OO gauge GWR Mogul and Prairie

[Ian Hargrave]

So it’s fortunate…for me…that the only one I am considering is the BR black. A shame…to say the least.

[BenL]

20 minutes ago, gwrrob said:

It does look like it's the whole batch are fitted with an incorrect door as seen by this Rail's example.

 

 

 

The safety valve cover also doesn't look well fitted - rather proud of the boiler at the base? And is it chipped on the top edge or is that a photoshopped white background gone awry? Decent green though.

[BenL]

33 minutes ago, BenL said:

The safety valve cover also doesn't look well fitted - rather proud of the boiler at the base? And is it chipped on the top edge or is that a photoshopped white background gone awry? Decent green though.

The fitting of the safety valve cover looks better, and no apparent chips, on the other examples on the Rails site, so looks like it’s just an issue with this particular individual. 

[The Johnster]

It's 2024, which I think is about time to accept that separately fitted BR smokebox door number plates with daylight visible behind them are a reasonable expectation.  We've dispensed with moulded splashers and boiler skirts, this should also be consigned and confined to the dustbin of history.

[cctransuk]

16 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

It's 2024, which I think is about time to accept that separately fitted BR smokebox door number plates with daylight visible behind them are a reasonable expectation.  We've dispensed with moulded splashers and boiler skirts, this should also be consigned and confined to the dustbin of history.

 

I can't agree - just one more part to be found - if you're lucky - loose in the box; or lost amongst the sleepers at some later date.

 

The amount of daylight to be seen behind a BR smokebox numberplate was non-existent, unless your head was upside-down and pressed hard against the smokebox door!

 

CJI.

[The Johnster]

Point taken, but while the amount of daylight behind the smokebox plate is small, it is not quite non-existant; on a model you don't have to have your head upsidedown and pressed against the smokebox, just looking down at it from a higher viewpoint, which is the default way of looking at models on layouts.  The moulded numberplates catch the light when they shouldn't and draw attention to themselves even in a side-on view.  They are at least better than the smokebox numbers on Lima 4575s, printed direct to the smokebox, though!

 

There was a time, back in the Pre-Cambrian era, when it was considered acceptable for handrails to be moulded as part of the bodyshell, because the small amount of daylight, similar to that available behind a smokebox number plate, was not considered worth the bother.  As RTR modelling evolved, this became unacceptable despite lowering construction costs.  We may have been helped in this regard by the moulded detail making it less easy to extract the bodyshells from the mould, but it was the exploitation of cheap Chinese assembly plant workers that eventually finally did for the practice at the end of the Cretaceous.  But the above paleoentological tale illustrates that properly mounted separate smokebox number plates are possible without radically increasing costs, just another among many task for the Chinese assemblers, who are at least nowadays being paid properly for their labours...  I doubt the practice would put more than 10p on the cost of a model, and it would certainly make life easier for anyone converting a BR loco to it's pre-nationalisation state.  Separately attached brass number plates are already becoming common.

 

 

[Pre Grouping fan]

At least being removable to access the DCC socket it makes it easier to swap out for the correct door.

[Ribird]

Does anyone know where to get spares of the outside steam pipes? (Instead of trying to backdate a BR one). Not end of the world, I have other options in my allocation list, but already have an inside piped version from the previous release batch.

[The Great Bear]

6 minutes ago, Ribird said:

Does anyone know where to get spares of the outside steam pipes? (Instead of trying to backdate a BR one). Not end of the world, I have other options in my allocation list, but already have an inside piped version from the previous release batch.

247 developments do them in white metal I think. Come in three lengths if I recall, not sure which one would be best fit for 43xx.

[57xx]

I know I want a 43/53xx but still not sure which one. Livery-wise I was thinking Shirtbutton as my 63xx is Great Western, but with all these options of steampipes (or not in the case of potential liveries) and chimney types, I need to get my head down with some research.

[gwrrob]

12 hours ago, Ribird said:

Does anyone know where to get spares of the outside steam pipes? (Instead of trying to backdate a BR one). Not end of the world, I have other options in my allocation list, but already have an inside piped version from the previous release batch.

 

Could you use the Dapol prairie pipes available from DCC supplies or Peter’s .

[The Great Bear]

Pictures of one of the latest batch I purchased.

 

As per the photos above in this topic, for this model the supplied smokebox door has the blank BR plate on it. I happened to have a spare already. It doesn't have the lamp iron on the door though, will need to add that for my modelling era, hence a goods train for its first outing. Runs smoothly.

 

[gwrrob]

1 hour ago, The Great Bear said:

Pictures of one of the latest batch I purchased.

 

As per the photos above in this topic, for this model the supplied smokebox door has the blank BR plate on it. I happened to have a spare already. It doesn't have the lamp iron on the door though, will need to add that for my modelling era, hence a goods train for its first outing. Runs smoothly.

 

 

As you're the first to get yours @The Great Bear would it be possible to do a full review please. Also , my order with Rails, they have honoured the pre-order price of nearly three years ago at £142 , which offsets the need to get a new smokebox door nicely.

[Miss Prism]

Difficult to tell when parallel-body buffers started to be fitted. My guess is c 1932. The more typical buffer for the 1930s is the Collett tapered.

 

[The Great Bear]

8 hours ago, gwrrob said:

 

As you're the first to get yours @The Great Bear would it be possible to do a full review please.

OK. I don't think I'll be threatening Messrs York. Wright and co for knowledgeable insight but here goes...

 

Mine arrived with all bits intact. Packaging is good, like previous issue. Not in the Accurascale Manor league but a notch up from some others. Fitting a the next 18 decoder (Zimo MN180) was straightforward, the Dapol solution in the smokebox is a neat idea. It runs nicely, the slow speed control on dcc with no adjustment is good. At first I thought the original 63xx issue was no worse, but realised that I had adjusted the decoder settings to help low speed control. Having reset them I can confirm the new version is better out of the box as you might expect with its lower gearing.  The top speed I reckon works out at around 90mph, still a bit fast but more believable than the 125mph plus of the first issue. The finish, the green is good to my eyes. It is richer and shinier than the previous issue and better for it in my view. The pony truck tracks ok...I think, my track is far from perfect, I did ease out the back to back a tad. The tender in my original issue one didn't run that well, first set of wheels lifting, could just be a bit of maintenance needed on my part of course. The new issue doesn't have that issue.

 

Finally, a comparison between previous 63xx issue (left) and the new 43xx issue (right). The cab roof of the 63xx is noticeably lower.

 

As for the accuracy of it, I'll leave that to the experts here to comment. Overall, I think it's a nice model. I may well get another... as the GWR's original "Swiss army knife" loco, they are a useful model to have for mine and other main or secondary line GWR layouts.

 

(Mine, having to the tip from here they had landed, I got from Kernow Models. )

[Miss Prism]

The difference in cab height looks a lot more than 1mm.

 

[Hal Nail]

45 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

The difference in cab height looks a lot more than 1mm.

 

It does but looks like the cab comes off, so I suspect for those so inclined, filing off the bottom (and where it fits over the firebox) wouldn't be that hard, wouldn't damage the paint and its areas where dirt would accumulate anyway.

Edited February 8 by Hal Nail

[Miss Prism]

10 hours ago, The Great Bear said:

The top speed I reckon works out at around 90mph, still a bit fast but more believable than the 125mph plus of the first issue.

 

Feels like 40:1, like the Romfords of all those years ago, but apparently now completely out of fashion, was the right approach.

 

Why do manufacturers think the laws of physics will change for their new locos?

 

[57xx]

2 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Feels like 40:1, like the Romfords of all those years ago, but apparently now completely out of fashion, was the right approach.

 

Why do manufacturers think the laws of physics will change for their new locos?

 

 

I was thinking similarly when I read the improvements had changed the gearing to 30:1. 45:1 randomly sprang in to mind as being better, it multiplies the motor torque more too giving better haulage,

[57xx]

On 07/02/2024 at 10:08, 57xx said:

I know I want a 43/53xx but still not sure which one. Livery-wise I was thinking Shirtbutton as my 63xx is Great Western, but with all these options of steampipes (or not in the case of potential liveries) and chimney types, I need to get my head down with some research.

 

This dilemma seems to have resolved itself... An email came in this morning saying Rails had shipped my shirt button Mogul. Only I didn't remember ordering it at any time! I check on my account and it wasn't listed in the orders, so I gave them a call - Apparently I placed the order last May 2023. 🙈

[Siberian Snooper]

4 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

This dilemma seems to have resolved itself... An email came in this morning saying Rails had shipped my shirt button Mogul. Only I didn't remember ordering it at any time! I check on my account and it wasn't listed in the orders, so I gave them a call - Apparently I placed the order last May 2023. 🙈

 

Is it being sent to your address?

 

 

[Ian Hargrave]

4 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

This dilemma seems to have resolved itself... An email came in this morning saying Rails had shipped my shirt button Mogul. Only I didn't remember ordering it at any time! I check on my account and it wasn't listed in the orders, so I gave them a call - Apparently I placed the order last May 2023. 🙈

Happens to us all . 

[57xx]

39 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

Is it being sent to your address?

 

Yes, it's all above board, I just didn't remember I'd ordered it and it's in between states on their system so not showing up at the moment.

Edited February 8 by 57xx

[Harlequin]

I got 5350 with portholes in "Great Western" livery today. (The pre-order was transferred from Hattons to Kernow. Sad that I had to do it but no problems.)

 

It's wonderful that Dapol have produced these older variations and taken the opportunity to address some of the issues with the first batch. Well done Dapol!

 

The only thing slightly amiss on first inspection is that the coal load won't sit down properly. I'll find out why later.

 

Overall she looks good but more later when I've had time to do a proper inspection.

 

Fitting the decoder is a piece of cake and she runs very smoothly, although still a bit too fast by default (about 60mph at 50% throttle).

 

Edited February 8 by Harlequin

[The Johnster]

13 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

I was thinking similarly when I read the improvements had changed the gearing to 30:1. 45:1 randomly sprang in to mind as being better, it multiplies the motor torque more too giving better haulage,

 

Back in the day, more than 5 decades ago, one of the advantages of kit chassis and mechs was that you could choose the gearing, and the introduction of foldup gearboxes made the meshing more reliable on the higher ratios.  I always favoured 40:1 on such models but would go to 50:1 for shunting and mineral work.  That was when the standard RTR ratio was an insane 18:1, and decent slow running with smooth starting and stopping was next to impossible to produce in an RTR model without replacing the gears, which was a fairly major undertaking involving the replacement of the wheels, axles, and motor as well.

 

Then, 40 or so years ago, two things happened, fairly close to each other but quite coincidental, and we are still affected by their aftermath.  The first was that the default RTR mech became a pancake motor driving through plastic spur gears because the motors were gutless and had to run at stupid speeds to develop any useful power for haulage, and even then rubber traction tyres were common.  This was done in order to hide the motors in fireboxes and preserve daylight visibility beneath boilers, which was in itself A Good Thing, but a backward step in performance; decent slow running and smooth stop/starting was no longer next to impossible, it was fully impossible.  It was a low point, thankfully we are past it.

 

But that didn't matter because the next development was DCC.  This is undoubtedly A Very Good Thing if you can afford it, because it delivers fully 12vdc to your track at all times and then to your locomotive, though not the motor directl, which makes decent slow running and smooth stop/starting much easier.  You have to be able to afford it, though, and some of us, myself included, can't.  Short of overthrowing the capitalist system (and we haven't got anything that has been proven to work to replace it with) and introducing something that provides both efficient creation and truly fair and equable distribution, of wealth, we peasants have to learn to live with this.  Fortunately the manufacturers take pity on us and continue to produce DC mechs, so presumably there are enough of us of the lower orders to make this worth their while.  I am grateful for this.

 

During the late 90s and early noughties, most of our manufacturers stopped manufacturing and contracted that activity out to the Chinese, and this proved a very successful move.  The Chinese are very good at assmbing multi-part models that are highly detailed and to scale, and have access to cheap, powerful, and reliable can motors, so they made mechs with these motors driving through idler wheels to the final cog, usually at a motor shaft to driven axle ratio of 38:1, not far off my old-time fave, 40:1.  On clean well-laid track with a clean-wheeled loco with clean pickups that has been set up properly, modern product DC performance is pretty good, and we've chucked the traction tyres.  A Good Thing.  Modern product DCC performance is superb, and comes with whistles and bells, literally, but I still can't afford it. 

 

Pretty good DC is all very well, but no excuse not to try and do better, and one way this might be achieved would be with higher gear ratios, but realistic top speeds might need faster motors; not sure of the availability of these, or the result of upping the track voltage to, say, 15dc to achieve this.  Higher gear ratios might be self-defeating if they significantly increase gearing friction.  There may be other ways to improve DC performance, such as better controllers.  The only significant development in DC controller technology in the last 40 years has been the recent introduction of NFC control from smartphones; the core inner workings of a DC controller remain the same.  The answer may be a combination of methods, but I rather doubt that anyone is currently actively seeking them...

 

Starting a DC loco smoothly and controllably is a big ask, always was.  We are requiring the motor to overcome inertia and rolling r esistance at the very time when the voltage is at it's lowest and dirt at the track/wheel or wheel/pickup interface along with the braking effect of the pickup wipers will be able to exert their greatest proportional effect on the motor.  I occasionally express a desire for a DC stayalive, and flywheels, but both of these devices will be at their least effective in the start-from-rest situation.  Where do we go to improve DC slow and start/stop performance?

 

FWIW I think that for now we are back to upping gear ratios and perhaps current by about 25%, 50:1 and 16vdc.  But that might affect the top speed of some locos, and while it is all very well for me with my short BLT where nothing needs to run at more than about a scale 40mph and most movements are at scale 15mph or less to suggest such a course of action, it may not suit those who like to run expresses at realistic speeds.  Tony Wright, for example, complains that his RTR ECML pacifics cannot achieve realistic speeds and loads, i.e, 90mph+ with 14 bogies on level track, while his kit-builds can, so higher gearing might work.  Tony is an above average modeller, though, and famous for fettling mechs, so it might not work as well for us lumpen proletarians.

 

My view is that, in the long term, a completely different method of controlling model trains will emerge, with a power source and control device correctly situated on the loco but controlled by NFC and servos, but this will not happen in my lifetime, so, until the lottery enables me to go for DCC across the fleet, I'll just have to bodge along the best I can.  I'd like to try higher gearing and voltages, though.