RMweb Premium Nile Posted July 29, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 29, 2014 I took the plunge and bought one. First impressions are that it's a big beastie. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Looks huge!,is it the right scale?. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigherb Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I wouldn't say it is particularly large. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 (edited) Its the same chassis as the 06 (which also looks overscale) and the width over the buffer beams is HUGE. The buffer centres are ok, but if you compare the outer widths with that on the Sentinel and the Pannier, you can see where the excess lies. WHen rebuilding my layout recently, I tested the platforms with all sorts of wagons, coaches and locomotives to check that clearances were ok. No problems. Then I ran an 06 through at speed (ie at a throttle setting appropriate to a scale 30mph for most other locos), that damn buffer beam caught a platform ramp and not just derailed it, but sent it cartwheeling through the air. Luckily there wasn't anything fragile on the platforms at the time! The 06 is now on "restricted duties". The funny thing is, the 101 and the Caledonian Pug, alias Smokey Joe, don't have the same problem even though they share the chassis. I feel that the buffer beams are so wide so as to hide the steam loco cylinder block mouldings, which are certainly present on my 06. I also see that the holes for the handrail stanchions at the front of the 06 are also present on the Bagnall. Looks like "Design Clever" has worked its way to the bottom of the range! I DO like the little "RR" logo on the rear of the cab however - it reminds me of the "TR" logo that Triang used to put on their freelance locos in the late 50s-early 60s. Edited July 30, 2014 by Hroth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauliebanger Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I took the plunge and bought one. First impressions are that it's a big beastie. HB_1.jpg HB_2.jpg Nile, Ring any bells? Warping reality with my freelance models.Lol Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Nile Posted July 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 30, 2014 (edited) It wasn't me, honest! It looks like the model was stretched sideways in order to fit over the motor mount. The same thing happened to Bill and Ben. Hornby could do with redesigning this chassis to improve its performance and make it narrower. It gets used under enough locos to make it worth while. Edited July 30, 2014 by Nile Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauliebanger Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 It wasn't me, honest! It looks like the model was stretched sideways in order to fit over the motor mount. The same thing happened to Bill and Ben. Hornby could do with redesigning this chassis to improve its performance and make it narrower. It gets used under enough locos to make it worth while. Actually, it's mostly not the chassis that gives he extra width, as your 'Smokey Joe' experience will show, but the footplate moulding/casting particular to each model which adds bulk. (the spring mechanism to hold the motor in place does widen the chassis a little, but still within guage. The tool/ejector/battery boxes on the sides of the engine room conceal these on the diesels) So, a bit of thinning down should enable movement within tighter clearances. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
avonside1563 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 The prototype the body was (very loosely) based on is at Foxfield and is much smaller than this has come out. I wonder if some of the apparent excessive width is because they drew the model based on the real thing then realised it wouldn't fit over the chassis so simply scaled it up, hence the bufferbeam width. It also looks like the length was similarly stretched to fit over the chassis. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted July 31, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 31, 2014 I was considering one of these to accompany the pair of Sentinels I already have. However they seem to be somewhat oversize so I'm reconsidering. How do they compare size wise to the 03/04 and the 08? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Looks huge!,is it the right scale?. Looks about right for 'S' scale, Be good for SN3.5. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted July 31, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 31, 2014 Looks about right for 'S' scale, Be good for SN3.5. Keith Almost right for metre gauge as it stands but the mere thought of modelling a metric gauge at 3/16" to the foot makes my head hurt! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted July 31, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 31, 2014 I wouldn't say it is particularly large. Given that doorways on industrial diesels are generally a bit on the small side, the size of that one compared to those on the coach suggests Hornby may have introduced the first r-t-r loco in O-16.5 without realising it. John 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweasel Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 Looks like an ideal candidate for a Gn15 bash. Bigger cab, no buffers, multi height coupling, job done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovenor Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 (edited) but the mere thought of modelling a metric gauge at 3/16" to the foot makes my head hurt! John Why metric! I did say SN3.5, 3ft 6inches covers most of southern and west Africa, much of Australia, New Zealand and Japan, appropriate attention to buffers and couplings and you have a nice industrial loco. And 16.5 mm is very close to correct for 3ft 6in. More so than for metre gauge. Regards Keith Edited August 1, 2014 by Grovenor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted August 1, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 1, 2014 (edited) Why metric! I did say SN3.5, 3ft 6inches covers most of southern and west Africa, much of Australia, New Zealand and Japan, appropriate attention to buffers and couplings and you have a nice industrial loco. And 16.5 mm is very close to correct for 3ft 6in. More so than for metre gauge. Regards Keith Agreed. I've just worked it out on a calculator and got the (right) answers I didn't come up with when I did it in my head! John Metre gauge @ 1:64 = 15.62mm, 3'6" @ 1:64 = 16.67mm (just to save anyone else going to the trouble) Edited August 1, 2014 by Dunsignalling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
58050 Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 It wasn't me, honest! It looks like the model was stretched sideways in order to fit over the motor mount. The same thing happened to Bill and Ben. Hornby could do with redesigning this chassis to improve its performance and make it narrower. It gets used under enough locos to make it worth while. Same goes for the 06 - if you see a photo of an actual 06 from the front, you realise how much the Hornby model was stretched to fit! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterpiper Posted October 4, 2015 Share Posted October 4, 2015 I have one of these, but did re-paint it, the red plastic was a bit loud for me 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweasel Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 Had a look at one recently as I need small shunters for my layout. It's huge compared with others I have. Too wide, too high and it just looks like it's been left in the rain too long. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterpiper Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Had a look at one recently as I need small shunters for my layout. It's huge compared with others I have. Too wide, too high and it just looks like it's been left in the rain too long. It is well oversized compared with the Bagnell it was based on, but I have a lot of, shall we say 'freelance' small shunters so it fits in well with the neverwasa's I already have Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJL Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 Mine fits in nicely on my colliery layout Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tomparryharry Posted January 6, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 6, 2019 I have one of these, but did re-paint it, the red plastic was a bit loud for me I quite like that. If it had a jackshaft connection (ala) 03-4, it would look quite convincing. Ian. 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