Farish new C class

[HRH_Dan_Hull]

33 minutes ago, Roy L S said:

 

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

Totally agreed, re-reading the review it feels like it was a hurried one to get it in before going to print, surely such a milestone model (the first all new Farish steam locomotive for about a year and the first ever RTR N Gauge C class)  deserved a more thorough/well researched review that covered at least 2 pages!

[OFFTHE RAILS]

9 hours ago, TomE said:

 

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

 

 

I  think you meant coupling rods as the C class connecting rods are inside the frames and not visible on this model

[TomE]

I collected my Southern Black C Class from Alton Models today and it's every bit as lovely as the SECR version, in a slightly less colourful way! 

 

Haven't had chance to get it running around the test loop at home, but in the shop it ran beautifully when tested. The switch to wiper pickups, whilst still not ideal and a retrograde step to my mind, doesn't appear to be too much of an issue when there are plenty of wheels collecting. The real test there will come once it is sound chipped. 

 

The coupling rods on the black version are blackend, and appear significantly less conspicuous than those on the SECR version. I still think the joint was completely unnecessary however and they could have been finer still without it. 

 

 

 

 

The insides of the tender, for those curious about speaker position etc. You will need a NEXT18 decoder for it:

 

 

Minor niggles over the step back to the wiper pickup arrangement and clunky connecting rods aside, there is no doubt it is a lovely model, and I doubt many would have thought we'd ever see a pre-grouping RTR loco in N Gauge of this quality. 

 

Tom. 

[dpgibbons]

It looks like the decoder space extends over the speaker so there should be room for larger sound decoders. I'm not aware of a custom sounds set for this loco, so any suggestions please as to the most suitable alternative?  

[capri_sam]

Does look lovely,  glad I ordered both! 

 

Annoyingly that does look like quite a spacious tender - I pre-purchased a Zimo mx659 with the yoochoos sound file on it thinking space would be tight, but could have gone for the larger 658 with the better stay alive by the looks of it!

[TomE]

From some quick measurements, the tender space should be just big enough for the larger MX658 chip. 

 

EDIT: When I ordered my MX658 the supplier suggested it may not fit. I've decided to give it a try anyway as I think although it will be tight it should be ok. I'll report here on the results! 

 

Tom. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by TomE

[dpgibbons]

To answer my own Q, YouChoos offers a custom sound set for the C Class.

[Paul80]

Will be interesting to hear from TomE if the larger Zimo MX658 fits over the smaller MX659 as it has more Stay Alive built in, I think I read in one of the Magazines (Hornby I think) that the smaller 659 was recommended.

 

I suppose from the look of it in the photo above the bigger one should fit, but I would put a bit of Kapon tape over the speaker just to be on the safe side (Given how easy it is to kill a Zimo)

 

Paul

[TomE]

1 minute ago, Paul80 said:

Will be interesting to hear from TomE if the larger Zimo MX658 fits over the smaller MX659 as it has more Stay Alive built in, I think I read in one of the Magazines (Hornby I think) that the smaller 659 was recommended.

 

I suppose from the look of it in the photo above the bigger one should fit, but I would put a bit of Kapon tape over the speaker just to be on the safe side (Given how easy it is to kill a Zimo)

 

Paul

 

I'll report back here once the decoder is received and I try the install. YouChoos have been great in agreeing to swap the 658 for a 659 if it won't fit. 

 

Interestingly, the included instructions do not make any mention of a recommended decoder for it, other than it being a NEXT18 socket, and as we've already seen there are other erroneous claims in the Hornby Magazine review!

 

Tom.  

 

[TomE]

Pleased to report the MX658 fits with room to spare! My only recommendation would be some Kapton/insulation tape over the speaker to stop any risk of shorting. 

 

 

 

less than a minute to fit sound to an N Gauge loco! 

 

Also kudos to YouChoos for getting the chip sent out so quickly! 

 

Tom. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by TomE

[Izzy]

Ah, that’s interesting. Do I take it that the two tantalums seen are onboard the MX658, 2x220uf? Although there is mention of stay-alive capacity with 658/9 no details of size are. Didn’t realise it was of those amounts.

 

Izzy

[capri_sam]

Good news about the 658 - for those in the know would it be worth me seeing if yoochoos will swap the smaller 659 for a 658? Are the stay alive/ other running characteristics different enough to make it worthwhile paying for return postage?

 

My gut feeling is just to fit it now that I've got it...

[TomE]

That’s a good question! I can’t actually find any definitive information that gives the tantalum capacity on the board, although I would say they are only half as tall as the 220uf tantalums in the SACC16 kit, so more likely to be around 100uf. 

 

 

I haven’t run this in properly yet so the chip will have to come out again so it can be given a run around the DC test loop. 

 

Tom. 

[Tomsontour]

Oh Tom why did you have to add a video haha, looks and sounds great. Looks like a phone call is in order to youchoos on payday from my br one

 

Matt

[capri_sam]

49 minutes ago, TomE said:

That’s a good question! I can’t actually find any definitive information that gives the tantalum capacity on the board, although I would say they are only half as tall as the 220uf tantalums in the SACC16 kit, so more likely to be around 100uf. 

 

 

I haven’t run this in properly yet so the chip will have to come out again so it can be given a run around the DC test loop. 

 

Tom. 

Oof, that does look and sound the part!

[Crepello]

Your track looks great too Tom. What is it?

[TomE]

15 minutes ago, Crepello said:

Your track looks great too Tom. What is it?

 

Thanks! It’s 2mm Scale Association Easitrac for the plain line, and Easitrac components for the pointwork but with clearances opened out to allow off the shelf N Gauge stock to run through.

 

Tom.

[Crepello]

Got my 31227 today; lovely model with (thankfully) a nice small coal load in the tender. Smooth runner in the forward direction BUT won't go through my Peco code 55 points in reverse! The tender seems ok and the culprit seems to be the pick-ups on the driving wheels hitting the check rails, as the back to backs are effectively reduced by them. Does anyone else have this problem? 

Obviously not! Got my replacement and there's no problems; maybe I had a 'Friday afternoon' example!

Edited September 17, 2019 by Crepello

[TomE]

Not had that problem with mine, and I have various clearances through my pointwork!

 

Are all of the wipers touching the backs of the wheels when you turn it upside down, if not you may need to remove the base plate and open the wipers out a bit to make sure none of them are getting in the way. That’s the only thing I can think would be causing a pick up to catch. 

 

Tom. 

[Roy L S]

With thanks again to Jerry for putting to bed the inaccurate info in the RM review about being unable to fully dismantle the loco, having been asked what I wanted for my birthday by my better half, I asked for a BR Black C Class, and duly picked it up from Anthony of AGR Model Railway Store at Silver Fox show today.

 

Pickups on loco checked and all making good contact it is now running in as I type this. The first thing to strike me is just how diminutive the loco is when compared to the J39 or even a 4F. Detail is quite exquisite, right down to the pipework and red painted regulator in the cab (which may even be a separate moulding). It runs like a swiss watch, the only noise audible is wheels on rails. When you see just how tiny the loco is, it is easy to understand why it doesn't have massive haulage capacity, but I won't reopen the debate about traction tyres here. 

 

I think it looks as good as anything Farish have produced to date and runs well too. With the Next 18 interface and speaker in the tender I think it very intelligently adds new functionality with plug and play DCC sound fit, and this for me makes the price I paid (Just shy of £115 with max allowed discount) acceptable.

 

OK, I do wish that Farish had stayed with the split chassis pickup arrangement but really that is my only gripe. 

 

A real "Rule 1" loco for me which these days is a fairly rare event, but one I will enjoy running, especially once I have a Zimo MX658N18 with sound fitted!

 

Roy

[Gareth Collier]

Re the chunky coupling rods (I can't find my etch at the moment) if my calculations are correct would the 2mm etch 3-205 which includes 4F replacement rods be able to be used?

[Tomsontour]

Have my British railways livered C class currently running around the test loop as I type, what a sublime little model. Captures the prototype beautifully, yes the coupling rods may be a tad on the chunky side, but in motion it really doesn't make that much difference. Livery application is superb, simple livery but the numbers and the logo on the tender are superb. With some subtle weathering it will look even better. 

 

Running is very quiet, after 20 minutes each way light engine I currently have it on 8 loaded with coal minerals and its not even batting an eyelid and this is on train set curves. Very very impressed. I will be adding the zimo chip as seen from Tom's video. 

 

All in all, farish have raised the bar with this model, for me the benchmark is the n class and this will look just at home with this as a shed mate. Congratulations Farish this is one hell of a model!! 

 

Now how about a T9 haha

 

All the best

Matt

[Gareth Collier]

50 minutes ago, Tomsontour said:

 Captures the prototype beautifully, yes the coupling rods may be a tad on the chunky side, but in motion it really doesn't make that much difference.

 

 

Totally agree with the black versions where the coupling rods are darkened but the bright silver ones on the SECR liveried version do stand out much more.

[Izzy]

9 hours ago, Gareth Collier said:

Re the chunky coupling rods (I can't find my etch at the moment) if my calculations are correct would the 2mm etch 3-205 which includes 4F replacement rods be able to be used?

 

I would think they could with suitable replacement crankpins.

 

Izzy

[Chris Higgs]

18 hours ago, Gareth Collier said:

Re the chunky coupling rods (I can't find my etch at the moment) if my calculations are correct would the 2mm etch 3-205 which includes 4F replacement rods be able to be used?

 

Yes, although the rods on a 4F are fluted (at least most of them were) whereas those on a C are not. Would probably still look OK though with them reversed so the fluting is on the inside.

 

Chris

Edited August 20, 2019 by Chris Higgs