Say if a person was cheap and broke (like me) and had extra time on their hands, how about taking Lionel 4-4-2 motor-wheels-drive chassys and moving the wheels closer and make say a 4-8-2. I know I would have to ground off the flanges of the two center axles. Does Lionel use bigger motors in them than what are in the starter set engines? Anyone out there try this?
The motor should not be a problem.I’ve been thinking of adding a set of drivers to a lionel General but would add them at the rear and just let the drive rods turn them.I don’t know if you should take the flanges off the center wheels until you find you have to as these are driving wheels and you probably need the traction.A 4-6-2 should take most turns.The problem is making the slot for the new axle 100% true or you will have binding problems.I’d ty that first and go from there.The General would be easier as the drive rods are seprate pieces and the third wheel would be easier to line up.
Ed
Well if I made a 4-8-2 I’d have to cut and splice the metal bodies which I don’t think would be too hard.
There’s a problem with turning another pair of wheels with the side rods of a Lionel General: The drivers are not quartered. Lionel aligned the cranks so that they could operate the air pump in the boiler. The model looks okay because you can’t see both sides at once.
If you added another set of wheels and lined them up correctly why wouldm’t they just follow?Would quatering really be a problem here.I realize you couldn’t turn them upside down but if the holes lines up on one side,wouldn’t they line up on the other ? I’m not trying to argue.Am I missing somethimg here ?I always thought that was why the drive rods are slotted,so they would take up the slack at the end of thier travel.
Ed
I guess the easiest way to get something bigger out of 2 engines working is building something like a 4-4-4-2, like a garrat-type locomotive. The drive wheels are too big in size to put the drive’s of both locomotive’s back to back, even if you take the flanges off. The 027 stuff with 4 drive wheels on each side has 2 thin wheels between 2 normal wheels, the flanges can move behind the diskshape wheels, so the are as little length as possible.
A rigid 4-8-2 frame with a lot of space between the wheels will probably only negociate a 090 curve or something…
Ed, the problem would be that, at dead center, the rods would not be able to produce any torque at the rear drivers. They will probably be turned by friction against the rails as the locomotive advances, but will not contribute to the tractive effort, twice each revolution. Being the rear wheels, they will probably have more than their share of the locomotive’s weight, due to the weight transfer induced by the drawbar pull of the train.
The result might work, especially if the side rods are solid and can act as levers to help keep the third axle from turning the wrong way; but I think it won’t be much of a puller.