Finally saw the 2016 catalog. It was nice to see some passenger cars, and steam locomotives; but, pray tell, was Lionel thinking when they threw 4 wheel rolling stock and gaudy paint schemes onto engines?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
but, pray tell, was Lionel thinking when they threw 4 wheel rolling stock and gaudy paint schemes onto engines?
Sales, Money, from the:
- uninformed hobbyists,
- ladies,
- kids,
- sukka collectors, etc.
nothing different than the gaudy silver 115th Berkshire anniversary engine.
El Classico posted:but, pray tell, was Lionel thinking when they threw 4 wheel rolling stock and gaudy paint schemes onto engines?
I checked the different catalogs and I did not see anything like that. I saw several with colorful, playful, and imaginative paint schemes for those who like their layouts to be fun. Looks like many were directed at the youth market and I hope that helps bring in younger hobbyists.
Some folks don't take life so seriously and look at life differently than you do.
ADDED: modified comment
LGB did that very same thing. Coca-Cola and other brand liveries on locos and cars. It's not my cup of tea. There are, however, people who collect such items. So as has been mentioned, it drives sales and makes money for the company.
LGB certainly needed that money when they decided to sue Aristocraft over a track issue. Plus their children, who would run the company as Wolfgang took a back seat, liked to spend more money that they were bringing in.
I haven't looked at the new catalog, but it sounds like these might have been aimed at kids. hope the prices reflect that thinking.
Well, there was:
Girl's train.
13 States BiCent train. (The U36B was short, but SCL did have one. SL-SF had a caboose, but not the PRR cabin car type.)
Beer Cars.
Tobacco Cars.
Lionel Lines. (There was an UP FEF3 lettered that for a convention fan trip, however.)
Disney items. (Depression handcar,and modern trains)
Military and Space.
The list goes on............
I only ask because 4 wheel Marx rolling stock, similar to the Lionel 4 wheel rolling stock currently catalogued, nearly drove me out of the hobby when I was younger. Is it a matter of penny wise, pound foolish?
Those are not for the rivet counting adults, they are for kids, and now that there is a remote for them the kids do run them.
I think it's clear, as a corporation returning value to it's stockholders what Lionel was thinking.
I think most manufacturers have done a bit of this. Back a few years ago MTH produced quite a range of Harley Davidson related cars, engines, buildings, bike/rider sets, water tower, etc. Fantasy to be sure, but they got a lot of my money!
Rod
People buy "fantasy" schemes all the time. Lionel and the other manufacturers put out a great amount of product that is close to scale and accurate. They also put out product that is "fun" and is aimed at people who are into more classic Lionel, people who are new to the hobby and want to have a more vivid collection consisting of fun things like Coca-cola, Disney, DC Comics, MLB, etc. To each their own. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean other people don't. So these products exist because they sell which means the consumer base is voting with their wallet. THAT is what Lionel was thinking. So stop trying to attack manufacturers for the products they make that you DON'T like, and just buy the ones you DO like. Let other people decide what they want. We're all here for the love and fun of trains. Bashing a company for the products they make only furthers the decline of this awesome hobby.
El Classico posted:I only ask because 4 wheel Marx rolling stock, similar to the Lionel 4 wheel rolling stock currently catalogued, nearly drove me out of the hobby when I was younger. Is it a matter of penny wise, pound foolish?
Nope, the issue here I think is you are seeing trains from your perspective, not as a train company. Your wish would be a world full of scale, perfect replicas of real trains, but after all this started as and in some ways remains toy trains. The Lionel operating accessories (the wonderful gateman who NBA teams would love to have *lol*), the S scale 027 trains, the Coors engine, the Polar Express, branded trains (Coca Cola), helicopter car, missile launching car, were all designed around "fun railroading' rather than scale replication. Not too many kids, or people building a layout around a Christmas tree, care about how many rivets to the inch or that the NY Central never had a compound engine, and that is the point, that that audience, which I suspect is much larger than the scale replica crowd, would be turned off, especially by the price tag on those kinds of units. Among other things, those "bright, gaudy" trains will be attractive to kids, some of whom later on may turn into the scale rail nut of tomorrow.....Lionel and the others are in the business of making trains, aimed at different markets, and focusing on any one would likely put them out of business.
gunrunnerjohn posted:I think it's clear, as a corporation returning value to it's stockholders what Lionel was thinking.
Pretty much, though to be a pain in the neck, Lionel is held by private equity firm, so there are no stockholders per se, simply returns profits to those who own it (technically they are shareholders, though
.....
If you folks want more realistic stuff, why not consider 2 rail? Nothing wrong with 3 rail, but you are in the wrong side of the house if you want realism. Here is what is out there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBcSz9iI7nY
Enjoy,
Simon
Guys, guys.... My question had nothing to do with realism. I am not a scale guy by any means. Heck, I run 8" scout boxcars behind a 2243! It was more quality than anything else. The '60's saw declining sales due to poor quality, and the '80's. That's why I was curious why Lionel was trying a low quality idea. My problem with 4 wheel cars, like the newer Lionel models and the old Marx plastic cars, is that they don't track very well, which would make someone less likely to think of Lionel with a good name. Didn't mean any of that!
Simon Winter posted:If you folks want more realistic stuff, why not consider 2 rail? Nothing wrong with 3 rail, but you are in the wrong side of the house if you want realism ...
Simon
Gee whiz gosh, I guess I should junk all my unrealistic vintage 3-rail trains and go back to HO scale.
Attachments
Even as a kid I wanted trains that were as "real-looking" as possible. Actually, I can't think that is not true of most kids? Back then I might not have been quite so discerning as my wallet now allows me to be, but I recall being VERY unhappy with F3 units without so much as lenses in the portholes! Yes, I had two. I recall trying to put wire handrails on them . . . but drilling the blank portholes was beyond me.
The military and space fantasy stuff drove me nuts even as a 12 year old!
But, I accept people, some people at least, actually like this stuff. "Whimsy" and all that.
Don't "understand" it, mind. But "accept" it.
As for the inevitable mention of that pesky third rail. Well, I'm far from happy about it . . . but sort of stuck with it too.
I also prefer scale wheels, but have learned they must be confined to my switchless outer loop.
I have one of Malcom's fine cabeese. Sadly it consistently derailed on my Ross switches. So, either replace the wheelsets or it too would have to be confined to the outer loop. I chose to replace the wheelsets on that one.
I am sure what "Lionel was thinking" was about making money. What companies ALWAYS think about. If "scale" stuff is what you want, it might be best to lower expectations about Lionel and look to the other companies that cater to our "rivet counter" fetish.
Regards my previous post. Not sure if "rivet counter" is a compliment or an epithet in this hobby? In any event, I proudly proclaim myself as one . . .despite the 3rd rail.
Simon Winter posted:If you folks want more realistic stuff, why not consider 2 rail? Nothing wrong with 3 rail, but you are in the wrong side of the house if you want realism. Here is what is out there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBcSz9iI7nY
Enjoy,
Simon
When I see a model (toy) 2-rail freight train in excess of 125 cars being pulled by 2 or 3 locomotives without any mid-train or back end helpers then you will have a realistic looking model (toy) freight train consist. And the layout better be the size of a Costco warehouse to get a true scale effect. Until then, a 2-rail train looks no more realistic than a 3-rail.
Well that layout of Gary Schrader's was awesome.
But . . . those beautiful steamers weren't smokin'!
And that just ain't right! 
The line of trains mentioned here are entry - level for the very young. They are so equipped to match the child's developing dexterity. The paint schemes are matched to their level of fun. I think it's a good transition from the Thomas world to the full-blown model train world. As an aside, my dad's starter set from 1932 also had four wheels...
Jon 
J 611 posted:I personally think fantasy paint schemes are stupid and would never spend a dime on them. But hey, if that's your thing go for it.
Wow. Nice guy. 
KOOLjock1 posted:The line of trains mentioned here are entry - level for the very young. They are so equipped to match the child's developing dexterity. The paint schemes are matched to their level of fun. I think it's a good transition from the Thomas world to the full-blown model train world. As an aside, my dad's starter set from 1932 also had four wheels...
Jon
Yes, that is exactly the point regarding the original post. Well said.
I've always liked the RTR stuff aimed at kids since my grandson loves trains. Also, I'm a big kid myself and love what Lionel did with Batman and Nightmare on Elm Street. Still waiting on Bond, James Bond.
Regardless of scale, I'm for whatever accomplishes these two things in this hobby:
* Keeps a company solvent.
* Gets kids into the hobby.
Whether or not I'll purchase said offerings is up to me, thus it is a personal decision and therefore is no more superior or inferior to another person's personal decision on purchasing.
Hey, this is supposed to be fun, remember?
laming posted:Regardless of scale, I'm for whatever accomplishes these two things in this hobby:
* Keeps a company solvent.
* Gets kids into the hobby.
Whether or not I'll purchase said offerings is up to me, thus it is a personal decision and therefore is no more superior or inferior to another person's personal decision on purchasing.
Hey, this is supposed to be fun, remember?
I agree!
KOOLjock1 posted:The line of trains mentioned here are entry - level for the very young. They are so equipped to match the child's developing dexterity. The paint schemes are matched to their level of fun. I think it's a good transition from the Thomas world to the full-blown model train world. As an aside, my dad's starter set from 1932 also had four wheels...
Jon
I like the old tinplate 4 wheelers. Length is the problem with the current batch, too long to track well.
They could go further by including LEDs and Electroluminescent film and wire in some locos, passenger cars, and mint cars, plus the PHANTOM trains.
Andrew
It's funny. When I was a tyke, not only did I have what we now call postwar Lionel (which only came out at Christmastime,) but some wind-up Marx tin, some kind of tin trains that ran on a tin panel (probably made in Japan) other battery operated and wind-up trains, Strombecker wooden trains and some kind of soft plastic trains. Even some soap in the shape of trains. Most of it hardly looked realistic. All of it was fun to play with
None of it deterred me from becoming an actual model railroader.
Rusty
POTRZBE posted:I've always liked the RTR stuff aimed at kids since my grandson loves trains. Also, I'm a big kid myself and love what Lionel did with Batman and Nightmare on Elm Street. Still waiting on Bond, James Bond.
And the "shaken, not stirred" tank car!
The '60's saw declining sales due to poor quality, and the '80's. That's why I was curious why Lionel was trying a low quality idea.
I think you are making a big assumption when you state that poor quality caused declining sales. IMHO, it more likely that their declining sales were caused by multiple causes:
First and foremost, the 1960's marked the end of the baby boom. There had to be a down turn in the number of new families with first children. Lots of folks had new families with first children in the late forties and early 1950's, and wanted toy trains. By the time the second or third child comes along, they already have trains, and didn't buy that many more. This cycle has repeated several times since then.
Trains were not the wow toy any longer. In my area, the number one toy was slot cars, both home, and commercial track. The commercial track in my area even attracted young adult males. The families of most friends had a Lionel train set (one kid had Flyer). A lot of them were older sets, purchased for an older brother. They were very rarely used. In addition to slot cars, we were into plastic model building.
Chemistry sets and science related toys were also big in my area.
I think they lowered their quality because they felt they had to get their prices down to maintain sales.
Simon Winter posted:If you folks want more realistic stuff, why not consider 2 rail? Nothing wrong with 3 rail, but you are in the wrong side of the house if you want realism. Here is what is out there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBcSz9iI7nY
Enjoy,
Simon
If I were to start from ground zero, I would probably go 2-rail instead of 3-rail. That said, the main difference between the two, is the track and not the engines and rolling stock. What keeps me in 3-rail is the fact that I already own many prototypical 3-rail engines and passenger cars from SGL, Weaver, Atlas, and 3rd Rail/GGD. Thus, rather than try and replace some of my current items, which would be very hard, if even possible, I have learned to ignore the 3rd rail of the track, and focus on the engines and cars (the thicker wheel flanges never bothered me.)
Jim
C.W.,
Your post is spot on for my situation as well.
In 1968, when I was 8 years old, I got my first train set. It was a 3rd hand American Flyer set that I got after my older cousin and then younger cousin where no longer interested it trains. I played a lot with that set, but when we moved three years later, it went into boxes and never got play with again. In 1971, plastic model building was huge. I built a lot of kits, up until 1976, when I turned 16 and got my first car. LOL, the time I would have spend on model bulding, was sucked up into keeping my old rust-bucket running and then my nicer car 2 years later. In the early 70's, I also spent a lot of time with my slot car set (was somewhat envious of my cousin, who would take his cars down to the local commercial track) and my hot wheels. I also had one of the chemistry sets that you mentioned.
I think the declining sales led to poorer quality products, as Lionel attempted to stay in business and that could only be done by selling cheaper to manufacture products.
In general, I think the current time is the best time EVER to be into the O gauge hobby. Pre-war, Post-war, and MPC trains are abundently plentiful and with the internet, never easy to find on the second hand market. Modern train (the last 35+ years) can be found with conventional or command control, and can be found in the traditional, semi-scale, or scale configurations. It has never been easier to find a niche that is fun!
Jim
johnstrains posted:J 611 posted:I personally think fantasy paint schemes are stupid and would never spend a dime on them. But hey, if that's your thing go for it.
Wow. Nice guy.
I'm not sure why my original post was deleted. The post was just my opinion on fantasy paint schemes. I don't like them, never have and never will. But my main point was that if you do like them, go ahead and buy them. That is after all why they make chocolate and vanilla.
Several posts were deleted, even mine where I just stated that it doesn't take much to bring out the ugly side of the hobby. Nothing unusual for this forum.
Apologize for taking this off topic, but there was a post in this thread, since removed, regarding Lionel LLC's ownership that piqued my interest. Does Guggenheim now own 100%? Did they buy out the interests held by the Martin Davis estate, Neil Young, Richard Kughn and Jerry Calabrese as indicated in the May 5, 2008 WSJ article entitled "Toy Maker Lionel Emerges From Bankruptcy With Broader Plans" that you must Google to access unless you have a paid subscription?
What, me worry?
Alfred E Neuman posted:Apologize for taking this off topic, but there was a post in this thread, since removed, regarding Lionel LLC's ownership that piqued my interest. Does Guggenheim now own 100%? Did they buy out the interests held by the Martin Davis estate, Neil Young, Richard Kughn and Jerry Calabrese as indicated in the May 5, 2008 WSJ article entitled "Toy Maker Lionel Emerges From Bankruptcy With Broader Plans" that you must Google to access unless you have a paid subscription?
What, me worry?
Who is the current owner of Lionel Trains?
HTH.
Pete
Pete
I was expecting this thread to be deleted because many comments were made that were inappropriate. I want to personally thank Alan for taking the time, on a Saturday, to go through this tread to clean it up without deleting the whole thread. I think there are a lot of good points here, and if you don't understand why your post was deleted than I think you need to go back and see the link in Texas Pete's post. Unfortunately, some have not taken the hint and this thread may be deleted anyway.
LGB did that very same thing. Coca-Cola and other brand liveries on locos and cars.
Just curious: when did LGB do their Coke stuff?
Lionel did their Coke set in 1974 (or was it 1973?). The idea was conceived by the owner of Kris Model Trains, Andy Kriswalus. He was supposed to get the entire run, but things didn't turn out that way.
