GIC Guide No. 7- Worldwide Wagons: Tyco EMD F-Units (F7, F9)

Global Covered Wagons: Tyco’s F-Units

Tyco's range of diesel locomotives was perhaps the most eclectic of any HO manufacturer. From the unpopular (Shark) and rarely configured (non-dynamic GP20), to the infamously rare (C430) and famously rarer (high-hood 630), to the oft-impractical (Plymouth centercab) and unloved (industrial switcher), to the ill-timed (1978 E-unit) and oddly rendered (shorty GG1), virtually none of their diesel offerings would ever be mistaken as mainstream or popular...

With the exception of the de facto price of admission to HO! Yes, even an eclectic manufacturer such as Tyco had to pay the conductor sometime, and release the one model that is virtually de riguer for any model railroad manufacturer: the Electro-Motive Division F-Unit.

A runaway success of packaging and technology, the EMD F was sleek, clean, colorful, and efficient. Its promises of lower operations and maintenance costs were realized through the use of cleaner-burning fuel and modular versatility. Although all the contemporary locomotive builders were quick to offer similar carbody engines – Alco with their “DL” and “FA/PA” series, Baldwin with the RF “Sharks”, and Fairbanks-Morse with the “C-Liner” - it was the EMD that refined and retained the lion's share of the market. Virtually every railroad in the US owned an “F” (and/or the similar, 6-axle “E”) at some point. Even to this day, many Fs still survive and they remain an endearing, instantly recognizable symbol of the best the Railroads had to offer in the waning days of their golden age.

With such a widespread presence on the rails, F's were in demand by modelers in all scales. In HO, it was first made readily accessible by Globe Models, whose tooling was purchased by Athearn in 1951 – and is still in use today. But seemingly every HO maker come and gone has offered an F-unit, and if it wasn't their own tooling it was sourced from someone else. How many of these have you encountered?

• Globe > Athearn > Highliner > Genesis
• Varney > Life-Like > Proto
• ATT
• Hobbytown
• Bachmann > Playart
• Cox > Model Power
• MRC
• Tyco/ Mantua > Pemco
• Revell
• Atlas/ Roco
• Intermountain
• Stewart/ Kato

Tyco placed their first diesel bet on a model of the Baldwin RF-16 “Sharknose”, but as that locomotive saw limited exposure and popularity in the real world, so too did Tyco's model in comparison to the demand for EMD's (the Tyco shark's poor performance did not help either). Tyco's F was finally readied for sale in 1960, with continued availability in some form or fashion light through 1993, thus enjoying the longest continual production of any Tyco diesel. As a result the Tyco F is unique for sporting a series of continuous ongoing revisions through the years, with different drives and mounting schemes, shell modifications, and outright tooling changes making appearances. It was produced in four countries on three continents, and with roadnames for a fourth; add in one more forthcoming distinction and it truly does become a “Global” model!

In researching and amassing examples for review it became evident that I don't have every version ever made, but I do have most of them. Where other examples are known I will make mention of their existence in the rough chronological order.

Important Disclaimer and Notes

In all phases of production except perhaps the very last, Tyco listed and sold their F-unit as an F9. In actuality, the tooling was really for an F7. The easiest way to distinguish between the two is the lack (or presence) of louvers between the cab and porthole window, and a pointed roof at the rear. Prototype EMD F9's added the extra louvers and went to a simplified, flush roofline. They were also rare, with only 87 A-units ever built.

To make matters more confusing, Tyco did correct the titular nomenclature for one brief production run in the late 1970's, even though the tooling was much the same as a prior offering. The very last production runs which were sourced from Yugoslavia use a proper F9 shell, but it was not distinctly labeled as anything at all. When Mantua reissued the earlier tooling, they usually referred to it (correctly) as an F7, but not always. Therefore, throughout this article I will attempt to make references to the models simply as “F-units” to avoid any further discrepancies or confusion. Distinguishing between real-life F-units (FT through F9, and rebuilds) is an exhaustive subject unto itself!

Also, comparison of F-unit models by and from other HO manufacturers is another daunting subject, and possibly even more exhausting. I currently posses neither the funds, time, nor interest to pursue such a project, so this article will focus on Tyco shells exclusively except where relevant comparisons to others are appropriate.

Generation I

An early example of the red-box Tyco F-unit

The earliest example of a Tyco F-unit in my collection is this B&O unit (I also have a Santa Fe dummy that is very similar and may in fact predate it). Tyco cataloged the B&O F from 1960 through 1968; I believe mine is from the mid-1960's do to the presence of white metal trucks (which gave way to blackened in later years).

The shell itself betrays some subtle issues that potentially date it to the mid-60's instead of earlier; details on those issues are forthcoming.

Tyco's F was introduced with the then-standard Mantua MU-2 drive, and produced in the USA. This also marked the introduction of Tyco's EMD Blomberg sideframe; previously the MU-2 had been equipped with AAR sideframes for duty under Sharks. Like the oversized Tyco AAR sideframe, the Tyco EMD Blomberg was specifically designed for compatibility with Tyco's drive. Not only was it sized for fit (not scale), it also needed to accommodate Tyco's drive-mounting schemes of the time.

The early revisions of the F-unit shell used a pair of screws to mount each truck, and the fuel tank as well. The screws thread into narrow posts within the shell; the first set of posts can be seen within the cab door windows. This mounting required an odd modification to the truck sideframe: there is a visible cylindrical bulge in the center of the truck where the leaf springs are. The purpose of the bulge was to create a void behind it big enough to pass a thin screwdriver through, to install the screws to attach the trucks to the shell. In later years when screws were no longer used, the hollow bulge became a mysterious trademark Tyco oddity.

Note the half-circle cutouts behind the leaf springs in the truck side frames. They are slots to provide access to the mounting screws (visible inside the shell above the rear truck)

Since the screws were hidden inside the body, these first redbox-era versions are the only Tyco F-units with no visible lugs or lug holes in the shell. Some Fs were cataloged and sold with a pair of power trucks as an upgrade over the standard model in this era. These used the same decoration and road numbers and simply used two power trucks wired in series. A few roadnames were also offered in fanciful (but striking) chromed versions.

"Genesis" of an F Model

Some further analysis of the details on Tyco’s Gen-1 F-unit shell is in order. The shell is impeccably detailed, to a level that far surpasses the earlier Shark and even the subsequent Tyco GP20 and C430. Rivet detail is fine, curves are contoured, and the detail on the exhaust fans is especially conspicuous in its fidelity compared to other (and later) Tyco offerings. Noticing this, one might be tempted to question the source of Tyco’s tool-and-diework…

…And the answer is found in the same place that Athearn turned to for their own F-unit: The Tyco F is in fact, a near-exact clone of the classic Globe Models F7!

The original Globe Models F7-A – a legendary model in HO-scale history.

One could argue that any skilled diemaker working from the same blueprints could produce identical molds as another, but in the days before CAD, with manual prototyping and direct human influence, some variance would be inevitable. Yet Tyco’s shell matches the Globe right down to every last detail: the size and placement of fill hatches, the alignment of cross members and rivets, and even the mistakenly crooked nose louvers above the engineer’s side of the front pilot!

Viewed head-on, careful study of the nose louvers reveals that both have slight leftward slant and thus are not symmetrical as they should be. The engineer’s should be slanted to the right, toward the center, to fit the profile of the nose. This subtle detailing gaffe clearly betrays Tyco’s shell (right) as a clone of the earlier Globe (left).

Comparison of roof details. Save for some refinement of parting lines, the Globe (top) and Tyco shells are again identical.

Tyco’s shell even sports “dimples” used for starter holes so the owner could add scale wire parts for the cab doors and rear grabs, even though Tyco never promoted or facilitated such superdetailing on any of their locomotives. But anyone who has ever seen an Athearn locomotive knows that “dimples” remain one of their most famous trademarks.

Now Tyco did of course make a few changes. The most prominent is the removal of sub-frame details under the rear end, to facilitate the swinging Talgo truck. There is a subtle difference in the size of the long, thin “holes” in the fuel tank skirting. They also cleaned up the crude nose door on the Globe model, and seem to
have adapted Athearn’s integrated number boards. In fact, one might even think they copied Athearn’s version of the Globe tooling, but Athearn retained the nose door and added the second headlight as well.

Comparison of rear details. Tyco removed subframe elements to make clearance for the talgo-style truck.

So the next time someone with a trusty fleet of Athearn F’s starts dogging on Tyco, ask him to take a good, hard look at the two. He just might be surprised! (On the other hand, one could never argue the use of an Athearn drive in place of a Tyco drive, but I digress).

Rolling Revisions

First revision: note the addition of slots for the rear truck and fuel tank mounts.

The first of many revisions to the Tyco F shell coincides with Tyco's modification of the power truck. Abandoning the screw-mounted system. Tyco modifies the swivel plate with the addition of a pair of small lugs, which are snapped into matching holes in the carbody sides. This change might have occurred with the introduction of the GP20 or C430, which never used the screw-mount trucks. The GP20 was introduced in 1962
followed by the C430 in 1966; it's not known if all MU-2 production was modified to the “gimball mount” or if some screw-mount trucks were still produced alongside. Certainly, it would have been cheaper and simpler to reduce to and stock only one style of truck as quickly as possible.

Interestingly though, only one truck was modified – the motor truck. The pickup/ dummy truck still used the screw mount. Because of this, only one set of lug holes is visible in the carbody, at the rear (one hole on each side).

Another modification also occurs: screws were no longer used to mount the fuel tank, so the tank/weight is modified as well. Previously, the tank had been a dogbone-shaped metal slug designed to fit between the screw posts in the shell. It was held in place by a cosmetic cap with the visible tank details, screwed into place over the slug. The new version is a single metal casting with appropriate integrated detail relief. Tabs are added to the casting, which fit into the new holes discreetly cut into the center of the carbody skirting on each side.

B-units did not immediately see modification at the same time as the A-unit. Also note the poor color mask separations on this example's "PC" logo.

My example of this style came with a matching F-B-unit. As B-units by this time were dummies (earlier versions could be had powered), the tooling for this example still features screws for both trucks, but it does gain the one-piece snap-mount fuel tank. Eventually, B-units would be modified with a pair of slots to accept both trucks. The ill-fated Penn Central roadname seen here dates both A-and B-unit offerings to 1968-1971.

The final revision to the original shell finally sees the modification of the dummy truck mount, eschewing screws in favor of the same tab-style mount introduced with the gimballed MU-2. To accommodate this, a second pair of holes is added under the cab. It's worth noting that while Tyco should have been discreet and made the hole fit neatly inside the cab ladder, their “one size fits all” truck philosophy precluded this detail. So, the hole is offset and results in a rather unsightly break in the cab ladder support.

Now starting to look worn and long in the tooth, the final revision’s cab ladders have been removed.

There is another odd change made at this time: for some reason, the frame stirrups under the cab are removed. This was a specific mold modification that is clearly evidenced by the marks which create a clean block on the bottom of the shell where the stirrups used to be. This may have been done to prevent interference of the
stirrups with the truck leafsprings, as clearance was always very tight. It might also have been done to facilitate the installation of the new snap-in front truck against the same concerns: it would be easy to break the stirrups while rocking the snap-in truck into place. However, the Tyco F was sold for over a decade before this change was made, so it is not clear why this was suddenly deemed necessary. It could be possible that the mold was simply broken, which is very plausible...

...and at this point a revisiting comparison of the preceding shells is due, so that a key point regarding a signature production defect in all first-generation Tyco F-units may be illustrated. As the molds for the shell were used and reused over the years, they seemed to wear out progressively, especially in the rear of the unit. There are subtle but interesting defects evident when you compare sequential production side-by-side.

The earliest unit shown, B&O, is almost perfect. But on very close inspection, at the very rear of the unit the long side grilles take on a slight deflection to them: they “fan out”. This deflection is repeated on every subsequent example, and it gets gradually worse over the years, working its way further up the sides, beginning earlier in the grilles with more and more fanning and waving, ultimately culminating in warpage of the surrounding rivet and frame detail at the same time the cab stirrups are removed.

Clockwise from top left: Distortion and warping of the grilles progressively worsens from year to year.

Did Tyco continually reuse the same tooling over and over to the breaking point? Did they not invest in additional masters or have new dies made from the original? Did they actually ruin the original? Was it a case of poor or indifferent quality control? Or were there other aspects of Tyco production (as opposed to Athearn’s use of similar tooling) that caused these odd defects?

We may never know the answers, and it may be a combination of the above. Nonetheless, a few interesting points are worth considering. For one, Athearn shells don’t seem to exhibit this problem. But the F-unit was not the only Tyco tool-and-die work to show evidence of wear over the years: the original wheels on Tyco piggyback trailers warped out over the years as well. Also, while other examples of warped shells from mainstream manufacturers are relatively infrequent, the AHM C-Liner and Model Power Shark shells have also been known to suffer arguably worse defects. Finally, a clue to the disposition of the original, unblemished

master tooling will surface through a rare, later production run. Nonetheless, the confluence of factors working against the later production might seem to make earlier
production runs more desirable.

Generation 2

Comparison of Gen 1 (left) and 2 shells. Aside from the chunky stirrups, the Gen 2 shell features a number of detail enhancements: note the differences in nose details, cab roofs, and grilles.

In the early-mid 1970’s, Tyco finally addressed the issues with the original tooling by replacing it with a revised shell. Production sources also start shifting to overseas, primarily Hong Kong. It first appears in the 1973 catalog in a group shot with earlier shells, and although it’s still an F7 sold as an F9, there are several differences in the shell. The most obvious is the use of new numberboard inserts, but there are subtler differences such as the removal of nose louvers, the addition of cab grabs on the roof and Farr grilles (vertical bands) on the sides, and new bulkier stirrups that have an overlayed or “tacked-on” appearance. Aside from the chunky appearance of the stirrups (which may be defensible as more durable in the hands of children), the new shell takes on a much-enhanced appearance over its predecessor. Did Tyco fix and rework the Gen 1 tooling to create this new F? Careful inspection of other details and aspects reveal it to be “all new” tooling. Features such as the carbody louvers and fill hatches are either slightly resized or repositioned, but these changes would not have been necessary as repairs to the original tooling. The superdetailing dimples are also gone. Thankfully, the nice touch of a solid pilot is retained and kept throughout production: no small feat in the PowerTorque era.

So if Tyco didn’t fix their old tooling, are they once again guilty of copying someone else’s? To date, after reviewing numerous samples of F-units from Athearn, Bachmann, Cox, Hobbytown, Life-Like, Marx, Model Power, and Varney, I have not found an F-unit that seems to match the Tyco Gen 2. As previously stated however, F-units have been made and sold by seemingly everyone, so there may yet be a match from some relatively obscure maker. Indeed, certain versions of this shell have been reportedly found with “Austria” stamped on the fuel tank which would seem to point to their origin. On the other hand, Tyco did have runs of their classic streamlined caboose made in Austria, so the connection is not quite clear. So, pending further information, Tyco may enjoy full credit for this one, if only through the benefit of doubt.

Some catalogs show a version of this shell with filled-in numberboards. This seems plausible enough but I have not seen one yet. Most numberboard inserts used the “4015” roadnumber, but a few were different – a surprising development given Tyco’s steadfast use of “5628, “4301” and “1102” on their standard GP20, C430 and C630 models respectively.

Breaking with Tyco tradition, some F’s received unique, specific numberboard inserts. Among such models were the Canadian-market CP Rail, and the Australian-market Victorian Railways.

Some examples of the CP Rail roadname have been seen with unique “979” inserts, matching a roadnumber dating back to the redbox era. Also, Tyco sold their F as a crude but “imaginably passable” stand-in for an Australian locomotive in that market. Some Australian roads used an altogether different numbering scheme and while Tyco’s F-unit was nowhere near a close match, they nonetheless took the step of making unique, correct number boards for them! Other Australian roads were “Americanized” with the number 4015. There are several other unique boards which were exclusive to certain roadnames.

Lowrider MU-2

Early Gen 2 offering equipped with the “plastic MU-2” drive. Note the low-profile Blomberg sideframes.

Early Gen 2 releases include a new, cheapened and scarcely seen version of the MU-2 drive which only appeared in the Tyco F! While the basic MU-2 armature and drivetrain design remains the same, the housing and overall robustness of assembly becomes a victim of cost-cutting. Made of plastic and assembled with screws, it is now easier to service and maintain, but noisier than and not as durable as the earlier metal versions. The truck sideframes are also quite comically squashed-and-stretched in appearance. Presumably dating this model to 1973-75, the pickup / dummy truck shares some traits with the oddball Phase I Super630 and Mark I PowerTorque drives, such as a pocket for inserting the early, separate draft-gear boxes (which would not have been used on this model). Both trucks are gimball / lug mounted, but the fuel tank weight is yet another new single-piece casting attached to the shell roof with a single screw.

Why was this drive created, then only released in such a limited scale? It’s interesting to note that the release of this version parallels the release of the original Super 630 and its exotic Rivarossi drive, which itself only lasted a year. But despite its basic similarities to the Mantua-metal MU-2, the plastic version is neither quite as strong nor refined; it is better than a PowerTorque in some respects but also noisy and less efficient. So, it may be that Tyco was experimenting with several different drives and market philosophies (the Phase1 630 was clearly high-end, while the rest of the line exhibited varying degrees of cheapness), and the PowerTorque was the ultimate winner.

Note unique fuel tank, Phase I 630 / PowerTorque dummy truck, and plastic MU-2 with screws*. Is this a factory kitbash of sorts? *The rear coupler pocket was attached as part of the rear truck but is broken from this example.

Powertorqued F’s

When the PowerTorque drive is introduced for 1974/75, the Gen 2 F is quickly modified to accept yet another new fuel tank! This time it’s an adaptation of the “snap in” PowerTorque tank. Tyco thankfully attempts to remain somewhat discreet, and uses the prototypical holes in the side skirting to locate the holes for mounting the PowerTorque tank. The new drive also brings new truck sideframes which, while perhaps not quite as detailed, are not as overly squashed as the Plastic MU-2’s. So they have a better overall look, even though they are now grossly oversized for the prototype. Like the MU-2 before it, the PowerTorque was intended as a “one size fits all” design, so various sideframes were sized for fit and not for scale.

Unlike most PowerTorqued diesels, the Tyco F’s have the distinction of sporting black sideframes for a time, like the Santa Fe example above The AAR, SD24, and Tyco’s homegrown “Vampire” trucks used on the C430, E7, SD24, C630, GG1, and GP20 were always and only ever available in silver…

…as were most F-units themselves, as this later-run Chessie example (with other silver details applied by the author) illustrates.

While the PowerTorque was a rather dubious performer, it made for the balance of Tyco production from the moment it was introduced in 1974, through Tyco’s exit from the train business in 1993. There were a few exceptions to this rule however, and the F-unit line accounts for two of them.

The “Deluxe” F: A Blast From the Past

In 1977 Tyco issued a line of “Deluxe” F-units. Perhaps part of the “deluxe” came from the belated correction of finally calling them F7’s instead of F9’s! More likely however was the advertised return of the “famous MU-2 power truck”. The balky and tempermental PowerTorque drive quickly gave Tyco a black eye in the marketplace and so perhaps they were trying to regain some respectability.

Ultimately however, it's been speculated and reasonably proven that the Tyco Deluxe F7 was the item through which the Tyler family would regain rights to some assets and return to the HO market, under the Mantua name. In fact, all of the models offered as “Tyco Deluxe” in 1977 were subsequently offered by Mantua in their own packaging. In all respects, the Mantua models are 100% identical in design, construction, and decoration.

“Deluxe F7” drive. While virtually identical to late redbox units, the motor truck is now held together with screws – an improvement for model mechanics.

The Tyco Deluxe / Mantua F7 is interesting for a few reasons. The MU-2 drive did in fact reappear, but was finally updated to use screws instead of rivets for assembly. The happy result was that service and maintenance was much easier; if the original MU-2s had one downfall it was that on the rare occasion when they did bite the dust, they were next to impossible to repair easily. The roadnames available were unique among Tyco’s 1977 offerings, but every single one was a reissue of an earlier Redbox F – right down to the roadnumber. And although Tyco had been using the 2nd-gen F shell for a few years, the “Deluxe” F line saw the resurrection of the 1st-gen shell. But not the one we’ve seen before!

The warped side grilles are fixed!

Indeed, at first glance, all the trademarks of the Gen 1 shell are in place. Louvers return to the nose. Cab roof grabs are gone. The stirrups have gone back their formerly slim profile. And the grilles are back to their plain appearance… but are now perfectly straight all the way to the back with absolutely no warping.

So we can eliminate the possibility that Tyco found a stash of old redbox units in the warehouse… but does this mean they finally dug up their original master F-unit dies for this run? It at first seems they did, until you look at the stirrups again. The original redbox Fs have sleek, thin stirrups which extend down from a point flush with the body. You can even see the carbody framework rivets cross them. The re-issue “Deluxe” F has tacked-on stirrups which stick out from the body, similar to the Gen2 F.

Comparison of stirrups, left to right: Deluxe F, Gen 1 F, Gen 2 F.

What was the point of this modification? There may be more to it than meets the eye but I could only guess. At any rate, it does serve one helpful purpose in the case of the “deluxe” F: The deluxe F shells are identical in all respects to a late redbox F, save for this stirrup detail (and the grilles if you know to look at them); even the paint quality is much the same. So the stirrups are THE distinguishing feature to make sure you’re not looking at a Redbox F with a swapped drive stuck in a Deluxe-Tyco / Mantua box, or vice-versa. The “Deluxe” F7 was only made as a limited run in 1977 and is somewhat rare in that form; likewise are certain redbox versions sought after, so the distinction is important.

Double-Duty F: Tyco's Yugo

As Tyco was ramping down support for trains in the 1980’s, much of their product became outsourced to other manufacturers and models. While a few freight cars were treated to upgrades or new tooling, the vast majority were still run in their classic forms. Bucking this trend, nearly all diesel locomotives were replaced with substitutes, mostly models made in Yugoslavia and sold by Mehano and/or IHC. The Tyco diesel switcher was the first to be replaced, with the mega-cab version formerly sold by AHM. The C430 was replaced with an all-new, rather fanciful version rendered by Mehano; the C630 was replaced by a Mehano C628 formerly sold by Life-Like and Model Power. Finally, in 1991, Tyco replaced both their own Gen 2 “F” and the venerable Shark, with one outsourced F-Unit imported from Mehano/RSO models of Yugoslavia. This new Yugoslavian F found its way into the Rock Island-themed Overnight Freight sets of the 1990’s, but the shell’s roots can be traced back to the short-lived American Train & Track offerings of the 1960’s. There are numerous traits that identify this shell as unique, not just among Tyco offerings but HO-scale F-units in general.

Finally a true F9 – Tyco’s Yugoslavian substitute sports many differences from earlier efforts.

It should be noted that 30 years after they first cataloged one, Tyco finally offers a true F9 shell - if only by accident, and while picturing a Shark on the box! The large dynamic brake fan behind the cab, extra louvers between the cab and porthole, and vertical-finned grilles are all appropriate spotting features for the F9. Among Tyco offerings, the dual headlight is unique to this model. The possible ATT heritage is identified by the somewhat squat or blunt profile of the nose. RSO also used a chassis frame with an integrated fuel tank that’s a bit too small for an EMD F; it doesn’t even come close to filling the skirting (which is actually incorrect for an F9).

Mechanically, the unit is similar to a typical AHM diesel with a can motor and dual powered trucks, while the chassis itself bears some resemblance to the one used on the AHM C-liner. It even has the pair of lugs on each side of the fuel tank to fit a C-liner; matching holes were added to Yugo-F shell. RSO also performed the crude injustice of hacking off a large portion of the front pilot to provide clearance for a front talgo truck; this modification severely mars the unit’s otherwise passable appearance.

While there are no markings to identify this as a substitute Tyco, the Rock Island F was known to appear late in sets that previously featured the Rock Island Shark. Tyco never offered its own F-units in Rock Island; conversely, the substitute F was ONLY available as a “Tyco” in the same Rock Island scheme used on the Shark.

Hence this oddball F-unit did double-duty substitution during its brief and ignoble appearance.

List of Roadname Offerings by Shell

This list is broken down by major shell types only; ongoing revisions for the different drives are not noted.

The availability of a specific roadname + shell + drive combo could be inferred by dates of production and/or catalog availability, which are noted when known. It is possible there are releases I am not aware of; additions and corrections are welcome.

Generation 1
Amtrak (1971-1974)
Atlantic Coast Line (1960-1968)
Atomic Energy Commission (1964)
Baltimore & Ohio (1960-1968)
Baltimore & Ohio (chrome) (1964-1965)
Burlington Northern (1971- )
Canadian National (1961-1968)
Canadian Pacific (1960-1968)
Chesapeake & Ohio (1960-1968)
Chicago Burlington & Quincy
CP Rail (1969-1974)
Denver & Rio Grande Western (1960-1968)
Great Northern (1967- )
New Haven (1960-1968)
Penn Central (1969 – 1974)
Pennsylvania Freight (green) (1961 – 1968)
Pennsylvania Passenger (brown) (1962-1966)
Santa Fe Freight (blue & yellow) (1960-1975)
Santa Fe Freight Warbonnet (1974-1972
Santa Fe Passenger (red & silver) (1960-1974)
Santa Fe Passenger (chromed) (1964-1965)
Tyco Clear Dual-drive Promo/demo (unknown; dual-motor screw-mount)
Union Pacific (1963-1974)

Generation 2
Amtrak (1974-)
Chessie System (1977-1992)
CN (1974- )
CN – VIA (1977- )
Conrail (1977-1982)
Cotton Belt (1982)
CP Rail (1974- )
New South Wales (Australian) (1977- )
Santa Fe Warbonnet (Red & silver) (1974-198x)
Santa Fe Freight Warbonnet (yellow logo) (1975- )
Spirit of '76 (1976- )
Union Pacific (1974– )
Victoria Railways (Australian) (1977- )

Deluxe F7
Canadian National (1977)*
Great Northern (1977)*
Pennsylvania (1977)*
Union Pacific (1977)*
Undecorated (1977)*
*subsequently available in Mantua packaging

Yugo F9
Rock Island (1991-1993)

Numberboard Gallery

The Gen2 F-unit broke with Tyco's stubborn tradition of using one road number board for all offerings of a particular locomotive. At a time when Tyco was otherwise attempting to cut costs, the tooling of specific numbers - often for just one roadname - was a noteworthy occurrence. This makes the Gen 2 F worthy of special attention.

537 (Union Pacific only)

979 (CP Rail only)

1776 (some Spirit of '76 only)

4015 (Chessie System, Conrail, Cotton Belt, Santa Fe, some Spirit of '76, VIA )

4316 (Amtrak only)

5628 (Canadian National only)

S301 (Victoria Rail (Australia) only)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GIC Guide No.7
Version 1.5
February 2009

Photo Credits
Australian F-Unit: Cameron Milne
Rock Island Yugo: Tony Cook

Additional thanks to Tony Cook for providing additional research, samples and information.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All text, descriptions, and original photos © Tony Lucio. All Rights Reserved.

Offered for personal private use for informative and entertainment purposes ONLY. Redistribution in any form or media beyond goingincirclez.com, and Tony Cook’s HO Scale Trains Resource, is strictly prohibited without permission.

Comments, corrections, submissions and other communication are always welcomed! Feel free to comment or contribute by using the Contact Form. Thanks for reading!