Jump to content

Farish new C class


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

EP samples seen at Alexandra Palace:

 

post-1467-0-49843600-1530226248_thumb.jpeg

 

post-1467-0-57769300-1530226312_thumb.jpeg

 

Although Farish are not offering a sound fitted version in the first batch, the model is designed to accommodate a sound chip and speaker in the tender.

 

Tom.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the EP afresh I wonder if the running plate is cast metal to provide extra weight? Just wondering why it would otherwise be black when the rest of the loco is grey. If so, sensible move so here's hoping.

 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the EP afresh I wonder if the running plate is cast metal to provide extra weight? Just wondering why it would otherwise be black when the rest of the loco is grey. If so, sensible move so here's hoping.

 

Roy

 

Following on from the 4F, I would think that cast metal is a must. Lack of weight is the only thing I can fault the 4F for and the C is smaller so will need all the help it can get. Fingers crossed that EP does show a metal running plate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That plastic coal load will be straight out and replaced with the real thing, but the rest of the loco looks superb.

Do you think it'll be easy to remove or require cutting? If the latter, I might just cover it with coal.

Looks excellent. Should go nicely with my Dapol Maunsells.

Plus your birdcages (maybe!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Do you think it'll be easy to remove or require cutting? If the latter, I might just cover it with coal.

Coal loads on Farish steamers are usually removable metal, with some representation of the coal space below, although being a small tender and needing room to fit a speaker and sound decoder they might have to take a different approach with the C.

 

Tom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...
  • RMweb Gold

This arrived today, it really is very pretty indeed. The review should be in the September BRM followed a couple of months later by an article on converting it to 2FS and a few aesthetic tweaks to the body - though to be fair there is very limited scope for improvement. Who would have believed just a few years ago that we would have pre-group models of this quality RTR in 2mm/N.

I'm told that a container with the locos in is on its way. How that equates to delivery times I have no idea but would guess at 4-6 weeks.

 

968506990_ChathamC.jpg.7d9dde1a38b14bace8a4b3964618f0ac.jpg

 

Jerry

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

It really does look lovely in that livery, the only thing I think really spoils the model is the clumsy way the coupling rods have been articulated. I can see that the join on the prototype was some way away from the centre axle crankpin, but such articulation has never been necessary on any other Farish locos which can pretty much all get round a 9 inch radius curve without it.

 

So, why now? Is the chassis compensated or something similar?

 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Just read the review in (washes his mouth out with soap!) Hornby Magazine. The loco looks absolutely exquisite even in the simple BR black livery. DCC fitting is simply a case of pulling out the coal-load and plugging the Next 18 decoder in, there is even a sugar-cube speaker pre-installed, making sound a simple plug and play operation. This alone for me justifies where the RRP has got to.


The only thing that concerns me is that from all accounts on the curves of HM test track, the loco would not take more than 14 wagons without slipping!! This seems pretty dismal, even for such a small loco, I am wondering if it could even manage a single Birdcage set based on this report. I understood that the loco has a cast footplate, and it certainly looks that way from the pictures early in the thread, in which case it doesn't appear in any way adequate to compensate for the lack of traction tyres. Although still a lightweight, my new tool 4F with full DCC sound gubbins in the tender does a lot better.

I am hopeful that the 8F, also with cast footplate (but no traction tyres) isn't hamstrung in a similar way. For me 25 wagons on my existing layout would be adequate, but for those with larger layouts there should be a reasonable expectation that an 8F would haul 40 I would have thought.

I was sorely tempted by the C Class purely as a "Rule 1" purchase because it is so pretty, but I think I may wait for further reports on haulage before deciding.
 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Roy L S said:

I am wondering if it could even manage a single Birdcage set based on this report.

 

I sent our C down to Jerry Clifford who tested it with a set on a gradient and it seemed to cope well enough. 

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/brm/reviews/bachmann/review-graham-farish-secr-c-class-0-6-0

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

I sent our C down to Jerry Clifford who tested it with a set on a gradient and it seemed to cope well enough. 

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/brm/reviews/Bachmann/review-graham-farish-secr-c-class-0-6-0

 

Thank you Andy, 

 

I have had a good read of that review which is very informative. Somewhat disappointed that Bachmann have reverted to solid cast chassis and wiper pickups on this loco, the split chassis arrangement with bearing pickups on their recent locos (up to now) has proved extremely reliable and not something that needed changing. Let's hope this was done for a specific reason for this model and isn't a precedent for future models. 

 

 I did notice that the HM review does actually confirm the that the C Class manages the Birdcage set comfortably too which may well be enough for many people. 

 

Roy

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can speculate that Farish returned to the solid chassis because of difficulties isolating the cast footplate from a split one, in which case a cast boiler could also have been used as with the Hornby J15 to aid weight and traction. Anything that prevents the use of those horrible traction tyres is welcome in my eyes. However, perhaps the general view was that the haulage meet what might be felt acceptable with this type/size of loco, a dozen or so wagons that most users may hang behind it. The 8F will hopefully weigh a bit more to assist with haulage capacity.

 

Izzy

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, Roy L S said:

Somewhat disappointed that Bachmann have reverted to solid cast chassis and wiper pickups on this loco, the split chassis arrangement with bearing pickups on their recent locos (up to now) has proved extremely reliable and not something that needed changing.

 

I can’t help but feel that a return to wiper pickup is a worryingly retrograde step by Bachmann given the improvement the bearing pickup method represented in their previous N Gauge steam outline models.

 

I’d be curious to know the reasoning for this given they’ve successfully produced similar sized models (3F, Pannier) using both a cast footplate and split chassis before. 

 

Tom. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TomE said:

 

I can’t help but feel that a return to wiper pickup is a worryingly retrograde step by Bachmann given the improvement the bearing pickup method represented in their previous N Gauge steam outline models.

 

I’d be curious to know the reasoning for this given they’ve successfully produced similar sized models (3F, Pannier) using both a cast footplate and split chassis before. 

 

Tom. 

 

I was thinking the same thing Tom, a worrying and disappointing regression and there appears little reason for the change from a design/engineering perspective given the existence of those two models. So then it seems the most likely reason must be cost. A split chassis with bearing pickup would undoubtedly be more complex to design, require more parts and more assembly time. However then balance that against the extra cost of the clunky, unsightly and totally unnecessary articulation of the coupling rods on the C Class, about the only thing that grates for me on an otherwise beautiful model.

 

It will probably fall on deaf ears, but my plea to Bachmann is not to cut corners on the quality of mechanisms. The level of detail and standard of decoration is to be applauded but at the prices now being asked the mechanisms have to be state of the art too, not go backwards in design terms.

 

Roy

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

As Andy said, I tested the C on Bath with the Birdcage rake. Bath is 2FS but the section from Bath Junction to where the line doubles at Twinhoe has no pointwork so I can run stock with N gauge wheels. It does mean they have to cope with a 1in70 incline from a standing start but curvature is gentle, 3' radius on the bank tightening to 2' through Devonshire and Combe Down tunnels.

 

Regarding the reversion to pickups and a solid chassis, I agree its a retrograde step. That said, the C runs beautifully, fully controllable and almost silent.

I took the picture below as part of a potential follow up article to the review for BRM on converting the loco to 2FS - (this now wont happen - or not at the moment anyway!). It shows the replacement 2FS wheels and rods I had prepared - it was only after I had laid the parts out that it dawned on me that it was a different design. I would suggest there are far more parts that require assembling with pickups as the chassis still has separate bearings. There are also far more potential problems, particularly regarding pickups getting bent out of shape or failing to touch the backs of the wheels at all - a common problem on the 08, 03/04.

I don't think the change of design has anything to do with cost, its simply a change of designer.

 

1576299308_C3.JPG.b17621881f73eb18ac9dbc8d94033776.JPG

 

Jerry

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

Thanks for the photo Jerry, very interesting. 

 

We appear to still have bearings, which is good, but solid Chassis and wipers only on the driving wheels with no tender pickups? I have to say this is not the standard I have come to expect from Bachmann in terms of mechanism these days. I’ll certainly be looking to squeeze some stay alive in there to compensate! 

 

Tom. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, TomE said:

Thanks for the photo Jerry, very interesting. 

 

We appear to still have bearings, which is good, but solid Chassis and wipers only on the driving wheels with no tender pickups? I have to say this is not the standard I have come to expect from Bachmann in terms of mechanism these days. I’ll certainly be looking to squeeze some stay alive in there to compensate! 

 

Tom. 

Hi Tom

 

I am sure Jerry will be able to confirm, but by the looks of it the loco does have tender pickups using the points of the axle-ends like the new tool 4F, Ivatt and all the more recent loco drive models.

 

On the subject of the new 8F, I can't tell what type of pickups it uses on the loco, there was a pic of the underside somewhere (could have been Facebook) and it would be useful to have another look, but I'm unable to find it now - typical!

 

Roy

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, TomE said:

Thanks for the photo Jerry, very interesting. 

 

We appear to still have bearings, which is good, but solid Chassis and wipers only on the driving wheels with no tender pickups? I have to say this is not the standard I have come to expect from Bachmann in terms of mechanism these days. I’ll certainly be looking to squeeze some stay alive in there to compensate! 

 

Tom. 

It has tender pickups, they are as before - split axle picking up from the pinpoints. 

Jerry

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
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.