hoovernut Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 I have just received my latest Bachman catalogue and noticed a significant difference with this loco. In the old book it was listed as 37041 split headcode and no skirts or valance. It been released with skirts and a valance which does not help when I pre- ordered them without. Especially when I wanted to do some large logo spilts. Just thought I would pass it on just in case some of you had not noticed especially if you had pre- ordered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted January 19, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19, 2017 This has already been covered a various posts in the thread covering Bachmann's new announcements, starting here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118606-Bachmann-announce-midland-1p-class-203-bep-buffet-car-vea-prestwin-and-carflat/?p=2576263 To sum up, yes Bachmann has changed the specification and 37041 now has dominoes and buffer beam valences. It's already appearing in stock with several retailers, along with the other two new 37/0s, D6714 in BR Green and 37284 in BR Blue without valences. EDIT: I've also posted on the other thread a comment about the incorrect "gouge" below the cantrail grills. D6714 and 37041 have the gouge but 37284 does not. Presumably this has something to do with the version of the body tooling being used. I had a look at previous releases and it seems that all 37/0s with the boiler exhaust port in the roof have the gouge, but those with plated over exhaust port the situation is more mixed. Perhaps there are certain body tooling combinations that can only be produced with the gouge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
37081LochLong Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 As soon as I saw the picture in the new catalogue I cancelled all my preorders for a number of 37041s because I too had them earmarked to be Scottish locos. Very disappointed that they decided to change from the original promised loco. I emailed Bachmann to ask why but as expected no reply at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 This has already been covered a various posts in the thread covering Bachmann's new announcements, starting here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/118606-Bachmann-announce-midland-1p-class-203-bep-buffet-car-vea-prestwin-and-carflat/?p=2576263 To sum up, yes Bachmann has changed the specification and 37041 now has dominoes and buffer beam valences. It's already appearing in stock with several retailers, along with the other two new 37/0s, D6714 in BR Green and 37284 in BR Blue without valences. EDIT: I've also posted on the other thread a comment about the incorrect "gouge" below the cantrail grills. D6714 and 37041 have the gouge but 37284 does not. Presumably this has something to do with the version of the body tooling being used. I had a look at previous releases and it seems that all 37/0s with the boiler exhaust port in the roof have the gouge, but those with plated over exhaust port the situation is more mixed. Perhaps there are certain body tooling combinations that can only be produced with the gouge. 37 041 - as I commented on another thread - so much for pre-ordering, when the model that actually arrives is different to what was advertised ! As for that "gouge" under the cantrail grilles, Model Rails L/E R/F Dist 37 068 Grainflow has NO "gouge" but it has a "plated" over boiler port. I believe the tooling was possibly altered to produce the Cl37lg 37 003 L/E with correct early style cantrail grilles, I assume it also has an open boiler port ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted January 19, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 19, 2017 I believe the tooling was possibly altered to produce the Cl37lg 37 003 L/E with correct early style cantrail grilles, I assume it also has an open boiler port ? The model of 37003 had a plated exhaust port. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold cambo74 Posted January 19, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19, 2017 Yes i did likewise for the same reasons - was going to respray some into Large Logo and also keep some in blue and put a white line on the bodyside ala early 1980s Eastfield Locos. Very very annoyed about the late change - especially when we've had 37034 and 37003 (i know it was a limited edition) released in this form...... Lets hope it stays around for a while and people vote with their wallets !! 37049 Imperial could be a good donor in future - i don't think thats modelled with a headlight so can hopefully still do the locos i want but will need to do resprays on all and not on some of the locos and thats not taking into account the fact that these will probably cost me more when they are released late 2017 / 2018 or whenever they do get released. One of Bachmann's champions over the years but this is very bad business practice in my opinion ! Ben Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 The model of 37003 had a plated exhaust port. Why then was the body tool (with no gouge) as used for 37 068 Grainflow NOT used for 37 041 ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrB Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Why then was the body tool (with no gouge) as used for 37 068 Grainflow NOT used for 37 041 ? As grainflow has a headlight and no buffer beam skirts, where as 37041 has buffer skirts and no headlight, there must be a difference on how the ends are fitted? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirey33 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 There are two different lengths of split box noses - 37049 was the first culprit released with an overlength one and I understand it was something to do with the way the 21 pin chassis was longer and didn't work with the original split box nose (that could also be a load of old b****x, but I seem to remember reading it on the internet somewhere <add pinch of salt here>). Bachmann really do themselves no favours with their 37's. Having worked with the C37LG to produce 37003 you have thought they would check with the group to ensure they get these releases correct. Class 37 detail differences are many and complex but the expertise is out there. 37254 (BR Blue) is generally considered to be OK with no gouge, 37254 (Dutch) is not OK and has a gouge. How can you produce the same loco model and get it wrong when it was right to start with ?? Arrrrrrgh. Like many on here I was looking forward to adding a batch of non-skirted split box 37's to the fleet - not any more. The ModelRail 37068 is apparently one of the good ones, I just hope 37049 follows suite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted January 20, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 20, 2017 As grainflow has a headlight and no buffer beam skirts, where as 37041 has buffer skirts and no headlight, there must be a difference on how the ends are fitted? I agree this is all likely to be about how the different tooling elements cab be fitted together. 37041 is has an open boiler port and as far I can find, ALL 37/0 with open boiler port have the gouge. 37254 (BR Blue) is generally considered to be OK with no gouge, 37254 (Dutch) is not OK and has a gouge. How can you produce the same loco model and get it wrong when it was right to start with ?? Arrrrrrgh. But 37254 in BR Blue was without headlight and radio aerial whereas 37254 in Dutch had them both. So Bachmann could not use the exactly the same tooling, some elements such as the nose ends would have to be different. This may affect other elements such as the chassis or body that can be used. Not a factor with 37254, but there are also different headboard clip arrangements to factor in. 37251 in BR Blue had the two clips above the headcode panel, dominoes and valences and the gouge. It would certainly be helpful if Bachmann could provide a list of possible combinations, but then doing so would highlight which model variants will be wrong so might be counter-productive from a potential sales perspective, although equally if they did then those more knowledgeable about this could no doubt then advise which locos, liveries and variants would work with the "correct" tooling. The new 37284 would appear to be exactly the same tooling as the BR Blue 37254 and so is also Ok. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 There are two different lengths of split box noses - 37049 was the first culprit released with an overlength one and I understand it was something to do with the way the 21 pin chassis was longer and didn't work with the original split box nose (that could also be a load of old b****x, but I seem to remember reading it on the internet somewhere <add pinch of salt here>). >> Yes the later 37 049 etc nose ends are more "boublous" than the originals....shame......it was something to do with chassis lengths I believe................ Bachmann really do themselves no favours with their 37's. Having worked with the C37LG to produce 37003 you have thought they would check with the group to ensure they get these releases correct. Class 37 detail differences are many and complex but the expertise is out there. >> Again AFAIK the Cl37Lg 37 003 is accurate, described as being one of the most accurate early split box Bach 37's available according to the paperwork that comes with the model. 37254 (BR Blue) is generally considered to be OK with no gouge, 37254 (Dutch) is not OK and has a gouge. How can you produce the same loco model and get it wrong when it was right to start with ?? Arrrrrrgh. >> Exactly.................. Like many on here I was looking forward to adding a batch of non-skirted split box 37's to the fleet - not any more. >> 37 049 Imperial will suit - but it will need a complete respray in some cases................... The ModelRail 37068 is apparently one of the good ones, I just hope 37049 follows suite. >> Of note 37 068 Grainflow is presently available @ Kernow for £105.00 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 As grainflow has a headlight and no buffer beam skirts, where as 37041 has buffer skirts and no headlight, there must be a difference on how the ends are fitted? The nose ends on most of the later 37's are removable, they can also be swapped around between split box/ centre box / flush / with and without BB shrouds... 37 041 could have been produced as per the original catalogue photo, with NO skirts and plated headcode boxes, by using the 37 068 Grainflow MAIN body (with NO gouge) tooling and standard Split Box noses with doors and NO headlight. and if so, sure they would have sold bucket loads .................... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob D2 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 That's a shame for you guys doing mctractors .... I struggling to see the ' gouge ' . I'm looking at 37251/174/035 . 251 ( as 116) seems to have slight trench under the cantrail grilles , is that what you mean ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 could be wrong but could the gouge be related to whether model has bodyside (I assume boiler filler) hatch & footsteps plated over or not. It seems in same general area and I wonder whether there is a slide in the mould for this which doesn't fit quite right (or perhaps completely different mould). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 could be wrong but could the gouge be related to whether model has bodyside (I assume boiler filler) hatch & footsteps plated over or not. It seems in same general area and I wonder whether there is a slide in the mould for this which doesn't fit quite right (or perhaps completely different mould).Yes that's correct. The 'gouge' is actually meant to be a raised strip, but Bachmann managed to get this detail very wrong. And yes, this gouge is also present with unplated steps and the small door panel next to the top trio of bodyside grilles. It's a pain, but I fill the trench/steps depending on the variant being modelled. The best version this Year for Scottish locos will be sector 37049. As long as you don't mind repainting, and your chosen prototype doesn't have roof horns!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Yes that's correct. The 'gouge' is actually meant to be a raised strip, but Bachmann managed to get this detail very wrong. And yes, this gouge is also present with unplated steps and the small door panel next to the top trio of bodyside grilles. It's a pain, but I fill the trench/steps depending on the variant being modelled. The best version this Year for Scottish locos will be sector 37049. As long as you don't mind repainting, and your chosen prototype doesn't have roof horns!! In all fairness to Bachmann, they did not get it very wrong. The original tooling was altered to correctly model the early removable cantrail grilles fitted to a few of the very first built 37's. The tooling was altered to produce the model of 37 003 for the Cl37lg accurately. The gouge unfortunately appears to have been a left over from the tooling alteration... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 In all fairness to Bachmann, they did not get it very wrong. The original tooling was altered to correctly model the early removable cantrail grilles fitted to a few of the very first built 37's. The tooling was altered to produce the model of 37 003 for the Cl37lg accurately. The gouge unfortunately appears to have been a left over from the tooling alteration... I beg to differ. A trench is the complete opposite of the raised strip that should be there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I beg to differ. A trench is the complete opposite of the raised strip that should be there. Only a handful of early built 37's had the raised/removable cantrail grilles with a lower strip. On all later builds the cantrail grilles were part of the main body assy with NO strip..... As for Bachmann models the "trench" has only been present on models that were produced AFTER 37 003 none of the previous models had it. Surely having re-painted numerous Bach 37's you would have noticed this ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 Yes of course I have. That is not relevant to this discussion. My point is that Bachmann, as per usual, have got a very noticeable detail wrong.That's all I was trying to say, I feel no need for a further 7 pages of debate as seems so prevalent on every thread these days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted January 20, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 20, 2017 The nose ends on most of the later 37's are removable, they can also be swapped around between split box/ centre box / flush / with and without BB shrouds... 37 041 could have been produced as per the original catalogue photo, with NO skirts and plated headcode boxes, by using the 37 068 Grainflow MAIN body (with NO gouge) tooling and standard Split Box noses with doors and NO headlight. and if so, sure they would have sold bucket loads .................... I'm not sure that's quite right. 37068 has plated over roof boiler port whereas 37041's is open. Unless the roof and body sides are separate bits of the tool and so are interchangeable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 I'm not sure that's quite right. 37068 has plated over roof boiler port whereas 37041's is open. Unless the roof and body sides are separate bits of the tool and so are interchangeable. It's possible that the body sides and roofs are separate toolings so either riveted strips or flush boiler roofs along with open or plated ports could be produced when required.... It's still a tad puzzling why Bach didn't produce 041 as originally advertised, they also changed the catalogue No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob D2 Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 It's possible that the body sides and roofs are separate toolings so either riveted strips or flush boiler roofs along with open or plated ports could be produced when required.... It's still a tad puzzling why Bach didn't produce 041 as originally advertised, they also changed the catalogue No. Did they suddenly decide buffer beam cowls had sold well in the past maybe ? Seems a bit of overkill to me though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold pheaton Posted January 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2017 Edit....helps if i read the thread properly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D6975 Posted January 21, 2017 Share Posted January 21, 2017 In all fairness to Bachmann, they did not get it very wrong. The original tooling was altered to correctly model the early removable cantrail grilles fitted to a few of the very first built 37's. The tooling was altered to produce the model of 37 003 for the Cl37lg accurately. The gouge unfortunately appears to have been a left over from the tooling alteration... 37003 accurate?? I don't think so. Bachmann made a complete mess of attempting to do the original cantrail grille. They would have been better off just using the RSH type. As a result of this cock up producing the gouge which has carried through to susequent models they have lost an awful lot of sales. They have lost about 10 just to me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John M Upton Posted January 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 21, 2017 Do we really need yet another Bachmann Class 37 whingefest? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.