locoholic Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Really? I've been looking at Hereford Model Centre website since they arrived and I'd question that assumption.Stock levels remain constant at 24.Don't all kill yourselves in the rush and I hope this post generates sales.Usual disclaimers apply. I wouldn't put too much faith on the Hereford Models website. I suspect it's not updated automatically like some of the more high-tech sites. However, Hatton's are still showing plenty too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 (edited) Detail aside, is the Bachmann Modified Hall a good runner on DC.........Slow take-off, slow running, very quiet mechanism,? Edited May 29, 2015 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDJR7F88 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Detail aside, is the Bachmann Modified Hall a good runner on DC.........Slow take-off, slow running, very quiet mechanism,? I tested my one in the review and found from the box to to be a bit stiff (as seen in the review), though it does get better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john dew Posted May 30, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 30, 2015 I received one this week.....it's not been run in yet but on the DC test track it did seem stiffer than the Railroad Hall. Will run it in next week on the rolling road and let you know how I get on Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
County of Yorkshire Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) I just can't square the glaring front-end issue I'm afraid. It's utterly wrong. This was my view from a Queen Mary brake van for a delightful 10 miles last Saturday behind 6960 Raveningham Hall. A front-end which is absolutely nothing like this: Unless you possess the skills of Brian Kirby, and indeed the desire and wherewithal to take your hacksaw to what is a £100+ model, you are going to have to put-up with a really poor fudge on an expensive model of idiosyncratic class of loco. Surely this front running plate issue is akin to having a King class model fitted with Hall steampipes? Or a pannier tank without its famous large dome? If retailers struggle to shift this batch, then surely Bachmann will be forced to get it right for future releases? I do hope so, because I'd want a few of these in GWR livery for the 1944-1948 period. Such a shame! CoY Edited May 30, 2015 by County of Yorkshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted May 30, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 30, 2015 I wouldn't put too much faith on the Hereford Models website. I suspect it's not updated automatically like some of the more high-tech sites. However, Hatton's are still showing plenty too. And precisely what evidence do you have to support your statement? I have dealt with them for over a decade and have never known them fail to update their website.Perhsps you have some knowledge! I Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 And precisely what evidence do you have to support your statement? I have dealt with them for over a decade and have never known them fail to update their website.Perhsps you have some knowledge! I The evidence is the rueful chuckle I get from staff at the shop counter when I use the words "It's on your website", after I've enquired about an item I want to buy. And the fact that quite often I've bought things from them that aren't on their website at all. Is that satisfactory evidence, your honour?! It's still an excellent shop, and I would recommend them to any modeller. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisf Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Well, despite it's errors, the modified Halls have sold very well, so I guess a lot of people are not that put off by it, This may be because some people will buy anything. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedfordtfc Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 If retailers struggle to shift this batch, then surely Bachmann will be forced to get it right for future releases? I do hope so, because I'd want a few of these in GWR livery for the 1944-1948 period. Such a shame! CoY According to Mr Longworth's tome.6959-6970 were built without side windows to the cabs for blackout reasons. They received the side windows in ther period 1945-48, the same as 6971 onwards from September 1947. Also the first batch didn't receive nameplates "for the first two or three years". I'd say your opportunity of wanting a "standard" Modified Hall in GWR livery is possible but you would be somewhat restricted in choice if you wanted to be accurate. Maybe better sticking with a "normal" Hall Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted May 30, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 30, 2015 In the present climate of restricted supply,if it doesn't sell,they are likely to drop it from the catalogue altogether.They took a decision not to retool last year and that is probably the only version you're going to get.You win some,you lose some.Hopefully,someone else will take up the baton some day.Maybe Sepp Blatter will reinvent himself . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach bogie Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Does anyone on the forum have the capability to design a 3-D printed Hawksworth bogie to enable conversion of a Hornby Collett "Hall" to a "Modified Hall"? They would of course need access to an appropriate GA drawing and CAD software capable of producing STL files for submission to a bureau such as Shapeways. Said print would of course have to be capable of attaching to the Hornby chassis, and take standard bogie wheel axles. Because it would be for a niche market it could be produced with no front coupling and could represent the distinctive plate across the front face. The closest I have to CAD software is an elderly version of Sketchup which I think does not allow STL export. Sorry. There are however some very bright sparks on RMWeb for whom this would be child's play. Comet produce a GWR bogie (LS6) that includes a Hawksworth bogie overlay that could be added to the Bacchmann bogie, or build up as the Comet parts. http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/ Mike Wiltshire Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveb860 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) Really? I've been looking at Hereford Model Centre website since they arrived and I'd question that assumption.Stock levels remain constant at 24.Don't all kill yourselves in the rush and I hope this post generates sales.Usual disclaimers apply. Yes Really, but what do I know, I only sell them, whereas you go by the information on one shops website. And interestingly one version has already sold out at Bachmann. This may be because some people will buy anything. Chris Yes, the silent majority, who buy anything, and put coffers in the manufacturers accounts, thus allowing new model development. Edited May 30, 2015 by steveb860 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hamlin Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Has anyone fitted a DCC decoder to a new modified Hall yet? Just took mine apart prior to surgery ala Brian Kirby and note how small the pocket below the cab is, looks quite restrictive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john dew Posted May 31, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 31, 2015 I received one this week.....it's not been run in yet but on the DC test track it did seem stiffer than the Railroad Hall. Will run it in next week on the rolling road and let you know how I get on Regards I have run it on my admittedly basic rolling road and the performance was pretty disappointing. So stiff and jerky that I had to have the DC controller at a much higher setting than I normally use for running in. However, while contemplating sending it back to Liverpool (something I have never ever done) I took the body off (see below)......the front retaining screw was very tight....ran the loco without the body on the short DC track and it was almost as smooth as a castle ! Put the body back without overtightening the screw and there was a little stiffness at very low speeds but I would rate it as acceptable........not brilliant but acceptable. Has anyone fitted a DCC decoder to a new modified Hall yet? Just took mine apart prior to surgery ala Brian Kirby and note how small the pocket below the cab is, looks quite restrictive. To insert the decoder you are supposed to remove the weight that is situated forward of the motor Which rather begs the question of why the weight is there......the wiring is then fed back via a narrow channel to the socket.in the cab area......far from ideal. I am not overly hung up about the front end......although now I know that it is wrong it kind of niggles........but I am frustrated with this set up ....particularly when you compare it with say the 4F or Dukedog which have sockets with ample space in the tender and tender pickups. Its a sort of half and half, penny pinching measure that I dont normally associate with Bachmann . Rant over......I will keep her.....add tender pickups and put the decoder in the tender. Done it before....all my split chassis are like that......but wasnt this a replacement? Regards from Vancouver 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 The best running Hall I ever came across was the Railroad red version. Must be that flywheel. I think any proficient modeller wanting a Modified Hall would be better starting from there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 How does it run? Well after running in and some oil - much the same as other Bachmann Halls (of the newer variety). One problem - and perhaps I should have sent the model back. I suspect the spindle on the vacuum pump on my particular model has been manufactured too short. On first running it had a tendency to jump out of the pump body and lock up the whole mechanism. First time I rearranged the slidebars and straightened the spindle. Second time I repositioned the pump body by about 1mm hopefully to prevent any re-occurrences before any of the bits get seriously deformed or broken. Nice work by Brian Kirby - perhaps I will be keeping Mere Hall after all. Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Not just a mere Hall, but a more accurate one.... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 How does it run? Well after running in and some oil - much the same as other Bachmann Halls (of the newer variety). One problem - and perhaps I should have sent the model back. I suspect the spindle on the vacuum pump on my particular model has been manufactured too short. On first running it had a tendency to jump out of the pump body and lock up the whole mechanism. First time I rearranged the slidebars and straightened the spindle. Second time I repositioned the pump body by about 1mm hopefully to prevent any re-occurrences before any of the bits get seriously deformed or broken. Nice work by Brian Kirby - perhaps I will be keeping Mere Hall after all. Ray Same here. I left mine running in and came back to find it jammed on a 6' radius curve (with a little kink in it where the lengths of track join). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Just for devilment I have loaded on YouTube a video of three Bachmann Halls. Two have split frames with a kind of rolling gait, the third has the incorrect framing at the front. Can you spot the differences? Regards Ray 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 At the risk of boring people I have loaded yet another video to YouTube. Unlike the previous video which was shot using the Camtruck, this video is made up of clips taken with a conventional camera. Two points stand out to my mind. Firstly the difference in framing on the old and new models beneath the smoke box is very visible - and needs the Brian Kirby treatment. Secondly in my opinion there is little to choose between the running of my old and new models with Gaugemaster DS controllers. Just some thoughts Ray 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 Whilst it is ridiculous that we've ended up in this situation of having to carry out our own surgery on these expensive new models, you do end up with a superior model. Having said that, i also still have (and will be keeping) a few of the old 1990s Bachmann Modified Halls, which still stand up quite well, and of course don't have THAT clanger on the front end. One of the best things on the new model, is that old focal point favourite, the chimney - it's beautiful ! On the other hand, the 1990s chimney is at best, clumsy and slightly chubby, some people may have replaced this with a turned brass version? I love the colour and lining of the new (green) one and of course we have the modern spec. body assembly and chassis, whereas the 1990s has the old-style split axle arrangement, which although reliable, is more prone to wheel wobble and bearing wear. Neither versions have the correct blank bogie front, but of course the manufacturer is obliged to fit an automatic coupling here, so this is fully accepted. One other little slight snag to avoid, is don't buy too many of these, because numerically for every one Modified Hall, there were nearly another four standard Hall locos in the fleet, to the ratio of 71/259. Cheers, Brian. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 Whilst it is ridiculous that we've ended up in this situation of having to carry out our own surgery on these expensive new models, you do end up with a superior model. Having said that, i also still have (and will be keeping) a few of the old 1990s Bachmann Modified Halls, which still stand up quite well, and of course don't have THAT clanger on the front end. One of the best things on the new model, is that old focal point favourite, the chimney - it's beautiful ! On the other hand, the 1990s chimney is at best, clumsy and slightly chubby, some people may have replaced this with a turned brass version? I love the colour and lining of the new (green) one and of course we have the modern spec. body assembly and chassis, whereas the 1990s has the old-style split axle arrangement, which although reliable, is more prone to wheel wobble and bearing wear. Neither versions have the correct blank bogie front, but of course the manufacturer is obliged to fit an automatic coupling here, so this is fully accepted. One other little slight snag to avoid, is don't buy too many of these, because numerically for every one Modified Hall, there were nearly another four standard Hall locos in the fleet, to the ratio of 71/259. Cheers, Brian. I've dithered over the green Modified Hall (mines black) but the dithering is now over. I won't get one, despite Bachmann's incomparable green. I dread to think of the mess I would make trying to carry out the surgery you have. Besides, may I query your use of the term "modern spec."? To my mind, if these Halls were to modern spec., surely they would have provision for decoder and speaker in the tender and (less controversially) Bachmann's neat arrangement of low-friction tender pick ups. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted June 7, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 7, 2015 I've dithered over the green Modified Hall (mines black) but the dithering is now over. I won't get one, despite Bachmann's incomparable green. I dread to think of the mess I would make trying to carry out the surgery you have. Besides, may I query your use of the term "modern spec."? To my mind, if these Halls were to modern spec., surely they would have provision for decoder and speaker in the tender and (less controversially) Bachmann's neat arrangement of low-friction tender pick ups. It would appear that the chassis/pick up&tender is identical to the one introduced to replace the split chassis design some ten years ago now.Is this correct ? If this is true then in my experience of running a couple of these is that they are perpetuating a somewhat indifferent performance with the "revised" Modified Hall.I hope this is not the case and that there is an improvement upon that crude and irritating connection between loco and tender.Surely we can have better than that in 2015? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 (edited) Well i meant "modern spec." with regard to the now solid axles, finer wheels and conventional chassis, being more like finescale kit construction. I don't use decoders on chuffers, although i do on diesels, for lights, etc., but i can appreciate the problem of where to hide the decoder on the former, especially small tanks. On the other hand, look how the required four wires from loco pick-ups to tender chip or plug and back to loco motor on the Bachmann Mickey Mouse 2-6-0 mucks up it's appearance around the drawbar. Not using chips, i diverted the wires on one of mine to run straight from pick-ups to motor, much neater looking now, although some other locos do have tender pick-ups as well these days, so through wires are inevitable i suppose. For Bachmann to make a mistake once is forgivable, but to release these babies two years ago, then suddenly recall them for a re-think, spend two years putting right some of the faults, but to leave the biggest fault (the front footplate) untouched and serve it up to us again, is unforgivable. They went to the trouble of making a new 6959 footplate to fit under the Hall boiler, complete with extended front frames, but either completely missed the flat centre void arrangement (hi-tech scanning, as previously boasted about?), or cynically overlooked it, so as to fit the standard 49xx Hall chassis with it's conflicting upward sweep at the front. If they had produced the footplate correctly, they would not have needed a brand new chassis block, they could have just cast more of the standard chassis and milled off the upward curve in the factory, in the same way as i cut mine with a hacksaw. It must be very frustrating for all parties concerned? Anyone remember the 73050gate fiasco a few years back? :-) Cheers, Brian. Edited June 7, 2015 by Brian Kirby 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted June 7, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 7, 2015 This is very strange when you consider the quality of new releases such as the64XX pannier and the E4 tanks.One that slipped under the radar? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now