6464-1 Western Pacific
6464-50 Minneapolis & St. Louis
6464-500 Timken

There's two more, also.

quote:

why is everyone still unconvinced?

Not everyone. Having been an active Lionel fan through that period I can tell you I was one those who complained to Lionel about not having a caboose for the #783.
At the York show not long after mailer flyer announcing the B&A Hudson arrived I still recall asking about that NYC caboose to Lionel reps in the small coat room display at the front of the red hall.
My main complaint was why I had to buy the B&A caboose to get the NYC for my #783...I wound up buying both then quickly selling the B&A
Joe

Stop sweating the Hudson/matching caboose issue. Other than working local freight for break in purposes following shopping, NYC's J Class locomotives were used almost exclusively in passenger service as the Good Lord intended. I don't think I've ever used any of my NYC Hudson models to power a freight on my railroad.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by NickyBigBoy:

I did all of this research before I bought the caboose some years back, and some addtional research now. With all this logic and reasoning, why is everyone still unconvinced? I'm starting to feel like I did all that for nothing

Nick,
Research is never wasted. You learned something and you are passing it on. That is all that matters. It is up to others to accept or not. It's good to see someone else interested in the history of these trains. Your age shouldn't influence whether your info is accepted or not. If others do so, that is their loss.

For those wondering about the caboose discussion, back in the MPC era, it was amazing how much emphasis was placed on getting a caboose to go with each engine. It was almost like the engine was seriously incomplete without a matching caboose. I think it was the only collecting era where this was true.

Jim

quote:

Does anyone have any of that packing material shaped like houses and tunnels mentioned in the 1971 catalog? I've never seen any in person or for sale.

I still have a MPC set I picked up used from a friend's (long defunct) hobby shop in about 1973. It had a box for the set. The engine and cars were in individual foam trays, which when inverted looked like houses. The set was from about 1971, and I haven't seen any other MPC sets after that which had the same packaging. I have the original Coke set, and the set is packed in a large foam block that fills the set box. Other sets, like the Milwaukee Limited had a set box, and then individual boxes.

Jim:

You make an excellent point regarding the matching caboose issue. In the case of the Bangor & Aroostook Bicentennial unit, a matching caboose was packaged in the same box with the locomotive so the purchaser had to buy both.

Bob

I clearly remember the original 783 Hudson Flyer. In fact I remember that the photos of the Hudson showed the locomotive with the front steps missing. The tooling for the steps was apparently missing and had to be recreated.

My recollection, which I believe to be excellent , is that the Pacemaker Caboose was matched to the GP9. It is also my recollection that the 784 B&A Hudson Flyer had both the NYC Caboose and the B&A Caboose, and that they were meant to match the 783 and 784 respectively.

quote:

I don't think I've ever used any of my NYC Hudson models to power a freight on my railroad.

Could be MPC modeled the #783 after the 1964 PW #773 freight reissue.
I'm wondering if Lionel will remake the 1963 issue of the scale PRR Hudson in its PWC series...LOL
Not many young fans know in Lionelville that oddity existed
Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Seafoid:

quote:

Does anyone have any of that packing material shaped like houses and tunnels mentioned in the 1971 catalog? I've never seen any in person or for sale.

I still have a MPC set I picked up used from a friend's (long defunct) hobby shop in about 1973. It had a box for the set. The engine and cars were in individual foam trays, which when inverted looked like houses. The set was from about 1971, and I haven't seen any other MPC sets after that which had the same packaging. I have the original Coke set, and the set is packed in a large foam block that fills the set box. Other sets, like the Milwaukee Limited had a set box, and then individual boxes.

Thanks! Do you know the set name or number, or what engine came in the set? I'd love to find one with the foam.

James

Joe:

I can tell you a funny story about that 773 with the plastic tender.

One evening during the mid 60's, my father stopped at the Macy's in Herald Square during his walk from the office to Penn Station and he saw that locomotive in the store's train department for $38. As much as he had wanted a 700 series Hudson his entire life, he could not bring himself to purchase the locomotive with the small tender, even at that price. As he claims to this day, it looked ridiculous even by three rail tinplate standards.

A more suitable replacement tender was eventually available at Madison Hardware but that wasn't an inexpensive option at the time. The cost of the tender would have been well in excess of the purchase price of the locomotive. I think the purchase price of the tender was about $100, most certainly not an insignificant amount during the 60's.

Bob

The MPC Southern F-3 where always on my wish list as a kid. I knew my Dad would never buy them for me. So they gave me the Amtrak Lake Shore Limited Set. This was my first O gauge train set which started on the path that I'm on today. My Dad also treated himself with the Gold Coast Limited and Mid-Atlantic Limited sets. He also have the Southern Pacific U36B's, a Chessie NW-2 Switcher, The NYC Yard Chief 0-4-0 work train set and the General 4-4-0 set.

quote:
"I don't think I've ever used any of my NYC Hudson models to power a freight on my railroad. "



We have gotten much more selective recently in choosing motive power for freight and passenger trains. Back in the postwar era, I can't think of many engines that were catalogued exclusively with either freight or passenger sets. The 2373 Canadian Pacific F3 is the only one I can think of offhand with just a passenger set, and the Scouts and NW switchers with freight.

773 Hudsons, Santa Fe warbonnets, 2046 Hudsons, etc. were catalogued with both freight and passenger cars. We never really considered what their prototypes were designed for. We can thank the MPC era for instructing us on the difference between freight and passenger engines.

Jim

quote:

Originally posted by breezinup:

quote:

Originally posted by KOOLjock1:
Chances are, Fritz said "get me some cars that look nice together", and these were the ones at hand. Unless you've spoken with Mr. VonTagen on the issue, don't write anything else into it.

In fact, I'd take it a bit further and say that often Lionel did not consider the concept of "matching" cabooses to engines. That's something collectors worried about. Take the infamous pressure to build "matching" cabooses for the Blue and Yellow Santa Fe, or the NP or the D&H deisels. Lionel TRIED to do the right thing and produce a correct caboose, but the collectors demanded "matching" cabooses!

Jon

Right. I know that in the Greenberg Guide book, repeated mention is made by the author Roland LaVoie of various items, particularly cabooses, that were made as a result of collector demand. That NP baywindow caboose is a poster child for this. The boxed NP Service Station set (headed up by a black and gold Geep) came with a (correct) green and yellow bay window. Subsequently, due to collector pressure, Lionel put out a black and gold baywindow, which of course NP never had.

It's fine by me that the gold and black is not prototypical. It looks great at the end of my original and my first NP geep set from 59. Dresses it up nicely. Anyway. who cares about prototypical when you're pulling a fire car with an exposed fireman swiveling and an aquarium car. I'll probably enjoy it at the end of my new NP geep set from the latest catalog. Why would I order the new set when I have the original? Because I like shinny and new.

On the MPC 6464-500 Timken issue, wasn't there two colors, an orange and a yellow version. I've got the orange version purchased from Glen Uhl at the price of $5.00.

Wasn't there a version of the N & W covered hoppered carried over from the postwar to the MPC days?

quote:

Originally posted by JC642:
Could be MPC modeled the #783 after the 1964 PW #773 freight reissue...

Except that the 783 had the 2426-style die-cast tender. I think that was MPC's first run of that tender. They had previously used the smaller 2224 die-cast tender, on the Alton Limited Hudson.

My problem with the 783 is that the ones I've seen don't have the casting parting line on the boiler top ground off. It was, on my 784 B&A.

If I wanted to replace the 9200 and 9700 plastic trucks with metal ones what would be the easiest fit?

quote:

Originally posted by CNJ 3676:
Joe:
...A more suitable replacement tender (for the 1960's 773) was eventually available at Madison Hardware but that wasn't an inexpensive option at the time. The cost of the tender would have been well in excess of the purchase price of the locomotive. I think the purchase price of the tender was about $100, most certainly not an insignificant amount during the 60's.

Yes, but those tenders were original 700E tenders!

quote:

Originally posted by breezinup:
That NP baywindow caboose is a poster child for this. The boxed NP Service Station set (headed up by a black and gold Geep) came with a (correct) green and yellow bay window. Subsequently, due to collector pressure, Lionel put out a black and gold baywindow, which of course NP never had.

Did the NP have any bay window cabooses? I didn't think they did.

Archdalecurve,

There were 2 colors, Orange and Yellow. Glen Uhl made a few specials cars. I beleive about 150 orange versions exist. Yellow was the standard issue. Glen Uhl also did the Illinois Central N5C Caboose. Instead of all orange like the standard version, the roofs of these cars were white, with the orange bottom. I beleive fewer then 200 were made this way. He also painted a few NW2 MPC switch engines in the white over orange illinois central theme. These are relatively hard to find.

For those of you who are asking, who is Glen Uhl, he was a lonnnng time very large volume Lionel Dealer back in the day who used to voice his opinion at train shows, and give Lionel management and earful, during there decline in the late 50's. He used to always wear and engineers cap and coat covered with railroad patches. He was a colorful figure! He made several runs of special cars in the MPC day, If you get a copy of TM's book, Lionel 1970 to 1990, ( I have the revised edition) There is an article on Glen Uhl..

Mark

Jim:

There were indeed those, although perhaps not many, of us who attempted to operate our postwar trains as prototypically as possible. So, red and silver warbonnet F's, Tuscan pinstripe G's and New York Central Hudsons ran in passenger service while 736 Berkshires and ALCo FA's powered freight long before MPC came along.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by CNJ 3676:
As much as he had wanted a 700 series Hudson his entire life, he could not bring himself to purchase the locomotive with the small tender, even at that price. As he claims to this day, it looked ridiculous even by three rail tinplate standards.

Didn't the tender also say "PENNSYLVANIA"? I'm sure that put him off even more. I believe this was said in TM's hudson video:

"Putting Pennsylvania on the tender of an NYC hudson was like putting a Red Sox jersey on Joe Dimaggio"

Mark

Glen had the only " Un-Authorized Service Station". I have a car from Glens somewhere.

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by NickyBigBoy:

quote:

Originally posted by CNJ 3676:
As much as he had wanted a 700 series Hudson his entire life, he could not bring himself to purchase the locomotive with the small tender, even at that price. As he claims to this day, it looked ridiculous even by three rail tinplate standards.

Didn't the tender also say "PENNSYLVANIA"? I'm sure that put him off even more. I believe this was said in TM's hudson video:

"Putting Pennsylvania on the tender of an NYC hudson was like putting a Red Sox jersey on Joe Dimaggio"

Yeah, and it was originally the tender for the Pennsy turbine, a 3/16" scale model! I believe, catalog-wise, that only the '64 built 773's had Pennsy markings. Those from '65 and '66 were NYC.

Boxcar Bill,

I love that story about him. He stopped buying from Lionel directly and went through a distributor. All because Lionel was tired of him complaining. Lionel came and got $93,000 worth of his merchandise he had, and closed his account and gave him a credit note. It was all over the plastic "diapers" for the MPC GG1's. He sent empty boxes of pampers to the MPC executives, to let them know he never reveived the diapers when the 93 Penn Central GG1's he ordered, were delivered to him without the diapers....

He made a few special run cars during the MPC era, and they are hard to find!

Mark

Mark

Glen, at the time was definitly in the top ten or maybe the top five of Lionel dealers. I to,love hearing the story.

Bill

quote:

quote:
Does anyone have any of that packing material shaped like houses and tunnels mentioned in the 1971 catalog? I've never seen any in person or for sale.


I still have a MPC set I picked up used from a friend's (long defunct) hobby shop in about 1973. It had a box for the set. The engine and cars were in individual foam trays, which when inverted looked like houses. The set was from about 1971, and I haven't seen any other MPC sets after that which had the same packaging. I have the original Coke set, and the set is packed in a large foam block that fills the set box. Other sets, like the Milwaukee Limited had a set box, and then individual boxes.


Thanks! Do you know the set name or number, or what engine came in the set? I'd love to find one with the foam.

quote:

James

My recollection was that it was a Grand Truck set, that may have been originally sold through Sears. I will check this evening to confirm that.

Regarding that plastic tender with the 773, I don't think it would have made a difference what lettering was on it. The combination of an O scale locomotive with a slightly larger than S scale tender was not a good one.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by CNJ 3676:
...I don't think it would have made a difference what lettering was on it...

It was just one of those "As if this wasn't bad enough" kind of things. Somewhat reminiscent of the 1997 heritage hudson with the oil tender, big mistake....

Count me in as one of those that grew up with MPC. My first train set was the Black River set when I was about 5 years old. Plastic 8602 steam engine, Rio Grande tender with the enclosed cylinder underneath filled with BBs that rolled along the 3rd rail to made an attempt to simulate chuffing sounds, and if I recall correctly the yellow B&O hopper & blue Repubic steel flat car had plastic wheels and dummy couplers, while the rest of the cars had plastic trucks, metal wheels, and operating couplers. It did come with an elevated trestle and telephone poles & signs, but supposedly it also had a paper-tab depot that you assemble yourself, but I don't remember ever seeing that in mine.

For the age when I got it was fun, but overall was actually an unremarkable set. The engine was not a particularly strong puller with minimalistic siderod gear and the shell eventually cracked and other parts & details on it started to break off over time. I still have the green Burlington gondola (minus load) and the Republic flat car (minus the stakes). I was always adding more cars to my collection and the engine/tender was eventually replaced by a second-hand postwar 2026 along with a 6466T non-whistling tender, both of which I still have. Eventually bought a custom-painted MPC GP9 and dummy unit in black window paint, but that wasn't a great puller either in spite of it having traction tires due to it's single motor and relatively light weight. Event though that Black River set is firmly placed into the less-than-spectacular category when compared to higher-end MPC and postwar items, it was all it took to get the seed planted in my head.

quote:

Originally posted by Robert S. Butler:
....and the #773 in 1966 was a $50.00 item.

As my grandfather once said, "Hey, if you want the goods, you gotta pay up."

quote:

Originally posted by Robert S. Butler:
....and in 1966 I did.....

And it was a great innvestment, I'm sure those are worth a lot of dough these days

Gee....we are on page EIGHT already!

Yesterday I browsed through the MPC photo thread on another forum. Sixteen pages of photos and there is really some colorful stuff made during that time period. The tobacco and liquor cars probably wouldn't fly today, but they sure were some colorful and interesting stuff.

Oh, that road number question.....I forgot about the 6-8359 B&O GP7 in gold GM50 colors. Real engine was a Geep 40, not a 7.

If one is interested in Right Number Right Unit, then the SCL U36B in Bi-Cent colors in 1974 would be correct.

quote:

Originally posted by Frank53:
Yesterday I browsed through the MPC photo thread on another forum. Sixteen pages of photos and there is really some colorful stuff made during that time period. The tobacco and liquor cars probably wouldn't fly today, but they sure were some colorful and interesting stuff.

No, they wouldn't fly today. Some years ago Lionel announced that they would not be producing liquor, beer, and tobacco cars anymore. This was due to their revised public policy, and given the reputation they wanted to maintain (understanding that their traditional market was young people), it was understandable that they didn't want to do anything to violate current public values, which discourage advertising of drinking and smoking related products.

I was somewhat surprised when they did a new Schlitz reefer just a couple years ago, although it was an uncataloged special edition for one of the train clubs, and there were only about 900 made.

You're right - these are some very colorful and interesting cars. Wonderful graphics. Due to limited space issues a few years ago, I was considering whether to sell my collection of these cars (I have most of them), or at least some of them. I took them out of their boxes and set them out together in their groups. After seeing them all again, I shook my head and said to myself, "What were you thinking?"

Mr. Butler:

Thanks for the clarification regarding the price of the separate sale 700 series tender at Madison Hardware. I honestly had thought it was more expensive than that. Perhaps I was thinking of an ad from an early to mid 70's issue of MR after the price had increased? My age was still single digits in the 60's so I wasn't exactly what you would call price savvy back then. Heck, during that time, I was begging my parents for the 2322 Virginian Train Master and was having trouble grasping the whole "we don't have the money for it right now" concept.

Thanks again,

Bob

quote:

Thanks for the clarification regarding the price of the separate sale 700 series tender at Madison Hardware. I honestly had thought it was more expensive than that. Perhaps I was thinking of an ad from an early to mid 70's issue of MR after the price had increased?

Madison Hardware's last advertisement in Model Railroader was in the July 1989 issue.
They didn't list the entire tender, but they did list:
"original 700T tender cab" for $175.
In the following issue, August, 1989, their display ad was overlayed with an announcement of their closing.
It's hard to beleive it's been twenty years.

There happens to be one of these tenders listed on Ebay right now. I am not the seller, and I cannot vouch for the authenticity. Here is a link:


http://cgi.ebay.com/773-700T-S...?hash=item19b6deda06

quote:

quote:
quote:
Does anyone have any of that packing material shaped like houses and tunnels mentioned in the 1971 catalog? I've never seen any in person or for sale.


I still have a MPC set I picked up used from a friend's (long defunct) hobby shop in about 1973. It had a box for the set. The engine and cars were in individual foam trays, which when inverted looked like houses. The set was from about 1971, and I haven't seen any other MPC sets after that which had the same packaging. I have the original Coke set, and the set is packed in a large foam block that fills the set box. Other sets, like the Milwaukee Limited had a set box, and then individual boxes.


Thanks! Do you know the set name or number, or what engine came in the set? I'd love to find one with the foam.
quote:


James

My recollection was that it was a Grand Truck set, that may have been originally sold through Sears. I will check this evening to confirm that.

James

It was a set that was originally sold at Sears. It had a Grand Trunk Western 8025 2-4-2 steamer and a hopper, flat car, gondola and SP style caboose, with no light or windows. It was a low end set (cost $22 in 1973) and came with track and transformer. As I mentioned, the foam trays were individual trays for each piece, and when inverted looked like a house.

not trying to be evil here but it would be great if somebody could drop a hint as yo wear this pic thread is i've searched around but no luck. not asking for a link just a hint to point me in the right direction.

also the milwaulkee set has been on my went list for a long time but i've always backed away becuase of the way the couplers are mounted i've heard horror stories about these.

Seafoid -

Thanks, I'll be on the look out for them at York.

Spifff -

Email me and I'll reply with the link....

James

Yeah, I would like the link as well, to see the pics!


Mark

quote:

Originally posted by ZWPOWER13:
Yeah, I would like the link as well, to see the pics!


Mark

My email is in my profile...

James

I would like to have the link also. Please.

e-mail in personal profile.

Tex

No problem. Hey, we should start our own MPC Photo Thread!

James

Just sent you an Email.

I would love to start the MPC Photo Thread, I just dont know how to put photos on here, Wish they would make it easier then what they have now...


Mark

Instead of linking to that offbeat forum why not post photos of your own favorite MPC train here?
Pictures speak louder then words.
Joe

I just posted the start of a photo thread! Let's have at it!

http://ogaugerr.infopop.cc/eve...57660482/m/825106652

spifff:

The plastic couplers of the Milwaukee passenger cars are attached to the car body by way of screws inserted in a plastic post which extends down from the undercarriage. They have acquired a reputation for being fragile; however, when handled with care, I haven't found this method of assembly to be problematic.

These, along with their PRR counterparts, formed an attractive consist although I always thought the steam locomotives which accompanied them did not do proper justice to the cars. Both sets look very nice when powered by the MILW and PRR EP5's respectively.

Bob

quote:

Originally posted by spifff:
...also the milwaulkee set has been on my went list for a long time but i've always backed away becuase of the way the couplers are mounted i've heard horror stories about these.

I replaced the trucks on my five Milwaukee cars with the Southern Crescent-style trucks, which look the same, but have the working couplers. They also couple closer. At the same time, I also replaced the snap-in pickup plates with the version that has both the roller and axle wipers. Those went on both trucks of each car, and the tender. Needless to say, I have no flickering light, or tender sound problems.

You can also give the cars more weight by replacing the die-cast wheelsets with sintered iron sets. Of course, all these conversions are totally reversible(as if the Milwaukee cars will ever be worth anything!)

I read that MPC had initially planned to put a 2046-type Hudson with the Milwaukee set, but that they weren't quite ready to produce it(it debuted instead with the Empire State Express set a couple years later.)

quote:

Originally posted by CNJ 3676:
These, along with their PRR counterparts, formed an attractive consist although I always thought the steam locomotives which accompanied them did not do proper justice to the cars. Both sets look very nice when powered by the MILW and PRR EP5's respectively. Bob

Very true. As I mentioned above, the Milw. cars with the EP-5 (their colors match perfectly) look terrific together.