Oxford Rail announces Warwells

[rovex]

These are in at Ian Allan in Birmingham.

[PaulRhB]

Australian version with Magnedesion?

[rovex]

No. I think it's another failure by Oxford. This time they've modelled the whole thing upside down.

[GreenGiraffe22]

Has anyone bought one yet and compared it against a Hattons one, I'm wondering if it is as weighty?

[Edwardian]

No. I think it's another failure by Oxford. This time they've modelled the whole thing upside down.

 

No, what they've done is delivered to the wrong retailer; these were destined for the Australian market.

 

 

Has anyone bought one yet and compared it against a Hattons one, I'm wondering if it is as weighty?

 

Why, because those in Ian Allen's shop appear to defy gravity?

[Andy Y]

Has anyone bought one yet and compared it against a Hattons one, I'm wondering if it is as weighty?

 

Oxford 36g

Hatton's 95g

 

 

 

My review of the Hatton's one is in this month's BRM (August) and my review of the Oxford one is in next month.

 

I would say the definition on the moulded plastic on the deck of the Oxford model is finer but Hatton's make better provision for variations through the wagon's life and it feels better quality overall.

[PaulRhB]

When you talk about the provision for variations Andy have Oxford given any indication of the other mouldings as their descriptions suggest a different moulding for the later MOD at least? Is it likely to be that that makes the difference?

[M.I.B]

The Oxford version comes with a small bag of parts requiring fitment.

 

 

There are four "feet" for the stabilizing jacks, and two pairs of hoses.

 

One is a vac hose and the other is an air brake hose.

 

But there is no list for the non-experts to work out which gets fitted w to which variant.

 

Does anyone have a simple to  follow guide?

Edited July 20, 2017 by M.I.B

[Fat Controller]

The Oxford version comes with a small bag of parts requiring fitment.

 

IMG_1663.JPGIMG_1663.JPG

 

There are four "feet" for the stabilizing jacks, and two pairs of hoses.

 

One is a vac hose and the other is an air brake hose.

 

But there is no list for the non-experts to work out which gets fitted w to which variant.

 

Does anyone have a simple to  follow guide?

The original 1940s wagons would have had both pipes, as they were intended for service on mainland Europe. They should also have safety chains just inboard of the buffers

The air-pipes were probably removed when these wagons returned to the UK post WW2, as were the safety-chains.

The 'feet' for the jacks would have been removed from those vehicles used as bogie bolsters; many of these also lost their vac-pipes.

The 1970s rebuilds were fitted with air-brakes (so air-pipes) and initially had vac-pipes, as many locations only had unfitted or vac-braked freights.

[hmrspaul]

The original 1940s wagons would have had both pipes, as they were intended for service on mainland Europe. They should also have safety chains just inboard of the buffers

The air-pipes were probably removed when these wagons returned to the UK post WW2, as were the safety-chains.

The 'feet' for the jacks would have been removed from those vehicles used as bogie bolsters; many of these also lost their vac-pipes.

The 1970s rebuilds were fitted with air-brakes (so air-pipes) and initially had vac-pipes, as many locations only had unfitted or vac-braked freights.

I partially disagree about the safety chains. Yes removed from the ones rebuilt as bogie bolsters, but several of my photos show chains remaining much later. This is the wrong place really but my site should be checked when doing the Hattons version.

 

Paul

[Fat Controller]

I partially disagree about the safety chains. Yes removed from the ones rebuilt as bogie bolsters, but several of my photos show chains remaining much later. This is the wrong place really but my site should be checked when doing the Hattons version.

 

Paul

Some of the Warflats used by BSC Landore retained their safety chains, as did the Flat WLLs (the six-axled Warwell, intended to carry the Sherman replacement)

[M.I.B]

In "GWR Goods Wagons" Plate 720 at the back of the book shows the real MS1 as modelled by Oxford.  Good clear photo.

 

It traveled without the feet attached to the jacks, much like travelling road cranes these days.  So where were the feet plates stowed?  No where obvious to me on the model.  Are they provided for use in dioramas?

 

The vac hoses and air hoses should clip on under the buffer beam in two manufactured recesses.  But if you do, they foul the movement of the articulated tension lock coupling.

 

In retrospect, two pairs of safety chains would have been a good accessory to pop in the bag of parts to fit.

 

If anyone has a detail photo of how a safety chain looks, what sort of end link, and length, that would be great.  How were they stowed when coupled to a vehicle which had no hooks for safety chains such as a mundane freight wagon or an engine?   I may add my own fine chains when I replace the chunky ones on the deck.

[Fat Controller]

In "GWR Goods Wagons" Plate 720 at the back of the book shows the real MS1 as modelled by Oxford.  Good clear photo.

 

It traveled without the feet attached to the jacks, much like travelling road cranes these days.  So where were the feet plates stowed?  No where obvious to me on the model.  Are they provided for use in dioramas?

 

The vac hoses and air hoses should clip on under the buffer beam in two manufactured recesses.  But if you do, they foul the movement of the articulated tension lock coupling.

 

In retrospect, two pairs of safety chains would have been a good accessory to pop in the bag of parts to fit.

 

If anyone has a detail photo of how a safety chain looks, what sort of end link, and length, that would be great.  How were they stowed when coupled to a vehicle which had no hooks for safety chains such as a mundane freight wagon or an engine?   I may add my own fine chains when I replace the chunky ones on the deck.

It's been a long time since I looked at one, but I recollect the link size was half the size of a normal coupling, perhaps even smaller. The last link was a hook. To stow these, I would imagine you'd loop the 'chain' back on itself, and put the end of the hook through one of the links nearest the headstock.

[bigherb]

I picked one up yesterday and a cheapo 1/72 Sherman. Warwell looks a nice model, fine moulding, printing and paint finish, yep chains are bit over scale but actually don't look so bad when there is a load on it, underside looks plainer than the Hattons version, but I am not bothered about detail I am not going to see under normal circumstances and what you can see when on the the track looks good enough and the price advantage reflects that.

 

1/72 Cheapo Sherman does not look too out of scale.

 

And fits on the bed.

 

An Armourfast model 1/72 Crusader is too wide.

 

I like the printing on the bogies.

Edited July 21, 2017 by bigherb

[M.I.B]

It's been a long time since I looked at one, but I recollect the link size was half the size of a normal coupling, perhaps even smaller. The last link was a hook. To stow these, I would imagine you'd loop the 'chain' back on itself, and put the end of the hook through one of the links nearest the headstock.

 

That seems very feasible.  And to achieve the hook, cut a link at the 2 o'clock position and turn it from a "0" shape to a "6".  I have some fine chain so I will try this soon, along with painting the butters and some weathering.

 

Thanks for the update.

[cctransuk]

That seems very feasible.  And to achieve the hook, cut a link at the 2 o'clock position and turn it from a "0" shape to a "6".  I have some fine chain so I will try this soon, along with painting the butters and some weathering.

 

Thanks for the update.

 

Etched hooks for side chains are available - http://www.roxeymouldings.co.uk/product/485/4a135-side-chain-eyes-and-hooks/

 

The old PC models etching for screw couplings certainly had them; (I used them extensively for side-chains on OO9 stock).

 

I'm pretty sure that the PC etching is still available, but I'm not sure under what brand name.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[GreenGiraffe22]

Great to see one on someone's layout I wonder how the colour of Bachmann 's warflats will compare to the two different warwells, I tried a 1/72 Churchill on my warwell the other day, just slightly too wide.

[M.I.B]

After the heavy use they got from 1944 - 1946 it is highly likely that they had been patch painted a few times and/or had no paint left on most of the decks.

 

End loading tracked vehicles over the headstocks, when tracks didn't have rubber pads like they do now, would destroy the paint.

[Fat Controller]

Great to see one on someone's layout I wonder how the colour of Bachmann 's warflats will compare to the two different warwells, I tried a 1/72 Churchill on my warwell the other day, just slightly too wide.

Did it have the side air-intakes on? These were removed for rail transport, I believe.

[Guest Midland Mole @ Footplate]

OR76WW001 is now in stock with us, and I quite like the look of it. Box is far too big though

Alex @ Footplate

[bigherb]

 Box is far too big though

 

I thought that but probably space for the Sherman Tank.

[Guest Midland Mole]

I thought that but probably space for the Sherman Tank.

 

Maybe, but I meant more the length of the thing....it's as long as a coach box!

Alex

[bigherb]

Maybe, but I meant more the length of the thing....it's as long as a coach box!

Alex

So did I. Wagon at one end, Sherman the other.

[Guest Midland Mole]

So did I. Wagon at one end, Sherman the other.

 

Ahh, good point.

Alex

[slg]

Most likely the box if it's the same as the carflat one is going to be used for the mk3 coaches as well, then all they have do is design a new inner sleeve.