The Bachmann Panniers

[PAL]

I'm thinking of buying a Bachmann Pannier for ultra-slow-running shunting on a layout that's all points and no long runs. I've already got a 64xx; it's all right, but not as good a crawler as my MR Sentinel or Hornby 08. Of the three classes of Pannier that Bachmann do - 57xx, 64xx, 87xx - I was wondering if there are any differences in slow-running ability. I believe they came on the market over a period of decades, which perhaps might indicate that the latest one - the 87xx I believe -  would be the best runner from my point of view. Have the motors or drive mechanisms changed for the better - or worse? Or is it just pot-luck -  a matter of which individual example is taken off the shelf at the shop irrespective of class? I guess there'll be members out there with  the experience and knowledge to make comparisons, and I'd greatly value your thoughts before I lay out the wonga. 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The 57/87xx mechanism has a sprung centre axle, a considerable aid to pick up reliabiity, bu it won't be much different in slow speed crawl to your 64xx. I have made quite a lot of use of them to power older whitemetal bodies, usually with a DCC decoder added. With a Lenz Standard or MX600  they will creep about as slowly as is desireable to get a smooth transit in and out of motion. So the performance potential is there if a good feedback control is deployed.

 

I can make the direct comparison to the Bachmann and Hornby 08, which start out mechanically advantaged by having five pole motors with flywheel and 40:1 reduction. A good DCC decoder gets the same on track performance available from the 08s, out of the smaller three pole motor without flywheel and about 25:1 reduction on the pannier mechanism. The electronics compensate for the inferior mechanical specification in short.

[Andy W]

It isn't as simple as all that. The 57xx and 8750 classes are different bodies on the same chassis - that's fine, because the real things are basically the same, the most obvious difference between the two series is the cab.

But early Bachmann pannier tanks used a split-chassis design. These are fine when new, but over time the bearings wear and the axle-muffs that join the stub axles together split. You will find both 57xx and 8750 series panniers like this. Later they developed a conventional chassis which is much better, and again you will find both 57xx and 8750 series panniers with the conventional chassis.

Added problems happen when previous owners have mixed-and-matched bodies and chassis, to avoid repainting or renumbering their locos, and you will also find Mainline 57xx bodies on Bachmann split chassis - they sold the chassis separately to help people who wanted to do this because the Mainline bodies are excellent and the chassis are dreadful.

 

All the Bachmann 57xx and 8750 Panniers that I own are on the modern chassis, and I'm very happy with them. Because of people mixing and matching, there's really no substitute for looking at the model before buying. Take the body off, if there's a motor in a white pod, it is a Mainline chassis. If there's a huge cast metal block with a motor almost hidden in it, that's a Bachmann split chassis. If the chassis looks "normal" then it is a later conventional chassis. If the model is described as DCC ready, then it must be the conventional chassis, but it has been round for long enough for conventional chassis to be have been produced without DCC sockets - I have some that I've hard-wired, and some perverse people will have hard wired DCC decoders into split chassis examples.

[Dunsignalling]

It isn't as simple as all that. The 57xx and 8750 classes are different bodies on the same chassis - that's fine, because the real things are basically the same, the most obvious difference between the two series is the cab.

But early Bachmann pannier tanks used a split-chassis design. These are fine when new, but over time the bearings wear and the axle-muffs that join the stub axles together split. You will find both 57xx and 8750 series panniers like this. Later they developed a conventional chassis which is much better, and again you will find both 57xx and 8750 series panniers with the conventional chassis.

Added problems happen when previous owners have mixed-and-matched bodies and chassis, to avoid repainting or renumbering their locos, and you will also find Mainline 57xx bodies on Bachmann split chassis - they sold the chassis separately to help people who wanted to do this because the Mainline bodies are excellent and the chassis are dreadful.

 

All the Bachmann 57xx and 8750 Panniers that I own are on the modern chassis, and I'm very happy with them. Because of people mixing and matching, there's really no substitute for looking at the model before buying. Take the body off, if there's a motor in a white pod, it is a Mainline chassis. If there's a huge cast metal block with a motor almost hidden in it, that's a Bachmann split chassis. If the chassis looks "normal" then it is a later conventional chassis. If the model is described as DCC ready, then it must be the conventional chassis, but it has been round for long enough for conventional chassis to be have been produced without DCC sockets - I have some that I've hard-wired, and some perverse people will have hard wired DCC decoders into split chassis examples.

The Bachmann 8750 was launched with the new chassis. Neither Mainline or Replica ever made an 8750 and Bachmann only made 57xx with their old split type.

 

If you find anything other than the solid chassis under a second-hand 8750, you're looking at the leftovers from somebody upgrading an old 57xx. Best to whip the body (or the keeper plate) off to check before parting with cash.

 

Catalogue numbers give guidance for any boxed loco that hasn't been messed with, 31-9xx = split chassis, 57xx only, 32-2xx = the new one, both sub-classes.

 

 

John

Edited January 10, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[PAL]

Many thanks to contributors so far. Perhaps I should clarify further;  the layout is basic DC; and my intention is to buy new. Further contributions most welcome.

[Dunsignalling]

Many thanks to contributors so far. Perhaps I should clarify further;  the layout is basic DC; and my intention is to buy new. Further contributions most welcome.

I don't think either the 57xx or the 8750 is currently listed by Bachmann, so you'll be looking for a 64xx unless you happen across a dealer with one of the others still in stock. 

 

John

Edited January 10, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[cctransuk]

I'm thinking of buying a Bachmann Pannier for ultra-slow-running shunting ......... 

 

Fine - if that's your 'thing' - but it's not prototypical.

 

Railways existed to make profits - or at least to try to avoid excessive losses. Why would any operation be undertaken at an ultra-slow pace?

 

As a child, I lived within earshot of a BR wagon repair works, where there was almost continuous shunting throughout the day and night. I lay in bed and listened to the bark of a 4F accelerating a raft of wagons, so that they could be directed into their respective sidings 'on the fly'. Having done so, it would set off at an equally smart pace to pick up another raft.

 

It astonishes me to see layouts at exhibitions where locos creep about with barely perceptible movement - any driver who did that would have been demoted / sacked for not getting through his rostered work.

 

If you don't believe me - watch a few videos of steam locos operating in marshalling years.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[mervyn]

Must agree with you john, shunting was done quite "speedily" when i was on the job as we could get back to cabin for  a cuppa and a warm in the winter !

[Dunsignalling]

Fine - if that's your 'thing' - but it's not prototypical.

 

Railways existed to make profits - or at least to try to avoid excessive losses. Why would any operation be undertaken at an ultra-slow pace?

 

As a child, I lived within earshot of a BR wagon repair works, where there was almost continuous shunting throughout the day and night. I lay in bed and listened to the bark of a 4F accelerating a raft of wagons, so that they could be directed into their respective sidings 'on the fly'. Having done so, it would set off at an equally smart pace to pick up another raft.

 

It astonishes me to see layouts at exhibitions where locos creep about with barely perceptible movement - any driver who did that would have been demoted / sacked for not getting through his rostered work.

 

If you don't believe me - watch a few videos of steam locos operating in marshalling years.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Agreed. Where I grew up the longest siding was almost a quarter mile in length and, believe me, most drivers didn't go any further up it than they had to.

 

John

Edited January 10, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[PAL]

Thanks to further contributors. Not being a close follower of the ads, I didn't realise that only the 64xx is available at the moment. Can I assume that if I wait long enough, the 57xx and the 87xx will reappear?

 

I found members' observations on shunting speed very interesting and - tho it's slightly off-topic -  would like to hear more. It's beyond me but someone somewhere must have worked out  prototypical shunting speeds scaled down to the various gauges. I have Kadees and my rule-of-thumb speed is one that will work the couplings!

 

Further thoughts on the relative performances of the three Bachmann Panniers still most welcome.

[lofty1966]

Thanks to further contributors. Not being a close follower of the ads, I didn't realise that only the 64xx is available at the moment. Can I assume that if I wait long enough, the 57xx and the 87xx will reappear?

 

Probably gonna need to plan for at least another 10 years of your life waiting !

;-)

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...I found members' observations on shunting speed very interesting and - tho it's slightly off-topic -  would like to hear more. It's beyond me but someone somewhere must have worked out  prototypical shunting speeds scaled down to the various gauges...

 

 

The real benefit of smooth dead slow speed operation is that this means the mechanism is capable of replicating the smooth accelerations of a high inertia vehicle.. The peak speeds in shunting were governed by the yard dimensions as space is required for both grafting up to speed and safe stopping. From memory of what it looked like I would guess at peak speeds in the 10 to 20mph range, for yards ranging from quarter mile long (the lower end of that speed range) to half a mile (the upper end of that speed range).

 

Linearly scaled speed in 4mm scale, a good round number approximation for 10mph is 4 yards a minute.

[spikey]

And if it's any help to know, I have two Bachmann panniers, both recent production, and both run beautifully at very low speed on DC.  How much of this is down to the superb Morley Vector Two controller I use as well as to the locos' design and build, I wouldn't like to say.

[The Johnster]

The real benefit of smooth dead slow speed operation is that this means the mechanism is capable of replicating the smooth accelerations of a high inertia vehicle.. The peak speeds in shunting were governed by the yard dimensions as space is required for both grafting up to speed and safe stopping. From memory of what it looked like I would guess at peak speeds in the 10 to 20mph range, for yards ranging from quarter mile long (the lower end of that speed range) to half a mile (the upper end of that speed range).

 

Linearly scaled speed in 4mm scale, a good round number approximation for 10mph is 4 yards a minute.

 

There was shunting and then there was shunting.  Track in yards and sidings, anything other than running lines, was speed limited to 15mph, which would be the maximum speed that shunting operations other than those on running lines could take place at (yes, i know this was sometimes observed in the breach).  Operations in marshalling and sorting yards where there was plenty of staff on the ground to deal with the work would take place at this sort of speed and rapidly accelerate to it from stops and changes of directions; the work needs to be done and everyone wants to go home; wagons get banged about enthusiastically!

 

But a pick up loco shunting a wayside goods yard, where there is usually only the guard on the ground to change points, couple/uncouple, pin down brakes, and so on, will proceed a bit more sedately as there is no point in rushing about only to have to wait for him to catch up.  About twice walking pace, say 8mph, would be more usual in this case.

 

And if you were propelling stock in to a goods shed or loading bay where men might be working unloading vehicles already positioned there, very great care is exercised and speeds are down to a crawl.  The same applies when stock is being shunted on to trains in platforms that are already carrying passengers; the normal practice here is to pull up short of the point of contact and bring the vehicles in the last few yards very slowly.

 

I have 5 panniers on Cwmdimbath, 4 of which have current production Bachmann mechanisms from 57xx or 8750s.  2, a 57xx and an 8750, are as supplied by Bachmann, and the other 2 with Baccy mechs are a Lima bodied 94xx and a very ancient Mainline 57xx that has been converted to 8750 spec using an even more ancient K's whitemetal cab; these locos have chassis sourced on 'Bay; the mech under the old Mainline loco is actually originally from a 64xx.  All perform very smoothly and run slowly very well indeed, but some are better than others, the original condition 57xx being the best and very near perfect.  These are DC and controlled with a Gaugemaster HH.  

 

The 5th pannier is a Hornby 2721, and while this is geared a little highly, can with care be controlled to run very slowly and smoothly indeed.  My view is that Bachmann's panniers are superb performers and ideally suited to any type of shunting work, in fact any sort of work real panniers did!  They are more than powerful enough for any work on my layout, admittedly only a small BLT, smooth, and very quiet.  They are also (so far) 100% reliable, with an occasional wheel and pickup cleaning.

 

My only moans about Bachmann's panniers are the fact that they cannot be obtained without top feeds, and that they are taking geological time to produce the 94xx announced 6 years ago and deferred twice to my knowledge.  I'd prefer to see them without top feeds because that is the sort of detail easily retrofitted but quite some faff to remove as a moulded detail.

[cctransuk]

.... without top feeds ..... quite some faff to remove as a moulded detail.

 

Oh, come on ! It must surely be one of the simplest modelling projects going?

 

Crop off the bulk of it with Xuron cutters; scrape of the remains with a curved scalpel blade; finish off with wet & dry paper; mix up a tiny amount of matching paint, and touch in as required.

 

If that's not achievable then it's not modelling.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[PAL]

Many thanks to all supplying priceless shunting gen but partic to Johnster and 34 for  such detailed stuff. Definitely worth filing away. The general consensus appears to be that there's not much in it between Bachmann's 3 panniers. But Spikey raises another question - does the controller you use make a real difference to slow running - and  might it be that some locos behave better with particular controllers? 

 

Straying from my original question but not too far, I have another one. Hornby's 08 diesel appears to represent the gold standard when it comes to shunting operations. I was sceptical, and rather resented forking out so much money. But I see now how right prevailing opinion is. But why is it such a wonderful performer? Other locos have 5-pole motors and - like the Bachmann panniers -   pickups on all 6 wheels. I can see that the gearing is very high - or is it low, I can never work it out - compared to any other loco I've known. Is that it? 

 

 

[The Johnster]

I think the secret to the Hornby 08 is the combination of a high gear ratio (by RTR standards) and small diameter driving wheels, which effectively lower the 'final drive' ratio even further.  A pannier is used for other work besides shunting and may have to haul a passenger train (Newport-Brecon for example) at up to 50 mph or so, so cannot be geared like this; the Bachmann's perform exceptionally well nonetheless.  

 

Controllers make a difference, but opinion on the matter is largely subjective; I use a Gaugemaster HH which suits both Bachmann and Hornby DC mechanisms very well, though there are noticeable differences in characteristics between the companies and between similar mechs from the same company, again a subjective and unquantifiable view.  I cannot comment on DCC, as I know more or less nothing about it, but whatever method and whatever controller/chip combination you use, I would imagine that you will be able to get a very good slow running performance from any Bachmann pannier.

[melmerby]

Oh, come on ! It must surely be one of the simplest modelling projects going?

 

Crop off the bulk of it with Xuron cutters; scrape of the remains with a curved scalpel blade; finish off with wet & dry paper; mix up a tiny amount of matching paint, and touch in as required.

 

If that's not achievable then it's not modelling.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

After removing handrails, delicately remove top feed & it's associated pipework from by other detail (lifting rings, fillers, tank straps, other pipework)

Sand with utmost care any remains.

 

Sorry, it doesen't look to be for the fainthearted and IMHO large areas of the tank would need a re-spray.

 

.http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51504-gwr-pannier-next-a-57xx-and-a-5205/page-2

 

Keith

[cctransuk]

After removing handrails, delicately remove top feed & it's associated pipework from by other detail (lifting rings, fillers, tank straps, other pipework)

Sand with utmost care any remains.

 

Sorry, it doesen't look to be for the fainthearted and IMHO large areas of the tank would need a re-spray.

 

.http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51504-gwr-pannier-next-a-57xx-and-a-5205/page-2

 

Keith

 

It's called modelling and, if it's your first attempt, pick up a 'parts only' body off Ebay and have a trial run.

 

It's not out of the question to repaint the whole body by hand afterwards; three colours needed - green,black and red.

 

None of us were born with the basic skills, and we produced quite of few 'questionable' Airfix kits during the learning process.

 

If you want non-mainstream subjects, there really is no alternative.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[The Johnster]

I find myself in agreement with both of these points of view!  I am capable of the modelling required should I need to, but all 3 of my 57xx/8750s ran with top feeds in my period, the 2 8750s from the 96xx series produced new with them and the 57xx with photographic evidence.  If I wanted a prototype without a top feed I'd have no hesitation in taking plastic off the model, cleaning up the mess, and repainting, but I would rather be in the position of retrofitting this sort of detail, in order to have more choice of prototypes and have separate, unmoulded, pipework, than be restricted to top feed examples only; it's not just the 57xx/8750, the 64xx comes with a top feed whether you want one or not as well.

 

Were I to acquire a 4th 57xx/8750, I would be looking at removing the top feed and associated gubbins for the sake of variety.  I like variety, and these 3 locos exhibit 3 different liveries, all correct for my time frame.

 

But I think that the removal and making good job would be a challenge for some RTR modellers; this is not a criticism, just a recognition that not everybody has the same skillsets, or, necessarily, the tools and facilities as those of us who are happy to chop things about, and some folks are concerned with preserving the model's resale value. 

 

It's a very minor niggle, the classic first world problem, in the general scheme of things, and I am very satisfied with my Bachmann panniers, lovely models that run like little sewing machines.

[melmerby]

 I am very satisfied with my Bachmann panniers, lovely models that run like little sewing machines.

Oh Dear.

You must have noisy ones then!

 

Re: modelling skills

I don't have the relevant skill or time to do a backdate of a 57XX, much as I would like to, as that is my period.

The detail is too fine and my fingers are fyffes!

However there are other skills that I have which others may baulk at.

Much of my DCC kit apart from the controller is built from kits.

e.g. I can build an LDT kit and have it ready to use in an evening.

I have also done some whitemetal kits & brass/nickel chassis.

 

Keith

[The Johnster]

I'd suggest having a go on a scrap body, Kieth.  Minidrill tools are your friend, being able to get where your fingers (mine are sausages, and shaky ones at that) can't, and steadiness of hand is probably the limiting factor.  Cut the bulk of the feed casing off with a hot knife, and remove the rest of the material with the power tools, a little bit at a time to avoid heat build up which could distort bits you want left alone.

 

Says he as if he's ever done this job!  This would be how I'd attack it, though.  If you've built brass or nickel chassis, you should be able to nail this...

[cctransuk]

Oh Dear.

You must have noisy ones then!

 

Re: modelling skills

I don't have the relevant skill or time to do a backdate of a 57XX, much as I would like to, as that is my period.

The detail is too fine and my fingers are fyffes!

However there are other skills that I have which others may baulk at.

Much of my DCC kit apart from the controller is built from kits.

e.g. I can build an LDT kit and have it ready to use in an evening.

I have also done some whitemetal kits & brass/nickel chassis.

 

Keith

 

I really can't accept this - if you have the time and skills to build small electronic equipment, you can modify plastic loco bodies. Be honest, such work simply doesn't interest you, does it?

 

As I said, if the decision is taken to model other than a mainstream era, modelling will be necessary; the manufacturers are very unlikely to offer what you require.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[cctransuk]

I'd suggest having a go on a scrap body, Kieth.  Minidrill tools are your friend, being able to get where your fingers (mine are sausages, and shaky ones at that) can't, and steadiness of hand is probably the limiting factor.  Cut the bulk of the feed casing off with a hot knife, and remove the rest of the material with the power tools, a little bit at a time to avoid heat build up which could distort bits you want left alone.

 

Says he as if he's ever done this job!  This would be how I'd attack it, though.  If you've built brass or nickel chassis, you should be able to nail this...

 

I can't endorse either the hot knife or the minidrill options on plastic - far too arbitary and uncontrollable for precision removal of small detail.

 

After removing the bulk with precision hand cutters, the smaller items can be removed with a new curved scalpel blade in a holder.

 

For removing detail adjacent to other detail, a miniature screwdriver sharpened to a chisel blade is excellent - or you can invest in http://modelshop.co.uk/Shop/Item/Chisel-precision/ITM7404 ; I can vouch for the latter as being indispensible.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[PMP]

The Bachman 57xx/8750 with solid chassis have not had a change of motor or gears since release. As above the 64xx chassis does not have a sprung centre axle and is not as good a chassis as the 57/8750 in running qualities. The tooling for the current 57/8750 bodies has certainly had a good run over the years and the body mouldings are showing signs of that heavy use, the last release of one of them was a couple of years ago with a GWR shirt button livery 57xx in a train set. The easy way to tell split chassis vs solid is to look at the wheels. If the hub is solid it’s split chassis, if you can see the end of the axle it’s solid chassis. There are a least two versions of the hardware fitted to the solid chassis version. The first version was not DCC ready, and the boiler weight is heavier and larger than the DCC ready chassis weight, which is lower to allow for chip fitting.

Regarding the removal of top feeds from all three types, it’s not that difficult a task, but use hand tools not power. It’s actually easier to remove rather than add top feeds. If you’re adding them there are shroud panels on the vertical faces which would need adding, with removing them they’re simply cut off. Matching paint subsequently is the same problem whether removing components or adding them.