Bachmann announce Fowler 4F

[buffalo]

There's a photo of 43875 in Essey & Jenkinson An Illustrated History of LMS Locomotives Vol 4 where it is fitted with a replacement tall Stanier chimney. I think that is what the model is intended to represent. However, I don't think it should have a capuchon.

 

Nick

[GWRLMSLNER]

Mine (the LMS version) is running in alongside the 3F and together they are excellent. Will not be looking for so called 'faults', just enjoying the pair taking over services alongside the Compound and other great offerings from Bachmann,

 

John

Edited August 21, 2013 by GWRLMSLNER

[davefrk]

Yes, I mentioned the tender brakes above.

Well, there's no representation of the space between the frames, or the snifters under the cylinders, or the vacuum pipe with its moisture trap, or the steam sanding gear, and the wheels are too close together, and then there's that enormous non-prototypical coupler. Have any rtr models got these things right?

 

Nick

 

Almost got it, leaving aside the obvious that you've quoted. The front sandboxes are fixed to the chassis and they sit in line with the others along the chassis side where-as they should stick out on a solid bracket so they come to within approximately 2mm of the footplate edge making the front view look bulky under the beam, check a 3/4 view photo and you'll spot it. I've built a few etched 4F chassis and some were right, some the same as Bachmann. Even Airfix had them sticking out a bit but that horrible push along chassis had to be binned. Oh and the guard irons are no-where near wide enough, they don't even come out to the OO wheelsets. Okay, rant over, just annoyed they can't get it right when previous models were, nearly.

The splashers on the Bachmann model are still, of necessity slightly over size but better than the Airfix ones by 1mm and are a nice fit in the metal footplate if a little widely spaced, good for the wider gauges though the measurement inside at 22.2mm doesn't leave much clearance for P4.

Personally I'm in a quandary whether to re-chassis or save time and just re-wheel, rectify and pack out the chassis to EM. I have some trial etches for a 4F chassis so I may mod one for this Bachmann model, afterall it's basically a good model and with a bit of work a great model but then so can the Airfix one be. Talking of which, the two side by side show a difference of just over a mill in the length of the firebox but the detail is much better on the new Bachmann model. All other dimensions are very close and the chimney shapes are similar but as someone else has said - are they correct.?

One last thing, talking of the front sandboxes, how does one fill them when there's no filler cap on the footplate. Oh dear.

 

I think it's a good model and it runs beautifully out of the box, add some detail, change the buffers for your period if you need to. And, just be grateful there's no gearbox under the boiler to offend the eye.

 

Dave.

And I'm not going to be drawn into a debate on chassis Vs frames, totally different things, so there.

[buffalo]

Almost got it, leaving aside the obvious that you've quoted. The front sandboxes are fixed to the chassis and they sit in line with the others along the chassis side where-as they should stick out on a solid bracket so they come to within approximately 2mm of the footplate edge making the front view look bulky under the beam, check a 3/4 view photo and you'll spot it. I've built a few etched 4F chassis and some were right, some the same as Bachmann...

Ah yes, Dave. Not sure how I missed that as I had the same issue with my Brassmasters 4F

 

The splashers on the Bachmann model are still, of necessity slightly over size but better than the Airfix ones by 1mm and are a nice fit in the metal footplate if a little widely spaced, good for the wider gauges though the measurement inside at 22.2mm doesn't leave much clearance for P4.

Personally I'm in a quandary whether to re-chassis or save time and just re-wheel, ...

22.2, luxury! Mine are between 21.6 and 21.9, so I'm going to have to do something with them to get P4 wheels in.

Hopefully, for now, I'll be able to just re-wheel mine and see if I'm still happy with that after a few months.

 

Mine (the LMS version) is running in alongside the 3F and together they are excellent. Will not be looking for so called 'faults', just enjoying the pair taking over services alongside the Compound and other great offerings from Bachmann

John, I completely agree with you that it is an excellent model. To my eyes, it is even better than the 3F because of the treatment of the area beneath the boiler. I'm sure the great majority of modellers will, like you, be very happy with the models as they come out of the box. But please, is it really necessary to talk of "so called 'faults'"? Either they are errors or they are not. Whether we care about them is entirely down to the individual. Remember that railway modelling is a very broad church and a few of us gain much of our modelling pleasure from attempting to correct such errors. Each to his own and I hope you continue to enjoy your model for years to come, as I hope I will once I've sorted a few little errors and managed to fit P4 wheels between the splashers. BTW, the difficulty there is neither an error nor a fault as I happily accept that rtr manufactures don't design with wider gauges in mind.

 

Nick

Edited August 21, 2013 by buffalo

[County of Yorkshire]

How often would these have graced GWR metals prior to nationalisation? I think some were shedded at Bristol actually, but I'm unsure whether I can justify one for my layout that's still in the conceptual stages. And yet for beasts such as these, there's always rule 1...

Edited August 21, 2013 by County of Yorkshire

[barrowroad]

How often would these have graced GWR metals prior to nationalisation? I think some were shedded at Bristol actually, but I'm unsure whether I can justify one for my layout that's still in the conceptual stages. And yet for beasts such as these, there's always rule 1...

Bristol Barrow Road, the Midland Shed in Bristol, had a minimum allocation of 7 and maximum of 16 during the British Railways era. The latest Bachmann 43875 and 43924 were both allocated to this shed during this period.

[Ian Hargrave]

How often would these have graced GWR metals prior to nationalisation? I think some were shedded at Bristol actually, but I'm unsure whether I can justify one for my layout that's still in the conceptual stages. And yet for beasts such as these, there's always rule 1...

Regular goods workings ,stopping passenger trains......in fact,if you want to define Flanders & Swann's 'On The Slow Train' then a New Street-Temple Meads 'stopper' is for you.....Bredon, Eckington,Defford ,Wadborough etc. etc...Vintage 4F stuff.....numbingly boring at the time but now remembered  with tearful nostalgia.....great view of Bredon Hill,though.Light years away from today's Voyagers and Turbostars...but still within my lifetime.Better to travel hopefully,than to arrive? 'Some were shedded at Bristol'?........shedloads

[neal]

For reference with Fowler 4F's, see attached coal hole of 44123 Fowler tender at the AVR.

 

Also, If Bachmann do the Fowler variant, there is the possibility of coupling these with the Deeley/Fowler tender combo as per the recent 7F model.

 

N

 

 

Count the liveries...

 

[County of Yorkshire]

Regular goods workings ,stopping passenger trains......in fact,if you want to define Flanders & Swann's 'On The Slow Train' then a New Street-Temple Meads 'stopper' is for you.....Bredon, Eckington,Defford ,Wadborough etc. etc...Vintage 4F stuff.....numbingly boring at the time but now remembered  with tearful nostalgia.....great view of Bredon Hill,though.Light years away from today's Voyagers and Turbostars...but still within my lifetime.Better to travel hopefully,than to arrive? 'Some were shedded at Bristol'?........shedloads

 

I'm mulling over a layout set in the Gloucester area circa 1945-1948, so thank you for this. Gloucester - one of the few places to have both a GWR and LMS MPD, and plenty of 4f's... 

 

CoY

[2ManySpams]

Quite ironic, really, that the model's axles run in nice, beefy bearings which appear to have a lot of life in them, whereas the prototype...

 

Just saying.

 

BR(W).

 

Nah, I think you'll find those 4F axle boxes will be fine on a S&D 7F and a Garrett.....what could go wrong?

[Rail-Online]

Talking of which, the two side by side show a difference of just over a mill in the length of the firebox but the detail is much better on the new Bachmann model.

Regarding the Airfix/Hornby 4F the firebox was stretched to make the (enlarged) splasher/firbox interface closer to the prototype

 

Tony

[davefrk]

Okay, but the Airfix firebox is shorter than the Bachmann one by just over a mill! and to make the interface look better it would need to be shortened surely.

 

Dave.

[Dunsignalling]

For reference with Fowler 4F's, see attached coal hole of 44123 Fowler tender at the AVR.

 

Also, If Bachmann do the Fowler variant, there is the possibility of coupling these with the Deeley/Fowler tender combo as per the recent 7F model.

 

N

 

image.jpg

 

Count the liveries...

 

image.jpgimage.jpg

Thank for those, Neal. They will be very useful for backdating the Fowler tender on mine.

 

You don't, by any chance, have a slightly wider/less cropped version of the first shot?

 

John  

[neal]

Sorry John,

 

Checked my library and that's the best I have.

 

However as a counterpoint, see the attached which is of the gangwayed Fowler tender partnered with the 8F resident at Bitton at that time. Axle box detail also pictured.

 

Also I have added the side view of the 4F tender cut in two!

 

 

Neal

 

[Rail-Online]

Okay, but the Airfix firebox is shorter than the Bachmann one by just over a mill! and to make the interface look better it would need to be shortened surely.

 

Dave.

That is very strange! Has anyone measured the Bachmann one against the works drawings in the Wild Swan book?

 

Tony

[Gordon A]

The two halves have been moved from Bitton yard to the quarry north about 300 yards north. This area is not accesible to the public.

The tender chassis is in the process of being overhauled.

 

The 8F and the gangwayed Fowler tender have been moved to Chedleton.

 

Gordon A

Bristol

[Dunsignalling]

Sorry John,

 

Checked my library and that's the best I have.

 

However as a counterpoint, see the attached which is of the gangwayed Fowler tender partnered with the 8F resident at Bitton at that time. Axle box detail also pictured.

 

Also I have added the side view of the 4F tender cut in two!

 

 

Neal

 

image.jpgimage.jpgimage.jpg

Thanks anyway, Neal.

 

At least I now know where to go to see one for myself.

 

John

 

Edit: Thanks, Gordon, for above post which will save me some confusion when I visit the AVR!

Edited August 26, 2013 by Dunsignalling

[buffalo]

Just to complete my earlier sets of photos of what it's like inside, here are a few more. First, the underside of the tender showing the pickups on the outer axles (the brake linkage has been folded out of the way for a clearer view). Pickup is from extended bushes in the metal wheels rather than from the back of the flanges.
 

 

The tender top is removed by undoing the two screws behind the buffer beam and hinging the top upwards and forwards to release two plastic lugs at the front. As with the 3F, there's room inside for a 21 pin decoder and speaker:

 

 

Back to the loco and the boiler/firebox/cab is removed from the running plate by releasing a couple of screws, one under the saddle, the other under the backhead. The other two screws visible here are to hold a substantial metal weight inside the front part of the boiler.

 

 

The final photo shows the running plate with various motion and lubricator details, and parts of the cab interior:

 

 

Of interest to those of us who may wish to re-gauge this model is the way the splashers are formed. Earlier, davefrk and I expressed some concern at how little space there was between the splashers. It turns out that the splashers are in two parts. There's a metal part made as part of the running plate casting and a plastic outer part with all the detailing that fits over the metal piece. For the rear splashers, the plastic piece is part of the body molding, but for the other two axles, it is a separate piece that can be removed (with some care) from the running plate. The above photo shows one of these plastic parts removed. So, it looks like it shoule be possible to remove the metal inner parts and gain about 1.3mm extra space when the plastic splashers are replaced.

 

As an aside, these separate plastic parts might open the possibility for Bachmann to make other later versions without splasher beading.

 

Nick

Edited August 24, 2013 by buffalo

[simplex]

Picked up the preserved version yesterday from the model shop in Northampton for 76 quid. Chose that version as it has the Fowler tender and late crest. Beautiful loco, runs almost silently a great companion for my 3F.

[Ray H]

. . . ., runs almost silently a great companion for my 3F.

 

Mine arrived by courier from Hattons yesterday - it was waiting the newly arrived all green Heljan Class 16 as a pilot hence the delay!

 

I was surprised how noisy it appeared on my hastily lashed up, unsecured couple of lengths of flexi track resting on Spaceboard that has a void under it. The Class 16 which also had a quick spin on the same test track didn't seem as noisy by comparison.

 

I shall have to finally open the box that came a while ago with the 3F in it and see if that is similar and perhaps back..

[Ray H]

I took the plunge and opened the 3F box and ran that up and down a bit (and did likewise with the 4F again). The noise level from both seems similar although the 4F does seem slightly noisier so perhaps my hearing aids were just having an off spell yesterday.

 

The imitation coal in both tenders is loose and the 4F's has two holes in it so perhaps they are rattling about a bit.

 

T'is early days yet, I really must get a circle of test track built.

[PenrithBeacon]

... these separate plastic parts might open the possibility for Bachmann to make other later versions without splasher beading.

 

Nick

It might also permit the use of splashers that are the right size, although I do have some sympathy for Bachmann in that the Midland didn't leave much of a clearance inside their splashers.

 

Regards

[buffalo]

It might also permit the use of splashers that are the right size, although I do have some sympathy for Bachmann in that the Midland didn't leave much of a clearance inside their splashers.

Yes, David, it could certainly be done in P4 but would be difficult with the Bachmann 00 wheels which are about 22.65mm across the flanges. I don't have a suitable drawing to hand at the moment but, in comparison with my Brassmasters 4F, the outside dimensions of the plastic splashers are about 2mm too long, though they are about the right height (both measured at running plate level). As Larry hinted above, there may be an opening for an etched replacement here.

 

Nick

 

ps. looking at the Bachmann 3F, the plastic splashers appear to be all but identical to those on the 4F, but without the inner, width reducing, metal part on the running plate. Perhaps the market for an etched replacement that would fit both models would make it worth one of our small suppliers having a go?

Edited August 26, 2013 by buffalo

[Alan Higgi]

I have not yet bought a Bachmann 4f as I am confused by the conflicting reviews in the big 4 magazines.

 

(I guess I am also hoping the price drops after Christmas). The haulage claims vary as do the comments on quality, running and just how robust this model is. One factor is the advertising revenue from manufacturing companies prevents the mags from being too critical. This does not apply here as we have a free press. You just can’t beat the help from rmweb so please comment.

 

 

[Colin]

I bought one of the small-tender locos (BR 43875 from memory). Lovely smooth runner which looks exactly as a 4F should IMHO, streets ahead of the old and nowadays overpriced Hornby offering (which I think really should have gone into the Railroad budget range).

I can't comment on haulage as my current layout only permits short trains, but if it's anything like my Bachy 3F (AFAIK they use the same chassis), then it should be more than adequate for a 20-25 wagon freight.

Absolutely no complaints from me!