Colas locomotive 37099 named ‘Merl Evans 1947 – 2016’

[Krieghoff]

Its about models that are being produced and corners being cut. Make of this what you wish. Twist the original post I made as you wish. No matter how enlightening you feel this buffer envy is, the facts are that costs are being cut and some models will suffer as a consequence.

 

I will re-iterate for those that didn't understand or comprehend my original statement............the model is an excellent one, no questions there, what is worrying is that we are paying large amounts of money for something that is now not available on the RTR model yet others in the range seem to be unaffected !

 

Amusing or not...............its FACT !

 

Its about having a highly detailed model at a price point and if that means buffer envy and door envy or whatever you want to call it then so be it.

 

As has been already said, if you want to have models with no opening doors or sprung buffers then you stick to what you want to buy. Me..............i'll be supporting Hattons and others who will bring even more detailed models to us not LESS 

[newbryford]

Its about models that are being produced and corners being cut. Make of this what you wish. Twist the original post I made as you wish. No matter how enlightening you feel this buffer envy is, the facts are that costs are being cut and some models will suffer as a consequence.

 

I will re-iterate for those that didn't understand or comprehend my original statement............the model is an excellent one, no questions there, what is worrying is that we are paying large amounts of money for something that is now not available on the RTR model yet others in the range seem to be unaffected !

 

Amusing or not...............its FACT !

 

Its about having a highly detailed model at a price point and if that means buffer envy and door envy or whatever you want to call it then so be it.

 

As has been already said, if you want to have models with no opening doors or sprung buffers then you stick to what you want to buy. Me..............i'll be supporting Hattons and others who will bring even more detailed models to us not LESS 

 

 

Sprung buffers are pretty useless on the vast majority of layouts where folks will use couplings other than 3 or screw link.

And then if you do use buffers in combination with link couplings, the slop of 00/16.5 makes them pretty ineffectual unless the curves are genteel - again beyond the vast majority.

 

So the solution is to use a more prototypical track gauge with less side to side movement. (Oh - did someone forget to mention that the wheels are 2mm or more too close to each other?)

 

Yes - we have had these features in the past and some current production, but the manufacturers are realising that more moving bits = more cost. I fully expect manufacturers to start cutting out the gimmicks unless they want to avoid the £200 barrier in the very near future. 

 

I appreciate that the forthcoming Hattons 66 will have some pretty good levels of detail at well below £200, but they can make allowances for cutting out the middleman. Typically a Bachmann RRP for a 6 axle loco is £160, typically available for less than £140.

 

I've been looking at US stuff lately and for similar levels of detail, you're looking at $200 and more (£155 at current rates) and that's supposedly for a larger market and consequently higher production numbers. (And they don't have sprung buffers.............  )

 

Unfortunately, the time has come that UK model railway prices are catching up to the rest of the world.

[Not Captain Kernow]

Its about models that are being produced and corners being cut. Make of this what you wish. Twist the original post I made as you wish. No matter how enlightening you feel this buffer envy is, the facts are that costs are being cut and some models will suffer as a consequence.

 

Amusing or not...............its FACT !

 

It is a fact that you are eleven years late in reporting!  32-780Z 37 207 William Cookworthy released in 2007 had fixed non-sprung buffers!

[pheaton]

Deleted duplicate post

Edited August 22, 2018 by pheaton

[pheaton]

Sprung buffers are pretty useless on the vast majority of layouts where folks will use couplings other than 3 or screw link.

And then if you do use buffers in combination with link couplings, the slop of 00/16.5 makes them pretty ineffectual unless the curves are genteel - again beyond the vast majority.

 

So the solution is to use a more prototypical track gauge with less side to side movement. (Oh - did someone forget to mention that the wheels are 2mm or more too close to each other?)

 

Yes - we have had these features in the past and some current production, but the manufacturers are realising that more moving bits = more cost. I fully expect manufacturers to start cutting out the gimmicks unless they want to avoid the £200 barrier in the very near future.

 

I appreciate that the forthcoming Hattons 66 will have some pretty good levels of detail at well below £200, but they can make allowances for cutting out the middleman. Typically a Bachmann RRP for a 6 axle loco is £160, typically available for less than £140.

 

I've been looking at US stuff lately and for similar levels of detail, you're looking at $200 and more (£155 at current rates) and that's supposedly for a larger market and consequently higher production numbers. (And they don't have sprung buffers............. )

 

Unfortunately, the time has come that UK model railway prices are catching up to the rest of the world.

Now compare your us pricing research with average us take home pay.... And then compare that with British take home pay.... Then compare European model prices with average European take home pay (im talking germany here) and i think you will find interesting pattern develops.... For the record i dont fully subscribe to the reasons given for the justification of the price rises.... Model companies have shareholders shareholders expect profit! As for the Bachmann 37 the first 37 i saw without sprung buffers was actually viking! 37057....hmmmmmm whats viking got in common with 37099.........my biggest issues at the time was previously the model press hailed and heralded spring buffers but marked models down that didn't have them... The lack of sprung buffers went completely unnoticed by every review in the model mags.... Esp model rail!

 

I might be wrong but i seem to recall viking doesn't have separate hand rails... Does 099?

 

Fine these are nice to havez or gimmicks whatever you want to call them and im firmly with the sprung buffers are pointless brigade 99% of the time they only move when you take them out the box and tap them with your finger.... Or is it just me that does that

...

 

Bloody android phone can one of the mods please delete my unedited post

Edited August 22, 2018 by pheaton

[Budgie]

I wish this argument about sprung buffers would go away. It is totally pointless, and pads the thread with too much noise.

[Krieghoff]

It is a fact that you are eleven years late in reporting!  32-780Z 37 207 William Cookworthy released in 2007 had fixed non-sprung buffers!

 

I don't give a flying fig whether its eleven years or 111 years!, what ive said.

Edited August 22, 2018 by Krieghoff

[tetsudofan]

Basically I couldn't care a toss whether or not a model comes with sprung buffers but must admit that it looks like magic when you connect some wagons with Roco Close Couplings and watch the action of the buffers touching each other and moving in and out as the train enters and leaves the curves:

 

 

 

Keith

[Ian Hargrave]

I don't give a flying fig whether its eleven years or 111 years!, what ive said.

As the late Michael Winner would say...."Calm down dear,it's only a commercial "

[Krieghoff]

Reply from Bachmann.

 

Basically its old tooling for the front of the 37 that has been modified to reposition the light. Bachmann are to continue all new toolings with sprung buffers and have no intention of removing them. What I find strange is if they have updated an old tooling why not go the whole hog ?

 

cost maybe ?

 

Who knows.

 

Enjoy your week folks.

[Krieghoff]

I wish this argument about sprung buffers would go away. It is totally pointless, and pads the thread with too much noise.

 

You are a sensitive lot you modellers. I hope you never get a headache Budgie.  I thought this was a forum where we could discuss things like this is a mature and respectful manner. Some of us don't have vast experience like some of you folks do so try to be a bit more understanding and patient. We all have our little vices. Mine just seem to be doors and buffers at this moment in time

 

Calm down dear, its only a commercial.

[rob D2]

Thing is , it’s a fine line this extra “ detail ‘. If it keeps the price below £150 I’ll forgo all the moving bits .

 

The most detailed stuff I had were Hornby 09s and 50s but I got rid of them as extra detail quite often means extra fragile - after too many scares I went back to Bachmann 09s.

 

I don’t believe it’s s conspiracy and Bachmann shareholders are sitting on 200’ super yachts in nice either ... there must be a standard level of return they need to make to be viable I’d think ...

[G-BOAF]

Reply from Bachmann.

 

Basically its old tooling for the front of the 37 that has been modified to reposition the light. Bachmann are to continue all new toolings with sprung buffers and have no intention of removing them. What I find strange is if they have updated an old tooling why not go the whole hog ?

 

cost maybe ?

 

Who knows.

 

Enjoy your week folks.

See my post #221.

It is the EXISTING tooling. the 'old' 37/0 tooling was used to make William Cookworthy, Viking D6707... the list goes on.

This is not the same tooling as that, but rather the tooling produced AFTER the current refurbished 37s.

[big jim]

What I find strange is if they have updated an old tooling why not go the whole hog?

The nose on 37099 is unique to the loco so why not use an existing ‘out of date’ tooling and modify it for a fraction of the cost of a complete new tooling that can only be used in 099

[Guest Mancunian]

Its about models that are being produced and corners being cut. Make of this what you wish. Twist the original post I made as you wish. No matter how enlightening you feel this buffer envy is, the facts are that costs are being cut and some models will suffer as a consequence.

 

I will re-iterate for those that didn't understand or comprehend my original statement............the model is an excellent one, no questions there, what is worrying is that we are paying large amounts of money for something that is now not available on the RTR model yet others in the range seem to be unaffected !

 

Amusing or not...............its FACT !

 

Its about having a highly detailed model at a price point and if that means buffer envy and door envy or whatever you want to call it then so be it.

 

As has been already said, if you want to have models with no opening doors or sprung buffers then you stick to what you want to buy. Me..............i'll be supporting Hattons and others who will bring even more detailed models to us not LESS 

It's not just one manufacturer but several... Although I prefer the steam era, the cheap parts used in many models today are more to scale but, in some cases (Hornby) they're more fragile or fail to work properly!  This particular manufacturer has parts that fall apart, the con-rods and valve gear are so thin that they twang and ping and tie themselves in knots whenever they get the chance...I'm frightened of trying to handle them after three x9592 literally fell apart and, NO!, I'm not heavy-handed.    Don't ask Hornby to repair because they have not got spares and can't do!    I have now stopped buying Hornby because far too many corners have been cut...

On a positive note I have thanked Hatton's for their courage in raising the bar with their new class 66 and I hope they will also concentrate on steam.    Their action has another manufacturer concerned.    Improvements to the models we pay a lot for should be made on a regular basis and not just because "Any Firm" decides to raise the bar.

[G-BOAF]

The nose on 37099 is unique to the loco so why not use an existing ‘out of date’ tooling and modify it for a fraction of the cost of a complete new tooling that can only be used in 099

Having spoken by Bachmann a couple of years ago at Alexandra Palace, they are not using an out of date tooling. They are using the CURRENT 37/0 tooling (I'm sounding like a stuck record) with a NEW nose end tooled up. The nose ends are separate parts glued into lugs at the end of the body shell, as anyone who has played around with a Bachmann 37 will know.

[big jim]

Having spoken by Bachmann a couple of years ago at Alexandra Palace, they are not using an out of date tooling. They are using the CURRENT 37/0 tooling (I'm sounding like a stuck record) with a NEW nose end tooled up. The nose ends are separate parts glued into lugs at the end of the body shell, as anyone who has played around with a Bachmann 37 will know.

I’m just basing my assumption on what Bachmann have told kreighoff in post #260 “it’s the old tooling for the front of the 37 that has been modified to reposition the light”

 

I’m reading it as we have used the new tooling for the body but the unique nose is a modified ‘old’ tooling, my reasoning being it will save them money on a new tool (and us money should they have passed the cost of a ‘new tool’ on to the consumer

 

Blimey imagine the s### storm had Bachmann said “we aren’t putting a working head light on it as it’s too costly but it’s got sprung buffers”

 

the headlight was fitted by Colas purely so Bachmann could model the loco as per prototype as it wasn’t possible to model the original ‘car spotlight’ headlight 099 had when Colas bought it, similarly the end number is 099 and not 37099 as the longer number was difficult to print on the model due to the curvature of where it was applied to the nose so it was modifed on the real thing to make it easier to print

 

TBH if I still worked at Colas I’d be pouring superglue over the buffer shanks to make them non sprung to calm everyone down!

[Krieghoff]

Well at least we have driven this part of the thread to its conclusion.

 

Many thanks to all who have been sympathetic.

 

onto my next purchase..................Tintagel Castle...............now let me see.................sprung buffers....no opening doors, open window

 

Have a good one chaps

[MRDBLUE17]

Makes a lot of sense the reply from Bachmann, tooling costs vast sums so to modify an older 37/0 nose tool to make the noses for 099 is sensible. Will be looking forward to getting mine soon.

 

All the best

Mark

[dave56]

My 37099 is due to arrive tomorrow, really looking forward to seeing it in the flesh. 

[Krieghoff]

Me too

[classy52]

Well at least we have driven this part of the thread to its conclusion.

 

Many thanks to all who have been sympathetic.

 

onto my next purchase..................Tintagel Castle...............now let me see.................sprung buffers....no opening doors, open window

 

Have a good one chaps

 

Luckily I only paid £117 for this model since it doesn't have sprung buffers 

Anyway, since starting this s***storm it's been a very interesting and amusing read and too be honest love everyone's passion and knowledge on the subject 

[tractor_37260]

I’m just basing my assumption on what Bachmann have told kreighoff in post #260 “it’s the old tooling for the front of the 37 that has been modified to reposition the light”

 

I’m reading it as we have used the new tooling for the body but the unique nose is a modified ‘old’ tooling, my reasoning being it will save them money on a new tool (and us money should they have passed the cost of a ‘new tool’ on to the consumer

 

Blimey imagine the s### storm had Bachmann said “we aren’t putting a working head light on it as it’s too costly but it’s got sprung buffers”

 

the headlight was fitted by Colas purely so Bachmann could model the loco as per prototype as it wasn’t possible to model the original ‘car spotlight’ headlight 099 had when Colas bought it, similarly the end number is 099 and not 37099 as the longer number was difficult to print on the model due to the curvature of where it was applied to the nose so it was modifed on the real thing to make it easier to print

 

TBH if I still worked at Colas I’d be pouring superglue over the buffer shanks to make them non sprung to calm everyone down!

 

Interesting and informative comments,  this must be a first where a real loco has actually been altered etc to enable a "model" to be more accurate. Super-glue the buffer shanks !  lol 

Edited August 23, 2018 by tractor_37260

[Melly]

Thing is , it’s a fine line this extra “ detail ‘. If it keeps the price below £150 I’ll forgo all the moving bits .

 

The most detailed stuff I had were Hornby 09s and 50s but I got rid of them as extra detail quite often means extra fragile - after too many scares I went back to Bachmann 09s.

 

I don’t believe it’s s conspiracy and Bachmann shareholders are sitting on 200’ super yachts in nice either ... there must be a standard level of return they need to make to be viable I’d think ...

 

AS Dags says. . . . . my Hornby 56's have poxy small rubber 0-rings to hold the sprung buffers in place.  Over time they have perished and the buffer falls out. Spares not available. Buffer now glued in place . . . . . .so why chuffing bother in the first place.  Expensive and waste of time gimmick.  Bachy sprung buffers are more robust with the 'crimped' buffer shank holding the buffer in place. That said. . . . I would prefer a more robust solution that doesn't 'fall off' so readily.

 

M

[dave56]

Its arrived and its very impressive, will able to run it with 37421.