Ceptic Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Thanks again, Craig, for your tip-off. £125, eh ?..It might be worth a punt, or two, but I think I'll wait and see how my funds settle down, after this latest splash-out. Information on what you get in the Blue 'n Red box No.32-850A, is, as follows :- BR Std. Class 9F 2-10-0 Loco + BR1G Tender "Evening Star" in pristine BR Green livery, with 82F (Bath Green Park) Shed plate. Sorry, all. No etched metal nameplates, or 'Pines Express' headboard included. Photos to follow, once I get ma act together. Regards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 From the description above, it seemes IDENTICAL to the original release. Looking at the review pics on the old forum, Bachmann did an 82F shedcode on the first one. Can anyone inform whether the first release came with etched plates? Where would people recommend for a good source of etched name and commemorative plates? G-BOAF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted February 26, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 26, 2011 From the description above, it seemes IDENTICAL to the original release. Looking at the review pics on the old forum, Bachmann did an 82F shedcode on the first one. Can anyone inform whether the first release came with etched plates? Where would people recommend for a good source of etched name and commemorative plates? G-BOAF The original release came with the etched nameplates only.I bought a set off 247 Developments that include works plates if I remember correctly.Shed codes are extra. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
97403_Ixion Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Hi G-BOAF, indeed the loco (32-850) came with nameplates and commemorative plates. However, the commemorative plates have no detail on mine. The worded part appears to be just be flat and black. That said, the ones printed on the model are readable, so adding the plates would result in loss of detail. The shedcode is indeed 82F (on the front). On the side, there is a '9' above and a blue circle below the 92220 number. The roller bearings on the tender are highlighted yellow with a red line. The Modelzone 92240 was indeed £125 when it came out, though naturally it came with a certificate. I remember when it did come out as the weathering was, in my opinion, somewhat a step ahead of previous models. Bachmann released another similar version - I think it was 92242, with almost identical weathering. I'm not sure of the tender arrangement though. I may be able to arrange photos of either the original 92220 or the Modelzone 92240 if interested? My 92220 is not weathered though Cheers, Ixion. P.S.: The original 32-850 version had the 'HR Heritage Range NRM' sticker on the box front - does the new one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Thanks all, will probably order a set of plates from 247, along with TPO nets! I would argue that issuing with/without etched plates, or in a different style box does not count as differences in the model, but maybe good enough for Bachmann! Its a shame, as I was hoping for the revised front step, which was added after the locos second spell on the S&D. Ceptic, we await pictures....!!! For info, the original rmweb review is here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11699&p=179969&hilit=evening+star Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 47107 Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 "The Modelzone 92240 was indeed £125 when it came out, though naturally it came with a certificate. I remember when it did come out as the weathering was, in my opinion, somewhat a step ahead of previous models. Bachmann released another similar version - I think it was 92242, with almost identical weathering. I'm not sure of the tender arrangement though." It was 92044 with a BR1F tender. http://www.ehattons.com/Trade/StockDetail.aspx?SID=21260 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
97403_Ixion Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Hi 47107, I stand corrected However, just taken a look and noticed: If it's BR1F tenders: 32-851 92192 32-853 92044 weathered 32-858DC 92185 double chimney + weathered, DCC on board There are also BR1B and BR1C tenders too... and also forgot the Collector's Club 'Black Prince' 92203 More details of previous models from Bachmann's past products list. Cheers, Ixion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Apologies, all round folks, for not replying sooner. I got called away, in mid post, to get my left eye cataract fixed. The NHS.... What would we do without them ? Anyway, here's a few squinty-eyed pics of what came out of the box. ] By all accounts, and seeing G-BOAF's link to the original RMweb review, nothing much has changed, between this batch, and the first ?? If anyone would like any different angled shots ?, please post in. Regards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Thanks for the pics Ceptic Good luck with the visual recovery, and the regular eye drops (based on experience on relatives post-op)!!! Differences: Coal Load, trying its hardest to look like a Hornby Tender-Drive coal load!! The firs release was coal-less. Hope the empty bunker is underneith, because it looks silly! Front buffer beam - holes for Steam Heat bracket (never fitted during BR life) and (unfortunately) the Vac Hose support arm have been filled in, leaving hole for vac hose only. Chimney - copper cladding appears to be on the top of the rim only and not extend down the top half of the chimney itself. Some copper paint is called for! running plate - orange runs correctly at bottom of buffer beam running plate, instead of along the top in the first batch! I will assume the bend that appears to be in the running plate moulding is a product of baral distortion of camera lense, rather than casting flaw! Very impressive model. drool.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Thanks for the pics Ceptic Good luck with the visual recovery, and the regular eye drops (based on experience on relatives post-op)!!! Differences: Coal Load, trying its hardest to look like a Hornby Tender-Drive coal load!! The firs release was coal-less. Hope the empty bunker is underneith, because it looks silly! Front buffer beam - holes for Steam Heat bracket (never fitted during BR life) and (unfortunately) the Vac Hose support arm have been filled in, leaving hole for vac hose only. Chimney - copper cladding appears to be on the top of the rim only and not extend down the top half of the chimney itself. Some copper paint is called for! running plate - orange runs correctly at bottom of buffer beam running plate, instead of along the top in the first batch! I will assume the bend that appears to be in the running plate moulding is a product of baral distortion of camera lense, rather than casting flaw! Very impressive model. drool.... Hi G-BOAF & All. Re :- Coal load. This is removable, leaving a near empty bunker, as 1st. batch. Front Buffer beam connections. - As noted, hole for vac. pipe only.- supplied separately in bag, along with tender vac. pipe, front steps, cyl. drain cocks & front screw-link coupling. Steam heat - blanked off (left open on 1st batch). Chimney - Copper coating only on lip & rim .1st. batch had it applied under the lip also. Running plate Orange lining on lower edge only, as noted. The 2006 catalogue (1st. batch) picture also shows it in this position, as does gwrrob's. pic. The running plate camber is partly due to camera lens distortion, although, running an eye (the good one) along, from an end, close up, there does seem to be a slight upward curve, on the near (LH) side only. The RH side is perfectly flat. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 That is simply not true, regarding the first batch and the chimney. It is in fact applied to the top, the rim, and underneath, as I shall demonstrate with photographs of my own Evening Star. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 That is simply not true, regarding the first batch and the chimney. It is in fact applied to the top, the rim, and underneath, as I shall demonstrate with photographs of my own Evening Star. Ah, I now see what you mean. Apologies. I will now edit my previous post.. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Hi G-BOAF & All. Re :- Coal load. This is removable, leaving a near empty bunker, as 1st. batch. Front Buffer beam connections. - As noted, hole for vac. pipe only.- supplied separately in bag, along with tender vac. pipe, front steps, cyl. drain cocks & front screw-link coupling. Steam heat - blanked off (left open on 1st batch). Chimney - Copper coating only on lip & rim .1st. batch had it applied under the lip also. Running plate Orange lining on lower edge only, as noted. The 2006 catalogue (1st. batch) picture also shows it in this position, as does gwrrob's. pic. The running plate camber is partly due to camera lens distortion, although, running an eye (the good one) along, from an end, close up, there does seem to be a slight upward curve, on the near (LH) side only. The RH side is perfectly flat. Cheers. Any chance of a pic of the RH side, and possibly a pic of both sides with a straight edge to assess the extent of bend? I am assuming the bend is at the point of lubricator 'cutout'. Do we think it could be straightened (assuming it was post casting bend and not cause by a casting flaw)? The Hattons website example seems to have same problem, evidenced by the deflector bottom not lining up with the running plate http://www.ehattons.com/StockDetail.aspx?SID=32688 I have a black 9f with similar problem (both sides) and have tried, but on the sound of 'creaking' plastic, stopped before anything moved. I probably should be more persistant! Hmm, what with bendy running plates, and poor chimney paint, I'm wondering if I should resume my search for a first batch example again... Should I be asking my model shop (when they get stock) to set it back to Bachmann for REPAIR of running plate BEFORE I buy it? Bachmann THIS IS REDICULOUS!! Sadly this is not suprising given the gap between assembly quality (poor) and design/detail quality (excellent) of Bachmann recently. I am suprised that magazine reviews etc don't make more of an issue of this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Thanks for the pics Ceptic Good luck with the visual recovery, and the regular eye drops (based on experience on relatives post-op)!!! I will assume the bend that appears to be in the running plate moulding is a product of baral distortion of camera lense, rather than casting flaw! Very impressive model. drool.... I've got to say, there's quite a few things wrong with this above post. My model - from the first batch - has none of these problems for a few simple reasons: Differences: Coal Load, trying its hardest to look like a Hornby Tender-Drive coal load!! The firs release was coal-less. Hope the empty bunker is underneith, because it looks silly! Mine - 1st batch - is coal-less now - but it was indeed fitted with a plastic insert of "coal" as delivered - as is this batch. If you press gently on the front or rear of the insert, it will pop out and you can fill it with real chips of coal to your heart's content. Front buffer beam - holes for Steam Heat bracket (never fitted during BR life) and (unfortunately) the Vac Hose support arm have been filled in, leaving hole for vac hose only. As can be seen here, not on the first batch: But it is surely not beyond the remit that it presents Evening Star in a different time period? I seem to recall that the original batch was as preserved, this may be as "in service"? Chimney - copper cladding appears to be on the top of the rim only and not extend down the top half of the chimney itself. Some copper paint is called for! But not, as I stated earlier, on the first batch. running plate - orange runs correctly at bottom of buffer beam running plate, instead of along the top in the first batch! And yet my photograph of my first batch Evening Star shows the lining running at the bottom as well. So this point too, is incorrect. If you are not satisfied with your example, take it back and exchange it. That is your right as a consumer and customer. I don't think your rather general view of the first or second batches is particularly helpful as yours might be an isolated case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 I've got to say, there's quite a few things wrong with this above post. My model - from the first batch - has none of these problems for a few simple reasons: I think there's a misunderstanding here. I was highlighting differences between the second batch and the first batch. OK, based on your experience I was wrong with coal load and lining (although I seem to remember a press release saying that Evening Star DIDN'T come with a coal load in that batch. I have not yet got my evening star (it seems that most shops have NOT yet got deliveries. But I am concerned that there are some batch-wide flaws. This will not be a case of 'swapping' to a good example. Also, my GUESS on the steam heat holes on the original batch etc is that they were included due to measurement of a preserved example. ALL of the first bach (of which ES was the only presrved loco modelled) had this. There is NO WAY that Bachmann's ES was reprasentative of preserved ES; it has the wrong smokebox footplate. The fact that the steam heat bracket was removed from the tooling suggests Bachmann realised it was not reprasentative of the class as working (in addition to being an over-scale lump!!!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Mc Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 Hi A beautiful model by Bachmann and an excellent loco to work on. To be fair here to Bachmann I wouldnt have a clue whats right or wrong between the NRM model and this release it doesnt bother me. The only thing I could pick up on was the the colour seems to be slightly too bright on the pristine model. Here is the cab with a bit more detail added using different grades of wire and copper pipe. The top loco has being weathered and below is the pristine one. I understand when this loco was running it was always kept in a very good condition. Here she is on youtube with DCC sound duel speakers, duel working smoke generators, real coal and lights added. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBnCMpZJce4 Enjoy Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 That sure looks good to me i got my evening star runs and looks great sounds if i should not be running it from this batch with blue and ivory mk1s Ps was redditch34 thread on old forum requesting this model be reintroduced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Marty MC, is the darker colour on your weathered 9F due to the weathering, or is the base colour a darker green? OK, popped into the LT Museum at lunchtime. ES in stock, livery is beautiful (but a bit on the 'green' side... but OH DEAR. The entire front end of the running plate is on a downwards trajectory, looks as if its had a heavy shunt. Just eyeballing it, the front of the running plate is a good 2 mm lower than the centre. Even the buffer beam looks like its not vertical (slightly). Albeit this is the worst example seen on here, or online, but there appears to be a major manufacturing error here, and I'm suprised no one else has noticed it. I'm not going to get a recall just by shouting on my own. Bachmann do take notice (the 4mt tank case a few years back) It can't be chance that the 'flesh' example backs up my concerns from **all** second batch photos! Alpha Fox (Starting to sound like a stuck record, sorry all) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Good looking modelling work, there, Martin, & Marty Mc. , Cheers. . A few pics. for G-BOAF, showing the LH running plate camber, compared with the RH side. My main bane,..moan... bone of contention,.. is the heavy-weight boiler bands..(This includes your Mk.1 coach roof ribs an'all, Bachmann). This is Kid's stuff...Get rid of 'em !!...Please...(The boiler band issue goes for Hornby, as well) Regards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 That slight kink is certainly a lot less than the visible damage the real thing had when withdrawn from service for preservation.. Now if only i'd have known early on they'd do a new one I could have put the old one on eBay and bought two new ones . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Mc Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Hi Marty MC, is the darker colour on your weathered 9F due to the weathering, or is the base colour a darker green? Both are the NRM 9f's one has being darkened and weathered based on a photo I saw of it climbing up a hill In the 60's??? The Brunswick green as I said just looked too light but the new 9f's especially the photos Ceptic posted look the right colour. Cheers Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Evening Star arrived today in Canada - It is a delightful model but Bachmanns quality control dept seems to have got Hornby disease.. So I have a couple of irksome questions... Is the smoke-box door meant to fall off? I was looking for a hinge or two but it appears someone forgot to glue it in - Does anyone know what the best glue to use to attach it would be? It also came with a stern warning in red that the tender and the Loco were joined and to be careful removing them from the packaging. In fact the opposite was the case. They were quite separate and detached from each other! Rejoining them was not much of a problem providing I used the shortest setting on the draw bar. But I wondered if something important may be missing or had fallen off to make for a more secure attachment - like a screw or sometning.. There was just a small plastic protusion to attach it to which did not seem adequate... Running is very smooth and comparable to a Hornby 5 pole so there are no problems there. It did not appear to be banana'd alomg its length but I'll check... The Brunswick green is indeed a darker shade Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Marty Mc and all, why when you fit lights do yous insist on fitting a tail light on the loco tender? If a tail light is fitted it is fitted to the REAR vehicle not one half way down the train or the loco tender. The same goes for diesels the rear lights are only on when a loco is running light loco or pushing a train (the loco becomes the rear vehicle) and not when coupled to a train . Rant over. Nice weathering on ES by the way, it makes the green look a lot better. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Hi folks, ag'in On re-apraising, I've just noticed this. A drooping RH smokebox step. Now... did I break this ? (me , being more than slightly cack- handed, at times)....or. was it damaged beforehand ? I'm thinking... Is the best bet / option, for me, to send it back to the retailer, including all the hassle involved, especially for overseas enthusiasts (Bill, in Canada, for example), asking for a replacement ?. Or,.. to fix it ourselves ?.. And, by fixing any simple defect ourselves, would this invalidate the product's guarantee ?. Time for a separate thread, somewhere else, methinks. Cheers. P.S.... Bill, I had the same Red Warning, but I didn't take much notice.(me, being me)... That draw-bar wants shortening anyway. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The red warning will have been for the newer locos which have permanent wired connectors for a decoder socket in the tender. The 9F doesn't have that but someone clearly updated all of the instructions anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.