Which Berk is better? 726 or 736

The 1946 version had a smoke bulb instead of the normal postwar smoke unit.

The 736 has magnetraction, while the 726 does not. Depending on the track used, this would certainly give the 736 more pulling power.

736 on account of Magne-Traction.

Go searching for a six-axle tender. Some years ago Lionel made such a tender with some sort of independent sound system. Found one and it makes the loco-tender combo look great. Letter the tender New York Central for utmost "authenticity"

Some 726 used a smaller worm gear out of the 671 and were bad pullers, they later changed the worm gear, more teeth, and added a shim to the motor and it helped a lot, I agree the 736 is the better puller, and I believe it uses the late 726 worm gear.

The 726s from 1946 through 1949 also have the attractive nickle rims which really set them apart from their later brethren. All are good pullers due to the weight of a large die cast shell and the heavy mechanical innards. Personally, I would go for a 1947-49 726 that should come with a 6 wheel tender (No 2426W) as they have the aforementioned bright rims and are good smokers. The 48-49 model will have a dummy coupler on the pilot as added realism.

The Berkshire and the 1950 773 Hudsons share the large tender as well as the large motor.

The 1946 726 has a different smoke system, E-Unit activation, and the motor is mounted horizontally with a spur gear like the early F3s. The 1947 and later models have the motor at an angle with a worm gear.

There may be a different motor as pointed out above but I was not aware of one. The Magne-Traction is only a factor if you operate on old tubular track or Fastrack. Not effective on the more realistic track systems however.

Here is ours with the tender lettered for the New York Central which as Rex mentions is a nice touch.

Either one is a good choice - they are one of Lionel's nicest steamers!

c.sam is pretty much on target here.  The only thing I would add is that from a cosmetic standpoint the early 1946 Berky is a bit more pleasing to the eye since in addition to its beautiful nickel rimmed Baldwin Disc drivers it doesn't have an ugly E-unit leaver protruding from the shell.  Also, from a maintenance standpoint the early 1946 model is a lot of fun to work on with its Bld-A-Loco like easy access drive system.  In any event, whatever choice you make I don't think you can go wrong with a postwar Lionel Berkshire.  

I have the 736, but I like the looks of the 726 better...baldwin disk drive wheels with silver rims as well as the neat 12 wheel, nicely detailed tender.

The 726 came with a large die cast tender and nickel rimmed Baldwin drivers. Therefore, it's my choice over the 736.

And there is the 726RR, the 1952 Korean War version of the 736, with no magnetraction (due to shortage of magnet material). My 726RR is a very smooth runner, good smoker, and good puller. I will have to match it against my 736 to see how much extra pull the magnetraction adds to the loco.

My personal choice for a Berk would be the 765!  Rich agrees with me.

Paul Fischer

Williams sells, or used to sell, their Berk tenders as a separate item.  I use one behind a prewar 226 to pull postwar cars. 

That prewar caboose has postwar trucks.

The later 736s used a cheaper trailing truck made of plastic instead of metal. While mine runs really good and smokes good too, that truck just looks bad. I need to swap it out for a diecast one. Just something to look out for if you go with a 736.

If you go with the 726, and end up with a smoke bulb style (1946, no e unit slot), I took my turbine that uses the same smoke bulb setup, and added a bit of fiberglass insulation above the lamp, and wet it with smoke fluid. It smokes amazingly good until the fiberglass gets charred.

J White

This is an apples to oranges kinda thingie.   Collectors and folks with small

layouts and trains might be better served with a 726, everyone else needs

a 736...or better yet, the WBB PW style Berk!

Well, the truck itself is made of metal, but it has plastic sideframes.  I agree with you about the diecast truck looking better though.  One of the first things I did to mine was to go out and buy a 726 trailing truck to swap out with the plastic/sheetmetal one.  The only thing that didn't quite work was the original screw was too short.  Luckily I had one and it looks great.

And in response to jaygee's "... or better yet, the WBB PW style berk", the berk is one engine you have to have an original of.  They run great and look great.

The best of the 736 would be the 1950 issue. It came with the best of the streamline plastic tenders with 6 wheel trucks, wide spread Lionel Lines lettering. The 1950 engine comes with the diecast trailing truck and magne-traction. I'm not a fan of the 726 from an operating point of view. While the first 726 had a unique drive train with horizontal motor - all that gearing took too much power from the motor. The diecast tender with diecast whistle is just too heavy. The smoke unit while novel with its smoke bulb is all but useless. The later 726 engines with the slanted motor didn't have magne traction, but still retained the heavy tender, so not much of an improvement from the first 726.

In summary...

If you want a very nicely detailed engine with fine trim and upper features, such as the Baldwin disk wheels and die cast coal tender - go for the 726.

If you want a long-time running, good pulling engine and can live without some of the higher details for the plastic streamlined tender and Magnetraction wheels - go for the 736.

I read that Roadside America in Pennsylvania in the 90's ran 736's the most, along with the Trainmasters, because they were the most dependable and powerful engines.

I forgot to mention, mine is the latest version with the PRR 736W whistle tender.  It was definitely cheapened up a tiny bit over the previous models (plastic/sheetmetal trailing truck, plastic tender trucks, thats about it), but is a great looker and runner.

No question here,,,the "50 model 736 with  the 2671WX tender, and I don't remember any weights added to this engine, if they were they were added by the new owner. On my layout sitting side by side the 736 is the best puller and runs quiter.  you won't go wrong buying either one ..Have fun and enjoy. By the way good choice of the 783 over the higher priced 773.

Rod

To all of you, thank you very much for the input. I realy appreciate it! I went ahead and bought a 48-49 726 with the large die0cast tender. I just could not pass up on the nickle silver rims, Baldwin Disk drive wheels and that very nice tender. I'm sure I will have fun with it when I get it (bought it from ebay). Thanks guy's!

Jake, What is the engine on the right in your second picture? Nice locomotives, BTW>

Bill

Glad I looked at this thread again

That's a Postwar 2055 4-6-4 "baby hudson".  They made them from 1953 to I think 1955?

You mentioned in your post that you heard they both have a huge weight inside. This is not true. The 671 has the weight in it up front. The 726 with Baldwins looks great, but the 736 pulls better. I bought the 736.

Rob

Hi guys. My son and I just picked up our first Postwar piece-a 2046 Hudson which uses the boiler from the Berk. I was just wondering what can be done to enhance the slow speed operation? It isn't bad, but maybe there are tricks I don't know about?

Also, could someone post a comparison 726/736 photo? I would love to see them side by side. Thanks.

Taking a different stance, I am awaiting the Lionel repro 726, now due in August, but I won't hold my breath! 

It will have a diecast tender but it is anyone's guess about the inclusion of the nickel-rimmed drivers and the extra valve gear. 

  From the two posts above here are the two photos you asked for Johnnyspeed. The main difference visually is the drivers - the 726 has nickel rims while the 736 has solid black drivers. Both look like real steamers and it's really a matter of personal taste as to which is more appealing. There are subtle differences in detail and valve gear too.  There were different tenders for the different model years as well.

As mentioned earlier, the 1946 version of the 726 is unique in that it lacks the 'toy-like' slot in the boiler with the E Unit sticking out!

The 1946 726 also has a smaller, more-accurate sand dome, turned handrail stanchions and a different pilot.

I have a well broken in 726RR and a well broken in 736. While the 736 pulls better due to magnetraction, the 726RR is an unbelievably smooth and quiet runner. Any Berk is fine

I wonder. The 726 boiler was re-purposed from the prewar 226e, which looks very much like a "baby" 700e / 763e Hudson. Perhaps Lionel felt the altered dome was actually more realistic, as it made the 726 look less like a Hudson and more like something else. And the large, square-ish sand dome was something of a trademark of the Lima works, originator of the Berkshire type.

That being said, I do think the smaller dome looks good.

And how does the MPC production compare to the postwar 736?

The postwar 736 locos that I have serviced are generally better runners than the MPC versions. I have a Pere Marquette 736 with the Railsounds tender, and it isn't in the same league as the postwar version of either Berkshire. The advantage to the MPC Pere Marquette is that it has the same style reverse unit as the postwar 773 with the plug controlling the E unit, and it also has, if I remember correctly, the turned handrail stanchions, although I might be mistaken on that point. I have 2 726 Berks, and they are far smoother than the MPC version, although that might be 50 plus years of breaking in. I don't think that there is a bad Berkshire, and some MPC locos are based on the Berkshire, and have similar running and pulling characteristics.

That's true. The larger dome with the included sand lines adds a bit of additional detailing.

I've got a 726 with the larger dome--looks fine and is definitely fun to run!