EFE LSWR Cross-country coach sets

[trevor7598]

33 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

I genuinely don't know what's wrong with them and I didn't notice anything in your photograph, please could you let me know what's wrong with them?

Hi Tim,

The problem lies with the height of the quarterlights and door droplights.

On the models they are no in no way tall enough, and the door vent bonnet is too deep.

To my eyes this seriously affects the ' look ' of the models.

May I suggest you compare the B&W image I posted earlier, with the models.

If you choose to buy a set you will see that the images of the prototypes illustrated

on the inside of the box show how the models should look.

 

For the money being asked for a three coach set they ought to be spot on.

[Ian Hargrave]

12 minutes ago, trevor7598 said:

Hi Tim,

The problem lies with the height of the quarterlights and door droplights.

On the models they are no in no way tall enough, and the door vent bonnet is too deep.

To my eyes this seriously affects the ' look ' of the models.

May I suggest you compare the B&W image I posted earlier, with the models.

If you choose to buy a set you will see that the images of the prototypes illustrated

on the inside of the box show how the models should look.

 

For the money being asked for a three coach set they ought to be spot on.

Thank you for this.Yes,I was already aware of the issue with the droplight dimension. I respect your opinion and decision but I’ll still go ahead as I’m fixated with a vision of a Q1 gliding around my tabletop with a set in tow 😁.I’m pretty sure the discrepancy isn’t going to bother me as my eyesight isn’t quite as sharp as it once was. Regards,Ian.

[pete_mcfarlane]

15 minutes ago, trevor7598 said:

Hi Tim,

The problem lies with the height of the quarterlights and door droplights.

On the models they are no in no way tall enough, and the door vent bonnet is too deep.

To my eyes this seriously affects the ' look ' of the models.

There's also some weirdness with the top panels, and the alignment of the top of the door vents and the top of the panelling (which should be in line, but aren't so the moulding above the top panels is too deep). 

 

There's also something not right with the duckets, which don't extend high enough and look stuck on to the sides rather than growing out of them. That's probably a production compromise, rather than a mistake. 

[Dunsignalling]

42 minutes ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

There's also some weirdness with the top panels, and the alignment of the top of the door vents and the top of the panelling (which should be in line, but aren't so the moulding above the top panels is too deep). 

 

There's also something not right with the duckets, which don't extend high enough and look stuck on to the sides rather than growing out of them. That's probably a production compromise, rather than a mistake. 

It seems unlikely that three separate design errors would be made with the quarterlights, droplights and duckets. One basic dimensional mistake with the upper panels leading to the other features being wrongly adjusted to fit seems much more plausible to me.

 

All that said, I've decided I can live with it. Having such sets available r-t-r is so wholly unexpected that I can't resist one.

 

Mine will inherit the role of a 3-set of Hornby's alleged "Maunsells" that dated from the "Year of the Coach" and which I shamelessly misrepresented as "Ironclads" for decades, their role being taken over by some BR Mk.1 non-corridors which also stretch area/period credibility a little!  

 

Whatever their shortcomings, the EFE set will be much less wrong than either. 🥸

 

John

 

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[GreenGiraffe22]

Given that I posted photos here of different ex Lswr coaches I presumed to be the same type (they still look the same to me) , I think these models are good enough for me! 😅

[Oldddudders]

12 minutes ago, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Given that I posted photos here of different ex Lswr coaches I presumed to be the same type (they still look the same to me) , I think these models are good enough for me! 😅

We each have our own threshold of acceptability. I work on the basis that these will be the only RTR models of these sets in my lifetime. I'm 74 this week. Thankyou Bachmann/EFE.

[Ian Hargrave]

3 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

We each have our own threshold of acceptability. I work on the basis that these will be the only RTR models of these sets in my lifetime. I'm 74 this week. Thankyou Bachmann/EFE.

Well then,Happy LSWR set ….from an octogenarian.Bless ! 

[trevor7598]

Many thanks Tim and Ian.

I'll soldier on with my Hornby reframed LSW coaches, and Bachmann Birdcages.

[johnofwessex]

Were they used over the S&D?

[Dunsignalling]

8 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

Were they used over the S&D?

Yes, up to the early 1950s, though possibly not regularly. The corridor versions will have been more commonly used by then. Later replaced by Ironclad, Maunsell, and Bulleid corridor stock in turn.

 

John

Edited November 7, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[JohnR]

4 hours ago, RFS said:

 

Top of the blood-and-custard website is a 1952 photograph of set 130 with its numbers lower down as in the Bachmann model. 

 

Indeed. But I was commenting on the photo which was supposed to clearly demonstrate how awful and wrong these coaches are that render them completely unacceptable to some. 

[JSpencer]

I wonder if the bluebell coach (either in preserved or as she was as part of a set in BR days) will be done at some point?

[JSpencer]

15 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

Which one?

 

 

 

 

The one in the second photo.

 

The other, number 320 has been done by Hornby in SR days and is not part of a cross country set.

[JSpencer]

2 hours ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

Cheers, all a bit of a learning curve for me.  I should read Mr Weddell's book again (instead of just looking at the pictures).

 

Thanks, I was not even aware of the books ;-) So we both learned something.

 

[Wickham Green too]

On 17/11/2022 at 12:56, Tim Dubya said:

"LSWR Carriages in the 20th Century" 

Always thought that was a very stupid title ! ......... it's "Volume 2" of three but doesn't say so - and plenty of 19th century LSWR Carriages survived in the 20th Century but only appear in Volume 1 !

 

Edited November 18, 2022 by Wickham Green too
spilling orror

[chris45lsw]

On 18/11/2022 at 12:47, Tim Dubya said:

 

It's a shame that these are unlikely to be published again and the price demanded for (I agree) Volume 2 is insane!  I have seen them on eBay for £1000!  I was fortunate to look up whilst walking past the Oxfam Bookshop in Bath and spotted that copy in the window for £35, it's almost perfect, with just a tad of fade to the spine.

 

I think all three volumes were published by different houses too?

Vol 1 1838 - 1900 was published by Wild Swan and encompasses the 48ft carriages rebuilt on 58ft frames by the SR, including 320 on the Bluebell and Hornby's offerings.

 

'In the 20th Century' was published by OPC which was why they didn't want to call it Vol 2!  This covers the 'cross country' sets, inter alia.

 

Vol 3 Non-Passenger Carriage Stock, and Volume 4 Goods, Departmental Stock and Miscellany were published by Kestrel.

 

Chris KT

[Edwardian]

On 18/11/2022 at 10:52, Wickham Green too said:

Always thought that was a very stupid title ! ......... it's "Volume 2" of three but doesn't say so - and plenty of 19th century LSWR Carriages survived in the 20th Century but only appear in Volume 1 !

 

 

... of 4!

 

If the genesis of these models is the Gate Stock models, I would be hesitant to invest. There is a lot wrong with the Gate Stock models, which isn't relevant here, but I recall that the underframe details and fittings were all produced as mirror images of the prototype, a matter that does not seem easy to remedy, so if the models use the same underframes as the Gate Stock models, I can see how they would fall short of accuracy, with everything essentially back to front. 

 

I wonder if this is the explanation for what are otherwise apparently new models going into the IFI EFE range?

 

That said, I haven't had a good look at the u/fs on these models, so whether they are the wrong way round ones used on the Gate Stock I simply don't know. I would just say that for anyone who is likely to be concerned about this level of potential inaccuracy - many folk won;t be, of course - that's probably the area to check out. A study of Weddell should furnish the answer, and, I agree, it would likely be volume 1 (as I write I haven't checked).

 

.

[Edwardian]

1 minute ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

Maybe check first, then comment ?

-

Harsh. I simply said it was likely to be volume 1, which I think it is. I'm not obliged to do everyone's research for them!

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

... of 4! ...

indeed - there were eventually four volumes to LSWR Coaches .... though the final one's not particularly coachy !

 

Iffy brakegear isn't unique to the Gate Stock - Bachmann got it wrong on the Birdcage sets, too .

[Edwardian]

5 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

I was referring to the, already discussed, underfames not the books, of which I have all four volumes.  Neither was I asking you to do my research for me, strange that you should mention such, but nevermind.

 

Well, that was the part of my text you seemed to have quoted in the now hidden post, so I responded accordingly

 

5 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

The cross country sets are in volume two.

 

 

 

 

Well that saves me the bother of checking, thanks.

 

Given that you say you had intended to refer to the underframes issue, then, again, I think you were unduly harsh.  I was merely responding to earlier traffic that suggested these coaches might suffer from a common heritage with the Gate Stock by suggesting that if that was so the likely area of concern was probably the underframe and that anyone with a concern about accuracy should probably check that area and see for themselves.

 

I had not expected you of all people to be so quick to challenge a suitably caveated comment, but there we are.

 

People got very over-defensive concerning the Gate Stock, as I recall, despite it being objectively inaccurate in several noticeable respects. The detailed critique was censored, as I recall, so I'll not repeat it, but, I wonder, is the same sensitivity resurfacing here? Perhaps I've unwittingly trespassed on some unwritten ex-LSWR taboo. If so, don't care as I've suddenly lost all interest.   

[rembrow]

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

... of 4!

 

If the genesis of these models is the Gate Stock models, I would be hesitant to invest. There is a lot wrong with the Gate Stock models, which isn't relevant here, but I recall that the underframe details and fittings were all produced as mirror images of the prototype, a matter that does not seem easy to remedy, so if the models use the same underframes as the Gate Stock models, I can see how they would fall short of accuracy, with everything essentially back to front. 

 

I wonder if this is the explanation for what are otherwise apparently new models going into the IFI EFE range?

 

That said, I haven't had a good look at the u/fs on these models, so whether they are the wrong way round ones used on the Gate Stock I simply don't know. I would just say that for anyone who is likely to be concerned about this level of potential inaccuracy - many folk won;t be, of course - that's probably the area to check out. A study of Weddell should furnish the answer, and, I agree, it would likely be volume 1 (as I write I haven't checked).

 

.

You may not be aware, but when a further run of gate stock coaches were produced for release in the EFE range, Kernow retooled the chassis to correct the errors in the positioning of the brake components and battery boxes. I have both original and later EFE branded releases in BR livery and can confirm the changes, which weren't widely advertised. They even retooled the seating to correct a bench seat that went across the corridor connection. 

[PJT]

2 minutes ago, rembrow said:

You may not be aware, but when a further run of gate stock coaches were produced for release in the EFE range, Kernow retooled the chassis to correct the errors in the positioning of the brake components and battery boxes. I have both original and later EFE branded releases in BR livery and can confirm the changes, which weren't widely advertised. They even retooled the seating to correct a bench seat that went across the corridor connection.

 

The roof vents were changed, too, for the EFE run, so all in all it was quite a hefty revamp of what had gone before.  By that point I'd already modified my two Kernow branded sets to my satisfaction so didn't buy any of the EFE releases.

 

Pete T.

   

[Paul.Uni]

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

I wonder if this is the explanation for what are otherwise apparently new models going into the IFI EFE range?

 

No, EFE Rail is the brand name for models made for Bachmann Europe PLC, that are not made in Kadar factories. The tooling tends to, but not always, be owned by other companies, such as Kernow Model Railway Centre (O2, Gate Stock, etc.) or Heljan (Hymek, Class 58, etc.).

[Edwardian]

12 minutes ago, rembrow said:

You may not be aware, but when a further run of gate stock coaches were produced for release in the EFE range, Kernow retooled the chassis to correct the errors in the positioning of the brake components and battery boxes. I have both original and later EFE branded releases in BR livery and can confirm the changes, which weren't widely advertised. They even retooled the seating to correct a bench seat that went across the corridor connection. 

 

That's interesting, thanks.

 

I wish the change had been better advertised! I had a good hard look at the Kernow releases at the time with a view to back-dating to LSWR condition, but concluded that there were just too many issues to correct before you got to the back-dating work. Perhaps the improved versions would have tipped the balance, mind you, the one thing the Kernow models did have going for the would-be back-dater IIRC was the taller LSWR torpedo vents, wrong for the periods depicted in the Kernow releases, but fine for the likes of me! 

 

IIRC, the original battery boxes in fact were to the proportions of the gas cylinders, one of several misinterpretations, I suspect, of the drawings in Weddell, which showed an earlier, LSWR, condition than Kernow was aiming for. Was the solitary gas lamp (over the vestibule) bizarrely included on these electrically lit versions, removed from the EFE versions?

 

Based on what you say, I'll give these a look, and these latest sets, too. 

 

Thanks again.

 

'

 

 

[chris45lsw]

On 16/11/2022 at 18:24, JSpencer said:

The one in the second photo.

 

The other, number 320 has been done by Hornby in SR days and is not part of a cross country set.

The first one is a LSWR corridor third, SR/BR 673 withdrawn in 1953 after which it became camping coach 39.

 

The third, 320, was built as a 48ft third but was lengthened to 58ft by the SR in 1935 and put on a Maunsell underframe, becoming a lavatory third.  As has been said done by Hornby.

 

The second one, 1520, was SR/BR 2975 and was one end of 3-LAV/cross-country set 146 though this one didn't last long under BR as it was withdrawn August 1948. 

 

A lavatory composite from a cross country set does survive, though in need of restoration, and that's 5065 on the K&ESR.  It was in set 134 withdrawn March 1953 after which 5065 became camping coach 31.

 

Chris KT