventional, that's a personal preference with advocates both pro and con across all of the scales.

The 735 (and it's companion, 715) retains most of the factory paint.  The ends were repainted because the yellow was a bit thin.  AM's painting has gotten better since over the years.  I bought my Santa Fe's around 1998.

There are added parts: grab irons, lift rings, new horns, drop steps, MU stands, almost invisible plumbing on the air tanks and an out of view ratchet brake stand.  Doing two of them was a couple of evening project.  Conventional DC.

The 2617 is a little more involved.  Take the above parts and add: winterization hatch, windshield wipers, a different style MU receptical, new footboards and safety chain above the drop step.  I don't remember how long this one took, but it was longer than doing my two Santa Fe GP9's, mainly because of the freelance paint job.  Conventional DC.

The 9052 took just this side of forever, partially because I wanted to get more accurate with the detailing and partially because it took a Evil Knievel flying leap across a lift out section that wasn't there.  I wasn't paying attention during a test run while it was under construction.  It was several years before I turned my attention back to it.  But it did survive it's 45" plummet to a concrete floor.  I'd wager many of today's models wouldn't fare so well.

Add to the basic rework performed on the above units: new handrails, grills, brake pipes to the brake cylinders, speed recorder, coupler lift bars, filling the pilot openings and "potty pipe" as seen on the IC GP's. Conventional DC.

Would I add DCC and/or sound to any of the above?  Probably not.  I'm pretty happy with the way they are.  I can switch between DCC and DC at will on my railroad, depending on what I'm running.

Even though the level of detail varies between these three units, I don't think any one is better or worse than the other, possibly because they're the results of my own handiwork.

Would I redetail a AM GP today?  If the spirit moved me, certainly.  My mind moves in mysterious ways sometimes.

Would I buy contemporary GP's with the "all the bells and whistles?"  Depends on the roadname.

Rusty

I agree with some of your points Rusty. It depends on perspective though. From my perspective, I want a RTR version with all the details and bells and whistles right in the box. If S is going to move forward and expand It will need these features to draw in modelers from other scales. The AM geeps aren't going to bring any new blood in from HO for example. Otherwise it would have happened already. 

I am sincerely happy that you enjoy what you have and how you have them detailed. For others, like me, that won't cut it though. There are a lot of "legacy" S modelers that are quite content with the status quo and I respect that.

Personally, I would like to see the scale take on more attributes of HO. I am encouraged by Lionel's progress so far, and I am anxious to see what MTH will do as well. I just wish they would focus on small and medium size models as well as the biggest of the big. Like the geeps. I have every confidence that Lionel or MTH can make a superior product to anything currently on the market. I don't understand the idea that they shouldn't do a GP-9 because AM did one 20 years ago. It was a good model 20 years ago, I will agree. It's time for a modern version that takes advantage of everything that can be done today. Of course, that is just my humble opinion though.

That is some mighty nice work,Rusty.

It seems model railroading has ( for better of worse) entered a new stage, where building and/or modifying stuff has taken a back seat to a "plug and play" mentality. I see this at the train shows I go to; it's getting harder to find a table of tools or building supplies or kits-it's like everyone just wants to open a box, set it on the tracks, and that's all you have to do.

Not making any judgements here; just my own observations. I'm sure I'll be "corrected".

Mark in Oregon 

It's a valid observation, Mark. 

I sit at a workbench for 40 hours a week, looking through a magnifier and sitting at my home workbench, looking through a magnifier no longer has the appeal it did as when I had a field job.

I still do some building, but snails and glaciers keep passing me by.

Rusty

Rusty,

Impressive work on the AM GP9’s.  I would say they’re close to the detail of today’s RTR stuff and probably not as fragile.

The thing about the AM GP9 is the price and anything you get from Lionel that compares to today’s RTR will cost mucho dinero.

Although the RTR from MTH and Lionel will persuade more to come over to S, I hope the stuff from AM won’t get swept under the rug.

I have four of the GP9’s and will be adding appropriate details as I get the time.  We’ll see who gets the RTR out there first but if they are single truck drive like it has been suggested I’ll stick with my AM models. 

Another thought I have is the market is so small that MTH and Lionel duplicating each other will make it hard to break even on the new models.  There are so many models that could be covered before duplication starts IMO.

Greg 

I totally agree with this, Greg.

Mark in Oregon

I'm looking foward to the new A/F catalog for 2013!

Hoping they will start a PWC series for us.

Thanks,

Phil   

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Lionel and MTH duplicate each other. Someone just suggested that a modern GP9 from Lionel would be a good idea and then some people respond like it's an attack on American Models.

I have several American Models products. Some of their stuff is fantastic (the Budd passenger car set for example). I really like their GP9 and it looks great with classic (AF) equipment. I want an AM Trainmaster and I have money set aside to get one as soon as they do another run in the Demo paint scheme.

However, I also want to have choices. I'd like to be able to buy a GP9 that looks good next to my RR MT-5 without having to spend many hours (or additional dollars) detailing and painting it. I also don't think that having more choices will get AM swept under the rug. If more people come to S Scale, the larger market will help them, not hurt them.

  Dreyfus NYC Hudson

  N&W J class

  NYC Niagara

  PRR T1

  Big Boy(re-tooled to scale)

  UP Turbine

   Al

Dreyfuss NYC Hudson (20th Century Limited)

Yeah, let's get this back on topic.

GP-30

RS-1

C-630M

SD-7/9

GP-7/9

SD-40 or 40-2

MP-15

EMD E class passenger diesels

Updated scale Alco PA with correct nose

Any PRR steam (I, T, S, Q, L, etc... class)

NYC Hudson

N&W J

SF 4-8-4

SP Daylight 4-8-4

B&O EM-1

C&O H-8

That's a lot, but that's just the start I would buy any of those with scale wheels, couplers, and all of the electronic goodies.