Jump to content

Darth Vader

Members
  • Content Count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

42 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If your oven cleaner is in an aerosol can, then check to see what propellant is being used, most propellants are LPG, which is a hydrocarbon and will attack the plastic. I assume that when you say restore, this means you would like to keep any painted surfaces intact and not clean the model to bare plastic. Most paints used in Tri-ang models are fragile in that they can be removed with methylated spirit. This will not affect the body but will ruin any painted finish. So beware. Whatever method you choose, I would recommend testing it on some Tri-ang model that if ruined will not be the end of the world.
  2. Typical of survey producers, they don't get the end user to try out the survey to find out if there are bugs or things that don't work. If you put out a survey that is flawed then the results will be meaningless.
  3. It would appear that Horny have released both types. R4899 and R4900 are the later versions of the clerestory coaches with the printed sides and Dean bogies. R4913 and R 4914 are the old Tri-ang short coaches from the 1960's
  4. The ones fitted with the Dean bogies were a much later tooling that Hornby produced in the late 70's or early 80's and are totally different from the ones referred to in the original post. If you Google "Hornby clerestory coaches" and then select images you can see that there are two very different mouldings.
  5. These coaches are from tooling that dates back to the early 1960’s and are therefore quite rightly part of Hornby’s Railroad range. This is aimed at the budget end of the market. I would suspect Hornby are trying to squeeze a few more quid out of a really old tooling. No point in fitting a NEM pocket unless you intend to switch couplings. You will need to snip of the awful angle iron that is the coupler moulded to the bogie. As for Kadees, the best option would be a 146 fitted to the body. It will require some packing behind the buffer beam to allow attachment to the body. This will allow for the coupler box to fit snuggly against the buffer beam and the shank will be long enough to clear the buffer heads to avoid buffer lock. This all depends on how tight the curves are on your layout. If the curves are too tight for a 146 then the next option would be to fit the 146 coupler into a 252 coupler box, this will extend the coupler head out a little further but still keep the couple box snug against the buffer beam.
  6. It all gets down to a personal choice. Having used Kadee couplers since 1982 – (long before NEM pockets were available on UK models), you get used to fitting the coupler box straight on to the wagon. While at first glance the idea of simply pulling out the tension lock coupler and replacing it with the coupler of your choice sounds appealing, the reality is, that manufacturers seem to show little regard to the NEM standard and simply fit a pocket as best they can. Which is usually ok for tension lock coupler, but when fitting a coupler that is not as tolerant with regard to height it can be problematic. You have a couple of choices; Either fettle the NEM pocket or coupler to make it work, or simply remove the NEM pocket all together. I find that it is quicker to remove the NEM pocket and fit a Kadee coupler box
  7. I used a number 146 Kadee coupler. Decided that the Nem pocket was too much of a hassle to get the coupler to sit at the right height, so the Nem fitting was removed and the 146 bolted in place.
  8. As Bachmann have been re-tooling their older coaching stock, my guess would be a re-tool of the Mark 1 suburban coaches. From a manufacturing point of view, a class 104 would make sense, as the tooling could also include a the front end for a class 110, which had an identical body but was fitted with the 4 character head code box.
  9. The cement truck that could be filled directly from a presflow wagon as in the attched link. http://www.nrm.org.uk/ourcollection/photo?group=British%20Transport%20Commission&objid=1996-7038_BTF_C5_41
  10. First let me say that the selection of a coupler is a modellers own personal choice - not for me to judge. While not a fan of the tension lock coupler I can see why they are used by manufacturers. They are reliable and rarely uncouple. The only issue is when you try to mix the different types produced in the past with the modern slimline ones. As for the NEM pockets, it’s not always a simple matter of plug and play. Each manufacturer does not seem to understand that ‘NEM’ is a ‘standard’ and needs to be manufactured conform to the standard. No end of times, has different rolling stock (from the same manufacturer) had NEM pockets that are set at slightly different heights or set back too far or not far enough from the buffer beam. Quite a lot of NEM pockets have too much slack and the replacement coupler sags. Most time for me, it’s out with the xuron cutter to chop the mounts off and fit the desired coupler straight to the body at the correct height. It usually works out quicker that trying to fettle the NEM pocket to get it at the right height or position. The other pet hate of mine is magazine reviews that state the item has a NEM pocket, but never fit another coupler to see if it works properly.
  11. Hi Dave Thanks for the reply, just committed to 17. Cheers Manfred
  12. Just checked the crowd funded web page. There are wagons listed as 'BR Grey', but there is no mention of numbering, either pre or post TOPS. I like the idea of being able to but 17 wagons each with a different number. It's about time the UK manufacturers woke up to this concept. Local manufacturers here in Australia have being doing multi packs for years and they sell out very quickly. If they are TOPs then I won't bother. Don't want to place an order only to find that I have to renumber the lot to pre TOPS. Dave could you confirm the numbering, pre or post TOPS. Cheers Manfred
  13. Now that this particular can of worms has been opened, my main gripe is not necessarily with the articles, but with the reviews. Living on the other side of the planet means that you cannot see a new release first hand until it makes it way down under, sometimes a couple of months. Therefore you tend to rely on the reviews. Most reviews are pretty poor, containing a lot of prototype information (sometimes most of the review is prototype information) and then a cursory look at the model, all in all it just reeks of “it’s available go out and buy it”. Two things that stand out for me are; The model is fitted with NEM pockets – yeah well are they at the correct height, have you tried another type of coupler to test if it works. The model is DDC ready – yeah well how do you open it up to get at the insides to fit a decoder. The other real pet gripe is details of haulage capacity; “It ran around our test track and pulled X number of vehicles”. Yet when I get the model and put it on my layout that is dead flat and has generous curves (min radius 36 inches) it will not pull anywhere near the quoted figure. There should be set standard to measure haulage capacity.
  14. Having a look at the new Hornby sets for next year and R3400 caught my eye. The Golden Arrow Set. If you look closely at the Pullman cars, you will see that the toilets have square windows. So possibly new Pullmans for next year as well.
  15. Tried looking for these, but the website does not even list Dapol as a brand. Tried the search function , but that did not get a result either.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.