Model Railway Forum banner
21 - 27 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Ah, 60134 - don't get me started on the 'Arthurs. When the first (and still current) Hornby pictures came out, I posted a question as to exactly what variant the pictured engine was. Its supposedly number 736 - Excalibur in SR days, but looks much more like a Maunsell version - check out the cab and boiler.

I have KA himself on order, and I am hoping that it arrives with the water cart tender, but I have a feeling it may show up with a Urie twin bogie version. Still there was mention of tooling for three different tenders, so I live in hope

Norm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
213 Posts
QUOTE (pedromorgan @ 20 Jul 2006, 05:55) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>donsent matter. just turn it round and its a 4-4-0. that means GWR outside framers and LMS 4-4-0's. just use your imagination a little. the point is that they have got the balance right so they will be able to do either.

Ermm...
,Yes,-it does matter,-quite a bit really!,-the M7's coupled wheelbase is only 7'6",-how many 4-4-0's do you know of with a coupled wheelbase that short?,-not many that's for sure!!,-for example a GWR Duke has an 8'6" coupled wheelbase,and most 4-4-0's are longer.....you need to do your homework properly..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,614 Posts
my point is that they will have gained a wealth of experience in producing that model that will help them conciderably with other 4-4-0's.
the important thing is to get the weight over the rear driver in order to provide the loco with adheasion and balance out the other end of the loco. that is the problem they have tackeled with the M7. and i lookforward to seeing if they have suceeded.

i agree that most 4-4-0's are longer but if you look at the ratio of wheelbase-length, it is about the same. (i did do my homework!)

Peter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Gresley designed teak coaches for the LNER. Not to sure what's really wrong with them apart from the tumbleholme and the printing of the teak finish on the end doors going the wrong way. I bought the blood and custard variety so it's not as noticable. The problem is there is always goinfg to be something wrong with a model that someone is going to spot. Check out the Bachmann US heavy 2-10-2 in DM&IR colours. They got that right but buggered up on the air tanks. The DM&IR locos had their air tanks on the top of the boiler making it a quite distinctive feature. So Bachmann put them under the running board. I do remember bachmann saying that these locos would be faithfully replicate the prototype. They did with the C&O J-2 mountain why get it wrong with this loco. I suspect it was much the same for P2K with the C&O Berkshire. Only the first batch from Alco had the air tanks under the running board. The three batches after that had the air tanks cast integral with the frames but P2K keeps producing roadnumbers for the wrong batch of locos. Perhaps it's problem with research or more likley costs in producing slightly different models.

Ozzie21

QUOTE (Dennis David @ 22 Jul 2006, 15:42) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What's the problem with the the new Hornby Teaks? Oh and what are the new Hornby Teaks?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,293 Posts
All the teak panels in these coaches had the grain running horizontally. I am fascinated by the thought that there was a proposal for Mk1s to carry their regional colours, it happened with WR and SR but they never got around to applying the scumbled teak paint to the ER allocated stock - it would have been amazing to see. The Severn Valley Railway applied this livery to an experimental Mk1 they have and very convincing it looks too!

60134
 
21 - 27 of 27 Posts
Top