Questions about adding TMCC & cruise to a dual pullmor F3

Frank Timko at Timko repair depot will sell can motors to replace the Pullmore motors.

http://timkorepairdepot.com/Services.html

You can get a Cruise Commander from Electric railroad.

www.electricrr.com/

You can NOT put cruise control into a loco with Pullmore motors.

By the time you are done adding Timko motors and a full TMCC set up (you can get a TMCC upgrade kit that will work with open frame AC motors), it will be cheaper to simply buy an F3 with all of that installed.  The postwar celebration series from Lionel will have almost every classic postwar made, but updated with TMCC, sound, etc. and in many cases all of the higher end detailing that Lionel Corporation omitted after the 2343 F3s.  If you don't own the loco already, that is what I would do.  

Very doable with ERR EXCEPT The cruise for AC motors.  So if you do not need cruise the AC CDR with sounds would work.  Or Lionel OEM install.  I can do Install.  But if you want cruise, you do need to do the TIMKO mod.   So Ray's advice is sound.  G

I have the AC Commander in my Lionel Phantom locomotive.  I added a second motor to mine and then updated the electronics.  It runs WAY better than with the old LCRU, you might be surprised at how well it'll do by just adding the AC Commander.  You'll spend around $150-160 for the AC Commander and the RailSounds Commander, so you have to decide if it's worth it to do the upgrade.  In my case, I couldn't get a Phantom with dual motors any other way. As others have said, you'll spend a lot of money if you really want cruise by the time you add two Timko motor mods and the $200 for the Cruise Commander and RailSounds Commander.  I'd probably look for an F3 with those features already installed.

Here's my thread on the Phantom. Improving the Lionel Phantom Locomotive

I have the engines Brad is questioning. If I'm reading all this correctly AC Commander can be added without TMCC??

Actually, the AC Commander is a TMCC package.  It'll run fine in conventional, but why would you want to.

Thanks for the advice guys. I'll have to consider the A/C commander and decide if I am willing to forgo cruise.

So I have a Santa Fe F3 AB set with add on A from '96.  It has TMCC but with pullmore motors there is no cruise.  I did some quick checking based on suggestions here and found both the 2383 Post War Celebration and 2343 Conventional Classic are listed with dual pullmore motors.  I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong but to me that means that cruise is not available in any Lionel offerings of the older like stuff.

I have tried a few things to improve the low speed performance of the 2343's I have (Rectify the AC to the field of the motor, and all DC) but that is still not cruise. Low speed does get better with the DC mods.

The best way I've found to ensure consistent operation of pullmore motors it to have good track power.  On my layout I have a power drop every 4' or so.  If I can solder track pieces together, maybe every 8' or so.  With this setup, it is still not cruise with the slow speed performance but it is really good.  And for some of my older stuff that I refuse to screw with, it's the best option going, IMHO.

The attached video is my 1952 671rr.  The layout has power drops approximately every 4'.  The speed is not perfect, but relatively consistant.

Tony

It has been a while, but as I recall, both EOB and Jon Z's Electric RR company had prototype cruise control with Pullmore motors, but neither went to production. I recall Ernie, LionelXXXX (where XXXX was something like 2341, maybe L part number for a GG1??) even had a demo video of it. Or maybe the demo video was with a GG1.

Jon Z. stated that he could never get the low speed performance to a sufficient level for the AC driver for the Pulmore motor, I believe it was due to field strength, but I don't remember the details.  There was also an Odyssey AC motor that offered cruise, but the story I get was it worked fine but was considerably more expensive than a DC motor with flywheel feedback, so that's the way Lionel went.

I will say that there is a significant difference in the low speed control of AC motors between the older Lionel electronics and the ERR AC Commander.  I was really quite impressed with my Phantom upgrade when I installed the AC Commander, you may well get away without cruise and still have very livable performance from your AC motors.

On the AC Commander, I agree with John.  The older Pulmore AC motors do very well with the ERR upgrade, not to mention the TMCC/RS control aspect.  IMHO, I also believe anyone would be quite pleased with the results of installing AC Commander in older Lionel F3 units.  I have done so with a few of my "common" PW engines (ones I have multiples of) and plan on additional, when time and funding permit.  Still working on "fixing" a couple modern can motored units, along with restoration and better running of a couple prewar pieces.

Jesse     TCA

One thing I think helps with dual motors is they smooth out the power pulse compared to a single motored AC motor.  The three segment armature is pretty rough running at slow speed, having two motors that aren't synchronized probably smooths things out quite a bit.

I have two F3 units that I updated with Timko can motors and ERR cruise commander and they are great. Well worth the money if you are willing to get away from the pullmor motors.

Rod Miller

If the Lionel F3 units in question are the traditional ones that have their roots/lineage/ancestry in the post war era, a good substitute is the Williams/Bachmann F-3 copies. They already have can motors, so a Cruise Commander would fix them right up.

MTH makes good copies in the RailKing line (not rugged rails) also.

By the time you add the ERR electronics and can motors, you're up in the Legacy locomotive range I would think.

My experience is with using an AC commander into an MPC era twin motor F3 and I really have never felt the need for cruise control on the engine. I set it to the 100 speed steps and have run a passenger consist at many shows with it for hours on end with no throttle adjustments needed. I would seriously consider going with the AC commander.

That's similar to my experience with the upgraded Phantom.  The difference was night and day over the old LCRU.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

I have the AC Commander in my Lionel Phantom locomotive.  I added a second motor to mine and then updated the electronics.  It runs WAY better than with the old LCRU, you might be surprised at how well it'll do by just adding the AC Commander.  You'll spend around $150-160 for the AC Commander and the RailSounds Commander, so you have to decide if it's worth it to do the upgrade. 

This thread sparked an interest in installing AC Commanders in several of my F-3s (three, actually). Unlike the OP's F-3 without TMCC, my engines are all PWC type A-B-A sets with sound B units, and dual Pullmor motored TMCC-equipped A units. So as I understand it, installation of AC Commanders to replace the LCRUs in these engines would improve smoothness and low speed performance. These cost $69.95 each, it appears - not too bad. However, since the engines already have TMCC, is there an abbreviated route? Is it possible to just replace the LCRU with a R4LC to get improved performance? 

If these are older unit with LCRU that is a combined board, no R2lC. It is an integrated package just like the AC CDR.   If the engines are newer, (Lionel moved from LCRUs to Modular pretty quickly) you have a Mother board with RS, R2LC, and ACDR Motor driver.  Problem is there is no AC equivalent of the CCM, so you do need to gut it to install AC CDR.  At that point you need to figure out how to do sounds.  If sounds stand alone in a B unit you are good, if they were in the A unit with the LCRU you need to retain some portions (if things will fit) or move to a RS Powered MB just for the sounds.   G