Simonsteel

The gap looks much better with the modifications you've made

I don't know if anyone has tried but two teak coaches have Hornby close couplers attached. The gap doesn't seem to make much difference so for those wanting close couplings, roco ones may be a better choice. Curiously, I also put a 6 wheel coach next to the recent Gresley teak bogie third. Still a similar gap but the corridor connector makes the coaches feel closer. The colours are slightly different but seem to be a good match with each other; the gresley being more brown and the graining is much more subtle. Both effects are rather wonderful and are great additions to LNER coaching stock.

The coaches are looking brilliant, including the DVT; high hopes for a good quality product to have a little display set. I was wondering about the TSOE though. Shouldn't these coaches have roof vents near the blanking plate? Cannot remember if they are together or offset, keep getting confused between the standard smoking vents and the first class vents.

To be honest, Hornby has twisted my arm with the LNER coaches. They would go well alongside their existing wood stock for variety. I'm down for a good set of 10+ unlit coaches over time for a planned small layout. However, I am also staying loyal to the Hattons + Compound's coaches (he helped a lot to design them). Different needs can be given from both and both look really well made. Personally, the Hattons pre-war brown coaches can fill a slot that they were around longer than Hornby's, giving the sense that they could no longer be teaked but were still pressed in service. Hornby's teak are a newer refined addition that could have been created on company demand. Then again, rule one can always apply! This may be everyones chance to show exactly what coach they want; the more interest shown, the more likely that actual prototype representations could appear future-wise. Heres hoping someones taking notice!!

I've just been checking out the CAD's for the 6 wheel coaches. From the looks of it, the seating appears to lie within the brake compartment. Don't know whether this is an error or not, but some passengers won't be able to see outside!!

Brilliant work in terms of developing the 4 and 6 wheel coaching stock! Will definitely have to invest in multiple sets purely for some lovely colour schemes. May end up rocking the boat (sorry!) but wonder whether success would lead to more respective variant coach patterns? Or maybe even "Genesis" Style non corridor bogie stock in the future? Cannot wait to see the model EP's...

For anyone wanting to justify a rake up north, a rake was spotted by old ferryhill station. This rake consisted of a GBRF blue JNA-T, a VTG blue JNA-T and a long rake of Ermewa (non Tarmac branded) wagons. A perfect excuse of there ever was one!

It does make the APT-e and the venerable Bratchell model like bargains! Quality means you pay for what you get and more. However, unlike the latter, more varieties can be made to suit the modeller whilst maintaining a standard pricing of what you wish. For a challenge, you have a 321 kit, that retails for around £320 with motoring an extra £64 to make a running set: a total of &384 for a running model. Unlike some modellers, we aren’t (potentially) confident enough to build up such a model without damaging it. Though there are no reports I am aware of. This still makes makes the Bratchell kit appealing to experienced modellers, with their hard word put into such a kit to make it rewarding. For others, £384 could be a price worth paying for a high spec model that can be justified on a lot of lines, with hazard lights, cab and interior lights, low mechanism to allow a full model interior. Whether that could be a 321 for £464 for a class 321. Which then adds its own problems. Whilst the current poll shows that a 321 has a slightly higher vote, the possibility would mean that we could lose potential voters to make this viable. That being the case, would compromises on the model be desired to keep the costs down, or are features wanted to keep this model with other high spec EMUs and DMUs that are in different ranges? Or, with a multi-pay option, or would this still put people in line to pick a model or two up?

I will try and make sure you have enough time for the model if we are successful. I'm aiming for some 142's and 156's from Charlie but it will be out of my hands, it is up for the public to make this model viable, I just want to help push this model and the N-gauge model along so both modellers can have one.

If that is the case, I appreciate your input, especially with yourselves working on the n gauge 320/321. Although I came here with no intention to demand wok on this, that and that, at least we can put to bed that the whole family will be difficult to produce. I hoped that unpowered locomotives may have been a possibility but thank you for this information. I have a weakness for the modern image so you may have to forgive me! If the 321/320 becomes successful, then who knows what is next.... As long as you won't mind, I will update the poll to represent the classes you have mentioned, plus an average of prices. As long as you do not mind helping to spread word of this poll and for the N gauge model? I'd have supported your project but it is unfortunate about the scale, but I have message a scotrail-mad friend about getting the spotty 320 from yourselves. I appreciate the feedback and information, thank you.

It was always going to be a new model in the long run but there is potential for a spin off. If body dimensions could help with creating an accurate model then all the better. All I did here was agree that there should be a RTR 325 and I would invest in some, but that is all. but I’m still sharing posts and using my social media to attract attention on the 321/320. And I’m encouraging those by finding solutions to aid with what I, and others, see as a model with potential. All I can say is I’m doing what I can, being interactive but I’m not intentionally turning things into wishlisting. Help me with this project and if this can be used to support this kind of EMU, then if successful, there’s another project to work on. At the moment, just help with sharing posts to help?

This is still a class 321/320 questionnaire poll with a discussion for a model that is viable. With the potential for a 325, should the 321/320 be successful. If people want to to ask for a 325, they can try and find a way to get their ideas expressed, just like what I’m doing with mine. Agreed, things got carried away with being new and overly optimistic/ambitious, but I have proven that 40+ people would buy into the 321 EMU. Though not a superior number, it’s a start and it’s a positive one. The poll has been amended to see if a Dummy 321/320 would be preferred for multiple train formations. If this is one way to encourage people then it might help. One person stated that he wouldn’t pay over the top so this may help bypass that issue. From my sources, a 325 and 321 has a very similar, if not the same, body profile, bar roller shutters, cab ends and under frame details. This is where the ideology would be. People have brought it up, if there are similairities between the units, it’s just an expression of potential. I’d for one would love to see an 325 but priorities are the 321/320.

Agreed, The lights and cab lights would keep to the realism which a lot of people will want that feature. That would be a great spin-off to the 320/321. If the 325 will be as popular as this, then there is a big chance to propose it. I do not believe I can create another poll as I do not want to rish locking this thread. If someone were to make a proposal/poll for that thread, I would back that project up and try get other people to invest.

It seemed like a good idea but if pricing is the case in terms of sharing lighting features, it will not be hard to see, In the meantime this concept has been applied to see how people feel about it. A 325 would be a lovely addition to the EMU family and I helped load them when I worked at Royal Mail, Tyneside. An unpowered unit would be more effective as only the cab would require lighting? That would be a better saving in terms of electronics. and I'd be up for two of them as well!