New announcements from Bachmann

[Ravenser]

Whilst the bodies of the RTR locos are in many ways superior to kits this is only a part solution for those of us that model the whole loco in 4mm scale. We still need to source a chassis wheels and motor which adds considerably to the cost to the extent that a kit may well be the cheaper option. An ideal solution would be for the manufacturers to sell the bodies only.

 

This would seem to be an own-goal for P4 compared to EM. EM modellers seem routinely to use the manufacturer's chassis and either rewheel or even (shock horror) pull out the wheels originally fitted to 16.5mm B2B. (And it's worth pointing out that the 101 will be a straight rewheel job for both EM and P4 , like all other diesel and electric RTR - no doubt Ultrascale will do the necessary. Even 08s get rewheeled to P4, not replacement chassis) . I'm trying to find the issue of MRJ in which a Bachmann O4 was converted for Retford, but I'm pretty certain a new chassis was not involved. You could argue an LNER/ER layout with 3 x O4 is more auythentic that a layout with only one - I doubt if many folk are up for building 3 from kits (though they may be up for taking a Bachmann chassis and grafting in the boiler off a dead split chassis B1...)

 

With P4 accounting for a maximum of 5% of the 4mm market and P4 modellers tending to have fewer locos anyway,these concerns are irrelevant to probably 97%+ of Bachmann's potential market . "Build a kit instead" is not really constructive advice to OO modellers who fancy a 101, a J11 or a Director on their layout (and 4-4-0s were traditionally something of a problem for kit and scratchbuilders anyway)

 

In the heyday of the loco kit in the 1970s and 1980s, a statistic that used to be regularly trotted out was "only 10% of loco kits are ever built". I suspect this meant "finished and run" - it'scertain quite a few kits were started but never finished, and a lot were never started at all . The proportion has no doubt improved over time as things come out of cupboards 20 years later , but the steady supply of second hand kits around tells a tale. Even when the spirit was willing, the flesh all too often found it was too weak...

[newbryford]

It may be just me.......

 

 

As the manufacturers produce more and more variety (generally of a higher quality than before) there seems to me, to be more of a backlash to them for not producing someone's particular pet loco/coach/wagon.

Is there a perception that now the likes of the L&Y 2-4-2T is on the cards, then everyone should get their J21/47xx/Q/Class 185 or whatever as soon as possible?

 

I will use an oft-quoted phrase "We've never had it so good" although I'm not particularly worried because a couple of items I want won't be available this year or maybe the next or the next after that.

 

Some of this wishlisting and post-announcement slagging is comparable to trainspotters wanting to retain Class 37's et al on frontline duty - the TOC's are there to provide a service AND make profit.

 

The manufacturers are there to make money, not pander to the whim of everyone with some indistinct prototype that may sell a few hundred items.

 

It is only a hobby after all and it won't kill me to wait or build what I want. I have been doing this for about 35 years..............................

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Jol Wilkinson]

Jol

 

 

I think he is spot on.

 

Paul,

 

there are probably different aspects of building a model railway that we each don't enjoy, but, if you want a layout, you have to get on and do those things. Sometimes that means learning how to do it and buying the appropriate tools.

 

I don't enjoy building baseboards, wiring up the layout and control panel or even building trackwork, although I get a sense of satisfaction (or is it relief) when the job is done. The options are that I can either do it myself or pay someone else to do it for me. Hoping that a company with whom I have no direct commmunication will volunteer to do it for me at a very reasonable price, by writing about it on an internet forum, doesn't usually get the job done.

 

Jol

[The Stationmaster]

Did they get as far north as Oxford?

Cheers,

Mick

Hmm, strange how folk get such odd ideas - how about a GWR 'Duke' seen alongside one of those fancy L& Y 2-4-2T thingies (well not absolutely alongside but perfect;y possible once upon a time to photo such a scene with both of them on regular booked workings, not everybody realises that Manchester was at the end of a GWR branchline once upon a time).

[Pennine MC]

I presume you mean me but as it appeared on page 8 my comment would have been meaningless without the quote. A bit like yours really if I have got the wrong end of the stick.

 

The idea is to edit the quote Paul, if it's a long 'un, to keep it down to the really relevant bit. Makes things much easier to follow

[Jol Wilkinson]

This would seem to be an own-goal for P4 compared to EM. EM modellers seem routinely to use the manufacturer's chassis and either rewheel or even (shock horror) pull out the wheels originally fitted to 16.5mm B2B. (And it's worth pointing out that the 101 will be a straight rewheel job for both EM and P4 , like all other diesel and electric RTR - no doubt Ultrascale will do the necessary. Even 08s get rewheeled to P4, not replacement chassis) . I'm trying to find the issue of MRJ in which a Bachmann O4 was converted for Retford, but I'm pretty certain a new chassis was not involved. You could argue an LNER/ER layout with 3 x O4 is more auythentic that a layout with only one - I doubt if many folk are up for building 3 from kits (though they may be up for taking a Bachmann chassis and grafting in the boiler off a dead split chassis B1...)

 

With P4 accounting for a maximum of 5% of the 4mm market and P4 modellers tending to have fewer locos anyway,these concerns are irrelevant to probably 97%+ of Bachmann's potential market . "Build a kit instead" is not really constructive advice to OO modellers who fancy a 101, a J11 or a Director on their layout (and 4-4-0s were traditionally something of a problem for kit and scratchbuilders anyway)

 

In the heyday of the loco kit in the 1970s and 1980s, a statistic that used to be regularly trotted out was "only 10% of loco kits are ever built". I suspect this meant "finished and run" - it'scertain quite a few kits were started but never finished, and a lot were never started at all . The proportion has no doubt improved over time as things come out of cupboards 20 years later , but the steady supply of second hand kits around tells a tale. Even when the spirit was willing, the flesh all too often found it was too weak...

 

Great use of statistics, you must work in government.

 

Why is suggesting that "building a kit" is not an option?

 

If someone so desperately wants a model (as their postings often suggest) and the RTR manufacturers don't produce it or have published plans to do so, then what are the options? Learn how to do it and make their own model, commission someone else to do it for them or go without. Of course the popular other way is now "wishing" for it on various forums, but there is no guarantee that you will succeed.

 

Or is the "wishing" the real fun?

 

Jol

[Peter Kazmierczak]

If someone so desperately wants a model (as their postings often suggest) and the RTR manufacturers don't produce it or have published plans to do so, then what are the options? Learn how to do it and make their own model, commission someone else to do it for them or go without...................... Jol

 

Or modify/kit bash something to resemble the desired prototype.

 

I remember that I wanted a Cl.56 many years ago - long before the Mainline model, let alone the Hornby one. So I converted a Hornby Cl.47 into a 56.

 

Of course it doesn't stand comparison with current rtr stock, but it was something I created and, well, I liked it anyway.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Kit building is most definitely an option, Jol, and one I have used to reasonable effect. The kit however, should be of buildable quality. I've said it before and I'll say it again; unless it's possible for a modeller without extensive techical/engineering skills to produce a satisfactory working model from said kit, it will merely serve to undermine the modeller's confidence and deter further adventures of that kind. That was my experience over 20 years and I suspect it was so for very many of us who trod a similar path. It is only the advent of quality tools and kit design that has really opened up this option for The Masses such as myself.

 

Dave.

[Pennine MC]

No offence Jol, but I get more than a bit weary of this 'learn to build a kit' argument coming up in seemingly every RTR thread, especially when it takes no account of the many middle ground modellers who ably use both approaches, such as Dave above. Let's be right, neither side is going to greatly alter its view - if you want to do that, you're going to have to come up with a fresh approach

[Guest Max Stafford]

My advice; go for Alexander, Gem or wholly etched. Avoid 'Consett Crocks' like the plague! ;-)

 

Dave.

[newbryford]

What Id like to know i where we D=E chaps get these kits from?

 

Is there secret supply

 

We D&E guys don't need kits - we have Heljan...........

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Paul Cram]

This would seem to be an own-goal for P4 compared to EM. EM modellers seem routinely to use the manufacturer's chassis and either rewheel or even (shock horror) pull out the wheels originally fitted to 16.5mm B2B. (And it's worth pointing out that the 101 will be a straight rewheel job for both EM and P4 , like all other diesel and electric RTR - no doubt Ultrascale will do the necessary. Even 08s get rewheeled to P4, not replacement chassis) . I'm trying to find the issue of MRJ in which a Bachmann O4 was converted for Retford, but I'm pretty certain a new chassis was not involved. You could argue an LNER/ER layout with 3 x O4 is more auythentic that a layout with only one - I doubt if many folk are up for building 3 from kits (though they may be up for taking a Bachmann chassis and grafting in the boiler off a dead split chassis B1...)

 

With P4 accounting for a maximum of 5% of the 4mm market and P4 modellers tending to have fewer locos anyway,these concerns are irrelevant to probably 97%+ of Bachmann's potential market . "Build a kit instead" is not really constructive advice to OO modellers who fancy a 101, a J11 or a Director on their layout (and 4-4-0s were traditionally something of a problem for kit and scratchbuilders anyway)

 

In the heyday of the loco kit in the 1970s and 1980s, a statistic that used to be regularly trotted out was "only 10% of loco kits are ever built". I suspect this meant "finished and run" - it'scertain quite a few kits were started but never finished, and a lot were never started at all . The proportion has no doubt improved over time as things come out of cupboards 20 years later , but the steady supply of second hand kits around tells a tale. Even when the spirit was willing, the flesh all too often found it was too weak...

 

I wasn't starting an argument just stating a fact. If you are modelling accurately then the frames need to be re spaced and the wheels replaced. This adds to the cost and is a personal choice. It is easier with diesels on the whole as the bogies are already at the correct width but as I don't model anything later than 1941 that doesn't help me.

[northendboy]

As a very, very average vague modeller of a sort of North West area in some time around about the early BR period (with some notable era-bursting exceptions) I am overjoyed at the announcements. L&Y tanks were deployed on the Longridge Branch for ages, Compounds found their way up here, 4F's and a re-chassied Ivatt 2-6-2. Good heavens, all my Christmases have come at once, and I'm lucky I didn't reading the announcements... A 101 sort of fits in as well, if you don't think too hard.. marvellous.

 

It does seem to me a little but biased towards.. well, me really, so I can only apologise to everybody else, and offer them a go next year with my mind-altering ray gun device located here in my hollowed out volcano Bond villain lair. *strokes white cat...*

[The Black Hat]

I do wonder if it is this kind of post that frankly puts Bachmann off producing North Eastern prototypes.

 

I am a North Eastern modeller, but I don't go off one like a petulant child when I don't get what I want. If you want a K1, J21 etc....three options.

1. Build one of the many kits available.

2. Save some money and commission one of the top modellers to build said loco.

3. Put up and wait.

 

What I see is quite a balanced release from Bachmann. A J11 was a widely used locomotive which would have ventured into the North Eastern Region granted it's not a NE prototype.

 

As Max Stafford says, the North Eastern's time will come.....but to be perfectly frank, your recent postings on this matter do little to help the North Eastern cause.

 

Im sorry but Im just expressing an opinion, and Im entitled to have one. I would hope that my post was more apologetic about past actions, and also explained why I would understand if Bachmann should choose to think another engine might be a better return for them. I believe Bachmann to be the best model railway manufacturing company there is at present and Im perfectly willing to wait until a time that their selection and my choices match. The Bachmann range has always been more ballanced which has been noticed more so in recent years. Im willing to accept the thoughts an opinions of others and would understand if some thought I had a reputation which is somewhat deserved, and perhaps a little difficult to move on from.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Let's see; how many pre-grouping companies are now represented at Barwell?

 

Well, there's now GC, GW, MR, LNW, MR, SECR and L&Y. Seven major constituents already. If we discount some of the smaller and joint operations, that leaves the Furness and Maryport and the North Staffs in the LMS group.

Dapol and Hornby have given considerable attention to the L&SWR. So, if we're following a logical sequence here, that leaves the GN, GE and NE, along with the five Scottish companies and the Welsh constituents of the GWR. If there's a genuine effort afoot here to provide 'engines for all corners' , there's a good chance that most of these companies will have some kind of indigenous representation by the end of the decade and possibly within five years.

 

Dave.

['CHARD]

Im sorry but Im just expressing an opinion, and Im entitled to have one. I would hope that my post was more apologetic about past actions, and also explained why I would understand if Bachmann should choose to think another engine might be a better return for them. I believe Bachmann to be the best model railway manufacturing company there is at present and Im perfectly willing to wait until a time that their selection and my choices match. The Bachmann range has always been more ballanced which has been noticed more so in recent years. Im willing to accept the thoughts an opinions of others and would understand if some thought I had a reputation which is somewhat deserved, and perhaps a little difficult to move on from.

 

Fair play our kid. I reckon this was a pretty decent - not exactly a retraction - but certainly presented a calmer context than last night's post. I did post a reply this morning that I later pulled for being perhaps a bit overly tongue-in-cheek with you. When I first read your address the colourful language and passion was such that I could hear Brian Blessed blasting it out!

 

I reckon we've had a wee chuckle at your expense - but I don't think anyone's in any doubt that you've the DNA to be the NER's advocate - and as you said tonight, you've also got the patience and the respect for Bachmann's long-game. I look forward to marking the 2013 announcement with the Black Hat on level, not the cocked-hat we saw last evening!

 

Enjoy your faith matey - you're a True Believer.

 

'Chard

[S.A.C Martin]

When I first read your address the colourful language and passion was such that I could hear Brian Blessed blasting it out!

 

I would actually pay money to hear Brian Blessed read out the Bachmann announcements. Whatever comes up, it would just be brilliant and give us all a good laugh.

[Ozexpatriate]

I do find the "we haven't been served yet" argument to be rather wearying. We should be absolutely praising to the hilt the choice of:

 

GCR J11

GCR D11

L&Y Tank

GWR City Class

MR Compound

 

I mean quite frankly, who in their right minds ten years ago would have predicted any of these?

Indeed yes! (Excepting for the MR Compound which was done in RTR in the 1980s.) I quite agree with you. I think the majority of the posts on Tuesday and Wednesday said exactly that and gave Bachmann Branch-Line a chorus of well deserved 'attaboys'.

 

A few years ago the people who thought we would ever see a RTR outside-framed GWR 4-4-0 were quite in the minority and I don't know anyone who really thought a L&Y tank would be here this soon.

 

Moving on ... I'd like to reiterate the following post.

I see this is another thread being hijacked by the kit vs rtr argument. Can we not just accept that folk have different preferences, skills and demands on their time/cash? We're thankfully not all clones. Live and let live.

Can we move past the well trodden 'kit v rtr' discussion? We've done it before, with the much same result.

 

People who express 'disappointment' in the Bachmann Branch-Line releases are just sharing. Perhaps this is tedious for some, but with few exceptions, I think it's no harm, no foul.

[The Black Hat]

Fair play our kid. I reckon this was a pretty decent - not exactly a retraction - but certainly presented a calmer context than last night's post. I did post a reply this morning that I later pulled for being perhaps a bit overly tongue-in-cheek with you. When I first read your address the colourful language and passion was such that I could hear Brian Blessed blasting it out!

 

I reckon we've had a wee chuckle at your expense - but I don't think anyone's in any doubt that you've the DNA to be the NER's advocate - and as you said tonight, you've also got the patience and the respect for Bachmann's long-game. I look forward to marking the 2013 announcement with the Black Hat on level, not the cocked-hat we saw last evening!

 

Enjoy your faith matey - you're a True Believer.

 

'Chard

 

'None taken...' In a word, 'Thanks.'

[Ravenser]

Let's see; how many pre-grouping companies are now represented at Barwell?

 

Well, there's now GC, GW, MR, LNW, MR, SECR and L&Y. Seven major constituents already. If we discount some of the smaller and joint operations, that leaves the Furness and Maryport and the North Staffs in the LMS group.

Dapol and Hornby have given considerable attention to the L&SWR. So, if we're following a logical sequence here, that leaves the GN, GE and NE, along with the five Scottish companies and the Welsh constituents of the GWR. If there's a genuine effort afoot here to provide 'engines for all corners' , there's a good chance that most of these companies will have some kind of indigenous representation by the end of the decade and possibly within five years.

 

Dave.

 

Add the S&DJR to the list of those done. Technically the first two Gresley Pacifics were GN locos , and Hornby's (not entirely accurate and elderly) J52 is also GNR. J11s saw significant use on ex GN lines in Lincolnshire, and the O4s saw a lot of use on the GN and GE sections. Those with GN interests haven't done too badly

 

LBSCR is a moot point (Terriers and the old Hornby E2 - maybe you could butcher a Thomas)

 

Missing therefore are:

 

NER, GER, Caley (unless you count the Pug and 123 from Hornby), NBR, GSWR, NSR, M&GNJR, Highland, Cambrian, GNSoR, Furness, HBR and M&CR . Plus the Irish companies, and various minor companies

 

Most of that lot is what the Edwardians would have called the lesser railways - so realistically the main companies still untouched are the NE, GE, Caledonian, and NBR - with a question mark over the LBSCR and LNW (as the G2s were very late in the piece)

 

Before we get bogged down in cries of outrage about the continued failure to announce a CV&H 2-4-2T , it is perhaps worth considering which classes from the NER, GE, CR and NBR escaped from the confines of their own systems (or got south of the Border), as these are likely to be the obvious next moves

 

And with 2F (OO Works) 3F (Bachmann) 4F (Bachmann/Hornby), Compound (Bachmann/Hornby) we are a long way to coverage of the MR . Another one or two passenger engines and maybe a resin body to pop on top of a Jinty chassis and you are broadly there

[darren01]

HI

I am glad Bachmann have gone over the border on some of there up and coming loco's , as the north has been overlooked far to long.

All my loco's a southern based ,but even i am happy to see these coming out, the one i will be getting is the 4F ,mayby one or two.

Rolling stock looks good as well and thier will be a lot of them i will be getting this year, So i think Bachmann have done a smashing line up to come .

Well done Bachmann

Darren

[45568]

What Id like to know i where we D=E chaps get these kits from?

 

Is there secret supply

YESSS!!!!!! Whisper it very quietly though, ready...? EM TEE KAY!!

Cheers, Peter C.

[coachmann]

Ozepatriate said :

People who express 'disappointment' in the Bachmann Branch-Line releases are just sharing. Perhaps this is tedious for some, but with few exceptions, I think it's no harm, no foul.

 

Sadly the expressions have gone beyond 'dissapointment' at times, and I don't think it is just coming from boys.

[Oldddudders]

Can I just chuck in a small rider to the RTR vs kits debate. Even if I kit- or scratch-build a model, my ability to render it full justice when painting and lining is always going to fall well-short of a Chinese factory finish. Less so for some BR-era versions, maybe not too bad for black steam locos, perhaps - although my disliking weathering does not help - but dramatic where pristine Southern Railway olive coaches with lining is concerned. In a rake of coaches my effort is going to spoil the whole effect. In that respect, PC models from decades ago had the right idea. Since I do not reckon to participate in wishlisting, and certainly not bellyaching when there's nothing announced that I need, I may not be central in the sights of the "build a kit instead" brigade - but I bet I'm not alone, either.

[bike2steam]

I'll also add that to do a good kit justice these days it's just too damned expensive - plus I don't have the time( and I'm too tight to have it done professionally!)