“One thing to be cautious of when adding weight to engines with low grade can motors and plastic gears is overheating the motors and/or stripping the gears.”
I had thought of that concern years ago, so I had conversations with two technicians at Lionel at different times about this concern. One assured me by listing some of the much heavier die-cast steamers which used the same identical motor also used in much lighter weight plastic locos… ALL having plastic gears. They felt it would be no problem.
And many years later, time has proved to me they were right. I have weighted several Industrial Switchers, so that they are as heavy as some steam engines I have. And that was 13 years ago, and those Industrial Switchers still run just fine with no noticable wear on the gears.
Matter of fact, every engine I own has extra weight in it. And though I like plastic trucks, I have a good amount of cars with die-cast trucks and am fond of the post-war Lionel metal ones. I haven’t had a problem with overheating the motors either. Well once it happened to one motor on a dual motored diesel. You could feel the warmth on the bottom of that one motor truck. And I did end up replacing that motor… the only one I have ever had to replace in all my years back in the hobby.
Not a bad track record for inexpensive trains with low grade motors and plastic gears. My own experience in this hobby is a definite advertisement for “less actually being more.”
Bob, with all due respect I admire your knowledge and expertise. What I do know is I currently have an unaltered Lionel Industrial Switcher awaiting my reworking. As is, it pulls a few cars, and any more than that, it slips and stalls on switches. My reworked ones with no traction tire easily pull a train of a dozen cars with die cast trucks with ease… nice and slow with no stalling. Same goes for a bun
Two simple words. “better adhesion” even if it’s got traction tires, weight will hold them firmer to the rails. I will say no more. I did not advocate it but if that’s the route he decides to go, there are precautions to consider because he’s messing with the engineering (which I pointed out). And no, it is not a good idea.
I agree with you to a degree. I’ve seen too many burned out motors, stripped gears, and fried reverse units to agree completely. It all depends on how much weight you are pulling, how much the engine weighs in the first place, and the load you’re pulling. Your industrial switchers are light in the first place. I don’t know what his GP-38 weighs. My advice was to be cautious which is the sensible thing to do.
But you see it’s already adhering so firmly to the rails that the wheels can’t turn. No amount of weight will make the wheels slip less, because they’re already slipping not at all. But added weight will increase the torque that the already stalled motor is called upon to deliver to move the train up the hill. So adding weight in this situation goes beyond pointless to counter-productive.
OK, I get it. I’m not stupid. I went back and looked. He didn’t say what you say until about his fourth post. When people started chiming in about adding weight, I pulled the trigger and stated my case. But I think we know where I’m coming from.
I saw one of these sets displayed, and as I recall, it may have had the Powder Puff (Power Max) transformer, which if that is the case, it might only be a 30 watt transformer, or 40 watt if it is the Powder Puff Plus. That could very well be the problem, simply not enough wattage to run a dual motor locomotive up a steep grade.
Stu, does your transformer have one or two sets of power connections on the back of it? also look on the bottom and see what model it is, and what the power OUTPUT wattage rating is. If You have a CW-80, that should be Plenty of power for that locomotive, but the Power Max or Power Max Plus, may not have enough UUMMPH, for your sharp grade.
I have one of these engines and I have used a CW80 and a new ZW with both bricks powering only this unit on the track and no other accessories running.
I have had the same problem. Put on a couple of heavy cars, this loco just stops. The wheels are not slipping. The grip is fine, there just is not enough torque from the tiny 2 motors to move the thing! All power wires and motors are working, they are just flat out too tiny. I have lubed it, ran it, and then ran it for extended periods of time. These things are just gutless, period.
Adding weight won’t do it, I am thinking from all of my testing and experience that it will harm it even more. My advice? Lionel should stop building this loco since it is a gutless paperweight!
You could think about a Williams. Most will pull over ten times what the GP38 Nascar does.
Can anyone confirm that these motors are in fact different/smaller than the usual truck-mounted Mabuchi motors that have been installed for 15+ years in Lionel & K-Line diesels?
Wow, sorry didn’t mean to start a fight, but thanks for all the replies, and everyone’s help.
The transformer is a KW, on two loops, (you guys helped w/wiring, works great). It doesn’t make any difference if power is divided between loops, or all going to loop w/ the grade. It stalls.
This weekend I will check motors and test run them. Will also try and re-wire in series. Saw a diagram how to do it, around the web somewhere.
Also thought of getting a set of GP-7 trucks, and changing to one Pulmor motor, heck that would be better than what I have.
Think of it. A hot-rodded GP-38. I don’t think I can fit 2 Pulmor’s inside that body. Hmmm?
I love tinkering and have a small machine shop, and I LOVE A CHALLANGE.
I know I could just get a bigger loco, but due to the size of my layout, the GP-38 size loco’s fit and look proportionally nice!!! Even my FM Virginian, looks too big.
I welcome all thoughts and comments.
Thanks everyone, will provide an update, after this weekend’s tinkerings. Stu
The pullmors will fit in the shell but wont be able to rotate. I did this to a Lionel geep. I wrote a Wire EDM program made the approite cut-outs and it will not rotate because the shell is too narrow. That is why they are in the cab portion.
If you can find an interchangeable truck with the vertical can motors you might be able to put two in since they are a bit smaller than the Pullmor. Plus they come with traction tires which most of the pullmors, except the newest ones, don’t come with them. I’ve had one converted, the Rock Island GP-7, to traction tires and it made a significant improvement in it’s performance.
**Bob…**I really liked this thread. It was like reading “His car is out of gas and won’t run, so he should add air to the tires.” [:D] I kept going back and rereading the posts, thinking I had missed something.
Just for knowledge I just opened my Nascar set that I got in it has the dreaded Power Max transformer. (hello Ebay) (30 watt) . I also sent Jeff Kane an email asking if there are different power can motors that would fit the GP-38 from a starter set. told him I have the Nascar set.
Basically he said he didn’t know of any different power in can motors.
but I think I came up with a solution for me anyway I have a tmcc NYC GP-9 that has pul-mor motor and magnatraction that it appears the shells will swap out only difference is the NYC frame is black and the Nascar is yellow don’t want to repaint them in case I ever want to switch back but don’t believe it will hurt the appearance on th Nascar any and it kinda brightens up the NYC
Just an update. After my previous post/blast about this engine I decided on a whim to run it again pulling a consist that I knew it could not before. I had run it for many hours and lubed it, and after watching it stall, I had given up and set it on a shelf.
So…wouldn’t ya know it…the NASCAR engine pulled the consist just fine. I was stunned. I guess the speculation of a long break in period and the powertrain being really tight was dead on. I really would have preferred that it had been built right in the first place. Now I will recommend other owners run the heck out of it and lubricate it well.