Carl BR

I got to run my sound fitted 37026 on the club layout tonight and discovered something a bit odd with driving at low speed for the likes of coupling up. With sound on the loco won't start moving until I get up to speed step 3 on the controller and then have to back down to speed step 1 to have it just crawl but with sound off it will start to crawl at speed step 1 straight away. No need to go up to step 3 first. Can someone else try this to see if it's the same and not just my loco being daft. We are using the Lenz set 200 with LH101 hand sets on Euxton Junction. Carl

For anyone who normally comes to the Preston show by train to Preston station then bus to the venue please be advised that Preston station will be closed over the weekend of the show for engineering works. There is plenty of parking at the venue for any additional cars that may turn up as a result of the closure.

Not of much use either if like on my layout you have OHLE that prototypicaly changes height to negotiate bridges.

This evening on the Preston model club layout "Euxton Junction" I got to see one of these 92's first hand actually running with it's pans up under the wires. The pantograph is an absolute work of art like the rest of the loco but is very much let down by the lack of movement of the pantograph head that prevents the head from sitting flat against the wire. See photo's below. For comparison behind the 92 is a Bachmann 90 with it's pan also up against the wire and the head is sitting flat and stays doing so through it's entire range of height. I'm not personally in the market for a 92 but I do have the Class 89 on order and was hoping that the Accurascale offering of the BW Pan would trump the Bachmann offering and it dose by miles but is let down by this seemingly fix position head. Also a metal head rather than a plastic would have been a better idea. Could these issues possibly be addressed before the arrival of the Class 89 please.

I have 37026 "Shapfell" on order and paid for. How likely of a chance could it be seen running on my layout "Alderford" that is attending The Great British Model Railway Show at the Gaydon motor museum at the end of this month?

A minor correction to the above, Alderford is now a run through station and no longer a terminus. Anyone who visited Doncaster earlier this year will have seen Alderford in it's new round & round format. We are looking forward to the show.

My 86404 was waiting for my at home and once having had a good look at it I've come to conclude that the BW Pan won't be happy running up against wire's with the head not wanting to hold position and excessive upward pressure even after softening the spring tension.

Any opinions on the BW pan that's fitted to 86404? Will it happily run up against wire's? I'm hoping that mine is waiting for me at home.

@ Ben Jones. As someone who has the pans up against the wires on my layout "Alderford" can you confirm what the BW pan is made of on 86404. I ask as some people on this thread have commented that it looks to be made of plastic. I'm hoping that it is all metal including the head.

I'm interested in seeing how Heljan approach the Bracknell Willes pan that some of these locos are going to get. Ben! do you know which of these locos are going to be receiving BW pans?

According to Kernow's facebook page Heljan have a newly developed Bracknell Willes high speed pan for some of these forthcoming 86/4, 86/6 loco. But which loco get's which pan?

With the loco sat on rails could someone possibly please measure the height of the pan in the down position from the top of the rail head please. The lowest point of the wires on my layout is 57mm from the top of the rail. I would like to think it would be around 53-54mm clipped down.

Cheers for your input on this subject Ben. I do agree with you regards the pantograph on this new model being a much better representation than on the older version of the 86. I will just have to wait and see how well the pan works up against my wires when the 86/4's land later in the year. But overall this model looks to be a much better representation over the original version. Carl

Yes I do agree with you that the pantograph in the down position is still higher than the cab roof it's not much higher. Definitely not as high as portrayed on the model.

A very impressive looking model and an improvement on the original Heljan version but the one thing that still looks wrong to me is the amount of space between the recessed roof and the base of the pantograph. In the down position the pan protrudes way above the cab roof. This could be a potential problem on my layout "Alderford" as the OLE wire's drop down quite low to pass under a bridge at the scenic break. Not a problem for any of my loco's & EMU's fitted with Sommerfeldt Pan's and Bachmann's class 90, but for this model it looks like some modification of the height of the pan will need to happen when my 86/4 arrive's later this year.