Farish new C class

[TomE]

Good news! Thanks gents! 

 

Tom. 

[Dr Al]

11 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

Regarding the reversion to pickups and a solid chassis, I agree its a retrograde step.

 

I disagree. The pickup on locos with the axle pickups and bearings, particularly 6 wheelers (in terms of pickup) like the Fairburn, is in general poor. I've looked extensively at pickup on the Farish 4F and j39 also, and the loco pickup is also pretty poor - they rely on their tenders totally.

 

The reason is simple - the wheels simply don't always make positive contact with the axle bearings, and if any muck gets in there it further hinders conduction. Wipers are much more positive in terms of contact. 

 

So I think Bachmann have seen returns with poor pickup, and have altered their designs appropriately, and therefore should be applauded.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[Roy L S]

1 hour ago, Dr Al said:

 

I disagree. The pickup on locos with the axle pickups and bearings, particularly 6 wheelers (in terms of pickup) like the Fairburn, is in general poor. I've looked extensively at pickup on the Farish 4F and j39 also, and the loco pickup is also pretty poor - they rely on their tenders totally.

 

The reason is simple - the wheels simply don't always make positive contact with the axle bearings, and if any muck gets in there it further hinders conduction. Wipers are much more positive in terms of contact. 

 

So I think Bachmann have seen returns with poor pickup, and have altered their designs appropriately, and therefore should be applauded.

 

Cheers,

Alan

Hi Alan

 

For one very rare time I find myself in disagreement with you. I have found the bearing pickup very reliable, it speaks volumes that with just six wheels picking up through the bushes my sound fitted 4MT Tank's sound is extremely reliable without "stay alive". I have another four tank locos that use the same method, the only one that has been a problem was the Jinty that was over oiled from the factory and needed the bushes cleaning out.

 

As for my tender driven locos, the J39s' (8 last count) all pickup fine across the whole footprint provided the sprung wires in the drawbar's that transfer current are properly adjusted - that is the bigger issue in my view, A2s and A1s are reliable too and have to be as I tend to double up on traction tyres on the rear two axles of the tender-drive.

 

Of my loco-driven tender locos which all pick up through axle bushes on the loco, I have only one with notably poor loco pickup and that is one of my Ivatts - I suspect factory oiling is again the culprit but I haven't taken it apart to check.

 

Conversely, wiper pickups have their issues, they need to be carefully adjusted so that they make proper contact with wheels and in my experience far too often have come out of the factory needing attention (3MT Tank, 08, 04 immediately come to mind). In addition wipers pick up dirt and other crud that can start to affect wheel rotation on tender driven locos which are definitely better served by the axle bush approach. Another issue I have seen on the B1 in particular is a propensity for the loco to "crab" if their is more tension on pickups one side than the other. 

 

Clearly there will be pros and cons with both, but personally I am far happier with the axle bush approach, and it can't be that bad or the 2mmSA wouldn't use it so widely!

 

Regards

 

Roy

[TomE]

Have to agree with Roy on this one, I’ve had no issues with pickup on any of the Farish steamers fitted with pickup bushes, but my 08, Std4 2-6-0 & especially my Black 5 have all required the pickup wipers repeatedly adjusting to maintain reliable running, and for a layout where everything happens at very slow speed, good pickup becomes quite an important feature for me! 

 

I am slightly less less concerned by the C Class now it’s confirmed there are tender pickups and that the running qualities are reported to be good, but I’m still left with the overall feeling that in terms of mechanism, this is a step backwards for Bachmann. 

 

Tom. 

[queensquare]

As Roy and Tom have said, split axle pickup which dispenses with the need for wipers is a far superior system both in terms of reliabity, complexity and ammount of maintenence required. The early pioneers of 2mm, almost 100 years ago now, adopted the principle for good reason and it has long been standard practice in 2mm scale with thousands of locos being built over the years.

If there is a build up of grot in the very tight working clearance between axle and bearing bush which is sufficient to hinder current collection, I suspect that pickup would be the least of your problems.

I'm not aware of Farish having any returns for pickup problems on split axle locos. Certainly when I was still doing the repairs and maintenance for the local model shop (now closed) I didn't get any which was in stark contrast to locos with wiper pickups which regularly needed cleaning and adjustment.

 

Jerry 

[Roy L S]

Today my September RM popped through the door, and in the reviews, perhaps unsurprisingly was another one relating to the C Class. One thing in this review that hasn't been mentioned in previous ones is that: -

 

"the motor itself is fully enclosed inside the bodywork, so not user-serviceable save for oiling as indicated in the instruction sheet".

 

This will be a first for Bachmann, up to now it has always been possible to strip any loco right down if needed to replace failed or worn parts and to me that has been a reassuring feature and one representing good design. If what this review says is correct then presumably, if there is a motor failure replacement won't be possible meaning an expensive ornament from that point on??

 

If true, that would be an even more significant regression than the wiper pickups, so I am hoping someone will tell me (1) RM has it wrong and it is not actually the case and/or (2) the 8F won't be the same, as £220 ish (with discount) for a sound fitted one would be a heck of a lot of money to spend on a model loco that can't be owner maintained and is effectively therefore a disposable item!!

 

Roy

[Izzy]

It does seem as if there have been significant design changes doesn’t it? The split chassis design captures the motor (coreless) between them via plastic end caps but with a solid chassis this would no longer be possible. Will be very worrying if they have adopted the awful method used by other makers - to my way of thinking - of fixing/gluing the motor into the body shell. Oh dear.

 

Izzy

[queensquare]

Must admit I've not taken the body off to reveal how the motor is mounted. Will try to find time later on and post a picture.

 

Jerry 

[CF MRC]

I noticed a review of the black liveried C in Hornby magazine that the tender body work also has incredibly thick top edges: I know that I commented about it earlier regarding the cab side sheets, but it was very apparent in the monochrome livery.  

 

Tim

Edited August 6, 2019 by CF MRC

[Roy L S]

On ‎06‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 08:19, queensquare said:

Must admit I've not taken the body off to reveal how the motor is mounted. Will try to find time later on and post a picture.

 

Jerry 

Hi Jerry

 

Thank you, that would be very much appreciated. I am still very tempted by a BR black one, but if the loco cannot be readily dismantled for maintenance or if needed motor replacement, then that is something of a deal breaker for me and I would give it a miss.

 

Roy

[Paul80]

Bizarrely with no dealer reporting these in stock yet, there is a second hand one on eBay

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F254321826055

 

I wonder were it came from ?
 

[TomE]

No photos of the actual model though. Someone pre-empting imminent delivery perhaps? 

 

Tom.  

 

 

 

[grahame]

Maybe. But how does that stack up with eBay rules and regs? Is it allowable to sell items that you don't actually have (and may get delayed or not turn up)?

 

G

[queensquare]

On 08/08/2019 at 21:57, Paul80 said:

Bizarrely with no dealer reporting these in stock yet, there is a second hand one on eBay

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F254321826055

 

I wonder were it came from ?
 

 

Not from me, the one I have is waiting to have its warranty invalidated - once I work out the best way to do it. I'm hoping to get some wheels as spares so I can investigate them to destruction !!

 

Jerry

Edited August 9, 2019 by queensquare

[5944]

51 minutes ago, TomE said:

No photos of the actual model though. Someone pre-empting imminent delivery perhaps? 

 

Tom.  

 

 

 

Quite a lot of his stuff is just the stock manufacturer images. Quite a few other items on there that haven't been released yet either. I'll give it a miss, ta! 

[TomE]

Just had notification the Cs are now in stock at Alton Model Centre.

 

Tom.  

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by TomE

[Paul80]

There are now a few more appearing on the BayofEvil, stock must be arriving but to the smaller dealers before the box shippers get theirs as most of those are still showing pre order.

[Tomsontour]

Paid for mine on Friday, being posted on Monday, cannot wait to get my hands on this one having seen the review in model rail I feel this is going to be a very special model

Matt

[nick_bastable]

Just a off the wall thought could the 2mm replacement axle boxes be cast in resin/plastic to resolve the isolation issue on one side  ?

 

Nick

[TomE]

I had the opportunity to have a play with Jerry’s C Class this weekend whilst operating Totnes. It is a beautiful little model, and it ran excellently with a Birdcage set. Looking underneath not all of the pickup wipers on the driving wheels were making contact but the fact it picks up from all six axles is probably mitigating this.  We’ll see how mine holds up over Ropley’s trackwork once I’ve collected it. 

 

 

 

This one appears to have taken a wrong turn somewhere around Guildford!

 

Tom. 

Edited August 11, 2019 by TomE

[Crepello]

I hope someone can explain how to adjust the loco-tender gap in due course--the reviews have highlighted this feature; it seems a bit wide straight from the box. Maybe the 8F will have this too. 

[TomE]

The drawbar can easily be removed and replaced, but you’ll need to fabricate a shorter one yourself as there isn’t another one included. Electrical connection between loco & tender is all via wires now and not that crazy electrical drawbar they’ve previously used so it should be a fairly simple task.

 

They do include cab doors which would lessen the impact of the gap if the drawbar is not changed and your corners allow for them to be fitted. 

 

The only other thing that really stands out, and as others have commented on, the coupling rods are somewhat bulky and that joint is completely unnecessary.

 

Tom. 

Edited August 12, 2019 by TomE

[HRH_Dan_Hull]

Just some initial thoughts after having read this thread and the one on the NGF;

 

Haulage - so this is potentially yet another model to require bullfrog snot. (Like the Castle did).

Chassis/body - this does not bode well, seen as I have ordered an 8F to use the chassis under an 8K (O4) body.

To my mind Farish have yet to better the N class model, it is the the peak of their development, in changing the fundamental layout of future designs they are shooting themselves in the foot. Not only the the N great as an N, but I have bought no less than 3 more to turn into other things using 3D printed bodies and parts! that is 300% extra sales from one customer alone. The 8F could be another of these useful models, giving the chance to build a decent 8K (O4), 7F, Maunsell Z, and probably many others...


And a footnote:

Has anyone actually managed to the the 'body' off the C class loco yet? I fail to see how a motor can be placed inside such a thing, sure it is not cast around the motor and geartrain so there must be a way to separate the 'body' and 'chassis'?

Edited August 12, 2019 by HRH_Dan_Hull

[queensquare]

After a hectic Wells weekend I finally got time this afternoon to pop the body off the C. I don't know where this notion of a completely sealed motor within the body came from but whoever it was clearly didn't take the body off to have a look. The motor is the same excellent 7mm coreless one of recent releases held captive by plastic caps at either end. Releasing the body so the chassis can be removed to give access to the motor involves undoing two screws and is a matter of moments. The motor is covered with a piece of insulating tape presumably to stop the leads going walk about.

 

The  photos also show the ' dog bone ' loco/tender coupling, making a shorter one would be another simple job.

 

 

 

Jerry

 

 

[Roy L S]

2 minutes ago, queensquare said:

After a hectic Wells weekend I finally got time this afternoon to pop the body off the C. I don't know where this notion of a completely sealed motor within the body came from but whoever it was clearly didn't take the body off to have a look. The motor is the same excellent 7mm coreless one of recent releases held captive by plastic caps at either end. Releasing the body so the chassis can be removed to give access to the motor involves undoing two screws and is a matter of moments. The motor is covered with a piece of insulating tape presumably to stop the leads going walk about.

 

The  photos also show the ' dog bone ' loco/tender coupling, making a shorter one would be another simple job.

 

 

 

Jerry

 

 

 

Hi Jerry

 

The notion came from the review in the Railway modeller where they said: -

 

"As the photo below demonstrates, the motor itself is fully enclosed inside the bodywork so is not user serviceable save for oiling as indicated in the instruction sheet".

 

I am delighted that this is not the case, I just wish RM had not set such a hare running when your pics show it is clearly not factually correct. I am grateful for your clarification. 

 

Regards

 

Roy