Jump to content

How's Your Limby ?


Recommended Posts

Re slightly earlier comment, has the Railroad range "lost its way" what with cheaper and more expensive models now in it ? When originally launched some said it could be the new Triang but we now have some quite technical stuff in there instead of a cheaper, basic but good range. Are some being priced out as a consequence ?

Also, with super detailed models restricted to larger radius, some don't have the space. Living in a traditional Cornish granite cottage, space for 4th radius curves is limited so a cheaper model that can use tighter curves will be preferred rather than a display spec. one, again, this is where the Limby type and Railroad models would come in.

Then there are those who do model oo outdoors where an expensive model is at risk from snail, cats, feet, balls etc. .

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

Re slightly earlier comment, has the Railroad range "lost its way" ...

 I am of the opinion that it never 'found its way'. Right from the off Hornby failed to clearly differentiate 'Hornby' and 'Railroad'. They had the opportunity to retain all their Chinese tooled introductions in 'Hornby', and classify all their pre-China tooling as 'Railroad', augmented with some new simplified introductions as alternatives to the full price Hornby versions: nice and clear. All their older tooling, long ago amortised or bought in by fire sale, very suitable for production of a simpler and lower priced product.(Much of it having been tooled in the R1 era would also meet that requirement.) The Railroad A4 a good example that they knew full well how to achieve lower cost alternatives to the main range product, and undoubtedly a popular item. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To expect no overlaps at all between Railroad and main range may be asking for too much.

 

There are 2 main influences super detail and super fine finish (so fine in fact that you need a microscope to read it!).

 

Basically a model having any one or both of these is a main range model.

 

In early days, there may have been more overlaps until certain items were down graded.

I would guess production numbers are far greater for a railroad model too.

 

I am not sure about the new triang statement. None of the manufacturers back in Triang days stood out as being far more accurate than the next. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
How's Your Limby?

 

Don't be so cheeky in public!!!!  :jester:

 

When I started accumulating rolling stock in earnest for the current layout I didn't have much in the way of spare funds and bought some pre-owned Lima stuff.  None of that was a good idea.  I know a decent number of modellers who are perfectly happy with their Lima items but who have either owned and maintained them from new or perhaps had the time and skills to effect complete overhauls and rebuilds.

 

All that's left here is a few DMU cars (apparently class 117 though more generic in design as was Lima's style) and a single 37 which is a numbered limited edition.

 

The rest turned out to be tat and has since been disposed of.

 

There are still some passenger coaches and vans of Lima origin most of which have a long-term future on new wheels though I'm replacing the CCTs with Bachmann ones.  I have also made a very unusual purchase in that a three-car DMU set has been obtained (and is yet to arrive) to replace a two-car set.  The power car is a non-runner and the dummy warped in extreme heat but given they cost me next to nothing the loss isn't grievous.  Here's hoping the replacement at least runs .....

 

I don't expect to buy any more Lima items however.

Edited by Gwiwer
Link to post
Share on other sites

 I am of the opinion that it never 'found its way'. Right from the off Hornby failed to clearly differentiate 'Hornby' and 'Railroad'. They had the opportunity to retain all their Chinese tooled introductions in 'Hornby', and classify all their pre-China tooling as 'Railroad', augmented with some new simplified introductions as alternatives to the full price Hornby versions: nice and clear. All their older tooling, long ago amortised or bought in by fire sale, very suitable for production of a simpler and lower priced product.(Much of it having been tooled in the R1 era would also meet that requirement.) The Railroad A4 a good example that they knew full well how to achieve lower cost alternatives to the main range product, and undoubtedly a popular item. 

Have to agree 

 

The 90 & 91 boggles my mind. Neither in the Railroad range, there is no lighting and they have traction tyres. Nasty pantos. The price between them both is weird also. Hattons has the 90 on for £64 yet the 91 is £84. and then there is the 92 which seems to fall in between price wise but IMO is a much better looking model ( I think it has lights too?) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Railroad is conceptually a good idea. However it suffers from overlap with main range and building common locomotives with a high spec Main range one and a lower spec(usually decoration) was not s sound idea eg the Hall.

 

There is a role for Limby items though. I've long maintained the 156 should be in there . Good body just under frame letting it down . I'd argue the 66 and Hst should be in there too . I Suspect the HST not being in there this year is because it's actually pretty good and would take some sales off the high priced main range one.

 

It's like everything else though there is good and bad. I'd say the 09,20,31,40 ,37,47 and HST are not bad .0nthe other hand less impressed with 26,27,33,42,52 and Deltic . And of course they enable model railways at a reasonable price.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few words of clarification.  

 

My EE Type 4 fleet is 100% new mechanism RR chassis - the bodies are appropriate to my WR needs, so 64B machines predominate - ScR headcode versions D260-66 and D357-368, a host of disc locos and brace of split-box.  The bodies are about 50:50 Italian/ Margate.  I only retained pancake until the RR came along in quantity, it was the low end controllability that was never great, and the pure Italian locos are getting on a bit now.  What's not to like about the smooth replacements - of course it's not a flywheel, but it's no deal-breaker.

 

All the 101s are Hornby RR - I'm happy with the good finish on the recent models, which reduces the amount of work in the bank....

 

Sealions have survived alongside Bachmann examples, and LMS bogie CCTs have even been recently added off eBay.  These are now reshod with Bachmann LMS bogies.

 

My fleet quantities of CCTs and GUVs have been shipped out in favour of Bachmann again - it was really the undernourished running gear that did for them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As per 'Chard's post - of course the only tooling available of the ScR-modified D260-266 variant is Lima (I.e squared headcode box edges and extended lip at bottom of nose where the gangway doors used to be) but a few other machines acquired them later in life, and a few of the D260-266 batch lost them at one end. Always use prototype photos :)

Neil

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

blogentry-6720-0-47251200-1429648333.jpg

 

This is pure Lima, and it's still going strong after 36 years. All right, it's had a few things done to it: Brassmasters and Craftsman detailing parts, reworked windows and "brow", Ultrascale wheels and new pickups, and finally a new motor transplanted into the existing Lima power bogie. But the basic guts of the model are still 100% Lima, with the gears only being given a polish and a dip in an ultrasound cleaner to clean them up, followed by minimal lubrication. With a decoder in, the running is superb - easily as good as a Heljan equivalent, and it's damn near silent as well. Haulage is counter-intuitively good as well, despite only having two driven axles. It'll easily shift six bogie coaches with no wheel slip, and I only added a small amount of extra weight around the cab area.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I agree, and wrote to Hornby as recently as yesterday asking them to perhaps refresh the Class 101 and 156 chassis and reissue them. IMHO the Limby Class 101 body is better than the Bachmann one, and with a more detailed chassis would easily surpass the Bachmann model in terms of basic looks. Sure it may not have lights, but I can add two colour LEDs from Rapid Electronics which are about 20p each (so less than £2 per unit) and have a model that is easily on par with the Bachmann offering for a fair few quid less.

 

I've been quite critical of Hornby lately, but they certainly have an opportunity to steal a lot of sales from a major competitor but seem to be actively choosing not to. 

Edited by sub39h
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I agree, and wrote to Hornby as recently as yesterday asking them to perhaps refresh the Class 101 and 156 chassis and reissue them. IMHO the Limby Class 101 body is better than the Bachmann one, and with a more detailed chassis would easily surpass the Bachmann model in terms of basic looks. Sure it may not have lights, but I can add two colour LEDs from Rapid Electronics which are about 20p each (so less than £2 per unit) and have a model that is easily on par with the Bachmann offering for a fair few quid less.

 

I've been quite critical of Hornby lately, but they certainly have an opportunity to steal a lot of sales from a major competitor but seem to be actively choosing not to. 

 

I was looking at the Limby 101 body a couple of days ago and marvelling at what a smart piece of tooling it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking at the Limby 101 body a couple of days ago and marvelling at what a smart piece of tooling it is.

 

Isn't it!  Whenever I see a cheap box on eBay bearing either one of a couple of serial numbers, I have to resist particularly strongly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today been looking at Hornby class 20's as cheaper alternatives to Bachmann's. The ones I'm interested in are GSYP D8053 and D8092. Are these Hornby or Limby? Are the mechanisms OK? Opinions welcomed.

 

Thanks

 

Graham 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bachmann 101 was one of those models where when I looked at it I really thought it wasn't that much of a step beyond the old Lima tooling. That may be less of a criticism of Bachmann than a recognition of the fact that Lima did an excellent job. Ditto with the 156, the under frame lets it down and looks dated but the body looks very good and is still an excellent model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These are Hornby revisions of the ex-Lima tooled model, so they are Limby, by our definition.  Hornby never made its own 20 prior to this.  

 

Lima Class 20s had a non-standard motor, I expect the Hornby reissue did away with this in favour of a conventional five pole in the Limby.

 

 

EDIT: this is in answer to #65

Edited by 'CHARD
Link to post
Share on other sites

These are Hornby revisions of the ex-Lima tooled model, so they are Limby, by our definition.  Hornby never made its own 20 prior to this.  

 

Lima Class 20s had a non-standard motor, I expect the Hornby reissue did away with this in favour of a conventional five pole in the Limby.

 

 

EDIT: this is in answer to #65

According to the Hornby service sheet their version still has the same mechanism as the Lima, i.e. central motor driving one bogie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today been looking at Hornby class 20's as cheaper alternatives to Bachmann's. The ones I'm interested in are GSYP D8053 and D8092. Are these Hornby or Limby? Are the mechanisms OK? Opinions welcomed.

 

Thanks

 

Graham

 

The Lima class 20 was the only UK out line model they did that used a central motor and shaft drive (this to the front bogie only). Hornby kept the design though added separate handrails. The Hornby version was just as expensive as Bachmann when they both first appeared but things have changed since.

 

In much the same way I did up a Dublo model to bring it nearer to Lima standards, you could do the same with a Lima model to bring it nearer to Bachmann standards (if I was a newcomer now, I would probably do so). I recently replaced my Lima model with a Bachmann one, mainly due to time constraints and I could afford it than anything else.

 

I did toy around with running the Bachmann and Lima as coupled pair, but the running qualities are not the same even if I had detailed the Lima one up to close the gap on appearance.

Edited by JSpencer
Link to post
Share on other sites

I fitted a Mashima 1830 with flywheel in one of my Lima 20s, it was a direct swop for the original motor. It runs very smoothly but you have to be careful opening up the controller as it is so powerful it can derail the power bogie. If it was dcc fitted the decoder could probably be tweaked to tame it a little.

 

Edit: photo attached

 

post-7005-0-90253400-1453056264.jpg

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

I have today been looking at Hornby class 20's as cheaper alternatives to Bachmann's...Are the mechanisms OK?

The mechanism is heavily compromised by the 4:1 reduction. By the time that is sorted out, the Bachmann is probably cheaper. (Body shape is good, bonnet side grille and panel positions incorrect. Back when the Lima was the only RTR 20 in production I have seen some very skillful 'cut and shuffle' operations to correct this.) The Bach has enough traction to drag around both a Lima or Limby 20 with the gears and pick ups removed, and a good size train; potentially a lower cost route to a pair of 20s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, body aside, for a reliable, non derailing, less expensive than Heljan class 33, does the Limby 33 do its job ?

If you define job as also pulling decent length trains then yes. All Lima locos are good pullers, reliable and non derailing (except the loose pony within the bogies of a class 40).

 

The only issue I ever saw with Lima were people cleaning the contact face of the armature with a knife edge. This cause the thin PCB board to wear out in no time writing off the armature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As John said earlier, the Lima BRCW's do need a bit of help to bring them to their full potential, one shall diplomatically say.

 

If you just want something to pull some carriages or wagons around in  circles then it will do you fine. If you want an accurate BRCW then you will have to do some work to it. My local shop had a Heljan s/h 33 for £55, which isn't a lot more than you are going to pay for a Lima.

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.