Poll: GWR Pannier Tanks; time for a modern spec OO loco.

[Neal Ball]

27 minutes ago, PMP said:

I’m not convinced that’s a ‘valid’ deduction….

Thank you, but that was my reasoning.

[Star-rider]

25 minutes ago, PMP said:

I’m not convinced that’s a ‘valid’ deduction. Like the 57 family, top feeds would be a 1940’s+ addition, and very few didn’t get them. Because the Bachmann 64xx is so recent, (7 years 64xx review) I suspect most people would have thought don’t need one, current one is good enough, that was my thoughts reading it’s inclusion.

 

A 54xx however, would likely have got more votes as it’s a type not available, and notably different with larger wheels, and the GW/BR lifespan.

 

If you want to determine top feed demand, then ask the question, but make it available with or without rather than the option of both. You’d need to assume that people would know the era/livery implications of their choice, but that would give some data as to whether earlier variants of the applicable types might be prioritised.

Exactly so - I'm learning all the time and when the Bachmann 64XX came to market I had become aware that the top-feed (as well as the livery) would exclude it from the general 1930s period I had decided to focus on. I therefore declined to purchase one.

 

The 57XX/8750 models that I have were already in my posession and until something better comes along they will no doubt do their duty. Although they have an undesirable top-feed they do trundle around my railway quite nicely though and give me more enjoyment than some recent "better detailed" models that have to be poked in the bunker with a forefinger now and again.

 

I was watching a DCC ready shirtbutton pannier on Ebay yesterday, I think it finished up at £126.00 so people still want them...

[Siberian Snooper]

10 hours ago, Andy WD said:

Personally, my choice would be for an outside frame variant, 1076 maybe. They seemed to live long lives and have many different guises

 

 

I would love a couple or three if they did a rectangular cab window version.

 

 

[Neal Ball]

3 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

 

 

 

I think it is fair to say that there is scope and an appetite for a manufactuer to 'corner the market' for highly accurate, detailed GWR locos that run well. 

 

If you want a small Midland loco, you go to Bachmann. If you want an ex L&SWR loco or South Western section loco, you go to Hornby if they ever remember that there are still customers who will buy this sort of thing. 

 

Bachmann have kept their 57xx/8750 in the range for many years with, in my opinion, minimal up grades other than a new chassis at some point in the past. ( Arguably the same approach for their small Prairie )

 

The reason it's still there is simply that it still sells. It still sells because there is no other RTR alternative for the customer and ( again arguably ) every GWR/ WR  layout from the 1930s onwards 'needs' a Pannier or two or three.............

 

Personally, I care not from whom it comes from as long as it looks the part and as already stated, runs well. 

 

Again, as already stated, my personal benchmark for a well running loco is either the Dapol B4 or a Hattons P class. Both will run smoothly and come to a lovely gradual halt, moving off in the same manner. They don't stop as if an anchor has been chucked out or start as if they've had a good hard kick up the bunker. Oh, and they're accurate renditions as well. 

 

The Achilles heel is of course mass production and the perhaps inevitable variation that occurs in the manufature of components. A case in point is Hornbys new Terrier. I've had a few. One ran beautifully but wouldn't gradually slow and halt. No amount of removal of white grease, adjustment to pick ups or keeper plate changed this. Spare motors for these are about £4. I bought four and ran all, checking with a volt meter. All were different, some significantly so. In the end one was found to be better than the one fitted and was swapped. Success ! Running hugely improved. This is the challenge that they face. 

 

It's true some of us are touting Accurascale as the one manufacturer they'd like to see producing a new Pannier ( or Small Prairie...!) but I would venture the brand name wasn't chosen at random. Moreso it hints at their approach to their products..............you only have to look at their Manor to confirm this. 

 

One presumes ( I know ) that they are not producing their models as alternatives to those that are already available. They are producing them to be the go to models that others have to live up to. 

 

And I for one would go to them for a Pannier  or 'cough'.......small prairie...'cough'.

 

Rob. 

 

 

 

I might also go further Rob, in as much as Bachmann have (in my view) been complacent about the loco over the years, which as the manufacturer, is their right of course.

 

You won’t be surprised that  I always ask the question when I see them…. Either on a members event or on their club stand at a show. The last time on the stand, I asked “when will we get a new Pannier”, which I didn’t qualify properly and got the reply that a new livery was due next year or something similar. When I qualified it by saying “without top feed” it was met by a rolling of the eyes! I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusion from that.

 

 

[KNP]

13 minutes ago, Star-rider said:

Exactly so - I'm learning all the time and when the Bachmann 64XX came to market I had become aware that the top-feed (as well as the livery) would exclude it from the general 1930s period I had decided to focus on. I therefore declined to purchase one.

 

The 57XX/8750 models that I have were already in my posession and until something better comes along they will no doubt do their duty. Although they have an undesirable top-feed they do trundle around my railway quite nicely though and give me more enjoyment than some recent "better detailed" models that have to be poked in the bunker with a forefinger now and again.

 

I was watching a DCC ready shirtbutton pannier on Ebay yesterday, I think it finished up at £126.00 so people still want them...

 

I was watching the same one, good job we didn't end up bidding against each other!!!!!

When it past £40 that was me out.......

[PMP]

In terms of manufacturer preferences I have none, but would be wary of one in particular. It’s worth considering that  both high and low cab variants have been produced in 7mm scale recently to a high standard, so contemporary, good data is extant within the industry for these types already.

Those two players being Dapol (illustrated above), and Minerva. Dapol already in the OO market, and if Minerva were so minded an opportunity to enter either by themselves, or in partnership.

[Captain Kernow]

1 hour ago, PMP said:

A 54xx however, would likely have got more votes as it’s a type not available, and notably different with larger wheels, and the GW/BR lifespan.

I certainly agree with Paul on this, but would also say that a 74XX (and later 64XX) would also have considerable appeal. The 54XX were a relatively small class but there were rather more 74XX and they could be found on both passenger and freight work, especially in Wales.

 

I'm also not convinced that Bachmann would want to do either at the moment, though, given the recent date of their 64XX.

 

Although some have grouped the 57XX, 8750 and 54/64/74XX together as 'modern panniers', they are most definitely separate entities in their own right, in that the body of a 57XX or 8750 could not be considered as an ideal starting point, were you to want to produce a 54/64/74XX.

 

I also agree that one of the strengths of producing a new 57XX and 8750 is the opportunity to produce non-top feed variants and also riveted tank versions (which were generally produced by contractors such as Bagnall or Kerr Stuart, rather than Swindon Works).

 

[Harlequin]

There is an opportunity here to make something different from the 64/74xx and 57xx/8750 classes that people are focussing on. (Does the discussion centre around those classes because the models and their shortcomings are so familiar to us?)

 

Wouldn't a manufacturer get more traction in the market for a different class of pannier tank? (And avoid aggressive behaviour from makers of those existing classes?)

 

[Craigw]

17 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

There is an opportunity here to make something different from the 64/74xx and 57xx/8750 classes that people are focussing on. (Does the discussion centre around those classes because the models and their shortcomings are so familiar to us?)

 

 

 

 

RTR is a bit of a peripheral thing to me. If a model fits with my interests and can be converted to P4 I will use it but otherwise it does not cross my path.

 

So, things like the 57XX and 64XX have no interest  to me - they do not fit my early 1920s timeframe. A 2021 or 850 or Metro in suitable condition would certainly get me to open my wallet though.

 

Unlike many, I do not really have a great tolerance for models that do not fit in with my era. If it does not fit the era, I do not buy it.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Star-rider]

39 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

There is an opportunity here to make something different from the 64/74xx and 57xx/8750 classes that people are focussing on. (Does the discussion centre around those classes because the models and their shortcomings are so familiar to us?)

 

Wouldn't a manufacturer get more traction in the market for a different class of pannier tank? (And avoid aggressive behaviour from makers of those existing classes?)

 

Perhaps how numerous the prototype was may have a bearing on desirability of a model?

 

For example, the  Loriot Y recently announced by both Rapido and Hornby amounted to two real world examples, I can't see anyone being in the market for three of them, sales will probably be limited to a single purchase of the model with minimal opportunities for the manufacturer for a re-run in 5 years time.

[Mikkel]

Just a heads-up for Accurascale: You'd be well advised to stay clear of the 1854s, as I happen to know that someone else is already doing them.

 

 

 

Me 

 

 

 

 

 

But an 850 would be nice, and cute seems to sell !

 

[Neal Ball]

2 minutes ago, Star-rider said:

Perhaps how numerous the prototype was may have a bearing on desirability of a model?

 

For example, the  Loriot Y recently announced by both Rapido and Hornby amounted to two real world examples, I can't see anyone being in the market for three of them, sales will probably be limited to a single purchase of the model with minimal opportunities for the manufacturer for a re-run in 5 years time.

 

Thats a good example. for me it's too niche, even for my time period. But I would happily stretch a point by getting an Accurascale Siphon or two to run as a parcels train at Henley on Thames.

[57xx]

6 hours ago, Neal Ball said:

The addition of the 64xx was a deliberate ploy - Bachmann have only added it as a top feed loco, do we want it without top feed? I think the answer is coming through as probably not.

 

Completely the opposite for me in fact.  The reason I did not initially vote for it were because:

a) it is a very recent addition relatively speaking to other pannier classes available and to "modern" standards so the least likely candidate of any to be redone.

b) Bachmann had the opportunity to produce it without top feed but snubbed all pre WWII modellers by sticking one on anyhow. Given their track record, I've probably got more chance of appearing in a movie with Pamela Anderson than them producing a pannier without top feed (cf your own observations with Bachmann).

c) There's nothing specific in the poll regarding to pfeeds, with or without.

Hence I didn't bother putting a vote down for it. I've amended my vote now based on your "logic" for putting it in the poll.

Edited February 6, 2022 by 57xx

[PMP]

26 minutes ago, 57xx said:

 

b) Bachmann had the opportunity to produce it without top feed but snubbed all pre WWII modellers by sticking one on anyhow.

Thats perhaps a little unfair on Bachmann's choice. With tooling they've got they can do most of the 64xx class in at least three liveries, GWR+BR E/L crest. If they'd adopted no top feed that would have meant they'd need to have added the footplate raised lubricators in GW versions, and it would have significantly reduced the prototypical number choices available in the BR era's. With the top feed on it also allows them to add most of the 74xx range and late 64's (with a new cab/bunker tooling), should they wish to do so. If they took that path then the existing (no lubricator) footplate can be used. So in terms of bang for their buck they probably made the right commercial decision.

[Miss Prism]

I think asking/expecting Bachmann to do drastic things to their current tooling is unrealistic. Altering the top and sides of the tank (for  backfeed locos) would, in effect, demand a substantially new tool set.

 

I think CAD may have been around in early Mainline days, but whether the files are readable by modern software is another matter.

 

[Neal Ball]

1 hour ago, 57xx said:

 

.....c) There's nothing specific in the poll regarding to pfeeds, with or without.

Hence I didn't bother putting a vote down for it. I've amended my vote now based on your "logic" for putting it in the poll.

 

It's contained in my rationale on page 1 under the poll, including what I consider the spec for a new Pannier tank.

[The Johnster]

13 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Seems to be some confusion with the 54XXs. They had bigger wheels, not smaller. They had the same size as a 14XX at 5 foot 2 inches

 

Exactly; the bigger wheels increase the height of the body from the railhead by 3.25 inches, call it 1mm in 4mm scale allowing a little wobble room for tyre wear, so the body needs to come down by 1mm.  This can be achieved either by altering the mounting method to the chassis block.  Mea culpa for the confusion.

 

54xx and the intial lot of 64xx had curved profile joins between the cabside rear and the bunker top sides, and the cab roof had a lip protruding forward about an inch over the cab front.  Later 64xx and all 74xx had the '8750' style, square corner between cab rear and bunker and no roof lip.  I'm not sure that boilers had top feeds 'fitted' in the retrofit sense, but from 1942 new boilers for the pannier classes and the 0-4-2 tanks were built with top feeds and fitted to new build locos.  Subsequently, because overhauling a loco takes less time than overhauling the boiler, these boilers found their way into the boiler pool and got swapped about between engines, becoming more common over time, but 'normal' boilers without topfeeds could be seen on locos right up to the end of steam, including locos built post-1942, and of course topfeed boilers were common on locos built pre-1942 in later years.  It is not as simple as saying 'all locos built post 1942 and all overhauled post 1942 carried topfeed boilers'.

 

This is a problem for anyone wishing to represent any particular locomotive at a given time period, as unless you have verified dated photographic evidence there is no way of telling what the topfeed status of it's boiler was at that time.  You are fairly safe modelling, say, a post 1942 late series 8750 with topfeed in the late 40s up to the mid 50s before its first overhaul, but once the loco has been overhauled you are in guesstimation territory.  Classes affected are 14xx/48xx/58xx, 54/64/74xx, 57xx/8750 and variants, Dean Goods, and Dukedog.  TTBOMK but I'm happy to be corrected,  1901, 1854, 2021, 2721, 517, and Metro never carried topfeed boilers despite being in service long after 1942, and (again, TTBOMK and happy to be corrected) 16xx only ever carried topfeed boilers (some of these were scrapped before having their first overhaul).

 

I see no need for new toolings of the Bachmann panniers, which are pretty good as they stand, but versions with topfeedless boilers would be useful for pre-1942 modellers and in many cases for post-1942 modellers as well.  Were I an RTR company considering going head to head with Bachmann with a 57xx or 8750, I'd probably wish to take advantage of this variation, and were I to be considering a 64xx, would go for the later variant which could be easily converted to 74xx condition.  54xx is a completely open goal, of course; nobody's ever made an RTR one.

[Captain Kernow]

4 hours ago, Harlequin said:

There is an opportunity here to make something different from the 64/74xx and 57xx/8750 classes that people are focussing on. (Does the discussion centre around those classes because the models and their shortcomings are so familiar to us?)

I completely understand this and I would certainly be in the market for an older pannier, provided it was one that survived into BR days and perhaps NCB ownership as well.

 

But given the ubiquity of the 57XX and 8750 in real life and the fact that the Bachmann body is a little aged now, compared with more modern productions, I think there is a real opportunity for the right manufacturer ** here.

 

 

 

** Of course, what I really mean is Accurascale.

 

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

 

Exactly; the bigger wheels increase the height of the body from the railhead by 3.25 inches, call it 1mm in 4mm scale allowing a little wobble room for tyre wear, so the body needs to come down by 1mm.  This can be achieved either by altering the mounting method to the chassis block.  Mea culpa for the confusion.

 

54xx and the intial lot of 64xx had curved profile joins between the cabside rear and the bunker top sides, and the cab roof had a lip protruding forward about an inch over the cab front.  Later 64xx and all 74xx had the '8750' style, square corner between cab rear and bunker and no roof lip.  I'm not sure that boilers had top feeds 'fitted' in the retrofit sense, but from 1942 new boilers for the pannier classes and the 0-4-2 tanks were built with top feeds and fitted to new build locos.  Subsequently, because overhauling a loco takes less time than overhauling the boiler, these boilers found their way into the boiler pool and got swapped about between engines, becoming more common over time, but 'normal' boilers without topfeeds could be seen on locos right up to the end of steam, including locos built post-1942, and of course topfeed boilers were common on locos built pre-1942 in later years.  It is not as simple as saying 'all locos built post 1942 and all overhauled post 1942 carried topfeed boilers'.

 

This is a problem for anyone wishing to represent any particular locomotive at a given time period, as unless you have verified dated photographic evidence there is no way of telling what the topfeed status of it's boiler was at that time.  You are fairly safe modelling, say, a post 1942 late series 8750 with topfeed in the late 40s up to the mid 50s before its first overhaul, but once the loco has been overhauled you are in guesstimation territory.  Classes affected are 14xx/48xx/58xx, 54/64/74xx, 57xx/8750 and variants, Dean Goods, and Dukedog.  TTBOMK but I'm happy to be corrected,  1901, 1854, 2021, 2721, 517, and Metro never carried topfeed boilers despite being in service long after 1942, and (again, TTBOMK and happy to be corrected) 16xx only ever carried topfeed boilers (some of these were scrapped before having their first overhaul).

 

I see no need for new toolings of the Bachmann panniers, which are pretty good as they stand, but versions with topfeedless boilers would be useful for pre-1942 modellers and in many cases for post-1942 modellers as well.  Were I an RTR company considering going head to head with Bachmann with a 57xx or 8750, I'd probably wish to take advantage of this variation, and were I to be considering a 64xx, would go for the later variant which could be easily converted to 74xx condition.  54xx is a completely open goal, of course; nobody's ever made an RTR one.

 

That's what Pannier Papers is for. No need to guess, if people really want to research things the information is out there. 

 

Many of the major classes are now covered by Irwell, with more to come.

 

http://irwellpress.com/acatalog/GREAT_WESTERN_RAILWAY.html

 

The 14XXs were covered in the Peto's Register. Pity they only published three of them. For those unfamiliar with them they are like the Yeadons Guides of LNER locomotives. Kings, Manors and 14XX were the only ones published though.

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Petos-Register-Great-Western-Locomotives/dp/1871608880

 

 

It's the earlier types of Pannier that are difficult to find details of. Not much published information apart from what is in the RCTS books and Russell.

 

 

Jason

[Harlequin]

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I completely understand this and I would certainly be in the market for an older pannier, provided it was one that survived into BR days and perhaps NCB ownership as well.

 

But given the ubiquity of the 57XX and 8750 in real life and the fact that the Bachmann body is a little aged now, compared with more modern productions, I think there is a real opportunity for the right manufacturer ** here.

 

 

 

** Of course, what I really mean is Accurascale.

 

 

I take your points. Here are a couple of other points to take into account:

• Consider the proportion of people who have said in this thread and the related "Is the time right...?" thread that they are happy with the Bachmann 57xxs they already have and they see no reason to replace them. It's very ubiquity (as a model this time) makes it a more difficult prospect for a new model.
• Consider also that the 57xx had Blue route availability until 1950 when they fell back to Yellow so a lot of modellers running a 57xx on their small BLTs are having to invoke Rule 1 (whether they realise it or not!). Other classes of pannier tanks have less restrictive route availability and so are inherently more suitable models for branch line layouts. (Similarly for the 2721 class actually...)

I think it will be tricky for a manufacturer to work all this out and decide what to make!

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Harlequin

[Neal Ball]

1 hour ago, Captain Kernow said:

......given the ubiquity of the 57XX and 8750 in real life and the fact that the Bachmann body is a little aged now, compared with more modern productions, I think there is a real opportunity for the right manufacturer ** here.

 

 

 

** Of course, what I really mean is Accurascale.

 

 

Thats spot on @Captain Kernow - the Bachmann bodies are now getting beyond their prime - they could be bettered - more finesse with the mouldings etc. Plus of course the loco needs to weightier, with DCC sound & stay alive.... just a few areas I consider could do with being improved.

 

Plus of course, this lovely people at Accurascale would do a great job with a new Pannier tank 0-6-0...... just saying.

 

28 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

That's what Pannier Papers is for. No need to guess, if people really want to research things the information is out there. 

 

Many of the major classes are now covered by Irwell, with more to come.

 

http://irwellpress.com/acatalog/GREAT_WESTERN_RAILWAY.html

 

The 14XXs were covered in the Peto's Register. Pity they only published three of them. For those unfamiliar with them they are like the Yeadons Guides of LNER locomotives. Kings, Manors and 14XX were the only ones published though.

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Petos-Register-Great-Western-Locomotives/dp/1871608880

 

 

It's the earlier types of Pannier that are difficult to find details of. Not much published information apart from what is in the RCTS books and Russell.

 

 

Jason

 

Thanks Jason. Pannier papers is to be recommended plus of course the site gwr.org.uk both of which I used for my research. Sadly though the pannier Papers don't go into any detail on the older locos.

 

Interesting to look through that Irwell Press catalogue, I wish someone would re-issue / update both the old OPC loco books and obviously the OPC GWR carriages books vol 1 and 2 plus the appendix 1 and 2 as a complete volume - it will be huge, but to update it will be the complete works. 

 

 

[Neal Ball]

7 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

 

I take your points. Here are a couple of other points to take into account:

• Consider the proportion of people who have said in this thread and the related "Is this the right time..." thread that they are happy with the Bachmann 57xxs they already have and they see no reason to replace them. It's very ubiquity (as a model this time) makes it a more difficult prospect for a new model.
• Consider also that the 57xx had Blue route availability until 1950 when they fell back to Yellow so a lot of modellers running a 57xx on their small BLTs are having to invoke Rule 1 (whether they realise it or not!). Other classes of pannier tanks have less restrictive route availability and so are inherently more suitable models for branch line layouts. (Similarly for the 2721 class actually...)

I think it will be tricky for a manufacturer to work all this out and decide what to make!

 

 

Thanks Phil,

 

Given its unlikely Bachmann are going to do anything with their 57xx / 8750 (They clearly don't see the need), its going to come down to a (new) manufacturer to bring one of the earlier models to market.... 

 

If of course a company with high standards is prepared to take an early loco... issue it as a Saddle tank and also as the (later) Pannier version then that will be great..... 

[Steamport Southport]

Another website that many don't seem to know about.

 

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/

 

It is a bit tricky to navigate. But if you hover over the wheel arrangements the classes come up.

 

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/index-st.htm

 

 

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/m_in_060_5400.htm

 

And if you click on details things like allocations appear. Look at all those Southall allocated 54XXs crying out for a Dapol Toplight set....

 

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/060_5400det.htm

 

 

Jason

Edited February 6, 2022 by Steamport Southport

[Neal Ball]

At this point in the on-going debate about potential new Pannier locos to modern standards, it might be an idea to point anyone just joining the conversation to my rationale and detail specifications on page 1.

 

Given we are now on page 4, the details might have slipped people by.

 

Thanks, Neal.

 

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by Neal Ball
typos

[Miss Prism]

50 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Look at all those Southall allocated 54XXs crying out for a Dapol Toplight set....

 

Is there a picture of such a combination?