Jump to content

How's Your Limby ?


Recommended Posts

Been wondering this for several years now. My last 3 locos purchased new were all Hornby/ex Lima and are now pushing 10 years. I know they are not the most detailed but, importantly to me, they don't derail if your track is an atom out, they pull enough and not once has a motor or axle been oiled. Indeed, no body has ever even been removed. Also, even after droppsies, are still complete. Used indoors and out, my 67, 121 and GWR railcar run smoothly and continuously.

 

All this reminds me of my Triang stock so, is Limby the new Triang ? Am I just lucky or is the Warship, 33, 40 etc. similar ?

Edited by Chy Mengrowyn Paul
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I take my hat off to you, I really do. Your observations make you very brave. You will soon be bombarded with dis-proportionately aggressive and argumentative posts if the anti-Lima brigade spot this.

 

My recommendation is to either delete the topic or change the title to something about Spanish villas or the weather or something. If the anti-Lima people see it, they will hunt you forevermore.

 

Mechanically speaking I would say that the drive is clearly not going to be as good as a modern central motor driving all axles via flywheels. However, in reality few modellers have a layout big enough to run a train that would tax the Lima drive (you will find it quieter and smoother at slow speeds if you do lubricate it).

 

Where I think Lima is still a credible option though is the bodies. It is true that they are not as finely detailed with separate grab rails etc (though to be fair some Bachmann and Hornby models are the same) and in the case of the 47, for example, the under frame is just a moulded block. However, the shape and dimensions are usually very accurate indeed- there are some really skilled modellers that are using Lima models (detailed of course) in preference to the more detailed, but dimensionally inaccurate more recent models. Although I am not the most experienced modeller in the world, I have been watching those who are and it is clearly easier to add on detail than to correct major shape errors.

 

So in summary: If you want to run trains about and aren't worried about getting every rivet correct, then Lima is a good option. If you want something that is generally quite accurate as a base for a super-detail model then Lima is no worse an option than any other.

 

PS I have yet to hear of the plastic used in Lima models suffering from metal fatigue or "zinc pest" as with Hornby, Bachmann and Heljan.

 

Edited by Derekstuart
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the event that you did decide to give them a service, they'd probably be even better. Unlike with other peoples products this would be straightforward and not involve a high risk of bits dropping off, or drive trains falling out.

 

Stick with it!!

 

John.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP's models are Hornby versions which in many cases have better mechanisms. I realise we are casting ourselves into the dark Siberian wastes to say so, but although I have a fair few 'superdetail' models and too look at they are a joy, when it comes to playing trains it's Wrenn, Lima, Triang, and older Hornby for fun. Mainline models are fatally compromised by their splitting gears although I have a couple of Warships fitted with the Ultrascale final drive replacement gears so that's them sorted for the playroom too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The hobby has backed itself in a corner with the quest for absolute perfection.  Sadly this has influenced the buyers who demand every detail whether it can be seen or not but luckily there are those who are quite happy with early trains, perhaps obtained in their youth and lovingly kept all these years.  They obviously get as much fun as the detail enthusiast and don't have to worry if a rivet is missing after the count!  Most of my early trains were post Dublo era which lasted well until I changed scales.

 

Brian.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hornby motor bogie transformed older Lima models. As has been said many of the old Lima models had good body tooling which captured the shape well and was certainly good enough for running on a layout or which made great bases for a detail projects. The Hornby motor bogie provided a lovely quiet and smooth motor that really is a massive improvement over the Lima pancake. I really believe that the old Lima models still provide a useful function in the Hornby catalogue for those on a budget or those who like detailing.

Edited by jjb1970
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Two other points if I may:

 

- Ebay and second hand cabinets in model shops can yield good value perfectly serviceable Lima that have been casually tossed aside in the race for the newer models- if someone is happy with them then it saves waiting 5 years for Bachmann's 'next year' releases.

 

- For those moving to EM or P4 (and I appreciate that is the minority) you can easily re-wheel and there is more room to build in "slop" as opposed to the compensation usually recommended. (and of course you can avoid the rocking of the middle axle found on some earlier Bachmann models- though in fairness this was corrected later). On the subject of bogies- have a look at a real class 47/Brush 4 bogie (or a photo) and then a Lima and Bachmann of the same class. Even though the Lima is 30 years older the detail is far more accurate (except of course the duplicate pipes under the secondman side)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got two models that fall into this category.  One is a Metro Cammell DMU, one of the first produced by Hornby with the new motor bogie.  I rebuilt it as a two-car, and it runs very smoothly and quietly indeed, after probably about ten years of use.  The other on is an English Electric Type 4 which started out as a Lima model, purchased cheaply at a toy fair as a 'place marker' until Bachmann bring out the version I want (green, disc head codes, unnamed and no yellow panel).  Soon after I bought it, Hornby brought out the Railroad version so I bought one and put the underframe etc. into the Lima body; I had to cut away the glazing unit slightly as the underframe moulding was slightly different.  Again, it runs very well and has done for several years.  Its only drawback is that it has traction tyres on the driven wheels, which I dislike, but have retained in the interest of traction.  It would probably be possible to replace them with metal tyred wheels and increase the weight to improve adhesion, but I didn't really expect to still be using it!  Although both models have been running for several years now, they only work on a 'terminus to fiddle yard' type layout, so don't really get thrashed and I don't know how they might stand up to harder work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve is that the 101 you rebuilt the underframe on?

 

 

Speaking of underframes, one really big mistake Lima made was the 156. In my opinion the body is dimensionally very accurate as is the shape, but it has been built with a solid block as the underframe.

 

Just before Christmas I finally started building MK2 version of the underframe as originally inspired by your 101. (I am using a Hurst kit as a guide along with Railway Modeller 11/94.)

Edited by Derekstuart
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly it has become more difficult to obtain detailling packs for these older D&E models in recent years, with A1 Models, Craftsman and other ranges now dormant or defunct. I think it's a great shame for people coming back to the hobby (like me), as working with these older models would be an ideal way of getting some skills together.

 

I do know about Shawplan, though I perceive their parts to be perhaps more orientated to finescale modellers. Perhaps I need to cast the net wider for detailing parts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve is that the 101 you rebuilt the underframe on?

 

 

Speaking of underframes, one really big mistake Lima made was the 156. In my opinion the body is dimensionally very accurate as is the shape, but it has been built with a solid block as the underframe.

 

Just before Christmas I finally started building MK2 version of the underframe as originally inspired by your 101. (I am using a Hurst kit as a guide along with Railway Modeller 11/94.)

 

Hi Derek, yes, that's the one!  As you know, I was and still am very pleased with the way it turned out, as well as the way it continues to run.  I see I took the pictures of the conversion in 2011, but it had run as a three-car for many years before I plucked up courage to modify it.

 

post-31-0-23068500-1452725237.jpg

 

For the sake of completeness, here's the best picture I can find of the EE Type 4:

 

post-31-0-80662700-1452725310.jpg

 

I've detailed it up a bit, with etched frost grilles and turned buffers, both from A1 Models (although I'm not sure they still do such things but others are available) and some bits of wire etc. around the buffer beams.  The worst feature is probably the windscreens which I could also have replaced with brass items, but I didn't want to do a full repaint.  The top middle folded down headcode disc isn't attached in the right place, but has since been corrected.  I see the picture of the Type 4 is dated September 2011, so that's probably about the time I bought the Railroad one.

 

As I said, I'm very happy with the running of both but a quirk of the DMU is that I believe the wheels on the motor bogie (only) were made to 'Lima' standards so they tend to rattle on the chairs of the Peco code 75 track (or maybe high bits of ballast that other wheels don't touch) - it doesn't stop it running well though.

 

I tend to agree with you regarding the 156; as far as I can tell, the body stands comparison with much more recent models but a pity they made the underframe so 'boxy', and not as easy to improve as the other Metro Cammell DMU.  I've long coveted the one Hornby released in Northern livery with the Settle & Carlisle graphics on the sides, if only for the standard of printing of the graphics, but as it doesn't fit in at all with my layout I've so far resisted!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

44 Limbies at the last count, that's the 40 locos of Project 1600 (do the maths), plus four assorted bog-carts.  

 

Yes, I am one of the unspeakable reactionaries who regards these two classes as rendered by the Italians and repowered by Margate, as their preferred starting point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would depend which Lima model.

 

The 26, 33, 42, and 55 are dreadful models vaguely representing the prototype.

 

The 50 and 52 start to look like the prototype in question, though some parts are misplaced or have the in correct proportions or shape.

 

The HST, 20, 31, 40, 47, 59, 60, 67, 73,  87, 92 capture shape and proportions very well.

 

I have mixed feelings on the 37, some parts of its shape simply do not look right  others are quite good to me personally.

 

They are robust solid models. Powerful pullers though somewhat noisy even back in the 90s. Most are easy to take apart (the 59 is a right cow though).

Paint and decoration and colour was generally very good during the 90s.

 

All of these models use about 60 parts to assemble compared 300+ for todays models. They do not have lights, nor etched fitted grills, nor seperate handrails, nor lots of fine free floating fine fittings, nor super fine print that can only be read under a microscope and date before DCC. 

If you running long trains on a big layout daily, they are perfectly apt. If you want to look at a model from 6 inches away, or film in HD with DCC sound running, then the modern stuff is better suited. If you have time, you can improve Lima standards (you can also improve modern stuff too).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve

That EE4 will still hold up well against anything Bachmann might make as even the habitual rivet counters can't find much to complain about it. I still do like your 101 and when I got mine I went for Bachmann, which is OK but I prefer the Lima (Hornby) look.

 

Chard

The thing that gets to me about "us lot" is that we can respect the viewpoints of others to use whatever make they want; we can support our viewpoint without attacking theirs. But there are quite a few that automatically deride everything if it isn't the latest version and one in particular that is really vicious in his viewpoint.

 

John

The EE3/37 is a bit of an oddity to me. I KNOW it isn't accurate with a larger gap between the bogie and body and the body lower in height to make up for it and the tumblehome is too shallow. However, I've dropped mine by about .75mm on the bogies and it looks a lot better. Granted changing the tumblehome is a major operation (a chap named James Wells did it I believe) but when I saw one- not even lowered- just painted, detailed and weathered on emgauge70.co.uk it really looked the part. I would suggest that the big change to make on a Lima 37 is to cut away the gap between the two fuel tanks and the small corner recesses. As a distraction from my stalled Whitby plan I have nearly finished a photo plank set in the Fens and habitually visited by 37s... so I have a few on the roundtuit queue.

 

BTW I actually quite like the BRCW 26,27,33 models from Lima. How could one describe them... a blank canvas perhaps? They are an excellent way to build up the skills and confidence before tackling a larger project and you would be surprised what can be done with them. (he says...)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BTW I actually quite like the BRCW 26,27,33 models from Lima. How could one describe them... a blank canvas perhaps? They are an excellent way to build up the skills and confidence before tackling a larger project and you would be surprised what can be done with them. (he says...)

 

LOL - the Lima BRCW family always looked a wee bit gormless to me, although I happily made a 27 from a 33 back in the day, as an impecunious student, shivering in a leaky Sheffield garret.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly it has become more difficult to obtain detailling packs for these older D&E models in recent years, with A1 Models, Craftsman and other ranges now dormant or defunct. I think it's a great shame for people coming back to the hobby (like me), as working with these older models would be an ideal way of getting some skills together.

 

I do know about Shawplan, though I perceive their parts to be perhaps more orientated to finescale modellers. Perhaps I need to cast the net wider for detailing parts?

I may be wrong, but I thought A1 were still going strong, and saw them at some shows in 2015.

 

Craftsman sadly do appear defunct, and I was told recently that the present owner has really struggled to match casting moulds and etch masters to final product, because of the way the handover was done, which is sad for him and for us.

 

The Shawplan range has been upgraded by the present owner Brian Hanson, but I think you will find he still offers some of the older, less fine items, which paradoxically can be very useful if you want to maintain consistency in your fleet.

 

John

Edited by John Tomlinson
Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but I thought A1 were still going strong, and saw them at some shows in 2015.

 

Craftsman sadly do appear defunct, and I was told recently that the present owner has really struggled to match casting moulds and etch masters to final product, because of the way the handover was done, which is sad for him and for us.

 

The Shawplan range has been upgraded by the present owner Brian Hanson, but I think you will find he still offers some of the older, less fine items, which paradoxically can be very useful if you want to maintain consistency in your fleet.

 

John.

 

John.

 

I've seen A1 at local shows (in the North of England) recently too, but got the impression from a cursory glance at their stand that they concentrated on narrow gauge and transatlantic stuff these days.  I think Shawplan would be my place to go to for diesel parts these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with many of the comments on this thread, Lima did get the shape spot on with a lot of models. The Lima 31 is generally a nicer shell than the latest Hornby super detailed one, my class 31 uses a Hornby central motor/chassis with a detailed Lima shell. Add in Laserglaze and it is a nice model and I had change from £70. My class 40 also uses parts of the Lima body grafted to Bachmann bits/chassis, while my backscene uses a GBL (Static Lima) class 47 as part of a stopped train.

 

I once owned circa 30 Lima locos but even with good maintenance the slow running is not as good as a central motor chassis, so as my layout is a shunting layout the last Lima powered stock went last year. The wheels also won't run on code 75 track but Lima locos are great for those on a budget or wanting to practice respray/detailing skills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  I have also found much in the way of useful models among the Bachlica, Darnby, Horfix and Repmann hybrids, It all comes down to the original tooling: if that was fundamentally accurate as a representation of the prototype, then a better mechanism or running gear is all it needs. I could even see a Triarnby class 77 being well received, if the old body tooling proved useable.

...The Lima 31 is generally a nicer shell than the latest Hornby super detailed one, my class 31 uses a Hornby central motor/chassis with a detailed Lima shell...

 It has the great advantage of being fundamentally the correct shape. What would it take to persuade Hornby that replacing the current 30/31 with a 'Super Limby' combination of the main range mechanism with a well finished Lima body might just be a winner. (Lower cost to produce, what with no lights, turning fan and opening doors.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote from derekstuart ,'I take my hat off to you, I really do. Your observations make you very brave. You will soon be bombarded with dis-proportionately aggressive and argumentative posts if the anti-Lima brigade spot this '.

 

 

God, get over it Derek. There's no anti -Lima brigade, no conspiracy, no black helicopters.

This is called an ' Internet forum ' -you will find differing viewpoints I'm afraid , if you are too sensitive for this I suggest the Internet may not be for you.

Edited by rob D2
Link to post
Share on other sites

He's found us. I don't know how but he's found us.

 

I believe that I have had a very balanced view on Lima Vs newer stuff. I have showed courtesy and respect to those who have a different viewpoint.

 

I certainly do not recall ever seeking out every Bachmann/ Hornby thread and telling everyone that they must be wrong.

 

If you have nothing constructive to add to this discussion please do not feel the need to stay on my account. It is very telling of course that you chose to respond to that point. I have no idea what made you think I was referring to you.

 

Quote from derekstuart ,'I take my hat off to you, I really do. Your observations make you very brave. You will soon be bombarded with dis-proportionately aggressive and argumentative posts if the anti-Lima brigade spot this '.


God, get over it Derek. There's no anti -Lima brigade, no conspiracy, no black helicopters.
This is called an ' Internet forum ' -you will find differing viewpoints I'm afraid , if you are too sensitive for this I suggest the Internet may not be for you.

Edited by Derekstuart
Link to post
Share on other sites

God, get over it Derek. There's no anti -Lima brigade, no conspiracy, no black helicopters.

 

 

 

He's found us. I don't know how but he's found us.

 

 

Behave you two, otherwise you'll be sent to bed early with no tea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.