GWR 4mm RTR tenders

[M.I.B]

Mainline/Palitoy/ Bachmann did two types of tender behind their 2251 offerings.  A 3500 gallon and a 3000 gallon.

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, M.I.B said:

Mainline/Palitoy/ Bachmann did two types of tender behind their 2251 offerings.  A 3500 gallon and a 3000 gallon.

 

IIRC, the Churchward 3500g first made an appearance with the Mainline (now Bachmann) Manor, or was the Mogul first in 1981? The Bachmann Dean 3000g was a fortuitous matchup with the City of Truro tender. And the ROD 4000g also appeared on the Collett Goods from the Bachmann LNER O4.

 

[M.I.B]

On 26/12/2023 at 11:15, Miss Prism said:

 

IIRC, the Churchward 3500g first made an appearance with the Mainline (now Bachmann) Manor, or was the Mogul first in 1981? The Bachmann Dean 3000g was a fortuitous matchup with the City of Truro tender. And the ROD 4000g also appeared on the Collett Goods from the Bachmann LNER O4.

 

I bow to your research on the 3000 gallon offering - My first 2251 must have been tender swapped at the shop for some reason - being 12 at the time I was unaware and pleased with my purchase.  The shop is still trading some 44 years later so I  won't name them (:

[rprodgers]

Bachmann did their own version of a Collett 4000 gallon tender for some of their Hall class.

[Steamport Southport]

On 26/12/2023 at 11:15, Miss Prism said:

 

IIRC, the Churchward 3500g first made an appearance with the Mainline (now Bachmann) Manor, or was the Mogul first in 1981? The Bachmann Dean 3000g was a fortuitous matchup with the City of Truro tender. And the ROD 4000g also appeared on the Collett Goods from the Bachmann LNER O4.

 

 

Manor first in 1980.

 

Still disappointed my Lydham Manor didn't come with smoke like what was advertised!

 

http://www.mainlinerailways.org.uk/Smoke.htm

 

Very much jumping on the bandwagon of Hornby with that as the smoke fitted 4-4-0s were pretty popular at the time. I think this was Hornby's first version of a 3500 gallon tender. Unfortunately ISTR the chassis was generic for all four models.

 

http://www.hornbyguide.com/item_details.asp?itemid=81

 

 

Jason

[JimC]

On 11/12/2023 at 08:10, Wenrash said:

,,,the underframe they have provided has the 45 degree sloped frame, not the 12 degree frame of which the A113's had.

So the complete tender is something that never happened.

 

Well, it's something that so far as we know was never built new. As for never happened, don't we need to be rather careful about that? There's plenty of evidence for bitsas from Swindon, especially older tenders upgraded with the later 45 degree frames. According to the VCT list there are three surviving tenders from Lot A113, all of which now have the later style frames. I don't, I'm afraid, know what fillers they have.  Tenders get horribly complicated. There are a number of weight diagrams from Swindon, for instance, that show combinations of tender features that were never on newly built tenders, but I would hesitate to say they never could have existed.

[Wenrash]

Jim, I probably have not made myself clear. No doubt you are correct in what you say, but the model has the paint scheme as they had when they were new. The tenders then would all have been of the steep slope variety as at that time the A113 were the only Collet 4000 gal tenders in existence. Hence my rather loose rant.

I have Bill Peto's book on the "King Class" and it lists the Swindon record of every tender number, and date, attached to a King. Looking at this shows that the A113 tenders disappeared off the Kings by mid 1930's, and only a few Kings ever again had them attached. 6019 is one that had one in the 1950's and again in June 1960. What they looked like then is anybody's guess.

Which brings me to another point. I am reading that people believe the King Tenders had larger water feed pipes. Bill Peto's work shows this can NOT be correct. The sheer number of random tender numbers clearly shows that they used the next tender off the rank! There is just no rhyme or reason to the tender numbers. The tender shop could have change the pipework as required, but I doubt that.

Just another "old wives tale" that has arisen.

 

Richard Ashenden

 

[JimC]

I should have thought the water feed information was best obtained from those maintaining the locomotives now! Its something that could have been changed later as a result of experience though. I've got scans of the tender drawings register and I will say that I can't see any relevant drawings listed for A120 (which was ordered against lot 267) that are unique to that lot. A113, according to the Register, was originally ordered for  Lot 234 (Castles) so the register might not list changes made post order. However the register does seem to support your contention that there was no difference. On the other hand Swindon seems to have been quite happy to swap autogear on and off pre group tank engines on works visits,  so it doesn't seem impossible they could have changed pipework. I believe there were other changes that needed to be made to tenders to suit what they were leaving the works with. But tender frames seems to be something few notice. I wonder if I'm the only one who wishes Didcot would shuffles tanks between 3822 and 2999s tenders so 2999 could have the pre grouping style frames!