The silence from Lionel is deafening. Is @Dave Olson or @Conrail6358 reading this?
@harmonyards posted:The legacy Berks ( former KLine tools ) show the same set up as Pete’s pics of the Mohawk, ….a generous bushing on the open side, …..seems maybe Lionel saw the writing on the wall after the K4s …..so we can cross off the Legacy Berks, ….
Just rereading this again.. man the gearbox is much more heavy duty than the K4s’.
@rplst8 posted:The silence from Lionel is deafening.
No comment .....but...most, if not all of these are out of warranty. Even the worst offenders, the 2011 k4s survived a year.
What would they have to say...oops?
In all fairness. I emailed Mike Reagan about this issue after he moved to TW.
It was the only email of the few exchanges I've had with him over the years that never got answered. Maybe it was just a coincidence, who knows?
I'm just so thrilled that I only own 2 locomotives with this design. The rest are well built TMCC and early Legacy locos with the good ole' 2 gear design.
@rplst8 posted:The silence from Lionel is deafening. Is @Dave Olson or @Conrail6358 reading this?
As far as Lionel is concerned, the only model with a problem is so far out of warranty, I doubt it’s a concern for them…..what we’re doing with the rest of the models is adding our own insurance policy,……as a manufacturer, they’d have to see repeated failures of in-warranty products. I’m not defending the big L, just giving a dose of reality…….when your car goes out of warranty, and it breaks down, you either fix it yourself, or go to an independent garage, or even perhaps the dealership,……it’s going to be up to the independent techs, the dealers with techs, and the plethora of talented DIY guys to keep our favorite machines in operation…….
let’s recap here what we know to help keep any hysteria from getting out of hand: in a nutshell, the only KNOWN failures are on the 2011 run of Legacy PRR K4s’s …we’ve identified a few other models ( with your help too ) that ONLY exhibit the possibility of a failure due to their design & close relationship with the 2011 run of K4s’s ……the purpose of identifying those “ potential “ trouble makers is to offer the insurance policy to simply remove that variable all together……
Pat
Very well said Pat. The main take away for me is that my locomotives(which haven't been run yet for lack of a big enough layout) will be able to not suffer from failures that would eventually happen without the fix that you have come up with, with tinkering about and help from the fellow forumites that know well more than me about things like this. Wow, that is a really long sentence, but I don't care because it says all that needs to be said.
So, what direction are we looking towards now? K4's versus Pacific's is a question on my mind. Are the Pacific's more or less a different design like a USRA(or other design) versus what a K4 would be(or is), or are they essentially the same chassis? Still a ton of Mike's on the list as well. Hmm, where do we put our feet?
I believe the S1s from last year have the same gearbox setup. I have not had time yet to open mine up to check it. I see on the side the same bushing and shaft as others have shown for the K4s.
@RickO posted:No comment .....but...most, if not all of these are out of warranty. Even the worst offenders, the 2011 k4s survived a year.
What would they have to say...oops?
Admitting there was an issue with the metallurgy of the first run (if that's actually the case) would provide some reassurance that the rest of the models - and future ones - are unlikely to have problems.
I just bought my K4s - so it's technically still under warranty. Lot's of other models use it too - not sure if any have been cataloged recently but I'd guess they were. Would just be nice to know the new ones are "safe".
@rplst8 posted:Admitting there was an issue with the metallurgy of the first run (if that's actually the case) would provide some reassurance that the rest of the models - and future ones - are unlikely to have problems.
I just bought my K4s - so it's technically still under warranty. Lot's of other models use it too - not sure if any have been cataloged recently but I'd guess they were. Would just be nice to know the new ones are "safe".
As I’ve said many times, why worry your self to death over it, add the fix, and completely remove the variable……won & done ……😉
Pat
It is interesting that the principle engineer from Harmon Yards has already come up with a fix.
Not a peep from the Pennsy shops. These are their K4s.....I guess now we know why the hudsons are better😄
Oh the irony, that Lionels legacy hudsons are one of the few modern locos to still use the traditional gearbox.
This has been a great thread Pat! You can't beat ,all of the great contributions from everyone, and a solution to boot.
@RickO posted:It is interesting that the principle engineer from Harmon Yards has already come up with a fix.
Not a peep from the Pennsy shops. These are their K4s.....I guess now we know why the hudsons are better😄
Oh the irony, that Lionels legacy hudsons are one of the few modern locos to still use the traditional gearbox.
This has been a great thread Pat! You can't beat ,all of the great contributions from everyone, and a solution to boot.
Rick, I couldn’t agree with you more,……it’s really good to see the brightest minds on the forum, come together, have a good clean discussion, with whining to a minimum,…….identify the deficiency, classify potential offenders, discuss the defect, find a solution, and implement the solution with results …..to quote Ron White, ….it’s gonna be a good day tater!..
Pat
Yeah, this has been one great topic, can't argue with that one bit. What is going to be funny is like what Rick was saying, Hudson's being better, moreover though, that the Pride of the Pennsy has to go to the Harmon Shops for repairs/replacements/fixing. I for one know that there are a few for starters that will eventually be heading that way, but that can wait until we are at the point to schedule fixing these things. What is next on the engine chopping block pray tell?
I didn’t really think about the irony of an army of Pennsy engines heading to a NYC shop ……this would be worthy of some pics of Harmon flooded with K4’s …….no??…
Pat
Okay, Mikado 4501 was asking about the motor, so I looked at that this time.
Overall, and @harmonyards if you have ideas about how to better light or better angle, let me know, I'm leaving this disassembled for the moment. Yes I tried to clear some of the grease but I couldn't fit a qtip and had to rely on a folded paper towel. Photo pairs show idler gear shoved one side or the other.
First two are oriented front of the engine to the right of the image.
Second pair is roughly down and towards the back of the engine.
Attachments
Images (5)
@naresar posted:Okay, Mikado 4501 was asking about the motor, so I looked at that this time.
Overall, and @harmonyards if you have ideas about how to better light or better angle, let me know, I'm leaving this disassembled for the moment. Yes I tried to clear some of the grease but I couldn't fit a qtip and had to rely on a folded paper towel. Photo pairs show idler gear shoved one side or the other.
First two are oriented front of the engine to the right of the image.
Second pair is roughly down and towards the back of the engine.
You did great!….photos are fantastic!….we can clearly see there’s no large spacer….Dave, would you do the honors?….another fail……
to recap what we’re seeing, and where the dividing line in the sand is, if we’re seeing a large spacer as in some of the other Legacy offerings, those engines will definitely be ok, with no actions required IMO…..if we’re not seeing a generous spacer, as is the case with the above photos, then those locomotives could stand to have some help,….it does look like the gear box is tighter in wall width than the K4, however, again, IMO, these still will benefit from a fix now, rather than finding out down the road they are developing issues,…..again, remove the variable, remove the worry,…..
Pat
@harmonyards posted:You did great!….photos are fantastic!….we can clearly see there’s no large spacer….Dave, would you do the honors?….another fail……
to recap what we’re seeing, and where the dividing line in the sand is, if we’re seeing a large spacer as in some of the other Legacy offerings, those engines will definitely be ok, with no actions required IMO…..if we’re not seeing a generous spacer, as is the case with the above photos, then those locomotives could stand to have some help,….it does look like the gear box is tighter in wall width than the K4, however, again, IMO, these still will benefit from a fix now, rather than finding out down the road they are developing issues,…..again, remove the variable, remove the worry,…..
Pat
Is that the whole family of Mikado's from where we started all the way to present day?
@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:Is that the whole family of Mikado's fr where we started all the way to present day?
Which model year is nareasr’s example?….I think he mentioned it maybe?…
Pat
You'd better mark all of them, Dave - considering this is one of the batch that Lionel made most recently in 2020, and Pat already got info from his buddy the early 2012 ones have it, too, I think it's fair to say all the LEGACY light, heavy and Santa Fe brass hybrid models have this gear box design.
I'll likely hit up Pat sooner than later about this fix, since I plan on getting some decent use out of my new Mike.
Yeah, it is the latest batch. That is all the way from the get go or dang near.
@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:Yeah, it is the latest batch. That is all the way from the get go or dang near.
I’d concur fellas,……that’s the whole family of Mike’s then….
Pat
Yeah, this was one of the most recent batch.
Okay, completely updated on the Mike's. The only ones that we have not looked through to my knowledge is the short list of Pacific's that I listed earlier. So, since Zachariah's post back on page 3 of his 2021 USRA Pacific 2131300 Zachariah's USRA 2021 Pacific in the clear is in the clear, does that mean that the below Pacific's fall into that as well?
Also, another thought, since we have a list of all of what we know, should the title of this be changed to be specific to the K4's, Mike's, and H10's?
A final note, we have almost 3000 views to this topic, and I would have thought that there would be more of a response especially since the Mike's cover a great number of railroads and would be sold to more people than most other of the engines I would have thought. I know of a few people that would have definitely bought other engines than the NYC and PRR much like I did with the Southern offering. Scratches head. 
Attachments
Images (1)
@RickO posted:It is interesting that the principle engineer from Harmon Yards has already come up with a fix.
Not a peep from the Pennsy shops. These are their K4s.....I guess now we know why the hudsons are better😄
Oh the irony, that Lionels legacy hudsons are one of the few modern locos to still use the traditional gearbox.I
This has been a great thread Pat! You can't beat ,all of the great contributions from everyone, and a solution to boot.
I was going to mention this earlier, but as a die-hard Pennsy fan, I didn't want to call undue attention. Maybe someone at the big L is a NYC fan and just trying to make the ol' Standard Railroad of the World look bad. 
@harmonyards posted:Rick, I couldn’t agree with you more,……it’s really good to see the brightest minds on the forum, come together, have a good clean discussion, with whining to a minimum
I've done most of the whining. Sorry about that. When I see stuff like this I tend to go all French Revolution on stuff (heads roll, etc.) especially when the answer is often "let them eat cake."
@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:Yeah, this has been one great topic, can't argue with that one bit. What is going to be funny is like what Rick was saying, Hudson's being better, moreover though, that the Pride of the Pennsy has to go to the Harmon Shops for repairs/replacements/fixing. I for one know that there are a few for starters that will eventually be heading that way, but that can wait until we are at the point to schedule fixing these things. What is next on the engine chopping block pray tell?
@harmonyards posted:I didn’t really think about the irony of an army of Pennsy engines heading to a NYC shop ……this would be worthy of some pics of Harmon flooded with K4’s …….no??…
Nooooooooooooooooo...
Pat maybe you can teach me to do the fix and I can take care of some of them to spare the most diehard Pennsy fans the embarrassment! 
Just kidding of course. For all you've done for the forum and the knowledgebase here, I'd be proud to have one of my PRR locomotives where a "Harmon Yards" badge. But only one, lol.
OK Guys - Just so I'm clear, I'm wondering if @naresar could provide the product number of the engine shown in the photos he posted above today? I'm asking because it's always a little confusing when someone has an engine number as part of their moniker (in this case Mikado 4501).
I have the 6-11334 Southern Crescent Pacific #1393 (from 2012) that I already know is on NYC Dave's list above, but I also have the 6-11258 Southern Mikado #4501 (from 2012) and I want to confirm whether it's on Dave's Bad list as well needing the spacer.
Thanks.
Very informative thread. I have the older K-Line version of the 4-6-6 Tank Engine. If it’s been mentioned I missed it. It’s a new model to Lionel and maybe those owners aren’t looking at this thread. Not the easiest of engines to take apart for a look inside. Rick’s method of looking through the spokes could put it to rest. I imagine it’s really tight in there under the shell. It seems only the larger steamers with this arrangement got a spacer. Maybe Lionel feels these engines being a little more underpowered it’s not needed. Just seems odd that some have it and others don’t.
Pat, I have 4 Mikados from different eras of production. They are always on the layout but don’t see a lot of use. Maybe twice around the layout in a session about once a month. Frequent greasing certainly couldn’t hurt. Are there any tell tale signs of the start of the problem that can be checked each time the Loco is serviced without ripping into it ? If I dug that far into one just to look. I’d just send it your way and get it done rather than reassemble just to check again.
@Dave_C posted:Very informative thread. I have the older K-Line version of the 4-6-6 Tank Engine. If it’s been mentioned I missed it. It’s a new model to Lionel and maybe those owners aren’t looking at this thread. Not the easiest of engines to take apart for a look inside. Rick’s method of looking through the spokes could put it to rest. I imagine it’s really tight in there under the shell. It seems only the larger steamers with this arrangement got a spacer. Maybe Lionel feels these engines being a little more underpowered it’s not needed. Just seems odd that some have it and others don’t.
Pat, I have 4 Mikados from different eras of production. They are always on the layout but don’t see a lot of use. Maybe twice around the layout in a session about once a month. Frequent greasing certainly couldn’t hurt. Are there any tell tale signs of the start of the problem that can be checked each time the Loco is serviced without ripping into it ? If I dug that far into one just to look. I’d just send it your way and get it done rather than reassemble just to check again.
Let’s clear up some misnomers on this subject…….first, I hear a lot of folks and I get a lot of emails asking: “ what if I don’t run it much ?” or “ what if I promise to only pull a few cars?” …….folks, there’s no way I can guarantee what is or is not going to happen to the locomotives as they are,…..again, we’ve seen repeated failures on the 2011 batch of K4’s ….we’ve identified certain locomotives that share the same construction as the K4’s …..so those locomotives have a variable ….yes??…..that variable being will they fail??…or will they be ok??…the fix will eliminate that variable …..all together……as far as tell tale signs, the K4’s that are affected just all of the sudden stop moving and start grinding……too much grinding, and it’s curtains for it,….your buying a chassis,….and then on top, they still have the same construction, so you’re right back in the same soup,……I’m all about longevity,….I didn’t pay all this money for locomotives to “ limit “ or let them sit on a shelf, or only run them twice around the layout because I’m scared they’re gonna blow up,…..phooey!!….let’s fix these pups better than the factory could, and run the dog snot out of them!….😉
Pat
Dave C - You may want to look at the 20 sec. video posted by PRR Mike on page 4 of this thread to see what potentially might happen (worst case scenario) to the list of engines which require the spacer alluded to by Pat.
@PH1975 posted:OK Guys - Just so I'm clear, I'm wondering if @naresar could provide the product number of the engine shown in the photos he posted above today? I'm asking because it's always a little confusing when someone has an engine number as part of their moniker (in this case Mikado 4501).
I have the 6-11334 Southern Crescent Pacific #1393 (from 2012) that I already know is on NYC Dave's list above, but I also have the 6-11258 Southern Mikado #4501 (from 2012) and I want to confirm whether it's on Dave's Bad list as well needing the spacer.
Thanks.
2131330 GTW #4070 is the exact locomotive.
@rplst8 posted:I was going to mention this earlier, but as a die-hard Pennsy fan, I didn't want to call undue attention. Maybe someone at the big L is a NYC fan and just trying to make the ol' Standard Railroad of the World look bad.
I've done most of the whining. Sorry about that. When I see stuff like this I tend to go all French Revolution on stuff (heads roll, etc.) especially when the answer is often "let them eat cake."
Nooooooooooooooooo...
Pat maybe you can teach me to do the fix and I can take care of some of them to spare the most diehard Pennsy fans the embarrassment!
Just kidding of course. For all you've done for the forum and the knowledgebase here, I'd be proud to have one of my PRR locomotives where a "Harmon Yards" badge. But only one, lol.
Yeah, that is the thing. So much to fix. Irony makes me laugh all the time, and I need some good laughs.
@PH1975 posted:OK Guys - Just so I'm clear, I'm wondering if @naresar could provide the product number of the engine shown in the photos he posted above today? I'm asking because it's always a little confusing when someone has an engine number as part of their moniker (in this case Mikado 4501).
I have the 6-11334 Southern Crescent Pacific #1393 (from 2012) that I already know is on NYC Dave's list above, but I also have the 6-11258 Southern Mikado #4501 (from 2012) and I want to confirm whether it's on Dave's Bad list as well needing the spacer.
Thanks.
Like Pat has said, the fix will have to come one way or another. Will the engines blow up, it is a good possibility, in their own time. You could have an engine run with no issues for years and years(depending on what your layout is like), and others could blow up after a few years(maybe months) of use. This would of course mainly depend on how the gears move about, some may have more movement than others, thus will most likely suffer consequences sooner than later.
Are any of the engines Ford Pintos? Again, it is going to depend on the movement in the gearbox and what your layout is like. I know I will consult with Pat when I am ready to get things fixed up for every single engine I own that is on the list. I can wait as none of these are current able to be ran as there is no layout with big enough turns to accommodate them. The fix like Pat said is not something that would require a whole tear down of the engine, unless of course it was ran and all the guts in the gearbox are screwed, like the example GunrunnerJohn supplied I believe(on page 1).
@Lou1985 posted:Based on what has been opened on this thread besides the K4 (early Lima Berkshire, NYC Mohawk, ATSF Northern) anything with a large motor in the firebox, dogbone driveshaft, and separate worm shaft has a nice big bushing next to the worm wheel to center it. The J, T1, and S3 are all probably equipped the same way.
This seems to be an issue with old K-Line tooled locomotives with a small 385 style motor facing forward towards the smokebox. Those seem to lack the proper bushing to keep the worm wheel centered.
Guys read what I posted earlier. If you have a old K-Line tooled locomotive with a forward facing (in the smokebox) motor with a worm pressed onto the motor shaft the gearbox is suspect. Anything else is fine.
@Lou1985 posted:Guys read what I posted earlier. If you have a old K-Line tooled locomotive with a forward facing (in the smokebox) motor with a worm pressed onto the motor shaft the gearbox is suspect. Anything else is fine.
I don't think the issue is that clearly defined. Possibly, it's a small to medium Lionel locomotive issue.
The H10 is Lionel (tmcc h9) tooling and has slop.
I think the moguls could be worth a look as well.
As I mentioned earlier. The 10 wheelers appear to have a fixed shaft pressed into the gearbox, not sure what's going on in there.
Having said all that.
Without opening every steam offering from Lionel. There really is no guarantee that every larger locomotive may not have a sideplay problem.
let’s not rule ANY locomotive out until we have concrete proof it either has the big spacer or it doesn’t……yes, Lou you’re probably on the right path, and so is Rick O, ….but this thread can remain open indefinitely and used as a tool to determine those with deficiencies, and those that do not,…..accuracy in diagnosis is key,…..last thing we need on here is misinformation……we didn’t condemn the entire K4 family until we were sure the latest run showed no change in design,……so no guessing, no speculation, no “ I think” ….concrete proof makes the thread a viable tool,….😉
Pat
Well, I'm with the mechanical proof that has been provided and those that know what they're talking about. As I said before, I do intend to get mine fixed through Pat, but it will wait as I have somethings going on and also, it is not that pressing. When I'm ready, I'll message Pat and see what is up with his schedule. I have several on the list, and they all will get a good and thorough looking at to provide more proof if needed as well as fixing.
@RickO posted:I don't think the issue is that clearly defined. Possibly, it's a small to medium Lionel locomotive issue.
The H10 is Lionel (tmcc h9) tooling and has slop.
I think the moguls could be worth a look as well.
As I mentioned earlier. The 10 wheelers appear to have a fixed shaft pressed into the gearbox, not sure what's going on in there.
Having said all that.
Without opening every steam offering from Lionel. There really is no guarantee that every larger locomotive may not have a sideplay problem.
Do the H10 and Moguls have 385 motors with the worms pressed on? If so it could affect every Lionel Locomotive set up that way, which is usually the small ones.
But everything with a large motor and separate worm shaft doesn't have the issue.
Wow... just stumbled onto this thread.
I don't think I have ever hit the "like button" more times. This is a thoughtful, intelligent conversation which is what all forums should be like.
I don't have a stake in this... but I don't think I've seen a better discussion.
Thanks to everyone for helping out; it's awesome! 👍
Mark in Oregon
@Strummer posted:Wow... just stumbled onto this thread.
I don't think I have ever hit the "like button" more times. This is a thoughtful, intelligent conversation which is what all forums should be like.
I don't have a stake in this... but I don't think I've seen a better discussion.
Thanks to everyone for helping out; it's awesome! 👍
Mark in Oregon
And you would think Mark that with over 3000 views and the number of engines we have listed, that there would be more people commenting about probably needing theirs fixed or such. I thought about that when I was putting together the list and going through the Mikado's. So many road names, I surely would have thought it would be on page 20 or so right from the get go. So, don't know why that is, but maybe in due time things will change or perhaps it will be personally emailed to Pat and others about getting theirs fixed, hard to say.
@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:And you would think Mark that with over 3000 views and the number of engines we have listed, that there would be more people commenting about probably needing theirs fixed or such. I thought about that when I was putting together the list and going through the Mikado's. So many road names, I surely would have thought it would be on page 20 or so right from the get go. So, don't know why that is, but maybe in due time things will change or perhaps it will be personally emailed to Pat and others about getting theirs fixed, hard to say.
There’s a good bit of folks bypassing the thread, and contacting me offline…
Pat
@harmonyards posted:There’s a good bit of folks bypassing the thread, and contacting me offline…
Pat
Oh boy. So....are these folks just looking for a preventative?
Or are there a bunch of k4s and Mikados that sound like their making coffee grounds?
@RickO posted:Oh boy. So....are these folks just looking for a preventative?
Or are there a bunch of k4s and Mikados that sound like their making coffee grounds?
Most are K4 owners, some 2011 models having issues, all others wishing for a preemptive strike, …
Pat
Having just re-read this entire thread again (and hitting the "like" button a few more times), one has to wonder how many of these "compromised" models are out there, waiting to fail...
You would think that, instead of adding additional "bell and whistle" effects, Lionel would pay attention to the basics... like making sure these things are capable of running without unnecessary failure. 🤔
Mark in Oregon
@rplst8 posted:Drumroll please…
This is a recently purchased, brand new Legacy K4s from the Warren G. Harding Funeral Train set # 1922031.
Grease packing from the factory:
Top view, maximum extents left and right:
“Worm view”:
I’ll let Pat @harmonyards be the judge…
Because of this thread, I went to eBay to see if there are any offerings there, and I believe there's that same set currently listed, so buyer beware...😳
Mark in Oregon
