Restoring a Lionel PRR Prewar Steam Switcher & All Things Related to Keeping Them Running! Spring 2024

I should have said...Property taxes! maybe it makes more sense now. 

The seller threw in 2 pieces of Lionel T-Rail track, seen in the photo below, under the track the loco is resting on. These are the first 2 pieces I've ever had. I think they are pretty nice looking. 

Anyone have any thoughts on Lionel T-Rail track? Summarizing from what I've read about T-Rail:

• It was first cataloged in 1935 by Lionel 
• The Zamac ties can be prone to Zinc Pest  
• You bolted the pieces together, like real track 
• They are heavy and not flexible 
• The rail is solid (not sure what metal the rail is made from although I saw it is supposed to be good for Magnetraction) 

If these are the only 2 pieces I have, at least they are in good shape with no signs of Zinc Pest/Rot. 

Here is an older topic about it:

https://ogrforum.com/.../lionel-t-rail-track 

Tom 

There was a story in the other mag about a guy...Nick Balasimo (sp) that had a T Rail layout, and another guy had a Prewar layout using the T Rail. It looks great, but is expensive and not a  lot out there. I'd love to have some, but it's above my pay grade.

Updating...March 22, 2019

I have some news on all things #228 related. I had picked up two prewar #228's off of eBay, one just before Christmas. We'll call that one #228 number three (since it was my third #228). The other around New Years (yes, #228 number four). The first one was not running when it arrived, but I was able to get it running after soldering on a disconnected wire. However, I noticed the wiring was pretty brittle. I guess my wiring would be a little brittle if I was almost going on 80! So, again, I got it running and the e-unit worked flawlessly, but it was running on too many volts. Luckily, Harry Henning answered my email and said, "Tom, send that bad boy in." This was my second (in a row) prewar switcher where I needed help. Harry's brother Tom worked on it and after I got it back, after being rewired and repaired, it ran like smoothly like it just left Joshua's factory. 

#228 number three...

Three of my four #228's are seen here, the repaired #228 is in the middle after coming back from Harry Henning's shop. On the left is my usual workbench #228 switcher, on the right is the new arrival, received in January 2019. 

#228 number four...

This one luckily broke up my string of needing to ship my switchers off for repairs, which I hate to do. 

This  locomotive ran well from the start, but was a bit noisy. A little Red 'N' Tacky on the gears and Labelle oil on the armature shaft and she is also another smooth runner, just like the day she left the factory. 

Tom 

Those #228s look sweet.

Thanks Jim.

Boy I wonder if they just retooled my restored 1656 from the same old molds it sure doesn't have a lot of changes.

I just put it back on my layout last week to show some friends how good it runs. I really like the look of this old gal especially with the slant back tender. Good luck with your restoration.

Gene, my Pop got me a 1656 for Christmas when they were new in about 1954? Still runs and would part with it for the world. I use to double head it with my 2026 I got in 1948. Don

Here's my #1656 on my old switching layout...

It worked for many years as my "go-to" switching engine until my love affair/addiction/affliction with the 227-series locos began. 

Tom 

gene maag posted:

Boy I wonder if they just retooled my restored 1656 from the same old molds it sure doesn't have a lot of changes.

I just put it back on my layout last week to show some friends how good it runs. I really like the look of this old gal especially with the slant back tender. Good luck with your restoration.

 

well here is a Postwar 1615 repowered with a Prewar switcher motor....fit like a glove.

It looks like they all came out of the same mold??????

I believe so, the postwar 1615 and 1656 and the prewar 1662 and 1663 all had shorter boilers.

Tom 

And shorter tenders. 

I recently picked up a frame from a prewar 227. After cleaning off a lot of old grease I discovered that this locomotive had a custom made worm and worm wheel. These were very nicely made. The worm had a single lead and the worm wheel, the gear on the axle had 20 teeth.  The stock worm is a three lead worm and the worm wheel has 21 teeth.  

The srock 227 has a gear ratio of about 14.77 to 1. This means that the motor turns 14.77 times to make the wheels turn once. With the custom made single lead worm and gear, the gear ratio was about 42.2 to 1. This switcher was a really slow running locomotive. 

In the photo below the gear on the left is the stock worm and gear and the worm and gear on the right is the custom made, single lead worm.

I have a 1615 and recently picked up a nice  8516 which is a more recent model than I usually buy but it is nice. The other day I was running them double headed which was cool. Have to look for a prewar 227 series.

David Johnston posted:

I recently picked up a frame from a prewar 227. After cleaning off a lot of old grease I discovered that this locomotive had a custom made worm and worm wheel. These were very nicely made. The worm had a single lead and the worm wheel, the gear on the axle had 20 teeth.  The stock worm is a three lead worm and the worm wheel has 21 teeth.  

The srock 227 has a gear ratio of about 14.77 to 1. This means that the motor turns 14.77 times to make the wheels turn once. With the custom made single lead worm and gear, the gear ratio was about 42.2 to 1. This switcher was a really slow running locomotive. 

In the photo below the gear on the left is the stock worm and gear and the worm and gear on the right is the custom made, single lead worm.

David, 

 That's very interesting. Somebody must have really loved these switchers to go to that trouble and have decent machinist skills to turn something out that looks very professional. So, you found it in a frame of a locomotive...are you willing to take the next step and install it in a working 227-series locomotive? 

So, those internal gears would not mean that the external gearing and idler gears would need to also be re-machined differently, correct?

I know Harry Henning was originally on this topic...I wonder if he would have any interest in casting copies of that if it works.

Tom  

Wow David, how lucky can you get!!

I've asked this before... In the '39 catalog, Lionel claims their scale switcher has a "20-to-1 gear reduction."  When discussion on the Forum revealed an observed ratio of 14.77, I wondered whether Lionel changed the gearing during early production.  I know for a fact they changed the ratio of the 700E (in that case they made it slower.)  Are you sure this is a custom job?  If Lionel originally used tower gears of 1:1, your worm and worm wheel would yield the gear ratio of 20:1 claimed in the catalog.

From the apparent pitch of the worm, I presume this unique combo of worm and worm wheel are self-locking.  Can you turn the worm shaft by turning the geared wheels?  Along with possibly being perceived as too slow, if the loco didn't coast freely, that might be another reason why Lionel switched to a taller gear ratio with a multi-threaded worm.

@Steamer @gene maag is that 1615 shell in your photo repowered with a 227-type mechanism, or a 201 / 203 type mechanism?  I always thought the 227 "semi-scale" switchers had a longer boiler.  The 201 / 203 0-6-0 is a neat engine that was never reissued after the war.  I have no doubt that the 203 6-wheel parallel plate chassis would be a drop-in upgrade for a 1615.  I've also seen some home-made upgrades using a 1666 or 2026 chassis.  Not sure how difficult this mod is, but I've seen it more than once!

That you would have to ask Dennis Holler, I got the motor from him, but I do believe you are right that the scale switchers are longer.

Dave's boiler is the shorter version used by the 1656, 1615, 201, 203, 1662 and & the 1663.

Tom 

How about a long boiler list edited in?

Adriatic posted:

How about a long boiler list edit in?

Not sure if you are asking for a list of the long boilers?

If yes:

227,228, 230, 231, 232, 233, 701 (scale) and the 1989 remake.

Tom 

Yep It's kinda nice when the info is close. 

I can't pour those numbers of the top of my head fluently like you folk  

Ted, as far as I know, Lionel never used worms on locos with less than three leads because of the lock up issue you pointed out on single and double lead worms. There was not enough of this loco for me to be able to date it.  So I have no way to know how old it was. It would be a lot easier to adjust the ratio by changing the design of the two spur gears rather than redesigning the worm gear.  

On the 700E there were actually three unique drive train designs.   Took me a while to figure this out. The first 700Es had a 1/8" thick flex coupling element. This must have proved to be inadequate as they changed to a 1/4" thick flex coupling element. To accommodate the thicker coupling element they shortened the worm gear shaft. As you pointed out the, third design was a change to the worm and worm wheel design to change the gear ratio. This third design also has the shorter worm shaft. 

MNCW posted:

David Johnston posted:

I recently picked up a frame from a prewar 227. After cleaning off a lot of old grease I discovered that this locomotive had a custom made worm and worm wheel. These were very nicely made. The worm had a single lead and the worm wheel, the gear on the axle had 20 teeth.  The stock worm is a three lead worm and the worm wheel has 21 teeth.  

The srock 227 has a gear ratio of about 14.77 to 1. This means that the motor turns 14.77 times to make the wheels turn once. With the custom made single lead worm and gear, the gear ratio was about 42.2 to 1. This switcher was a really slow running locomotive. 

In the photo below the gear on the left is the stock worm and gear and the worm and gear on the right is the custom made, single lead worm.

David, 

 That's very interesting. Somebody must have really loved these switchers to go to that trouble and have decent machinist skills to turn something out that looks very professional. So, you found it in a frame of a locomotive...are you willing to take the next step and install it in a working 227-series locomotive? 

So, those internal gears would not mean that the external gearing and idler gears would need to also be re-machined differently, correct?

I know Harry Henning was originally on this topic...I wonder if he would have any interest in casting copies of that if it works.

Tom  

Tom, to install this in a loco would require tearing the center wheel and axle assembly apart. This is actually something I try to avoid. It is a lot of work and risk to get everything put back together correctly. But I will think about. If I came up with a good frame, I might try building a frame up from the ground up.  One of the beauties of this design change is it does not impact anything else. Just the worm and worm wheel were changed. Everything else is original 227.  

July 13, 2019- I cross-posted this on Switcher Saturday...

I finally finished the prewar #227 switcher/shifter that started this topic, by installing the 2 missing marker lights on the front of the locomotive. Thank you to Harry Henning and his folks for doing the fine work they did to get the innards of this once "basket case" locomotive repaired. 

Here is the "patient," my 15 year old package of JB Kwik and the 2 marker lights (in-between the 2 on the Styrofoam) in a "Before" photo:

The 2 marker lights, bought off of eBay several years ago in a "New old stock" group sale of approximately 30 lights.

Getting ready...mixing the epoxy with wooden coffee stirrers, metal snips for snipping off the unneeded excess of the marker light posts and a metal file for evening out the base of the marker light.

You can't have enough JB Kwik or JB Weld! The outer-most package seen here is 15 years old. The tubes are a bit leaky at this point, but the 2-part epoxy still works flawlessly! 

Engineer's side, installed! 

Fireman's side, installed! 

 I'll let the two marker lights dry and then install the "jewels." If I need to, I'll take some flat black paint and paint the grey colored dry epoxy. Please excuse the dog hair on the smoke box that I didn't notice until after I took the picture! 

Tom 

Very happy to have stumbled across this thread! What  great amount of information regarding these switchers.

@PRR8976 , 1styour article for Tinplate times was great. Really enjoyed the questioning of the “scale” brethren to the 701. I enjoy model train articles from a bunch of sources- but, yours was one of the few, if not the first, that my mind was able to feel a bit of a higher level of thinking with your comparisons and and questioning of what I’ll call “scale-itity”. 

Again- to MNCW- Im taking my 203 switcher to my regular repair person today. However, after reading this thread I’m re-thinking who I’m going to have repair it...keep an eye on your inbox.

sincerely,

Steve

Hi Steve,

  Glad you liked the topic and the article. "It takes a village" to sometimes get these locomotives up and running, so luckily, several people contributed their knowledge. Feel free to email at any point. 

Tom 

Adding the Jewels-July 19, 2019

Almost done with this locomotive's complete restoration. I had red jewels handy so I was able to mount them on the marker light housing. 

I used Gorilla glue as my glue, but have also done well with Duco cement. 

Using a copy box lid, I covered the inside of the lid with a strip of paper towels. I placed 2 red jewels on the paper towels. It's easy to see them on the while paper towels. Then I put a little glue on the tip of a toothpick and rubbed the glue in the open hole where the jewel would be going. I position the marker on the paper towel so that the front of the jewel is (later edited) facing up (not like in the picture)...then I lick (yes lick) my index finger and pick up the jewel and transfer it into the hole (which has been smeared with glue) of the marker light housing. I'm sure Joshua Cowen never used this technique, but it sure works for me!   Voila! 

Tom 

Say that again?  Front down?  You mean the side that goes in the socket down, right?  Otherwise I like it, and will try it.  I guess double sided tape on your finger might work if not too sticky?

Hi Bob,

 You are 100% correct! I goofed and should have said the jewel needs to be facing up and then the licked finger sticks to that (I since edited that)! Thanks for catching it. 

Funny story--I tried to hurry up and fix that and somehow while doing it for maybe 5 minutes, an image of father's obituary (which I was looking at earlier) was accidentally posted & showing in the last post (and my computer froze up and I had to unplug my router to reset everything). Since my father and I shared the same name, my wife thought someone might have thought it was my obituary. So, I explained that while updating this topic, I would have had to die, get my obituary written and printed all within a few minutes, now that would have been very efficient, I guess! 

Tom 

The amber jewels were installed tonight.

Tom

Trying to get a 227 with bell tender up and running.  Does anyone have a wiring diagram for the 227B bell tender?

Thanks

I'll look and see what I have. My friend hand-drew one a few years ago. Not entirely sure it is 100% correct, but maybe you can use it as a starting point.

Tom 

Oh, I see, an Army man! 

My dad spent nearly 50 years in between Army and the National Guard, from before WWII to around 1980. 

Thank you for your service. 

Tom 

Here is a sketch I need to turn into a real drawing.  The unusual thing about the bell is that the manual switch interrupts the ground to the bell only. The bimetallic switch continues to operate as long there is power to the tender. This can usually be seen in the back up light getting bright then dim, even though the bell is shut off. 

David,

   Thanks for chiming in. Here is my other friend's drawing. I would go with yours first, though as your knowledge on the wiring of these locos is extensive. 

Tom 

Thanks guys.  I'll print them out.

By the way - looking trough the old Lionel repair manual and instruction sheets I came across Lionel touting a 15:1 gear ratio for the 0-6-0 switchers.

Good luck and feel free to post pictures of your work before and after your tender repairs.

Tom 

This is a sketch of the 232/233 loco and tender wiring.

David Johnston posted:

This is a sketch of the 232/233 loco and tender wiring.

Hey David,

  A+ on your efforts...Thanks very much for contributing your prewar switcher wiring knowledge to the topic. Not sure why Lionel could not have issued something useful like that "Back in the day."

Tom 

Hey Tom. Hope all is well.

Bob