Jump to content
 

Heljan announce re-tooled Class 86 in OO


Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, 61661 said:

Pantograph is the Faiveley type, as shown on the sample with the incorrect roof colour. Don't recall seeing any photos of Parcels/Res 86/4s with the BW high-speed type, but I haven't done an exhaustive survey. In this batch of 86/4s only IC Exec 86404 and Caley Sleeper 86401 have the BW type. All the others are Faiveley. 

 

Just had a delve through flickr and of the RES examples 86401, 416, 417, 426 and 430 had the AMBR pan, while 86419, 424 and 425 had the BW pan. 

All the RES 86/2s had AMBR pans.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The pans got swapped around a lot. I recall at least one 87 with the AMBR pan, in IC executive with the extended yellow end, and possibly red bufferbeams. I am sooo tempted to get a second exec 86 and do the fuller yellow end when I sort the cabs out.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 14/11/2021 at 00:54, adb968008 said:

Dont forget 86101 was sleeper blue too..


I’m wondering how much down the road of robbing a class 87 to make an 86101 is possible ? .. its mostly beneath the body isnt it ?

 

 

Just the bogies are the same.  The 86/1 underframe is different; the weak field case is on the opposite side to the 87 and the 86/1 is dual braked so has exhausters which the 87 doesn't.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

@ Ben Jones. As someone who has the pans up against the wires on my layout "Alderford" can you confirm what the BW pan is made of on 86404. I ask as some people on this thread have commented that it looks to be made of plastic. I'm hoping that it is all metal including the head.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Markwj said:

Post on Heljan facebook page to state the class 86/4's have arrived in Denmark!

Could be those and my APT in the same week- expensive- yes- excited- very!!!

I've had 3 emails from Hattons for mine. Look forward to receiving them!

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

so the new 86s are expected this week.   My order is with Kernow anf from the photos I am really looking forward to getting the exceutive 86/4.  Hoping its just got the originl MU jumpers on the front which I tihnk it has and not the later RCH cables.  Presumably they will re-debit my card and just dispatch it when its ready or do I have to ring them to progress the order?   Never ordered before with KMRC.

 

Also do these newer released come with cab interior lights?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, ThaneofFife said:

so the new 86s are expected this week.   My order is with Kernow anf from the photos I am really looking forward to getting the exceutive 86/4.  Hoping its just got the originl MU jumpers on the front which I tihnk it has and not the later RCH cables.  Presumably they will re-debit my card and just dispatch it when its ready or do I have to ring them to progress the order?   Never ordered before with KMRC.

 

Also do these newer released come with cab interior lights?

It has both the older MU jumpers and a representation of the earlier style of RCH if the sample is anything to go by. Unfortunately the RCHs look moulded which is a shame with an otherwise good brand new model. There's a few jobs they I'll do to mine to get them spot on. Gutter rails and a tweak to the marker lights too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, ThaneofFife said:

so the new 86s are expected this week.   My order is with Kernow anf from the photos I am really looking forward to getting the exceutive 86/4.  Hoping its just got the originl MU jumpers on the front which I tihnk it has and not the later RCH cables.  Presumably they will re-debit my card and just dispatch it when its ready or do I have to ring them to progress the order?   Never ordered before with KMRC.

 

Also do these newer released come with cab interior lights?

Kernow usually just automatically take the money and send assuming your credit card and everything is in date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Padishar Creel said:

Surprised that Ben J allowed the error on the buffers of 86401 in Caledonian Sleeper livery to go through

 

es grüßt

pc 

Shame it was pointed out earlier in the thread.

The Gaugemaster 86/6s have the correct buffers fitted.

 

Maybe replacement buffers are available ?

 

This is going to hurt, ive a lot of 86’s on the shopping list.

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

The cab front numbering on 86609 in Freightliner doesn't look to be correct either from what I can find.

 

Looks like it was painted in around 1999, with the cab front numbers looking to be the same size as the cab side numbers.

 

86609, 86635 & 90146, Crewe, June 15th 1999

(Crewe, June 1999 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It looks like it carried them like this until mid-2012, when it was given a spruce up of the cab front at which point the numbers moved to the right, with them starting relatively inline with the corner of the ex-headcode box.

 

IMG_8043

(Rugeley, May 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

86609 Garston

(Garston, November 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It then carried them like this until withdrawal in 2021. If the pictures of the model I've seen are correct, then the model has the number too far to the left and too small, in a position it never carried.

 

I know it's a trivial observation, but literally 15 minutes on Flickr threw up plenty of clear images of how it should be. I'm aware that either position wouldn't have appeased everybody depending on what era you model, but on a model pushing 200 notes I expect that something like the numbering to be correctly positioned one way or another.

 

Andy.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, SWT442 said:

The cab front numbering on 86609 in Freightliner doesn't look to be correct either from what I can find.

 

Looks like it was painted in around 1999, with the cab front numbers looking to be the same size as the cab side numbers.

 

86609, 86635 & 90146, Crewe, June 15th 1999

(Crewe, June 1999 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It looks like it carried them like this until mid-2012, when it was given a spruce up of the cab front at which point the numbers moved to the right, with them starting relatively inline with the corner of the ex-headcode box.

 

IMG_8043

(Rugeley, May 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

86609 Garston

(Garston, November 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It then carried them like this until withdrawal in 2021. If the pictures of the model I've seen are correct, then the model has the number too far to the left and too small, in a position it never carried.

 

I know it's a trivial observation, but literally 15 minutes on Flickr threw up plenty of clear images of how it should be. I'm aware that either position wouldn't have appeased everybody depending on what era you model, but on a model pushing 200 notes I expect that something like the numbering to be correctly positioned one way or another.

 

Andy.


Interestingly…. appears to have oval buffers at one end, round at the other..


(not my image/flickr image)

86609

 

 

Edited by adb968008
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I think the pictures of the models so far are the decorated samples, as opposed to the production run, so hopefully any faults will have been rectified before the main production run. 

 

As an aside, I’m really not keen on the Freightliner liveries in real life. Even the current orange one jars from some angles, though the 86s have been spared from it! 

Edited by 97406
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SWT442 said:

The cab front numbering on 86609 in Freightliner doesn't look to be correct either from what I can find.

 

Looks like it was painted in around 1999, with the cab front numbers looking to be the same size as the cab side numbers.

 

86609, 86635 & 90146, Crewe, June 15th 1999

(Crewe, June 1999 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It looks like it carried them like this until mid-2012, when it was given a spruce up of the cab front at which point the numbers moved to the right, with them starting relatively inline with the corner of the ex-headcode box.

 

IMG_8043

(Rugeley, May 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

86609 Garston

(Garston, November 2012 - Not mine, click for more info)

 

It then carried them like this until withdrawal in 2021. If the pictures of the model I've seen are correct, then the model has the number too far to the left and too small, in a position it never carried.

 

I know it's a trivial observation, but literally 15 minutes on Flickr threw up plenty of clear images of how it should be. I'm aware that either position wouldn't have appeased everybody depending on what era you model, but on a model pushing 200 notes I expect that something like the numbering to be correctly positioned one way or another.

 

Andy.


What I assume were the pre-production photos of the Powerhaul 86622 the cab side numbers appear too bold/big and the logos above them too small.

 

Had asked the question as to whether the production versions would be different but yet to receive a response.

 

Hoping it’s just my eyes mind…

 

 

B7AC13DD-9A9B-4BA6-B678-150052461758.jpeg

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, 97406 said:

I think the pictures of the models so far are the decorated samples, as opposed to the production run, so hopefully any faults will have been rectified before the main production run. 

 

As an aside, I’m really not keen on the Freightliner liveries in real life. Even the current orange one jars from some angles, though the 86s have been spared from it! 

The Photos on Rails are of the production version as being sold as an FYI :)

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, chris37422 said:


What I assume were the pre-production photos of the Powerhaul 86622 the cab side numbers appear too bold/big and the logos above them too small.

 

Had asked the question as to whether the production versions would be different but yet to receive a response.

 

Hoping it’s just my eyes mind…

 

 

B7AC13DD-9A9B-4BA6-B678-150052461758.jpeg

You’ve not mentioned the shade of yellow either!

  • Agree 1
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...