Jump to content
 

'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement


Hattons Dave
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Craigw said:

 

 

Do you have any proof that "correct  first time" would not be financially viable?

 

None, but this isn't a zero-sum game. The "little bit of effort" being proposed costs money, resources and time, especially if you want "right first time" coaches. The resulting coaches would by necessity have to cost more. Given the number of people modelling each individual pre-grouping company, they'd probably have to cost quite a lot more, perhaps in the region of £70-100 or higher. Especially given that you're now explicitly marketing to people with an expectation of perfection, as opposed to those willing to accept compromise. The assumption you'd have to make is that there are a similar number of people willing to pay the higher price to those who'd be willing to pay the lower price Hattons is currently offering.

 

Now, you could take a gamble on this. You could hope that the availability of coaches would drive up the number of people willing to take the plunge into seriously modelling that particular company, but that's quite a risk. Especially in the case of railways that have very little by way of available ready-to-run locomotives.

 

This is all an untried proposition. Nobody makes ready-to-run pre-Grouping coaches to a modern standard except for Bachmann's SECR birdcage stock, and even now there are relatively few pre-Grouping passenger locomotives. Nobody can really say how pre-Grouping coaches would sell, whether generic or not, but there seems to be plenty of interest in these coaches and I would say that Hattons is only being sensible in choosing a lower risk option.

Edited by HonestTom
  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

It seems entirely in character that the goods porter should look to be a cheerful fellow* whereas the passenger porter**...

 

*has just placed his pre-order for Hattons Genesis carriages?

**... models in P4?

 

Sorry, OT, but we're enjoying ourselves.

* Yes, he has got a rather vacant look in his eyes.

 

** I imagine he is the sort of bloke who is into modelling period wagons to the Nth degree of detail. :P

  • Like 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have only just seen this announcement, but it seems a pretty good idea to me. I say that as a modern modeller, who knows little about the specifics of pre-grouping coaches, but since the Hornby "generic" 4-wheelers and clerestories seem to be popular amongst freelancers and builders, I imagine these will take on that same role quite nicely. For those who want something that looks right behind their pre-grouping locos, they will work fine, and possibly encourage them to build more accurate stock later on. It would certainly encourage me to build something of that era if there were more rtr available, and I suspect that barrier exists for many more too. As many have said, there's never going to be the demand for each individual railway's stock, but if these sell well they might provide the impetus for more accurate versions of certain companies' coaches (ie the liveries that sell the best). 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I do think that anyone expecting an RTR suite of company-specific pre-Grouping coaches is not living in the real world. 

Given this reality, railing against a generic product in favour of a specific one is, quite apart from anything else, an exercise in utter futility.

None of us lives in the real world – at least some of the time!

 

I haven’t railed against this generic product nor do I expect a suite of company-specific pre-grouping coaches. My observation on the topic is that I would prefer accurate, company-specific coaches to generic ones. Let me say that hoping for, rather than expecting, them is not totally futile. After all, Dapol is providing Stroudleys to match the 0 gauge Terrier. It is not, I submit, totally futile to hope that the same might happen in 00.

 

I concede that the appearance of a range of generic coaches might persuade Dapol that Stroudleys in 00 would be too much of a commercial risk.

 

There has been criticism of a lack of joined up thinking and delight when it occurs. More usually, the request is for stock for a pretty pre-grouping locomotive to pull but the announcement of a Wainwright D to tow Bachmann Birdcages is an example of it happening the other way around. I don’t think it unreasonable for a manufacturer or commissioner to look at what pre-grouping locos are available and produce suitable stock. In a way, it’s already happening. Two examples are Bachmann’s Midland brake van and Hornby’s LSWR one. There are quite a few “generic” wagons floating around, in the sense that grouping-era wagons are finished in pre-grouping liveries. Where wagons are concerned, a big gap is in pre-grouping RCH wagons. There is hope here – Rails has embarked on producing short runs of wagons using 3D printing.

 

Granted, an occasional wagon or brake van doth not a passenger rake make but I bet that my hope will come to fruition at some stage in the years ahead. I am increasing my intake of vegetables in the hope that I last long enough.

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

13 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

None of us lives in the real world – at least some of the time!

 

I haven’t railed against this generic product nor do I expect a suite of company-specific pre-grouping coaches. My observation on the topic is that I would prefer accurate, company-specific coaches to generic ones. Let me say that hoping for, rather than expecting, them is not totally futile. After all, Dapol is providing Stroudleys to match the 0 gauge Terrier. It is not, I submit, totally futile to hope that the same might happen in 00.

 

I concede that the appearance of a range of generic coaches might persuade Dapol that Stroudleys in 00 would be too much of a commercial risk.

 

There has been criticism of a lack of joined up thinking and delight when it occurs. More usually, the request is for stock for a pretty pre-grouping locomotive to pull but the announcement of a Wainwright D to tow Bachmann Birdcages is an example of it happening the other way around. I don’t think it unreasonable for a manufacturer or commissioner to look at what pre-grouping locos are available and produce suitable stock. In a way, it’s already happening. Two examples are Bachmann’s Midland brake van and Hornby’s LSWR one. There are quite a few “generic” wagons floating around, in the sense that grouping-era wagons are finished in pre-grouping liveries. Where wagons are concerned, a big gap is in pre-grouping RCH wagons. There is hope here – Rails has embarked on producing short runs of wagons using 3D printing.

 

Granted, an occasional wagon or brake van doth not a passenger rake make but I bet that my hope will come to fruition at some stage in the years ahead. I am increasing my intake of vegetables in the hope that I last long enough.

 

I'm not sure that it would put Dapol off producing LBSC coaches, which are conspicuous by their absence in the Hattons range. Obviously I don't know how much either company knows about the other's plans, but it's interesting that we're getting coaches for the GER (one RTR locomotive) and the Caledonian (three RTR locomotives, one not out yet, two very dated) and none for the LBSC (six RTR locomotives, all designed for passenger work).

 

Given the appearance of a SECR D in Hattons' train formation guide followed by an announcement of a D, I wouldn't be surprised if there have been a few tip-offs here and there (he said, removing his tinfoil hat).

 

Now, whether this might put manufacturers off, e.g., producing NER coaches in the future, I can't say, but I suspect the opposite will be the case. After all, it's not like the existence of Bulleid coaches in Bachmann's range put Hornby off making Maunsell coaches. Rather, I think it will give manufacturers a better idea of which pre-Grouping modellers are most likely to invest in more prototypical coaches in the future.

Edited by HonestTom
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Over the next 5 years I forsee several developments :

 

- One or two small specialists announce authentic etched 28' and 32' sides to be applied to  the Hattons generics. It's a well-recognised approach to building a different , more specialist vehicle, though so far it's involved Comet and MJT etched sides stuck to Grouping era or Mk1 donor vehicles

- One or two people start to offer replacement 3D printed bodyshells for these underframes. A SECR 6 wheel birdcage full brake might be an ideal follow-up for Rails SECR van...

 

It should be possible to produce 32' GE 6-wheelers by either route (34'6" stock is more difficult) . I can also see GN 6 wheelers being done by either route, though again I think many GN vehicles were somewhat longer than 32'.

If you can't build/paint an LRM LNWR kit, it might be possible to apply suitable LRM sides to a Hattons donor - if LRM are able to take the Comet approach and supply the sides separately  [ If LNWR livery is the real sticking point , would it be practical for anyone to supply pre-painted or part-painted LRM sides??  I can see risks applying pre-painted sides - but also practical advantages. ]. These are low-volume routes, but would still open up opportunities

 

As matters stand - the Hattons models look like reasonable approximations of MR arc-roof and MSLR 6 wheelers. Both MR and GC  have modest suites of RTR locos available 

 

And just to stir the pot - the rear 3 compartment brake third in that Barry Railway train shown a page or so ago looks remarkably like the Hattons 6 wheel brake third

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
25 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

Over the next 5 years I forsee several developments :

 

- One or two small specialists announce authentic etched 28' and 32' sides to be applied to  the Hattons generics. It's a well-recognised approach to building a different , more specialist vehicle, though so far it's involved Comet and MJT etched sides stuck to Grouping era or Mk1 donor vehicles

- One or two people start to offer replacement 3D printed bodyshells for these underframes. A SECR 6 wheel birdcage full brake might be an ideal follow-up for Rails SECR van...

 

It should be possible to produce 32' GE 6-wheelers by either route (34'6" stock is more difficult) . I can also see GN 6 wheelers being done by either route, though again I think many GN vehicles were somewhat longer than 32'.

If you can't build/paint an LRM LNWR kit, it might be possible to apply suitable LRM sides to a Hattons donor - if LRM are able to take the Comet approach and supply the sides separately  [ If LNWR livery is the real sticking point , would it be practical for anyone to supply pre-painted or part-painted LRM sides??  I can see risks applying pre-painted sides - but also practical advantages. ]. These are low-volume routes, but would still open up opportunities

 

As matters stand - the Hattons models look like reasonable approximations of MR arc-roof and MSLR 6 wheelers. Both MR and GC  have modest suites of RTR locos available 

 

And just to stir the pot - the rear 3 compartment brake third in that Barry Railway train shown a page or so ago looks remarkably like the Hattons 6 wheel brake third

 

Length and wheelbase are the sticking points. The comparison with Comet isn't really valid as there there are donor carriages with the right length, roof profile, underframe / bogies / running gear, i.e. the only thing wrong is the sides. I really can't see LRM being interested in producing stretched LNWR sides to fit a 32 ft underframe - it's really not there ethos . I know they started out producing replacement sides to turn the Ratio 50 ft corridor carriages into non-corridor carriages but again the starting point was right for the prototype. 

 

For the Midland, there is the hope that the Slaters 6-wheeler kits may reappear and of course there are the Ratio 48 ft Bain suburban carriages, spot on for the Bachman 1532 Class, if you happen to be modelling the Birmingham area!

 

Someone mentioned the Bachmann Midland brake - in fact an LMS diagram, based on the very last design of Midland brake built in relatively small numbers in 1919 and 1922/3 - the last batch almost certainly entering service lettered LMS. But to look at the situation more positively, if you're looking for a pre-grouping railway to model, the Midland c. 1922 is probably the easiest to approximate with RTR equipment.

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

13 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Length and wheelbase are the sticking points. The comparison with Comet isn't really valid as there there are donor carriages with the right length, roof profile, underframe / bogies / running gear, i.e. the only thing wrong is the sides. I really can't see LRM being interested in producing stretched LNWR sides to fit a 32 ft underframe - it's really not there ethos . I know they started out producing replacement sides to turn the Ratio 50 ft corridor carriages into non-corridor carriages but again the starting point was right for the prototype. 

 

For the Midland, there is the hope that the Slaters 6-wheeler kits may reappear and of course there are the Ratio 48 ft Bain suburban carriages, spot on for the Bachman 1532 Class, if you happen to be modelling the Birmingham area!

 

Someone mentioned the Bachmann Midland brake - in fact an LMS diagram, based on the very last design of Midland brake built in relatively small numbers in 1919 and 1922/3 - the last batch almost certainly entering service lettered LMS. But to look at the situation more positively, if you're looking for a pre-grouping railway to model, the Midland c. 1922 is probably the easiest to approximate with RTR equipment.

 

Do LRM still sell sides separately?

 

I'd love to convert the Ratios into non-corridors.

 

With the 6-wheelers, it seems to me that having the correct w/b is more significant than the length; I can always cut that down by a scale foot.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Do LRM still sell sides separately?

 

I'd love to convert the Ratios into non-corridors.

 

With the 6-wheelers, it seems to me that having the correct w/b is more significant than the length; I can always cut that down by a scale foot.  

 

They do currently supply complete kits incorporating the Ratio underframes etc. New roofs are included, as the Ratio roof include rebates for the lavatory and side corridor lamps.

 

Changing the length of the Hattons underframe may be easier or harder depending on the plastic used. When I modified some Hornby 6-plank wagons, I found the underframes were made from a shiny plastic that was particularly unpleasant to work on. I suspect that one might be better off starting from the Slater's Midland underframe, if that becomes available again - which could happen on much the same timescale as the Hattons carriages.

 

As the Irishman* said, "If I wanted to get to there, I wouldn't start from here".

 

*He was from Arklow and hence my ancestor. Arklow turned out to be a good place to start from to get to Liverpool, then Birmingham.

 

 

Edited by Compound2632
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

As the Irishman* said, "If I wanted to get to there, I wouldn't start from here".

 

*He was from Arklow and hence my ancestor. Arklow turned out to be a good place to start from to get to Liverpool, then Birmingham.

Ahhh, but where did he want to get to? :huh:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
19 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

I'd love to convert the Ratios into non-corridors.

 

 

The Ratio Midland Bain suburbans might actually make a reasonable starting-point for the NER 32 ft 6-wheelers, since they share the relatively deep waist panel. There's no surprise there, since Bain came to the Midland from the North Eastern. Unfortunately those Midland carriages have 5'10 5/32" thirds and 6'8 3/8" firsts* neither of which is a good match for the NER compartment dimensions - a 5-compartment carriage using the third class sides would come out around 30' long or using the first class sides, around 34'. I've seen them used as a starting point for passable NER bogie carriages.

 

*an injection of new century parsimony after the clerestory carriages Clayton had built for Leeds - Bradford area suburban work, with compartments to his full main-line specification of 6'6" thirds and 7'9" firsts.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 minutes ago, truffy said:

Ahhh, but where did he want to get to? :huh:

 

Ireland, early 20s - more a question of where you would rather not be. Actually, he (my maternal grandfather) did well enough, becoming a council foreman in the housing department, with five children all of whom became university graduates. He had a story about one university graduation ceremony at which he found his boss, the clerk of works, sitting behind him looking very pleased with himself. "Fancy seeing you here, Jack! This must be quite something for you!" - "Ah well, this is the third one I've been to." 

 

He also taught me everything I know about bidding at Bridge, which according to my elder son, is particularly unfortunate.

 

Sorry, rambling OT.

 

Now what did the carriages of the Damn Slow & Easy look like?

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Length and wheelbase are the sticking points. The comparison with Comet isn't really valid as there there are donor carriages with the right length, roof profile, underframe / bogies / running gear, i.e. the only thing wrong is the sides. I really can't see LRM being interested in producing stretched LNWR sides to fit a 32 ft underframe - it's really not there ethos . I know they started out producing replacement sides to turn the Ratio 50 ft corridor carriages into non-corridor carriages but again the starting point was right for the prototype. 

 

For the Midland, there is the hope that the Slaters 6-wheeler kits may reappear and of course there are the Ratio 48 ft Bain suburban carriages, spot on for the Bachman 1532 Class, if you happen to be modelling the Birmingham area!

 

Someone mentioned the Bachmann Midland brake - in fact an LMS diagram, based on the very last design of Midland brake built in relatively small numbers in 1919 and 1922/3 - the last batch almost certainly entering service lettered LMS. But to look at the situation more positively, if you're looking for a pre-grouping railway to model, the Midland c. 1922 is probably the easiest to approximate with RTR equipment.

 

 

Agree the length has to be the same , and the wheelbase needs to be close

 

But there are existing kits for 32' LNWR 6 wheelers in LRM's list. I was wondering aloud if those might be applied to a Hattons  32' "donor" vehicle 

 

See the lower part of the 6 wheel Coaches section of this list.  (Of course if there is too much else on the same etched sheet, selling the sides seperately may not be practical)

LRM LNWR coach kits

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The LRM kits for LNWR carriages have a etched brass body kit to go onto either their own etched underframe or, for the 50ft arc roof stock, on to a Ratio LNWR plastic moulded underframe. The etches for the body include the sides, ends, duckets, end steps and various other bits and pieces. It would not be economical to sell just the etches for the sides only without producing a new etch tool for each 32ft coach Diagram (seven in all). Given that  the likely sales volume would be pretty low (probably by people being deterred  through having to paint and line the LNWR livery themselves), I think it would not be a viable exercise.

  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The  reasons given for the acceptance of these freelance coaches was that people wanted models to run with the RTR models and did not have the skill or inclination to build kits and finish them off in the pre-grouping liveries. Now we have talk of people doing cut and shuts on them and using donor sides to make something else, creating the very issues that pushed the case for them. Seems to me more than a little contradictory. 

 

I simply cannot imagine someone taking the time and effort to produce a range of sides as being viable and I cannot see many people cutting the sides out of a 30 GBP plus model to fit alternate sides to them.

 

Craig W

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Craigw said:

The  reasons given for the acceptance of these freelance coaches was that people wanted models to run with the RTR models and did not have the skill or inclination to build kits and finish them off in the pre-grouping liveries. Now we have talk of people doing cut and shuts on them and using donor sides to make something else, creating the very issues that pushed the case for them. Seems to me more than a little contradictory. 

 

I simply cannot imagine someone taking the time and effort to produce a range of sides as being viable and I cannot see many people cutting the sides out of a 30 GBP plus model to fit alternate sides to them.

 

Craig W

 

Since the Hattons range is not yet on sale, all comments about markets are to a degree speculative. And with the greatest respect, you are not part of the potential market - and so your speculations about its motivations may be wide of the mark

 

But the Shirescenes etches for Ratio 4 wheelers do exist. Given that building a Ratio kit is more demanding than buying RTR , I can't see why the market for such sides for these vehicles would be less than for etched sides for the Ratio kits . And I believe it only requires sales of 50-75 units for an etched kit to be viable? The MR, LNWR and GE certainly had 32' 6-wheel coaches (Lengths of MSLR stock eagerly awaited...) 

 

Artwork for etched 32' LNWR sides exists in the LRM range . I take Jol's point that drawing up new "sides only" etches would be uneconomic , so the only route would be to offer the existing brass etch , with all its extra bits - looking at pricing for the relevant kits and the n/s underframe as a sperate item, I assume the cost of a brass etch only would be about £16-18. But this - plus the cost of the RTR - would only by a few pounds more than the cost of a full kit , but with much of the work (eg a running underframe) already done . At this point the development cost for LRM would be nil - they would simply add an extra 10-15 units onto their next order of the brass etches for the 32' kits. Not a huge commercial risk , nor a huge investment

 

We seem to have got fixated on the idea that these coaches are no good because they are not really credible as LNWR/Furness or GNR stock.. There are routes round that problem.

 

But they look pretty close to MR, MSLR, NER, or LBSCR  stock (perhaps even to Barry Railway stock..) , and far closer to GE and SECR non-bogie stock than anything else currently available. Hattons seem to be promising to make a dead-ringer for a GSWR full brake that survived into the late 50s.

 

Enough people stick etched sides on bogie RTR coaches to make it worth Comet supplying the sides separately. Why not for these??

 

The case for the 6 wheelers in simply that there are currently no RTR 6 wheelers and precious few kits. For the major late user of 6 wheelers (LNER Southern and Scottish areas) there seem to be no readily available kits. For 4 wheelers you have only the incredible Hornby coaches in RTR, and Ratio kits  which really don't suit any company other than the GWR . The GWR was 15% of the British system , leaving the other 85% of the network uncovered. (The LNER Southern Area was as big as the GW - and had more non-bogie stock)

 

The complaints that they aren't perfect  ignore the fact that there are currently no real options - even as kits - for these vehicles

Edited by Ravenser
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A generic RTR model with inherently crisp, tidy, straight, square construction, that can be converted by those able willing to make only a little effort effort into something that is at least fairly convincingly representative of a specific prototype may, even if it is not "exact", end up looking better and costing less in both time and money than an exotic, specific kit, imperfectly assembled. I therefore see absolutely no contradiction that is created by those who may intend to use these models as a convenient starting point for limited effort conversions.

  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

Since the Hattons range is not yet on sale, all comments about markets are to a degree speculative. And with the greatest respect, you are not part of the potential market - and so your speculations about its motivations may be wide of the mark

 

But the Shirescenes etches for Ratio 4 wheelers do exist. Given that building a Ratio kit is more demanding than buying RTR , I can't see why the market for such sides for these vehicles would be less than for etched sides for the Ratio kits . And I believe it only requires sales of 50-75 units for an etched kit to be viable? The MR, LNWR and GE certainly had 32' 6-wheel coaches (Lengths of MSLR stock eagerly awaited...) 

 

Artwork for etched 32' LNWR sides exists in the LRM range . I take Jol's point that drawing up new "sides only" etches would be uneconomic , so the only route would be to offer the existing brass etch , with all its extra bits - looking at pricing for the relevant kits and the n/s underframe as a sperate item, I assume the cost of a brass etch only would be about £16-18. But this - plus the cost of the RTR - would only by a few pounds more than the cost of a full kit , but with much of the work (eg a running underframe) already done . At this point the development cost for LRM would be nil - they would simply add an extra 10-15 units onto their next order of the brass etches for the 32' kits. Not a huge commercial risk , nor a huge investment

 

We seem to have got fixated on the idea that these coaches are no good because they are not really credible as LNWR/Furness or GNR stock.. There are routes round that problem.

 

But they look pretty close to MR, MSLR, NER, or LBSCR  stock (perhaps even to Barry Railway stock..) , and far closer to GE and SECR non-bogie stock than anything else currently available. Hattons seem to be promising to make a dead-ringer for a GSWR full brake that survived into the late 50s.

 

Enough people stick etched sides on bogie RTR coaches to make it worth Comet supplying the sides separately. Why not for these??

 

The case for the 6 wheelers in simply that there are currently no RTR 6 wheelers and precious few kits. For the major late user of 6 wheelers (LNER Southern and Scottish areas) there seem to be no readily available kits. For 4 wheelers you have only the incredible Hornby coaches in RTR, and Ratio kits  which really don't suit any company other than the GWR . The GWR was 15% of the British system , leaving the other 85% of the network uncovered. (The LNER Southern Area was as big as the GW - and had more non-bogie stock)

 

The complaints that they aren't perfect  ignore the fact that there are currently no real options - even as kits - for these vehicles

If people are thinking of these as a basis for conversion I wonder if there would be any point in someone producing something like the etched sides (and ends?) that Shirescenes do for the Ratio GW kits for these?

They'd still not be dead right for a prototype probably (underframe?), but a good deal closer.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, johnarcher said:

If people are thinking of these as a basis for conversion I wonder if there would be any point in someone producing something like the etched sides (and ends?) that Shirescenes do for the Ratio GW kits for these?

They'd still not be dead right for a prototype probably (underframe?), but a good deal closer.

 

Exactly. I think the potential market should be larger than for the Shirescenes GW sides

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The underframe for LNWR vehicles in particular is very distinctive and therefore I wonder how popular conversion sides would be.

But then again who would buy them? Most comments on here have said that they can't paint and line pre-grouping liveries, so unless the replacement sides were pre-painted and ready to stick on, I can't see the point (but of course for small runs this is going to cost a fortune, and will be totally uneconomic).

Again those that can (or are prepared to try) and care enough about things actually being right, will continue to buy kits.

 

Sadly I think sides might be a non-starter...

 

Andy G

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

GWR is a much bigger market than LNWR and the development cost would be a new set of artwork so it’s not free. Depending on the type that exists for all the coaches that isn’t necessarily an easy thing. Although most etchers have moved to requiring cad files it may not be a simple thing to split off part of it requiring that time to be accounted for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps what would be needed for replacing sides on these generic models, while overcoming the painting and lining deterrent, are pre-printed overlays on acetate as supplied in the  old range of PC kits.

 

Even then, I think that most owners of RTR pre-group locos would be satisfied with an "inaccurate" coach but in the correct livery, as Hattons propose.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

GWR is a much bigger market than LNWR 

 

Hattons are offering these carriages in fully-lined-out chocolate and cream, i.e. the livery applied up to c. 1908. I'm not convinced that the market for pre-Great War Great Western is any greater than the market for pre-Grouping LNWR.

 

What Great Western RTR locomotives are available for the pre-Great War period? From the Hattons website, selecting Era 2 steam locomotives: Bachmann City, Hornby ex-Triang Achilles, Oxford Dean Goods; to which one could add the Hornby County and 28xx. I'm not sure that all those are currently available in the appropriate condition and livery, if they ever have been. Three of those were in that period front-line express passenger locomotives and one a heavy freight locomotive, for which 4 and 6-wheeled carriages are not exactly the most appropriate rolling stock. I don't know to what extent the Dean Goods was used on secondary passenger work at that time.

 

If Hattons offered these carriages in the claret livery, the situation might be seen as getting a bit easier but who wants to model claret-era Great Western? Surely the Great Western's biggest selling point to modellers has to be those chocolate and cream carriages? ;)

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...