Collett 2251

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hi,

 

We are considering just one exGWR loco as an occasional visitor to Child Okeford in the shape of the ubiquitous Collett 2251 therein lies the rub - our knowledge of the 2251 in 4mm model form is somewhat lacking.

Does the modern Bachmann still use a split-chassis (we are non-DCC, if makes a difference) or is it one of those models 'in waiting' for an upgrade?

What is the most appropriate livery for the 50-60s?

Finally, if the loco requires a full rebuild, what is the easiest solution - Bachmann Pannier chassis or etched gubbins? The requirement is for a model that will stand its ground when compared with the rest of our motive power (almost all modern Bachmann steam outline) in terms of reliability and appearance.

 

I think that just about covers it, if these concerns have been previously raised, our apologies.

 

JB

[Captain Kernow]

The modern Bachmann model doesn't have the split chassis, as far as I can recall (having owned a new and unused example until I sold it to Hattons last year).

 

The 22XXs weren't introduced to the S&D until the WR took over much of the line following the 1958 boundary changes, so by this time the WR lined green was starting to appear and quite a number did appear in this livery on the S&D. There were also examples in unlined black (which is the livery my own model carries).

 

If you need a replacement chassis, then the High Level one features dummy inside valve gear, always a consideration with a high boilered loco, but personally I found the Comet chassis a more straightforward proposition many years ago (before the High Level one came out, in fact).

 

I'm not sure that a Bachmann pannier chassis is quite right, would have to look further into that.

 

[Guest Jack Benson]

Tim,

 

Thanks, the only question is 'how to tell if the chassis is not split'

 

Was/is there a Bachmann product code which defines the introduction of the conventional chassis?

 

I take onboard your welcome comments about the Comet chassis, much simpler for bodgers.

 

JB

[Captain Kernow]

I recall buying my Bachmann example in the 1990s, when they had just brought out the 'Blue Riband' classification for 'improved' locos and the 22XX was, as far as I can recall, the first example of the 'Blue Riband' brand. One of the features of the Blue Riband status was that they didn't have the split chassis of previous Mainline examples.

 

I stand to be corrected, but in terms of Bachmann panniers, it was only the early examples of the 57XX that featured the split chassis. I look upon that as Bachmann simply churning out the same old Mainline tooling, just to get some examples on the market. Once they had had time to sort themselves out, they reissued the pannier with the new (non split) chassis. I think that the first pannier examples with the new chassis was the 8750 variant, with the 57XX lower cab type then coming out a little later.

 

One thing to consider with replacing a 22XX chassis is that the lower half of the boiler (cast Mazak, I think) is included as part of the chassis. Any attempt to use a Bachmann pannier chassis would not only have to ensure that the chassis itself fitted into the 22XX plastic body moulding, but would also need to have no encumbrances that would prevent you from fitting a replacement lower boiler half to the plastic body.

 

What I did was to use a bit of Evergreen (or similar) plastic tube of a suitable diameter, which I fitted to the loco body, before fitting the Comet chassis.

 

But I would be extremely surprised if you found yourself buying a Bachmann-branded 22XX that didn't have a contemporary chassis under it.

 

The one drawback with the current Bachmann chassis for the 22XX is that it is a solid block of metal, so that is what you see under the boiler. This wouldn't matter on a loco like a pannier, where the amount of space visible between the frames is limited, so it doesn't worry me that my pannier doesn't have dummy inside valve gear.

 

It's a bit more obvious on the 22XX with its higher boiler, however. The Comet chassis (into which I added single-beam compensation) at least gives you some 'air space' between the frames, even if the inside valve gear isn't there to be seen.

 

That is one of the advantages of the High Level chassis kit (or indeed, the erstwhile Martin Finney 22XX kit), in that inside valve gear is included (if you have the time and inclination to build and fit such a thing, which these days, unfortunately I don't!).

 

 

[D9020 Nimbus]

AFAIK Bachmann never issued the 2251 other than in "Blue Riband" form without the split chassis. In my experience the Bachmann ones run superbly—I've never had a Mainline one, so can't comment on those.

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hi,

 

Bachmann have responded 'we have never offered a Collett goods with a split chassis' 

 

This simplifies the search enormously, thanks guys.

 

JB 

[88D]

The Bachmann 2251s run very well with their existing chassis, so I would only upgrade it if there was an imperative need to do so,P4 etc. I think 2277 worked on the S&D and this is one you can buy second hand in BR lined green, not sure if you can buy it new. 

[DCB]

The Bachmann 2251 runs Ok.    You can see  at a glance which 2251s are split chassis, The wheels don't have ugly protruding axle ends on the split chassis and the Motor fills half the cab.

They are all too low though, not sure if the Bachmann driving wheels are too small (Mainline ones definitely are)  but the buffers are too high on the buffer beam and the running plate is too low which makes them look rather odd.

The S+D inherited several under WR rule .which basically worked out their mileage before withdrawal following the withdrawal of the Midland 3F locos. Much of the local passenger work was being taken over by DMUs by 1958, branches were closing to passengers or closing completely and large numbers of small GW locos were being withdrawn so using 2251 as 3F replacements made sense.  I expect the fact they had decent cabs was a welcome bonus to S+D crews.

[Guest Jack Benson]

48 minutes ago, DavidCBroad said:

The Bachmann 2251 runs Ok.    You can see  at a glance which 2251s are split chassis, The wheels don't have ugly protruding axle ends on the split chassis and the Motor fills half the cab.

 

OK, as reported two posts ago, Bachmann confirmed that they have never offered the Collett goods with a split chassis moreover the completely new chassis repositioned the motor so that a full backhead could be included. 

 

Therefore I really do not understand the above comment's relevance to the Bachmann offering.

 

Thanks

 

JB

[DCB]

Bachmann completely retooled the chassis to fit the badly proportioned Mainline body and then retooled the Body to match the existing tender and to fit the retooled chassis which has the motor mounted vertically so it didn't allow the oversize firebox to be reduced to scale proportions.  Mainline and Bachmann look pretty similar and \Mainline locos are sometimes sold S/H as Bachmann.  It does not look right, far too matronly.

Black with early or late BR emblems,. or green with late emblems both Lined and unlined should be appropriate for the S+D but some of the locos had the revised huge balance weights in the driving wheels and there were at least 2 different  types of tender Collett 3000 and Churchward 3500 gallon.  Plenty of pics in the Ivo Peters books to show which locos had which tenders in which livery with which balance weights 

[Guest Jack Benson]

10 hours ago, 88D said:

The Bachmann 2251s run very well with their existing chassis, so I would only upgrade it if there was an imperative need to do so,P4 etc. I think 2277 worked on the S&D and this is one you can buy second hand in BR lined green, not sure if you can buy it new. 

Thanks, 

We took onboard both the Cap'n and 88D's comments and bought a late Bachmann model and  it will receive a new identity as 3210 as seen at Highbridge. It will be be used on the daily  Highbridge-Bailey Gate turn as it pootles through Child Okeford.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

JB

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Jack Benson

[Miss Prism]

3210 tended to run in its last years with a Collett 3000g tender. Quite possibly it had a Churchward 3500g in earlier BR times, as per your pic.

 

[Captain Kernow]

11 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

It does not look right, far too matronly.

 

That may well be, but by the same token, it doesn't look like anything else (other than a 22XX) either.

 

Any Mainline or Bachmann 22XX on a layout isn't going to be mistaken for a Black 5.

 

There are always going to be compromises with most RTR items, whether to a greater or lesser extent.

 

This is not to excuse inaccuracies of any kind, but most of us will be living with constraints of time and other factors, which prevent us acquiring the skills to build a Finney kit or scratchbuild to the standards sometimes seen in MRJ.

 

If I needed another 22XX for my layout (which I don't), my choice would be to get a Bachmann body and accept any limitations it may have, because I simply don't have the time to do anything else.

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Captain Kernow
Thought of something else.

[DCB]

20 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

That may well be, but by the same token, it doesn't look like anything else (other than a 22XX) either.

 

I think what I am trying to say is it isn't up to 21st century standards, its not even good by 1970s (Airfix 14XX) standards but can be improved with an awful lot of work, but unlike the equally inaccurate 1960s  Triang Hall and 1950s  Hornby Dublo Castle it doesn't capture the look of the class which is rather a shame

Edited August 17, 2019 by DavidCBroad

[Captain Kernow]

1 minute ago, DavidCBroad said:

I think what I am trying to say is it isn't up to 21st century standards, its not even good by 1970s (Airfix 14XX) standards but can be improved with an awful lot of work, but unlike the equally inaccurate 1960s  Triang Hall and 1950s  Hornby Dublo Castle it doesn't capture the look of the class which is rather a shame

Whilst you cannot argue with measurements and dimensions, I think that the question of 'perception' can be looked upon as a personal thing. I agree with you re the Hornby Dublo Castle, but not the Triang Hall. To me, the Bachmann 22XX does look like what it is supposed to be. My can pass over the discrepencies you mention, whereas it doesn't in the case of certain other things. I don't propose to take my 20 year old 22XX (with a Comet chassis) apart now to undertake remedial body work.

 

Interestingly, I was never a big fan of the Airfix 14XX as sold. The smokebox door was awful (as was that of their 61XX), but could be improved (which I did for a couple of friends over the years, by replacing it with a turned brass example, to which I added new hinges etc.).

 

Sadly, whilst the body of the Hattons/DJM in Model Railway Administration 14XX is so much better, the motor and drive mechanism represented a few steps in reverse, as far as I was concerned. 

 

[Guest Jack Benson]

 

As the new owner of the Bachmann Collett goods, may I interrupt.

 

The 'ultimate' 2251 from Finney is beyond my paygrade and Child Okeford is a fully functional home layout rather than a someone else's perception of what is correct. Therefore I am rather pleased with the outcome and must concur with the Cap'n 'the Bachmann 22XX does look like what it is supposed to be'

 

 

Thanks

 

JB

Edited August 17, 2019 by Jack Benson
Uploaded the correct image

[Miss Prism]

Here's a Bachmann with a Collett 3000g, which is more appropriate to what 3210 is supposed to look like, although I suspect Bachmann has taken a liberty with the early crest application.

 

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hello,

 

Though inspired by 3210, our purchase of 2244 does limit our options somewhat however the online SDJR loco list

does provide a few candidates that need to filtered.

 

Miss Prism,

what type of  tender is coupled to 2244, we can change the livery and identity but somewhat restricted by the tender. Any further information and advice is sought and gratefully received- thank you.

 

JB

 

 

[Steamport Southport]

Have a look here. It might seem a bit daunting at first, but you'll soon pick up the important bits.

 

http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-tenders.html

 

 

 

Jason

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, Jack Benson said:

Miss Prism,

what type of  tender is coupled to 2244, we can change the livery and identity but somewhat restricted by the tender. Any further information and advice is sought and gratefully received- thank you.

 

Jack - your 2244 has a Churchward 3500g. The pic I posted of 2251 has a Collett 3000g, with the continuous fender around the rear. (Bachmann's 2251 is a backdated and unlined version of an Oswestry loco in 1960.)

 

Livery-wise, you have a choice of black, plain green or lined green. The online SDJR loco list has 19 Collett Goods, and I'm sure there is a variety in livery styles to choose from. CK states that Collett Goods didn't get to the S&D until 1958, so whatever livery is chosen, late crest would be more appropriate.

 

As to tender types, the Collett Goods ran with all sorts of things, the Churchward 3500g and the Collett 3000g being the most appropriate for the S&D allocation, although I get the impression the Collett 3000g was the favoured tender type for the line in later years. (I don't know why, except for the fact that the Colletts were a lot younger than the Churchwards, the latter starting to be chucked out for scrap by that stage.)

 

Personally, I can never get too excited about wanting to choose a particular loco for a particular line. Allocation and livery tended to be a bit of an adhoc process anyway, and tender changing was frequent, so Rule 1 depends entirely on how far you want to take it.

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by Miss Prism

[Guest Jack Benson]

Miss Prism,

 

Many thanks.

Sometime ago we downloaded an image of every 2251 listed to have worked on the SDJR, naturally not every image is appropriate to the line but it gives us a start.

My best guess is that we will simply order a set of Narrow Planet plates based on a picture of a loco that is closest in appearance to 2244 and have done with it.

Pragmatic modelling always seems to work.

 

Cheers

 

JB

 

[57xx]

On 17/08/2019 at 10:16, Captain Kernow said:

Interestingly, I was never a big fan of the Airfix 14XX as sold. The smokebox door was awful (as was that of their 61XX), but could be improved (which I did for a couple of friends over the years, by replacing it with a turned brass example, to which I added new hinges etc.).

Sadly, whilst the body of the Hattons/DJM in Model Railway Administration 14XX is so much better, the motor and drive mechanism represented a few steps in reverse, as far as I was concerned. 

 

My biggest gripe on the Airfix 14xx was the cab spectacle plate, it just did not look right with the crude window openings right up to the roof line. Even with the Mainly Trains detailing kit, it still looked wrong to me because of that area. As you say, whilst the Hattons one made progress on the looks, the chassis was a huge step backwards. Maybe I'm looking back 40 years with rose tinted specs, but I always remember my Airfix 14xx to be a reliable runner.

[Combe Martin]

Referring to your idea of modelling 3210, when on the S&D this loco was in lined green and with a Collet 3000 gallon tender with late crest, ie one of the Mainline split chassis models.  Mine runs well but you need to be a bit innovative to convert it to DCC.    

[melmerby]

The difference in chassis between the early Bachmann 2251 and the later DCC ready version is that Bachmann (IMHO) have removed too much metal to fit a decoder, making it rather light footed.

Both my new DCC ready have now been modded (in different ways) by adding lead.

I managed to fit a decoder to an early one without too much metal removal!

 

See here:

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by melmerby