TMCC GP9 conversion - AC Pullmor to DC can w/ERR Cruise Commander

@Mike0289 posted:

1. It seems to me this project would involve replacing the Pullmor motor with a DC can motor, replacing the ACDR board with an ERR Cruise Commander, and wiring everything up. Am I missing anything? Sounds good.
2. I haven't replaced motors in locomotives before...
   1. What exactly is involved? Take out the old motor and bolt the new motor in, after adjusting the gear mesh.
   2. Where could I purchase appropriate DC can motors? Frank Timko at timkorepairdepot.com
   3. Is it possible to replace a motor and keep the original powered truck? Yes. Frank makes motors that install with one screw, plus another screw to adjust gear mesh.
3. For those of you who've done this (or something similar), can you share any advice or pitfalls you encountered? I have the parts to convert two F3 locos, but have not done them yet.

Thanks in advance for all your help!

If these had an ACDR you would only need a Cruise M but they appear to have an LCRU so you would need a Cruise Commander. I believe Frank Timko has DC motors for these engines.

Pete

@Norton I'm not too familiar with the terminology. Is the LCRU the control module similar to the L2RC?

It appears your engine was made mid 1990s or so. The receiver and motor driver are on a single board called an LCRU. Starting around 1998-99 Lionel went to a modular system. They have a separate receiver called an R2LC and Motor driver, either an ACDR for AC motors or DCDR for DC motors. Both non cruise. Cruise Ms work with modular boards and would replace either the ACDR or DCDR provided the motor was DC. A Cruise M won't work with an AC motor.

Since you don't have modular boards you have to remove the LCRU and replace it with a Cruise Commander which is both the receiver and motor driver.

Pete

As stated above, Frank Timko can give you a drop in replacement with flywheel. ERR cruise commander and railsounds will finish it off. Just keep in mind that you will still only have a single motor unit so the pulling power will be limited.

Personally, I recommend against it unless you're going to double-head them.  The single motor, especially in front, is pretty wimpy at best.  I did a pair of SD-11's with exactly that mod for a client.  We did the first one, and it really was not much of a puller, it couldn't pull four passenger cars!  I added over a pound of weight right over the driven truck, that helped, but it still was pretty weak.  We then did the second one and tethered it to the lead unit so we could use one cruise module, it also got weight over the powered truck.  After that, with them MU'ed, they're acceptable, and it increased the pulling power significantly.

Note that they have significantly better pulling power running with the motor in the rear, about 40% more than with the motor in front.  The MU configuration had that bonus as well, the trailing slave had the motor in back, aiding the traction.

My point is, if you do this, temper your expectations, they're not going to be performance champs.  The run fine, and the cruise works well, but pulling power for the MU set isn't up to a single modern GP9 with two motors and traction tires.

I actually sent the trucks back to Frank Timko for traction tires, that was another significant improvement.  However, the gearing in the truck, which is retained with the upgrade motor, is taller than the newer can motored trucks, so the pulling power still is not awesome.  In the end, with all the mods, the client was quite happy with the result, and so the story ends well.

Another possibility is to buy some Williams GP9 locos and put the postwar Lionel shells on them. The Lionel and Williams GP9 and GP7 shells are interchangeable.

Thanks everyone for the great feedback! I'll have to think about this some more.

I like RoyBoy's suggestion, that gives you a dual motored GP9, the difference in performance will be significant.

One last question - if I did decide to upgrade these locos with DC can motors and ERR Cruise Commander, could I keep the existing Railsounds or would I have to swap in an ERR sound board as well? Is the sound board even separate in these locos? Thanks again for all the advice and feedback!

Since it already has TMCC, one would presume that you could wire that correctly with power and serial data and use the old board.  Note that I've seen the old RS 2.5 boards sometimes need a "boost" for the serial data in order to function correctly, if you experience issues with either the cruise commander running away or the serial data not being recognized by the RS 2.5 board, I have a buffer that will fix that.

@Mike0289 posted:

Thanks everyone for the great feedback! I'll have to think about this some more.

Sounds like a good idea - sentiment is worth something, after all. Wms frames and original Lionel shells as suggested...not really "sentimental", I'd say.

Certainly a motor in each unit, then "lash 'em up" is advisable, as suggested, but, per pulling power, please remember that these locos don't have to pull anybody else's trains (I presume), just yours, and if your trains are not overly large, then the locos will do the job that you want to do. With sentiment.

@D500 posted:

Sounds like a good idea - sentiment is worth something, after all. Wms frames and original Lionel shells as suggested...not really "sentimental", I'd say.

Certainly a motor in each unit, then "lash 'em up" is advisable, as suggested, but, per pulling power, please remember that these locos don't have to pull anybody else's trains (I presume), just yours, and if your trains are not overly large, then the locos will do the job that you want to do. With sentiment.

Can't agree more. I love the sound on these locos and it would be fun to run them slow and smooth like my newer Legacy/LC2.0 locos. They were ok pullers lashed up with the Pullmor motors, just couldn't run very slow or smooth.

Is it reasonable to expect the pulling power to be about the same after a conversion to DC can motors?

@Mike0289 posted:

Can't agree more. I love the sound on these locos and it would be fun to run them slow and smooth like my newer Legacy/LC2.0 locos. They were ok pullers lashed up with the Pullmor motors, just couldn't run very slow or smooth.

Is it reasonable to expect the pulling power to be about the same after a conversion to DC can motors?

Mike, if you can hang loose a day or so, I’m heading home with a giant pile of MTH junk....might be some Geep frames with motors on them,...I do not know right at the very moment.....might be right up the alley you need.....you can ERR them to death....they’ll be void of boards, and shells, ....could be just the ticket you need if the Lionel shells will sit down on them......I can report back on here if you’d like, or you get a hold of me....

Pat

@Mike0289 posted:

Can't agree more. I love the sound on these locos and it would be fun to run them slow and smooth like my newer Legacy/LC2.0 locos. They were ok pullers lashed up with the Pullmor motors, just couldn't run very slow or smooth.

Is it reasonable to expect the pulling power to be about the same after a conversion to DC can motors?

I would think so. I am confident that they would do the same work as the Pullmors, but run smoother due to the cruise control.

To drill down a bit further: a lot of Pullmor equipment was hamstrung by poor (zoom-zoom 200 mph) gearing, and the AC motor started off with 2 strikes against it. A 1-700E scale Hudson with Pullmor will run smoothly at reasonable speeds because it was geared more like a model than a toy. As conjecture, I think that your GP's may be geared "higher" (more toy-like) than current locos, so their creepy-ness may not be quite up to current levels. It will still be good. Someone here will know about the ratios for sure. I do not.

@RoyBoy posted:

Another possibility is to buy some Williams GP9 locos and put the postwar Lionel shells on them. The Lionel and Williams GP9 and GP7 shells are interchangeable.

My thought also.

Having actually done some of these exact conversions on the same type of locomotive, I have to disagree with a couple of opinions.  They don't appear to have the torque of the Pulmore motor, remember that Timko uses the Mabuchi 3xx motor, a fairly small motor.  The gearing is very tall, I don't remember the gear ratio, but it's not as large a ratio as modern diesels and doesn't have the low end torque.   I'm sure someone with a similar engine in captivity could probably easily measure the gear ration and clue us in.  Also, the can motor is much lighter, so you have to add considerable weight to the engine at the motor end to even have the traction to the rails the same as the old Pulmore.

I was going to do a Timko on the same engine years ago hoping the frame was already cut for another power truck but not the case. If someone could find a frame to accommodate two power trucks and utilize the original shell then I would go for it. I may try to sell mine but probably won’t even get $.25 on the dollar.

Something to consider. Part of the sentimental attachment involves that Pullmor motor. You will loose that growl when you replace it. Williams makes a reproduction of that very engine, same style frame and paint job. I would leave the original alone and update a Williams Geep.

Thats been my approach to my Post War favorites. Leave them original.

Pete