Quality Control & Post-War Trains

"With post-war trains, you don't have this problem."

This is not a fact based statement and is not accurate.

Charlie

Postwar stuff had issues too. I recall an article in one of the O Guage magazines (either this one or ctt)

It told  about  a run of brand new defective postwar locos that customers were told to bring to Madison hardware to be exchanged  for another new loco.

My father,77, had a postwar set as a kid.

He talks about how many things never worked quite right, had to be tweaked or adjusted

 He said the button on his transformer never activated the whistle reliably.

Dad is so thrilled with his tmcc remote and Lionmaster big boy he doesn't miss the old 675 pacific one bit.

Gentlemen,

   This all depended on the exact era and the manufacturer, have you ever opened a Post War Williams original Train that did not work correctly.  You can take this to the bank, very few it any.  

PCRR/Dave

"Caveat Emptor" something my Dad taught me at an early age. I came back to the hobby with only my personal post-war Lionel. Now I have added a modern LionChief Plus. Hard to evaluate the quality control for either without extensive testing. My concept of testing is "running the trains!" Running to me means many hours on a layout and providing excitement and joy. What I can evaluate is the "expected" price to performance ratio;  When I buy a new toy train engine for over $1000.00 the expectation is that it will run as advertised because today's quality control standards are a heck of a lot better than they were over 50 years ago. By reason of technology alone the QC should be better. However, corporate profit expectations may temper those results. Though in my advanced years I still adhere to what the Ole Philosopher said: "He who expects nothing will not be deceived"!  Just my 2 cents . . .

The original poster's comments that only the more robust postwar trains are still around (offered tongue in cheek) is actually largely correct. Those that were defective were either exchanged, repaired or thrown out.  The survivors we see today, the higher quality stuff,  is what we still have around to have fun with, mostly.   

Dan,

You forgot one thing. They were made in the U.S.A.

In the early 90's, CTT had a great story about Tony Xifo, who worked in, and then managed the Lionel repair dept. in NYC back in the 50s'.

He mentions the diesel shells that had poor reinforcement around the screw hole and thus, they went through cases of replacement shells for unhappy customers who had cracked shells.

He also talked about furious housewives who's carpeting was scorched by faulty transformers, D-cell batteries exploding and destroying F-units, etc.

I m a prewar guy with a bunch of postwar stuff and I happy.

I m sure that there were manufacturing problems/defects for Lionel  throughout it's history of operation (Made in USA/Mexico/China etc.).

Maybe the reason for some of the failures on the new equipment is the complexity of the product with all the electronics, detail of the train and with the paint not being the correct color as the original and poor packaging.

Dan is right as with the postwar (prewar) there is no one to complain to and all you do is fix the short coming.
This also could apply to the for the newer items from the secondary market. Problem with the newer items may be hunting down with replacement parts.

Charlie posted:

"With post-war trains, you don't have this problem."

This is not a fact based statement and is not accurate.

Charlie

Conversely, can you, Charlie, produce the facts necessary to document your claim that Dan's post is "inaccurate"?

Until then, your statement is strictly an opinion, just like Dan's.

It's like the old axiom:  The more moving parts the more things to break.  New trains have a lot more parts therefore they're more likely to have issues.  They actually have a ton more moving parts if you count all the electrons in the massive amount of circuit boards.

Alan

ajzend posted:

It's like the old axiom:  The more moving parts the more things to break.  New trains have a lot more parts therefore they're more likely to have issues.  They actually have a ton more moving parts if you count all the electrons in the massive amount of circuit boards.

Alan

"Aye, sir. The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

Montgomery Scott, Chief Engineer Starship Enterprise Retired

Question:  Does anyone here think that a modern Lionel Vision Line Hudson could take anywhere near the abuse a Lionel 1950 773 endured?  The abuse of course would include some head on collisions, ramming through a pile of Lincoln Logs and derailing causing the transformer to short circuit, running over rubber army men and derailing, tumbling off the [platform and plummeting to a concrete basement floor.  There may be some here who believe a Vision Line locomotive could endure all of that.  I have two 773s and believe me they did endure all of that.

How much did a 1950 773 cost in today's dollars, and what percentage of kids who had Lionel trains could be expected to have them?

Maybe a Williams Hudson would be a better comparison in terms of physical durability?

---PCJ

ANYTHING manmade is subject to faults and/or failures regardless of the date produced.

I'm sure no one really wants to damage their locomotives by sending them flying off the tracks, off the table top and onto the concrete floor. I guess we can accept that in postwar engines that already are scratched up and dealt with youthful punishment, and aren't sacrificing anything significant. I have many LTI locomotives that are trouble free, yet I still wouldn't want any of them taking a tumble and scratching off any paint...

Tinplate Art posted:

ANYTHING manmade is subject to faults and/or failures regardless of the date produced.

Tell that to to the crew of Apollo 13.

As for the trains. The post war stuff (like so many things from that period), were well made pieces. I like the simplicity of them and the ability to take them apart and fix them with ease.

Anybody look under the hood of their car lately? Same argument could be made there.

And then there were the Scout motors . . . .

Simple and reliable are nearly synonymous. The more basic it is, the less parts it has, the easier it is to repair.  Old P/W products are electric trains. New Lionel products are electronic trains are are vulnerable to voltage spikes, transients, shock, and EMI/RFI  (interference) . Electric products can last for 100 years or more. Some hobbyists run 70 year old trains and they still perform perfectly.  Electronic products while offering far more options like sounds, command control/remote operation and better realism are difficult and expensive to repair because they are manufactured to be disposable. Eventually the electronics fails and you throw the thing out;   ex TV.s, computers, smart phones, audio equipment, DVD players, appliances and yes trains. Its just the way things are built today.

"I'm sure no one really wants to damage their locomotives"

https://youtu.be/HMxJtMoTnx8    

Tinplate Art posted:

ANYTHING manmade is subject to faults and/or failures regardless of the date produced.

And that's where Murphy comes in.....LOL

I didn't want this topic to be a war between post-war guys and modern operators.  I hope it does not go in that direction.  I'm not targeting any one individual, but can see a movement in that direction.  

Let me reiterate my thought process.  I happen across a thread titled something like Lionel Quality Control, Again.  It got me thinking of post-war trains that are approaching my age, and some are older.  I don't recall hearing about as many issues with them as I do with the new production items.  As has been pointed out by some members, the more bells and whistles, the more there is to break.  So the comparison is not entirely a fair one.

An analogy.  Automobiles of the fifties, sixties and seventies had old school technology.  They needed tune ups, oil changes, tires more often, etc, etc.  The newer cars seem to go and go forever, without nearly the maintenance required as the older cars did.  That said, how many of us can get under the hood on the new cars to do anything but check the oil and add windshield washer fluid.....LOL

Landsteiner, has it right.  The weak pw units were thinned from the heard many years ago.  So we are left with trains that will far outlive us.

I bought a lot of pw trains from original owners in the 80s and 90s.   I bought them strictly on cosmetics.  Trains that were taken care of, always worked.  A lot of the lesser than trains worked as well.  There's little to no shelf life on current postwar trains.

The electronic trains will evolve the same way until you have component EOL issues.  The problem then will be parts availability. 

The OP asked about PW trains and QC and there are already many well thought out responses.

Thought I'd add a comment that's not totally on point but related. One of the things I like about PW Lionel (been buying more and more of late) is they are relatively easy for the average hobbyist to work on. Motor maintenance, E-units, wiring, smoke units, you name it. Most of us can handle these things with some basic understanding of the loco's design. Modern trains not so much. Especially with sophisticated electronics.

And getting back to quality, I always marvel how most of the PW stuff I acquire runs fine the first time and every time. Bought a 1950s O27 steamer recently that's as old as I am and it looks and runs like it just came out of the factory.  What a delight!  

Okay guys, let’s make it simple.  Quality Control problems during the Postwar period would be hard to follow, and find out about any issues.  Bring that up to today, and what do we have?  The Internet, forums, social networks, where you can follow things about Quality Control, (we are discussing trains, so leave out anything else).  

It is a lot easier to repair pre & post war trains then the trains Lionel & MTH are making today.