What is the shortest locomotive or diesel engines that Lionel made for o27 gauge?

@Mannyrock posted:

Thanks for the warning about K-line motors.   They are now off my list.

I gotta tell you guys, that this O gauge stuff is really foreign to me.   All of these precautions for blowing fuses, and engine motors burning out.

I had a huge HO layout, which I built from age 12 to 17. I ran all of the trains at high speeds, with long trains.  Mostly two at a time.

In that entire 5 years, I never once blew a fuse or burned out a motor.  My transformer had a screw in type fuse in the side, and honestly, I didn't even know what it was for.

So, why is O gauge so electronically delicate.  Is it because they run on AC?

Mannyrock

 

a

Manny,

  I think in 3 rail O its a multifaceted problem.  First of the gap between the center and outer rails is small compared to wheel sizes, so derailments tend to lead to shorts pretty easy.  On top of that bigger cars give the ability overload trains a bit easier.  

@Mannyrock posted:

Thanks for the warning about K-line motors.   They are now off my list.

 

Manny, I still have and run my K-Line Alco's, S-2's, RDC cars and MP-15's that I bought some 25-30 years ago. So you can't just write off K-Line entirely.

As has been written, the K-Line Plymouth and Porter both have much smaller motors than do the one's I liked above. For that reason, I have neither the Plymouth or Porter. But for that matter, there are Lionel engines like the starter set Dockside and 0-8-0 that also have much smaller motors, which could also be more prone to failure. As does the Williams by Bachmann scale 44 ton switcher.

But it is not just smaller can motors alone: It is also trying to consistently pull trains with these locomotives that are either tool long or too heavy. Most real life switchers only pull a few cars.

The thing with this hobby is there are many guys with small layouts who want small engines, which do look better, but then they try to run trains with them as if they were larger motored locomotives.

Someone above suggested the Lionel 1615, and there are modern versions made of this loco that have DC can motors. But they have the standard (and larger) DC motors used in most starter set engines. There's also the MPC era version of this same engine that has an open frame AC motor. This is a fine running smaller locomotive that looks right on a smaller layout and has better pulling capacity than do some other small locos like the K-Line Plymouth and Porter.

By the way, it is a complicated hobby these days. It the old days, there was NO need to say "scale." It was ALL simply "Lionel." The words traditional and semi-scale were never used before, because they were just Lionel's. Now you have to clarify. And there were no DC can motors... now there are. Never mind the electronics, which on one hand for some, made the hobby much more appealing but have also muddied the waters when it comes to trying to figure everything out.

SO, you do learn as you go along. And you buy what you like... at least that's what I do.

Manny:

You're getting a lot of good information here. Lots of input.

IF you are willing to look "outside the box", so to speak, you can really enhance the illusion of size for your layout by looking at the postwar Marx "3/16" scale tin lithograph line. I have just purchased a set and the cars are wonderfully proportioned and the lithography is quite surprisingly effective. The Marx "3/16" cars are basically S scale cars using 3-rail track. Given their proportions, they are very nice looking.

Here is a comparison photo showing a Marx 3/16" boxcar (left) sitting with a ubiquitous Lionel 6464 car. The size and proportion difference is quite noticeable. I think the Marx car better fits its trucks than the Lionel car. (I like both so this isn't a "brand war" statement. I intend to run both, but I will run my Marx 3/16 separate from Lionel's traditional stuff.)

Marx didn't make an overwhelming amount of 3/16 products, so obtaining almost all of them is within reason. Here's a look at some of their 3/16 equipment:

Anyway, you might find this input useful in your quest, so thought I'd post it up.

Best of luck whatever you decide!

Andre

Here's one more vote for the RMT Beep.  Here's a video of mine, which I converted to Lionchief remote control.

https://youtu.be/EXEjfO_v0lo

It's a lovely little o-gauge engine, that imagines what a GP-7 or GP-9 would be if it were about half as long. As originally built, they were conventional control. I replaced the control board in this one with the Lionchief control board from a Lionel Thomas & Friends Diesel engine. The Beep has dual motors, lots of onboard weight, and very low gearing, so it's a great puller. In this video, I'm at about half throttle and it's still pretty slow. If you go down to 10% throttle, it can really, really crawl.

My smallest Steam Engine is an old Lionel 1656 switcher ( 81/2" long ) I also run a RMT Beep Diesel ( 8" long ) then there are Lionel Trolleys ( 7" long ). The photos were taken with a 027 Baby Ruth box car for size comparison. I run a couple of Lionel Trolleys on the same loop sometimes and I also have bumpers for the bump and go feature.

I think the locomotives suggested here more than do the trick, but I just wanted to throw this into the mix. This is an MPC set called the Kickapoo Valley & Northern, and it came with one of those cheaper 0-4-0 switchers, and then three two-axle cars that could fit what you want pretty reasonably. The locomotive only went forward, but it definitely could fly, lol, and the cars could each come in red, yellow or green, not just the configuration you see here. In recent years they did make more sets with these car types, and they probably look better too.

@brianel_k-lineguy posted:

By the way, it is a complicated hobby these days. It the old days, there was NO need to say "scale." It was ALL simply "Lionel." The words traditional and semi-scale were never used before, because they were just Lionel's. Now you have to clarify. 

Is that really accurate?  Wasn't the 700E a scale engine? Additionally, Lionel used the term Standard O for items that were 1/4" scale back in to the MPC era of not earlier, AFAIK.

I think that's one thing that limited Lionel and the 3-rail hobby, in that it wasn't always clear what you were buying.

@gene maag posted:

Gene: Do you happen to have a 685/2055, or 665/2065 engine/tender?

If so, could you please take a pic of your 1656 beside one? I'm interested in one of the Lionel 0-4-0's, but I want to see how it compares in size to the smaller Hudson's. It would much appreciated.

Andre

@laming posted:

IF you are willing to look "outside the box", so to speak, you can really enhance the illusion of size for your layout by looking at the postwar Marx "3/16" scale tin lithograph line. I have just purchased a set and the cars are wonderfully proportioned and the lithography is quite surprisingly effective. The Marx "3/16" cars are basically S scale cars using 3-rail track. Given their proportions, they are very nice looking.

Didn't A.C. Gilbert also offer a line of 3/16" on 3-rail O guage trucks? Coupler compatibility would probably be an issue, but might be worth looking into.

@rplst8 posted:

Is that really accurate?  Wasn't the 700E a scale engine? Additionally, Lionel used the term Standard O for items that were 1/4" scale back in to the MPC era of not earlier, AFAIK.

I think that's one thing that limited Lionel and the 3-rail hobby, in that it wasn't always clear what you were buying.

Standard O or Full O , semi scale were most used around me... "Scale Hudson" or "The X"? ...Pre-mpc.

@rplst8 posted:

Is that really accurate?  Wasn't the 700E a scale engine? Additionally, Lionel used the term Standard O for items that were 1/4" scale back in to the MPC era of not earlier, AFAIK.

I think that's one thing that limited Lionel and the 3-rail hobby, in that it wasn't always clear what you were buying.

Yes, the scale Hudson is a well known exception. And the Standard 0 cars introduced by MPC were always referred to as such. And I've read that they were a initial disappointment in sales for MPC. And by today's expectations, for the true scale purist, that's not what they looking for. And these productions were the exception, not the rule. In 1952 alone, Lionel sold 182,000 operating 027 milk cars. Even today, the best selling items for Lionel are the non-scale traditional train sets.

But the VAST majority of Lionel product over the decades has been as I mentioned. Lionel product was categorized for years as "027" and "0 Gauge." So a larger engine that didn't negotiate an 027 curve, was under the "0 Gauge" line, but that didn't mean it was scale proportioned by any means.

During the Richard Kughn ownership of Lionel, they started using the terms for their catalogs, "Traditional" and "Collector Lines." But that was more reflective of product quality and price than it was proportion and size.

As a side note, what's even funnier, is to read the product descriptions in postwar catalogs and to read phrases like "just the real thing." To the purist today, the post war air whistle is hardly like the real thing. Nor is the 027 plug door box car just like the real thing.

The odd thing is, some products were close to scale in their general proportions. The postwar GP-9 has a shell that is very close to being scale. The K-Line MP-15 also has a shell that is very close to scale proportions. Yet compare them to current high end scale models, and they don't cut it at all for that particular buying market.

But this is all because years ago, these trains were really toys that were marketed to boys via their fathers. Today, it's different. There are lot more options, and therefore a lot more confusion. The true scale products, though there were some before, didn't really increase in a big way until Lionel made the move to China, where the overall lower production costs would allow them to channel more investment dollars into scale product tooling. 

@laming posted:

Gene: Do you happen to have a 685/2055, or 665/2065 engine/tender?

If so, could you please take a pic of your 1656 beside one? I'm interested in one of the Lionel 0-4-0's, but I want to see how it compares in size to the smaller Hudson's. It would much appreciated.

Andre

Andre,

Is this what you wanted??? I restored both of these engines. Gene

Gene:

Yes. Those pics are perfect. Thank you very much.

Reason for asking: I like to stay with "traditional" sized trains, but I have a bit of a quirk in that I want them to be similar in proportions. That is, I don't want a switch engine to dwarf a steam "road" engine.

For example, that is the case with an Lionel NW2 and a 2065 or 2055/etc. The NW2 dwarfs the "baby" Hudson's.

It does appear that the 0-4-0 reflects a large 0-4-0 in proportions, compared to the 685 Baldwin Hudson... but I don't think it's too objectionable. For example, in your cab-to-cab pictures, the 685 is taller than the 1656. That's a good thing to my eyes. So, could be that the 1656 could represent a large, heavy-duty 0-4-0 and not a "dinky" (small engine) little 0-4-0.

However, to play it safe, before I add an 0-4-0 to my "acquire" list, I probably need to see one first hand and compare it to a Baldwin boiler Hudson.

Thanks again! Your pics are encouraging that I could be "okay" running a Lionel 0-4-0 among my "baby" Hudson's and Lionel FA's.

Andre

@rplst8 posted:

Is that really accurate?  Wasn't the 700E a scale engine? Additionally, Lionel used the term Standard O for items that were 1/4" scale back in to the MPC era of not earlier, AFAIK.

I think that's one thing that limited Lionel and the 3-rail hobby, in that it wasn't always clear what you were buying.

You make a good point. I've looked back at old MTH catalogs, and in their early years, it seems like Premier and Railking weren't separate lines yet. So I was seeing things like semi-scale GG1's in purple boxes and I was kind of confused, lol.

Seems like Lionel has made non-scale switchers, diesel and steam, closer to scale-size than a lot of others, but perhaps they could only compress down so far. In absolute terms, it seems like a switcher is still the best option if looking for as small an engine as possible.

I appreciate everyone who's thrown in some history here explaining the genesis.

I settled on "traditional" in 2002 when I inherited my grandfather's PW Lionel collection. We had watched his Seaboard NW-2 switcher since the 1960s and never noticed it was closer to scale-size than his 0-4-0, 2-6-2, 4-6-4, 4-4-0, or his FA2 AAs, and sticking with semi-scale has never bothered me. I don't mind the PW milk car, merchandise operating car, or cattle car being smaller than the 6464 boxcars I've added since.  They work size-wise with anything modern I've purchased. A 1:48 purist would likely disagree, but the average person doesn't notice.

The NW-2 is approximately 1:48.  Not sure about the "General"-type 4-4-0 but it's probably close.  The 0-4-0s (like 1656, 1615, etc.) are actually LARGER than scale.  Lionel re-used the 4-wheel mechanism from its 2-4-2 and I guess they couldn't make the shell any smaller.  As you said, I got used to it.  I have a true scale PRR A5 from MTH, and it looks "too small" by comparison!