What is the definition of a 6464 boxcar?

Its a traditional size boxcar made by Guggenheim owned Lionel Electric Trains. They can name it anything they so desire since they own the name.

What about the 29 Postwar 6464 cars made by the original Lionel Corporation?

hello TRAINPHREAK.....

I have 2 modern "6464" type boxcar # 6464-196 and 6464-396 and seeing your blue and black B&M boxcar, it has all the tooling marks of the "6464" boxcars ( metal door guides , full rivet detail) so it is a "6464" car.  if you need proof just take a look on E-bay and type Lionel 6464 and look closely at the Postwar boxcars bodies and compare to the one you have. It would have been nice if it says "6464-189" instead of 76189. That blue and black boxcar is a good looking car, I like it. Hope this helps.

the woman who loves the S.F.5011,2678,2003,200,amtrak 8303

Tiffany

If you are serious about ascertaining LIONEL's intentions, ask them.  With your responsibilities in the hobby, surely they would be responsive to any question(s) you have about the item.

As for my feelings about the item, I have none.  It's no more a 6464 box car than any other reissued item in the recent past is a "real" 2343, 313, etc.

I suppose it is, technically a 6464, since it shares the same frame & body as the original 6464 postwar versions. The major differences are the trucks, fast angle wheels, & improved paint & graphics.

perhaps the car below should have been included with set.

Bob, First off thank you for your research on the TCA reference page. I have checked it more than a few times. My 6464 collection is mostly of reissues with a 1/2 dozen or so originals. For me the number on the car has to start with 6464. Lionel has done many modern boxcars using the same molds and trucks but unless they have 6464 printed on them I don't look any further.

My $.02

Pete

Let's take another example.

Chevrolet has made a Corvette since 1953.  There have been 7 generations produced.

It has always been considered a sports car, the body style has always been either 2-door convertible or 2-door coupe and has either had a drivetrain that was a front-engine, rear-wheel-drive or front mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive.

The powertrain has ranged from 235 cubic inch to a 7 liter V-8.

I think that we all would agree that all variations of this would still be considered a Corvette.

What if Chevy put the Corvette name on a Silverado truck or a Suburban or even a hybrid?

Would one still consider a Chevy Corvette Volt true to form?

bob

P.S.  This reminds me of the farce, the original Casino Royale starring Peter Sellers where EVERYONE was named James Bond

I know the answer, but does anyone know what set this originally came from? (ya gotta luv Photoshop, huh?)

Bob,

Easy question, from the 30053 Hammacher Schlemmer Set.  I couldn't find the original

"Lionel Lies" gondola photo, think a different member of the OGR forum may have created it originally.  Couldn't resist having some fun with a image editing program.

regards

Edward H.

quote:

How does everyone feel about this item?

Lionel can call it anything they like. They purchased the rights.

The last 6464 boxcars were cataloged and sold in 1969.

Anything after that is a legal reproduction.

They are still nice cars, I have a few.

quote:

I think that we all would agree that all variations of this would still be considered a Corvette.

True, but those who are into Corvettes would not see a 1953 model as being the same thing as a 2014 model.

Bob:

I think your analogy isn't a bad one, but it's running in the wrong direction to apply to this case.  Please let me present a revised scenario:

• For the 2016 model year, Chevy announces they're going to recreate and market a vintage Corvette, built to the exact specifications of the 1959 model.
• The new vehicle is going to be a BTO item, so customers are asked to put down a deposit beforehand.  All of the advertising describes it as a Corvette.
• The proposed vehicle will not replace the latest generation Corvette, it will simply be marketed alongside it.
• The new model is manufactured and appears in dealer showrooms.
• The first purchasers note with horror that, even though it's virtually indistinguishable from the original, Chevy put the name "Nova" on the side of it.
• All along and into the future, however, the vehicle is still advertised as a Corvette.

What did people purchase?  A Corvette?  A Nova?  Something else?

My personal opinion is that they bought something else, i.e., a recreation of something that Chevy once manufactured, perhaps using some of the original tooling or at least some of the original design drawings, but not a Corvette.  Even if Chevy had put "Corvette" or "Corvette 2" on the side of this new thing, it's still not a Corvette.

Another opinion I have regarding your case -- which I agree is kind of annoying -- is that some train-ignorant young person in Lionel's marketing department didn't/doesn't understand that there's a difference between a "6464 boxcar" and a "boxcar".  This lack of knowledge led him or her to describe it on the package and in advertising as a "6464 boxcar" without understanding that what's included in the set is really just a 6464-style boxcar.

I think what you have on your hands is a Nova.

Robert,

We apologize you are unhappy with the set.  This may have been a change in production.  Often our cars within sets do not have numbers placed on them but have a designated number on the box.  This appears to be the case for this set as well.  Our products in the catalogues are subject to change in price, color, size, design, and availability.  This is a disclaimer listed on the catalogues cover.  Unfortunately we cannot offer a refund for this set.  You have the option to return the set to the place of purchase if they have a refund policy.

Thank You, 

Angela S

Lionel Customer Service

6000 Victory Lane | Concord, NC 28027

586-949-4100 ext 2 (o) | (330)-286-4146 (f)

quote:

 Our products in the catalogues are subject to change in price, color, size, design, and availability.  This is a disclaimer listed on the catalogues cover.

I don't know how folks can place preorders or build to orders under these conditions.
I learned my lesson years ago when they made the first knockoff of the 164 log loader. The product didn't come close to the catalog description / picture.

Which raises the question, what is "real?"  Perhaps the labeling on these reproduction items could be changed to read, for example, "Genuine Imitation 1464W Union Pacific Anniversary Passenger Set."

Pete

This is NOT that hard to figure out guys and hardly worth the debate.

For the purist, the 6464 box cars ended when the original Lionel Corp. ended in 1969.

The basic traditional box car made by Lionel (and size-wise, patterned after the 6464) has not changed in size over the years, only in construction and features. Some have plastic floors, some have sheet metal floors. Some have side detail rivets, some do not. Some have two door guides, some only one. Some have plastic trucks, some have sprung die cast trucks. A few even have a heavy die cast floor.

When Lionel said on this mentioned train set, that is was a 6464 box car, they meant it as a 6464 STYLE box car, like the way it is on the box as illustrated above. It's the body of the 6464 (with full side rivet detail), sheet metal floor, a metal brakewheel and die cast trucks.

That's good enough for me... it's not a lie. There are quite a few of the Lionel PW reissues that come with modern sprung die cast trucks and fast angle wheels, instead of the original PW style die cast truck.

Plus in the catalog illustration, the car clearly does not have a 6464 number. I wouldn't be bothered by it at all and definitely would not return the set over something so small.

Now, if the box car came with plastic trucks, plastic floor and a single door guide on the top, that is still a box car, but not a "6464 STYLE" box car... that would be another story.

Since it is not numbered as a 6464 boxcar why would Lionel even mention it. Lionel uses the word Traditional to describe their smaller size rolling stock and this boxcar fits the bill as a traditional size boxcar. Looks to me that Lionel did a little smoke and mirrors with the 6464 wording.

When did you receive this communication from LIONEL customer service?

If this communication was received BEFORE you initiated this thread, why didn't you disclose these facts in your initial post:  (1) you asked LIONEL for a full refund; and, (2) LIONEL declined your request?

Your original post disclosed that you had purchased the set, but said nothing about seeking its return to LIONEL for a full refund.  I took the disclosure of your purchase of the set as merely establishing the bona fides of the facts that the box car had no 6464 markings and the box it came in did.  In other words, the facts were based on your personal knowledge and not some report from some TCA member. 

Likewise, referencing your position with TCA reinforced the notion for me that your initial post was for the purpose of resolving an apparent quandary for you as a TCA representative about how to classify this item within TCA's historical function of categorizing LIONEL products, by seeking active LIONEL hobbyists' opinions on the matter.

The facts that you bought the set, sought to return it for a full refund, and were denied a refund casts this thread in an entirely different light for me.  If you were asking the initial question due to your disappointment with "Lyin' L" (the term you used in the initial post), there was no need to reference your TCA duties--you are just another unhappy consumer which has nothing, really, to do with TCA.

So, I repeat, when did you receive the communication from LIONEL denying you the full refund you sought?

OBSERVATION:  Given your TCA responsibilities AND as a representative with more than nominal "public" stature, don't you think it unwise, even improper, to use a pejorative phrase ("Lyin' L") when referring to LIONEL? 

FWIW, here are my thoughts on the subject...

6464 boxcars are simply a classic part of the Lionel post-war period train folklore.  Plain and simple.  The 29 or 30 of them deserve the exclusivity that many of us remember in their day.  Everything else in the past 15+ years or so have been either reproductions or an attempt by Lionel to "extend the series" with all kinds of variations by playing the nostalgia card.

Back around 2000 (give or take a few years), Lionel literally offered ten 3-packs of "6464 boxcars" packaged as Volume I through X.  Great stuff for folks who missed out on the post-war originals.  That's where modern-day Lionel should have stopped.  Instead, they've muddied up the works by offering more silly variations, including an archived series and an over-stamped series.  They also started a 6565 series that included completely new paint schemes and road names on slightly heftier body frames with die-cast sprung trucks.  The latest attempt to resurrect 6464 marketing was a short-lived foray into scale PS-1 offerings with the original 6464 roadnames/paint-schemes.  They issued two 2-packs of these about 3 years ago, and we haven't heard anything further since.

Some things are better left as part of toy train history.  And 6464 boxcars are a great example of that.  The 29 or 30 originals will always remain that way for me.  And those 30 reproductions offered as ten 3-packs can be considered -- well -- reproductions of those originals.  Beyond that, the other offerings just blur the once-very-cleanly-defined 6464 name in less-than-creative attempts to sell a few more odds-and-ends pieces of rolling stock to nostalgic post-war toy train enthusiasts.

David

Did you confirm that with Lionel?  The addition or omission of a single word typically makes all the difference in how something is defined or interpreted.

quote:

OBSERVATION:  Given your TCA responsibilities AND as a representative with more than nominal "public" stature, don't you think it unwise, even improper, to use a pejorative phrase ("Lyin' L") when referring to LIONEL? 

I didn't know TRAINPHREAK was Bob Mintz. By mentioning E*train, he gave his post context. I didn't take his post to be anything more than his personal thoughts. Clearly the post was not an official TCA statement. I don't recall the TCA ever getting involved in such matters.

I just received this item the day before Xmas so my post was before I contacted customer service.  It was my understanding that Lionel was off until Jan 5th, but I did receive the response this morning.

As a collector, it is extremely difficult to keep up with all of these items.  As a courtesy to the hobby, I have been sharing the knowledge that I have accumulated FOR FREE for the past 14 years, not only to TCA members, but to the world at large.

Sometimes I am able to buy these items as a separate sale, sometimes dealers require that I purchase the entire set because they refuse to break it up.

As I wear several hats, perhaps I should have specified that I am

a)irate customer

b)TCA e*Train editor

c)TCA National Treasurer

d)part of LITTLE (Long Island Toy Train Locomotive Engineers) who has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars including moving the Lionel Visitor's Center from Chesterfield Michigan to Long Island New York.

Because I am am an officer in a major toy train club, does not necessarily negate my being an unhappy customer.  At least I have identified myself and have not hidden behind an avatar.

bob mintz

irate customer

When you belong to an organization, just like in business or in the military, especially if it involves being in an official position, you have the freedom to have your personal thoughts, but that doesn't mean you should be expressing thoughts that can be perceived as putting the organization in a negative light or is shedding a negative light towards companies or affiliates that are closely associated with that organization. 

No it does not negate you being an irate customer.  However, being in an official position means that you have additional responsibilities that the average hobbyist doesn't have, and that includes exercising discretion when it comes to comments made towards companies like Lionel that have a vested interest in the TCA.

quote:

When you belong to an organization, just like in business or in the military, especially if it involves being in an official position, you have the freedom to have your personal thoughts, but that doesn't mean you should be expressing thoughts that can be perceived as putting the organization in a negative light or is shedding a negative light towards companies or affiliates that are closely associated with that organization.

I've dealt with that issue for my entire carrier, thanks for the lecture.

It would be a heck of a stretch for someone to think Bob's post was representative of the official position of the TCA. There are reasonable limits.

The funny thing about all this, the car was produced exactly as it was illustrated in the catalog.

Usually, the criticism comes from something being produced not as it was illustrated.

Plus, as we all know, the Lionel catalog descriptions are always 100% accurate, even when they're not.

Rusty

Bad press is bad press.

Doesn't matter if it's a stretch or not.  While I was working in the semiconductor testing industry you better believe that I would not have posting comments online about an affiliate or customer that could be interpreted as negative, even if it was just me expressing my own personal opinion and not the company I worked for.  Same for when I was in the military.

Everyone is guaranteed freedom of speech & expression.  What is not guaranteed is freedom from consequences from exercising said freedoms.

The purpose of this post was to determine if I should include this item in my continuing article or not.

Seems to me like some folks got a lump of coal for Christmas

Then it would appear to me that if you are writing about boxcars that have a physical 6464 prefix on the side, then the answer would be no.

If you are writing about cars that utilize the 6464 design parameters regardless of what number appears on the side, then the answer would be yes, with maybe a footnote that the box flap indicates it's a 6464 car.

The B&M boxcar is what it is.  An updated car based on Lionel's 6464 design.

All this stuff about Lyin' L, refunds or Corvettes is irrelevant.

Rusty

Wow! I just gained a whole bunch more respect for the 3 rail scale folks. This is re-dic-u-lous.

It might help to understand Bob's quandary if you saw his article in the TCA eTrain on 6464 cars. It is a pretty comprehensive listing of all cars produced by Lionel with the 6464 designation both original and modern. All of the cars listed start with 6464 on the car sides. Some of us collect original PW cars, some modern, and many both.

Lionel advertised the car as a 6464 but didn't number it such. Should Bob include the car on his list or not? Should he be upset because it was not delivered as advertised? 

As someone who has received a few items that were not as advertised from many manufacturers I would be disappointed. As for 3RS guys, you may have missed the thread on the Lionel CZ cars.

Pete

Bob,

I think it's your call as to whether to place this car in the 6464-style category.

As you know, all the MPC 9400 series and 9700 series boxcars and all the later 5 digit products similar to those series are also 6464-style cars in terms of dimensions, etc. In fact, some of them have decorations that are very nearly the same as some of the cars in the original 6464 postwar series. But, they lack any reference on the cars to the 6464 number. I seem to recall ads from Lionel MPC in those days that implied these to be related to the original 6464s, and thus in the same category as the recent B&M car (called a 6464 but without the number).

My take on the matter is that if you include all cars in the 6464-style in your list, then the 9400s and 9700s and their successors might also qualify and the list will be immense. The actual postwar 6464s and the re-makes with the actual 6464 numbers on the cars will be lost in the mix.

It might make more sense to limit the list to the original postwar 6464s and remakes that have the number 6464 somewhere on the car.

Possibly, you might also include those 6464-style cars that do not have the number, but which have the same road names and decoration as cars in the original series.

The 9709 is one of those cars in the latter category:

Ultimately it's up to you, and whichever way you approach it, the list will be of benefit to collectors in their hunt.

The train community is indebted to you for your research and publications. Thank you.

Jim

TCA #85-2100

Norton, very thoughtful reply IMO.

But, why start a thread for research purposes and refer to LIONEL as "Lyin' L" in the initial post?  And do so when simultaneously identifying oneself as a TCA officer?

Why include an unhappy purchase experience in a research thread?  How does that information advance the "research" objective of the thread?

This thread went off the rails, for me, when the subject was introduced about the OP seeking, and not receiving, a full refund on the OP's purchase, and the OP announcing that he is an "irate customer" and TCA officer in the same post.

I regret that the OP had a disappointing purchasing experience and wish him well with his continuing research and article.

Its a 'Tweener, just like the RGS imposter from the TCA Pittsburgh Convention or the RGS Lonestar club car. Are the Century Club 1 Boxcars 6464's since it says so on the shipping carton? Stuck between totally a 6464 and something else.

The Sellers one was not the first production. There was a previous Casino Royale that is closer to the original than the satirical one, it even predates Dr No

This whole thread needs to be removed from the public eye. It's very embarrassing to those of us who enjoy collecting toy trains, rather than obsessing over toy trains.

Agree with Arthur P. Bloom.