Ventnor

I raised this exact same issue earlier with Rapido on this thread with a possible similar solution and was told it's a "tooling compromise". I don't like to compare manufacturers but Accurascales J67/68/69 has a metal smokebox but an all plastic chimney that push fits so is complete without join a third of the way up. It also looks like a decent fit. I think we'll just have to accept it. Further refinement may make it less noticeable as these are early engineering prototypes but I'm not convinced. Being told it's a tooling compromise I think closes the issue.

Wrong thread.

Even better than lined black? A candidate for another Accurascale exclusive........

Hi Corbs Was a one piece chimney moulding considered that could be push fitted into the smokebox? If possible it would look a lot more prototypical. Cheers Andy.

Now, I know that this is an early engineering prototype but I couldn't help noticing that the chimney has been moulded in two parts. The prototype has a one piece casting. Is this due to tooling restrictions or could the chimney be cast / moulded as a one piece item and then fixed direct to the smokebox? It does spoil the overall look of the chimney, and has this approach changed its shape due to the join? Some photos of the front end would be useful to see how the two piece approach has affected the look of the model. Apart from that the model is looking great. Andy.

I agree with Fezza, these models are fantastic. Quality and detail are great, nice and heavy, run well and decoration spot on. I'm surprised that more people aren't raving about them. Not much regarding them on NGRM-online either which is odd. Anyway, great models (I have No.1 and No.4). Well done Bachmann!! Cheers Andy.

Thanks Corbs The new version of the chimney looks great!! Cheers Andy.

Whether they are, or are not going to fit the Royal Train headcode, just get rid of all of the lamps and have a few "fit your own" in the accessory bag. You really can't unsee this!! Why Hornby......WHY??

It’s worth checking against the real thing. Hornby originally proposed a “parallel” chimney for their H Class based on works drawings but changed to the correct type with graceful, gentle, subtle curves. Can’t think of any SECR locomotives with a parallel chimney. Apart from that, looking great!! 👍 Andy.

I think your trap is well and truly open!! 😉 A distinct difference between the two!! Bachmann got the correct shape of the long type of chimney on the SECR liveried C Class. Chimneys always seem contentious things……

The GN got to Derby (Friargate) so why not!! Mine will be running on the Southern Region. I’ve seen photos of them at Clapham Junction so good enough for me!!

Buffers etc aside, any chance of checking the chimney is the correct shape? I’m sure the curves should extend further up. I remember this being an issue with the Hornby H Class which they corrected. Cheers Andy.

Totally agree, NO LAMPS PLEASE!! Please, no lamps!!

The thing that stands out to me and on the other models is that the base of the chimney should be black. In the colour renders they are. Cheers Andy.

Hi Bob I agree that the practice of removing front coupling rods did not continue post grouping. In fact, the only photos I possess showing this modification (6 in all) were all taken in 1910. In “The Tollesbury Branch” by Petter Paye it is implied the modification was short lived as the Colchester shed fitting staff found removing and replacing rods time consuming and no benefit was gained in reducing wear on leading flanges and bearings. In fact it’s stated that there was a detrimental effect on the leading axle boxes and frames by removing them!! Prior to 0-6-0Ts working the branch, Adams K9 0-4-2Ts worked services. Maybe they were trying to replicate the more (assumed) flexible wheelbase of these locos by removing rods. The LBSCR did something similar with a small number of Terriers on motor-train workings. Andy.