Model Train Forum banner

1 - 20 of 70 Posts

·
Yard Master & Research
Joined
·
10,606 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
The Subject.




The motor.

...




Time to play with the Vanerbilt and the 1664 engine.
I am doing a fabrication to make this work. The engine does go with this motor but it has a different rear mount. The Lionel Jr isn't wide enough so I opted to make one that fits.

I already removed the rivet. I cut some metal for a rough fit in.



After the screw holes were made I used 4-40 allen heads and nuts.



The next trick was to cut the slit for the frame to fit. used two used whells of the same size to give me a wide cut.






Then with a toothpick and paint I lined up the final hole to drill.



Then prime and paint.

 

Attachments

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,666 Posts
T-Man,

Clever retrofit!

As you know, that's one of my beloved Lionel Jr motors which were used on the 1689's, as far as I know.

I've never fiddled with a 1689 up close, so it's rather intriguing for me to see how that motor would have attached to the shell. I realize you're using the 1664 version of the Jr motor, which had that diamond-shaped bracket on the back. Per your disection work, I guess you've found that that same diamond bracket was NOT used to mount the Jr motor to the 1689.

This begs the question, though ... what did the original 1689 Jr mount look like???

Take a look at the next-to-last photo in the post-link below ... that's the bracket that exists inside my 258 loco ... it's riveted to the shell. The Jr motor mounts to the center step on the bracket.

http://www.modeltrainforum.com/showpost.php?p=48572&postcount=7

Is there any evidence on your 1689 shell that it would have had a bracket like this at some point???

Or would it have had a larger bracket riveted to the motor itself, with the bracket then screwed to the shell?

What do things look like on the other end? Do the two "nipples" on the front of the motor sideplates engage into something ???

Ohh ... another thought ... my 1688 ...

Look at the pics in this post:

http://www.modeltrainforum.com/showpost.php?p=53256&postcount=1

I'll bet that THAT's what the bracket for your 1689 originally looked like. The width of the 1688 shell is probably the same (or just about) as the width of the 1689.

And look at the inside/front of the 1688 ... there's a bracket that slides into the shell to mount the front truck. And the rear of the bracket has two slots to accept the "nipples" on the front of the motor sideplates.

Fun stuff ... I enjoy learning about how all of this old stuff fit together long ago.

Cheers,

TJ
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,666 Posts
This from a recent (completed) ebay 1689 listing:



Quasi 1688-style brack in back. Slidey bracket in front (though different from the 1688 front bracket).
 

Attachments

·
Yard Master & Research
Joined
·
10,606 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I have no idea about the original bracket.

The shell has the four holes so something like the 1688 may work.

The front tabs fit into the cross brace like the 259e steamchest.
 

Attachments

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,666 Posts
Thanks, T-Man.

Sidebar ...

I "discovered" a Lionel design flaw with my beloved 1681's. As you know, the motor sideplates are offset from the a loco centerline a bit, to account for the fact that the drive wheels on one side have geared backs, and the wheels on the other side do not. This offset is compensated for in how the motor (and its mount bracket) attaches to the shell ... the rear bracket mounts the motor shifted a bit to one side, while keeping the wheels properly centered. Except ...

On the 1681, Lionel forgot to offset the shell's front mount-flange (that holds the motor sideplate front tabs). The motor sideplates are positioned on loco centerline on the front, which shifts the wheels slightly off center a bit. (The back of the motor IS aligned properly.) As such, any 1681 motor is installed skewed on an slight angle. One can see this with clearances between the drive wheels and the drive rods (which slide into the steam chest).

I wonder if anyone has noticed that before ???

Cheers,

TJ
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,666 Posts
Alright ... I've got a big time case of the jealosies going on here, T. That's gonna be a slick looking loco.

I keep hunting for a cheap one on ebay (say $25 or so), but they usually fetch quite a bit more than that. Pretty locos.

Keep us posted!

Ohh ... Do you have a color in mind?

<... redredredredredredred ...> :D

TJ
 

·
Railroad Tycoon
Joined
·
23,712 Posts
Take a closeup looking at the just front (nose) before you paint it, T.
Please.
 

·
Yard Master & Research
Joined
·
10,606 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
I am tempted to shine it up as is. Bergundy maybe.

The oven cleaner phase is done, I'm trying the rubbing compound.

You should get one TJ. It may cure the cat lady fever, or atart another one . :rolleyes:

Ed, I need another front view the last one was out of focus.






Patience Ed, I'll get more. Updated.:thumbsup:
 

·
Yard Master & Research
Joined
·
10,606 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Take a closeup looking at the just front (nose) before you paint it, T.
Please.
Since the Bergundy 1689e is done I am digging up the older one that was set aside. I compared fronts and noticed the original has no side cutouts for the red marker lights????




I also attached some spare wheels to the front. The swage tool made divets to hold the nail on. Not large but just enough to tap on with a small hammer.



After the Bergundy I am frustrated for a color. I was thinking gray or navy blue in gloss.
What do you like??
 

·
Railroad Tycoon
Joined
·
23,712 Posts
I say Alien Green.:D:thumbsup:

I forgot why I requested pictures of the front.:dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
"...no side cutouts for the red marker lights?"
Given the sorta clunky (scientific term) red side marker lights on the other one, I feel this is an improvement. Too bad they weren't smaller, round and in a streamlined fairing more in keeping with the overall art deco styling of the locomotive itself. JMO
I do like your paint job on the repainted loco. Nice work there.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,666 Posts
Lionel used those same translucent red markers on several streamliner locos ... 1668, 1688, 238, etc.

I didn't know you had a second 1689 in the quiver there, T ... glad she's gonna see the light of day!

Cheers,

TJ
 

·
Admin
Joined
·
43,794 Posts
"...no side cutouts for the red marker lights?"
Given the sorta clunky (scientific term) red side marker lights on the other one, I feel this is an improvement. Too bad they weren't smaller, round and in a streamlined fairing more in keeping with the overall art deco styling of the locomotive itself. JMO
I do like your paint job on the repainted loco. Nice work there.
If I were to redo one of these, I'd find some better markers for it, I agree the stock ones look pretty lame.
 
1 - 20 of 70 Posts
Top