Bachmann 94xx

[TheSignalEngineer]

124.33mm and 133.66mm?

[tomparryharry]

124.33mm and 133.66mm?

 You're probably about right. Please excuse my poor mathematics!

 

Ian.

[The Johnster]

According to my drawings here, the 64xx 'should' be 31'1" over buffers, whilst the 94xx 'should' be 33'2" over buffers. That 'should ' equate to 124.03mm (64xx) and 133.66mm (94xx). I think I've got that right. That's about 9.63mm longer.  Please feel free to check my figures, but it does go to show how much larger the 94xx actually was.

 

Ian.

 

 

Quick line up of my Baccy 64xx on the cutting mat scale has it at around 31' 3", not far off, over buffers.

 

My Baccy 57xx comes out at a dead 31', and a Hornby 2721, which, for all it's inaccuracies, should come out at the same length over buffers, does!  This is also acceptably close to scale given that I am measuring them by line of sight and cannot claim proper accuracy!

 

There are other parameters of size besides length over buffers, though, and a 94xx is a much heavier brute and more massive than other panniers.  The tapered boiler is higher pitched on the centre line, and the extended smokebox overhangs almost as much as a 56xx.  It has a no.10 (IIRC) boiler developed for use on some absorbed South Wales engines by Collett and first used on a pure GW loco on the 2251, which the 94xx is basically a tank engine version of.  The smaller driving wheels and tractive weight of the tanks are responsible for the change from 3F to 4F in this case, although the 2251 is really more of a light mixed traffic loco.  When you consider the loco as part of Swindon's ongoing replacement and modernisation of it's constituent/absorbed South Wales esoterica in 1947, especially in regard to locos like the TVR 04 and the remaining Barry locos, things make a bit more sense.  South Wales allocations counted for a good number of the class, and they were inevitably less noticed here than on the blocks at Paddington 'looking modern' and attracting criticism.

 

Drivers I worked with in the 70s at Canton and talked to on the subject, however, regarded them as no great improvement over the 57xx and inferior to the Taff 04s, which had much larger cabs that were easier to fire in; you could swing a shovel better! 

 

A good deal has been written about them not being much more than a visual improvement over the 57xx, but it is pertinent to mention that they were produced up to a class number of 210 at around the same time as the last series of 8750s were being turned out; they were never considered a replacement for the smaller panniers, but a new and different thing altogether, more powerful and with a red route restriction.  BR considered the 57xx types as 3F power classifcation, and the 94xx as 4F, which I would suggest is a fair reflection of the reality.

 

The all up weights come in as follows:-

 

64xx = 46.3 tons

57xx = 48.3 tons

94xx = 56.2 tons

 

...which tells the story fairly succinctly I think.

 

A 64xx is  really a passenger loco designed for auto work in South Wales that the 54xx, itself designed to take heavier loads than a 48xx, was out of it's depth with.  The 57xx and it's derivates were a general purpose 0-6-0 capable of light freight, branch passenger, empty stock, or shunting duties, and the 94xx is really a short haul heavy freight loco for colliery or transfer freight duty, radically different purposes from each other, not that there wasn't an overlap!

Edited January 24, 2018 by The Johnster

[tomparryharry]

I've always reckoned that there is a 'good' market for a re-worked 2721, with greater fidelity & detail. Strangely, I've also thought that it would most likely Hornby might do this. After all, why not?

 

Apologies for taking this topic for going over to the Bachmann thread.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[tomparryharry]

Quick line up of my Baccy 64xx on the cutting mat scale has it at around 31' 3", not far off, over buffers.

 

My Baccy 57xx comes out at a dead 31', and a Hornby 2721, which, for all it's inaccuracies, should come out at the same length over buffers, does!  This is also acceptably close to scale given that I am measuring them by line of sight and cannot claim proper accuracy!

 

There are other parameters of size besides length over buffers, though, and a 94xx is a much heavier brute and more massive than other panniers.  The tapered boiler is higher pitched on the centre line, and the extended smokebox overhangs almost as much as a 56xx.  It has a no.10 (IIRC) boiler developed for use on some absorbed South Wales engines by Collett and first used on a pure GW loco on the 2251, which the 94xx is basically a tank engine version of.  The smaller driving wheels and tractive weight of the tanks are responsible for the change from 3F to 4F in this case, although the 2251 is really more of a light mixed traffic loco.  When you consider the loco as part of Swindon's ongoing replacement and modernisation of it's constituent/absorbed South Wales esoterica in 1947, especially in regard to locos like the TVR 04 and the remaining Barry locos, things make a bit more sense.  South Wales allocations counted for a good number of the class, and they were inevitably less noticed here than on the blocks at Paddington 'looking modern' and attracting criticism.

 

Drivers I worked with in the 70s at Canton and talked to on the subject, however, regarded them as no great improvement over the 57xx and inferior to the Taff 04s, which had much larger cabs that were easier to fire in; you could swing a shovel better! 

 

A good deal has been written about them not being much more than a visual improvement over the 57xx, but it is pertinent to mention that they were produced up to a class number of 210 at around the same time as the last series of 8750s were being turned out; they were never considered a replacement for the smaller panniers, but a new and different thing altogether, more powerful and with a red route restriction.  BR considered the 57xx types as 3F power classifcation, and the 94xx as 4F, which I would suggest is a fair reflection of the reality.

 

The all up weights come in as follows:-

 

64xx = 46.3 tons

57xx = 48.3 tons

94xx = 56.2 tons

 

...which tells the story fairly succinctly I think.

 

A 64xx is  really a passenger loco designed for auto work in South Wales that the 54xx, itself designed to take heavier loads than a 48xx, was out of it's depth with.  The 57xx and it's derivates were a general purpose 0-6-0 capable of light freight, branch passenger, empty stock, or shunting duties, and the 94xx is really a short haul heavy freight loco for colliery or transfer freight duty, radically different purposes from each other, not that there wasn't an overlap!

I was given to understand that the 1944 -45 Great Western locomotive requirements indicated that new locomotives were needed to replace the last of the amalgamated companies' locomotives. Pretty much all of the remaining Taff Vale, Rhymney, & Cardiff railway locomotives. Typically, about 4F power. In all, these numbered some 190-ish locomotives. This dovetails neatly into the class 94xx builds.

 

Ian.

[tomparryharry]

Well, the 34xx-94xx book has shown up. Now for a very large mug of tea, and a serious dose of looking at. It's either some awful television programme, or some  historical research. Easy really.....

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

Edited January 25, 2018 by tomparryharry

[The Johnster]

I've always reckoned that there is a 'good' market for a re-worked 2721, with greater fidelity & detail. Strangely, I've also thought that it would most likely Hornby might do this. After all, why not?

 

Apologies for taking this topic for going over to the Bachmann thread.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

Reasonable assumption, as they have presumably done the bulk of the research already.  Shame they didn't use it to make a better model, but, credit where due, it was a brave foray into a pre-grouping world for Triang Hornby when it first appeared, just let down by TH's toy standards and use of a generic chassis.

[The Johnster]

Went on the Baccy website earlier, which I have not visited for a little while, to see how this loco is progressing.  There is still no photo of even a pre-production model, and the web catalogue relies on photos of real 94xx.  There are 3 versions, a green G W R initials liveried 'first ten', a black BR unicycling lion and a ferret and dartboard, which I believe covers all the bases as IIRC none of these locos was actually produced during the 'BRITISH RAILWAYS' lettered period either in Egyptian or Sans Serif.  The price, assuming it is not increased by the time of the model's introduction, is £125 bar a gnat's wotsit, which I suppose is not ridiculous in this day and age, though I will be expecting a very good model at this price level.  I'll probably buy one anyway, though (probably; who am I kidding!). And an ETA has been suggested (though I'll believe it when I see it) of Oct 2019.  

 

By the way, I like the new layout of the website catalogue, which is easier to use.  But there are very few details of the models, just pictures and price, and I would like more details.

 

Apparently nobody is currently producing a 57xx or 8750; opening here for Oxford or a commissioner?

Edited March 25, 2018 by The Johnster

[Andy W]

Apparently nobody is currently producing a 57xx or 8750; opening here for Oxford or a commissioner?

The Bachmann website only displays models they have in stock in the warehouse, plus forthcoming items that have been announced, and possibly models that are in the current catalogue but have sold out from the warehouse (not so easy to tell this from the current design of website)

The most recent Bachmann 57xx/8750s have been acceptable to most modellers and of course Bachmann still have all the tooling to hand.

They seem to be working on the "one pannier at a time" principle, so there are plenty of 64xx around at the moment.

I doubt any other manufacturer would risk launching their own new tooled 57xx/8750 as it would be fairly easy for Bachmann to undercut them on price (because their tooling costs will have been covered by lots of previous sales and is sitting there waiting to be used). The models that have been snatched out of Bachmann and Hornby's back catalogues are those where there are known problems, or where nothing has been reissued for literally years. So the GW Moguls were last produced by Bachmann in split-chassis days, the Hornby Large Prairie is the 1970s Airfix tooling with a more modern motor, the 14xx was again an Airfix design that did get a new chassis from Hornby but had serious build quality issues, the Dean Goods was Airfix in origin, though first sold by Mainline, and was still tender drive when last produced by Hornby.

 

Now might someone commission Bachmann to rerun their 57xx or 8750? Entirely possible, and if they don't it will be because they believe there are ample unsold or good second hand ones about.

[Gordieb01]

Absolutely much rather see an earlier pre 1923 Pannier than one of the later versions like the 94xx, especially if there was a Saddle Tank version!   Of course Bachmann and Hornby aren't terribly interested in anything that didn't run into the post 48 era.. 

 

I've always reckoned that there is a 'good' market for a re-worked 2721, with greater fidelity & detail. Strangely, I've also thought that it would most likely Hornby might do this. After all, why not?

Apologies for taking this topic for going over to the Bachmann thread.

Cheers,

Ian.

[tomparryharry]

I think it's 'education' on our part. We've covered this with Dapol, and the large prairie, and 43xx classes.

 

As a market, we can lead pretty much any producer to make what we want. In turn, however, any producer will need to ensure that returns in a commercial sense will work out. No Philanthropy here!

 

Is the 94xx too much of a niche market? Especially in volume terms? Look at your subject model. Limited time frame/era. Probably the last knockings of Western steam. Dirty, unkempt locomotives. Does it bear resemblance to the popular 57xx, a cute little model?

 

It seems that we're on an upward trend, in terms of quality & fidelity. I'd guess it only takes a respectful request to ask a producer to 'take a look' to set the ball rolling.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

PS, I have no intention of knocking Bachmann, BTW.

[JimC]

On lengths, I reckon there was/is a horrendous cockup in CJ Freezers' 94xx drawing in Railway Modeller and reprinted in his book "Locomotives in Outline GWR" where the back of the locomotive is ~10 inches too short. I tried scratchbuilding one as a teenager and gave up when it didn't look right, but didn't figure out the error until I was making drawings for the below.

 

I make the 2721 365", 6400 373", 8750 374" and 9400 398". (sorry about the inches, my electric sketches are scaled 1mm = 1 inch)

 

The 54/64/74/16 series was a much lighter locomotive with a smaller boiler than the 2721s/57s with greater RA.

My reading of the drawings makes the 2721s and contemporaries 9in shorter at the front than the 57s, which gives the pre group large classes a distinctive truncated look.  The 54/64/74s were only a couple of inches longer than the 2021s at the front so the effect is less marked.

Edited March 26, 2018 by JimC

[The Johnster]

The Bachmann website only displays models they have in stock in the warehouse, plus forthcoming items that have been announced, and possibly models that are in the current catalogue but have sold out from the warehouse (not so easy to tell this from the current design of website)

The most recent Bachmann 57xx/8750s have been acceptable to most modellers and of course Bachmann still have all the tooling to hand.

They seem to be working on the "one pannier at a time" principle, so there are plenty of 64xx around at the moment.

I doubt any other manufacturer would risk launching their own new tooled 57xx/8750 as it would be fairly easy for Bachmann to undercut them on price (because their tooling costs will have been covered by lots of previous sales and is sitting there waiting to be used). The models that have been snatched out of Bachmann and Hornby's back catalogues are those where there are known problems, or where nothing has been reissued for literally years. So the GW Moguls were last produced by Bachmann in split-chassis days, the Hornby Large Prairie is the 1970s Airfix tooling with a more modern motor, the 14xx was again an Airfix design that did get a new chassis from Hornby but had serious build quality issues, the Dean Goods was Airfix in origin, though first sold by Mainline, and was still tender drive when last produced by Hornby.

 

Now might someone commission Bachmann to rerun their 57xx or 8750? Entirely possible, and if they don't it will be because they believe there are ample unsold or good second hand ones about.

 

I think you have summed the situation up very well, Andy; I was of course looking at the issue from a customer's point of view and your assessment of the reasons that a manufacturer does not release a model that it is tooled up for are well thought out.  They do seem to be working on the 'one pannier at a time principle, and if this is so one might expect the 64xx to become unavailable when the 94xx comes on stream, and it may be that this will be when Baccy consider that it has reached market saturation.  

 

But the 8750 version is rare as rocking horse sh*t on eBay, as it has been out of production for a good time now.  One hopes that Hornby will not re-introduce their Triang toy travesty, even with a current chassis!  As they are not easily sourced second hand, and I am probably not alone in my reluctance to buy other people's problems in the form of second hand locos, I would like to see a commission of this model and think it would cover costs for it's commissioner quite rapidly; there must be a reservoir of demand that has built up by now.  This, if anyone were to have a go, would presumably depend on Bachmann being willing, and able to source production facilities.

 

Put me down for one!

Edited March 25, 2018 by The Johnster

[Barry Ten]

 

 

But the 8750 version is rare as rocking horse sh*t on eBay, as it has been out of production for a good time now.  

 

 

 

I've just had a quick look on ebay and there are plenty of 8750 Panniers available in either new or second hand state, including "buy it now" offers in the region of 60 pounds. You might be being over-specific with your search term: instead of "Bachmann 8750" try "Bachmann pannier" and just weed out the irrelevant entries. 

[Captain Kernow]

I think it's interesting that the Bachmann 57XX/8750 is sufficiently good, that none of the etched kit producers have ever sought to produce a kit for one (although there are etched chassis kits to improve on the Bachmann one).

[tomparryharry]

Hmm. Bachmann pannier on E-Bay?

 

Watch out for unscrupulous vendors, passing off the older Mainline model as the newer one. I've been caught before.

 

Look carefully at the top of the main steam dome. Of it looks like a 'teat', then the chances that's the older version. Likewise, have a look at the coupling. If it's got the coupler screw on the chassis keeper plate, then that indicates it's an older version also.

 

Some are asking silly money at the moment, for a model that might be about 30 years old. Little wonder that someone will pass it off as 'Brand new Bachmannn'.

 

Caveat Emptor:- Let the buyer beware!

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[Barry Ten]

Hmm. Bachmann pannier on E-Bay?

 

Watch out for unscrupulous vendors, passing off the older Mainline model as the newer one. I've been caught before.

 

Look carefully at the top of the main steam dome. Of it looks like a 'teat', then the chances that's the older version. Likewise, have a look at the coupling. If it's got the coupler screw on the chassis keeper plate, then that indicates it's an older version also.

 

Some are asking silly money at the moment, for a model that might be about 30 years old. Little wonder that someone will pass it off as 'Brand new Bachmannn'.

 

Caveat Emptor:- Let the buyer beware!

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

The keeper plate is much deeper on the Mainline one, as well as the original split-chassis Bachmann variants, which is fairly clear in side elevation.

 

If in doubt, check the loco number against production runs.

[9402 Fredrick]

Getting back on topic, did Bachmann have an EP samle of the 94xx? I'm asking as they had the EP for their class 117 DMU from another thread in the Bachmann threads area.

[The Johnster]

I asked, a little timidly, about the 94xx at the Bachmann stand at the Bristol show in Thornbury today.  Apparently the matter is with the Chinese, and their rep expected the next development to be the appearance of a pre production grey sample to gawp at in amazement.  He commented that 'just because it's basically a square box, doesn't mean it's easy', a sentiment I readily agreed with quoting the abortion that Lima made of theirs below the footplate, but I wonder if behind the words lie a tale of problems of what we are not wont to wot of.

 

Various attempts were made early in 00 RTR days, notably by Graham Farish, and one of the reasons RTR manufacturers then chose prototypes was that they had enough space inside to hide the chunky motors and drives of the period.  Under boiler valances to hide the bottom of the motor and the drive train were the norm, as were the cabs full of motor that further discredited Lima's mess.  A more scale approach preserving daylight beneath the boiler may belie the apparent ease of making a distant fist of the model, especially if drive to the centre axle is required.

 

But, apparently, there is progress and reason for hope!!!

[TheSignalEngineer]

Still on course to finish my conversion before Bachmann produce theirs then. Making handrails is the next job. That's another few quid they won't be getting.

[adb968008]

I think there’s a lot to be said for Heljans approach to motorising the 47xx..

It’s a self contained unit... a motor in a block that sits inside the boiler, that connects to a gear box in the firebox.

The whole block slides into the boiler space, meaning even the boiler is a full conical shape (not a crescent shape with a cut out underneath to slide the chassis in).

 

In the 9400 for instance, a separate cab/bunker could mean a boiler/tanks unit as a full shaped moulding, and slide the motor block unit in via the exposed firebox space before the cab is fitted, the fit the cab and add a chassis that fills the firebox space with a gear train.

 

Lots of options in the hobby now that didn’t exist only a few years ago. Bachmann a master of it, i’m Sure the 9400 will be spot on.

Edited May 4, 2018 by adb968008

[tomparryharry]

Sad to say, I think Bachmann have missed this one. The conversion between Mainline & Lima turns out a pretty good model. Add to that, High Level do a nice little chassis for the 94xx. Either way, they'll be somewhat less than the £120-odd that we can realistically expect to see when the model sees the light of day.

 

I did a conversion model some years back. It 'wasn't bad' but since then, other posters on here have made much better examples of it. I've got a couple to do, when I can find a 'Roundtoit' It's not to say that Bachmann (or others) shouldn't make it. It's just that prevarication doesn't always help.

 

One locomotive, or ten wagons? Hmmmm.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[JimC]

Sad to say, I think Bachmann have missed this one. The conversion between Mainline & Lima turns out a pretty good model.

I'm sure you're right, but I doubt Bachmann will consider that folk combining Mainline and Lima models into something more than the sum of their parts will have a huge impact on their sales.

[tomparryharry]

I'm sure you're right, but I doubt Bachmann will consider that folk combining Mainline and Lima models into something more than the sum of their parts will have a huge impact on their sales.

 

Quite right. But, tt will have to be very, very good indeed to make the extra choice.

 

If however, Bachmann decide to make something different, like an 'Aberdare', then I'm sure that Bachmann will make a good job of it. Perhaps we've come to the end. No more Western locomotive models?

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

Edited May 7, 2018 by tomparryharry

[ndg910]

I agree GWR locos that have not been done in RTR are now thin on the ground but still have

 

Armstrong Goods

Metro tank

Aberdare

Saint (retooled)

Manor (retooled)

County (retooled)

AEC Railcars 2-4 and 5-7, 17, Twinsets

Duke

Bulldog

74xx

1101 dock tank

 

Whilst not for me there are 16xx and 15xx designs but as they are BR builds.

 

That should keep the interest going and I don’t mind being dripfed.

 

Now back on topic....