Super 381

Yes sir - should have four (4) flagpoles - brass - no flags.

Hiawatha, I'm about to rip into my State Green super 381 to replace the battery with a BCR.  I was going to ask you where the battery is, if I could get away with just opening one end of the engine, but never mind.  Figures you would have a traditional.  You're right about the traction, mine pulls all 6 State cars up a 2% grade without even noticing it.  IMHO this is a great engine. It fits on my layout, for one thing, which the Brute does not, and although it is big it's still in acceptable "scale", whatever that means in standard gauge.  And the articulation is very cool.  

With a 3 volt board a BCR is pretty much a waste of time and money. 5 or 8 years from now when the battery goes change it then. A dead battery will do no damage to a 5 or 3 volt board. It is the Proto-1 boards that had the chip scrambling.

However, If you do change to a BCR make sure you get the one made for a 3 volt board.

Hojack

Just going into one end is neither possible nor relevant, unless there is a huge difference between the conventional and PS/2 versions. It comes apart with four screws in the middle and the whole body and frame lift off the power chassis assembly. You have to work it back and forth a bit to get past the tabs at the outer ends of the motors. It's easier with two guys. You want to pad your work space carefully to keep from bending the handrails, the bell, and the pantographs. I am guessing that the electronics are in the center section, which is pretty much empty on mine. The 0 gauge Bi-polar has the battery in one of the end units. That thing is a nasty job to take apart, too. 

Personally, I wouldn't consider swapping the battery for a BCR to be worth the risk of damaging something during the teardown and reassembly, but that's a personal choice. I had no choice; I had to pull mine apart to repair the handrails. Hopefully your frame drops right onto the chassis and all four holes line up, unlike mine which I suspect may have been a little bit sprung from shipping damage. 

I've got kind of a funny view of the traditional vs. electronic divide. I don't care. I would have preferred a PS/2 version of this particular locomotive, but the conventional one came along at a good price and I grabbed it, figuring it might be a long time until another showed up at an affordable price. I once bought an MTH/Ives set with an Ives 3245 electric (also a Bi-Polar design) without knowing whether it was conventional or electronic. The price was right, no worries. It turned out to be conventional, which was fine with me. The only thing I will not do is clutter up my Standard Gauge collection with Protosound 1. I still have a couple of PS-1 engines left in 0 gauge, which sooner or later I will either upgrade or sell, but I won't touch one in Standard. 

Thanks for the disassembly directions. I'll look it over.  I've been changing out all my batteries to BCR's, and have some thick soft seat cushions on the bench.  Some are pretty easy, two screws to pop the cab off.   Others.... the Flyer 4696 piper, I never did figure out how to get it apart: eventually found I could snake out the battery holder without further disassembly.

Funny, from your various posts since I've been here, I thought you were pretty much traditional.   Shows what I know.   I'm right with you on the traditional/ contemporary/ Ps2/Ps1 lineup: I have more PS2 than anything, but quite a few real vintage, and MTH traditional, and I couldn't say which are favorite.   Either are fun, it's nice to have the variety of running modes, and both run with no difficulties in various configurations with the z4000's and DCS.   There are times for the whole computer thing and there are times to grab a transformer throttle handle.  Picked up a few PS1 a while back, but they will be for sale, it's an unnecessary complication on the layout.    Marty Fitz tried to convince me of their unique attributes, but it just strikes me as an interim technology that's not very compatible either backward or forward.

this is all standard gauge of course.   I have a little O Gauge sideshow but it's all vintage prewar Ives, Flyer, Marx and Hornby.  Authentic rattle trap, not even remotely PS nothin.

Thank you again for posting about taking the Super apart.  I would imagine the shells are the same whether proto or not.

 Here's another photo showing how I loaded the Super 381 in a box to carry it to the Toy Train Museum. I didn't want to futz with bolting it into the cage. I spaced the chassis with scraps of 2x3 and 2x4 so that it couldn't move around and especially so it wouldn't crush the couplers. The box will ride nicely in the back seat of the pickup.

Hojack:

Actually, I am very big into modern electronics, just not so much in Standard Gauge. My main collecting and operating areas are scale 0 hi-rail (not 3RS, just detailed, scale size equipment), Standard Gauge, and ETS tinplate from the Czech Republic. I got started in Standard Gauge with the Lionel Hiawatha, which has TMCC. Next thing I got, several years later, was an all-original 390E and some common 500 series cars. Since then I have mostly gotten modern, repro, restored, or repainted locomotives and rolling stock. I don't even have anything with DCS in Standard Gauge - just never run into a good deal on something I wanted. In 0 gauge I run a lot of DCS, in fact I've even converted a brass steamer - not a task for the faint of heart. 

I'm glad you can use the information on the Super 381. Good luck.

I just bought the one that was on ebay for $800 shipped. I thought it was a deal. It also was damaged when the original owner received it. He had it repaired before selling it to me. Now I'm waiting to see what damage happens when it gets here! There must be a problem with the way MTH packaged these, for so many shipping damage reports.

Bill: Let us know what you find when you open your Super 381. My shipping damage cannot be attributed to any fault of MTH; it was clearly not packed correctly by the estate liquidator or family member who shipped it to me. I am not going to go back and complain because I knew the piece was not in expert hands and fixing it didn't actually cost me any money, just time. I will say that the way MTH packs these is not intuitive for someone who has never used the metal cages before. I am familiar with them, having bought several of the MTH 0 gauge electrics that use them, so I figured it out pretty quickly even though the instruction book was not there. 

400 Bills Super 381 was listed 3 times by the sellor. He stated he shipped it back to MTH for repairs because the engine had problems going over switches. When the repairs were done the screws were to short for the shims and came undone in transit causing the cab to bounce around in the box causing damage. The problem was MTH should have used longer screws because of the shims and had nothing to do with the way it was packed.

Interesting. I test ran mine yesterday on the museum layout and it had problems going over switches due to the foot stirrups on the edge of the pilot being too low. The stirrup would hit the center rail on the diverging leg of the switch, causing a shower of sparks. The cab/frame assembly also sits too low on the chassis, causing it to rub against the pilot deck. I haven't worked on that problem yet, but it sounds like the same thing, and I imagine I will have to shim it. Looks like MTH may have an engineering error here. 

It will crash into a MTH lighted lockon. One has to do more than remove the green cover. The base needs to be ground down also.

The seller told me about the whole shim & not putting the correct screws in. He said he has it ready. I don't mind a few scratches in my tinplate. I actually think it was originally intended to be scratched as it's played with. I have a machine shop and work with metal. I'm into the whole 7.5" gauge outdoor trains. So I can fix whatever it needs. Thanks for the heads up. I still think it was worth $800 with free shipping.

Bill

Thanks for the warning. I'm currently building two Standard Gauge layouts, one at home and one at the toy train museum, so it's timely. I had been planning to use the lighted lockons at home, guess I'll have to bag that idea. Looks like I'll also have to be super vigilant about trackside obstacles on the museum layout.

I'm disappointed in MTH's engineering on this - looks like they may have taken their dimensions straight from the old Lionel prototype without doing the additional development work that Lionel would have had to do if they were actually going to produce it. The fact that it interferes with MTH's own switches and lockons does not speak well for the MTH product engineering operation. I'm confident I can fix what needs to be fixed, but it sure is annoying to have to get out a grinder, make shims, and who knows what else for a brand-new product in that price range. 

Oh well, at least it's not an outright disaster like the 72" switches.

The paint damage in the photos is very small. $850 plus shipping had been the bar for a great price.

Your right MTH may have taken everything straight from the prototype and Lionel never made it to the point of running on there equipment so these issues slipped through the cracks.

I run my Super 381 on my layout and it works fine over 72 switches and also over a Gargraves standard Gauge switch that I have in the loop.

Yes, watch your clearances all over the layout.  What I ran into was no problem with the 72 switch that the Super was running over, but the low apron on the Super frame would hit the light housing on the 72 switch for the next track over, in some cases.

It truly does not work over lighted lockons, I found that out early on.

I even have it going over a 280 bridge, but I did modify the bridge slightly, which most would probably not want to do.  Bent some tabs, so they could theoretically be bent back.  This was a repainted one anyway.  The other bridges on the loop that the Super runs on are steel bridges made for "G" scale and work beautifully.

The Brute, on the other hand, did not work on any of this.

Hiawatha, you do make an interesting observation: both these engines were reproduced from non-production prototypes.  There may indeed have been a whole testing and refining phase that was missed with these. At least, it goes a ways toward explaining what we're experiencing here.

I really enjoy my Super 381 on the outside loop of the layout, I think it looks much better with the State cars than the original 381 or even the 408.  Also, the level of trim is so much better on this than on the Brute.

It does fit through a Hellsgate bridge but barely. I would not try running it through under power. Did not know about the 280 bridge issue.

It did not like the 72 switches on my layout or a friends.

This is all good info for me. I'm taking my 10x30 layout all apart this winter. So I will address all these issues on the outside loop. I did my layout about 10 years ago and just was not thinking. I like standard gauge better than O gauge. But it was a big mistake to make the whole thing standard gauge track. I have all these O gauge 260's and so on just sitting on shelves. I'm planing on making the outside loop the home made 5 rail track with parts from USA Track. I hope I can add the O gauge to the existing standard gauge track. That is oppisite of the way shown on the Tinplate Times article, but Kirk says it will work that way too. Then my second loop is gauge 1 tree rail tinplate for my Marklin & European gauge 1 tinplate. Inside of those 2 loops, I'm hoping I can squeeze another std ga & O gauge in there some how.

This is interesting.  Perhaps there is some variation in manufacture??  It definitely will not fit through my Hellgate, it is the stanchions on the top brass rail that hit, also the door hand rails on the side:

Even Master Yoda couldn't make it fit.

Here is the evil butchering I did to my gray 280, compared to the uninjured black one on the inside loop which the Super does not run on.  I found both of these deeply pitted with rust, had to sandblast them heavily and repaint, but I still thought long and hard about bending those braces. Result works well, cruises through under power with acceptable clearance:

Here is a tinplate bridge by the 100 Year Bridge Company on the outside loop, marketed for G Scale.  Made of sheet metal, bent together with tabs, classic tinplate construction.

The Lionel 101 - 104 type bridges have the same trouble as the 280, only more so: again, it is the low apron on the Super that makes it impossible.  Also, overall width.

Jim, after reading your comments about fitting through the switches, I tried some different ones.  All the 72 switches on the outside loop that the Super runs on, there is no clearance problem.  It's close, but adequate clearance:

However, I tried it on some 72 switches on the inner loop that is not set up to run the Super, and maybe because the approaches were different, and the articulation hinged into the switch differently, I found that the lower apron would crash into the chromed throw arm if the switch was in the curve position....

but would clear when the switch was thrown straight (with the throw arm retracted into the switch housing under the lamp):

I guess this is one of those YMMV deals.  Apparently MTH made little or no effort to ensure that this loco fit with existing equipment, so you are on your own - except that we have the shared forum experiences!   My take would be that anyone intending to use the Super on their layout would want to:

1) not assume that anything will fit, you will have to test try everything with the Super you are going to use.

2) have the Super on the layout as you are building it, to check curves, clearances, accessories, etc.

3) be prepared to accept that there will be limitations on how the trackwork can be built and what accessories can be used if you want to run the Super,

4) and so the best solution may be to custom-make one loop for the Super and not try to run it on the whole layout.  That way other loops can utilize accessories too small for the Super - the best of both worlds

5) explore some of the accessories made for G scale. Some are not suitable for a tinplate environment, but others are.  Along with some steel bridges, I also used "G" tunnel portals for my mountain. (Needless to say, the Super also does not come close to fitting the vintage Lionel tunnels i have.)  These "G" bridges and portals are very well scaled to the larger Standard Gauge equipment.

sorry for such a long post.  hope this helps someone contemplating the Super on their layout.

Thanks Hojack, a lot of good information in that last post. It will help me with my projects, especially the museum which involves a tunnel. 

It looks like the biggest problem in general is the skirt or apron at the bottom. I will have to take my unit apart again as it has some problems with the lights, as well as clearance problems. I suspect some wires got knocked loose in reassembly. While I have it apart, I may just take a grinder to the bottom of the skirt at the corners where it is lowest. Knocking off 1/16" or so should take care of the problem with the switches. 

There have been at least four different repro versions of the Hellgate bridge, in addition to the original. Lionel, MTH Tinplate Traditions, MTH Rail King, and T-Reproductions. The Rail King one has different proportions and is set up for double track in 0 gauge - could that be the one that clears?

The MTH STD-72 switches are junk. They look beautiful but the engineering is terrible. After my experience with them at the museum, no way will I ever use them again. Sooner or later the Ross switches will be available. Jim (F&G) was not specific about his problem with the switches, but it's likely that the weight of the unit is distorting the frog and making the unit bounce through the switch. The frog is made of too-thin sheet metal and is unsupported at one end. I fixed this by making brass shims and super-gluing them in place. 

I think the #4 Ross switches are on the market.

The switch was thrown straight and I believe it ran into the frog.

My Hellsgate is a Tinplate Traditions and maybe it went through because I twisted the engine on the frame as I pulled it through.

MTH should have done a better job making this engine operational with there equipment. I would have preferred the engine to be a little smaller to fit through a Hellsgate bridge. The side frames different to fit through  switches and go over lockons etc.

Has anyone tested the Super through a new Ross switch?

Bob

400 Bills Super 381 was listed 3 times by the sellor. He stated he shipped it back to MTH for repairs because the engine had problems going over switches. When the repairs were done the screws were to short for the shims and came undone in transit causing the cab to bounce around in the box causing damage. The problem was MTH should have used longer screws because of the shims and had nothing to do with the way it was packed.

My Super is scheduled to be here today. Is was reading the post again. The one I bought was not the one that MTH put the shims & short screws on. That one is still for sale. Mine is the one that had a bent axle and was repaired by a MTH dealer for $800 free shipping. You can see it on ebay under completed items. Number 330745091038

It's here. Wow! It's much larger than I was expecting. I thought it would be mainly a stretched out 381. More like the Richart locos. I can only imagine how large the Brute must be. Very happy to have one for $800 shipped.

Bill

It is even bigger than the Avon 381.