Skip to main content

HEY GUYS THIS IS NOT A JOKE! I need some feedback. this will not be a LCCA item ok.it's a

FLY N EL QUESTION.

If LIONEL got enough orders to produce a flyer hudson would you want it available with the following features. rail sounds, smoke, polished sides on drive wheels or white walls, optional scale wheels,addtional detail such as more piping , lingage etc. IT WOULD NOT BE SUPER DETAILED SIMILAR TO AN O SCALE 5344. TWO VERSIONS. one with the normal hudson tender and the other with a centepeed. knuckle coupler only and no link style. would you want both gun metal gray and black. would you by them as seperate sale and in a set. do they need to be prototypical paint scheme's every time they are produced. do want them to run in legacy and conventional or just conventional to keep the cost down.

PLEASE ANSWER ON THE O OR S SCALE FORUM BUT NOT BOTH.

THANKS

LOUIE

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I'm sensing that the engine will be utilising the original tooling as it exists now to some degree. My concerns here as I have mentioned elsewhere in another thread is that at the end of Hudson production, the tender shell was made of plastic, not die-cast as for most of time which was from '46' to I think '58'. If the Hudson is done, will a new die-cast tender shell be made?

 

If you consider making it to reflect a conventional only model then it would need to cost in at not too much more than an EX+ current 326 otherwise it may end up not being attractive to consider. I personally would rather put my money into a really nice original.

Now if it has Legacy etc then that makes it different and depending on cost is worth considering.

 

Regards,

 

Neil

Originally Posted by Ukaflyer:

I'm sensing that the engine will be utilising the original tooling as it exists now to some degree. My concerns here as I have mentioned elsewhere in another thread is that at the end of Hudson production, the tender shell was made of plastic, not die-cast as for most of time which was from '46' to I think '58'. If the Hudson is done, will a new die-cast tender shell be made?

 

If you consider making it to reflect a conventional only model then it would need to cost in at not too much more than an EX+ current 326 otherwise it may end up not being attractive to consider. I personally would rather put my money into a really nice original.

Now if it has Legacy etc then that makes it different and depending on cost is worth considering.

 

Regards,

 

Neil

i'm certain it wont be cheap. it will be new tooling and would look much better than the original. i would only produce it with a diecast tender too

Let's hope that if the decision is made to go ahead that they will do as nice a model with as much detail as possible to set it completely apart from the Gilbert Hudson. The older model was/is a very nice rendition of the NYC Steamer but why not create something on par with current technology for S scale fans? Seems that any really good Hudson will be a sure winner!

I wish to see cataloged and built an all new accurate scale-sized detailed NYC Hudson (J1a or J3a) with all of the features (RS, Legacy, smoke, electrocoupler, speed control, etc.) as done the new AF Challengers. All die-cast. A centipede tender version would be very attractive. Just as the prewar OO version was the 700EW's little brother in about every way, so should be a new S gauge Hudson relative to modern 0 gauge versions, within reason. I would opt for the hi-rail version, but Lionel may profit from a scale flange version, too. Prototypical schemes and configurations only. No gray ones or other fantasy schemes desired here.

 

A complementary set of prewar scheme NYC heavyweights also being made available is an obvious 'lay down'. 

 

And, let the old chestnuts (and their old tooling) be. There are plenty of nice vintage Gilbert Hudsons out there for reasonable prices.

 

Bob

As I have said before, in my opinion, the Hudson is the most pleasing steam locomotive ever produced, both in proportion and size.  Personally, I would like a "modernized" hi=rail version, that is, a more detailed version of the Gilbert issue.  There are many originals out there, but frankly, I'd prefer a "runner" to a "collector".  Not that I don't run my originals, however.  Sticky reverse units and open frame motors of the originals, although "period", aren't what you expect any more.  Modern electronics is preferable, (can motors and modern reverse units) but offered without the RailSounds and Legacy, to keep costs down.  Perhaps later on the full boat electronics can be offered. 

 

Just my dos centavos....

 

Jerry

Roasting in Wayne, MI

I wish to see cataloged and built an all new accurate scale-sized detailed NYC Hudson (J1a or J3a) with all of the features (RS, Legacy, smoke, electrocoupler, speed control, etc.) as done the new AF Challengers. All die-cast. A centipede tender version would be very attractive. Just as the prewar OO version was the 700EW's little brother in about every way, so should be a new S gauge Hudson relative to modern 0 gauge versions, within reason. I would opt for the hi-rail version, but Lionel may profit from a scale flange version, too. Prototypical schemes and configurations only. No gray ones or other fantasy schemes desired here.

 

Ditto.....I would buy

 

Rich

I love the Hudson and would be interested.... I would trade a few of the Legacy bells and whistles for dependability.   No "China" drive, please.  

In fact,  my suggestion would be to use the American Models Northern as a benchmark.   Offer me a newly tooled Hudson die cast shell on top of a mechanism that well-made and I'll buy it.

Nick C.

For me the first thing is scale wheels are a must. I don't mind AF couplers if I can put kadee couplers on myself. I would like full Legacy control and sound or DC/DCC socket. I would Prefer as scale as possible, but an S version of the 700E is fine with me. I am also of the mindset that it must be a "runner". My Mikado is a horrible runner. I don't need another shelf queen. I would also really prefer a fan driven smoke unit if possible and I like black steam engines.

 

If Lionel can make something along those lines I will gladly pre-order in a set or alone.

Last edited by jonnyspeed

My observation is almost anything with TMCC or Legacy electronics run poorly on conventional AC, but it's not a fault of the drives.  The inherent delays in deciding whether a command signal is there affects the overall running.

 

I've noticed that even with so called "dual mode" DCC decoders, a loco dosen't run as well on straight DC as it does without a decoder.

 

Even with a basic early TMCC rig, the new Flyer runs pretty well.

 

Rusty

Guys, if you think the Mikes and Pacifics run well then you haven't seen what a modern HO engine runs like. I don't mean that to come off wrong but Those two have horrible low speed performance. Their min speed is like 15 scale mph. Check out my YouTube channel and watch the video of my MTH HO Mikado going at 1 scale mph. If you can get a Flyonel Mike to do that I'll eat my hat. And yes I ran them on TMCC, lubed them, and broke them in four hours.

 

The Hudson would need to be a good slow speed operator for me to keep it. Obviously, we won't know before we would have to pre-order which is risky to me but I'd give it a try.

Last edited by jonnyspeed
Originally Posted by jonnyspeed:

Guys, if you think the Mikes and Pacifics run well then you haven't seen what a modern HO engine runs like. I don't mean that to come off wrong but Those two have horrible low speed performance. Their min speed is like 15 scale mph. Check out my YouTube channel and watch the video of my MTH HO Mikado going at 1 scale mph. If you can get a Flyonel Mike to do that I'll eat my hat. And yes I ran them on TMCC, lubed them, and broke them in four hours.

 

The Hudson would need to be a good slow speed operator for me to keep it. Obviously, we won't know before we would have to pre-order which is risky to me but I'd give it a try.

IF LIONEL will allow me to work with their head engineer as they have now started too with all his hard work its paying off. first improvement was the burlington 216 with front wheel drive, folled by a super flywheel powered texas tommy sample, the 2 new generals and the LCCA vulcan switchers. they will run great. most of the time its not the 2 engineers but the chinese assemblers.

thes lionel folks are at their mercy no matter how hard they try.

regards

louie

Originally Posted by Bob Bubeck:

I wish to see cataloged and built an all new accurate scale-sized detailed NYC Hudson (J1a or J3a) with all of the features (RS, Legacy, smoke, electrocoupler, speed control, etc.) as done the new AF Challengers. All die-cast. A centipede tender version would be very attractive. Just as the prewar OO version was the 700EW's little brother in about every way, so should be a new S gauge Hudson relative to modern 0 gauge versions, within reason. I would opt for the hi-rail version, but Lionel may profit from a scale flange version, too. Prototypical schemes and configurations only. No gray ones or other fantasy schemes desired here.

 

A complementary set of prewar scheme NYC heavyweights also being made available is an obvious 'lay down'. 

 

And, let the old chestnuts (and their old tooling) be. There are plenty of nice vintage Gilbert Hudsons out there for reasonable prices.

 

Bob

 

Lou, I agree with Bob and this would be my preference as well.

Originally Posted by jonnyspeed:

Guys, if you think the Mikes and Pacifics run well then you haven't seen what a modern HO engine runs like. I don't mean that to come off wrong but Those two have horrible low speed performance. Their min speed is like 15 scale mph. Check out my YouTube channel and watch the video of my MTH HO Mikado going at 1 scale mph. If you can get a Flyonel Mike to do that I'll eat my hat. And yes I ran them on TMCC, lubed them, and broke them in four hours.

 

The Hudson would need to be a good slow speed operator for me to keep it. Obviously, we won't know before we would have to pre-order which is risky to me but I'd give it a try.


Well, to be a bit fair, a comparison is being made of an engine w/o speed control vs. one with speed control, which (to stay on topic) is included in the suggested list of spec's for our hypothetical L-AF Hudson. I suspect that most of us wish for excellent low speed performance which is doable (i.e., the "Roll" speed step) within the Legacy system as part of 'the total package'.

 

Bob

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×