Poor traction/pulling power on PW lionel

Are all the drive wheels sitting on the track? This loco is listed as having Magnetraction on both drive axles, so the wheels should grip the track and not spin. Most of the weight is on the drive wheels, so there should not be any traction problems.

(You mention a battery, does your loco have a horn? If so, there is no mention of a horn in the #204 in the literature I have examined).

Larry

What track are you using?

PW locomotives are notoriously bad at traction. MY 2343 ABA F3s can't pull their 4 car passenger train out of the station. MPC F3s are no better.

Traction tires on the "newer" locos make them infinitely better for operation. 

TJ

It might be o.k. to add a little weight in the area of the fuel tank, to increase tractive force.  Don't overdo it or you'll strip the drive gears.  

TrainLarry raises an important point.  Unlike the better die-cast examples made in the early 1950s, the power truck in the 200-series Alcos is made of stamped metal which is staked together.  A fall from the table or a bad crash could have caused a shift out of alignment, such that all of the wheels are no longer resting squarely on the track.  If this is the problem, you might be able to re-stake the truck frame.  If not, you'll have to obtain a new power truck with its integral motor field assembly from a donor unit.

Some folks would tell you to apply a liquid rubber called Bullfrog Snot to the powered wheels; this would increase traction.  Personally I don't like rubber tires. so I suggest that you to follow the example of real RRs and add another powered Alco for longer trains.  If the two units are closely matched in start-up speed they'll "help" each other and give smoother operation as a bonus.

Good luck, let us know if you found a problem, or were successful in getting this to pull better!  -Ted

You have the late post war version of the Lionel Alco with stamped steel frame. Not really good for much pulling power no matter what you do. The earlier version such as the 2023 with cast frame has the same motor as a PW Lionel GG1. Between the motor, magnetraction, and weight - the early version Alcos were great pullers.

Keeping in mind that this was a set engine it's not gonna pull very many cars no matter what you do to it.

A drop of oil on the car wheels/axles helps a lot.

These videos were taken years ago after a complete tune up....not much you can do with these....maybe tubular track would help...

Exactly so.  That's why it's meaningless to make generalizations about "all" PW locomotives.

I have a 200 series locomotive with Magnetraction on both axles and a horn. It easily pulls a 5 car train with power to spare on tubular track. It will even go up a steep grade with the train with no hesitation.

TonkaNut, if your F3 cannot pull more than 4 cars, it probably needs a good servicing. See here for that loco pulling a 9 car train.

Larry

Bob Taylor's engines are running on MTH track. The rails are aluminum. If it was fastrack, or Super O or tubular, They would run quieter and with more power.

I agree with Chuck, I have a 229 with the 200 series motor, and using MTH track it wouldn't pull the nonpowered loco and four cars. Changing to old style Lionel tinplate track, made it a much better puller. I only have a 4x8 test track loop, but it pulls five 6464 cars and a postwar caboose with no problem. I know it would be traumatic to pull up your layout's track, but....

Gentlemen, thank you for the responses, I made an error, it is a #208. 

that aside, the engine has magnetraction, and I am testing it on Atlas track. the the wheels are all making contact but it is as if there is oil on the wheels, which there isnt.  I just experimented with slipping a traction tire for MTH trolleys on two of the wheels.  the difference is dramatic.  Now whether or not the tires hold I don't know.  But it is test and solution that I will go with, for now..thank you again for all the replies and great information

Sorry don't agree...The 204 couldn't pull the skin off of rice pudding.

Why does this former 622 Lionel switcher (now custom painted) walk away with this train which is a lot heavier then the train in my original video ?

Sorry for the poor quality ...only had a old Iphone available to make the video...

I do agree the 204 would perform better on tubular track.

The 204's motor field windings are split due to the 2 position eunit. So for the amount of windings only the power of half of them are available for each direction. The 204 power truck doesn't have the ball bearing ring and thrust washer set up on the armature shaft that the early Alco's and the 622 in the video have. In fact the 622 in the video is very similar to the early Alcos as it has the cast frame and the same high quality motor.

Has anyone converted one of these dual winding motors to use a 3 position e-unit, wiring both fields in parallel, and does it give more power to the motor?

Larry

Add a thin coat of Bullfrog Snot to the wheels on 1 axle of the front and rear trucks. That will make a significant difference in the wheel slip and pulling power.

Yes ! Totally agree here^^^the weight and motor composition are the key factors for moving that train,also I tried to move the same train with a Postwar B&M GP9 and NOPE ...just spun its wheels with no movement(sheet metal frame).

Sounds like bbsfdl60 has fixed the problem if he can get those traction tires to stay on the wheels.

Gentlemen,

   If this engine truly has magna-traction it must not be working at all, if it was the engine would have no problem pulling a large load.  The fact that he had to install a traction tire on a Magna-Traction engine means something is not working or someone has altered the original engine.  I suggest he sends the engine to G for a complete

inspection & rework, unless he is satisfied with running traction tires on a Magn-Traction engine.

PCRR/Dave

The two fields are wound in opposite directions.  If you connect both at the same time, the motor will not turn at all.  If you want more power out of the motor, increase the current in the armature by shunting the field with a resistor.  But if the problem is adhesion,  only three things will help:  increase the coefficient of friction, increase the weight, increase the pull of the magnatraction.  The other option is reduce the train resistance by cleaning the wheels and lubricating the bearings on the cars being pulled. 

The 204/208 are a 3 position reverse. No split windings. Traction tire add on not recommended, the will make the engine uneven as the tires will make the wheels wobble. Plus making them stay on will be a challenge. You're trying to make the engine pull more than it can without the benefit of Magne-traction.

The OP said he was testing it on Atlas track...I am not familiar with that kind of track.What are the rails made of ? My example has pretty good Magnatraction.

two forks two clevis pins and a 5/8 Craftsman chisel....But as stated earlier totally useless with MTH Realtrack. Maybe the magnets are weak on his 208 Alco?

Chuck Sartor,

   Your analysis is right on the money, he needs to pay a trained tech to fix his Magna-Traction problem and the engine will work properly again, if the magna-traction can actually be repaired.  This almost sounds like somebody altered this engine.

PCRR/Dave

If it was me and I wanted to run those engines on MTH Ritetrack, I would replace the power truck with part # 600-8552-100 motor truck. Check with large parts order guys or ebay or advertise for one. This would be a direct drop in replacement for the original power truck, but it has 2 grooved wheels for traction tires. It will help considerably with the traction on Aluminum rails. Keep the original truck of course.  

Problem fixed... thanks for the help.. I may not know all about repairing postwar, but with advice and direction this tech did alright.  Thanks for all the responses. 

How did you fix the problem?

MTH's ScaleTrax & RealTrax are made from nickel-silver actually, not aluminum.  It's comprised mostly of copper with smaller equal parts nickel and zinc, all of which are non-ferrous metals (lack of iron) which makes them (like aluminum) non-magnetic.  So magnetraction will have no effect on that type of track.

Atlas O's 21st Century track system is also made of nickel-silver so that is also ill-suited for Magnetraction, although they did for a time make some solid-steel track which was intended for Postwar Magnetraction locomotives but apparently didn't sell well so it was discontinued.

So unless the original poster's Atlas O track is the solid steel version then any pulling power advantage with Magnetraction is lost.