298 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Mine also arrived today...... I couldn't help myself, and had to compare it to the Kitbuilding attempt I tried aged 12....: I think my kitbuilding efforts have moved on since(?) Here's CoT with 298, as seen in the current Model Railroader..: Which begs the obvious question, if the NRM are to continue with these limited editions, will the next candidate also be a popular model that many people tried building from the Kitmaster range but has previously been unavailable as a RTR model...? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold John B Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 CoT world tour reaches Selah! I like it.. B) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 That front coupling has got to go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 That front coupling has got to go. It already has... I've not tried opening the smokebox door yet, and don't intend to. I'd rather have paid a few quid less and not had such a frivolity. I've not looked through the detailing bits for it, is the TPWS kit in there...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 Just touched down here too. Some more photos to add to those already posted Did not forget you too All in all I know its a lot of money, but I am really pleased with these. Big thumbs up to NRM and Bachmann from me Brilliant thanks, looks very straight forward so will go and order in a minute! Edit: Mine is now ordered.... Now for the big decision, Ultrascales or Gibsons for it....... Just hope it arrives before I head down to the SW... Were they sent Royal Mail or with DHL etc? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Looks like a lovely model, but I'm sure that there's something not quite right about the height of the tender compared to the loco. Look at the proportions of the placing of the tender step compared to the prototype, and the way the loco top step lines up with tender framing. Is it low? Do you know Phil, I think you have a point. There is something weird about the tender frame/loco frame alignment and in particular the uppermost loco step and the height of the top surface of the loco frame above that of the top of the tender frame. It also seems strange that the fall plate is hanging in mid air. After all that effort and secrecy, I can't believe they would get that wrong. To be honest, I'm going the check the assembly in case something has not been assembled correctly. Unlikely, but worth a check.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Bigcheeseplant Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Do you know Phil, I think you have a point. There is something weird about the tender frame/loco frame alignment and in particular the uppermost loco step and the height of the top surface of the loco frame above that of the top of the tender frame. It also seems strange that the fall plate is hanging in mid air. After all that effort and secrecy, I can't believe they would get that wrong. To be honest, I'm going the check the assembly in case something has not been assembled correctly. Unlikely, but worth a check.... It seems like they have missed out the spacing framework on the tender footplate, this was required on the prototype to allow the loco footplate to be level as dependent on what class of loco the tender was coupled to, I remember building a Martin Finney kit and I think there were parts to ensure you could couple to any class type. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 The bottom and middle steps on the loco appear to line up with the steps on the tender, which is correct. The top step however should be in line with the running plate of the tender. This seems to be where the problem arises. Close up the gap by a good foot or you will lose the crew. Bernard. ( Who knows SFA about the GWR and has not bought one). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Bigcheeseplant Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Looking at plotos it seems that the large wheeled locos such as the City's required the footplate on the tender to have the spacing framework, on locos like the Dean goods with smaller wheels the footplate of the loco was lower requiring no spacer. David 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 It seems like they have missed out the spacing framework on the tender footplate, this was required on the prototype to allow the loco footplate to be level as dependent on what class of loco the tender was coupled to, I remember building a Martin Finney kit and I think there were parts to ensure you could couple to any class type. David You mean the 'box' structure on the front of the tender that the fall plate rests on? Shows in this picture?? http://trainsferriesbuses.co.uk/2007_10_05-3440-5553-md2.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedanticmongrel Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I was on a 12 hour shift today then i got home to find 3440 had arrived, unfortunatley the hinge had fallen off but it was a simple case of a dab of glue and pushing it back into place now as good as new, I have to blame parcel force for that, the was a fecking great dent in the box it came in but the NRM seem to have packaged it well enough. Now for the horrible bit, since ordering and paying for it my mother has given me the money for it and as such I can't use it until the 25th, as is tradition but the up side is I save ??150, another downside though is by the time the 25th is around I will be in Wales and not be home until Jan, but at least by the time it takes to the rails again it will have the full detailing treatment done to it. I was however asked to test it on arrival to check it was all good and test it I did, I have photos and even a short video as well as well (Link Below) I have to say this is a stunning model, perhaps one of Bachmann's best if not their best, it will only manage 6 Bachmann MK1's but it does so with ease (once is is moving) I however opted to show it running with 6 centenary coaches. It is smooth and silent and the track holding is phenominal straight from the box, Folks all I can say is if you're interested and can muster the cash buy now! Video here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeATYZU9Gr4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Maybe it is in the accessory pack...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Looking at plotos it seems that the large wheeled locos such as the City's required the footplate on the tender to have the spacing framework, on locos like the Dean goods with smaller wheels the footplate of the loco was lower requiring no spacer. David David, you're a star! Went back into the box and lo and behold as part of the odds and sods that you have to fit, was a box section similar to your description. Brilliant! I will fit said pieces tomorrow, but you know I do wish that Bachmann would give you a diagram of where all these bits go. It can't be beyond the wit of man to give an exploded diagram. Kato do it with their loco's.... So new pic with the box section just placed loosely in place....Looks a lot better now. The coupling gap will also improve once the box is glued in place. I think the tender/loco coupling is not connected as everytime I moved it the box section fell off.... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 If that's the worst problem found with CoT, it's not exactly the end of the world chaps - I'll still be picking mine up with a smile Easily fixed with a little modelling, no biggy. EDIT: Lo and behold...the solution! Great model I think - just seen pedanticmongrel's video of his 3440 in action. Both video and model thoroughly reccomended. Can't wait to get my standard issue one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 EDIT: Lo and behold...the solution! Umm, not quite. However as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, well, it is pretty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny7820 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 So whos going to be the first to weather theirs? How could you suggest such a thing :P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 How could you suggest such a thing :P Weather....No. Sound decoder in the tender....maybe. Upset the collectors by adding the detailing bits, electrification flashes, TPWS, OTMR, etc... I might even do a James May and throw the box away. Hang On, I could put that old Airfix model in it, and do an Aldo on eBay..... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 How could you suggest such a thing :P Perhaps just a light dusting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Umm, not quite. However as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, well, it is pretty. Very true phil - very true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Right, so lets have something more relavent next time......NRM Compound. If Bachmann does measure this one up, I hope somebody goes with them and tells 'em the tender is wrong....we don't want one off a S&DJR 2-8-0! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Right, so lets have something more relavent next time......NRM Compound. Stirling Single...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Stirling Single...? Gets my vote...second time of asking! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Gordon that box section should clip in further with the cutouts around the upstands, presumably it would then stay in place properly? The fact they have done that as a separate detail does suggest reuse with other classes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 So whos going to be the first to weather theirs? Not me, got too many other loco's to weather Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted December 14, 2009 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 14, 2009 Stirling Single...? Its surely going to be Lode Star.It makes sense.2010 the year of the GWR.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now