Bachmann LMS "porthole" coaches

[robertcwp]

6 hours ago, trevor7598 said:

I think I may have said this before somewhere, but I think Bachmann made a mistake by

only having portholes in the range. They made ' porthole ' a theme and this excluded other

types including the TO, as no porthole TO's were built. But plenty of TO's were built post war.

I am sure a TO would have out sold all of the three of the porthole 'firsts', in their range, put together.

 

I like many others bought a TK, CK and a BTK, but didn't bother with the 1st class vehicles.

As others have said they were very rare, specialist, vehicles.

I did buy one of each of the firsts in crimson and cream and maroon. I also kept to one crimson and cream and two maroon corridor thirds/seconds, as there were not many of them either (100) and because Hornby do an earlier version of the corridor third/second. I have seven brake thirds/seconds (two c/c, four maroon and one repainted for me in blue/grey) and six composites (two c/c, four maroon), the latter partly because Hornby omitted the composite from their range of Stanier types. 

 

A post-war open third would have been a good one to do. I'd like a kitchen car or a restaurant type as well. 

[Leander]

On 21/08/2019 at 14:46, Zunnan said:

 

Short answer is both lengths were widely used. Composites were always more common on the BR(M), there were more than twice as many Porthole composites built than TK/SK (57ft seconds). The all first class coaches were rare as hens teeth, they were barely built in the double figures (15 corridor firsts built, 14 brake firsts, 19 open first) where as the CK and BTK were built in the multiple hundreds and there were just over a hundred TK/SK. I'd say that for every one corridor second you'll want 2 corridor composites, and unless you're modelling a crack express to ignore the all firsts.

A Porthole BFK was at one end of each 'Caledonian' set until the Mark 1 BFKs were introduced.

[Barry O]

14 hours ago, robertcwp said:

A post-war open third would have been a good one to do. I'd like a kitchen car or a restaurant type as well. 

 

Problem then is, if you do a 50' kitchen car you need other stock to go with it (period I or two TOs ..or convertibles). Would people buy the dining pair? I doubt it.

The twelve wheeler ( ex Airfix, Dapol and Hornby) has never generated too many sales. Could it be too long for most layouts?

 

Baz

Edited August 28, 2019 by Barry O

[truffy]

53 minutes ago, Barry O said:

The ywlve wheeler

I'm assuming that's 'autocorrect', but...really?

[Zunnan]

2 hours ago, Barry O said:

The ywlve wheeler ( ex Airfix, Dapol and Hornby) has never generated too many sales. Could it be too long for most layouts?

 

Its shorter than a Mk3 coach and people manage with those just fine. The issues I see are twofold. First is that its a P2 coach with a very different appearance to other models in the range, modellers can be picky and insist on matching vehicles. The other issue with that model is its age, its a '70s relic that while an OK model it doesn't stand up to current models. Looks fine with the equally ancient ex-Mainline panelled coaches and the Dapol (ex-Airfix) Staniers for which it was developed, but its nowhere near the standard of the Portholes and Hornby P3 Staniers.

[Compound2632]

2 hours ago, Barry O said:

 

Problem then is, if you do a 50' kitchen car you need other stock to go with it (period I or two TOs ..or convertibles). Would people buy the dining pair? I doubt it.

The ywlve wheeler ( ex Airfix, Dapol and Hornby) has never generated too many sales. Could it be too long for most layouts?

 

 

If the Airfix-designed, Dapol-produced, Hornby-nibbled D1811 car is too long, then any LMS stand-alone dining car is too long, as they were all 68ft. The Period 1 D1697 50ft kitchen cars were flush-sided, so not too challenging - and both Horby and Bachmann already have the 50ft underframe, for their BGs. They were, by catering vehicle standards, very numerous - 66 in service. Open firsts and thirds of any Period can happily run with them - this whole Porthole discussion is a bit hung up on the idea that matching coaches are needed. The LMS operating people didn't give a hoot what the outside of a vehicle looked like so long as it had the right number and layout of seats! (And let's not forget that the Period classification is an invention of Essery & Jenkinson.)

 

On the other hand, the D1811 vehicle was a really good choice, from the range of possible LMS diners. As a neutral car, it can run as the sole diner in a train, without any other open coaches. It's ideal for long-distance cross-country trains - not everyone models the WCML! I've not seen any marshalling info but would hazard a guess that Bristol-Leeds/Newcastle service or similar might have been using these diners. 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Compound2632

[Barry O]

As it happens I have a number of ex LMS 12 wheelers kitchen/dining cars from across the Periods. The 50 and 57  60ft (2 off all electric prototype) kitchen cars are interesting as the LMS built lots of them but they do need coaching stock to go with them. Hence the specialist Opens built in Periods I , II and III.  These are available as kits or sides. There are some on my bodging thread.

 

Yes Jenkinson and Essery who "invented" the Periods but that was based on the design changes in LMS coaches design. Is there a better way of doing this??

Baz

 

 

Edited August 29, 2019 by Barry O
Correcting a Kitchen Car length

[Steamport Southport]

I've got plenty of the sides of dining and sleeping cars in the "to do" pile.

 

Bought when I thought it was easier to stick the Comet sides to the RTR models. It really isn't. Far better just building the kits. You have to paint them anyway which is probably the hardest part.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[Compound2632]

17 minutes ago, Barry O said:

 

Yes Jenkins on and Essex you "invented" the Periods but that was based on the design changes in LMS coaches design. Is there a better way of doing this??

Baz

 

 

 

Well, "Stanier" is a bit of a misnomer although I suppose he must have visited the C&W DO from time to time as he had ultimate responsibility. So whose name do we give to the vehicles behind a Coleman pacific? As far as I'm aware Robert Reid of the Midland was in charge of the carriage & wagon side of things immediately after grouping but after that my knowledge of personalities is nil. 

 

Jenkinson wrote somewhere of being rather pleased when, in his NRM job, someone from BR contacted him to see if the museum was interested in a BG, which they described as "Period 3"!

[Barry O]

Stanier was ultimately responsible,  so his name appears as CME.

 

Various other CMEs were involved during the LMS coach building years.

Some of the later coaches were onlyever built by BR. I suppose we could call these Mark 0.5???

 

Back to coach building..

Baz

[Compound2632]

18 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Stanier was ultimately responsible,  so his name appears as CME.

 

 

Though oddly enough I've never come across Period 1 carriages described as "Fowler" or Period 2 as "Lemon".

[robertcwp]

13 hours ago, Barry O said:

 

Problem then is, if you do a 50' kitchen car you need other stock to go with it (period I or two TOs ..or convertibles). Would people buy the dining pair? I doubt it.

The twelve wheeler ( ex Airfix, Dapol and Hornby) has never generated too many sales. Could it be too long for most layouts?

 

Baz

For the BR era, we already have a porthole open first.  Hornby do a Mark 1 48-seat open, which the LMR used for dining. As I mentioned, I would like to see an open third and a 7-bay one would do for a dining car. If the Hornby ex-Dapol 12-wheeler is a bad seller, why do Hornby keep doing batches of them? They have done several runs in recent years. 

[Compound2632]

... 50ft kitchen cars and dining open firsts and thirds (all Period 3) would open the way to an authentic representation of the Coronation Scot train.

[Barry O]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

For the BR era, we already have a porthole open first.  Hornby do a Mark 1 48-seat open, which the LMR used for dining. As I mentioned, I would like to see an open third and a 7-bay one would do for a dining car. If the Hornby ex-Dapol 12-wheeler is a bad seller, why do Hornby keep doing batches of them? They have done several runs in recent years. 

Robert, the 12 wheeler doesnt't sell for much on ebay. How many do you see on layouts? At 68' long, they have big cut outs in the underframes to go round tight radii curves.  Why do Hornby reissue them? Cheap to do and no other options available?

 

 

Strange that the LMS/LMR  moved from building open stock to corridor stock post war. Not many porthole open Firsts.. mind you they aleady had quiteafew 65'and other opens for dining car support.

Baz

[Compound2632]

42 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Strange that the LMS/LMR  moved from building open stock to corridor stock post war. Not many porthole open Firsts.. mind you they aleady had quiteafew 65'and other opens for dining car support.

 

 

A goodly quantity of side-corridor stock of modern specification - 57ft, elliptical roof, electrical lighting - was inherited from the major pre-grouping constituents, especially the LNWR but also Midland and Caledonian. In the first 15 years, the LMS was busily increasing the proportion of open stock in its fleet - along with an expansion in dining facilities. By the post-war period, the pre-grouping stock was at the limit of its useful life - getting on for 25 years old at the youngest, so naturally there was renewal of this type of carriage. Also, I believe quite a lot of Period 1 side-corridor stock was converted for ambulance train use in the second war and not returned to traffic.

[adb968008]

23 hours ago, D1051 said:

Well Dapol launched the 12 wheel restaurant car that came with a choice of Chassis .& Hornby included it in there range .If it was a "bad seller" would Hornby of bothered ? & it was never in the Airfix range BTW.  

Hornbys must have well had their moneys worth out of the twelve wheel dining car.. R4095 got to 8 releases (o+a-g) R4131 went past 4 , R4188 is at 4 now, R4802 is available now.

 

thats at least 17 runs.. and there could well be more.

 

As theres no other LMS dining car in town its no surprise its done so well, its that or a mk1 buffet.

Edited August 29, 2019 by adb968008

[adb968008]

1 minute ago, D1051 said:

There you go, i never knew that .Do you get two chassis per model still? I only have the first Dapol one

Never seen a second chassis from Hornby supplied.

 

i do have a spare Dapol one (as you mentioned Dapol supplied it with 2).

 

[Barry O]

16 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 Also, I believe quite a lot of Period 1 side-corridor stock was converted for ambulance train use in the second war and not returned to traffic.

 

Some were refitted for use a non gangwayed corridor thirds for the CLC, others were converted to BGs. Most were life expired. 

 

Roof now refitted

 

The TOs built in Period I and II did include convertible dining cars.. to go with the kitchen cars

 

 

 

Baz

 

[paul 27]

On ‎24‎/‎08‎/‎2019 at 22:05, TheSignalEngineer said:

Possibly because the LMS built about 3000 TK / TO between 1930 and nationalisation. Porthole TKs were probably to replace the remaining pre-grouping stock which had soldiered on due to WW2.

Would like to see photos of these especially in the North West.

[paul 27]

Seen a photo possibly on here taken at Sandhills  Liverpool showing a couple of portholes.,

any one have a link to this.

Edited September 15, 2019 by paul 27

[Robert Stokes]

I recently bought six Bachmann porthole coaches - 2 x FK, 2 x TK , 2 x BTK. Some were bought used from Ebay but the two FKs were bought new from a local shop. I think that I will have to take one of them back as it doesn't roll anywhere near as freely as the rest. Each of the other five, if placed on my 1 in 70 incline, will move off from a standing start and accelerate down the slope. One of the new FKs, if placed on the same incline, won't move of its own accord and if pushed gently downhill will roll to a stop in a couple of feet. I suppose its the dreases bogie syndrome.

[26power]

2 hours ago, Robert Stokes said:

I recently bought six Bachmann porthole coaches - 2 x FK, 2 x TK , 2 x BTK. Some were bought used from Ebay but the two FKs were bought new from a local shop. I think that I will have to take one of them back as it doesn't roll anywhere near as freely as the rest. Each of the other five, if placed on my 1 in 70 incline, will move off from a standing start and accelerate down the slope. One of the new FKs, if placed on the same incline, won't move of its own accord and if pushed gently downhill will roll to a stop in a couple of feet. I suppose its the dreases bogie syndrome.

“dreases”?

[Robert Stokes]

I meant to write "dreaded" but in poor light I hit the wrong keys and didn't notice.

[Zunnan]

Have you taken the bogies off to check that they are free rolling when off the coach? Could it be excess slop in the bluntpoint (they certainly aren't pinpoint!) bearings allowing the wheels to seat a little too close to the floor, causing it to rub? Marks on the chassis above the wheelsets would confirm if this is the case. That or they could be moving and rubbing on the brake mouldings, but I don't think that would offer the friction needed to stop on a 1:70 gradient. Possibly one or more of the brakes may be located a bit out of position and are actually working as brakes, which shouldn't be too difficult to identify. I'd side with the chassis resting on one or more of the wheelsets, especially if its a first batch coach. I've not had issue with the later maroon batch with the revised bogies but the first batch was a bit of a disappointment, I've had my share of the first batch which would drop their wheelsets as soon as they're picked up, so it wouldn't surprise me that they also push up too high. If you're careful with the brass pickup assembly you can them bend inwards a little to act more positively on the bearings.

 

It would be nice if Bachmann had the revised bogies as a spare to directly replace those on the first batch. I haven't checked to see if the revised bogies are a spare item yet as instead I took to butchering the older tooling, which was available as a spare at the time I needed them. They just need a good packing piece to get the mount height right and a slot cutting for the CCM to be retained, so that is also an option.

[adb968008]

Why not get a small drill bit, approx 2mm, and cut it to the width of the current wheel axle. 

prize off one wheel, put it in the end of the bit.

 

insert the bit into the bogie as an axle and spin the wheel with your finger, to ream out the axle bearing a little, swap sides if it helps.

 

when it free wheels on the bit, insert your original wheel.

 

if you want a pre-packaged solution DCC concepts.. £12.95

https://www.dccconcepts.com/product/bearing-reamers-set-of-two/

 

Edited November 9, 2019 by adb968008