Jump to content

EFE Rail launches N gauge Class 17 and Mermaids


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
On 24/08/2020 at 21:36, Duncan. said:

Clayton Class 17

I bought a model of 8512. It's not really suitable for my Shirebrook layout, however, the design of the loco is so different from anything I would normally run I thought why not.

When I opened the box my first reaction was 'It looks big', bigger than I imagined. After I read the instructions I left the loco running in on my test track for 1 hour. It ran very well. I was also surprised that  it was very light (44g) even lighter than the Farish class 20 at 59g, however it had no problems hauling prototypical length trains on my layout.

I checked a couple of dimensions (and found just like the Mermaids that DJM produced) the bufferbeam is too high, higher in fact than any of my other locos and rolling stock, about 0.7mm. The other measurement I found to be wrong was the overall height which I measured at 27.4mm I calculated it should be about 1.3mm lower if the prototype measurements I have are correct.  Perhaps that explains my initial reaction that it looked big.

All other major dimensions were close enough to call correct.

I have read elsewhere that the glazing can be improved by colouring the edges black to reduce the prismatic effect which as delivered isn't great and there was also a question about the size of the 4 character headcode apertures on the noses. I can't decide if they are small or not (can someone measure the size on the prototype?), but they don't look quite right. 

I have tried to see where the extra height is in the model, I get the feeling that the cab is too high, the proportion of the cab windows look slightly too deep the cab just looks too tall above the bonnets when I compare to prototype photos. It is easiest perhaps to spot by comparing the proportions of the exhaust stack between the cab front windows on the prototype and model, the model version is clearly 'longer' and therefore looks narrower than the prototype.

Cheers

Duncan  

 

Looks bulky in all dimensions to me.

 

OK, we all know that this type of locomotive, with narrow bonnets, is the most difficult to replicate in a model that has to go round trainset curves. But better to accept that it can't be done than to build up peoples' expectations of a good model. As someone else has written, a return to the 70s for N gauge.

 

Sorry to be so negative (I am having a really bad day elsewhere) but I was so looking forward to this release and am now rather disappointed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A return to the 70s?

 

Some people seem to have short memories what the 1970s looked like in N

 

Lima Deltic, class 31 or even it's attempt at a class 17 - a German bo-bo in a BR livery.

 

Minitrix engines - the Britannia and 9f - same body different chassis, the squat looking 47 and the 2mts.

 

Then we had Farish with it's single mould bodies plus generic suburban and express coaches.

 

This model is not a return to the 70s.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 10
  • Round of applause 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's head and shoulders above every other RTR Clayton in 2mm that's gone before it.  And if 1.3mm is literally a head and shoulders (it's 10 inches, so there or thereabouts) it's not so glaring from normal drooling distance.

 

If I weren't so committed (read 'in up to my head and shoulders') to a fleet of OO Class 17s (20-plus), then this signature traction could have persuaded me to downscale, the better to portray the Big Country in a garage space.  I wish all N-gauge Claytonites the very best of fun with their foxy little machines.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Looks bulky in all dimensions to me.

 

OK, we all know that this type of locomotive, with narrow bonnets, is the most difficult to replicate in a model that has to go round trainset curves. But better to accept that it can't be done than to build up peoples' expectations of a good model. As someone else has written, a return to the 70s for N gauge.

 

Sorry to be so negative (I am having a really bad day elsewhere) but I was so looking forward to this release and am now rather disappointed.

 

It's been measured by a respected source and the height was the only dimension out.  But the 'legends' have been established - poor haulage capacity (most people are having no issues), dimensionally incorrect - and unfortunately these will be repeated ad nauseam on this and other forums from now until eternity.

  • Agree 4
  • Round of applause 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bingley hall said:

 

 poor haulage capacity (most people are having no issues), 

So who are "most people" in this instance? 

Edited by spamcan61
inability to type on a phone
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Izzy said:


Hm, this sounds like a time warp back to the 1970’s, thought we'd managed to get beyond that era in N, such a shame.

 

Izzy

I see the DJ Hand in this.  He's got form in getting sizes wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Looks bulky in all dimensions to me.

 

OK, we all know that this type of locomotive, with narrow bonnets, is the most difficult to replicate in a model that has to go round trainset curves. But better to accept that it can't be done than to build up peoples' expectations of a good model. As someone else has written, a return to the 70s for N gauge.

 

Sorry to be so negative (I am having a really bad day elsewhere) but I was so looking forward to this release and am now rather disappointed.

 

I measured one of mine from rail height to the roof apex and found it to be exactly 27mm. This, at 2.065mm to 1ft works out at 13ft 1ins whereas it should be 12ft 8ins so it is actually by my measurements a "whopping" 5 ins over scale in height or circa 0,8 of a mm. Obviously it would be better if it were spot on, but personally I can live with that, I think it is a terrific model and am delighted it has found its way to market.

 

Roy

  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Roy L S said:

 

I measured one of mine from rail height to the roof apex and found it to be exactly 27mm. This, at 2.065mm to 1ft works out at 13ft 1ins whereas it should be 12ft 8ins so it is actually by my measurements a "whopping" 5 ins over scale in height or circa 0,8 of a mm. Obviously it would be better if it were spot on, but personally I can live with that, I think it is a terrific model and am delighted it has found its way to market.

 

Roy

 

Did you have a full fuel load?  and how worn are the springs??

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

Well it's head and shoulders above every other RTR Clayton in 2mm that's gone before it.  And if 1.3mm is literally a head and shoulders (it's 10 inches, so there or thereabouts) it's not so glaring from normal drooling distance.

 

 

 

I absolutely agree Chard.

 

From my measurements the discrepancy is 0.8mm but even if it were 1.3mm then 1.3 / 2.065 (British N is 2 and 1/16mm to the ft) = 0.63 ft x 12 = 7.5 inches.... 

 

The discrepancy could be at least partly explained by the necessarily oversized gap between bogie and loco body.

 

Quite honestly it feels to me as if some people aren't satisfied unless they can find something to complain about in a model.

 

Roy

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have collected a Clayton  from the model shop, it is green/full yellow ends/ black buffer beams.

 

If EFE  sell enough to require a second run  please may we have the missing livery version which is green/full yellow end /RED buffer beams?

 Red beams give the Clayton a visual  lift in my opinion and when I buy the blue version, I will pick the one with red beams

The video link shows the liveries the Claytons carried

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A

Edited by Pandora
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at this whilst considering a 2mm fine scale conversion - the prototype has 3’ 3 3/4” wheels according to the CLAG Wheelbase data which scales out to 6.8mm in 1/148. Measuring the EFE wheels measure 7.45mm so there’s a 0.65mm gain in height there which goes along way to the 0.8mm discrepancy discussed above. The final bit could easily be lost by tweaking the ‘flappy paddle’ pick up arrangement or replacement with springs as I plan to do. It’s still an excellent basis for taking the model further; I’m well up for a couple more of them.
 

Pix

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Pixie said:

Looking at this whilst considering a 2mm fine scale conversion - the prototype has 3’ 3 3/4” wheels according to the CLAG Wheelbase data which scales out to 6.8mm in 1/148. Measuring the EFE wheels measure 7.45mm so there’s a 0.65mm gain in height there which goes along way to the 0.8mm discrepancy discussed above. The final bit could easily be lost by tweaking the ‘flappy paddle’ pick up arrangement or replacement with springs as I plan to do. It’s still an excellent basis for taking the model further; I’m well up for a couple more of them.
 

Pix

 

Divide the 0.65mm by two as it is the radius measurement which will reflect the extra height from the axle to the rail, but nonetheless still a reasonable chunk of the 0.8mm all the same, I mean when someone is quibbling about 0.5mm and you see what that actually is on a steel rule with those graduations all I can say is....really???

 

Regards

 

Roy

 

 

 

 

Edited by Roy L S
signed name more than once
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pandora said:

I have collected a Clayton  from the model shop, it is green/full yellow ends/ black buffer beams.

 

If EFE  sell enough to require a second run  please may we have the missing livery version which is green/full yellow end /RED buffer beams?

 Red beams give the Clayton a visual  lift in my opinion and when I buy the blue version, I will pick the one with red beams

The video link shows the liveries the Claytons carried

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A

 

Nice set of pics there, many from the Polmadie I remember as a boy. I used to find them fascinating, I guess it was the centre cab, when I saw them out and about in Glasgow.

 

Mine arrived in the post this morning, I've spent the afternoon watching it go round in circles,  and trying to make my mind up which direction my embryonic layout is going to go in.

 

Captures the look perfectly in my book!

 

Angus

 

Edit: screw your eyes up, and think Southside Glasgow, urban decay, 1970ish.....

 

Edited by AngusDe
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

These look good to me (I’m definitely not an expert!) so I’ve ordered two BR blue, weathered examples.

 

...which leads me to a question. Can anybody with better knowledge explain the multiple working variations within the class? According to the Wikipedia entry the class was equipped as follows:

 

D8500–D8587 ◆Red Diamond
D8588–D8616 ★Blue Star

 

The EFE models all either have blue star markings or are not marked at all, with the exception of E84509 WSL EFE Rail Class 17 Diesel Locomotive D8600 BR Green which has red diamonds. According to Wikipedia this is one of the blue star series!

 

Can anybody more knowledgeable explain what is going on? Have EFE got the wrong running numbers for red diamond vs blue square locos? Is the Wikipedia entry wrong? Or is Wikipedia correct for Multiple Working “as built”, but some locos were changed from one multiple working system to another during their working lives?

 

For what its worth the two models I’ve ordered both have blue star markings and I’d like to be able to run them as a double header, but one of them is D8606 (blue star number series according to Wikipedia) and the other is D8507 (red diamond series).

 

In preservation the real D8568 (red circle series as per Wikipedia) has blue star markings.

 

Yours confused,

 

Tom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tiger said:

These look good to me (I’m definitely not an expert!) so I’ve ordered two BR blue, weathered examples.

 

...which leads me to a question. Can anybody with better knowledge explain the multiple working variations within the class? According to the Wikipedia entry the class was equipped as follows:

 

D8500–D8587 ◆Red Diamond
D8588–D8616 ★Blue Star

 

The EFE models all either have blue star markings or are not marked at all, with the exception of E84509 WSL EFE Rail Class 17 Diesel Locomotive D8600 BR Green which has red diamonds. According to Wikipedia this is one of the blue star series!

 

Can anybody more knowledgeable explain what is going on? Have EFE got the wrong running numbers for red diamond vs blue square locos? Is the Wikipedia entry wrong? Or is Wikipedia correct for Multiple Working “as built”, but some locos were changed from one multiple working system to another during their working lives?

 

For what its worth the two models I’ve ordered both have blue star markings and I’d like to be able to run them as a double header, but one of them is D8606 (blue star number series according to Wikipedia) and the other is D8507 (red diamond series).

 

In preservation the real D8568 (red circle series as per Wikipedia) has blue star markings.

 

Yours confused,

 

Tom.

The Class 17s were eventually reworked to have both sets able to work with each other.  I'm not sure which code they all eventually conformed too.  Hopefully the EFE art work was done from photos of real ones so it would be a case of look yours up and see what they were  coded and when.  Apparently the Ian Allen ABCs had this kind of detail but I live too far away and was born at the wrong time any case to be any help with those.

 

Cheers

Kevin of Oz

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tiger said:

These look good to me (I’m definitely not an expert!) so I’ve ordered two BR blue, weathered examples.

 

...which leads me to a question. Can anybody with better knowledge explain the multiple working variations within the class? According to the Wikipedia entry the class was equipped as follows:

 

D8500–D8587 ◆Red Diamond
D8588–D8616 ★Blue Star

 

The EFE models all either have blue star markings or are not marked at all, with the exception of E84509 WSL EFE Rail Class 17 Diesel Locomotive D8600 BR Green which has red diamonds. According to Wikipedia this is one of the blue star series!

 

Can anybody more knowledgeable explain what is going on? Have EFE got the wrong running numbers for red diamond vs blue square locos? Is the Wikipedia entry wrong? Or is Wikipedia correct for Multiple Working “as built”, but some locos were changed from one multiple working system to another during their working lives?

 

For what its worth the two models I’ve ordered both have blue star markings and I’d like to be able to run them as a double header, but one of them is D8606 (blue star number series according to Wikipedia) and the other is D8507 (red diamond series).

 

In preservation the real D8568 (red circle series as per Wikipedia) has blue star markings.

 

Yours confused,

 

Tom.

 

I partly answered this on the previous page

 

To expand.....I believe that over time most of the red diamond locos were converted to blue star, especially those that were repainted blue.

A quick search on Flickr brings up D8507 at Millerhill during July 70 in blue livery with blue stars.
However at least one of the Beyer Peacock built examples D8600 green SYP - one of the EFE weathered ones - carried the red diamonds and is correctly modelled so, 

There is also a pic on Flickr of 8599 at Tyne Yard in July 1969 with no mu working symbols at all. 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bingley hall said:

 

Numerous happy punters on the N gauge forum, with only one person having had haulage issues - on a 1 in 25 grade!

Trouble is, some people are very easily pleased, and some are unpleasable, so 'happy' is meaningless without some actual numbers of  wagons hauled so we can get some clue as to what average haulage capacity is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't felt a need to test the limit of haulage, but 20 Farish Presflo wagons and a Brake Van and it isn't at all taxed. 

 

In reality I doubt a single Clayton would manage 20 loaded Presflos that easily, I suspect the weight with a brake would be well over 600 Tons, I can visualise bits of engine letting go!

 

Smoke generator function for engine fire anyone?

 

Roy

Edited by Roy L S
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 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

×
×
  • Create New...