10 Times Lionel Trains Got It Horribly Wrong!

You’ve heard the saying: Nobody’s perfect. To err is human. Just like people, companies sometimes get things wrong - even companies like Lionel Trains who have been leaders in their field for over 100 years.
In this special Thanksgiving episode, we’re looking at the times when Lionel Trains got it wrong - their biggest turkeys and epic failures, if you will.
This topic is by nature very subjective, so feel free to comment on the turkeys I may have missed or some items you think I am judging too harshly.
So, here we go - in chronological order, Lionel’s biggest turkeys!
*As an Amazon Associate and a member of other affiliate networks, We may receive commissions on qualifying sales generated from the links on this channel.**
Visit Our Virtual Storefront! walmrt.us/3sIUMQu
Visit Our Sponsors:
Diecast Models Wholesale: www.jdoqocy.com/click-1009945...
Lionel Trains on Amazon: amzn.to/46tZiR5
Hobby Tools on Amazon: amzn.to/3rtRkc1
Toy Train Tips And Tricks is a channel devoted to the operation, repair, history, and collecting of classic 3-rail O and O27 gauge trains made by Lionel, Marx, K-Line, Menards, and other manufacturers.
Keep the trains running!
Music and Visual Effects Courtesy of Pixabay.com
Facebook: / ttttlocomaniac
Twitter: / ttttmike
Instagram: / mrmoore2001
#Promotion #Lioneltrains #Trainset #Trainrepair #Traincollecting #Ogauge #Oscale

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel Disney Christmas Train Set walmrt.us/3RuYXZS [Affiliate Link]

[@metalheadrailfan]

Here's a good turkey: The 1964 version of the 773 Hudson that came with a 736W plastic tender (and insultingly plastic trucks) and lettered PENNSYLVANIA. Like come on Lionel.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Ah, good one!

[@williamlee1429]

My Scout is the 1110 with a hole in its boiler, and headlight. The previous owner restored the motor which was supposedly not rebuildable. Mine has the Scout all metal tender, but with regular couplers, and runs perfectly. It’s one of my favorite small locomotives.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

About 2 years ago I did a video on servicing the Scout plastic motors. They're not "impossible" to fix, but you need a LOT of patience!

[@tje1966]

I once heard (unconfirmed) that back in the day; if you brought a Lionel Scout locomotive for repair to a Lionel Service station under warranty, that they simply replaced the entire motor. They made no attempt to repair the broken one. Has anyone else heard that? @@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks

[@MadMax-sc1su]

@@tje1966 That wouldn’t surprise me. I heard stories from Lionel repairmen and authorized dealers/repairmen that they absolutely hated the scout engines because of the plastic motors. They said they couldn’t understand how a small and simple engine such as that could be so difficult to work on.

[@trainliker100]

The Lionel "Wartime Train" known by many today as the Lionel "Paper Train" actually did do exactly what it was meant to do. And that was not to be a highly effective model train toy. But to keep the "Lionel" brand name getting attention and having a continued presence in the marketplace. It was more of a marketing gimmick to bridge during the wartime to when they could resume normal production.

[@joewoodchuck3824]

I only remember Lionel as being the strange one with the third rail. To me it was the outlier for that reason. It also didn't combine with what I believed to be the better A. C. Gilbert American Flyer. It didn't hurt any that I also lived in the city where they along with my other ACG stuff were made. New Haven Conn.

[@trainliker100]

@@joewoodchuck3824 For being an "outlier" Lionel did pretty well. In fact, in 1953 they were the largest toymaker in the world.

[@alanh1406]

I agree. It was a good idea born out of wartime realities.

[@trainliker100]

The Lionel "Electronic Set" was an idea slightly ahead of its time and is considered by some as one of the many steps along the way to where Digital Command Control (DCC) is today. But it isn't quite the first step for some sort of multiple control on one track. That was also by Lionel with its "Magic Electrol" introduced in 1940. It was a primitive, but a novel way to - sort of - control two engines on one track. It allowed reversing either engine independently with track power staying on. Instead of the usual "E unit" reversing operation by cutting track power, the E unit was operated by a solenoid in one engine controlled by the DC voltage superimposed on the AC usually meant to control a whistle. And in the other engine with a solenoid controlled by the opposite DC voltage. This is probably the earliest "independent" control of model train engines.

[@MMitchellMarmel]

There was also the "Detroit" method of operating model trolleys using half wave pulse DC and diodes... :D

[@trainliker100]

@@MMitchellMarmel True. But that didn't allow for reversing. You had to do that by some other means (like a switch on the car) or forever run in the same direction. If using just rails, or just the overhead, you could control the speed of two. If using rails AND overhead, you control the speed of four (two wired for overhead pickup, two using just the rails.) While half wave unfiltered seemed to be what was used, there is no reason you couldn't use straight filtered DC for the scheme. Not bothering to filter just eliminated parts by making it simpler. But I think that while the idea is somewhat novel, the inability to remotely reverse puts it into a lower capability category.

[@MMitchellMarmel]

@@trainliker100 Yeah. The Detroit system was primarily used for single end operation, although double ended cars with a pole on each end could be reversed by switching poles, much like the prototype. :)

[@LordCarpenter]

I can vouch for the 520 Box Cab being a turkey. My father's manager received the 520 Lionel set from one of their suppliers in the late 1950s to place in a Christmas display window. Upon opening the box and realizing there was no traditional steam engine, the manager requested that my father "get rid of it." I still have it. 😂

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Great story!!

[@trainliker100]

On the "OO" gauge it would not have been unusual for Lionel to have something unique and not follow the crowd. This is what they did with their pre-war track. "No 2" gauge of 2" was common and Lionel came up with 2.125" and had the nerve to call it "Standard Gauge" and trademark it. Of course, other items at the time were incompatible. Ives, Boucher, Dorfan, and American Flyer all ended up following Lionel's lead and using this gauge. Some argue that Lionel erred in reading Marklin track dimensions where Marklin measured from rail centers and not the inside edge. I don't believe that for a second. Lionel had very capable engineers and no doubt had samples of all of the products of their competitors such that they would not have made that sort of mistake. Lionel creating their own unique gauge certainly must have been quite deliberate. Also, at the time, motor size was a problem and OO made that little bit of extra room that helped a lot. When Lionel got around to HO finally, I believe they were selling only products made by others unlike the OO which they made themselves. In this sense, they were no longer leading but marketing a "me too" product.

[@muir8009]

I'm going to throw in that the 2 1/8" was basically a slight enlargement over the 2" strip rail, the new (for lionel) rounded profile tubular sectional rail over the edged strip rail profile. The two (overlooking the two rail / three rail bit) are basically compatible. Lionel early on advertised their standard as being at 2" gauge. Remember that standard had a bit of a different inference than today: standard then meant high end; the pinnacle. Lionel had brought in 3 rail, tubular sectional track when the others were still faffing around with the rigmarole of strip rail.

[@greglivo]

I read somewhere that OO happened to be very popular in New Jersey during the 1930's. Lionel observed the local interest and assumed that there was a market for it.

[@muir8009]

@greglivo @greglivo that's basically it. It's easy to overlook that Lionels chief market prewar was still almost what one could say as being local. 0 and too a limited extent standard were still the staple gauges. There was no real obvious predominance with H0 at the time. Across the pond what we know now as being the very British 1/76 00 gauge was basically shared market with 1/87 H0 prewar. It wasn't until the advent of the mass marketed Hornby dublo range in 1938 by the then huge meccano manufacturer that 00 became the predominant size. We have to also remember that Lionel was taking a healthy punt with the 700E: even then Lionel limited itself to just that loco and a few scale wagons before realising there was a market for semi-scale, not such a big market for full scale. A telling thing is that American Flyer Gilbert produced H0 equipment at the time, and that didn't prove successful for the company, its quite probable that even if Lionel had chosen H0 over 00 it would still have been just as unsuccessful.

[@njlauren]

HO in the 1930s was pretty crude, a lot of it was do it yourself, even with track you had to scratch build. The small motors were pretty crude too. OO used HO rail. So why did Lionel do OO instead of HO? I saw a video on Hornby, and they used 1/76 bc it was hard to fit the motors into a 1/87 chassis even post war. Could be the bigger motor was cheaper or worked better. In theory it wasn't a bad idea , given the DIY aspect of HO, Lionel like with its O gauge line could have offered rtr rolling stock, engines and switches. I suspect it failed in part bc ppl working in HO likely didn't like the oversized trains or they saw the Lionel name and associated it with 'toy' trains for kids. HO.in.the 30s was very much ppl wanting to do scaie modelling, so both the over size and them seeing it as a toy would have stopped it from selling.

[@muir8009]

@njlauren pretty much spot on with the brand problem. Both Lionel and American Flyer prewar 00 and H0 lines had that association of toy train. Flyer kept at it postwar but the situation didn't improve. The British 00 1/76 on 16.5mm track Was actually to do with wheel treads and bogie casting limitations. With the narrow British loading gauge the bogie sides would've stuck out beyond the bodies, so for aesthetics the little bit narrower gauge allowed for the prototype appearance, if not accuracy. Early N scale suffered the same problem and when bogie sides are wider than the stock itself, it really doesn't look that good. FYI bing fitted motors no problem into the first table railway so the motor size into 00 just seems to be a oft-repeated popular wives tale. Bit like how Lionels first train was the wooden gondola in the shop window. Makes a good story, but that's all.

[@williamgottlieb8723]

I would have taken those Girls Train sets and resold them as Easter Train sets. Included would be a coupon for some free jellybeans to toss into the gondola and hopper cars. It just might have started an annual tradition of the family setting up their Easter train each year along with all the other decorations.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

You should have been in Lionel marketing!

[@NWR_astrotrain]

That’s a clever idea

[@joshuacampbell9990]

I believe you hit the nail on the head with Lionel’s sales flops/screwups. Most were great ideas on paper but the execution was off. I really do wish the Sandy Andy loader wasn’t such a mess, but it was certainly a sign of the times trying to make something as cheap as possible.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

👍

[@RockyRailroadProductions_B0SS]

I love the design of the 520 in concept, but I really wish it had the fake side frames replaced with a six-wheel chassis - Could've made a very nice Pennsy BB1 (Er, "B1") locomotive for starter sets. And that pink Williams GG1 is ridiculously cool, in a goofy roundabout way, would have almost certainly been a flop back in 1947, but I want one in HO now

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

A four axle switcher chassis would have been correct for the 520. But the B1 might have been a better substitute overall. I prefer the looks of an interurban boxcab but the oddness of the 520 toy and the fact that I would thoroughly modify it has kept me from buying one so far.

[@Alcofoamer]

Two, I would have included are The Chugger from 1933 and Super O from 1957. The Chugger was supposed to imitate the chuffing of a steam locomotive, but was a rotating drum filled with pieces of metal. It sounded more like rattling metal, than chuffing, because that's what it was. Super O in my opinion is the best looking three-rail O gauge track ever made, but the thin stip that replaced the third rail ending up wearing a very prominent groove into contact rollers.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

The Chugger concept reemerged in the 1970s as the "Sound Of Steam" 'Bean Can' tenders. Despite its drawbacks, Super O had a too long a catalog run for me to consider it a "Turkey". Thanks for the feedback!

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

The groove comes from arcing, not the copper rail itself.

[@MMitchellMarmel]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks I have a few of the "bean can" tenders. Doesn't sound TOO bad if you're not fussy. The electronic "Sound of Static" has the edge in that you can simply unplug it when it becomes too annoying... :D

[@davidschaadt3460]

I think the "Chugger" is more than that. It seems to be some electrical device. I have a 385 with it and it is louder than pieces of metal. But they only carried it for a few years,It may have been troublesome or not cost effective.

[@modelrailpreservation]

There are two flavors of OO. British OO, as you mentioned, which does run on HO track, and American OO, which runs on slightly wider track. HO scale track is 5/8" gauge, American OO is 3/4". Lionel was not the only company making the stuff either. In fact, they had to pay a royalty to Scale-Craft for ripping off their truck design, and the tank car, hopper, and caboose all look suspiciously similar to Scale-Craft offerings too. Both HO and OO enjoyed popularity before the war, and the advances in manufacturing as part of the war effort helped ensure HO would become the dominant scale of the two in the postwar era. By 1946 the even smaller TT scale came out, so OO was just the odd man out by then.

[@muir8009]

They were actually scalecraft: Lionel basically bought out the company, although more in line with scalecraft being the exclusive supplier...

[@muir8009]

What a thoroughly enjoyable video. Excellent production values and your narration is just spot on. Enthusiastic, knowledgeable, just pleasant to hear. I'm going to throw in 3 here: first: Lionels 2nd, the 2 7/8" wooden gondola, commonly mistaken as being Lionels first toy. Not popular, and ugly. Both adults and kids, then as now, want something that looks like a train. The converse trolley was exactly that, and JLC quickly caught on and his next were of course the B&O tunnel motor, jail car etc. No more wooden cheeseboxes for Lionel. 2nd: the whole 2 7/8" track system. Even after a very short time the 6' lengths were being replaced by shorter lengths, with some rudimentary track joiners. After only a few short years JLC had already cottoned on as to why Marklin, issmayer, Bing, even dastardly Ives were doing what they were doing. 2 rail strip rail, all in the bin. Sensible sectional 3 rail the way forward. And finally: the infamous 411E set. For 1929 the new Transcontinental set, with its four stately cars, and the monster 381E, the grandest locomotive from Lionel. The 381 smoked and grunted and growled and wheezed, but couldn't haul the four massive state cars. Lionel hurriedly offered free upgrades to the monster puller twin super motored 408E, even to the point of repainting them state colours, and for 1930 the 381 was hauling a rather more manageable 3 car set. Love ya work :)

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for those additions!

[@gmaneis]

This is another in your long line of really great videos, Mike. I am lightly into O, and have learned a LOT from you. Lionel made so much profit in many of the years of those clunkers that their bottom line probably hardly noticed.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thank you very much!

[@wayneantoniazzi2706]

I don't know how true this is but I read somewhere that Lionel "appropriated" some of the technology used in all that equipment they made for the Navy during WW2 and put it in the Electronic Set. Maybe. At any rate if the price of the intial set ( At the time of the sets release that $75 price would have gotten you a Winchester 30-30 rifle AND a Colt .38 revolver!) didn't doom the set the unreliability surely would have. Ahad of it's time certainly but as the saying goes "If we don't TRY then we don't DO." Good video Mike! Thanks!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Interesting take on the war supplies. Thanks for sharing!

[@wayneantoniazzi2706]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks You're welcome! At any rate Lionel did learn a bit about miniature electronic circuitry when they manufactured proximity fuses for the Navy's anti-aircraft shells.

[@leverettrailfan5414]

Was prepared to get very mad, but pleasantly surprised to find this video gave credit to what each item got right, and why you categorized it as a failure- it's more of a critique on how these models failed in one way or another as products. I have the 2332, and it's a frustrating locomotive- it runs beautifully, but it really does struggle to pull anything near a decent sized train. For all the heft of the locomotive, the weight isn't entirely focused over the 6 powered wheels- even with a single motor, if Lionel had found a way to drive all 12 of the wheels that directly support the weight of the locomotive, it would have drastically improved performance I think. I have a 6110- frankly it's not so bad. It's never going to compete with the finer Lionel products, but it's not completely useless, and the hole in the front is something I can get over. I don't think it was strictly the best thing Lionel came up with, but it's charming, and it'll happily haul a moderately sized train for you. The 520 is a charming little critter, but I think they stripped it down a bit too far. A headlight and a traction tire would have vastly improved this economy model. I think Lionel's HO product line could fall into the 'Turkey' category, largely on account of their decision in 1959 to go from the realistic models they marketed from Rivarossi and Athearn, to making toy trains in HO- missing the mark on what the majority of the HO market wanted. Their difficult to service rubber belt drives also were a weak point, though not every Lionel HO model used belt drives, and they switched away from rubber completely in 1963. The designs were clever, and the quality was reasonably good, but they missed the mark overall. And I'm glad they did, because I'm a big fan of HO scale operating milk cars!

[@OriginalBongoliath]

Lionel has had many iterations in to the HO market. Every one (including their current try using old Model Power and Mantua tooling, the Marx brands of HO, then charging a premium for it because of the Lionel name like that somehow conveys value 🙄) have been absolute failures except for their 2003 attempt which was the only time they actually had a pulse on the HO market by introducing highly-detailed DCC/Sound locos the modelers wanted but stupidly they only put out two (UP Challenger and Veranda Turbine) then called it quits. Had they continued their 2003 plan and introduced more detailed models then Lionel would have had better success in the HO market.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel, Gilbert, and Marx - none of them really understood the HO scale market.

[@leverettrailfan5414]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks I think Gilbert got something right with their HO smoke and choo-choo though! Or maybe that's just my personal bias.

[@muir8009]

​@@leverettrailfan5414 unfortunately of course, the scale market at the time meant kits, handlaid track, and H0. Anything that came from American Flyer or Lionel meant you were on the road to modelling ostracism.

[@jrmeindl]

Lionel really made some great accessories and rolling stock. They were inovative. But as you say, they did make a lot turkeys. Some were just way ahead of their time. I'm sort of on the fence with the 2332 mainly because it is a classic. It definitely is no comparison to the 2330 and beyond, with regards to pulling. Great video. Thanks for posting.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

👍

[@clarencethompson2707]

LOINEL modeled their engines after the NY railroads and if look at pictures of the real thing they were perrty close.

[@asteroidrules]

In a way flops are a sign that a company is innovating, you can't fail if you don't try as they say.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

@@asteroidrules Good point!

[@phil4718]

It was hard seeing the 6110 engine on the list because it was my introduction to Lionel trains. In my case it failed to operate after a few year's service and became a static display engine on my layout. Fortunately, I kept it and when I found a Greenberg collection of repair instructions decades later, I was able to disassemble, clean and reassemble it, and it runs well to this day. I think that's pretty impressive when you think about it.

[@frostedbutts4340]

'companies like Lionel Trains who have been leaders in their field for over 100 years.' That's being extremely generous haha

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

In the field of 3-rail O gauge trains, who else has been doing it for 123 years?

[@frostedbutts4340]

The field is 'model trains'. I don't care if a company makes the best purple Z gauge monorails, Lionel haven't lead anything since the 70s at best.@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks

[@tje1966]

Lionel also got it horribly wrong by what they Didn't Do! In 1948 Lionel brought out the beautiful Santa Fe and New York Central F-3's. These new diesels were crying out for matching passenger cars; which the AMT company was all to happy to produce! Lionel finally caught up in 1952, but even then their aluminum cars were never as nice as the AMT's. Then in the 1990's, they made the same mistake in reverse. They made these nice O27 streamlined passenger cars in New York Central, Illinois Central, and Northern Pacific. These cars were crying out to be pulled by Alco A-A diesels. But Lionel in their catalogs mated these cars with black steam locomotives! Huh?? K-Line then jumped in and made the matching Alco A-A's that everyone wanted!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Good points. Thanks for sharing!

[@tje1966]

You are welcome! I currently have the K-Line No. Pac. Alco A-A's and all 8 of the matching Lionel passenger cars running under my Christmas tree! @@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks

[@DRCRailroard]

I think you covered it better than I would have thought. In fact, I'm amazed with all my Lionel acquisition that I managed to avoid all of them somehow.

[@michaeldavis33]

Mike I had the 520 up until a few months ago. Sold it on Ebay for $50.00. It was a little odd but a great little runner as long the train was only a few cars. I originally bought it to pull the track cleaning car having them staged on a siding. Didn't work out so good. I wish that I would have kept it.

[@poconotrainman]

To each his own I guess, but I kind of like the 6110 with it's smoke "inhale" hole in front. You must admit it is unique plus mine smokes very well! Thanks for sharing your thoughts in this video, it does make one wonder what the Lionel engineers were thinking.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the feedback!

[@therosejewelrailroad489]

Nice job on the video. The biggest Lionel blunder I’ve experienced is the scout couplers. They work great but not compatible to the standard knuckle couplers being produced in the higher end sets. The one on this list that surprised me and I did not know about. Was the video one from 1988. Black and White video was long dead by 1988. Then again the first video cameras had a black and white viewer while you recorded. Enjoyed the video.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, Railscope was introduced in 1988.

[@CSltz]

Please tell us that you have the date wrong or it’s a misprint from the printers. It just can’t be that long ago. I would have been 33.

[@MichaelJohnson-td1me]

I had a #520 as a young child. The only other locomotive I had was a #247 steamer. That was aq turkey. The 520 ran well and pulled more than the 247. I have many happy memories of the 520'

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing!

[@markstevens9249]

The Railscope system did make it to prototype phase in American Flyer. I was at an S Gauge convention where they demonstrated it in 1989 to stir up interest. The engines ran fine but it wasn't too long afterward they shelved the idea.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the info!

[@classicmodeltrains]

Nicely researched and put together video!!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thank you!!

[@trainliker100]

Lionel messed up on their "Wabash Blue Bird 21" Streamline" car set from their 2015 Vol 2 catalog. The catalog touted "scale". They had a photo of what was probably an HO set that looked reasonably correct (or perhaps a CAD drawing). And that means the "Budd" domes with curved side glass. What Lionel delivered had flat pane dome glass (like Pullman Standard) which is a COMPLETELY different look. Also, for some reason they made the cars riding about 1/4" higher above the trucks than they should have been which looked pretty ridiculous. But it seems that most didn't care (from what I could tell from discussions on the OGR Forum) as it looked nice enough to them and most didn't know of the glaring discrepancy and if they did, didn't care. Some DID complain that there wasn't enough light in the dome section. Of course, the real domes had almost no light at night, or you wouldn't have been able to see out.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the additions!!

[@WA1LBK]

At the time the RailScope system came out, I was into 2 - rail DC O scale. I decided I wanted to give the RailScope systema try; so I bought one ot the HO Railscope systems & gutted the camera electronics from the HO loco to install in a Weaver 2 - rail Pennsylvania Alco FA. I did NOT want to put an additional hole in the lcomotive nose; I wanted the view out of the engeineer's cab window! 🙂 By the standards of the high- performance cameras we now have in our cell phones, the RailScope camera was physically HUGE; the camera was actually 2 circuit boards consisting of the CCD sensor & lens on a board just large enough to accomodate them, & a long, narrow circuit board containg the rest of the camera electronics. I was an electronics technician by profession; over the course of my career, I had worked in consumer electronics (old analog TV & radio), commercial 2-way radio (including some railroad radio work), industrial control electronics, & ny last 20 years before retirement was working in computer equipment manufacturing. I've also been an amateur radio operater since age 16 (& still very active in that hobby, in addition to model railroading). So digging into the RailScope electonics held no terrors for me. 😁 After gutting the electronics out of the HO ALco FA, I didi a test fit in the O scale one. There was NO WAY that the camera lens would line up with the O scale FA's window, due to the CCD boards size. I unsoldered the CCD board from the main one & put it on a short length of ribbon cable so that I could move it around; even like that, I couldn't get it to line up properly in the FA's cab window. My final solution was to install a small mirror at a 45 - degree angle releative to the window, & place the CCD board with the lens facing UP into it. This WORKED 😀except for one issue; I was able to adjust the lens positioning to get a PERFECT engineers's eye view out the FA cab window! BUT due to mirror, the image was REVERSED left to right! 😱In viewing the image on a TV, it looked great (for the time; considering the low resolution of the camera, as you mentioned), until the locomotive rolled past a PRR passenger train on an adjacent track & you saw the word "PENNSYLVANIA" backwards! 😂Obviously, the scenery was reversed also, but that didn't matter as much. What was even more hilarious was the locomotive rolling past my cat lounging next to the track as the train rolled by looking like a 1950's monster movie! ("CATZILLA!!"). 🤣 (Somewhere in my huge VHS tape collection, I have that on tape!). And as you also mentioned, the RF signal from the camera going through the rails made it horribly subject to dirty track (I had several turnouts for my engine terminal & yard tracks in a row on the mainline; the video ALWAYS broke up HORRIBLY whenever the loco rolled through that stretch!) . I cna understand why they did that though; trying to put the signal over the air would've occureed the wrath of the FCC, which would have NEVER permitted the system to be marketed!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing! I didn't consider the FCC issue!

[@jimtomatola]

The pattern seems to be, "we spent a lot of $ developing this idea, we're going to sell it whether it works or not".

[@davidwayneprins]

A friend of my dad's had one of the Girls Train sets behind glass in the museum portion of his hobby shop here in Michigan. As for RailScope, it would probably work well today if reintroduced and worked via WiFi and displayed via a cell phone screen using an app. Bluetooth may not have the range for larger layouts thus my thinking WiFi.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

There are several modern train camera options. I know some who DIY it with an ESP32 video board with BT.

[@dennishadley9151]

My first Lionel train had the 520 engine and I loved it.

[@allegheny48]

Back when I was growing up my sister wanted one of the Girl's Train sets but our parents refused to purchase it. I attribute this to the mindset that boys played with trains and girls played with dolls, etc (Years later she did purchase one of the K-Line versions). Being that Lionel chose pastel colors for the sets freight cars may have been their quest to become more mainstream since many of the luxury automobiles of that era were painted in pastel colors. There also was supposed to have been a Boy's Train set featuring a blue locomotive yet I don't think it ever got beyond the preproduction sample stage. The 1991 reissue of the Girls Train set actually became more popular than its 1957 version with fewer sets produced with all being sold. Hence finding those on the secondary market tend to be pricey. Thanks for the interesting take on Lionel's mistakes.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the comments!

[@chrisresor1893]

Another fun enjoyable vid! Hope you had a blessed Thanksgiving!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thank you and likewise!

[@Cyberjjc]

Once again, you have impressed me with historic perspective.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks!

[@CSltz]

A lot of those I do remember. The price comparison was like the best part.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks!

[@raysrails2164]

Great video !!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks!!

[@Machia52612]

The automatic gateman was a complete success, but it’s configuration doesn’t make any sense. Turn the crossbuck to the left 90 degrees and it does.

[@TooManyHobbiesJeremy]

Great turkey video. A new one for me was Sandy Andy. Glad I missed out on that one.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks! I was so disappointed in my Sandy Andy as a kid!

[@victorcontreras3368]

Very interesting and good for collectors in what to look for

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thank you!

[@greglivo]

My father got me the US Steel switcher set in 1975. It had a Plymouth diesel switcher that was based on the #41 Army Switcher, a flat car, gondola, and bobber caboose. The set ran on DC. It pulled the provided consist okay, but my older brother had some postwar stuff and it would only pull a couple of his cars. He and I packed the body shell full of clay to add weight to it. We also put a rectified circuit in so that it could run on his postwar layout. It did okay then. The quality was a far cry from what they used to produce.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing.

[@Benthetrainkid]

The Boxcab tooling is still used by Lionel on some rolling stock. also the boiler front is the smokebox door

[@marvwatkins7029]

Good compilation.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@tjsnyder1968]

Good list, think you nailed it. Anyway as a kid dad gave the Sandy Andy and yep never worked very well. Basically was a “static roadside” building on my layout.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the feedback!

[@doneidson-ix2qn]

I was seven years old when I got a Lionel set that consisted of the classic steam locomotive that was cast aluminum. To activate the smoke feature, you dropped a pellet into the stack. The engine had a light, and I liked to operate the train in the dark. I had no problems as mentioned in this video. I kept it till I was thirteen.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel made many steam locomotives with smoke. The #6110 - the one with the hole in the front - had no headlight. Nor did the #1001. If your engine used smoke pellets you likely had a 671/2020 or 2035/675 - a better quality steamer.

[@doneidson-ix2qn]

Yes. This was in 1953@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks

[@rrad8106]

I recall in the mid/late 1970's, Lionel had a very... VERY cheap production run of cars where the two wheel trucks were just an extension of the plastic body with one wheel pinned in the center, along with a non-functioning plastic coupler at each end. I remember looking at that and looking at a Marx set and going with the Marx.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

One such car was based on an a prototype 4-wheel cargo car. Neither the model nor the real thing were particularly successful.

[@greenbeacon394]

The bobber I think was the most popular

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

This is the car I was thinking of. It was based on an experimental car that did not catch on. www.picclickimg.com/4qIAAOSwPoRkei11/Lionel-General-Mills-Mini-Max-Boxcar-9090-O.webp

[@normlor]

OUR DAD BOUGHT US A SET IN THE EARLY 50'S AND NOT ONE ISSUE HAD EVER COME UP. IT HAD A WHISTLE, MAGNETIC UNCUPLER AND REVERSE. WE LOVED IT. PERHAPS TODAY'S ONES SUCK BUT BACK THEN!!!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

:-)

[@lewrails]

Well done. I certainly agree with the selections. I don't know if the magnetic crane was a turkey, because I'm sure it sold a zillion units. But to hold one lever in while a second lever was manipulated to raise and lower the magnet was always a challenge---culminating with the crane wildly swinging just as the load was being dropped. And what about the 97 coal elevator which seemed to drop more coal on the layout rather than into the storage tower and the waiting car.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the feedback!!

[@randallellison6421]

First off, thanks for taking the price of those sets as they sold at that time and converting them into today's dollars! I feel alot of people who complain about model trains being so expensive look at the older stuff with rose colored glasses, while not fully realizing that we're essentially paying the same price, or even less for sets that have more features and better quality! I'm in no way saying its not expensive to buy model trains, but when you compare it to, say, buying an Xbox one, along with the games, extra controllers, etc, its not nearly as bad as people like to make it out to be! As for the Lionel "turkeys", its funny you bring up the GG1 being a dud when it debuted and ultimately turning into one of Lionel's most legendary locomotives ever offered. The president of the club I'm in has a pair of the later releases (one Brunswick green and one Tuscan red), and those things are tanks. A couple of years ago during the October display, the green GG1 missed the curve, went through a barn, and off the layout onto a concrete floor, it didn't even get a scratch! Definitely a locomotive that went from a potential failure to one of Lionel's superstars throught its production run!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the kind comments!

[@dgwachtel]

I was gifted with two train sets when I was around seven years old. The first was an American flyer tin plate 2-4-2 steam loco. I don't recall what rolling stock came with it. I still have the loco but it's pretty dilapidated and the motor is burned out. The second was a Lionel three rail set with a Hudson style loco with whistle and smoke. Again I don't recall what cars came with it. Each set came with a caboose though. The American Flyer set was in bad shape and everything except the loco was tossed. The Lionel set was given to the neighbor kids down the road. I was moving on to HO. Long after the Gilbert/American Flyer was paws high, the Lionel kept chugging away. I kept all of my old HO stuff and have pretty much restored the lot. The process is documented on my KZbin site. Most of the rolling stock is finished and additional detail added on a few. As for the locos, there are some cosmetic repairs to be done but most of the Locos run better now than when they were new, the rubber band drive F7's of which I have far to many. My Mantua Mikado, built from a kit during the mid sixties, now runs so well that I am thinking of super detailing it even though it isn't very true to the prototype. Right now it remains unpainted until I decide to detail it or not. Even with the original open frame motor it pulls 17 freight cars with four full size passenger cars coupled to the end of the consist. As medium scale chicken ranchers my parents weren't well off and after looking at you price conversions I'm a little shocked! They spent way more on those trains than they could really afford. I regret not taking better care of them and not being more appreciative at the time. -dave

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

@@dgwachtel Thanks for sharing! That's neat that you restore the old HO items. Very nice!

[@dgwachtel]

​@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks Thanks! 😁It was peak joy when almost everything was running smoothly on the test track after fifty years of sharing a steamer trunk with hundreds of generations of mice. Seeing "mike" running again was particularly rewarding and it made me laugh out loud, pump a fist into the air and shout a hearty "YES!". -dave

[@Engine1988]

I actually do like the "Electronic Set". It was a good idea, but it wasn't time for it... And yes, the 2332 likely is not the best of the GG1s. I have planned to actually detail my 1110 scout engine, which as soon as I cleaned and worked the inner workings of the motor ran wonderfully. The 520 would be fun in some ways. I intend to use a Lionel Sandy Andy in some of my layout (with numerous modifications). Once I almost bought a Railscope locomotive. It was on Ebay, and hence got ridiculously more expensive than I could afford.

[@Engine1988]

I was distracted when I wrote this. I made an error whilst describing my locomotive (isn't that fitting with this video?).

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

It was a great idea.

[@Engine1988]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks Everything is a great idea until it isn't!

[@clydemilner9166]

My 2332 pulls fine. Not as good as the twin motor but it pulls everything I hang on the drawbar. The 520 runs well and is good for what it was designed for.

[@paulremmey398]

The 2332 Pennsy GG1 is an Icon of the entire Electric Train Hobby

[@joshuahudson2170]

The stuff in Lionel Electric Control looks like it might be prime stuff to convert to modern DCC.

[@MMitchellMarmel]

When one has lemons, one makes lemonade. The 520 boxcab shell was repurposed into the much more successful 3535 Security Car, for example. :)

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

They had to do SOMETHING with the tooling! 😀

[@MMitchellMarmel]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks And RMT put a decent power truck and headlights on the shell, making a semi-decent switcher out of it as well... Personally, I equipped my 520 with a brass HO scale pantograph and a spare MTH bump and go trolley pole, and "Cousin Itt", as I've dubbed it, scoots along enthusiastically. :D

[@natehill8069]

Always hurts to see those old intentional "Fair" collisions...

[@marksabottke338]

The Rail scope was also bad in that some of the electronic parts for the video needed to be mounted on a DIY type piece of board. Similar to buying electrical parts that you need to assemble! I mounted the parts on a small wooden 3x5 board. Lionel could provide this to you? Like buying a car where you need to mount the tires to be able to drive it off the car dealer lot.

[@MrStevesTrains]

You missed Lionel’s Hot knuckle Reefer. That was a real Turkey. Cheap smoke 💨 unit always fails.

[@BAKU2K2]

Coming back to this video now that I have a 520 box cab, it's actually not as much as a turkey as it may seem. As I predicted in my previous comment, it does in fact make a great helper engine when coupled behind another locomotive; especially since it's one of the few "cheap" Lionel locos to include a front coupler. On its own, I have gotten it to pull at most a modest 9 car train on O27 track, more than what the typical plastic motored 'Scout' can handle.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the feedback.

[@_molls]

I actually ordered the 6110 a couple days ago and should arrive tomorrow. I found about it because of that bizarro smoke unit, and was planning on throwing my hat in and make a video about this weird locomotive and see how effective that smoke unit is haha

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

It should smoke ok - it's just weird looking!

[@_molls]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks I’ll let ya know tonight or tomorrow morning how good or badly it smokes compared to my 2055 Hudson lmao See ya soon with that haha

[@3ftsteamrwy12]

I can add what I belive to be the MOST glaring mis-step by Lionel in their history...the D.C. powered trains in the 1970's under MPC...I wonder how MANY of these engines have been fried by the unaware thinking they could just put them on the layout and run them without modifications?

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Maybe, but Marx, Flyer, and K-Line also dabbled in DC. So Lionel was not alone.

[@3ftsteamrwy12]

I didn't know K-line did DC as well.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

@@3ftsteamrwy12 One set - a Southern Pacific Alco switcher

[@andy41417]

Lionel OO also came in kits.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Yes, the less-detailed versions were often in kit form.

[@wilmeaux12]

Having grown up during those years, I liked the Marx and Gilbert American Flyer trains better as they were not as pricey and as for the Gilbert trains, more to scale.

[@christiandpaul2022]

The other big turkey is when they stopped using BAKELITE to make the cars and started using cheap PLASTIC. The Bakelite cars were magnificent! They cheeped out on the engine toos and stopped making die cast engines and started using the Bakelite on them.

[@paulhorn2665]

Fascinating how OO/HO never caught on in the US, but O-scale. In post-war Germany, since 1950, O-scale was dead. Just since a few years its re-vitalised, in a niche for hobbyists.I think it depends on living room area...In Germany you have HO or N for your layout in your small rented flat, while in the US you have more space, because everything is bigger+ aircondition. (In my imagination). My german flat is 50m2 and no aircon. I can just put some tin-plate O-scale temporally up, on the kitchen table...

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

HO is VERY popular in the US. N is second.

[@nicholmansgarage3501]

I have a 520, still with both the truck and pantograph, that came in a set. It was a great flea market find.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Wow! Nice catch!

[@ZeldaTheSwordsman]

OO scale abroad was split between 2-rail and 3-rail for decades (2-rail didn't win out til like the late sixties), so that may have influenced Lionel in offering both 2-rail and 3-rail. But going with a more to-scale track gauge (probably close to if not exactly what is now called EM gauge) instead of using HO-gauge track like British OO does... _that_ was probably what damned it. Electronic Control was definitely a case of "Good idea, but the tech's not there yet". It operates on the same design principles as DCC, which has been very successful, but with vacuum tubes rather than chips. I really like the Lady Lionel, honestly. The pastel colors charmed me when I saw an unboxed example at a model train shop years ago, and it's actually influenced me to do pink steamers and pastel freight cars in HO. Would love to own one of the reissues, or else the Williams by Bachmann recreation. Although I will say, the locomotive is not entirely satisfactory. Monochrome black looks fine, monochrome anything else... not so much; it could really do with painting the smokebox, cab roof, pilot, and running boards. And red wheels would go much better with the pink than black wheels do. I've gone that route with my HO pink steamers.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for the comments!!

[@rakhimilstead8951]

I got a Sandy Andy coal loader MIB in the 1990s. I assembled it, and it has always worked fine for me. While not the 98 coal loader, it's very good for being a mechanical accessory. But that was my experience. The plastic log and barrel loaders were REALLY crap.

[@rakhimilstead8951]

BTW, You forgot the 398 Rotary Aircraft Beacon. Designed to work by convection, there was no accommodation for adequate air flow up into the lens housing. the lenses would not rotate, owners increased the voltage until the lenses melted, and the tower was set aside. It had to be reissued with a vibrator motor as the 498.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

You were lucky!!!!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

That's a good one for the list!

[@trainliker100]

Here is another - so bad that Lionel offered a free shell replacement. In the "modern era" production they sold a C&NW NW-2 - both the "cow" and the "calf" versions. The shell was yellow plastic and not painted. The headlight shined through the shell horribly and they got a lot of complaints. I forget the terms, but Lionel would send you a replacement shell at no charge very nicely PAINTED so the light wouldn't shine through it.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing! Bare yellow plastic and headlights don't mix, as Menards is now discovering with the UP FP7s.

[@user-hz1yi6db7j]

i GOT A 520 WHEN i WAAS A KID. i STILL WORKS AND STILL PULLS IT'S CARS. iT WAS MY ONLY ENGINE FOR 6 OR 7 YEARS. i LOVED IT!!

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing!

[@greglivo]

I agree with your comment about the 2332 GG-1. The only GG-1 in my collection is a 2332. Although the horn has a unique sounds to it and it looks great, the pulling power is terrible. It's on par with a small non magnetraction steamer. But I have to correct you on calling it a Pullmore motor. That term was used by Lionel during the MPC era and was never used during the postwar era.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Technically correct, but the basic design and characteristics, ie open frame 3 pole universal motor, are virtually identical.

[@MMitchellMarmel]

@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks IIRC, Lionel adopted the term from American Flyer when they bought the line from Gilbert. :D

[@dutydruidfilms11]

0:00 intro 0:45 OO scale 3:00 Lionel’s crappy papercraft! 4:45 Electric boogaloo! 7:50 crusty 2332 GG1 9:06 Shitty scout 10:40 Shitty scout 2 electric boogaloo 12:23 GE 80 ton weighs nothing! 13:34 Lionel’s Edsel: Lady Lionel train set! 14:55 Sandy Andy lemons! 17:07 Railscope TV crap

[@greglivo]

I had a Railscope locomotive in the late 90's. It worked pretty good for what it was. I had a large track that ran the perimeter of my apartment living room. It went behind all of the furniture so I had some good tunnel effect going. Yes, I was single at the time LOL. I used to put a flat car in front of the camera and run it backwards. Then I'd put cat treats on the flat car and get video of my cat chasing the car around to get treats! I was even able to put some of it on VHS tape.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Sounds like a 1950s Sci Fi flick!!

[@greenbeacon394]

The 520 cab was later use in the searchlight/security car with the searchlight vibrating mechanism and was quite reliable The girl train actually had descent cars two 6464 boxcars, full size gondola, full-size hopper, and N5C Caboose

[@KibuFox]

Regarding Lionel OO at 1:41, the only reason it didn't take off, is Lionel's train productions got interrupted by WW2. The Idea behind the 2 and 3 rail locomotives for this smaller scale, came from modelers of the day. You had people who were modeling in both 'scale', (thus the 2 rail high detail version), and 'semi scale' (low detail 3 rail version).

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel's OO line was cataloged for 5 years, and in all that time they essentially manufactured one train set - no additional cars, structures, NOTHING else. That leads me to believe the line was going nowhere fast.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Also, the high detail and low detail versions each came in both 2 and 3 rail varieties.

[@muir8009]

​@@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks ​@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks just to add a little titbit: in scale 0 and 00 (and others) outside third was at least as common as 2 rail, if not moreso (there was even outside 3rd standard gauge on the market at the time) so having 2 rail, with its insulated running gear, and the 3 rail without, may have indicated that outside 3rd modellers were in the market. For some reason I think in 00 outside 3rd pick-ups were supplied as an alternative

[@markperlman8384]

I have three excellent 520s and run them triple headed. Together they can pull a reasonably long consist. I never had a problem with truck derailments and the lack of a headlight does not bother me. They look something like the picture I have of New Haven EF-1s running triple headed. I think they're cool.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing

[@1978garfield]

I would add the MPC GG1. They leaked oil. It seems fitting once you remember they were lettered for Penn Central.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

😂

[@MustangsTrainsMowers]

I bought two new in the box Sandy Andy’s on Ebay about 10 years ago. Never assembled them as I work a lot. Has anyone came up with fixes for them?

[@johnandrus3901]

Your turkeys are fairly accurate. OO was not a turkey, though. WWII basically put the kibosh on OO. Had Lionel decided to reintroduce them in 1946, they may have well been what saved Lionel as their O gauge sales declined. Lionel's reputation for reliability and durability was well earned. That alone probably would have made them a player in the smaller-scale market. HO really didn't take off until after the war, so the playing field would probably have started out evenly. Just as O replaced Standard Gauge before the war, HO pushed out O afterwards. OO would have kept Lionel relevant and may have saved the day. Unfortunately, we will never know.

[@johnandrus3901]

I also want to add that Lionel chose OO because they could put a larger motor in it. That meant that it would be a better puller, have more durability and be easier to work on. The die cast locomotives with the larger motor added more heft that HO didn't have, which also helped with tractive effort. Lionel AC motors, like other AC motors, could run on DC, whereas a DC motor won't run properly, if at all, on AC power. This made making both two rail and three rail fairly simple, adding little to the cost of production. The difference in size compared to HO was minimal, which would have helped them compete against HO. Lionel missed the boat because of the popularity of its O gauge line. They decided to stick with O, which seemed logical at the time. Unfortunately, not in the long run.

[@pennsy6755]

Surprised there’s no reference to the 1960 exclusive ho and o gauge over/under dad son set. Ya know how rare that stuff is? _man_ it’s overlooked hard

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

That would be a good addition to the list. However, since the only new tooling involved in the set was for the modified trestles, there was no serious financial hit for Lionel with this set. They didn't have to repaint rolling stock like with the girls set, and they didn't have to fill in holes in the boiler face like they had to with the leftover 6110 shells. They simply repackaged the components of the over and under set into the existing product line.

[@CSltz]

Was Lionel the ones that had both the race cars and the train. Along with the rail crossing? In HO? Or was it Bachman or Aurora? Gomez Addams would have loved that set.

[@BAKU2K2]

How well would the 520 work as a banking or helper engine, instead of a lead locomotive? Unlike most scout/budget locomotives, the 520 has a front coupler instead of just a rear one.

[@fredrickschwartz4687]

I was given a Lionel 1684. It only works in the model shop. I have a new transformer, tracks, etc..light comes on, won’t move.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

If it worked at the shop the first thing I would check is a stuck reverse unit. Sounds like you're stuck in neutral.

[@jamesemerson3414]

i bought the G Lionel Railscope back in the 80's. The camera battery only lasted 15 minutes before it died. Rechargeable batteries did not hold a full operating voltage for the camera and did not work. I was so excited but soon disappointed by the picture quality. I felt cheated. Never bought Lionel brand again. I still have it, it sits in the garage.

[@JohnHuntt]

I being 78 years remember the items in whitch you turkey. The one you did not show was the poor quality of the cars made. Plastic trucks and couplers and the cars made so light that they would not stay on the track unless weighted down. Lionel leaves a poor impression on my memory. That is why I buy MTH and K-line products. JH

[@user-fi9iw4gd8k]

00 scale are very valuable today.

[@user-tl7mj2bm4m]

A general rule with collectibles...IF it was EXPENSIVE back then....it's EXPENSIVE NOW. A good example, Tiffany lamps were expensive back then....they are outrageously expensive now. Same with most old trains.... My Grandfather didn't make a lot of money - hence, my Dad's collection was primarily MARX (litho-tin) with a few (very few ) Lionel cards. Lionel was always expensive.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

True!

[@MrKenichi22]

0:58 perhaps they should have gone HO (as HO was still niche back then) it could have gone either with OO (like in the UK) or HO (Like Germany and everyone else) but Lionel, chose to stick with O gauge.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel and Marx (as well as Gilbert/Am Flyer) all tried HO in the 1950s and 60s but were unsuccessful at breaking into that market.

[@MITSI1991]

My dads scout set was a lemon thats a fact. When he was 2 my grandfather bought him the set in 1963. Just a simple plastic body 1062 set. As a kid i remember him trying to get it working for me but could never get it going. He then gave it to me for christmas and i paid to have it repaired. The motors in those things were just unreliable. But since then ive learned how to work on lionel trains and o gauge in general and have been able to keep er going. Forgot to mention its a complete set! Track, transformer, cars, loco and caboose. Box and even the catalogs

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Thanks for sharing!!

[@BledsoeTrainsRC]

I could give 10 examples from the last 5 years haha. Lionel keeps with tradition

[@superjesse645]

As soon as you said 'paper trains' I asked myself "Why didn't Lionel just take a contract to make railroad-based propaganda posters if they had the means to make stuff with paper?" Sometimes I don't understand these things.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

They subcontracted the Paper Train to another firm. Even if they had the resources to manufacture them in house the factory was too busy with military production at the time.

[@trainliker100]

Lionel made the "Paper Train" to keep the Lionel name in front of the toy train buying public even when they couldn't buy regular toy trains. It was for toy train marketing goals.

[@jameskerner7782]

If I remember correctly, a video maker made a DVD about Lionel's OO gauge trains and thought that they were good. I thought that it was interesting.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

They WERE good. They just didn't sell enough to justify continuing production after the War. 1/76 was an odd scale.

[@HolzMichel]

interesting video! although producing turkeys in this line of toys isn't limited to lionel...just about all of them at one time or another have done similar bonehead moves.. some even went bust because of them

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

True to some extent. Although, except maybe for their HO line, I cannot think of an unsuccessful Marx train product. Maybe the one-off Lehigh Valley set powered by a lantern battery.

[@kleetus92]

My God... I think I still have a Sandy Andy in the basement somewhere. I was never a huge Lionel fan even as a kid. I much preferred the detail and wide variety of HO growing up in the 70's. I never understood the magic of Lionel. Everything I saw as a kid growing up always struck me as cheap even though they were anything but. And now today? I wouldn't even take a Lionel for free. Back when they made stuff out of metal, those things were cool and they worked, but as plastic crept in, the quality ran away.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Growing up. In addition to my modest Lionel layout, we also had a LARGE, prototypically operational, HO layout. I could (and still can) "count rivets" with the best of them, but Lionel is charming in part BECAUSE it is whimsical. It's a matter of different tastes. Thanks for the comments!

[@cpnscarlet]

My turkeys since starting in the hobby (early 1970s) - TruTrack, Railscope, FasTrack.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Ah, Tru Track!! That's a good one!!

[@trainliker100]

I think FasTrack is a pretty good product. I have built two children's layouts, one for a railroad museum, and one for an Exploration Discovery Center for kids, and they get a lot of heavy running. Easy to plan (sufficient track piece choices) easy to assemble, durable. One thing I do NOT like is that some of the switches are available only in remote control making them very expensive. And the lswitch stands for manual switches, although surprisingly strong, are rather small and spindly for children.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

@@trainliker100 I agree. Many have a grudge against it since it replaced traditional tubular track.

[@cpnscarlet]

@@trainliker100 The whole system is too expensive and was introduced at a time when cost was the main barrier in getting people into the hobby. My experience has been with friends' layouts and I am always troubleshooting bad track issues where the pins have come loose or have oxidized. I wind up having to make a power connection to every other section. And perhaps you know an "easy" way to make an insulated rail with this system? PS - Back in 2015 I started buying up as many O72 switches that I expected to need over the 20 years. The last run of Lionel O72s were great with LED lighting and microswitches replacing the sliding contacts.

[@trainliker100]

@@cpnscarlet Price would have mattered and meant a smaller market. But I'm quite sure Lionel understood that. Lionel had prior offerings that were also pricey like the 1937 Rail Chief set at $97.50 in 1937 which is $2083 today. I expect that Lionel was well aware these were not going to be bought by low and middle class households. The technical foibles are probably the primary reason. I can only assume that word spread to customers at the point of sale from hobby shop and hardware store sellers (especially those as authorized repair stations) warning customers away to avoid having to deal with inevitable complaints. But another might have been what Industrial Designer Raymond Loewy called "MAYA". He counseled that a design should be "Most Advanced Yet Acceptable." This technology may have been too advanced for people at the time. I really can't put my mind in the terms of the "average" buyer back then, but they may have seen it as something too complex for them to deal with and have too much to go wrong (which would be about right). MAYA was one of the problems with the General Electric ASTRAC system. It actually worked pretty well and was not overpriced for what it was. People just weren't quite ready and were still in the stage of just "thinking about such things a little" while comfortable with the massively entrenched DC control they were used to. A distinction with no real difference from people comfortable with the massively entrenched AC transformers they were used to.

[@jamesjette4343]

The Scout Set was a dead end. No way to upgrade. No extra cars with scout couplers. Replacement engines no Scout coupler and the transformer was so small (25 watt). Without changing the couplers over to regular Lionel the only upgrade was 027 track. The best upgrade was to buy a regular Lionel set.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Lionel DID make a coupler conversion kit, and there are several simple methods to make the couplers work with standard equipment. But, yes, the Scout line was a failed attempt to beat Marx at budget trains.

[@user-fi9iw4gd8k]

00 scale are very hard to find. And that makes them more valuable.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Yes, hard to find because they did not sell well.

[@ATSF874]

I’m probably gonna get smoked for this, but the prewar standard gauge 400E is a turkey in my opinion. I love this locomotive. Everything about it oozes class to me, but it was advertised as a scale model that’s, “just like the real thing!” and it was also advertised as something railroad men would give to their boys. like hell they, or anyone could afford it. Let’s be real, it looks nothing like the prototype. Still cool though.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

photos.app.goo.gl/guDTcHczYugBXrBc9 It DID have a whistle and headlight "just like the real thing", so close enough for Lionel??

[@natehill8069]

2:08 Surely the "OO" freight cars didnt care whether they ran on 2 or 3 rail? What would the difference be?

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Insulated (2 rail) vs non insulated axles.

[@JoeRailfan]

And let's not forget the cheap "Texas Special" train sets produced around 1959-1960 and sold widely outside of Lionel's usual authorized dealers. I foolishly spent some birthday money on one of these sets in a shopping center drugstore and was sorely disappointed. 1055 diesel with no reverser, no headlight, no Magne-traction. No uncoupling track--no reason for one, since there were dummy couplers on all the cars. The whole set was packaged in one flat carton, ready to be piled on a discount store shelf. Lionel didn't even list these sets in their consumer catalogs. I had earlier and better Lionels at home and the decline in quality was painful to see.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Collectors and operators often look down on MPC production, but it was often better than 1959-69 products. Thanks for sharing.

[@robertporterfield9578]

In the fifties Model Railroader magazine published a fictional story in which a man looking for a particular (and unusual) locomotive visits a number of hobby shops looking for one. The result is a number of the shop owners assault their suppliers trying to find the unusual loco. Sending a large demand for this product, the manufacturer begins to produce and market an item that only one person had actually wanted. The story was written as a fable to warn manufacturers about diving into such an undertaking. Not long afterwards, I encountered Lionel's ads for their pink locomotives and sent a letter to MR that their fable had come true.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Interesting story.

[@asteroidrules]

Huh, I never knew Lionel ever tried OO scale, I guess they don't like to talk about it nowadays, which is kind of funny since I know at their visitor's center in the 2000s Lionel still spoke proudly of the paper trains of all things. It's funny that they actually made true OO scale track, British OO scale is a bit of a mess because it still uses HO scale track for compatibility and so is caught between different scales. There are actually some British modelers who lay true OO scale track by hand and manually re-gauge their locos for it, so the idea that Lionel of all people were briefly producing true OO track all the way back in the 30s is funny.

[@1maico1]

Companies like Accurascale sell P4 wheelsets that convert their 00 locos to 18.83 mm gauge track which is spot on for accuracy.

[@cliffordkiehl3959]

I thought and bought at Handy Andy and it proceeded in piling gravel all over that part of the railroad. I repackaged and sold it.

[@ToyTrainTipsAndTricks]

Yep!