class"66" Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Looks good!! best get saving....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D400 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 The Class 37 Loco Group have put some photos of their painted sample of the Limited Edtion 37003 model on there website here: http://c37lg.co.uk/model.htm Looks rather good - I hope Bachmann choose to produce some more of the pilot scheme 37s using the new tooling Bruce Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 3, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2011 One of these was in the display case at Wigan this weekend and there is a rather apparent issue with it. The body and chassis tooling combo seems to be that used previously on 37254 (in BR blue with sound and cut back cowls) but with new noses fitted. So why is this a problem? Well, the chassis tooling has a buffer beam moulded on to it and to avoid hitting this the new nose with the cowled buffers has been artificially extended to avoid it. This means the coupling hook area is further back from the nose than it should be and the top of the nose has a flat bit on it as well as the extra space between the nose side grills and what I think are sand fillers on the nose corners. The diagonal slope of the cowls is also too shallow to compensate. The nose was a slightly different colour on the painted example in the cabinet which didn't help either. I probably wouldn't have noticed but now you've pointed it out, the error does stand out rather. Looking at the latest pictures on the Bachmann website, the extra space between the cabside grills and the sandbox fillers is clearly shown for both new BR Blue models. But why I wonder does it also show for 37049 (32-783DS) since this has cut away buffers so should be the same as the earlier 37254 model which I assumed from your comment was correct in this area. The Class 37 Loco Group have put some photos of their painted sample of the Limited Edtion 37003 model on there website here: http://c37lg.co.uk/model.htm Looks rather good - I hope Bachmann choose to produce some more of the pilot scheme 37s using the new tooling Bruce The 37003 model does look very nice, but it does seem to confirm that the nose has been extended for whatever reason - there is a clear space between the sandbox filler and the cabside grille that shouldn't be there. But looking again at pictures of the earlier 37254 Bachmann 37254, it is clear this model was the same. So has the nose been extended to avoid the cowled buffers as craigwelsh suggested or something else? 37254 does after all have different, oval, buffers. And it gets more noticeable the more I look at it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
(The) Youth Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I see that the NEM pockets are still moulded into the bogie frames, no again, no proper close-coupling. Hornby managed it (using the NEM standard dovetail slot) on their 31 and 50; why can't Bachmann? Hi, Just because its fitted doesn't mean it works Hornbys Spring isn't strong enough on heavy trains and it pulls the front wagon of the track when coming of the curve Much better like this IMO, Much more reliable when in exhibition use Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 The 37003 model does look very nice, but it does seem to confirm that the nose has been extended for whatever reason - there is a clear space between the sandbox filler and the cabside grille that shouldn't be there. But looking again at pictures of the earlier 37254 Bachmann 37254, it is clear this model was the same. So has the nose been extended to avoid the cowled buffers as craigwelsh suggested or something else? 37254 does after all have different, oval, buffers. And it gets more noticeable the more I look at it. There should be a gap between the sandbox filler and the grille: http://www.c37lg.co.uk/pics/rest/rest111008.jpg 37254 was slightly too much due to minimum plastic thicknesses I guess but the new one extends it by a couple of mil. The preproduction model had the chassis moulded buffer shanks behind the buffer beam when you looked underneath it, you'd really need to see an underside shot of this to see if its the same. Its one of those things that has affected noticeable proportions as the nose has had to be flattened off on the extended bit and the diagonal part of the skirt extended as well. You could fix it with a hacksaw though to remove the errant bit of chassis and move the nose back. The whole nose on the body shell of 37254 was actually a bit different to the old 37/0 cowled bufferbeam body shell as Pixie's replacements noses need a over a mil of plasticard behind them to mate the two.. It was a better shape though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 4, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 4, 2011 There should be a gap between the sandbox filler and the grille: http://www.c37lg.co.uk/pics/rest/rest111008.jpg 37254 was slightly too much due to minimum plastic thicknesses I guess but the new one extends it by a couple of mil. The preproduction model had the chassis moulded buffer shanks behind the buffer beam when you looked underneath it, you'd really need to see an underside shot of this to see if its the same. Its one of those things that has affected noticeable proportions as the nose has had to be flattened off on the extended bit and the diagonal part of the skirt extended as well. You could fix it with a hacksaw though to remove the errant bit of chassis and move the nose back. The whole nose on the body shell of 37254 was actually a bit different to the old 37/0 cowled bufferbeam body shell as Pixie's replacements noses need a over a mil of plasticard behind them to mate the two.. It was a better shape though. I agree with you about the small gap, my point was that Bachmann got it right with the first models Collectors Club 37/0 from 2004, so should have been able to do so again. This not being the case suggests something else isn't right. Or perhaps the sandbox filler is too small this time?! For me I now have a dilemna. I wasn't too concerned about the body shape errors with the 2004 model - in some ways this sandbox filler issue is more noticeable, perhaps because that's where the blue and yellow colour border is. To buy or not to buy 37251??? A close look at the final model will definately be needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I agree with you about the small gap, my point was that Bachmann got it right with the first models Collectors Club 37/0 from 2004, so should have been able to do so again. This not being the case suggests something else isn't right. Or perhaps the sandbox filler is too small this time?! For me I now have a dilemna. I wasn't too concerned about the body shape errors with the 2004 model - in some ways this sandbox filler issue is more noticeable, perhaps because that's where the blue and yellow colour border is. To buy or not to buy 37251??? A close look at the final model will definately be needed. The nose has all the detail too high up on that one and too deep a skirt as per the other original 37/0s. Looks at the sandbox fillers to the grille and the tail lights. Pixie did new noses that I was referring to. I actually think the deeper nose on 37254 was better and more accurate but now they've extended it a bit more for the skirted ones and caused this issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D400 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 In case anyone had missed it 37049 is now in stock at a certain Liverpool box shifter. Looks very very tasty but the bank says no... for now at least Bruce Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Piszczek Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 A couple of comparison shots, that clearly demonstrate, the extra yellow real estate... Model Prototype Model Prototype Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 7013 Posted April 22, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 22, 2011 Nice green one with BR late crest and D6*** suit me fine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 It seems odd that they've kept the extra nose length on the cutaway skirt one too. They don't need to hide a bufferbeam on that one.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brittannia Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 It appears Rail Express agrees with chraigwelsh about the nose error. They give it a hit and miss production Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 this nose end fault where the nose end has been extended slightly on 37049 surely they have the used the same nose end moulding on 37035, 37057, 37025, 37114 and the cut away valances on these would have the same fault as the new one if this is the case why aint the fautt been picked up before at end of the day it looks like a 37 so it will do me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB 34067 Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Sorry but I cant see the nose error where am I ment to be looking. James Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 think its to do where the sand box filler is and the gap between it and the body nose grills is a bit to wide, i cant see it either but at end of the day it looks like a 37 so it suites me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.C.M Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 I have been waiting for this model, now I am not so sure about rushing out to get it. I don't suppose it could be as simple as removing the nose and filing off a bit from the back?? Cheers Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 that sounds good idea but if you did that you run the risk of the lights not making contact on the chassis plates causing them not to work, its not stopping me from buying a blue 37049 its only about a mm or 2 so i dont think its out major Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Sorry but I cant see the nose error where am I ment to be looking. The you can buy one and enjoy it! But once you've spotted the error then it'll never look right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.C.M Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Just read the write up on the Rail Express, and they mention the groove under the cantrail grilles. Have a look at the pics of the model. Not sure were thats come from, the older models don't have it. Almost as much of a problem than the nose. Cheers Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 I agree with you about the small gap, my point was that Bachmann got it right with the first models Collectors Club 37/0 from 2004, so should have been able to do so again. This not being the case suggests something else isn't right. Or perhaps the sandbox filler is too small this time?! For me I now have a dilemna. I wasn't too concerned about the body shape errors with the 2004 model - in some ways this sandbox filler issue is more noticeable, perhaps because that's where the blue and yellow colour border is. To buy or not to buy 37251??? A close look at the final model will definately be needed. "Bachmann got it right with the first models Collectors Club 37/0 from 2004," Hhhmm - D6717 later to become 37 503 was Vulcan foundry built - and did not feature the extra "RSH" stlye cantrail grille strips - only D6700-4 were so fitted, so not correct in that respect. As for the gap between the sandboxes/nose grilles etc, that may well be a bit more accurate than the latest release, but the original nose end fittings were all out of line/misplaced etc, the buffers/cowls were too low and the wrong shape etc etc. The slightly bigger gap between the sandbox/nose grille, although wrong, is a more acceptable compromise than all the original's problems. More of an issue is the "trench" as reported in REX Mag that has appeared under the cantrail grilles ? where's that come from ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold uk_pm Posted April 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 23, 2011 I have read these posts - and the Rail Express review - with interest. I bought two split headcode and sound equipped 37s yesterday. When I got them home, I had a eureka! moment: for the first time Bachmann have produced a 37 that sits on the rails and looks like a 37. Subjective, I know, but that is my headline about this model. I agree that there is a superfluous trench beneath the cantrail grills - but it is very hard to see (at least to my middle-aged eyes) from normal viewing distances. And as for that nose, well I see it, but it doesn't offend. So, for those who are wavering I say see it in the flesh and make your own mind up. I'm off to renumber one of mine, before griming it up and working it's arse off in and around Doncaster. Lovely job!! Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Peter are the bogies the correct width now? Just thinking if you think the stance is right, the bogies which have been too wide and too low on the original Bo1-1Bo chassis always spoiled the look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold uk_pm Posted April 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 23, 2011 I suspect the bogies haven't changed. As with the Bachmann Deltic, the bogies are a weak area and I suspect the loco could do with being lowered by about 1 mm to reduce the gap between bogie and body. My previous comments were aimed primarily at body shape and overall look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 I suspect the bogies haven't changed. As with the Bachmann Deltic, the bogies are a weak area and I suspect the loco could do with being lowered by about 1 mm to reduce the gap between bogie and body. My previous comments were aimed primarily at body shape and overall look. I suspect with correct sized wheels it'll be the correct height; the others have been ok in this respect. A lot of people haven't spotted the issues with the widths and heights of the bogie sideframes themselse, so some people, with the original 37/4 did lower the whole loco to close the gap but this would affect all the proportions. Looking at the photo in REM if it did require lowering it may only be just 10 or 20 thou's worth of adjustment to make a difference - make sure the height's correct and that the overall width of the bogies is right and everything will look much better. I think the key to making realistic models of diesel and electric locos is being able to spot these little subtle requirements and then rectify them in a sympathetic manner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 I suspect the bogies haven't changed. As with the Bachmann Deltic, the bogies are a weak area and I suspect the loco could do with being lowered by about 1 mm to reduce the gap between bogie and body. My previous comments were aimed primarily at body shape and overall look. I suspect with correct sized wheels it'll be the correct height; the others have been ok in this respect. A lot of people haven't spotted the issues with the widths and heights of the bogie sideframes themselves, so some people, with the original 37/4 did lower the whole loco to close the gap but this would affect all the proportions. Looking at the photo in REM if it did require lowering it may only be just 10 or 20 thou's worth of adjustment to make a difference - make sure the height's correct and that the overall width of the bogies is right and everything will look much better. I think the key to making realistic models of diesel and electric locos is being able to spot these little subtle requirements and then rectify them in a sympathetic manner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.