Some ideas for Lionel AF PA's

Wow I like the Lehigh Valley... Very nice..

All good suggestions.  There's still a rainbow of paint schemes available for the PA's, whether fantasy or not. (I'm actually pretty fond of my C&O Flyer PA's.) 

BTW: The cancelled Flyer Railscope PA's way back when were to be decorated in Nickle Plate.

BTW part 2:  Nice job on the NorthWestern 4-6-2.

Rusty

richbr:

I always enjoy seeing your creative approach to S scale model railroading.  I really like the KCS units. That PA looks right at home wearing that paint!  (Very reminiscent of the KCS "Erie built" locomotives.)

Delaware and Hudson - a set would look sharp and double PA-1's would be prototypical.

Bob

Bob,

I have an A-B-A set already made by AM in a chrome finish.

Rich

Gorgeous, I'm sure, Rich.

It would be fun to have a full passenger set done with double PA's with Legacy features and the cars to match. Just so folks know, the D&H did not have any PB-1's (as I recall).

Bob

I, too, like the Lehigh VAlley, but would really find it tough to resist a Delaware and Hudson version, that would really make me perk up!

I have an idea for them... Ditch the horrible old tooling and make a new scale PA without its mouth hanging open. Just my opinion of course.

Try the AM version.

  I'm in for a D&H set. What about CNR? They at least tried a pair of Demo's from Alco, painted in green/gold.  Al

The Gilbert PA is just as iconic as the Lionel F3, so I don't think it's going anywhere, but a newly tooled scale version would be nice.

Rusty

For the D&H fans. These were produced by AM early in the PA run and are chromed.

these are not dark in tint as the chrome reflects strangely. They are bright.

Rich

It would be great if AM reran the D&H and Santa Fe PA's (maybe minus the chrome...)

Rusty

It might also be nice if AM did a run of the passenger cars for the D&H PA's with the correct blue and yellow striping. AM has an unfortunate tendency to do specific passenger engines and then orphan them (streamlined K4s anyone?). Also, having to buy an unnecessary PB as part of the package is less than appealing.

Bob

Heavyweight equipment was not unknown to the streamlined K4:

and AM does make a set of heavyweights for Pennsylvania.  I have the K4 and a set of Pennsy cars, it's hardly objectionable looking.

(Added the AM PRR set, just for grins....)

Initially, when the PA's came out, they could be had without the B unit.  I have a pair of New Haven's sold that way, complete with a foam inset where the B unit would normally be.

AM's been trying to unload the remaining PA's as AB or ABA sets.

Rusty

True, heavyweights are an option, but what were really needed were smooth-sided Fleet of Modernism cars in the manner of Raymond Loewy. An alternate deco of the correct passenger cars would have gone nicely with the PRR PA's.

Agreed, I use Lionel PRR heavies with my AM K4s as stand-ins. The AM heavy weights are just not quite the right thing, however, some being modeled after CNJ day coaches. Their  (AM's) construction is also unacceptable, IMHO, to put it politely. By comparison, the AM NYC ESE was much better executed.

And, still no Budd cars with D&H blue and yellow stripes for the PA's......

Bob

We had a set of these back in the early 1990s as well as the chromed Santa Fe's - beautiful locomotives!

The AM heavy weights are just not quite the right thing, however, some being modeled after CNJ passenger cars. Their construction is also unacceptable, IMHO, to put it politely. By comparison, the AM NYC ESE was much better executed.

 

And, still no Budd cars with D&H blue and yellow stripes for the PA's......

 

Bob

Well, if the AM CNJ based heavyweights would be wrong for the Pennsy, the Budd cars would also be wrong for the D&H anyway, being they're based on NYC ESE cars.  As I recall, the bulk of the D&H fleet were Pullman Standard cars...

(Now, before you think I don't believe in stand ins, I've got AM Budds for Santa Fe, Burlington and Texas special in scale, plus New Haven and Atlantic Coast line in HiRail...  The only thing that bugs me is the lack of dome cars for my Burlington set.)

Rusty

Originally Posted by Bob Bubeck:

The AM heavy weights are just not quite the right thing, however, some being modeled after CNJ passenger cars. Their construction is also unacceptable, IMHO, to put it politely. By comparison, the AM NYC ESE was much better executed.

 

And, still no Budd cars with D&H blue and yellow stripes for the PA's......

 

Bob

Well, if the AM CNJ based heavyweights would be wrong for the Pennsy, the Budd cars would also be wrong for the D&H anyway, being they're based on NYC ESE cars.  As I recall, the bulk of the D&H fleet were Pullman Standard cars...

 

(Now, before you think I don't believe in stand ins, I've got AM Budds for Santa Fe, Burlington and Texas special in scale, plus New Haven and Atlantic Coast line in HiRail...  The only thing that bugs me is the lack of dome cars for my Burlington set.)

 

Rusty

Well, AM used their Budd cars to put together an ESE which does give one a set for respectable hi-rail use at a minimum. For the sake of economy, the AM Budd cars done in D&H colors and chrome would have been (much) better than nothing. 

To bring this thread back to the question at hand at the top, it would be very desirable for Lionel to do a Legacy ALCo double PA matched set in D&H. Such an offering would be new in S, imperfect as it might be. LV is a great suggestion, too. Such updated sets would be fun to run (TMCC, AF Cruise, smoke, sounds) and to look at in their own right.

Bob

Well, this is one case where I think the "toy" is better looking than the "scale" version.  That is, aside from the gap in the pilot for the large AF coupler, I think the nose and windows of the AF PA are very nice... whereas the same areas on the AM model is lacking. 

I recall reading a couple years ago about one scale modeler hacking off the nose/windows of an AF PA model and grafting it onto the body of an AM version!  Now THAT'S dedication!

To me the AM PA looks like an upscaled Athearn unit. 

Greg

It's kind of a toss up, the Flyer PA's flat roof and extra "stuff" up there are kind of a turn-off for scalifcation without a lot of extra work.

The late Charles Sanderfeld (Omnicon Models) once talked about making a replacement roof for the Flyer PA to go with his PA drive, but it still would have been a lotg of work to replace it.

Rusty

I recently obtained 5 of the AM ESE Budd cars in chrome. Lacking the matching ESE steamer, I plan on using the NYC PA's from the Flyonel NYC Passenger set to pull it. I read somewhere that this lash-up is actually prototypical. I can do without the B unit but may add the Lionel made baggage car to the front because I can

PA's on the ESE are a possibility.  With few exceptions, most railroads didn't "dedicate" specific diesel locomotives to specific trains, they just drew available power from the locomotive pool.

Heck, I remember seeing E5's on Burlington commuter trains...

Rusty

quote:

It's kind of a toss up, the Flyer PA's flat roof and extra "stuff" up there are kind of a turn-off for scalifcation without a lot of extra work.

Rusty:

Reckon that's why the mystery modeler (I can't remember who it was) grafted the AF nose/windows onto the AM body and sanded the AF contours to match the AM?  Sort of a "best of both" approach?

Anyway, I recall it looked pretty darn good.

Pretty much a judgment call on how much rework one wants to do.

I've accepted both the Flyer and AM PA's for what they are and am happy with both.

Rusty

Hard for me to tell the AM's window contours given the black NH paint in the window area.  Also could be the PA pictures at the AM site do NOT present the most photogenic angle of their model.

HOWEVER...

For now 'tis a non-issue for me as I seriously doubt a PA will be seen on my urban switching layout.  Could happen "one of these years" perhaps?  But for sure not in the near or foreseeable future!

This has been an interesting and fun thread... and I still really like those KCS PA's (AND that nice looking GN PA!) that richabr shared up above.

Can anyone tell me why my AM NYC Heavyweights came in an S Helper Service outer Carton? I got them at an auction.

There are some issues with the AM PA nose, but over all the effect is there.  It looks better from a different angle:

After all, look across the model railroading world and see how well (or not) the EMD E/F unit nose is executed...

Until someone comes out with something better, if a set of AM scale Santa Fe Pa's crossed my path, I'd be all over them.

(And by the way, there's at least 5 ways a New Haven PA can be offered by Lionel...)

Rusty

Because SHS helped finance the first run of heavyweights and I believe was also responsible for much, if not all of the design work. 

S Helper Service was just that at the time, they weren't their own independent manufacturing company yet. 

If they're NYC Pullman green cars, they were also part of the exclusive SHS roadnames.

Rusty

Appreciate the suggestions, Jerry, and I performed them myself over a decade ago. But why should one have to perform several fixes on a brand new piece of rolling stock? The AM heavies have been around coming on two decades and they are still the same pieces of 'you know what'.

Yes, one can carefully bend the coupler support up, but it often returns back to the warped position because the truck assembly is thermoplastic and has a memory due to the injection molded orientation of the polymer molecules. But why have cheap plastic trucks in the first place? (Folks using Kadees bypass this issue). The wheel sets can still part company with the plastic trucks.

Removing the roofs on the coaches is a difficult, but not impossible task, but removing the roof on their observation car is a bear. But then, AM could add opacity to the roof interiors during initial assembly. 

The Lionel AF heavies are far superior in terms of construction and (hi-rail) operation, and have detailed die-cast trucks. They are nearly scale length and handsome. So, why bother with an substantially inferior product unless one is unusually devoted the AM prototypes?

With American Models, go with their Budd cars, which are very nice.

We can agree to disagree. Respectfully,

Bob

>> I recently obtained 5 of the AM ESE Budd cars  <snip> may add the Lionel made baggage car to the front <snip>

The real NYC ESE never used a Budd "pure" baggage car.  The official ESE consist included the following:  1 mail/mail storage, 1 tavern/lounge/baggage, 3 parlor, 8 coaches, 1 observation/buffet.  At least, according to Railway Age magazine, Feb. 1, 1941.   Just so you know..........Ed L.

Is there a retrofit for that or do the weakly constructed trucks make it a losing proposition?

Rich

Thanks for the consist Ed!

Correct.  The AM heavyweights were designed over 20 years ago.  That must be taken into account in any critique of the product.  (And for those keeping count, designed and initially built in the U.S.A.)

I seriously doubt AM currently has the resources available to scrap the old tooling and begin anew.

The overall body construction was based on the Rivarrossi method, which had been used successfully in HO and N since the late 1960's, long before the AM heavyweigths were made, while the trucks assembly method was based on how Pacific Rail Shops designed their freight car trucks. 

Now, could they have been done better? 

Yes. 

I'm sure that given a chance for a redo, the AM heavyweights would be an entirely different animal.  But, they are the hand we are dealt from AM.  Not a great hand, but not a bad hand either...

Personally, I would have preferred clones or near clones of Athearn HO heavyweights in construction and design, but it wasn't my money footing the bill.

Now, just for grins, a comparison.  The AM, Lionel/Flyer and Gilbert(reproduction) heavyweights:

Also the AM 85' and Lionel/Flyer heavyweights

The Lionel/Flyer heavyweights, while nice in their own right, IMO have their own issues:

1: The letter boards appear too tall,

2: The windows appear too low,

3: Some of the window locations on the coaches appear odd,

4: Not readily available,

5: Not available with scale wheels.

Other than that, they're fine.

So, it's really six of one or half a dozen of the other.

Rusty

Yes, one can retro fit a circuit board with lights and silhouette paper. Contact AM for current pricing for the necessary bits. You will have to remove the combination roof-window glazing part to do the upgrade which is a bit tricky to do (Jerry and I, each in our own way, managed to accomplish this). The addition of stiff wire axle wipers to the trucks is part of the job. Remember to increase the opacity of the roof while the car is disassembled. 

The worth of doing the retrofit is your call. If you like the cars and enjoy using them, then seriously consider doing it. They will look more appealing. If yours are troublesome, the trucks will still be a weakness.

Hope this helps.

Bob

Even though the AM heavyweights have their truck problems I've noticed they track better with some added weight. AM was selling a steel rod which fit in the underside of the chassis.

Rich