Opinions on Legacy Switchers Please

I have very little experience with 3-rail (just building my first small shelf layout) but I have Legacy SW1 & SW8s and they run really well (and crawl really well) and the sound is great -- especially the SW8. But the electro couplers leave a little to be desired...sometimes they are a little reluctant to latch and sometimes don't always like to unlatch properly when fully stopped - you can hear the unlatch mechanism fire but the claw coupler sometimes needs a little coaxing by pulling the loco away at the same time as the release. But as said, I'm new to 3-rail so maybe this is just how it is?

Update: I just did a little 30 minute switching session with the new Cab3 app and as luck would have it the electro-couplers worked just fine. They will give me problems from time to time, but there's also the added variability of the freight car couplers...switching out rolling stock with a good operational couplers certainly helps. Anyway, I hope I didn't leave too negative an impression as that wasn't my intent. I'm more used to running kadees on On30 which operate quite differently...not that they don't have their own set of problems.

But I do love the way these switchers run -- running @1 smph with the new Cab3 app is no problem (probably not really 1 smph, but it's close enough).

I have the Legacy SW7, couplers are fine, but it's not much of a puller.  These are single horizontal motored with driveshafts to each truck.  It's a cool little switcher, but just like the real thing, it's not a power champ.

Ok. Thanks for the responses. On the plus side you can do a steady 1 smph but it's a bummer if the couplers are reluctant to latch. The condition you describe where the couplers open but the car doesn't want to depart is common with MTH engines as well if it's just a single car. And the single motor explains a lot. After trying to no avail to get the shell off of a Legacy GP9 because of all the electronics Lionel has crammed inside, I wondered how they could make things work in the smaller volume of a switcher. I can live with the lower pulling power though.

@Scott J posted:

Ok. Thanks for the responses. On the plus side you can do a steady 1 smph but it's a bummer if the couplers are reluctant to latch. The condition you describe where the couplers open but the car doesn't want to depart is common with MTH engines as well if it's just a single car. And the single motor explains a lot. After trying to no avail to get the shell off of a Legacy GP9 because of all the electronics Lionel has crammed inside, I wondered how they could make things work in the smaller volume of a switcher. I can live with the lower pulling power though.

The SW-1 and SW-8 have dual motors with flywheels.

FWIW and from what I've read, the main problem with sticky lobster claw couplers are rough unrefined moving edges of the plastic pieces...if you pull them apart (requires drilling out and replacing a rivet) and sand the rough edges, that apparently makes a big difference. I don't have the rivet tool (yet) but if I stay with 3-rail I'm going to look into this.

I should add that I typically switch single cars, so that may also be part of my coupling/uncoupling problem. I'm expecting too much from the rather crude lobster claw design & manufacture.

You don’t need a rivet tool for the coupler rivets, a center punch will flare the rivet. Thats all thats needed. Legacy has been around for over 15 years and three generation of electronics. Most all the early diesels came with two motors and are just as smooth.

Pete

Some years back I had a chance to switch with a Vision line Genset.  It was a single-motored unit, but one of the slowest, smoothest locos I've ever had the pleasure to run.

I'm not personally a fan of MTH's diesels with two vertical motors.  I have examples in my own collection where the motors fight each other below 4 or 5 scale mph; all of the bucking and jerking getting up to speed spoils the illusion of realism.  The switchers especially have a low hood, which necessitates using tiny motors with tiny flywheels.  They're geared just like road diesels for a top speed of 100+ mph, which inevitably leaves some slow-speed performance on the table (prototype SWs had a top speed of 45 mph.)  I'll take the hit on pulling power and choose a Lionel SW with single motor and shaft drive every time.

Also- It's not whether a loco will run continuously at 1 mph.  Unless you're flood-loading coal hoppers, even in real life locos don't do that.  It's how gracefully your model oozes from zero... to one... to two mph that makes it prototypical.  Someday I'm going to objectively document this with a stroboscope or high-speed videography (easy enough to do with an iPhone!)  Until then you can take my word for it.  Or buy both, and experiment for yourself.

@Ted S posted:

Also- It's not whether a loco will run continuously at 1 mph.  Unless you're flood-loading coal hoppers, even in real life locos don't do that.  It's how gracefully your model oozes from zero... to one... to two mph that makes it prototypical.  Someday I'm going to objectively document this with a stroboscope or high-speed videography (easy enough to do with an iPhone!)  Until then you can take my word for it.  Or buy both, and experiment for yourself.

Yes, the lack of "oozing" is noticeable and unfortunate. Would re-wiring the motors in series help? The fastest I run my switchers is maybe 10 smph so top speed isn't an issue.

@Norton posted:

You don’t need a rivet tool for the coupler rivets, a center punch will flare the rivet. Thats all thats needed.

Pete

May I ask what you use to punch out the pin?

@Garfield Irwin posted:

FWIW and from what I've read, the main problem with sticky lobster claw couplers are rough unrefined moving edges of the plastic pieces...if you pull them apart (requires drilling out and replacing a rivet) and sand the rough edges, that apparently makes a big difference. I don't have the rivet tool (yet) but if I stay with 3-rail I'm going to look into this.

The coupler knuckle is metal on any Lionel Legacy locomotive that I've seen.  However, you are correct, you can make the couplers "butter smooth" by cleaning up the knuckle latching surfaces.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

The coupler knuckle is metal on any Lionel Legacy locomotive that I've seen.  However, you are correct, you can make the couplers "butter smooth" by cleaning up the knuckle latching surfaces.

Thanks, I don't have any problem with the electro couplers sticking, it's the couplers on the rolling stock. Even brand new Atlas couplers can be sticky right out of the box.

I assume folks have tried the graphite treatment on sticky couplers, or a plastic safe lubricant?  Any thoughts?

@Garfield Irwin posted:

Thanks, I don't have any problem with the electro couplers sticking, it's the couplers on the rolling stock. Even brand new Atlas couplers can be sticky right out of the box.

Rolling stock couplers do tend to be more troublesome, some brands more than others.

@Garfield Irwin posted:

May I ask what you use to punch out the pin?

I just grind off the head with the edge of a Dremel cutoff wheel. Can be problematic to try and squeeze or punch off from the flared end. The diecast couplers can break easily under the force. BTDT.

Any loss of blueing can be restored with a cold gun blue.

Pete

@Norton posted:

I just grind off the head with the edge of a Dremel cutoff wheel. Can be problematic to try and squeeze or punch off from the flared end. The diecast couplers can break easily under the force. BTDT.

Any loss of blueing can be restored with a cold gun blue.

Pete

Thank you!

Garfield, I like the look of your layout. Would like to see some more pictures of it. Don’t want to get in debate over Kadee’s as everyone has a preference. Your familiar with them from other scales. Is there a reason you are using the 3 rail couplers on your rolling stock. Longer cars and tight turns are one obstacle. I do some switching. What got me sold was the ability to pickup a single car on a siding without chasing it down the track. You can still retain your coil couplers at least on Lionel engines as long as you go with the 805 Kadee’s.

@Ted S posted:

Some years back I had a chance to switch with a Vision line Genset.  It was a single-motored unit, but one of the slowest, smoothest locos I've ever had the pleasure to run.

I'm not personally a fan of MTH's diesels with two vertical motors.  I have examples in my own collection where the motors fight each other below 4 or 5 scale mph; all of the bucking and jerking getting up to speed spoils the illusion of realism.  The switchers especially have a low hood, which necessitates using tiny motors with tiny flywheels.  They're geared just like road diesels for a top speed of 100+ mph, which inevitably leaves some slow-speed performance on the table (prototype SWs had a top speed of 45 mph.)  I'll take the hit on pulling power and choose a Lionel SW with single motor and shaft drive every time.

Also- It's not whether a loco will run continuously at 1 mph.  Unless you're flood-loading coal hoppers, even in real life locos don't do that.  It's how gracefully your model oozes from zero... to one... to two mph that makes it prototypical.  Someday I'm going to objectively document this with a stroboscope or high-speed videography (easy enough to do with an iPhone!)  Until then you can take my word for it.  Or buy both, and experiment for yourself.

This confirms the advantage in low speed control that I am very familiar with. MTH diesels are smooth enough for me and realistic enough with a low acceleration setting up to 4 or 5 smph but not a chance of getting smooth steady speed at less than 4. Unfortunately I only have the Cab 1L and that just doesn't provide enough control or feedback for me. I understand the big orange speed control wheel but don't like it. Really just not a fan of the Cab 1L remote overall vs the DCS remote. Also sounds like my coupler issue is probably unique to that particular engine.

In all the discussion on coupler repair/improvement are we saying that the electro coupler can be fixed while it is still on the engine? If I have to take a Legacy engine apart forget it. Also, once the rivet is removed does the mechanism come apart and go back together easily? Or is there a spring I need to catch and reinstall?

Thanks for all of the discussion!

@Scott J posted:

Unfortunately I only have the Cab 1L and that just doesn't provide enough control or feedback for me.

I only have a Lionel Universal remote, but my initial experience with the new Cab3 app was much better (and better than the Lionchief app). I'll try to do a short video and post it later.

The initial startup is more abrupt than I'd like -- not exactly the ideal "oozing startup" mentioned above, but it wasn't exactly terrible either.

I have one legacy/ BT switcher- a PC SW1200. Single motor shaft drive. It can really creep better than any twin can-motor can.

I've run it with my Cab 1L and the BT app, prefer the remote. I haven't tried the new Cab3 app yet but will soon.

As for couplers- I've given up and use the 5-finger switcher/ hand of god regularly.

@Dave_C posted:

Garfield, I like the look of your layout. Would like to see some more pictures of it. Don’t want to get in debate over Kadee’s as everyone has a preference. Your familiar with them from other scales. Is there a reason you are using the 3 rail couplers on your rolling stock. Longer cars and tight turns are one obstacle. I do some switching. What got me sold was the ability to pickup a single car on a siding without chasing it down the track. You can still retain your coil couplers at least on Lionel engines as long as you go with the 805 Kadee’s.

Thanks Dave...I'm building a simple shelf switching layout to go around the walls of my small home office -- about 8'x8'x11' with narrow shelves (13", 20" and 5" respectively). It's very much a work in process but here's a quick pan if you're interested. I'm just going to run an SW8 and GP30 around it for switching duties...very slowly! LOL

As for the claws vs kadees issue, that was the topic in another thread I started...

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...e-with-claw-couplers

but that thread got locked by the moderator! It seems the claws vs kadee debates get kind of hot around here! LOL

Anyway, when I decided to build a small 3-rail layout for my home office (initially inspired by Youtuber Steve of Steve's Trains) I was convinced the only way to go was with kadees, but I ended up staying with the lobster claws. Firstly I found native 3-rail rolling stock runs much more reliably on my Atlas switches vs. 2-rail, and secondly I didn't want to lose the use of the electro-couplers which are mighty handy on a switching layout. Also, turns out I don't mind the look of the lobster claws! They kind of go with that third rail if you know what I mean. I expect things might be different if I was building a 2-rail scale layout, but that's a discussion for another day/layout.

Kadees are certainly visually superior, but my experience suggested kadees still can have problems staying coupled on tight curves, an still have to be managed by hand much of the time. After playing around with both kadees and lobster claws I'm now of the opinion that a fine-tuned lobster claw can function almost as well and are simply better suited to the 3-rail experience. JMO of course.

@Scott J

FWIW Here's a quick video of my Lionel Legacy SW-8 running at 1smph using the new Cab3 app....

@Garfield Irwin posted:

Yes, the lack of "oozing" is noticeable and unfortunate. Would re-wiring the motors in series help? The fastest I run my switchers is maybe 10 smph so top speed isn't an issue.

For any given voltage, series wiring will cut your speed in half .  If the loco doesn't have speed control from the factory, rewiring the motors in series should calm it down.  If it does have speed control, it still might help a little, but there could be unpredictable effects so proceed at your own risk.

On vertically-motored diesels from MTH, Weaver, etc., one truck cannot "push" the other.  So when one motor/truck encounters friction and "sticks," the speed control increases power until it breaks loose.  The loco surges briefly.  Then speed control reduces power, and it sticks again.  Rinse, lather, repeat until track speed is high enough to put the motors in the linear portion of their speed-voltage curve.  This phenomenon seems more noticeable on locos where the flywheels are small or thin.  Circa 2008, Lionel switched to back-drivable gears whereby the motors can actually help each other.  So you're less likely to see this behavior on a Legacy GP9, etc.

Locos are longer than they are tall.  So by orienting the drivetrain fore-and-aft, the motor can be longer, producing more torque.  The flywheels can be thicker, too.  1,000,000 model railroaders in other scales do it this way.  Vertical motors are a toy-train thing, originally because of tight curves.  Today because the modular dual-motor setup costs less to produce, is easier to service, and it leaves plenty of room for that big stack of circuit boards that we can't live without.

AFAIC, couplers in 3-rail O are a lost cause.  Remember, there are no NMRA-like standards; as much fault lies with the heterogeneity of rolling stock as with the locos.  I'm with RSJB18, if it doesn't couple on the first try I use my hands.  So much for destroying the illusion of realism!    The "Hand of God" approach also requires that your yards and sidings be within arms' reach.  My $.02.

I don't have a Legacy switcher.  (I sold a Genset that gave me a lot of problems.). I do have an MTH switcher (PS3) and it works very well - couplers are reliable and slow speed operation is excellent.  On the advice of the late and great Marty F., I also converted a Williams SW switcher (the one that has the die cast chassis, so it is nice and heavy and stable) to PS2 3V, and this is a terrific switcher.  Couplers are reliable (part of MTH kit), slow speed is perfect, and it pulls like a tank if you need it to do so.  I am not sure if that conversion is cost effective anymore, but this locomotive sees a ton of usage and folks are continually surprised at how it performs.  But Marty knew what he was talking about so I shouldn't be surprised.

The Lionel switchers are probably fine - Legacy is great for speed control and the detailing looks great.  A little graphite goes a long way with recalcitrant couplers.  Also even track work as well.  But if I needed a switcher, I would have no problem trying out one of the Lionel models.  If you aren't worried about whether it is cost effective, I would find one of the Williams SWs in an acceptable road name and convert it to PS3 or have someone do that work for you.  Candidly, for running quality and durability, I am going to guess that is your best bet.  

I have two Legacy switchers: an ATSF NW2 and a BN SW1200. I regularly see BN SW1200's pass through King Street Station with 30 cars in tow.

I rate these units a D+.  While they look pretty, they are gutless wonders. The motor overheats pulling anything more than 10 cars.  I found that the difficult way. I had my SW1200 pulling 20 scale tank cars. After 10 minutes the unit froze. The motor was so hot that plastic components melted. After taking the unit apart, I was able to repair with epoxy and unfreeze the unit. In a carefully controlled experiment, the NW2 will do the same thing. Both units operate ok, but only with trains 10 cars or less. They can't be used like the prototype.

If I need a train to be pulled by a switcher, I generally go to my postwar 623 in which I installed TMCC. The 623 will pull 20 scale cars with no problem. This is subjective, but I find the postwar NW2 shell has better cast details such as hexagonal bolts and doors. Thus, while my Legacy switchers get in occasional service, they spend most of their time on a shelf.

The Legacy switchers I find to be gutless wonders that overheat with any type of work, but they look pretty. 

@WBC posted:

I have two Legacy switchers: an ATSF NW2 and a BN SW1200. I regularly see BN SW1200's pass through King Street Station with 30 cars in tow.

I rate these units a D+.  While they look pretty, they are gutless wonders. The motor overheats pulling anything more than 10 cars.  I found that the difficult way. I had my SW1200 pulling 20 scale tank cars. After 10 minutes the unit froze. The motor was so hot that plastic components melted. After taking the unit apart, I was able to repair with epoxy and unfreeze the unit. In a carefully controlled experiment, the NW2 will do the same thing. Both units operate ok, but only with trains 10 cars or less. They can't be used like the prototype.

If I need a train to be pulled by a switcher, I generally go to my postwar 623 in which I installed TMCC. The 623 will pull 20 scale cars with no problem. This is subjective, but I find the postwar NW2 shell has better cast details such as hexagonal bolts and doors. Thus, while my Legacy switchers get in occasional service, they spend most of their time on a shelf.

The Legacy switchers I find to be gutless wonders that overheat with any type of work, but they look pretty.

Ok, yikes! If that's true I don't have much use for these based on the way I operate my layout. Switchers have a to move a few cars and sometimes a lot of cars to get them to where the bigger engines can connect and run laps. Wow, they really overheat under load? Electronics heat transfer is my career profession. Sure would like to understand where Lionel under-designed for heat transfer. I know for example the early MTH PS 2's have totally inadequate heat sinking for the power FETs and I have overheated those engines. But these shut down without damage when they get to hot.

Thanks for this great reply. I wonder what feedback GRJ might have on this.

@Garfield Irwin posted:

Thanks Dave...I'm building a simple shelf switching layout to go around the walls of my small home office -- about 8'x8'x11' with narrow shelves (13", 20" and 5" respectively). It's very much a work in process but here's a quick pan if you're interested. I'm just going to run an SW8 and GP30 around it for switching duties...very slowly! LOL

As for the claws vs kadees issue, that was the topic in another thread I started...

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...e-with-claw-couplers

but that thread got locked by the moderator! It seems the claws vs kadee debates get kind of hot around here! LOL

Anyway, when I decided to build a small 3-rail layout for my home office (initially inspired by Youtuber Steve of Steve's Trains) I was convinced the only way to go was with kadees, but I ended up staying with the lobster claws. Firstly I found native 3-rail rolling stock runs much more reliably on my Atlas switches vs. 2-rail, and secondly I didn't want to lose the use of the electro-couplers which are mighty handy on a switching layout. Also, turns out I don't mind the look of the lobster claws! They kind of go with that third rail if you know what I mean. I expect things might be different if I was building a 2-rail scale layout, but that's a discussion for another day/layout.

Kadees are certainly visually superior, but my experience suggested kadees still can have problems staying coupled on tight curves, an still have to be managed by hand much of the time. After playing around with both kadees and lobster claws I'm now of the opinion that a fine-tuned lobster claw can function almost as well and are simply better suited to the 3-rail experience. JMO of course.

Great shelf layout. Love the use of the PTF building flats. I have those as well.

@Scott J posted:

Great shelf layout. Love the use of the PTF building flats. I have those as well.

Thanks Scott -- always a challenge squeezing o-scale into a small area. When shelf space is limited PTF flats come in mighty handy! ;-)