Bachmann Spring 2021 - New tooling Class 20/0

[adb968008]

On 04/02/2023 at 06:15, Roy Langridge said:

Perhaps because the first batch didn’t sell overly well with at least two versions being sold off cheap?
 

I was really suprised at how badly they seem to have sold, although the choice or liveries and half-baked lighting may have been a factor. 

 

Roy

 

2 hours ago, Waverley West said:

 

Ditto, but as far as I know 20227 was the only headcode-fitted Railfreight-liveried 20 to be fitted with a high-intensity headlight in BR days, making it unique and meaning that surgery is required to renumber it authentically. That makes it a very strange choice to me, given that so many other Railfreight-liveried alternatives without a headlight were available.

Does seem to be a mistake that limits choices For the wallet.

 

I recall 47001, very popular plain blue 47, very good for renumbering.

But then the WCRC 47… unique to 1 example.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 6, 2023 by adb968008

[w124bob]

On 02/02/2022 at 10:01, sulzer71 said:

D8028-34/70-127 (20028>20034/20070>20127) had the deeper windows

The exception is 20115, at some point in the early 70's it must have received fairly hefty cab damage. It ran for all it's TOPS career with a standard cab and dual brakes, quite early for an ScR loco. So 20057  can be a start for this one, however you'll need to reposition the airpipes and MU dummy holder, all the tablet catcher example also had snow plough brackets . As always it's all in the pictures.

[sulzer71]

14 hours ago, w124bob said:

The exception is 20115, at some point in the early 70's it must have received fairly hefty cab damage. It ran for all it's TOPS career with a standard cab and dual brakes, quite early for an ScR loco. So 20057  can be a start for this one, however you'll need to reposition the airpipes and MU dummy holder, all the tablet catcher example also had snow plough brackets . As always it's all in the pictures.

Yes , I've only discovered about 115 recently

[Ian J.]

Silly question: which other 20s would it be acceptable to renumber the model of 35-355, '20 057' too?

[Covkid]

12 hours ago, Ian J. said:

Silly question: which other 20s would it be acceptable to renumber the model of 35-355, '20 057' too?

 

Obviously photos are your best bet but from what I can find D8028-D8034 and D8069-D8114 and D8116-D8127 were the disc headcode locos with token catchers and thus the deeper cabside windows.   You therefore can pick 20001-20027, 20035-20068, 20115 and 20128 for "standard window" class 20s with discs, but there are further complications with buffers and bogie equalising beams. The first few class 20s with fitted with oval buffers from new, as were the bogie equalising beams on which the first were plain beams. Some had a fluting then the majority had fluting and holes drilled in them. 

 

Good luck with your selection and depending on your era some lost their headcode discs !!!   

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by Covkid

[Ian J.]

I will have to do some photo research to try and find the most appropriate candidates. Initial searches suggest 20115 might be a reasonable choice, circa 1985...?

Edited February 8, 2023 by Ian J.

[sulzer71]

15 hours ago, Ian J. said:

I will have to do some photo research to try and find the most appropriate candidates. Initial searches suggest 20115 might be a reasonable choice, circa 1985...?

The only difference I can see is 20115 has the Scottish buffer beam arrangement which if you were fussy would mean creating some plough brackets an repositioning the MW box and pipework

[Ian J.]

9 hours ago, sulzer71 said:

The only difference I can see is 20115 has the Scottish buffer beam arrangement which if you were fussy would mean creating some plough brackets an repositioning the MW box and pipework

 

Short of researching and finding a directly suitable candidate, I'm willing to stick with 20115. I can always try and make the modifications to correct it at a later date if it's 'just' details and nothing structural.

[rob D2]

i'm very impressed with my recent purchase of 20057 .

 

The instructions are way better than old Bachmann , as is the buffer beam details .

 

It runs a lot smoother than anything else i have blubox wise and is close to the Hornby 31/60.

 

Shame it has no driver and the cost of a new  fangeled plux decoder made me spit my tea out but other than that love it.

 

Gonna be 20015 i think 

[SouthernBlue80s]

I turned 20057 into 20055.

It's a nice model. I am tempted to get another....but not sure what to renumber it as. 

 

 

 

[Covkid]

11 hours ago, SouthernBlue80s said:

I turned 20057 into 20055.

It's a nice model. I am tempted to get another....but not sure what to renumber it as. 

 

 

 

That looks good.  Definitely got the "Toton" number spacing.

 

The only comment I would make about class 20 weathering from observation is that exhaust soot seems to have mostly adhered to the top of the hood bodysides in one direction, not both. Whether it is to do with the air flow from the cab I am not sure.     

[sulzer71]

17 hours ago, Ian J. said:

 

Short of researching and finding a directly suitable candidate, I'm willing to stick with 20115. I can always try and make the modifications to correct it at a later date if it's 'just' details and nothing structural.

 

 

If it had the bufferbeams from the Railfreight 20227 it would be perfect , Bachmann have said they have the tooling to do all the buffer beam variants but when we will see a suitable one who knows

 

Fortunately I've got a couple of scrap bodyshells which I'm using to piece together a loco for myself , I've used the green disc headcode loco as a base , tablet catcher cab off the old tooling with the face of the new tooling one (so I can use the lighting boards) and it will have the buffer beams from the Railfreight one to create a 'proper' Scottish one

Edited February 10, 2023 by sulzer71

[Ian J.]

5 hours ago, sulzer71 said:

 

 

If it had the bufferbeams from the Railfreight 20227 it would be perfect , Bachmann have said they have the tooling to do all the buffer beam variants but when we will see a suitable one who knows

 

Fortunately I've got a couple of scrap bodyshells which I'm using to piece together a loco for myself , I've used the green disc headcode loco as a base , tablet catcher cab off the old tooling with the face of the new tooling one (so I can use the lighting boards) and it will have the buffer beams from the Railfreight one to create a 'proper' Scottish one

 

I've tried to identify the difference between 057 and 115 in available online pictures, however apart from the height of the (?) multiple working plug, I can't see what the differences are. Can you/anyone perhaps describe the differences in the pipework and snow plough brackets in more detail (if not somehow show them on a picture)?

[Ian J.]

OK, I think I see the differences now. I was looking under the buffer beam for the snowplough brackets, not on the buffer beam either side of the coupling:

 

 

 

I'm not sure how easy it would be to create such brackets, so I might have to find another candidate.

[w124bob]

I've done a couple of old tooling class 20's with ploughs and full buffer beam detail, it wasn't difficult. Use the Baccy plough first remove the prongs so the back of the centre plough is flush but leaving the connecting brackets to the outer ploughs(paint these black. First  glue a plasticard square (same size as the back of the plough)to the back then a second rectangle which is long enough to go up behind the buffer beam, take a file to the front(and rear) face of the chassis just to take the paint off. With the body on the chassis but not screwed down jiggle the two ploughs up under the buffer beam. As you can see I left off the vertical brackets but I recon micro strip would suffice. Similar principle works for Heljan Class26/27 locos too.

 

[Ian J.]

Unfortunately I'm not actually fitting the plows so it's about the remnant brackets for the centre plow part being visible and also looking the part.

[Daddyman]

On 09/02/2023 at 21:58, SouthernBlue80s said:

I turned 20057 into 20055.

It's a nice model. I am tempted to get another....but not sure what to renumber it as. 

 

 

 

Very nice weathering job there - well observed. A pale blue wash? These locos didn't seem to get very dirty bonnet tops - was it the perfect shape for rain to run off? 

[SouthernBlue80s]

18 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Very nice weathering job there - well observed. A pale blue wash? These locos didn't seem to get very dirty bonnet tops - was it the perfect shape for rain to run off? 

 

Thank you. Actually largely powders used wet and dry on this one. Also railmatch frame dirt.

I allways assumed that was the reason....but it is dangerous to assume.

 

[sulzer71]

Evening all

 

Has anyone successfully converted one of the new tooling 20s to EM or P4 yet?

Tia

[Davidjsmith]

On 06/02/2023 at 13:01, adb968008 said:

I recall  47001, very popular plain blue 47, very good for renumbering

Have you got any numbers for correct 47 re tanks lights etc as I have a spare 47001 I could renumber!

[97406]

At the weekend I treated myself to 20072 and 20010, sound versions and they are great models, but they will not move together in a consist. The sound and lights both work when in consist mode, other locos with ESU Loksound installed will run together in consist mode, and both 20s run OK if I assign the same number to each and reverse the direction on one. I’ve done a factory reset on my NCE Powercab and factory resets on both locos. I understand the decoders are Zimo ones. Has anybody else had the problem and if so, what did you do you fix?

[astropsidings]

On 12/02/2024 at 16:05, sulzer71 said:

Evening all

 

Has anyone successfully converted one of the new tooling 20s to EM or P4 yet?

Tia

I've done a pair to EM using Ultrascale wheels. Gibson wheels would be fine also (I'm doing a new tooling 47 with Gibson wheels having done one with Ultrascale. 

 

I've reused the existing bearings and gears (the Ultrascale wheels are intended for the older version so you don't need their bearings or gears - hence Gibson wheels make more sense). I've used 2mm ID, 0.5 mm thick brass washers with the Ultrascale wheels also, having reduced the plastic boss. 

 

The bogie frames (particularly the brake rod detail) need thinning as well.

 

 

[sulzer71]

8 minutes ago, astropsidings said:

I've done a pair to EM using Ultrascale wheels. Gibson wheels would be fine also (I'm doing a new tooling 47 with Gibson wheels having done one with Ultrascale. 

 

I've reused the existing bearings and gears (the Ultrascale wheels are intended for the older version so you don't need their bearings or gears - hence Gibson wheels make more sense). I've used 2mm ID, 0.5 mm thick brass washers with the Ultrascale wheels also, having reduced the plastic boss. 

 

The bogie frames (particularly the brake rod detail) need thinning as well.

 

 

Thanks 

 

The only thing putting me off switching to EM or P4 at the moment is the fact that anything I want to run on the layout other than my Suttons Loco's needs converting somehow

[Davidjsmith]

On 13/02/2024 at 08:13, 97406 said:

At the weekend I treated myself to 20072 and 20010, sound versions and they are great models, but they will not move together in a consist

I am having the same problem using prodigy advance at the moment as my ECoS 2 is away for repair so not as knowledgeable with this controller. no idea how to fix it. Very frustrating.

[97406]

1 hour ago, Davidjsmith said:

I am having the same problem using prodigy advance at the moment as my ECoS 2 is away for repair so not as knowledgeable with this controller. no idea how to fix it. Very frustrating.

I think I may post the problem in the DCC forum or else contact Bachmann direct if we don’t get to the bottom of it on this thread.