What if Lionel were to build S Gauge steam engines with plastic shells.

Francine posted:

Let me step into this puddle of poop, and state the future is flyerchief.  It can run on AC, DC, DCC or DCS. Solves all the compatibility problems, isn't expensive and is easy to use.  Less expensive for the manufacturer as well - might lead to a larger S gauge/scale selection, which might mean more customers purchasing, which would lead to more products offered etc, etc, etc.

And for those who say, you need a controller for each engine, Lionel has come out with a new controller to handle 3 at once.  Since this is still in the early stages, that could expand exponentially.

Making stuff for one small segment of the market isn't going to happen, not in today's economy.

Francine

 

If you are correct they will lose the customers that are actually willing to pay the higher prices for Legacy engines. They will have to decide which market is more profitable. They will also likely not bring in any new modelers to fill the funnel as younger modelers, on average, are more interested in detailed scale models (once they get past the Thomas stage and start modeling).

The model railroading hobby seems to be contracting. The scales that seem to be growing are HO, N, and Z. They all leverage DCC and standards and their customers demand scale fidelity.  Not exactly what we are talking about here.

IMHO, If Lionel takes this approach S will likely continue to shrink in proportion to the Flyer customer base. It's not my call of course. I wanted to see them build scale products to bring in new blood from O and HO. But nobody asked me

I would love to see Lionel offer a detailed plastic steam engine with a basic electronics socket (Think SHS) that would allow people to choose what they wanted ie. AC, DC, DCC, Legacy, FlyerChief and then sell the plugin electronic modules. Everybody wins! It is technically possible, but I doubt they intend to invest that kind of R&D into S at this time.

 

If Lionel just uses FlyerChief they lose me. I have my entire layout operating from the LCS on iPads. That includes turnouts, uncouplers and power blocks. I run Legacy and TMCC engines from the Cab 2 or with iCab on iPhones. I can run my original Gilbert engines from the Cab 2 since it can control the ZW-L throttle output. I now have 14 American Models engines, all converted to TMCC/Railsounds. I suppose I could run the FlyerChief in conventional mode, but that would not have full features.

There are a lot more S gauge operators using Legacy than post on these forums. Just ask the service providers what their backlog is to complete the TMCC engine conversions.

"And the 8-pin plug was brought up early on in the development of Lionel's DCC compatibility.  It was shot down by the people at the top.  Lionel simply isn't going to allow it."

This is a missed opportunity from management that appears to be some combination of ignorant and arrogant. One of the great attractions of the wonderful SHS locomotives was that it was easy to get plain, Locomatic, or DCC versions and later change formats because they included the 8-pin plug plus a DC shorting plug. Conversion was easy. Resale value was high because a new buyer could easily make a conversion or an upgrade.

If the money is in the electronics and Legacy is as great as Lionel believes--it certainly offers a lot for the money and a DCC hand-held wireless remote is more than twice the money--then why not offer Legacy modules that would use the DCC standard connector? Sell the Legacy modules to customers who have SHS locomotives that they want to easily convert to Legacy. Sell the Legacy modules to owners of American Models locomotives who want to "upgrade" to Legacy. Order enough modules from a supplier and you can afford to pack more functionality into programmable chips that allow Legacy to fit into O gauge and S gauge switchers. If they're small enough and have the DCC connector, you might even attract some HO users who would find the Legacy hand-held controller easier to use. Lionel could even upgrade chips for more Railsound options and sell new modules for replacement in Challengers and U33Cs to allow AC/DC use and new sounds. 

DCC offers standardization that is appealing. Legacy offers ease of use with the Cab-2 Remote Controller. Why not take advantage of both and start selling DCC-standardized Legacy boards? Even if buyers of Lionel Legacy locomotives want to convert to DCC, providing a standard DCC plug removes any resistance to investing except having to remove (or sell? Why not, if there's a market for these modules..) the Legacy module. That is the kind of forward thinking that made SHS so great and popular.

I think Lionel is as likely to go straight Flyer chief as they are LionChief on the O gauge side. Legacy is still the flag ship of both.  I for one will not miss another "conventional" flyer engine again. After all, every FlyerChief engine is ALSO conventional.  Just flip the switch. I don't see the sky falling with this.  

Now IF...IF Lionel is done with Legacy in S then I will eat crow and be mad about it. I am invested in Legacy S.  I think this is a break that might be needed, there was a flood of SD and ES desiels.  S can only soak up so much saturation.  We still have a completed UP heritage SD series (and who thought it was actually going to be completed?? Not me). 

And, while I am  adamant that the failure of the mechanical reefer is their own making because of the CH trucks, I'm sure it's hard at this point to pitch a bank or lender on xxx$ worth of new tooling right now when the scale rolling stock was, at least on paper, a flop.  

Is Lionel doing what we want, most the time no, (or at least not fast enough) but they are trying within their limits and comfort level.  Maybe Ryan K will bring some new life into Flyer, it's sounds like he at least  acknowledges that the SD40 is a reasonable choice for consideration.  If anything I feel Lionel has given us more inside info on what is up (mikado tooling, tooling decision process, info on the 10% number for the reefer) than what I think they have before.  And now we are being told that we are at least being monitored on here by the S gauge players at circle L.  It's not all bad.  

Ben 

TOKELLY posted:

"And the 8-pin plug was brought up early on in the development of Lionel's DCC compatibility.  It was shot down by the people at the top.  Lionel simply isn't going to allow it."

This is a missed opportunity from management that appears to be some combination of ignorant and arrogant. One of the great attractions of the wonderful SHS locomotives was that it was easy to get plain, Locomatic, or DCC versions and later change formats because they included the 8-pin plug plus a DC shorting plug. Conversion was easy. Resale value was high because a new buyer could easily make a conversion or an upgrade.

 

I suspect the culture there would prefer everyone buy Lionel products and nothing else.

Well, somebody at Lionel (I suspect Jon Z) was able to at least convince the powers that be to include DCC code into their electronics.  It was a herculean effort to get it done before the release of the SD70's because not all DCC systems are created equal. 

For example: Each system has it's little quirks, what worked on an NCE system didn't necessarily work on an MRC or Digitrax system.  And vice-versa. 

Granted, it could have all been avoided if there was an standard 8 pin plug, but that wasn't (isn't and likely won't ever be) an option. 

Ya gotta work with the hand you're dealt.

Rusty

 

I don't think you can run a FlyerChief locomotive on DCC or DCS.  It says in the catalog that Legacy engines are DCC enabled.  DCS can run Legacy engines, but only the features available in it for TMCC.  Someone would have to check with MTH to see if DCS can run FlyerChief engines.

Ok folks, we're off the tracks.  You can run Flyerchief on DCC 0r DCS, but only with a Flyerchief handset - not with a legacy or DCC or DCS handset.

I did it this weekend at York (Black Hall) and there is a youtube video of someone demonstrating it.  That is why I bought it.

 

 

Francine posted:

Ok folks, we're off the tracks.  You can run Flyerchief on DCC 0r DCS, but only with a Flyerchief handset - not with a legacy or DCC or DCS handset.

 

 

 

And that has been perhaps the BIGGEST complaint about the "Chief" system on the 3-rail side.  Folks heavily invested in TMCC or Legacy don't want to mess with a separate controller for 1 locomotive. (Or even up to 3 with the new remote...)

Rusty

The 3 rail operators have a much bigger issue and complaint than us S gauge operators. In 3 rail there is LionChief and LionChief+. FlyerChief=Lionchief+. Flyerchief can be run conventionally so a Cab 2 operating a ZW-L will run the engine. LionChief ONLY runs with its controller, so it cannot be operated conventionally. Thankfully we do not have that problem of two Lionel proprietary systems incompatible with Legacy. We only have one and it is marginally compatible.

Well, after trying to digest the info here about Lionel’s different proprietary system and how they play or don’t play or sort a play with one another or how Lionel’s top of the line compares to the outside world, the answer becomes obvious. Go to the universal 8 pin socket and let the buyer decide. I would guess they would sell more units though less of their Legacy, TMCC or FC chips. If it is true Lionel’s systems have been eclipsed by the rest of the model railroad industry, then forcing an inferior product on the customer is not, in the long term, wise.

However, from the S-scale group I read some interesting inside info this morning. From it I took that the American Flyer side of Lionel will continue to limp along, but the Hi-rail and scale side are gone.

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

If FlyerChief had been introduced first, before TMCC and Legacy I think we would think differently of its usefulness and place in the control system competitive landscape. Introducing FlyerChief (FC) after Legacy was established focuses the value of FC primarily to entry sets targeting new purchasers.

There is much more to Legacy than some electronics in an engine. Legacy is an entire ecosystem of layout control and automation products. There are the Apple store LCS and iCab products that integrate iPads and iPhones into the layout. There is the Cab2, SC-2, STM2, LCS Sensor Track, LCS WiFi, AMC, ARC, and AVC. Even the ZW-L has a Legacy receiver integrated into the throttle controllers.

Legacy and FC will continue to co exist. The only question is the pace of new product introduction to the S gauge market place.

Tom Stoltz posted:

From it I took that the American Flyer side of Lionel will continue to limp along, but the Hi-rail and scale side are gone.

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

I wouldn't say gone, just set aside:

Rusty

If you look waaaay back in the upper left corner, there's a crate with the Pacific and Mikado molds.

I NEVER expected Lionel to embrace Scale products in S.  When they did make some scale compatible products, I never expected them to do so in a big way.

Having said that, I would not be sad to see "Scale Detailed" plastic steam locomotives from Lionel.  However, I fully expect that the only way that wheels with scale flanges will appear on those locomotives will be if someone in a "cottage industry" will make them and the modelers will have to self install them. 

LittleTommy

Guys, Could you please start a thread on this topic of Lionel technologies so this thread can go back to Plastic Steam Engine shells.

Thanks so much.

Back to the plastic engine question. Make detailed engines, plastic or diecast. I will purchase them.

Tom Stoltz posted:

However, from the S-scale group I read some interesting inside info this morning. From it I took that the American Flyer side of Lionel will continue to limp along, but the Hi-rail and scale side are gone.

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

I concur.  I was helping Jon Z. Beta test the DCC implementation for the SD70s at that time. I was very excited to see where they were going next. Unfortunately they seem to have done an about face...

Sorry to stray off topic, I'll stop now. 

How about wood and embossed card?

Seriously, the detail can be captured very well in plastic and even be fairly robust.  This is a Bachmann HO locomotive that was released in the mid-1970's. (Bought it at Sears in the middle of summer!)  Only the front steps are a little clunky, but otherwise it's a pretty nicely detailed locomotive.  The only changes were adding an MV lens, coal load and weathering.

AHM/Rivarrossi really popularized plastic steam back in the 1960's.  Deep flanges and three pole motors aside, the detail on these locomotives still hold up today.  The landmark 0-8-0 introduced in 1961, although an odd choice, was pretty faithful to the prototype.

 

None of AHM's steam locomotives were really very heavy, (certainly less than an equivalent Mantua or Bowser locomotive) but they did have traction tires.  The pulled rather well, but then HO cars tend to roll more easily than your typical Flyer freight car.

Rusty

 

Rusty Traque posted:

 

AHM/Rivarrossi really popularized plastic steam back in the 1960's.  Deep flanges and three pole motors aside, the detail on these locomotives still hold up today. 

Rusty

 

Owned an HO AHM/Rivarrosi N&W Y6b when I was a lad. Very nice looking, smooth running piece. I never had to take it apart, however. 

Bob

Bob Bubeck posted:

Rusty Traque posted:

 

AHM/Rivarrossi really popularized plastic steam back in the 1960's.  Deep flanges and three pole motors aside, the detail on these locomotives still hold up today. 

Rusty

 

Owned an HO AHM/Rivarrosi N&W Y6b when I was a lad. Very nice looking, smooth running piece. I never had to take it apart, however. 

Bob

I took mine apart to build a quazi Y3 out of it:

Two screws held the boiler together, a zinc weight took up about half the bottom of the boiler and also held the gearboxes.  The motor took up the cab and the rest of the boiler was blissfully empty.

As you can see, I had no issues with hacking up plastic steam locomotives back in the 70's.  The tender was a modified Berkshire tender.  Later got the "Y3" a proper N&W brass tender and numbered it correctly for a Santa Fe Y3.

But, given the costs of locomotives today, I'd be reluctant to hack away at any of them, be they plastic or metal.

Rusty

Back during my (HO) steam-dabbling days, I PREFERRED plastic steam engines over die cast. A major part of the biggest enjoyment I received from my steam dabble days was kit-bashing steam. That was much more readily and easily accomplished on a plastic shell than a die cast shell.

So IF I was still in S scale, I would have zero issues with a well done steam engine with a plastic boiler/superstructure PROVIDED it could be had/easily adapted to scale.

Unfortunately, this thread is a good example of the many issues that exist in S scale, among them, the part where there seems to be several niches trying to get their way to be accepted as the best way.  Adaptability of product would SEEM to be the way a mfg'er ought to perceive being a good way to proceed, but apparently it is not.

 

Well, the crossover posting about this subject on Yahoo S-Scale died rather quickly.

Probably because A: Too theoretical, B: No suggestion of scale conversion, C: Perception of Lionel.

One person did make the comment of how it sounded like the plastic vs. metal debates of the 1950's.  Those that do not remember the past or some such thing...

Not a peep on Yahoo S-Trains.  They've been rambling on down memory lane for about a week and a half about non-train stores that sold trains.

So I guess this OGR forum is the only place to get any input from after all...  Sad.

Rusty

Rusty Traque posted:

Bob Bubeck posted:

Rusty Traque posted:

 

AHM/Rivarrossi really popularized plastic steam back in the 1960's.  Deep flanges and three pole motors aside, the detail on these locomotives still hold up today. 

Rusty

 

Owned an HO AHM/Rivarrosi N&W Y6b when I was a lad. Very nice looking, smooth running piece. I never had to take it apart, however. 

Bob

I took mine apart to build a quazi Y3 out of it:

Two screws held the boiler together, a zinc weight took up about half the bottom of the boiler and also held the gearboxes.  The motor took up the cab and the rest of the boiler was blissfully empty.

As you can see, I had no issues with hacking up plastic steam locomotives back in the 70's.  The tender was a modified Berkshire tender.  Later got the "Y3" a proper N&W brass tender and numbered it correctly for a Santa Fe Y3.

But, given the costs of locomotives today, I'd be reluctant to hack away at any of them, be they plastic or metal.

Rusty

I know what you mean. I have a lovely 2-8-0 I built when I was still in HO from probably 5-6 different engines. Probably would only do that job with an older TYCO model these days, or with an Airfix kit. 

Rusty Traque posted:

Well, the crossover posting about this subject on Yahoo S-Scale died rather quickly.

Probably because A: Too theoretical, B: No suggestion of scale conversion, C: Perception of Lionel.

One person did make the comment of how it sounded like the plastic vs. metal debates of the 1950's.  Those that do not remember the past or some such thing...

Not a peep on Yahoo S-Trains.  They've been rambling on down memory lane for about a week and a half about non-train stores that sold trains.

So I guess this OGR forum is the only place to get any input from after all...  Sad.

Rusty

Yes, how to interpret this?  My guess is a general lack of interest in things Lionel in the S gauge world.  So it stands to reason that the 0GF is where the interest is.  After all, the name of the forum implies how a large segment on the population got here… this is a Lionel and to a lesser degree, MTH, site.

Perhaps another way to look at this; how many of the Lionel cheerleaders are on the S sites and why not?

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

Tom Stoltz posted:

Perhaps another way to look at this; how many of the Lionel cheerleaders are on the S sites and why not?

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

Well, I did what I could on S-Scale.  Won some, lost some. 

The 57' mechanical reefer was a losing battle at first.  A lot had to do with the truck issue with the cylindrical hopper, along with Scaler's resistance to the Lionel name, but the tide was starting to change.

Around the same time, Smoky Mountain Modelworks (a part time manufacturer of resin kits) was taking reservations for two styles of 57' mechanical reefer.  Cost was projected to be about the same as Lionel's, however you had to build, paint, letter and still buy trucks and couplers.

Then...

They were cancelled in lieu of Lionel's announcement.  After Lionel canceled their reefer Smoky Mountain brought them back.  Then Smoky Mountain's real full-time industrial work intervened and most of the upcoming projects were cancelled, including their 57' mechanical reefers.

Result: No 57' mechanical reefers from anyone.

Isn't this a fun scale?  Right now there's not much to lead a cheer on.

I'm not on S-Trains or any other S forum. (Seems, sometimes I have my hands full here...)

Rusty

Rusty Traque posted:

Well, the crossover posting about this subject on Yahoo S-Scale died rather quickly.

Probably because A: Too theoretical, B: No suggestion of scale conversion, C: Perception of Lionel.

One person did make the comment of how it sounded like the plastic vs. metal debates of the 1950's.  Those that do not remember the past or some such thing...

Not a peep on Yahoo S-Trains.  They've been rambling on down memory lane for about a week and a half about non-train stores that sold trains.

So I guess this OGR forum is the only place to get any input from after all...  Sad.

Rusty

Well, the Yahoo S-Trains board was founded and continues to be the place to discuss, primarily, traditional Gilbert Flyer. You know. The trains that were made in good ol' New Haven, not in China, that have nostalgic value for those so inclined and are readily enjoyed and usually repaired without all the hubbub. And, the comments offered in this thread DO sound allot like the metal vs. plastic debates of the 1950s ... not a single post (including my own) has offered anything new not voiced multiple times before. Much of the S hobby is pretty fatalistic about Lionel. It has been well over three decades and their follow through has been, shall we say, spotty. If 'they' (either M.T.H. or Lionel) do something nice, well fine and dandy. If not, there is plenty of Gilbert (and Flyonel) around.

The fun, my friends, is in the trains, not serial posting (or is that post serials?) 

Bob

I would be all-in for a more detailed but plastic shell.  I would prefer Legacy/DCC equipped.  But if it is Flyerchief then so be it - I will remove the electronics/sell the board(s) and install a decoder.

Didn't want 3 or more control systems (Legacy, DCS, Flyerchief, DC, etc.) to be able to run Lionel, MTH, AM, SHS, and others.  The reason mostly being that I can go get a DCC decoder board no problem, but can't get DCS 3.0 or legacey boards unless someone is gutting a unit and selling it here on OGR or on the bay - so no way to standardize on one system or another except DCC.

Love my Legacy cab2 for my Y3, SD70, and just acquired Es44's.  I have run these with my O gauge Legacy system but will not use Legacey going forward for my S scale layout.  It will be used with my Xmas layout only for the forseeable future as I am starting to sell a good portion of my O scale stuff.  I would love to see more along these lines (SD70, ES44, SD40 hint hint) but if a lower price point unit gets more orders and maybe more people into S then lets do it.�� 

I did not buy one of the just released berks because it had to much molded-in detail - reminded me of the 1960's stuff I was stuck with as a kid just as General Mills was about to take over.  I don't need mega detail but give me something interesting to start with at least.

I would be interested. I really hope they dont drop the ball on it though.

Good detail + lower price point + Not built to order but a regular sku item +not too fancy electronics (no legacy) Yeah i would take a hard look at it.

Hey Lionel some feedback for you; 

1) The Docksider is approx a $100 but the Baldwin is $250 what gives ??? Both are little locos/engines where is the extra $ 150 going toward.

2) Please make the 57' reefer, why did you cancel it. Pursue that again please

3) The cylindrical hoppers; please sort out a better hi-rail/ or scale  truck situation and let us have the ability to change from one to other. But seriously $80 really!

4) Support the S gauge community more and we will support you. Also S gauge folks are not Lionel O gauge folks. Remember that.

5) One reason that I switched to S gauge and grew so tired of O gauge was the built to order madness and the pre-orders. 

Hey Lionel; 

Look at what Hornby did with their  “Design Clever” approach to less detail. Yes make a less expensive QUALITY product, that most folks can afford, and yes we would seriously consider buying it. 

 

ENP1976,

For the most part I agree with you but Legacy is a must for me.  I don't like the Flyer chief or non electronics.  To me Legacy adds fun to the layout as well.  My boys love it.  Having said that maybe the solution is to tool up the shell with detail and motor and offer two versions.  One with Legacy and one without.  I would even take the Legacy option as a built to order if it allows Lionel address two sets of buyers..... Those who want conventional and those who want Legacy.  I heavily invested in their Legacy engines and do not want to go backwards now.

--Rocco--

Lionel seems to be rich in new tooling for locomotives and poor in new tooling for rolling stock.  I'd much rather see big L figure out a game plan to introduce modern or or second generation diesel era rolling stock to go with their gorgeous GE and EMD behemoths.  Or at least a way to bring the product line forward in time to transition away from 70 year old tooling that was based on cars that were already 10 or more years in service.  I was really bummed when they canceled the 57' reefer and am discouraged that they haven't fixed the issues with the 'scale' Barber roller bearing truck in that its bolster makes the car body ride way too high.  A lower profile stamped bolster should be a simple fix but 'no-oh' after at least 3 years.  I really hate the idea of having to swap out trucks of $70 - $80 cars and lose the rolling endcaps even on the few cars for which they are appropriate.  :-(.

Actually I don't care what material they are made of, as long as the engine/tender are correctly proportioned and fairly well detailed.  If it gets more product to the market, we're all better and we can maybe get those wish list engines. 

I wonder why this has not been brought up on the American Flyer Face Book page. Makes a lot more sense than on an O gauge forum. Lionel does some pretty screwy stuff for sure. 

From my conversations with Lionel don't look for more modern freight cars in the near future. The issues are tooling cost and that the cars would be too long for the curvature of traditional Flyer track.  

If they can crank out cars using the same tooling AND the cars sell why go into the unknown and pay for new tooling.  This is a business to them and a hobby for us.

The waffle sided box cars needed tooling only for the plastic shell.  But no new tooling for the chassis or trucks. 

The reason for having me pose the question on plastic steamers here is obvious.  They can watch here for the S gauge conversations and with a quick flick they can watch O gauge conversations.

In the KC area, the last numbers were also "signs"  a 3 or 2 = Smoke & Choo Choo,  7 was "plain jane" (no S&CC, sometime note even a headlight!) 5 or 6 = S&CC and whistle,  4 was airchime whistle (only used on the 314). 1= Choo Choo only.

Of course, in all the years that have gone by, boiler shells could have been changed, so looking down the stack is the sure way to check!

OK There doesn't seem to be a way to delete one's own posting---the above, obviously, is in the wrong thread--don't know how I got it here. But I was going to add to this discussion, so: Remembering back to the 1980s when someone at Big L decided the AF plastic couplers weren't good enough and had them made of die-cast metal. This, of course, led to short circuits from the lighted cars and powered engines after the paint wore off. Plastic is sometimes better! Looking at that HO SP engine, I'd say plastic can be very realistic. Is the market still filled with folks that think plastic = junk? I don't really know. I do recall that we were told one reason the PE sets were so long in coming was the change from a plastic tender to a die-cast tender. When the expense of tooling the boilers in Die-Cast, why are the molds from the two first steamers "lost" (Maybe it was fallout from the manufacturer's sudden unavailability). I still think the Daylight or the J would lend themselves very well to plastic boilers, with all their streamlining.

Roundhouse Bill posted:

From my conversations with Lionel don't look for more modern freight cars in the near future. The issues are tooling cost and that the cars would be too long for the curvature of traditional Flyer track.  

 

Really...

American Models 70' passenger cars run fine on an R20 curve, but 50' and 60' freight cars won't?  Don't the U33C's, SD70's, ES44's, Northern's and Y3's run on R20 curves also?

Something doesn't jive here.

So, Flyer freight cars are doomed for all eternity to be built to fit on a stamped metal frame designed 60+ years ago?

I can understand the tooling costs, but if you want to make an omelet...

Sad.

Rusty

Guy's don't question my thinking on the length of cars.  I am just repeating what I was told as a part of my interview.  

This thinking must be universal with MTH and Lionel about build modern freight cars as MTH is not considering building any either.  MYH's reason was that are only looking at building engines from the mid 20th century so why build modern rolling stock.

You guys need to shout at American Models to come through for you.

Roundhouse Bill posted:

Guy's don't question my thinking on the length of cars.  I am just repeating what I was told as a part of my interview.  

 

Not questioning your thinking, Bill. 

Just Lionel's. 

It seems like they're still in denial about what went wrong with the cylindrical hoppers, which oddly enough, will still go around R20 curves.

Rusty

There may be a commercial logic to tooling badass modern locomotives.  There certainly isn't any modeling logic to have these engines to pull a stable of 60 or 70 year-old rolling stock.  More steam engines just seems to ensconce the Flyer name deep in the past.