Bachmann Standard 73118

[paftrain]

I notice that the illustration of Bachmann’s latest Standard Class 5 release has early emblem but also is named - does anybody know whether it was named while still bearing the early emblem? I only ask as it was in the late 50s when I saw these locos on the Southern Main line and all the named ones had late crest by then.

[Downer]

1 hour ago, paftrain said:

I notice that the illustration of Bachmann’s latest Standard Class 5 release has early emblem but also is named - does anybody know whether it was named while still bearing the early emblem? I only ask as it was in the late 50s when I saw these locos on the Southern Main line and all the named ones had late crest by then.

I checked this out, and did find a picture of 73118 with both  nameplate and early crest.  Can’t remember where, but I’ll try and find it again.

[Oldddudders]

6 minutes ago, Downer said:

I checked this out, and did find a picture of 73118 with both  nameplate and early crest.  Can’t remember where, but I’ll try and find it again.

The nameplate was attached W/E 20.2.1960, and Sixsmith & Derry's book shows her with the nameplate and early crest. 

[brushman47544]

The big question for me is whether 73118 will come with the original BR1F tender produced with the first releases of the 5MT, which had shape issues, or whether Bachmann has used the more accurate version produced for the 9F. Hopefully the latter.

[Right Away]

For the REALLY discriminating modeller, the upper front footsteps on No 73118, being a product of Doncaster would be almost in line with the top of the main frame ends. Those on Derby built Std5’s were a couple of inches or so lower, as is the current Bachmann model.

Having said that, my existing ‘Fives” attempt to portray examples from both Works, the lack of those millimetre differences are not discernible and in no way detract from what is a really handsome engine.

 

[Ian Hargrave]

On 28/01/2022 at 21:52, brushman47544 said:

The big question for me is whether 73118 will come with the original BR1F tender produced with the first releases of the 5MT, which had shape issues, or whether Bachmann has used the more accurate version produced for the 9F. Hopefully the latter.

 

Showing on Rails website with the correct tender.

[brushman47544]

21 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 

Showing on Rails website with the correct tender.

 
Rails’ photo looks like Bachmann’s catalogue image. Yes the tender is correct in that it is a BR1F, but Bachmann has produced two, the first with earlier 5MTs and a more recent, and more accurate, one with the 9F. So a photo of the actual production model is needed to tell which has been used.

[Pre Grouping fan]

Likely to be the one originally tooled for the Std 5 as I've read very little is shared between different loco's tooling so each loco type would have its own individual tooling suite even if it duplicates tenders or other items. 

[MikeParkin65]

26 minutes ago, Pre Grouping fan said:

Likely to be the one originally tooled for the Std 5 as I've read very little is shared between different loco's tooling so each loco type would have its own individual tooling suite even if it duplicates tenders or other items. 

I read the same but recall it was in reference to Hornby. Not sure all manufacturers have the same business model, I think Bachmann deal with one factory rather than the multiple suppliers Hornby use so maybe easier to share tools between models. 

[brushman47544]

On 28/01/2022 at 21:52, brushman47544 said:

The big question for me is whether 73118 will come with the original BR1F tender produced with the first releases of the 5MT, which had shape issues, or whether Bachmann has used the more accurate version produced for the 9F. Hopefully the latter.

I raised the which tender question with Bachmann directly via the website and have today received a reply that the BR1F used with 73118 is the one used with the 9F. However Bachmann also advised that the model has been delayed and a new delivery date will be posted on the website in due course.

[SRyan]

Out of curiosity, I wondered whether anyone had heard an update from Bachmann on a new delivery date?  
 

I had a quick check of the site before posting and it’s tagged as awaiting for now, but I seem to remember they had it down for delivery early this year at one point. No fuss either way and it’ll get here when it gets here! 

[Ian Hargrave]

18 minutes ago, SRyan said:

Out of curiosity, I wondered whether anyone had heard an update from Bachmann on a new delivery date?  
 

I had a quick check of the site before posting and it’s tagged as awaiting for now, but I seem to remember they had it down for delivery early this year at one point. No fuss either way and it’ll get here when it gets here! 

Believe it to have been shipped with the incorrect tender shape thus causing the delay.

[MikeParkin65]

18 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Believe it to have been shipped with the incorrect tender shape thus causing the delay.

The Standard 5 seems cursed when it comes to tenders! Didn't the same happen a few years back with the weathered 73050? And will there be another glut of spare tenders for years to come on the spares market as they try to shift whatever 73118 has been incorrectly shipped with? :)

[brushman47544]

It appears that the delayed 73118 is about to arrive in the shops. Please can someone who is familiar with the differences please confirm that it is indeed fitted with Bachmann's newer and more accurate version of the BR1F tender as produced for its 9F, not the earlier inaccurate version that came with the previous 5MT releases. I have neither but am considering getting this one. TIA.

Edited October 14, 2022 by brushman47544

[Ian Hargrave]

3 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

It appears that the delayed 73118 is about to arrive in the shops. Please can someone who is familiar with the differences please confirm that it is indeed fitted with Bachmann's newer and more accurate version of the BR1F tender as produced for its 9F, not the earlier inaccurate version that came with the previous 5MT releases. I have neither but am considering getting this one. TIA.

Who’s going to be first to jump? I too have my eye on this one and yes it is in stock. But thus far no image of it out of the box. Kernow will no doubt put it up online as soon as their order arrives. As of now,we don’t know whether or not Bachmann have modelled the correct tender design this time round. 

[Ian Hargrave]

Further to my above post,Olivia’s Trains have what I think is a set of current images,including close ups of the tender of 73118. I think it’s an accurate representation but I’d welcome other opinions on the matter.Ignore the unnaturally skewed view of the smokebox though when you do take a look.See what you think.

[Black 5 Bear]

15 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Further to my above post,Olivia’s Trains have what I think is a set of current images,including close ups of the tender of 73118. I think it’s an accurate representation but I’d welcome other opinions on the matter.Ignore the unnaturally skewed view of the smokebox though when you do take a look.See what you think.

This may hopefully assist you Ian. Photographs of both loco and tender recently posted on the ROS website:- https://railsofsheffield.com/products/Bachmann-32-510-br-standard-class-5mt-no-73118-king-leodegrance-br-lined-black-early-emblem

[geoffers]

Looks like a BR1F tender. I was going to caution about the name being present with an early crest on the tender since she was named in early 1960 but Bachmann have done their homework here as there is a picture of here in Derry's Irwell book of the Standard 5s with nameplates and early crest. Just shows how it pays to have photographic evidence.

[Ian Hargrave]

15 hours ago, geoffers said:

Looks like a BR1F tender. I was going to caution about the name being present with an early crest on the tender since she was named in early 1960 but Bachmann have done their homework here as there is a picture of here in Derry's Irwell book of the Standard 5s with nameplates and early crest. Just shows how it pays to have photographic evidence.

I’m sure the information you quote is correct. But forgive a note of caution here Over the last few years,I’ve noted a few of both dating and captioning errors in published photographic literature.In this case,some of the Arthur’s this build of Standard 5’s were introduced to replace were still at work and did in fact work alongside them for a few years. So the date of 1960 should be correct.

 
My own personal records show my first spotting of a 70A 5MT was 73111 and 73113 at Salisbury on 4/8/1956 and my last at Waterloo of 73114 alongside Arthur 30451 ( 72B)  at Waterloo on 16/1/1960. This latter date was memorable for an entirely different reason. I travelled from Waterloo to Twickenham to watch Richard Sharpe playing at outside half utterly demoralise a favoured Welsh XV within a few minutes at the start of the match.

 

 

 

 

in published railway literature .

[Oldddudders]

6 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

I’m sure the information you quote is correct.

So am I. I quoted it in this thread on 28th January!

[brushman47544]

19 hours ago, Black 5 Bear said:

This may hopefully assist you Ian. Photographs of both loco and tender recently posted on the ROS website:- https://railsofsheffield.com/products/Bachmann-32-510-br-standard-class-5mt-no-73118-king-leodegrance-br-lined-black-early-emblem

But Rails’ website says for pre-order so presumably they haven’t got a new one yet to photograph. Bachmann’s older version looked like a BR1F, but that’s not the issue. Is the tender fitted to this new batch the one Bachmann used with its recent 9F, which is more accurate than the previous one.

[Ian Hargrave]

1 hour ago, brushman47544 said:

But Rails’ website says for pre-order so presumably they haven’t got a new one yet to photograph. Bachmann’s older version looked like a BR1F, but that’s not the issue. Is the tender fitted to this new batch the one Bachmann used with its recent 9F, which is more accurate than the previous one.

Comparing the image on Rails website which I agree isn’t one out of the box with that on Olivia’s Trains,which is,there’s little or no difference.The question is,does that one satisfy the criteria for accuracy at an acceptable level ?

Looks fine to me,I have to say.But as 62 years have elapsed since I last saw an actual Standard 5 with a high capacity tender,I don’t possess the Judgment of Solomon. ATM ,Kernow and Bure Valley,in addition to Olivia’s,have them in stock. Which in fact coincides nicely with the release of the Bulleid stock.But in crimson & cream only just for now,apart from two shortly in BR (S). I think the combination would be just about ok for 1956 when this batch of Standard 5 were introduced but I think even then the SR stock was in the main green.  I wonder how Bachmann’s malachite will match up though?  An interesting but expensive time lies ahead with hard questions to be asked.

[romley midland]

9 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

But Rails’ website says for pre-order so presumably they haven’t got a new one yet to photograph. Bachmann’s older version looked like a BR1F, but that’s not the issue. Is the tender fitted to this new batch the one Bachmann used with its recent 9F, which is more accurate than the previous one.

Yes, it is, your very own post back in February this year states that Bachmann have confirmed it is. 

[brushman47544]

16 hours ago, romley midland said:

Yes, it is, your very own post back in February this year states that Bachmann have confirmed it is. 

Yes, but was before the problem with the model being sent back to China. I haven’t seen anything official about why, only rumours, and therefore was asking for visual confirmation of the model as released.

[Ian Hargrave]

Rails now have excellent out-of-the-box close up images of 73118 on their website .