Skip to main content

So I was looking more closely at the I1sa in the 2023 catalog. Specifically the ones with the long-haul tender. I think everyone is in agreement that this is former MTH tooling. I have one and they are nice models, but I have the short tender version.

What's got me wondering is that the tender that is pictured looks to be the one from the PRR 4-6-4-4 Q2. You can tell this because of the extremely large coal bunker. That makes it a 180F84 model tender.

MTH was guilty of this too. AFAIK they used the same tender on the Q2, J1a, and I1sa, so you know, no big deal. But I wonder what that means for the MTH Q2 tooling. Did it also go to Lionel? Additionally MTH just announced a run of J1as a few months back. Are there maybe two (or three) copies of the tooling for the 180F84 tender they used with those?

Anyway, I know people complained quite a bit about the lack of a 210F84 behind the J1s on each release (though it's most glaring error was the 5th driver being "tucked" under the firebox). Were 180F84s used with the I1sa? I know that 180F82s were used, but those are the 12 wheel coast-to-coast tenders that look like the ones that ran with M1as and M1bs (210F75). I know the 16 wheel tenders were used with the Hippos too though, here's a picture of one.

http://www.rrpicturearchives.n...ture.aspx?id=4982111

Last edited by rplst8
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

@rplst8 posted:

But I wonder what that means for the MTH Q2 tooling. Did it also go to Lionel? Additionally MTH just announced a run of J1as a few months back. Are there maybe two (or three) copies of the tooling for the 180F84 tender they used with those?



Don't you threaten me with a good time!! haha I would love to see a Q2 get released by either company.

I am glad I wasn't the only one thinking the tender looked familiar. I have no speculation on where tooling landed though. I'm not connected enough to know at the moment.

Here is a list of tenders that were used behind the I1s/sa decapods.  May not be complete.  No 180F84, and the 210F82b says it was converted from a 210F75a.

Class 90F82,      original I1s tender when built.

Class 130 F 82,     formerly 13000 gallons,  82 1/4" deck - Lines East.  No. 3700.  (I1sa Loco).

Class 180 F 82,      No 6000.  (Converted from 180 P 75)  I1sa - Loco (Narrow cast steel frame).

Class 180 F 82a,    Converted from 180 F 79 for I1s, I1sa (Berkley Stoker) Nos. 373, 374, 375, 377 and 378 (N. and W. Tenders)

Class 210 F 82,     Experimental Nos. 7866, 7867 (I1sa Loco) (No. 7866 Berkley Stoker formerly 210 F 78).

Class 210 F 82a,  I1sa,   ("L.T.", Berkley, Duplex and "HT" Stokers).

Class 210 F 82b,  I1sa, (Converted from 210 F 75a).  Berkley Stoker.

Class 250 F 82,     I1sa,  (Converted from 250 P 84, #6100)  Berkley Stoker.

Class 250 F 82a,  I1sa, (Converted from 250 P 75)  Duplex Stoker or Berkley Stoker.

Not sure where it came from, but my notes have this statement:  "One of the PRR’s main heavy haulers – their I-class Decapods – burned roughly 8100 pounds of coal per hour during high-power/low-speed use. An average-sized tender could power it for about 4 ½ hours before refueling of coal was necessary. The Coast-to-Coast tenders allowed the locomotive’s use to be extended to over 7 ½ hours."  I wonder if they had a Honey Bucket or just hung their rears out over the side when they need to go

Last edited by CAPPilot

Here’s some comparisons - 3rd Rail Q2 and J1a tenders:

314660FC-7450-4F72-A462-65CA46CFE5A7AB4ABA59-1261-49E6-AABB-D549C8F5A162

3rd Rail Q2 and I1 tenders:

EB83352B-3A5D-43A3-B60A-1DE00C33B926CE2448E8-C7EC-43A5-ADD7-47D6C96F7C26

Lionel made a pretty proper 210 F-84 for their TMCC  and later J1as:

14109C29-85F0-4808-9394-8A7A750BE826B5E8F16A-1A23-4BB8-A8BE-C13D79A949E2

So maybe Lionel could use their own 210 F-84 tool for the new ex-MTH Decs (close enough?). I hope Lionel got the Q2 and the M1b from MTH (Lionel's J1a is a bit nicer IMO). As much as I'm attached to my 3rd Rails, replacing them with modern Legacy versions would be OK with me over the next few years.

Here's a link I saved a while back: http://www.wsbcos.com/tenders.htm

Attachments

Images (6)
  • 314660FC-7450-4F72-A462-65CA46CFE5A7
  • AB4ABA59-1261-49E6-AABB-D549C8F5A162
  • EB83352B-3A5D-43A3-B60A-1DE00C33B926
  • CE2448E8-C7EC-43A5-ADD7-47D6C96F7C26
  • 14109C29-85F0-4808-9394-8A7A750BE826
  • B5E8F16A-1A23-4BB8-A8BE-C13D79A949E2
Last edited by Norm Charbonneau

Lionel made a pretty proper 210 F-84 for their TMCC  and later J1as:

14109C29-85F0-4808-9394-8A7A750BE826B5E8F16A-1A23-4BB8-A8BE-C13D79A949E2

So maybe Lionel could use their own 210 F-84 tool for the new ex-MTH Decs (close enough?). I hope Lionel got the Q2 and the M1b from MTH (Lionel's J1a is a bit nicer IMO). As much as I'm attached to my 3rd Rails, replacing them with modern Legacy versions would be OK with me over the next few years.

Here's a link I saved a while back: http://www.wsbcos.com/tenders.htm

What was the issue with Lionel's M1b that you think the MTH model is better?

Here are the Mth Q2 and I1 tenders side by side. I1 in the back and Q2 in the front.

Personally, I’d be shocked if Lionel didn’t buy the Q2 tooling. That’d be a terrific model with legacy. From what I understand, Mth also licensed some tools that are being used across multiple models.
B016F994-27BC-47CE-B0AA-C804993C441D

Yeah, that tender is wrong for the Hippo. It does at least have some detail differences though.

This is something I just had to swallow when I got my MTH J1a.

It’s not the end of the world, but I was mostly curious about tooling reuse.

I like @Norm Charbonneau’s idea of using the slightly closer tender from the Lionel J1. Smart cookie that one.

P.S. Norm, i’m not sure I would give up those 3rd Rail models what with their way more accurate tenders (among other things probably). Especially when you could have someone do an upgrade for you.

But if you do, I’d happily buy them from you!

One thing I did notice is that those long haul tenders are larger than the ones that Lionel had on the K4's they offered, at least it sure as heck does look longer. That's the one I'm ordering, don't need no short tenders, haha.

That’s because they are different, here and on the prototype. The K4s “coast-to-coast” tenders were closer to the M1b twelve wheel tenders. They had riveted bodies too AFAIK. The post-stoker K4s shared the same 75” deck height as the M1b too.

Here are the Mth Q2 and I1 tenders side by side. I1 in the back and Q2 in the front.

Personally, I’d be shocked if Lionel didn’t buy the Q2 tooling. That’d be a terrific model with legacy. From what I understand, Mth also licensed some tools that are being used across multiple models.
B016F994-27BC-47CE-B0AA-C804993C441D

P.P.S.

After looking at your pictures and comparing again to the catalog illustrations, it appears to me that Lionel did indeed get the Q2 tooling and they paired that even more wrong tender with the I1.

In the catalog the hatches are transverse like the Q2 tender in your picture instead of parallel to the direction of travel like they should be.

I think I’m good thanks, I do my own stuff:

This is my coast to coast 3rd Rail Dec. I am leaning toward keeping this and ordering a pair of the short tender ones with the modernized front end details.

Sorry wasn’t trying to insinuate you couldn’t, I like the posts you did fixing the High Iron K4s and stuff. I was thinking for the loss you’d take on them it would probably cover the upgrade cost done by a third party.

After reading more about I1s tenders, it looks like they were initially delivered with a 90F82 tender then most received the 210F82a welded tenders before WWII.  While other tenders were used, like the 110F82a from M1s, the 90F82 ans 210F82a seemed to be the I1s primary tenders. Not sure why the 90F82 tender was not included in the other list of Decapod tenders I used above.  I added it.

Also, there are pre-war and post-war versions in the Lionel catalog, so make sure you get the one the best matches your era.  Of the 598 built, around a 100 never were "modernized" so either one will work post war.

Has anyone spoken to Lionel about the tender issue? I recall they were willing to make corrections to the Class A after it had been announced and people found detail discrepancies between models, think it would be worth a shot to ask for the right tender? I want one of the coast-to-coast versions but already have a 3rd Rail I1 and I'm not sure I'd like the visual of the different tenders when they're sitting in the yard together.

Can any rational argument be made for an I1 having a Q2 tender? I'm usually not that steeped in equipment details like this.

@0-Gauge CJ posted:

Can any rational argument be made for an I1 having a Q2 tender? I'm usually not that steeped in equipment details like this.

Well, you got me curious on this.  I would say no, a Q2 tender would not work with the I1.  Here is why I think that based on trying to decifer the convoluted tender data from "Pennsylvania Railroad Classification and Description of Locomotives and Tenders", June 2 1952 .

-The tenders with XXXF82 had an 82" high tender deck (only I1?) with the stoker engine on the engine.

-The tenders with XXXF84 had an 84" high tender deck (Q2/J1/production T1) with the stoker engine on the tender.

Could a Q2 tender be modified to work on an I1?  Probably, but not likely.

I really do like the looks of these engines. I may decide to order two instead of one, but I think I'm going to have to really weigh my options on this. I definitely need some bigger Pennsy steam. Having a bunch of K4's, one M1, and one Texas, this will have more of a challenge or balance if you will to my New York Central fleet.

I will say, these look incredible double headed with the two long haul tenders. I run my Mth versions double headed and sometimes with the short tender in the rear as a pusher. Will try to post some videos

I really do like the looks of these engines. I may decide to order two instead of one, but I think I'm going to have to really weigh my options on this. I definitely need some bigger Pennsy steam. Having a bunch of K4's, one M1, and one Texas, this will have more of a challenge or balance if you will to my New York Central fleet.

I'm in the same boat, as I have nearly a dozen K4's and only a Williams L1 and boardless older H9 for freight. Wish I had ordered an L1 last year.....

@CAPPilot posted:

Well, you got me curious on this.  I would say no, a Q2 tender would not work with the I1.  Here is why I think that based on trying to decifer the convoluted tender data from "Pennsylvania Railroad Classification and Description of Locomotives and Tenders", June 2 1952 .

-The tenders with XXXF82 had an 82" high tender deck (only I1?) with the stoker engine on the engine.

-The tenders with XXXF84 had an 84" high tender deck (Q2/J1/production T1) with the stoker engine on the tender.

Could a Q2 tender be modified to work on an I1?  Probably, but not likely.

Thanks for this info. I did a bit of digging myself for my own curiosity and I had no idea there were so many variations to the tender. I knew there was a K4 version without the dog house, but didn't realize there was more to it than that.

Can anyone definitively confirm that the Q2 tender is longer than a more standard coast-to-coast tender? It looks like it from some pictures posted here but I am not sure. I was thinking of picking up a J1a or an M1 tender shell (would need to wait for the next time they're made, none are in stock) and then swapping the shells. If the Q2 tender is longer, then that idea is, naturally, off the table. I'm starting to think about reaching out to the dealer I pre-ordered with and asking if I can substitute for a short-tender version. This is bothering me a lot more than it should!

@0-Gauge CJ posted:

Thanks for this info. I did a bit of digging myself for my own curiosity and I had no idea there were so many variations to the tender. I knew there was a K4 version without the dog house, but didn't realize there was more to it than that.

Can anyone definitively confirm that the Q2 tender is longer than a more standard coast-to-coast tender? It looks like it from some pictures posted here but I am not sure. I was thinking of picking up a J1a or an M1 tender shell (would need to wait for the next time they're made, none are in stock) and then swapping the shells. If the Q2 tender is longer, then that idea is, naturally, off the table. I'm starting to think about reaching out to the dealer I pre-ordered with and asking if I can substitute for a short-tender version. This is bothering me a lot more than it should!

The body of the Q2 180F84 16 wheel tender is 52’ 10” long.

The body of the I1 180F82 12 wheel “K4s coast-to-coast style” tender is 45’ 4” long.

The body of the K4s 210P75 12 wheel “coast-to-coast” tender is 50’ 2” long.

I cant find exact measurements for the I1 210F82 16 wheel tender. But I believe it’s roughly the same length as the Q2’s. However the coal bunker is much smaller and the hatches are oriented differently.

Edit: I did find one resource that says the 210F82 was 51’ 6” long. P.S. most of my info is based on the drawings found here: http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html

It’s hard to get an apples to apples comparison because not all the drawings have the distances drawn from the same points. To me, the tender deck details are more important, especially since they’ve been done right before.

Last edited by rplst8
@0-Gauge CJ posted:

Thanks for this info. I did a bit of digging myself for my own curiosity and I had no idea there were so many variations to the tender. I knew there was a K4 version without the dog house, but didn't realize there was more to it than that.

Can anyone definitively confirm that the Q2 tender is longer than a more standard coast-to-coast tender? It looks like it from some pictures posted here but I am not sure. I was thinking of picking up a J1a or an M1 tender shell (would need to wait for the next time they're made, none are in stock) and then swapping the shells. If the Q2 tender is longer, then that idea is, naturally, off the table. I'm starting to think about reaching out to the dealer I pre-ordered with and asking if I can substitute for a short-tender version. This is bothering me a lot more than it should!

Since the poster is talking about swapping tender shells on MODEL TRAINS, this discussion and research on prototype tender lengths is meaningless.  It seems like what he needs is for someone who owns an MTH long-tender Decapod, someone owning an MTH Q2, someone owning an MTH M1a/b, someone owning a Lionel M1 a/b, etc. to measure their model tenders.  That way, he can decide if a switch of tender shells on the MODELS is workable.

I don't have a dog in this fight, since my 3rd Rail I1, J1 and Q2 tenders are correct. 

@rplst8 posted:

I'm not sure what you mean by "to get the other numbers."

Well, if you don't have length listed, what do you do, average out for capacity for the other numbers? That is what I mean. The Q2 has the height, length, weight, coal load capacity, water capacity, all those numbers. If you are missing some numbers, what do they do, average it out? I understand that the I1's had different tenders, so maybe that is why there is no fixed length reported. So perhaps the website was using the average numbers for all the other stats but didn't list a length.

I'm not sure if one of the books I have on Pennsy steam goes into the Q2's as I think the majority are the K4's, M1's, Texas and some other engines I can't quite remember. The other Pennsy book I have covers more about routes than engines though there are some details on some, but I doubt covering anything specific.

2 MTH Decs with an MTH Mike. They ran in perfect synch

077

Great shot, John. Like you and Eric posted above, I also ran my MTH Premier Hippos double-headed, and many times at that on my last layout in Paoli, PA where I had a 30+ foot long layout run with mountains and tunnels, just awesome it was (am currently building a new layout in Honey Brook, PA). In fact, I have to say out of all my train running years running those two engines (I had the long-tendered versions) was the most memorable experience of running trains ~ perhaps the double-headed bipolars were a close second.

While I love the PRR engines with Belpaire fireboxes (the Belpaire was developed by engineer Alfred Jules Belpaire from Belgium way back in the 1800s to give more heat transfer), e.g., K4s, M1As, H10s, etc., there's just something about the Hippos that both stand out and complement the rest of their Belpaire cousins; kind of squat-looking yet powerful freight locomotives with all those smaller diameter wheels, and the MTH model had great chuffing sounds ~ likely due to the large resonance chambers, and last but not least was the well-done diecast superstructure with simulated rounded boiler (fyi, they're semi-round with a notch cut out for motor and electronics). The only aspect I didn't care for, which was a trademark for this and other PRR engines, was the Banshee whistle ~ kind of "nails on blackboard" effect to me, though the two forward and 3-backward toots via the DCS remote was pretty good (just don't hold that whistle button down too long without ear plugs

Now, how the heck can I raise the funds to commit to pre-ordering the Legacy version which, if I understand right, will have selectable whistle selection?! Selfishly, this is one model I hope takes a long time to reach the market; the more time the more pennies saved I admit however, ordering anything new these days comes with a risk that they'll be something wrong with the mechanics, or this or that will need fixing or will break; I've got a backlog of engines, and most are Legacy, that need one thing or another done to them. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but this is the reality of our hobby that appears to be getting worse, not better as supposed advancements come down the pike. With that said, if I can figure out a way to budget for it, I'll bite the bullet and pre-order the Hippo.

Last edited by Paul Kallus
@Bob posted:

Since the poster is talking about swapping tender shells on MODEL TRAINS, this discussion and research on prototype tender lengths is meaningless.  It seems like what he needs is for someone who owns an MTH long-tender Decapod, someone owning an MTH Q2, someone owning an MTH M1a/b, someone owning a Lionel M1 a/b, etc. to measure their model tenders.  That way, he can decide if a switch of tender shells on the MODELS is workable.

I don't have a I1 with a long tender or a Q2. But I do have an MTH M1b and J1a. The MTH J1a tender is known to be the same tender as the Q1 except for the details on the deck.

I will try swapping those tender shells (M1, J1) when I get back home on Saturday or Sunday.

That said MTH used a totally different shell and frame as far as I know. The M1 shell is riveted and I'm not sure if it's a 210X75 or 250X75.

Well, if you don't have length listed, what do you do, average out for capacity for the other numbers? That is what I mean. The Q2 has the height, length, weight, coal load capacity, water capacity, all those numbers. If you are missing some numbers, what do they do, average it out?

Ah, I think I see the confusion. The numbers I had for the 210F82 were from a forum post on the PRRTHS forum. Not the PRR diagrams site.

Last edited by rplst8
@rplst8 posted:

Ah, I think I see the confusion. The numbers I had for the 210F82 were from a forum post on the PRRTHS forum. Not the PRR diagrams site.

I wasn't saying your numbers were off, where I had looked is what I meant. I think part of the numbers were from Wikipedia, others where a site I have not been on before. I don't think the I1's were on the other site, but the Wikipedia.

I really do like the looks of these engines. I may decide to order two instead of one, but I think I'm going to have to really weigh my options on this. I definitely need some bigger Pennsy steam. Having a bunch of K4's, one M1, and one Texas, this will have more of a challenge or balance if you will to my New York Central fleet.

Ironically, I am in the opposite position - waiting for Lionel to do an updated run of K4's and M1's before I am ready for an L1 or M1.

If they offered an L1 with a doghouse, then I might have pulled the trigger on that one.

@Prr7688 posted:

Ironically, I am in the opposite position - waiting for Lionel to do an updated run of K4's and M1's before I am ready for an L1 or M1.

If they offered an L1 with a doghouse, then I might have pulled the trigger on that one.

I got lucky on my M1. I had been out of the hobby and saw a video on it. By chance I called up my local train store which I had not been in for quite some time. He had the set, which was a surprise, I told him I would be there the next night if he was open, he said yes. I popped by the bank, got the money, drove down and paid cash. It was the best purchase I have made, all because of being lucky. He has had stuff come in, that I haven't ordered, and I see it for a bit, and it disappears.

@rplst8 posted:

That's my favorite part of the Hippos and MTH H10s!

I especially like this version, and I'm hoping Lionel gets a license to use it in the L1s and I1s.

https://youtu.be/r2aFPlXJqKw

Best around the 1:30 to 2:00 min mark.

Now that is dang eerie. Talk about piercing, that will definitely wake your behind up if you are asleep, that much is certain.

@Prr7688 posted:

If they offered an L1 with a doghouse, then I might have pulled the trigger on that one.

Unless I'm misunderstanding. There are 2 Prr L1 Mikados with doghouse in the Lionel 2022 c2 catalog.

The $789.00 preorder prices on these was a reasonable by today's standards.

They are due June/July and are the Mth tooling:

https://www.lionelstore.com/Pe...EGACY-L1-Mikado-1627

https://www.lionelstore.com/Pe...EGACY-L1-Mikado-1343

Back to the decapod discussion.

Last edited by RickO
@Prr7688 posted:

Ironically, I am in the opposite position - waiting for Lionel to do an updated run of K4's and M1's before I am ready for an L1 or M1.

If they offered an L1 with a doghouse, then I might have pulled the trigger on that one.

@Bob posted:

In addition to 3rd Rail, scale L1s with doghouse models were offered by Williams, Weaver and MTH.  Prr7688 must be a die-hard Lionel guy.

And didn’t actually look at the catalog?

https://www.lionel.com/product...-mikado-1343-2331021

@rplst8 posted:

That's my favorite part of the Hippos and MTH H10s!

I especially like this version, and I'm hoping Lionel gets a license to use it in the L1s and I1s.

https://youtu.be/r2aFPlXJqKw

Best around the 1:30 to 2:00 min mark.

Actually, it sounds like the I1s have Pennsy 3 chime like the M1s.

https://youtu.be/tro-mlwlE6A

With 5 legacy whistles I imagine the banshee and 3 chime will be in the selection.

@RickO posted:

Actually, it sounds like the I1s have Pennsy 3 chime like the M1s.

https://youtu.be/tro-mlwlE6A

With 5 legacy whistles I imagine the banshee and 3 chime will be in the selection.

They probably will have both like you say. I don’t think that whistles were specific to the whole class. Nearly all Pennsy steam was built by two different shops. Altoona and Baldwin.

I imagine the whistles that were affixed were probably influenced by that fact, rebuilds and shop visits, and maybe even the preference of the crews.

That said, I don’t know for certain.

Just checked out the links above for the L1 Mikado from 2022 catalog, had completely forgot about them, and saw the list price. With the understanding that the I1s are a bit larger, are there other factors in the large price difference ($500) between them? Both have whistle steam and I think both are "new" tooling acquired from MTH. This is a head scratcher...I can see $200 more for the I1s in just the overall size.

@Paul Kallus posted:

Just checked out the links above for the L1 Mikado from 2022 catalog, had completely forgot about them, and saw the list price. With the understanding that the I1s are a bit larger, are there other factors in the large price difference ($500) between them? Both have whistle steam and I think both are "new" tooling acquired from MTH. This is a head scratcher...I can see $200 more for the I1s in just the overall size.

Indeed. Maybe the licensing costs for the I1 tooling were higher? I don’t know if the L1 was a “from scratch” effort like the I1 might have been?

That or Lionel kept the L1 price low and released it first, to snag more sales of both from people that wanted some diversity in their Lionel-built PRR freight locomotives and settled on the L1.

It’s unclear to me otherwise because while inflation has been a problem, it certainly hasn’t gotten that much worse in the last six months.

@Paul Kallus posted:

With the understanding that the I1s are a bit larger, are there other factors in the large price difference ($500) between them? Both have whistle steam and I think both are "new" tooling acquired from MTH. This is a head scratcher...I can see $200 more for the I1s in just the overall size.

Every now and then. Lionel has an MSRP that's much easier on the wallet. Which is why I jumped on the L1 Mikado

The first MR s3 , and the Prr h10 from a few years ago also fall into this catagory

For comparison, the last "K Line tooled" mikado from Lionel was cataloged at $1299.99

I think the difference in price between the L1 and decapod is not as much "why is the decapod so high" as much as the L1 comes in reasonably priced as I mentioned above.

@rplst8 posted:

And didn’t actually look at the catalog?

https://www.lionel.com/product...-mikado-1343-2331021

@RickO posted:

Unless I'm misunderstanding. There are 2 Prr L1 Mikados with doghouse in the Lionel 2022 c2 catalog.

The $789.00 preorder prices on these was a reasonable by today's standards.

They are due June/July and are the Mth tooling:

https://www.lionelstore.com/Pe...EGACY-L1-Mikado-1627

https://www.lionelstore.com/Pe...EGACY-L1-Mikado-1343

Back to the decapod discussion.

Whoops! I realize I misspoke... I would have been interested in a pre-war L1 with doghouse. The only ones that were offered outright with doghouse were the post-war versions. The legacy set in the catalog did have pre-war L1 with doghouse, however I wasn't interested in the set as a whole (although may see if a dealer will break the set).

@Bob posted:

In addition to 3rd Rail, scale L1s with doghouse models were offered by Williams, Weaver and MTH.  Prr7688 must be a die-hard Lionel guy.

I would be interested in other manufactures' versions if they had the "bells and whistles" that come with Legacy out of the box as I am not really interested in after-market upgrades at this point in my collecting. I also don't have DCS (and no intent to get it at this time) so a second-hand MTH one would be out.

Last edited by Prr7688

I'm trying to remember from the catalog show, did Ryan say that the I1's would be moving coal with it double headed or even a pusher at the end or somewhere in the train?

I believe one of the videos I watched recently did have a double headed train, but I don't think it was I1's. I can't remember what video it was, other than it being Pennsylvania Railroad.

Any ideas?

Dave, am not sure of the video you're talking about, but in the Pennsy Power books by Staufer their are photos of multiple Is in action, pushers included.

Regarding the L1 Mikado and the I1 Decapod, has it been confirmed by Lionel that both are based on the former Premier dyes that MTH sold to Lionel? If so, am curious if these includes the drive-trains and all mechanicals? I would think yes but am far from an expert on the guts of electric trains and "the what and how" of the sale/transfer of such property includes.

The reason I ask is because as an owner of the Premier I1s I can verify that they are very-well engineered machines, although that observation is anecdotal as I've only run the heck out of them and the only maintenance I've performed is lubing and traction tires, nonetheless it'd be reassuring to know that the Legacy version will have the same mechanics (albeit Lionel is using Canon motors instead of Pittman) just different control and sound system.

FWIW: I've performed a visual check of my Legacy PRR K4s and Premier Decapod; and assuming Lionel uses the K4s boiler on the L1 Mikado, I still cannot understand the large price difference between them based on boiler size and detail alone. However, it is possible the Decapod drive train is more complex than the L1 Mikado (10 wheels vs. 8 wheels) and if true would warrant a higher price.

At the end of the day, and despite the price, it is exciting for us PRR fans to see an O-scale model of the Hippos with Legacy and Railsounds. MTH last produced their scale model in 2006, and their very-well-proportioned design will live on. The Hippos were a staple for the PRR and were a tremendous freight mover and lend themselves well to double and triple heading .

Last edited by Paul Kallus

Paul, it was one of the 15 videos I watched this weekend. The majority were all New York Central videos mainly with Dreyfuss Hudson's, but I did manage to stumble upon either one or two videos that had Pennsylvania Steam in action. My problem is trying to get back and see what I was watching. I watch quite a bit of stuff day to day, so I'd need a bit of time on the weekend to look back. The other problem is not remembering what the title is. It could have well been a mixed video with Penny vs New York Central, but those usually stand out. I'll have to check this coming weekend.

@Paul Kallus posted:


Regarding the L1 Mikado and the I1 Decapod, has it been confirmed by Lionel that both are based on the former Premier dyes that MTH sold to Lionel?

Yes

If so, am curious if these includes the drive-trains and all mechanicals?

Well, Lionel has been redesigning most of their gearboxes, as well as those of other tooling i.e. K Line and adding extra gears to either lower the speed or compensate for a shortcoming either electronically or with the now standard Canon can motor that is no where near as good as the Pittmans used in the mid 2000's. The rest of the lcomotive will probably be the same.

FWIW: I've performed a visual check of my Legacy PRR K4s and Premier Decapod; and assuming Lionel uses the K4s boiler on the L1 Mikado,

The Legacy K4 is K Line tooling. Its not likely a direct bolt on to the MTH decapod chassis. If they were to modify it, it wouldn't work for the K 4 chassis. I assume they will use the MTH boiler.

I still cannot understand the large price difference between them based on boiler size and detail alone. However, it is possible the Decapod drive train is more complex than the L1 Mikado (10 wheels vs. 8 wheels) and if true would warrant a higher price.

I surmised an explanation in my response to your questioning the price above. In short. Its not so much that the decapod is higher , but rather the Mikado is a" good deal " judging by Lionels previous pricing for previous Mikado offerings which were $1299. I paid the same preorder price for a Legacy heavy Mikado back in 2014, as for the current L1's. ( The more I think of it at $789.00 preorder price. I should have bought 2 L1's}

See here, the USRA Mikados are the K Line scale Mikados Lionel has had multiple runs of:

http://www.lionel.com/search?q...el%20legacy%20mikado

At the end of the day, and despite the price, it is exciting for us PRR fans to see an O-scale model of the Hippos with Legacy and Railsounds. MTH last produced their scale model in 2006, and their very-well-proportioned design will live on.

Agreed.

Last edited by RickO

Great picture-video and information, respectively, Dave and Rick, thanks! The whistle soundings are definitely cool and don't sound banshee-like, more of a throaty multi-chimer. In the one color photo of the dirty I1, you can certainly the resemblance to a Hippo

As I mentioned earlier, the Premier Hippo has a simulated-circular boiler underneath the mid-section that is very well done, and in studying the photos Dave provided above it's very accurate to the real thing.

Any idea what sort of whistle that is sounding out there? Almost reminds me of the Black River and Western's #60's old whistle before they replaced it recently.

Sounds like a Pennsy 3 chime, a little worn /raspy.

Here's a compilation of 1361's 3 chime. It sounds different in every clip.

https://youtu.be/Wdg7hcccGbQ

Lionel has a nice pennsy 3 chime they used on the Legacy M1b. Something a bit more raspy was used on the newer Legacy m1a. Maybe the decapod will have both available.

Last edited by RickO

One question I have is did the Pennsy have assigned whistles to classes? Is it possible that there could be a couple different whistle types for the same class of engine like the Decapods? I do know one of the other videos I listened to the whistle sounded deeper than the one I posted here, but not like the big whistles like the ones we find common on big N&W steam.

Pennsy had exactly two whistles: the single-chime "banshee" freight whistle and the multi-chime passenger whistle.  That's it.  The multi-chime whistle was applied to later freight classes like the M1 4-8-2's.  Other freight power often had their single-chime whistles changed out during the 1940's-50's.

The different pitches were due to the different boiler pressures in the locomotives: 205 psi for K4s and L1s vs. 250 psi for I1s, M1/M1a and 270 psi for M1b.

@RickO posted:

Sounds like a Pennsy 3 chime, a little worn /raspy.

Here's a compilation of 1361's 3 chime. It sounds different in every clip.

https://youtu.be/Wdg7hcccGbQ

Lionel has a nice pennsy 3 chime they used on the Legacy M1b. Something a bit more raspy was used on the newer Legacy m1a. Maybe the decapod will have both available.

Rick:

It would be great if the M1a whistle from the 2014 Legacy version is one of the options available. It's my favorite whistle by comparison to those on the other Lionel and MTH steam engines I own.

Pat

@Bob posted:

Pennsy had exactly two whistles: the single-chime "banshee" freight whistle and the multi-chime passenger whistle.  That's it.  The multi-chime whistle was applied to later freight classes like the M1 4-8-2's.  Other freight power often had their single-chime whistles changed out during the 1940's-50's.

The different pitches were due to the different boiler pressures in the locomotives: 205 psi for K4s and L1s vs. 250 psi for I1s, M1/M1a and 270 psi for M1b.

Yeah, if they were the same dia, legnth, and cut, then I would agree, pressure will change the note.  I mean it will change the note anyway, but also if those three dims are held constant.  The T1 had 300psi so it woul dhave probably sounded a bit different yet.

I ordered the two postwar numbers with the short tenders.  The L1s are due in early summer and they should give a good idea on how Lionel will treat these ex-MTH models. It seems like Lionel doesn't tout the scale coupler hardware anymore although it's been showing up on the new engines I've looked at or taken delivery of (Class A, Y3). I really appreciate that they do it for us weirdos that like the Kadees.

I hope Lionel got ahold of MTH's nice H10, that would be awesome with Legacy.

I ordered the two postwar numbers with the short tenders.  The L1s are due in early summer and they should give a good idea on how Lionel will treat these ex-MTH models. It seems like Lionel doesn't tout the scale coupler hardware anymore although it's been showing up on the new engines I've looked at or taken delivery of (Class A, Y3). I really appreciate that they do it for us weirdos that like the Kadees.

I hope Lionel got ahold of MTH's nice H10, that would be awesome with Legacy.

Honestly, the sound set for the H10 even back in the 5v version was really good.

A minor yet cosmetically interesting point; as Chris pointed out in his detailed video review, one of the short-tendered versions has the PRR maroon colored cab roof (shown as prototypically correct hue) but the same model has the wrong orange colored tender deck whereas none of the long-tendered versions have the PRR maroon colored option. Taking a wild guess, the Juniata shops used this color (3-digit cab #s) whereas the Baldwin Works did not (later 4-digit cab #s)? Personally, I like the PRR maroon colored roofs, but not so much the orange red that sometimes gets done on the toy-train production and catalog lines

Last edited by Paul Kallus
@Paul Kallus posted:

Copy-that Tom and Dave.

I have to admit I prefer the early version headlight and dynamo combo, assuming the early version has dynamo behind headlight; looks classic PRR to me.

FWIW: the Legacy PRR M1a mountains had the darker PRR color; whereas the MTH Premier Decapods had the brighter orange color.

Yeah Paul, MrMuffin when he was looking over the catalog commented about a few things about the Decapods. I think though that everything or just about everything has been chatted about it here. Yeah, the headlight does look great where it is supposed to be before it got moved, the PRR Atlantic's from I think around 2017's offerings looked great because that is how the headlight was on them. I actually have a Strasburg mug with #460 on it I think on the turntable and the headlight is the main focus on the cup since it is by the handle.

Add Reply

Post
This forum is sponsored by Lionel, LLC

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.
×
×