5050 Posted September 24, 2013 Share Posted September 24, 2013 Right, are you all sitting comfortably? Here's the first offering. I'm starting from early '52 as this is the earliest volume I've scanned up to now. I will try to go earlier once I borrow '51 etc. from our club library. Some of the other '52 ads I've already posted in the 'Formoway' thread but I may re-post them here later for completeness. Was the 'American Loco' and matching coach built to OO or HO scale? It is interesting to note that GF didn't advertise during the summer months. Perhaps they thought nobody would be interested in model railways at that time of the year! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted September 24, 2013 Share Posted September 24, 2013 The NYC Hudson' is to H0 scale, if 14" long (at least my Rivarossi one is that length). She was intended for the (well heeled at £9/5/0d) American market. I believe this (like the Formo 0-6-0) had a normal type of motor, rather than the Farish device. I believe the unanswered question as to radii is two feet. Certainly the Pullmans are incapable of taking even large radius Hornby Dublo curves (called 2nd radius these days). The "lasting dependability of sound construction" is debatable, seeing the number of items that suffer from mazak pest and/or warping. I can remember being impressed by seeing a Farish loco pulling two of their Pullmans (Gamages?). My Dublo Duchess could only manage one. In1952 I was given a Farish Pullman and a Trix LMS 'scale' coach (neither of which was successful) before a Dublo LMS composite was tracked down (Korean war shortages). The arrival of a Sir Nigel set at Christmas solved the Carriage shortage (A Duchess looks silly with one coach!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 Another one, this time from 1954. Looks as if the Graham Farish name was being overtaken by the 'Formo' branding. Also 3-rail being pushed at a time when it was in the decline - or at least the start of the decline. The motor looks quite neat - but was it any good? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardTPM Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Another one, this time from 1954. Looks as if the Graham Farish name was being overtaken by the 'Formo' branding. For a number of years in the 1970s they rebranded as Grafar, but went back to Graham Farish again in the '80s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagaguy Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I must confess that i love looking at these old adverts,I was never in a position to buy any of these being a pre teenager & having no money.A friend some years ago gave me some early MRN`s & constructor from the early 50`s but i put them in a box in the garage along with years of Model Engineer magazines & the mice chewed them to pieces but left the ME`s alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The motor was/is excellent, which is rather more than can be said about the 0-6-0 it was fitted to. She was obviously intended to be a Southern Q class but is rather crude and lacking in detail and for some reason ended up with B.F.B. wheels. She also rides high and the tender wheels (like all Formo wheels) are awful - a set of Dublo ones cured that!I have fitted wheels from a GF Prairie to one of mine (The original wheels were not quartered correctly and she tended to run in a series of jerks. She now derails at the least provocation as the centre drivers are too large and flangeless. The Formo track mentioned is similar to Dublo, but wider and has embossed sleepers -much more realistic but still in a strange beige/yellow colour. The straights are about 7" long and the curves of larger radius than Dublo and need 12 to a circle. The terminal rail has a length of twin flex soldered to it for connections (hardly worth an extra 9d). I think by "composite" Pullman they mean the brake vehicle. The Pullmans came with various names, as a 1st class car (K class?), a brake/3rd car and a spurious version of the 1st class car in 'CIWL' livery. (Triang did the same several years later.) EDIT corrected finger trouble Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted October 3, 2013 Author Share Posted October 3, 2013 The motor was/is excellent, which is rather more than can be said about the )-6-0 it was fitted to. She was obviously intended to be a Southern Q class but is rather crude and lacking in detail and for some reason ended up with B.F.B. wheels. She also rides high and the tender wheels (like all Formo wheels) are awful - a set of Dublo ones cured that!I have fitted wheels from a GF Prairie to one of mine (The original wheels were not quartered correctly and she tended to run in a series of jerks. She now derails at the least provocation as the centre drivers are too large and flangeless. The Formo track mentioned is similar to Dublo, but wider and has embossed sleepers -much more realistic but still in a strange beige/yellow colour. The straights are about 7" long and the curves of larger radius than Dublo and need 12 to a circle. The terminal rail has a length of twin flex soldered to it for connections (hardly worth an extra 9d). I think by "composite" Pullman they mean the brake vehicle. The Pullmans came with various names, as a 1st class car (K class?), a brake/3rd car and a spurious version of the 1st class car in 'CIWL' livery. (Triang did the same several years later.) But they say the loco was specially designed to withstand any amount of work! Are you saying that their advertising was a little bit optimistic........................................ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardTPM Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 The Pullmans came with various names, as a 1st class car (K class?), a brake/3rd car and a spurious version of the 1st class car in 'CIWL' livery. (Triang did the same several years later.) Oddly enough the CIWL livery is actually pretty accurate as a batch of 1925 built BRCW 'K' type pullmans were 'sold' for use on the Milan-Nice service. Most of them returned in 1928 but two Parlour cars stayed with CIWL. The Farish Pullman is a Kitchen car so would be close to Adrian, Ibis and Lydia in the period 1925-28. The Farish Pullman Brake coach body is actually based on one of the twelve-wheelers, recently done rather better by Hornby. They were built as First Class but later, after becoming brake coaches, were reclassified as Thirds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 The motor for the Q class looks identical to a Pittman motor, copied or supplied by them for Farish use? AFAIK they are one and the same, but I'm not 100% sure. But they say the loco was specially designed to withstand any amount of work! Are you saying that their advertising was a little bit optimistic........................................ She's a good solid job and seems immune to the mazak disease that afflicts other GF products, so if you can get her to go....... (The loco came in a set with a Formo version of the van (in grey) the 7 plank mineral (in dark brown) and the brake van (in bauxite) and an oval of Formo track. Running round and round with this lot, she'd probably go on for ever!) (I assume these colours were intended to represent LMS, SR and LNER livery (the brake van does have a passing resemblance to an LNER TOAD E). Most Farish wagons were available in all three colours, but I have only ever seen the steel mineral* in grey or bauxite or the brake van in bauxite**. *A welded example with no top doors and a pressed steel end door. It's also a bit too high. ** The colour is called 'Red oxide' on the brake van box I have, but is nearer to bauxite IMHO.This shows the first series of Farish wagons lettered LMS and NE - Van (LMS and white 'blob' on brown - presumably SR)), 5 plank mineral (NE and LMS) and brake van (NE). There are also some indecipherable P.O. names. 'Lydia' was one of the Pullman names avilable. I seem to recall 'Iolanthe', but can't remenber any others. Does anyone know? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted October 9, 2013 Author Share Posted October 9, 2013 Going back in time a bit, here are some from 1951. I suppose I should have started with these but.................... Firstly, everything you ever needed to know about the GWR Prairie Tank - apart from how reliable it was in actual use! Didn't it have a bit of a reputation for being a bit wayward, especially in starting? Something to do with the weird motor and the 'centrifugal clutch'? Plenty more to come folks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evanelpus Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 The NYC Hudson' is to H0 scale, if 14" long (at least my Rivarossi one is that length). She was intended for the (well heeled at £9/5/0d) American market. I believe this (like the Formo 0-6-0) had a normal type of motor, rather than the Farish device. The Hudson had the same unconventional "vibrator" motor as all the other Farish locos of the time. One of my Hudsons has a KTM "O" gauge motor fitted and is the most powerful steam outline loco in my collection. The other two Hudsons have the original motors which, when actually working, are also quite powerful, but incredibly unreliable. P.S It was stated elsewhere that the Formo 0-6-0 had the same wheels as the Hudson. They are boxpok, but not the same castings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evanelpus Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Having said that I did have a few original motored Farish which worked. The over run was brilliant, no sharp stop when removing power, just a gentle coast until restored or to a halt. This definitely applies to motors using the clutch (GP5, early Spam Can, kit Prairie), but later motors using the flexible spring connection as in the Spam Can ( '52 onwards), King, Hudson and Prairie (RTR version) didn't fare so well. Any abrupt stops would usually destroy the weak spring. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.