Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Looking at Hornby's new Maunsell Coaches, I am temped to buy some.
However what engines are suitable to pull these? I already know that the M7 is a prime candadate.
Also I really like Bachmann's Mk1's close coupling set up, how do the Maunell's look coupled up to each other?

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
QUOTE (Daz @ 17 Dec 2007, 01:53) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Looking at Hornby's new Maunsell Coaches, I am temped to buy some.
However what engines are suitable to pull these? I already know that the M7 is a prime candadate.
Also I really like Bachmann's Mk1's close coupling set up, how do the Maunell's look coupled up to each other?

Thanks

Any of Hornby's Southern locos (Bulleid pacifics, M7) would be ideal. Also any of the BR Standard locos that appeared on the Southern region should be fine with the BR-liveried Maunsells- (Bachmann's 4MT 2-6-4T, 4MT 2-6-0, and BR-liveried versions of the LMS Ivatt 2-6-2T anf Fairburn 2-6-4T for a start)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Dear Daz,

First of all you need to say which livery you are intending to buy, which may depend on the era you are modelling. SR livery Maunsells would be Ok for the 1930s, BR livery from mid 1950s onwards, until about 1961, when they were all scrapped.

For the SR livery, you would be Ok with any SR Olive Green livery loco, but definitely no BR standards.

For the BR lvery, then you should have SR locos in BR livery or BR standards. The LMS Ivatt 2-6-2T and Fairburn 2-6-4T would be Ok as well.

This a very simple answer to a complicated question. If you tell me what area of the SR or BR(S) you plan to model, I can be more specifc.
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,678 Posts
QUOTE (Daz @ 17 Dec 2007, 01:53) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Also I really like Bachmann's Mk1's close coupling set up, how do the Maunsell's look coupled up to each other?
They have the same close coupler system as the other recent Hornby coaches, (Pullmans, Gresleys, Staniers) which works well especially with a rigid bar type coupler. I have been using Hornby R8220 coupler, but shortening them so that the the corridor connector faceplates are in contact in straight track. That means there is no longer an autocoupling and uncoupling capability, but the trains look superb. (Ironically Hornby's R8220 coupler produces this 'connectors in contact' effect without any mods on Bachmann's mk 1's.) The close coupling mechanism permits a train to negotiate the same minimum radius and worst reverse curve combination negotiable by a carriage on its own.

It is somewhat amusing that neither manufacturer quite seems to trust the effectiveness of their close coupler mechanisms. Until this Hornby coupler became available I was heating the 'pipes coupler' supplied with Bachmann mk1's, and resetting it about 3.5mm shorter to get the connector faces in contact. But no more of that, having a coupler between each vehicle is a lot more convenient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
QUOTE (34C @ 20 Dec 2007, 06:12) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>They have the same close coupler system as the other recent Hornby coaches, (Pullmans, Gresleys, Staniers) which works well especially with a rigid bar type coupler.

Thanks for the replies guys. I am modeling BR(s)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
QUOTE (34C @ 20 Dec 2007, 06:12) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>They have the same close coupler system as the other recent Hornby coaches, (Pullmans, Gresleys, Staniers) which works well especially with a rigid bar type coupler. I have been using Hornby R8220 coupler, but shortening them so that the the corridor connector faceplates are in contact in straight track. That means there is no longer an autocoupling and uncoupling capability, but the trains look superb. (Ironically Hornby's R8220 coupler produces this 'connectors in contact' effect without any mods on Bachmann's mk 1's.) The close coupling mechanism permits a train to negotiate the same minimum radius and worst reverse curve combination negotiable by a carriage on its own.

It is somewhat amusing that neither manufacturer quite seems to trust the effectiveness of their close coupler mechanisms. Until this Hornby coupler became available I was heating the 'pipes coupler' supplied with Bachmann mk1's, and resetting it about 3.5mm shorter to get the connector faces in contact. But no more of that, having a coupler between each vehicle is a lot more convenient.

Sorry, some more questions on this 34C. Which system do you think is better? Are you saying that you use R8220 on bachmann coaches? How does the R8220 uncouple? I currently use Kadee's.
Thanks
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,678 Posts
QUOTE (Daz @ 19 Dec 2007, 23:12) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Sorry, some more questions on this 34C. Which system do you think is better? Are you saying that you use R8220 on bachmann coaches? How does the R8220 uncouple? I currently use Kadee's.
Within sets of coaches fitted with the close coupler mechanisms (both Bachmann and Hornby) I use the R8220. They will not autocouple because the connector face plates come into contact before the couplers make. They uncouple using a raised ramp, much as for tension lock types. (Note however that a permanently raised bow of flexible cellophane cannot be used as this will uncouple every vehicle.) As you may gather my operation uses pretty much fixed coach formations. I am intending to through wire for DCC control of lighting also.

At both ends of the sets I use Kadee, specifically for the reliability of auto coupling and uncoupling, which happily comes with reasonably prototypical appearance .

Good though the Kadee is, it doesn't form a rigid bar between coupled vehicles: if it did I would use it for preference over the R8220. To operate coaches with the connector face plates in contact on straight track, and retaining absolute reliability when they are on curves, demands a coupler which forms a rigid bar. The rigid bar will drive the close coupler mechanisms positively enough to get the necessary separation between vehicles as the first enters a curve, particularly when pushing; and also forces the Hornby version of the mechanism to re-centre. (The Bachmann is intrinsically self centering.) If I could find a way to make the Kadee perform the job I would use it, but no joy in experiments to date.
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,678 Posts
Something I forgot to mention as a necessity for getting Hornby coaches coupled up with the corridor connector faceplates in contact on straight track. It is necessary to retract the sprung buffers. A small plastic ring (from wire insulation) on the back of the buffer shank secured with a small dab of cyano does this job, and is fully reversible should that ever be desireable.
 

·
Chief mouser
Joined
·
11,775 Posts
As a thought it is possible to run Maunsell coaches behind ex LNER V2's as these were seconded to BR(S) when the Merchant Navies were temporarily withdrawn due to axle flaws. Stanier black 5's could also be seen working them on cross regional services.

Any help?

Regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
It really depends on the period.

By the 50's these coaches were no longer top link and would have gravitated down to secondary services behind N15's, N's (especially in the West Country) and BR/Fairburn 2-6-4T's for a very short period.

Prior to this, you could use them on all SR top links with MN's, N15's, V's and any multitude of pre-grouping express locos.

However my personal favourite will be a three car set behind Hornby's forthcoming T9 somewhere west of Exeter.
 

·
Chief mouser
Joined
·
11,775 Posts
I think I am right in saying the Navies wre taken out of service in '52 for a while, but on that I could be wrong.

Regards
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
QUOTE I think I am right in saying the Navies wre taken out of service in '52 for a while, but on that I could be wrong.

I came across a reference to a Southern loco being taken out of service in the '50s for cracked axle problems when I was flicking through late 70s Railway World annuals last night. The chances of me finding the reference again are pretty much nil, but I would say BritHO is right.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
QUOTE (BRITHO @ 21 Dec 2007, 06:11) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think I am right in saying the Navies wre taken out of service in '52 for a while, but on that I could be wrong.

Regards

That is quite correct. (I think is was 52) All sorts of interesting motive power was drafted in for a while, as the whole class of 30 was temporarily withdrawn from service to have the axles checked.
The most interesting 'foreign' motive power bought in were several Eastern region V2's I even have a photo somewhere of a V2 on the Bournemouth Belle, complete with nameboard
If anyone is interested I'll see what the source book for this information was

Regards Norm
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,844 Posts
QUOTE The most interesting 'foreign' motive power bought in were several Eastern region V2's I even have a photo somewhere of a V2 on the Bournemouth Belle, complete with nameboard

A clue - V2. The article I saw was "Gresley's 'Green Arrow'" by P.J.Coster published in The Railway World Annual 1979 by Ian Allen. One of the photos from the Ian Allen library (are you listening Black 5 man?) is of 60896 approaching Wimbledon with the up 'Bournemouth Belle" on 6th June 1953. The photo clearly shows the headboard "The Bournemouth Belle".

The caption also states that six V2s were sent on loan and shedded at Nine Elms and had "somewhat chequered career in strange hands".

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
Crewkerne Station's brief moment of fame came when, on 24 April 1953, Merchant Navy class locomotive 35020 Bibby Line hauling the 4.30pm Exeter Central to Waterloo cracked its driving axle. The resulting flailing motion destroyed much of the up platform awning although there were no injuries, the awning is still different from the down platform.

Does anyone have a record of the possible sets that can be created with Hornby's BR coaches?

BTW Black 5's were regular motive power on the Bournemouth-York service until the end of steam, the LMR locos were always immaculate and were turned and serviced at Bournemouth Central for the return journey.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
How about I be a bit more specific!
In 1962 could the Maunsell couches be seen being pulled by a light Pacific, class 33 diesel, or standard class 4 or 5?

I'm not a rivet counter and my knowledge is very limited, however recently I have been paying a bit more attention to what I'm running. Of course I know that I really should be buying books on the subject, which I will do when more fund become available.

Thanks again
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
QUOTE (Daz @ 22 Dec 2007, 03:20) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>How about I be a bit more specific!
In 1962 could the Maunsell couches be seen being pulled by a light Pacific, class 33 diesel, or standard class 4 or 5?
Yes !



Specific enough?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
In 1962 the BRCW D6500 class were allocated mostly to the east Kent lines on introduction and by this time Maunsell coaches were beginning to move westward to the Withered Arm and S&D, thus only relief scratch trains such as race specials were likely to have D6500 moreover only in the summer as the heating systems were incompatible.

Your most likely scenario was West of Exeter on the SWMain and its various branches.

If you have more questions about specific uses or are interested in the Southern in the West Country, please PM
 

·
Retired Software Engineer
Joined
·
52 Posts
Hi,
Santa brought me some BR Maunsell coaches. I would like to put lights in them, anyone know how they come apart?

Merry Christmas to All.

Cheers
Dave.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top