I’m with you. I have purchased two Tyco 4-8-0’s on e-bay. I am using them as a base for kit bashing SP’s 4-8-0 1890’s Mastodon TW-2 so I don’t have to scratch build or buy brass. I have already re-motored one of them with a Yard Bird drop in motor and I am now in the process of scratching a whale back tender over an IHC tender frame with all wheel electrical pickup. So far, in tests, it is running like a charm. I will post pictures when I am done. If you read this post Andre, the prototype can be found on page 51 of Signor’s SP Shasta division.
I’m with you. I have purchased two Tyco 4-8-0’s on e-bay. I am using them as a base for kit bashing SP’s 4-8-0 1890’s Mastodon TW-2 so I don’t have to scratch build or buy brass. I have already re-motored one of them with a Yard Bird drop in motor and I am now in the process of scratching a whale back tender over an IHC tender frame with all wheel electrical pickup. So far, in tests, it is running like a charm. I will post pictures when I am done. If you read this post Andre, the prototype can be found on page 51 of Signor’s SP Shasta division.
I’ve got his earlier version( “Rails In The Shadow Of Mt. Shasta” ). OTOH, I do have a nice copy of Dunscomb’s “A Century Of Southern Pacific Steam Locomotives”.
I’m wondering if a Mantua/Tyco mechanism could be mated with an MDC Harriman boiler to make a TW-8.
Andre, thanks for your comments, I think you are on to something. I checked my Dunscomb book and my unfinished Roundhouse Harriman kit and the boiler length and profile appear to be a good match for the TW-8 when placed over the Tyco mechanism! However, the TW-2 I have a picture of is in the right place at the right time for my Klamath Falls Division. I am also thinking of using my second Tyco boiler (Shortened a bit) over a Spectrum high boiler 4-6-0 mechanism to model an SP T-1 similar to SP no. 2255 shown on page 124 of Dunscomb’s book.
When I started collecting trains in the 1970’s I bought what I could find and a lot of it was Tyco. Over time I discovered that Tyco, as well as Bachmann and Life Like, cars didn’t stay on the track as well as other more expensive brands (the more you pay for something the better it is, right?) I got a weight chart from NMRA and replaced a lot of plastic wheel sets with metal sets, weighted the rolling stock to just below the weight standards. Now my “cheap stuff” runs just a good as the “expensive stuff”. Now when a piece of rolling derails I have to look closely to see what brand it is. And I’m very happy ;with the performance of my Tyco trains. As for motor issues if the engine can’t pull X number of cars, I don’t try to pull more.
1960’s Tyco/ Mantua was a quality product. Well made, free rolling, the horn hook couplers actually functioned properly. My 1969 Gp20 was the backbone of my first 2 layouts. It still runs.
And, I am currently setting up a display track for all my old trains, and the many I have accumulated.
Tyco was great early on, yet cheapened in later years, with diminished quality.
Exactly, but it was intended from the start to be durable starter product to introduce teens and adults to the hobby.
While the original versions were well made, it was a fine example of how to make a quality product at a low price with simple design and high levels of common parts from item to item.
As a teen, the first hobby shop I worked in was an aurthorized repair station for MANTUA/TYCO, LIONEL, and AHM. We also had a good stock of Athearn parts and did all sorts of repairs.
You learned quickly how the Mantua steam locos all shared a long list of parts, as did the freight cars.
For what it was intended to be, it was a good product for the market at that time. But even then, not something more advanced modelers were running unless they used it for kitbash fodder.
My Tyco rolling stock goes back to the 1960s. A tank car, a few box cars, and a parade of those operating clamshell hopper cars which I’ve carried around through 30 years of moves. Slowly, I removed the horn-hooks and the coupler brackets from the Talgo trucks, and drilled and tapped the frames for new Kadees. Later on, the Talgos disappeared, to be replaced with new trucks and Intermountain metal wheelsets. The old rolling stock now runs better than ever.
No, I don’t hate my Tycos at all. They are, by now, old friends of 60 years. Blessed with today’s trackwork and the patience of an old man like me to get it right, these are not junk at all, but smooth-running and attractive models that are actually a credit to my layout.
Since somebody has decided to resurrect this zombie thread, I’ll throw in my two cents. As people get more experienced in the hobby, they become more knowledgeable about quality. Generally speaking, trainsets are at the bottom of the totem pole in terms of quality because they are entry level designed to get people into the hobby. Tyco and Model Power were mostly of that quality. I had a Tyco Amtrak set with about 3 or four cars pulled by an F-7. The paint scheme was non prototypical and the lighted cars had sillouhetted passengers. My also bought about a dozen Tyco UP hopper cars with yellow plastic bodies with red lettering. I had no idea at the time how unprototypical those were. Eventually I become more discerning about things such as this.
The Tyco brand name was bought and sold several times and the quality of the brand suffered as a result. When I entered the hobby in the late 1970s, it was pretty much entry level stuff. Nothing a serious modeler would be interested in.
In both cases (Tyco and Model Power), it really depends on the product. As mentioned by others, when Tyco took over Mantua, there were some good loco kits offered. The problem is that quality just went downhill from the early 70s on, including the engine kits inherited from Mantua, and the company targetted the low-end youth market. Contrary to Life-Like and Bachmann, Tyco never changed its marketing strategy and died when most kids lost interest in trains.
Model Power was a different beast. They imported from various manufacturers, some good, some bad, some very good. Their N scale 4-4-0 and 2-6-0 were made in Korea, and were excellent. In the early 70s, they imported locos made by Roco, again excellent engines (but low in detail). But they also imported toy-quality engines that were only half a notch above Tyco.
TYCO (TYler CO.)was a decent brand when it was owned by the Tyler family that also owned Mantua- TYCO in the 60s was basically assembled Mantua product. The printing was mediocre, the detail was bare minimum, but they ran well. It changed when the Tylers sold TYCO to Consolidated Foods (the brown box era), who were more interested in selling them as multi-colored, mass-market toys. This began the era of the mega-sized tank cars that would derail at sharp curves, the gaudy paint jobs, and crappy electric motors and drives.
AHM and Model Power were basically importers of model train equipment under their own packaging. AHM seem to have better overseas manufacturers-Rivarossi and Lima and Pocher from Italy, Pola from Germany. Model Power’s stuff wasn’t as good-mostly imports from Mehano in Yugoslavia and Frateschi in Brazil. Both had more Asian made replacements by the late 70s/80s when importing from Europe was increasingly expensive.
But when you say “quality” to me, my first thought is build quality, are the wheels round?, do the parts fit together and work as designed and expected?, does the engine run reasonably smooth?, is it reasonably durable for the intended use?
As train sets of that era go, TYCO was good quality.
Prototype accuracy is not “quality”, that is a feature.
A model can be perfectly “accurate” and run like cr…, that is not quality.
And then you go and use that dreaded phrase, “serious modeler”. What exactly makes someone a serious modeler?
Am I not a serious modeler because I still run Athearn blue box equipment? Or because I will not replace all my old models with “better stuff”? I will go one better, I still run Athearn metal cars, and Varney metal cars from the 50’s. Guess I need to turn in my "