Oxford Rail announce J27 at Toy Fair

[Bernard Lamb]

A request for help please to the experts on here.

Looking at an idea of mixing and matching I am seeking information on tender coal rails for these two machines.  65792 and 65807  preferably as of around 1958.

Bernard

[Daddyman]

3 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

65807  preferably as of around 1958

Well, to get you started - 1952, two coal rails:  

https://www.rail-online.co.uk/p840639440/h72450207#h72450207
 

Did tenders change much? I wonder if the tender seen in 1952 is likely to have changed by 58? Yes, in the mid-60s maybe, when they kept what they could running. 

 

Note the old boiler, but Yeadon says it got a new-pattern boiler in October 58.

[Alcanman]

Enjoying this thread very much and learning more about the J27s which were an everyday sight back in the 1960s for me.

 

I wonder if someone could identify the number of the J27 in this photo I took at North Blyth in 1966.

[Porcy Mane]

1 hour ago, Alcanman said:

I wonder if someone could identify the number of the J27 in this photo I took at North Blyth in 1966.

 

My magic glasses say 65893, but they have been known to be wrong.

[tractionman]

36 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

My magic glasses say 65893, but they have been known to be wrong.

 

There's a 65892 in Sept 1965 spotted at North Blythe

 

https://shedbashuk.blogspot.com/2014/02/north-blyth-1938-1958-rothbury.html?m=1

 

Cheers,

 

Keith

[Alcanman]

37 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

My magic glasses say 65893, but they have been known to be wrong.

Thanks. I think you may be right. BR database shows the loco withdrawn from North Blyth on 31/7/66. The photo was probably taken a few weeks before withdrawl. I remember a sunny summer day. (rare for North Blyth)

[Porcy Mane]

8 minutes ago, tractionman said:

There's a 65892 in Sept 1965 spotted at North Blyth

 

Yep but that had a 3 Rail tender & no Lubricator late in life.

Edited July 2, 2021 by Porcy Mane

[Trev52A]

The front numberplate looks like 65857 to me

 

Trevor

[Alcanman]

30 minutes ago, Trev52A said:

The front numberplate looks like 65857 to me

 

Trevor

It's not 65857. The loco was withdrawn in 1963. Thanks for looking.

[Bernard Lamb]

6 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Well, to get you started - 1952, two coal rails:  

https://www.rail-online.co.uk/p840639440/h72450207#h72450207
 

Did tenders change much? I wonder if the tender seen in 1952 is likely to have changed by 58? Yes, in the mid-60s maybe, when they kept what they could running. 

 

Note the old boiler, but Yeadon says it got a new-pattern boiler in October 58.

Many thanks.

That will do for me.

I know about the boiler change and that fits in just fine as I can always go a bit earlier.

Bernard

[waggy]

 

By tilting the angle of my laptop screen and using my magnlfying glass I'm getting 65859.  Information on BR Database site is confusing York engine yet in store at Thornaby 09/09/63.  Picture on Rail-online shows it at Winning in 1966 and Shed Bash UK has it on South Blyth Shed on 9th July 1966

[Porcy Mane]

1 hour ago, waggy said:

65859

 

65859, didn't have lubricator, frame extensions nor squared piano boiler weight in 1965.

Edited July 3, 2021 by Porcy Mane
To put in the correct number.

[Alcanman]

1 hour ago, waggy said:

 

By tilting the angle of my laptop screen and using my magnlfying glass I'm getting 65859.  Information on BR Database site is confusing York engine yet in store at Thornaby 09/09/63.  Picture on Rail-online shows it at Winning in 1966 and Shed Bash UK has it on South Blyth Shed on 9th July 1966

I've had a look at the original photo with a magnifying glass and the last number is a 9, so I'm also thinking it's 65859. The loco was actually transferred from York to North Blyth in April 1966 and withdrawn in September 1966.  

 

Thanks to all for the help in identifying the loco,

[Porcy Mane]

56 minutes ago, Alcanman said:

I've had a look at the original photo with a magnifying glass

 

Don't thinks it's 65859. For the reasons outlined above along with there being no holes in buffer plank for snow plough and 859 didn't have the sandwich front buffer beam. 

 

[Alcanman]

3 hours ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

Don't thinks it's 65859. For the reasons outlined above along with there being no holes in buffer plank for snow plough and 859 didn't have the sandwich front buffer beam. 

 

Looks like the mystery of the J27's number continues...   I can see the buffer beam is different.  Thanks.

[micklner]

deleted

 

Edited July 3, 2021 by micklner

[cctransuk]

On 03/07/2021 at 16:33, Alcanman said:

Looks like the mystery of the J27's number continues...   I can see the buffer beam is different.  Thanks.

 

It reads 65959 on my screen - but I have no idea if that makes sense.

 

CJI.

Edited July 8, 2021 by cctransuk

[micklner]

4 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

It reads 65959 on my screen - but I have no idea of that makes sense.

 

CJI.

BR datebase says number doesnt exist

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, micklner said:

BR datebase says number doesnt exist

 

I had a feeling that might be the case.

 

CJI.

[Axlebox]

On 02/07/2021 at 16:18, Porcy Mane said:

 

My magic glasses say 65893, but they have been known to be wrong.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/8157260823

 

Check out the packing behind the buffer...must have had its buffers refitted in its last works visit...

 

 

Edited July 3, 2021 by Axlebox

[Porcy Mane]

15 minutes ago, Axlebox said:

Check out the packing behind the buffer...must have had its buffers refitted in its last works visit...

 

Maybe they used the same saw?  A blunt blade day.

 

https://flic.kr/p/bcba8x

 

[DougN]

While I wait for the sound fitted versions to arrive I have pulled out a Dave Bradwell kit I started about 7 to 8 years ago. For various reasons it has been placed in its box until I could get back to doing the detailing. I am starting on the tender. While I was looking at the etches and what I had built I was thinking that the spares from the 2 kits I have built could be very useful to detail and modify the oxford rail version. 

 

Any how back to a comment that Porcy made above regarding the surprisingly critical review by Hornby Mag. I found the same to the Hattons o Gauge teak coaches. It was not a glowing report as we have seen before but did have some criticism which was surprising. It could be a situation where Mike Wild (who I think is one of the best editors... other than having a nice quirky sense of humour on the youtube channel which I quite enjoy) might have been having a challenging time so was a little more "honest" than previous. 

 

I would say that these are better reviews as they really are reviews rather than unpaid for Advertorials.   

[Daddyman]

1 hour ago, DougN said:

While I wait for the sound fitted versions to arrive I have pulled out a Dave Bradwell kit I started about 7 to 8 years ago. For various reasons it has been placed in its box until I could get back to doing the detailing.

Snap. Porcy's dirty photos have really got the creative juices flowing... 

 

Body mostly done years ago. Basic chassis built yesterday. The dreaded brakes today. 

 

 

 

[Porcy Mane]

5 hours ago, DougN said:

Any how back to a comment that Porcy made above regarding the surprisingly critical review by Hornby Mag.

 

Don't think that was I, Doug  Dimples.   

[Porcy Mane]

3 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Snap. Porcy's dirty photos have really got the creative juices flowing... 

 

 

You have probably seen these.

 

https://flic.kr/p/bcb9dz

https://flic.kr/p/bbceip

https://flic.kr/p/rEMgfJ

https://flic.kr/p/dqQ6pv

 

A rivet free running plate.  Boot print transfers and masks are apparently available for the military modeller.  No evidence of the lifting cut out on the cab roof.