Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge GWR Dean Goods

[Dunsignalling]

Found this pic of 2516 dated 1935, have cropped it for comparison with the above.

 

Hope the pic helps

That looks pretty close to Oxford's revised sample and rather more "curvy" than the loco in Edwardian's prototype photo which suggests there were variations.

 

By the 1930s, the surviving locos in the class would have been very much like the proverbial fisherman's knife (or Trigger's broom in modern parlance) and we ought not to expect uniformity.

 

John

Edited October 17, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[bertiedog]

Obviously alterations seem to have been made, but still a poor match to the real profile, which has a classic elegance to to the Belpaire firebox shaping, which starts at the top being wider than the boiler barrel, and ends via the line coming down to just over the barrel size, due to the extra cladding over the firebox. Oxford shape would have worked on the real loco, but the lurch in the profile is just not there on the real locomotives.

As usual with the GWR, although the Gospel was standardisation, there were variants, especially after major overhauls dependent on whether for instance Swindon or Wolverhampton did the work. Each workshop had their own methods, and claddings varied in details. The worst offender was the Pannier, they were out shopped with many details altered, including livery.

The Oxford does look nice in the full GWR livery, but the one to perhaps wait for is the classic round top boilered version.

Stephen

[Dunsignalling]

 

The Oxford does look nice in the full GWR livery, but the one to perhaps wait for is the classic round top boilered version.

Stephen

That would certainly be more likely to be a subject that can be modelled "as drawn" with some likelihood of very many being the exactly the same which, judging by the two photos posted, was certainly not the case after they'd all been rebuilt/overhauled a few times and undergone various boiler swaps.   

 

GWR standardization at new build was fairly rigid, though classes produced over long timescales (like the Castles) were subject to incremental improvements. It seems not to have been adhered to (at least visually) for very long once vehicles entered the hurly-burly of day-to-day service and maintenance.

 

Heaven help (for instance) anyone who tries to tackle c1905-built coaches in c1930 condition other than individually.

 

John

Edited October 17, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[BG John]

The Oxford does look nice in the full GWR livery, but the one to perhaps wait for is the classic round top boilered version.

I'd better get my Mainline one done before that appears, so I avoid the temptation! I'll need it in as built condition though, so maybe if/when it appears it won't be suitable without a fair bit of work anyway!

[Mikkel]

From certain angles, the shape of the firebox on the real Dean goods looks more "waisted" than others, see eg:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1519/entry-13944-2301-research-reference-photographs/

https://locoyard.com/2013/12/18/dean-goods-2516/

 

So all you have to do is look at your Oxford Dean Goods from a certain angle   

[Edwardian]

the classic round top boilered version.

 

 

Domeless, forward mounted dome or centre mounted dome?

[Dunsignalling]

Domeless, forward mounted dome or centre mounted dome?

Quite!

[Mikkel]

Domeless, forward mounted dome or centre mounted dome?

 

Ideally I was hoping to do a domeless one, but it depends on what the Oxford model will actually allow in terms of motor vis-a-vis boiler diameter etc. Time will tell.

 

A forward mounted version is perhaps a more realistic mod, and not without its merits: http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrkd1634.htm

 

For later mods or other RTR versions, I imagine a WD version would also be popular: http://s248.photobucket.com/user/ebaykal/media/deangoods1.jpg.html

Edited October 18, 2016 by Mikkel

[Dunsignalling]

 I'll need it in as built condition though, so maybe if/when it appears it won't be suitable without a fair bit of work anyway!

But do you?

 

If I've read your earlier posts correctly, your chosen period is c1905, by which time some of these locos were more than a quarter of a century old and would have undergone three or four general repairs. During those, all manner of small and not so small alterations would have crept in but with no individual loco likely to have received all of them. The newest examples, contrastingly, were barely six years old and probably just coming up to their first major works attention.

 

Also, as a class of 260 locos built over a 16-year period, it is highly improbable that appearance of the earliest and final batches "as built" tallied exactly. (EDIT: that's a given as I understand only the first twenty were built with domeless boilers)

 

As for the most noticeable change, I can't find any reference to when Belpaire boilers were first fitted to this class in any of my books. Reading between the lines of other posts, there is an implication that none had them when first built though I've not seen it expressly stated, can someone else enlighten me? 

 

John

Edited October 18, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[BG John]

But do you?

 

If I've read your earlier posts correctly, your chosen period is c1905

My 1905 layout is too small for tender locos, and it would really be out of place anyway. It would be for a future layout set in the 1880s.

[Edwardian]

Here is one from Edwardian's 'To Do' List.

 

This is one of the first 20 built without domes.  It needs stripping down and repainting in dark green and then needs lining out. 

 

It also needs added details, such as tender rivets, and there are some later features that are incorrect for the 'as built' condition, such as the chimney, which is a later, shorter chimney, and the steps between the front 2 splashers, which should have curved sides.

 

After this, locos were built with domes on the front boiler ring.  Russell includes a good shot of 2537 in 1908 with an S4 boiler, with round-top firebox, and dome mounted on the centre boiler ring.   Typically, the locomotives are paired with the old 1,800 gallon tender as in the picture of my model, but I have seen forward and centre-mounted examples paired with the later tender.

 

My indulgent ideal would be a domeless locomotive and a forward dome example, both with Indian Red frames, and a centre dome round top and a centre dome belpaire, both black-framed.  All lined, of course.  If the Oxford example comes good, that's 2 of the 4!

 

Of course, a couple of Armstrong Goods would be needed to round things off!   

 

I don't have the RCTS volume that includes the Dean Goods. As is often said, and it is particularly true of a large class built over time, pick a contemporary photograph and model from that. 

 

EDIT: Though far from conclusive, on the dated photographs I have (and, of course, I do not know how reliable the dating is), I have not seen belpaire examples earlier than April 1914, but perhaps someone can produce information to confirm or deny that as the earliest date for these fireboxes on Dean Goods?.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

The Oxford model is of 2309.  This is one of the first batch of 20, so, as built was domeless.

 

I find I have an image of the rebuilt 2309.  She is at Birmingham Snow Hill and the photograph is said to date from April 1914.  Note she is powered by the Mainline/Hornby motorised tender, crudely disguised by a giant mound of coal [smiley face].

 

I assume that it is this state that the Oxford model is intended to represent. Indeed, it could hardly be otherwise.  So, it would be in order to compare the model with the prototype picture. 

 

- Notice the step between the front 2 splashers.  Like my model of 2319, the Oxford model is incorrect in featuring a straight-sided step.  So, I will have the annoyance of replacing and lining the steps!

 

- Query whether the dome on the prototype is polished brass or painted. 

 

- Note the apparent absence of rivets around the prototype's smoke-box. 

 

- Note also the position on the Oxford model of 2309's lower pair of firebox wash-out plugs, which seem too widely placed and along a plate that seems absent on the prototype.

 

- Also, I think there is a problem with the cab:

 

Note how much closer the cab side cut out appears to the roof on the Oxford model.  Some at least of the classes' cabs were later raised slightly, no doubt in conjunction with the installation of the higher belpaire firebox.  I do not know if the Oxford cab is of the higher or lower stature, but it has the cut-out coming close to the cab roof, as was the case before cabs were raised.

 

It does not seem to match the photograph of 2309, the cab of which has clearly been raised, resulting in a greater distance between the roof and the cut-out.

 

It is hard to tell, but the curve of the cab cut-out does not seem right, either. Look at my model of 2319 (Post #436 above), which, after all, is the same batch as 2309.  It seems to reflect accurately the original appearance of the cab-side, and you can tell, I think, that the curve of the scoop matches that on the picture of 2309.  The difference is that 2309's cab has been raised slightly by the time the picture was taken in 1914.  Look at the curve of the cut out on the Oxford model.  It seems different. 

 

I do not know how you could correct this, if at all, without ruining the cosmetic finish.  If the cab is to the greater height, but with a cut-out profile from the lower cab, stretched to go full height, it could be an inaccurate hybrid cab. It certainly does not look right for 2309. 

 

Now is the time to spot for any other inconsistencies!

Edited October 18, 2016 by Edwardian

[BG John]

Those huge warts on the smokebox stick out like a sore thumb!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Seeing as photos tend to highlight detail we could otherwise miss, it isn't beyond the bounds of possibility that the Dean Goods will be snapped up despite its peculiar firebox profile simply because it's overall appearance is spontifiacolotious... 

 I would be more optimistic than that. Considered overall as a package with a (hopefully) superior and quiet loco drive and a more accurate rendition of the tender, it will be better than the previous RTR Dean Goods.Though it will not be as much better as was possible, it remains significantly better.

 

My direct parallel would be with A4s. Hornby's circa 2005 introduction was far from perfect, with several very visible deviations from prototype. But better than anything previous in RTR? Oh yes, and on multiple counts. The good stuff in 'the package'  made it a no-brainer as the choice for a working model, and the deficiencies could be rectified.

[Horsetan]

Those huge warts on the smokebox stick out like a sore thumb!

 

Can they not be filed off?

[Joseph_Pestell]

Neither: it was in Monmouthshire.

Not sure why anyone considered this answer to be funny. It is technically correct. Covered in another thread some months ago, Monmouthshire did not fully become a part of Wales (as Gwent) until 1974.

[Edwardian]

Can they not be filed off?

 

I would have thought so.  The step can be cured.  Assuming you can live with the softer, better, but not quite right, firebox profile (I suspect I can), you could even add the missing plugs without too much bother.  I'd need to see the real thing, I think, to judge the cab-side.  On some photographs the curve of the scoop looks better than in others, as I have found with pictures of the Mainline version.

[Dunsignalling]

The Oxford model is of 2309.  This is one of the first batch of 20, so, as built was domeless.

 

I find I have an image of the rebuilt 2309.  She is at Birmingham Snow Hill and the photograph is said to date from April 1914.  Note she is powered by the Mainline/Hornby motorised tender, crudely disguised by a giant mound of coal [smiley face].

 

I assume that it is this state that the Oxford model is intended to represent. Indeed, it could hardly be otherwise.  So, it would be in order to compare the model with the prototype picture. 

 

- Notice the step between the front 2 splashers.  Like my model of 2319, the Oxford model is incorrect in featuring a straight-sided step.  So, I will have the annoyance of replacing and lining the steps!

 

- Query whether the dome on the prototype is polished brass or painted. 

 

- Note the apparent absence of rivets around the prototype's smoke-box. 

 

- Note also the absence on the Oxford model of 2309's lower pair of firebox wash-out plugs.

 

- Also, I think there is a problem with the cab:

 

Note how much closer the cab side cut out appears to the roof on the Oxford model.  Some at least of the classes' cabs were later raised slightly, no doubt in conjunction with the installation of the higher belpaire firebox.  I do not know if the Oxford cab is of the higher or lower stature, but it has the cut-out coming close to the cab roof, as was the case before cabs were raised.

 

It does not seem to match the photograph of 2309, the cab of which has clearly been raised, resulting in a greater distance between the roof and the cut-out.

 

It is hard to tell, but the curve of the cab cut-out does not seem right, either. Look at my model of 2319 (Post #436 above), which, after all, is the same batch as 2309.  It seems to reflect accurately the original appearance of the cab-side, and you can tell, I think, that the curve of the scoop matches that on the picture of 2309.  The difference is that 2309's cab has been raised slightly by the time the picture was taken in 1914.  Look at the curve of the cut out on the Oxford model.  It seems different. 

 

I do not know how you could correct this, if at all, without ruining the cosmetic finish.  If the cab is to the greater height, but with a cut-out profile from the lower cab, stretched to go full height, it could be an inaccurate hybrid cab. It certainly does not look right for 2309. 

 

Now is the time to spot for any other inconsistencies!

I think that photo poses more than one question.

 

Were all raised cabs the same or did they vary according to whether they were done at Swindon, Wolverhampton or perhaps even somewhere like Newton Abbot where such work would have been well within the establishment's capabilities? Were the side sheets replaced or extended - if the former, did the shape of the cut-out change?  Did the cab changes take place in concert with locos acquiring larger tenders, as a standard procedure at main overhauls, or more randomly?

 

I'd say the dome is very probably painted (a brass one, even if not buffed up for a few days should pick up more reflections) and the safety valve bonnet might well be, too.

 

Additionally, the chimney shows little suggestion of being copper-capped. Did they disappear from "lesser classes" over time or am I not looking hard enough? 

 

EDIT: I've managed to get the picture bigger on my screen and it is copper capped.

 

John

Edited October 18, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[The Stationmaster]

The Oxford model is of 2309.  This is one of the first batch of 20, so, as built was domeless.

 

I find I have an image of the rebuilt 2309.  She is at Birmingham Snow Hill and the photograph is said to date from April 1914.  Note she is powered by the Mainline/Hornby motorised tender, crudely disguised by a giant mound of coal [smiley face].

 

I assume that it is this state that the Oxford model is intended to represent. Indeed, it could hardly be otherwise.

 

-  Notice the step between the front 2 splashers.  Liker my model of 2319, the Oxford model is incorrect in featuring a straight-sided step.  So, I will have the annoyance of replacing and lining the steps!

 

- Query whether the dome on the prototype is polished brass or painted. 

 

- Note the apparent absence of rivets around the prototype's smoke-box. 

 

- Note also the absence on the Oxford model of 2309's lower pair of firebox wash-out plugs.

 

- Also, note how much closer the cab side cut out appears to the roof on the Oxford model.  I think the Oxford model represents the original appearance, but some at least cabs were raised slightly, no doubt in conjunction with the installation of the higher belpaire firebox.  I do not know if the Oxford cab is of the higher or lower stature, but it has the cut out profile for the lower. Either way, it does not seem to match the photograph of 2309.

 

Now is the time to spot for any other inconsistencies!

 

A complex class and no mistake, plus typical GWR load of alterations to both design and detail as time went on  (I've even seen a pic of one in WD hands 'somewhere in France' with a polished dome cover).

 

So according to the RCTS history -

The first 20 had domeless boilers, flush smokeboxes, and clacks on the side of the firebox.

The second 20 had a dome on the first ring of the boiler otherwise as the first batch.

The third and immediately subsequent batches (2341- 2360 and 2381-2450 had a boiler 2 inches greater in diameter but from 2381 onwards they had a normal smokebox and the clacks were placed inside the cab.

2451 - 2580 had boilers with the dome on the back ring, with 2491-2580 having fluted coupling rods and the final 10 reportedly having the extended smokebox which subsequently became standard on the class.

 

Some of the domeless boilers were removed in the early 1890s  although reportedly at least one, 2310, retained a domeless boiler until c.1905.  The boiler story then gets a little confusing as at least three different types were fitted as replacements from the early 1890s onwards with the belpaire firebox B4 boiler appearing in large numbers from 1901 onwards and the superheated version of that boiler appearing from 1911 onwards in increasing numbers.  Top feeds appeared from c.1913 and were reportedly carried by c.40 members of the class.  Cast iron chimneys were fitted from 1919 onwards according to the RCTS but photos suggest they might have been earlier and some engines had extra sandboxes added during the 1920s (which might be linked to lamp irons being relocated although that is surmise on my part).

 

There seems to me to be no reason to believe that more than one pattern/shape of belpaire firebox, and cladding over it, was used on the class - the two types of belpaire boiler were basically the same  and the main difference was heating area.

 

The Oxford model is a rather peculiar mixture of detail period wise - it has what appears to be a cast iron chimney with capuchon but painted to represent a copper top (in any case the capuchon would I suspect have been part of the inner chimney and not made of copper), a superheated belpaire boiler with top feed which dates it very firmly to post 1913 condition but earlier style of polished dome cover (but see my comment above about an ROD engine in France).  As already noted the footstep appears to be incorrect and the whistles are mounted the wrong way round (but it is a livery sample so no guide to production standard).  According to 'Great Western Way' polished dome covers were discontinued c.1906 although it is quite possible (again the ROD reference) that individual crews might well have cleaned the paint off the dome cover on their engine so potentially a post 1913 boiler might have appeared in that state.

[Edwardian]

A complex class and no mistake, plus typical GWR load of alterations to both design and detail as time went on  (I've even seen a pic of one in WD hands 'somewhere in France' with a polished dome cover).

 

So according to the RCTS history -

The first 20 had domeless boilers, flush smokeboxes, and clacks on the side of the firebox.

The second 20 had a dome on the first ring of the boiler otherwise as the first batch.

The third and immediately subsequent batches (2341- 2360 and 2381-2450 had a boiler 2 inches greater in diameter but from 2381 onwards they had a normal smokebox and the clacks were placed inside the cab.

2451 - 2580 had boilers with the dome on the back ring, with 2491-2580 having fluted coupling rods and the final 10 reportedly having the extended smokebox which subsequently became standard on the class.

 

Some of the domeless boilers were removed in the early 1890s  although reportedly at least one, 2310, retained a domeless boiler until c.1905.  The boiler story then gets a little confusing as at least three different types were fitted as replacements from the early 1890s onwards with the belpaire firebox B4 boiler appearing in large numbers from 1901 onwards and the superheated version of that boiler appearing from 1911 onwards in increasing numbers.  Top feeds appeared from c.1913 and were reportedly carried by c.40 members of the class.  Cast iron chimneys were fitted from 1919 onwards according to the RCTS but photos suggest they might have been earlier and some engines had extra sandboxes added during the 1920s (which might be linked to lamp irons being relocated although that is surmise on my part).

 

There seems to me to be no reason to believe that more than one pattern/shape of belpaire firebox, and cladding over it, was used on the class - the two types of belpaire boiler were basically the same  and the main difference was heating area.

 

The Oxford model is a rather peculiar mixture of detail period wise - it has what appears to be a cast iron chimney with capuchon but painted to represent a copper top (in any case the capuchon would I suspect have been part of the inner chimney and not made of copper), a superheated belpaire boiler with top feed which dates it very firmly to post 1913 condition but earlier style of polished dome cover (but see my comment above about an ROD engine in France).  As already noted the footstep appears to be incorrect and the whistles are mounted the wrong way round (but it is a livery sample so no guide to production standard).  According to 'Great Western Way' polished dome covers were discontinued c.1906 although it is quite possible (again the ROD reference) that individual crews might well have cleaned the paint off the dome cover on their engine so potentially a post 1913 boiler might have appeared in that state.

 

Helpful, as ever, not least because I don't have that RCTS volume.

 

It was particularly useful to learn that the top feeds were a 1913 feature.

 

Apply that to the Oxford model:

 

- While it seems that a polished dome is not an improbability for 1913-14, and interpreting old B&W plates can be tricky, it looks to me that, in April 1914, 2309 had a painted dome, as per regulations.  It might be that a contemporary locomotive, with top-feed, might have worn a polished dome, but it does not appear that 2309 did, and without photographic evidence for a class mate, you're no better off.  This is a problem, as to correct would involve matching Oxford's green shade and finish exactly.

 

- The chimney is interesting, because the photograph of 2309 clearly shows the capuchin (which appears black), but appears to show a polished metal top, so Oxford seem to be correct as to that, albeit the sample has it painted brass, not copper.  Easily corrected, as, presumably, is swapping over the whistles.

 

- The cab cut out appears too close to the roof line, and there may be other issues, but I will keep an open mind until I see it in the flesh..

 

- There is some room for interpretation on some of these points, perhaps.  Certain other details appear to be clear errors: The firebox profile is wrong generally, and the position of lower wash-out plugs and plating looks wrong for this engine.  The extent of riveting on the smoke box is wrong for 2309.  The step is wrong for 2309.

 

Interestingly, No. 2516, funnily enough the example preserved at STEAM in Swindon, ran at one stage in a similar condition, with top-feed.  She is pictured thus, though no date is given, looking more like the Oxford model: 

 

- Top-feed

 

- Straight-step

 

- Smoke-box riveting

 

- And, though the firebox lacks the plating at the base seen on 2516 in preservation and has the lower wash-out plugs closer together than seen on the Oxford model,  the photograph appears to show something of a crease to the turn-under on the firebox profile!!!!!

 

Unfortunately, there is no date given by STEAM for this picture, and it is hard to detect any trace of lining.  The shot is, perhaps later, the engine dirty and war-weary, but it is possible that, if the top-feed were fitted pre-War, c.1913-14, when still lined out, 2516 might have represented a better match for Oxford's tooling.

 

Annoying for a Museum not to offer a date for its photograph, but you can view it here:  http://www.steampicturelibrary.com/dean-goods-no-2516/print/4079975.html

Edited October 18, 2016 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

I think that photo poses more than one question.

 

Were all raised cabs the same or did they vary according to whether they were done at Swindon, Wolverhampton or perhaps even somewhere like Newton Abbot where such work would have been well within the establishment's capabilities? Were the side sheets replaced or extended - if the former, did the shape of the cut-out change?  Did the cab changes take place in concert with locos acquiring larger tenders, as a standard procedure at main overhauls, or more randomly?

 

I'd say the dome is very probably painted (a brass one, even if not buffed up for a few days should pick up more reflections) and the safety valve bonnet might well be, too.

 

Additionally, the chimney shows little suggestion of being copper-capped. Did they disappear from "lesser classes" over time or am I not looking hard enough? 

 

EDIT: I've managed to get the picture bigger on my screen and it is copper capped.

 

John

 

John,

 

Thanks.  I agree, that is a copper top to the chimney, thanks for confirming.

 

Note that the dome strikes you as painted.  I think so.

 

From the sample of photographs I have seen, the cab cut-out profile stays the same, but the distance of the top of the cut-out to the cab roof increases slightly but noticeably.  Were there variations to the curvature of the cut-outs? I don't know.

 

Were all cabs raised for belpaire boxes?  I don't know. There is a suggestion that spectacle plates were smaller after belpaires were fitted, though perhaps that need not have been the case where the roof was raised?   

 

You raise some very good questions.  If only we had the answers!

 

The example of 2516 shows that there might have been a prototype that, in c.1913-14, better was a better match for Oxford's model than 2309.  But, without a photograph .... 

[gismorail]

Having followed this interesting thread I'm still not certain that I'm going to rush to purchase this new addition until I have seen one for real and assessed the running quality. I have three Hornby models which are awaiting comet chassis builds so that I can convert them to DCC with sound. I'm looking to do one in WD livery as found on the Shropshire & Montgomery Railway during the military control late 50's the 1960 with the possible addition of Pannier tanks for extra water capacity in the second model (I certainly don't want to risk a new model for this attempt) And the third model will be in BR black for use on my proposed Wrexham Central layout. 

With all the comments regarding firebox and general finish etc I dug out on of the Hornby models to compare with current Oxford pictures. I have added these photographs to see what others feel 

 

                                

 

                                

[The Stationmaster]

Having followed this interesting thread I'm still not certain that I'm going to rush to purchase this new addition until I have seen one for real and assessed the running quality. I have three Hornby models which are awaiting comet chassis builds so that I can convert them to DCC with sound. I'm looking to do one in WD livery as found on the Shropshire & Montgomery Railway during the military control late 50's the 1960 with the possible addition of Pannier tanks for extra water capacity in the second model (I certainly don't want to risk a new model for this attempt) And the third model will be in BR black for use on my proposed Wrexham Central layout. 

With all the comments regarding firebox and general finish etc I dug out on of the Hornby models to compare with current Oxford pictures. I have added these photographs to see what others feel 

 

IMG_0002 (900x492).jpg                                 IMG_0003 (900x555).jpg

 

IMG_0005 (900x592).jpg                                 IMG_0004 (900x816).jpg

 

I think it looks better than the Oxford offering - the cabside cutout is a better shape and the washout plug holes are streets ahead of the weird things on the Oxford model.  It is let down by some detail items but they are all the sort of thing which are fairly simple to deal with and overall I think it has stood the test of time remarkably well considering its origins.

[BG John]

I think it looks better than the Oxford offering - the cabside cutout is a better shape and the washout plug holes are streets ahead of the weird things on the Oxford model.  It is let down by some detail items but they are all the sort of thing which are fairly simple to deal with and overall I think it has stood the test of time remarkably well considering its origins.

An Oxford Adams Radial appeared in the heart of Great Western land today. It's the first time I've seen one for real, and it seems far more impressive than it looks in the photos I've seen. Even the shortage of daylight under the boiler isn't as off-putting as I thought it would be. So it's just possible that the Dean Goods won't look as bad as we think it will.

 

Don't worry that I'm changing allegiance though, as it will be surrounded by locos that came out of Swindon, and is part of a long term plan where it will be even more outnumbered!

[bertiedog]

I have run the shot of 2309 through Photoshop to enhance it a bit, and goodness me, the firebox shape is wrong,,,,,No, only joking, but the shape of the Oxford is nearer the photo than the example at Swindon, which is the one that is usually taken as correct.

The real 2309 has not got quite the "fold" in the firebox cladding, but does have a more vertical line from the top to the middle line of the barrel, very like the Oxford. they differ only after the line waists in to meet the support plate.

So there is a big difference between Swindon and 2309, and the difference is in Oxford's favour.

 

 

Mind you the smokebox rivets are simply not there!, so Oxford must have referenced them from another source.

 

It does solve the Mainline Coal load though..............they saw the shot and thought it a good place for the motor to go.

 

Yet again it is another case of real locos differing, possibly Wolverhampton verses Swindon against.........