GWR Toplights Poll

[Trains&armour]

My favourite would be the 57ft corridor stock, but if a manufacturer decided to actually release any toplight stock, I would buy it, whatever diagram...

[Neal Ball]

There are some very interesting comments thanks guys. It is also good to see the different votes click up.

 

Personally I thought the non corridor stock might have been more tempting and for that reason, I also perceived that the 70ft would not be, hence only putting that 1st A13 in.

 

If there are specific stock diagram numbers to add in, which will possibly sell in sufficient quantities I am more than happy to add them in. Sadly it's not so easy to change the date ranges without affecting the current votes, sorry Like anything when pulling something together like this, it's hard to capture everything people would be interested in straight away.

 

Regards, Neal

[Clearwater]

There's some interesting trends emerging on the voting. Third corridor, composite corridor and brake third/composite seem to be leading. Probably still too small to be statistically significant at present though. Will be interesting to see how it develops.

 

On coach length, I suspect the key for the manufacturer is not whether a coach is 61' or 57' or even 70' but whether it will fit in their standard size outer boxes. Most of the newer coach or loco stock seems to be in the same size box irrespective of the length of the item inside. GivenH Hornby make modern mark 3s, which I understand are 75' long, they shouldn't have a problem with getting an outer box that fits their requirements for uniformity

 

David

[HowardGWR]

Yes I would have voted for diagram C or E (all seat, not brake) , multibar, 70 ft, if I could have voted, one of each, Neal, if you wish to note that.  Clearwater, I love that one about the box, probably correct too.  I am not friends with the fancy Hornby box.  I couldn't figure how to open the interior plastic one and when someone here kindly pointed out how to do it, it suddenly gave way and the coach dropped out onto the carpet.  Result:  I need a spare end grab rail to the roof and a lamp bracket for my D95.  Bah!  

[The Stationmaster]

There's some interesting trends emerging on the voting. Third corridor, composite corridor and brake third/composite seem to be leading. Probably still too small to be statistically significant at present though. Will be interesting to see how it develops.

 

On coach length, I suspect the key for the manufacturer is not whether a coach is 61' or 57' or even 70' but whether it will fit in their standard size outer boxes. Most of the newer coach or loco stock seems to be in the same size box irrespective of the length of the item inside. GivenH Hornby make modern mark 3s, which I understand are 75' long, they shouldn't have a problem with getting an outer box that fits their requirements for uniformity

 

David

 

A 70ft vehicle will logically be more expensive as it involves more work but a real problem is that many of the 70 footers were quite heavily route restricted in GWR days and I don't think any were allowed off GWR metals so they're not much use to a lot of people.  The shorter vehicles had better route availability and in some cases it got even better post 1948 for those that survived that long.

[Budgie]

As far as I am concerned, I don't mind what gets released as long as I can run a non-gangwayed train up the south Wales valleys with it.

[MG 7305]

I too am not concerned with the exact models or diagram numbers. I do however want toplights, and non corridor stock. A slip coach would be fantastic.

 

Best regards Julian

Edited January 10, 2017 by MG 7305

[Penrhos1920]

Now that I've been able to look at my books here are some 70 designs I would buy if made rate to the same standard as the Hornby collects: C29, D51, E84. Although 57' would be more realistic for my layout I'd prefer the 70' as they look better.

Edited January 10, 2017 by Penrhos1920

[Clearwater]

A 70ft vehicle will logically be more expensive as it involves more work but a real problem is that many of the 70 footers were quite heavily route restricted in GWR days and I don't think any were allowed off GWR metals so they're not much use to a lot of people. The shorter vehicles had better route availability and in some cases it got even better post 1948 for those that survived that long.

I'd doubt the extra design work would be more than 70/60? You'd have thought the fixed cost of design makes up most of the proportion of the design costs. I accept there are all the detailed differences between coaches of different diagrams and some small incremental materials costs.

 

On route availability, id agree too but how many people buy inappropriate stock because they like it? I seem to recall seeing a King chuffing around Oswestry on a prominent thread here! Suspect people would buy a 70' or two simply for the novelty and variety

 

David

[Castle]

Hi All,

 

You know all those ones you have marked up as preserved by the GWS? Them - those are the ones I want! In other, less selfish for comedy effect type comments, how about the first slip coach with a DCC operable coupling? It should be possible to have the coupling detatch and some sort of friction device as a brake. In a quest for making operation more interactive and realistic, it would be a great move. Only the cost would be a barrier but it would be fun...

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[57xx]

How many I'd buy and what actual stock I'd buy doesn't tally up. It all depends on what gets produced really. I could be tempted to buy more if a fuller range was there and the prices were within budget.

[HowardGWR]

I am not aware of any route restrictions on grounds of length of coach nor have I read any reference to such.  Are there any?  I've seen photos of them down many a GWR branch (see Russell).  Width, yes.  While I am here, Jim Russell in his books makes reference to the Concertinas (which are of course 'toplights' by the way, as are Dreadnoughts) being so designed because of the width problem; in fact they were only 9ft wide, so I don't know where he got that idea from.

 

Now, Dreadnoughts!  If I was a RTR  manufacturer, I would go for them.  They too lasted to a great age.  They would go like hot cakes.

Edited January 10, 2017 by HowardGWR

[Neal Ball]

How many I'd buy and what actual stock I'd buy doesn't tally up. It all depends on what gets produced really. I could be tempted to buy more if a fuller range was there and the prices were within budget.

That's an interesting point about budget / price. Given IF they get released they have to be at least 2 years R & D away, probably more. I therefore reckon they will be more than £50 which I have already said. But the majority of people are saying they would spend up to £50

 

With the current Collette £45 list price, it can't be long before that £50 barrier is broken.

[Neal Ball]

Now that I've been able to look at my books here are some 70 designs I would buy if made rate to the same standard as the Hornby collects: C29, D51, E84. Although 57' would be more realistic for my layout I'd prefer the 70' as they look better.

Those carriages have been added.

[St Enodoc]

That's an interesting point about budget / price. Given IF they get released they have to be at least 2 years R & D away, probably more. I therefore reckon they will be more than £50 which I have already said. But the majority of people are saying they would spend up to £50

 

With the current Collette £45 list price, it can't be long before that £50 barrier is broken.

I selected GBP 50 based on current prices and a comparison with other models available at present. I didn't try to guess what might happen between now and any potential release date.

[St Enodoc]

Those carriages have been added.

How do I go back in to add my vote for these?

[Castle]

Hi All,

 

I am not aware of any route restrictions on grounds of length of coach nor have I read any reference to such.  Are there any?  I've seen photos of them down many a GWR branch (see Russell).  Width, yes.  While I am here, Jim Russell in his books makes reference to the Concertinas (which are of course 'toplights' by the way, as are Dreadnoughts) being so designed because of the width problem; in fact they were only 9ft wide, so I don't know where he got that idea from.

 

Now, Dreadnoughts!  If I was a RTR  manufacturer, I would go for them.  They too lasted to a great age.  They would go like hot cakes.

Now, I happen to know where there is a Dreadnought coach, sitting, patiently awaiting a few tens of thousands of pounds and a team of skilled carpenters...

 

http://www.didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/coaches/3299/3299.html

 

Very long lived though - this one entered departmental use after its service life and went from construction in 1905 to final preservation in 1964! Over 60 years. It does mean real measurements can be taken however so it's not a paper and photographs only project to bring them back to life in model form.

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[Miss Prism]

Let's be honest, coach design wasn't exactly Churchward's strong point. The Dreadnoughts were a bit silly, and the Concertinas were a bit mad. It wasn't until the Toplights that a degree of sanity prevailed.

[Neal Ball]

How do I go back in to add my vote for these?

Just the same as any post on RMweb, you should be able to edit the poll.

[The Fatadder]

How do I go back in to add my vote for these?

Hitting delete and the re voting worked for me

 

70ft coaches would be very welcome (espically dreadnaughts or concertinas the latter looking particularly tricky to kit build well, and both looking a nightmare to line).

[Coach bogie]

I am not aware of any route restrictions on grounds of length of coach nor have I read any reference to such.  Are there any?  I've seen photos of them down many a GWR branch (see Russell).  Width, yes.  While I am here, Jim Russell in his books makes reference to the Concertinas (which are of course 'toplights' by the way, as are Dreadnoughts) being so designed because of the width problem; in fact they were only 9ft wide, so I don't know where he got that idea from.

 

Now, Dreadnoughts!  If I was a RTR  manufacturer, I would go for them.  They too lasted to a great age.  They would go like hot cakes.

 You won't find many 70 footers at Weymouth Harbour (artics banned because too close coupled) and Hemyock a definite no no.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Coach bogie]

Let's be honest, coach design wasn't exactly Churchward's strong point. The Dreadnoughts were a bit silly, and the Concertinas were a bit mad. It wasn't until the Toplights that a degree of sanity prevailed.

 Well it's one opinion.

 

Churchward was trying to eliminate the cultural expectation by passengers of a external door to each compartment - not popular at the time, so had to put the doors back in with the concertinas, then today what do all the express mainline stock have.....end doors only.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[57xx]

I selected GBP 50 based on current prices and a comparison with other models available at present. I didn't try to guess what might happen between now and any potential release date.

 

Same here. Also, even if the RRP has gone up to £60 in 2-3 year's time, if somewhere knocks off 20%, I'll still be paying £50. I certainly didn't pay £45 for my Colletts My comment about budget was more about what I had available to spend overall on railway items at the time of purchase. If I have more funds available and there is a bigger range, I might be tempted to buy more than the 4 I am currently anticipating (hence the extra ticks on the last section).

[St Enodoc]

Just the same as any post on RMweb, you should be able to edit the poll.

 

Hitting delete and the re voting worked for me.

Neal, I couldn't find anything to edit so I think I will have to follow Rich's way.

 

Edit - done!

Edited January 10, 2017 by St Enodoc

[firebirduk]

Great to see a poll for toplights……………….. unfortunately not so good if you model pre Great War!

 

As my modeling is fixed at August 1914,  the majority of Diagrams needed are not in the list so I am left with 2 or 3 choices so unable to poll.

 

The following list has been taken from Jim Russell’s books:

 

Class                      Diagram                  Year

1^{st                               A9                                1908}

^{1st                               A10                              1914}

 

^{3rd                               C28                              1907}

^{3rd                               C29                              1909}

^{3rd                               C30                              1910}

^{3rd                               C31                              1911-13}

 

^{Brake 3rd                    D45                              1908-09}

^{Brake 3rd                    D46                              1910-11}

^{Brake 3rd                    D47                              1911-22}

^{Brake 3rd                    D48                              1910}

^{Brake 3rd                    D49                              1911}

^{Brake 3rd                    D51                              1912-13}

^{Brake 3rd                    D52                              1912-22}

^{Brake 3rd                    D57                              1914}

 

^{Brake Compo             E82                              1907-08}

^{Brake Compo             E83                              1907}

^{Brake Compo             E87                              1910}

^{Brake Compo             E94                              1912}

^{Brake Compo             E95                              1913}

^{Brake Compo             E99                              1914}

 

^{Compo                        E85                              1908-09}

^{Compo                        E88                              1911-12}

^{Compo                        E93                              1912-13}

^{Compo                        E98                              1914}

 

^{Slip                              F14                              1908}

^{Slip                              F15                              1909}

 

^{Kitchen                       H16                              1908}

 

^{Brake                          K18                              1911}

^{Brake                          K19                              1914}         

 

^{If I have transcribed in error I apologize in advance as I have mislaid my Michael Harris tome.}

 

^{Mike Spence}