Bachmann announce Class 117 and Class 121 at Collectors Club event

[Rich Papper]

11 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Thanks for that. It's sort of how I remember it. To mis-quote Eric Morecambe, "All the right bits but necessarily in the right order"! Had forgotten the all-important ashtray. I bet they aren't included in the cab of modern trains. (CJL)

 

For another good load of first gen DMU cab views - albeit of a 115 - I recommend Video 125's 'Chiltern- Take Two'. Young lady at the controls has fag in hand and can of Quattro on the go for most of the journey! Can strongly recommend Video 125 for some very good quality cab shots of a range of things. No connection, etc.

Rich

 

[47137]

I've added the buffer beam details to my 121. The parts would have fitted perfectly had they not been painted, I gave up trying to scrape the paint off them and opened up the holes in the buffer beams instead.

 

This is very much at my limit of enjoyment of the hobby. I'd be happier with a smaller scale where I can have less detail or a larger scale where the bits could have some substance. Still, I only dropped two on the carpet and I found them both. And, the model does look so much better with them there. I think the printing on the yellow end is incredible.

 

- Richard.

 

[No Decorum]

3 hours ago, 47137 said:

I've added the buffer beam details to my 121. The parts would have fitted perfectly had they not been painted, I gave up trying to scrape the paint off them and opened up the holes in the buffer beams instead.

 

This is very much at my limit of enjoyment of the hobby. I'd be happier with a smaller scale where I can have less detail or a larger scale where the bits could have some substance. Still, I only dropped two on the carpet and I found them both. And, the model does look so much better with them there. I think the printing on the yellow end is incredible.

 

- Richard.

 

Very nicely done, if I may say so. I scraped and drilled. One of the joys of these is that they don’t need working couplings, so no ugly tension locks. That is also one of the virtues of modelling traction depots. The appearance of the models  is greatly improved.  

[BlackRat]

Am I right in thinking, that for the second powered  end to work it HAS to be connected up as part of the three car unit. Tho 1 of the power cars works independantly?????

[Geep7]

5 minutes ago, BlackRat said:

Am I right in thinking, that for the second powered  end to work it HAS to be connected up as part of the three car unit. Tho 1 of the power cars works independantly?????

Yes. I tried this out myself when I first received mine. It's due to the decoder socket and blanking plate being in the DMBS.

[BlackRat]

1 minute ago, Geep7 said:

Yes. I tried this out myself when I first received mine. It's due to the decoder socket and blanking plate being in the DMBS.

Thanks........I thought as much, first thing I normally do with a new buy is to clean the wheels then run it in on the rollers......

 

After much head scratching, and taking to body off its the same conclusion, so will have to work out a plan B for wheel cleaning and running in.

[Temeraire]

Evening all

 

My NSE 117 turned up from Kernow today and after  fitting a Bachmann chip, I’ve had it running in for about half hour in each direction. Running superb so far and it looks stunning, it was well worth the extended wait! It will get a weathering and a change of destination ready for Tidworth’s next exhibition, whenever that might be!

[Rich Papper]

Mine arrived today too. Just finished running it in and it seems happy. Did have to do a bit of propping up to run in both power cars at the same time as I didn't have enough rollers. Only peculiarity I found with Bachmann chip was it was set at a bizarrely high default momentum. Probably realistic but took half a lap of the room to stop from medium speed. 

Very pleased though.

Rich

[4railsman]

23 minutes ago, Rich Papper said:

Mine arrived today too. Just finished running it in and it seems happy. Did have to do a bit of propping up to run in both power cars at the same time as I didn't have enough rollers.

 

I wish that were the case with both my new Bachmann 117's. I model 4-rail London Transport (Metroland) & Great Central Railway Joint ) so DMU's in the 1960's ran (and still do even today), over LT metals between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham.

 

Beacause of the small wheel size fitted by Bachmann and the plastic moulding encasing the axles and a gear cover reducing the clearance below the axle even further, my power bogies just sit on top of the centre rail and don't pickup power to move. Not sure what I can do to sort this out, even if I butcher the plastic, so unless someone on this thread can come up with a practical solution, these otherwise nice models will likely end up in my static display cabinet.

 

It seems other recent models from Bachmann and Dapol are also similarly afflicted. I can't understand why these manufacturers have overlooked the fact that negative power centre rails on LT are higher than the running rails and make suitable allowances in their axle designs.

 

[NIK]

8 hours ago, 4railsman said:

 

I wish that were the case with both my new Bachmann 117's. I model 4-rail London Transport (Metroland) & Great Central Railway Joint ) so DMU's in the 1960's ran (and still do even today), over LT metals between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham.

 

Beacause of the small wheel size fitted by Bachmann and the plastic moulding encasing the axles and a gear cover reducing the clearance below the axle even further, my power bogies just sit on top of the centre rail and don't pickup power to move. Not sure what I can do to sort this out, even if I butcher the plastic, so unless someone on this thread can come up with a practical solution, these otherwise nice models will likely end up in my static display cabinet.

 

It seems other recent models from Bachmann and Dapol are also similarly afflicted. I can't understand why these manufacturers have overlooked the fact that negative power centre rails on LT are higher than the running rails and make suitable allowances in their axle designs.

 

Hi,

 

Would not butchering the plastic be enough?. If it turns out the plastic is 0.75mm thick would taking 0.5mm off give clearance?. Might just have to be a central groove 4mm wide so there is some strength left in the bogie plate.

 

 

Regards

 

Nick

[Oldddudders]

9 hours ago, 4railsman said:

 I can't understand why these manufacturers have overlooked the fact that negative power centre rails on LT are higher than the running rails and make suitable allowances in their axle designs.

I'm not sure many other models offer such a clearance. Track infills at e.g. level crossings are usually recommended to be slightly lower than railhead level. Kadee couplers, widely used by many of us on RTR stock, already often require adjustment to clear running rails over pointwork. Having to increase clearances over a centre conductor rail would be very unfamiliar for most modellers, and hence RTR manufacturers. 

[NIK]

37 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I'm not sure many other models offer such a clearance. Track infills at e.g. level crossings are usually recommended to be slightly lower than railhead level. Kadee couplers, widely used by many of us on RTR stock, already often require adjustment to clear running rails over pointwork. Having to increase clearances over a centre conductor rail would be very unfamiliar for most modellers, and hence RTR manufacturers. 

Hi,

 

Bachmann might know about the centre rail as they produced a London Transport Sub Surface tube train in OO.

 

Regards

 

Nick

[4railsman]

34 minutes ago, NIK said:

Would not butchering the plastic be enough?. If it turns out the plastic is 0.75mm thick would taking 0.5mm off give clearance?. Might just have to be a central groove 4mm wide so there is some strength left in the bogie plate.

 

 

I had to do that some years ago to a Bachman class 165 turbostar but that was a fairly simple "butcher job". I simply removed all the outer cover plastic over the axle gear and that did the job. Looking at this model again, the actual plastic gear teeth on one side appear to have been worn down over the years but the model still runs faultlessly, even over my complicated station approach tracks.

 

 

 

This view shows the underside of the Bachmann class 165 Turbostar with the small gear covers removed. This provided sufficient clearance to the raised centre return rail.

 

This view shows the clearance between the axles and wheels.

 

 

By comparison, this is the new Bachmann class 117 NSE version showing no thought has been given to clearances below the axle.

 

 

Looking directly down on the class 117 power bogie

 

 

Looking at this view, even the coupling might be a problem, but I haven't checked that out so far until such time as I can get the model sitting properly on my track. One option I have yet to look into is whether it would be an easy job to fit larger wheels to the power bogie and all the unmotored bogies in the 3-car set, so as to raise the whole model enough to clear the centre negative rail.

 

If anyone has changed the wheels for a larger diameter version, could they please let me know the procedure they used and how hard or easy it was to do the work.

[4railsman]

4 hours ago, NIK said:

Bachmann might know about the centre rail as they produced a London Transport Sub Surface tube train in OO.

 

 

I have a four-car set of the S-stock which I was able to easily modify by replacing the wheels on all coaches with a larger diameter. I did try to inform Bachmann of this issue at the time but they never got back to me, despite acknowledging my email.

 

However, the bogies on the new 117 and 121 DMU's are different to the S-stock, and may be more difficult to swap wheels ~ but to have to do this on a model costing the best part of £300 is simply galling and just adds unnecessary cost for me when the issue could have been avoided at design stage.

 

[Rich Papper]

I've just had my 117 and 121 apart to see how easy a body swap would be to represent a 121 substituting for one of the 117 cars. Short answer is no, as can be seen in the picture below, the clips are in different locations - slightly odd choice given that about 2/3 of the interior is identical?

 

Wouldn't be a problem if you were determined though, only a bit of plastic to file. The trick would be adding the second cab detail, but looking at the picture below it does seem to be a separate moulding to the area around the chip.

 

 

So would probably come down to: do you want to rewire the coupler or file some plastic. Using the 121 chassis for the 117 would be relatively straightforward: remove the cab and file the end of the chassis flat.

 

Given the prices though I might just stick to doing all this with Lima ones for now...

Hopefully the above images save anyone else the trouble of getting them apart to compare.

Rich

Edited July 30, 2020 by Rich Papper

[pauliebanger]

16 hours ago, Rich Papper said:

 Only peculiarity I found with Bachmann chip was it was set at a bizarrely high default momentum. Probably realistic but took half a lap of the room to stop from medium speed. 

Very pleased though.

Rich

 

Hi Rich,

 

Is this a Bachmann by ZIMO decoder? (CV8 = 145)

 

If so, perhaps this high momentum is because F2 has been set up as a Brake Key?

 

With the high momentum setting restored, try running at speed, reduce throttle to zero then apply F2 as if it were a brake. If it slows down more quickly with F2 engaged, then a high momentum will be used to simulate coasting, which can then be over-ridden with the Brake feature.

 

Or you could read CV309. If there is anything but 0 as the value, then the F key with the same number will be the brake key.

 

Conversely, if it doesn't have the brake feature already, you can add it by putting the F key number (of your choice, but F2 is often used since it can usually be set up as 'momentary') in CV309, and a brake force value in CV349, try around 6 or 7).

 

Best regards,

 

Paul

[Gwiwer]

6 hours ago, NIK said:

Hi,

 

Bachmann might know about the centre rail as they produced a London Transport Sub Surface tube train in OO.

 

Regards

 

Nick

And we have Met electric locos.

 

My guess is that if the centre rail issue were considered at all it may have been considered such a small niche among modellers that for the sake of the majority and given the scale of modelling it was impractical to arrange the ideal clearance.  

 

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Gwiwer

[NIK]

3 hours ago, 4railsman said:

 

I have a four-car set of the S-stock which I was able to easily modify by replacing the wheels on all coaches with a larger diameter. I did try to inform Bachmann of this issue at the time but they never got back to me, despite acknowledging my email.

 

However, the bogies on the new 117 and 121 DMU's are different to the S-stock, and may be more difficult to swap wheels ~ but to have to do this on a model costing the best part of £300 is simply galling and just adds unnecessary cost for me when the issue could have been avoided at design stage.

 

Hi,

 

How could it have been avoided at the design stage?.

Maybe the low profile mechanism resulted in a larger final gear on the axle?.

 

Regards

 

Nick

[NickL2008]

And wasnt it just class 115s that went on the LUL lines (mostly)?

 

NL

[adb968008]

What percentage of modellers model LUL 4 rail ?

 

I think this is niche interest and unpredictable from a manufacturers perspective.

You cant really fault them for not accommodating something which is bespoke and with nothing available in the rtr market to test against.

 

Edited July 31, 2020 by adb968008

[Metr0Land]

My Bachmann 121 negotiates most of my trackwork straight from the box.  Just 2 short areas that need attention to get the centre rail lower.

 

Layout thread here:

 

 

[47137]

On 30/07/2020 at 14:46, 4railsman said:

 

I have a four-car set of the S-stock which I was able to easily modify by replacing the wheels on all coaches with a larger diameter. I did try to inform Bachmann of this issue at the time but they never got back to me, despite acknowledging my email.

 

However, the bogies on the new 117 and 121 DMU's are different to the S-stock, and may be more difficult to swap wheels ~ but to have to do this on a model costing the best part of £300 is simply galling and just adds unnecessary cost for me when the issue could have been avoided at design stage.

 

 

All model motors need reduction gearing. Bachmann have chosen a fairly large worm gear and one stage of reduction gearing i.e. worm plus worm gear.  This is economical to build and it lets them hide the motor in the underframe.

 

If Bachmann had fitted a smaller worm gear they would have needed additional reduction gearing and space to put it, and might well have ended up with the motor inside the passenger compartment.

 

They have made their design to suit the majority of modellers, who will never notice the lack of "ground clearance" but will appreciate the open interior. Please don't see their decision as galling -  if you want to model something away from the mainstream, you have got to accept you will have to alter RTR things along the way. In this case, I suggest Bachmann have provided superb underframe and body mouldings, and have left you to provide a new mechanism.

 

- Richard.

[Taigatrommel]

My will is weak and I am easily tempted.

Aside from renumbering there's rewiring/DCC to do, and to find a good method of securing the body to the chassis- the clip positions are totally different between DMS and TCL chassis.  I also have to bring the cab end bufferbeam in by a slither.

Truth be told, I saw a TCL sold for silly money on ebay and decided that maybe this project wasn't going to break the bank if my TCL body sells for a reasonable amount.  The DMBS will become a 116 and be paired with a 101 driving car, and the spare chassis will also go for auction.

[Roy Langridge]

32 minutes ago, Taigatrommel said:

Truth be told, I saw a TCL sold for silly money on ebay and decided that maybe this project wasn't going to break the bank if my TCL body sells for a reasonable amount.  

 

Silly money was an understatement. Made me honestly think about buying one to sell as three coaches. If all three went for that price, the profit would pay for one to keep!

 

Roy

 

[Rich Papper]

On 30/07/2020 at 15:17, pauliebanger said:

 

Hi Rich,

 

Is this a Bachmann by ZIMO decoder? (CV8 = 145)

 

If so, perhaps this high momentum is because F2 has been set up as a Brake Key?

 

With the high momentum setting restored, try running at speed, reduce throttle to zero then apply F2 as if it were a brake. If it slows down more quickly with F2 engaged, then a high momentum will be used to simulate coasting, which can then be over-ridden with the Brake feature.

 

Or you could read CV309. If there is anything but 0 as the value, then the F key with the same number will be the brake key.

 

Conversely, if it doesn't have the brake feature already, you can add it by putting the F key number (of your choice, but F2 is often used since it can usually be set up as 'momentary') in CV309, and a brake force value in CV349, try around 6 or 7).

 

Best regards,

 

Paul

 

A belated big thank you for this advice, I've only just had chance to have a test. Clever feature, but not sure I'll always be on the ball enough to use it!

Always nice to learn new things on here from the wealth of collective experience.

Rich