robmcg Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I've been looking at GW 2-8-0's, 2-8-0T's and 2-8-2T's on DVD this week. GWR-knocking is popular sport but lets face it, this company was light years ahead of the rivals once Churchward took over and one company in particular didn't even see the light until the mid 1930s (LMSR). I rise to the bait. The LMSR certainly had some problems, but building cheap hard-working engines was an inherited thing and worked very well for accountants. So what if it took two 3F 0-6-0s to do what one Swindon 2-8-0T could do? They probably cost about the same to build... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I rise to the bait. The LMSR certainly had some problems, but building cheap hard-working engines was an inherited thing and worked very well for accountants. So what if it took two 3F 0-6-0s to do what one Swindon 2-8-0T could do? They probably cost about the same to build... But twice as much to crew . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drandles Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I notice that according to the Hornby website these tanks are to be fitted with a 3-pole motor, not the excellent 5 pole skew wound motor that has been almost universal in recent new models.. Why the change, I wonder ? David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 12, 2012 I notice that according to the Hornby website these tanks are to be fitted with a 3-pole motor, not the excellent 5 pole skew wound motor that has been almost universal in recent new models.. Why the change, I wonder ? David Presumably because it's cheaper - the RRP published thus far certainly seems 'keen'. But if it comes with a flywheel (will it?) the performance should hopefully be ok. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I notice that according to the Hornby website these tanks are to be fitted with a 3-pole motor, not the excellent 5 pole skew wound motor that has been almost universal in recent new models.. Why the change, I wonder ? Their principal competitor has been putting a very efficient 3 pole motor into steam models for the past eight or nine years, having originally commenced with 5 pole motors as part of the spec. of the Blue Riband range. A 40% reduction in commutator winding operations per motor is a manufacturing cost saving. And while my gut instinct is to prefer the 5 pole motor, with DCC control the on-track performance is indistinguishable from that of the 3 pole motors. With cost control as the marching orders... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Higgs Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 I rise to the bait. The LMSR certainly had some problems, but building cheap hard-working engines was an inherited thing and worked very well for accountants. So what if it took two 3F 0-6-0s to do what one Swindon 2-8-0T could do? They probably cost about the same to build... That was, until a Swindon man arrived to sort out the befuddled thinking at Derby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted May 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 12, 2012 I don't know if this is news but Hornby are saying the new 72xx 7202 will be in Great Western livery as opposed to the shirtbutton or G W R on the tanks. The 42xx will have the monogram. http://www.Hornby.co...ource=CM_hornby Edit spelling mistake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted May 12, 2012 Share Posted May 12, 2012 Same liveries as reported here on the arrival date thread. We established on one of the threads that most if not all of the first batch would have retained the GREAT WESTERN on the tanks from their earlier existence as stored 5095s. Mike (Stationmaster) did wonder whether the numbers had been finalised, so can we assume that they have from the web page statement "Two liveries have been confirmed"? Of course, there's still the question of whether when Hornby say "Great Western" they mean "GREAT WESTERN". Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 12, 2012 Same liveries as reported here on the arrival date thread. We established on one of the threads that most if not all of the first batch would have retained the GREAT WESTERN on the tanks from their earlier existence as stored 5095s. Mike (Stationmaster) did wonder whether the numbers had been finalised, so can we assume that they have from the web page statement "Two liveries have been confirmed"? Of course, there's still the question of whether when Hornby say "Great Western" they mean "GREAT WESTERN". Nick Plus a return to the original question about the running numbers - which in only one case out of the four they have quoted actually matches the illustrations of the EPs. Not that it matters in some respects as they can - subject to availability of plates - be easily renumbered to match their appearance but it still seems odd that Hornby have not yet corrected the numbers (or amended the 42XX description to 5205). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Glancing through Bradford Barton's 'GW Steam Through The Cotswolds' just now I came across three handy shots of none other than 5205 itself, shunting the Worcester - Oxford pick up goods at Kingham on 23/5/62.... the third shot is taken at almost the exact same angle as the first photo Andy posted at the start of the thread and makes for a good comparison between the model and the prototype. Looking forward to purchasing one of these handsomely proportioned machines now! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 2, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 2, 2012 According to this week's Kernow newsletter Hornby have revised the running number of their 5205 2-8-0T to 5274 (albeit 'with Great Western on the tender' - I think we can put that down as a misprint or typo ). So it looks as if they now have a second loco with a number that matches one of their early sample pics - result!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 ...So it looks as if they now have a second loco with a number that matches one of their early sample pics - result!! Progress, definitely, but It might not quite be a result. 5274 was built in 1926 and was the last with the square drop in front of the cylinders. However, the recess in the top of the bunker was introduced with 5275 in 1930. Earlier builds had this added eventually, but the RCTS says "...the process started in earnest about 1934 but a few were still unaltered in 1945/6." Given that 5274 was converted to 7239 in Feb. 1936 after being in store for some time, I would have thought it very unlikely that its bunker was changed before the rebuild. 5274 had a rather short life in service. It might have been better to have chosen a number below 5255 as these were not converted to 72XX. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 31A Posted June 2, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 2, 2012 Was able to have a look at some pre-production samples on the Hornby stand at Railfest today, and one thing that struck me was that the smokebox door handles appear to be solid mouldings rather than separate items as per (for eaxmple) the L1 or the B17 samples displayed adjacent. Is this a 'Tornado' legacy, and portent for the future I wonder? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozexpatriate Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 the smokebox door handles appear to be solid mouldings rather than separate items This is clearly the case in the photos in the OP and emphasizing this further, all the add-on details are black. I hope the factory remembers to use the alternative smoke box door without the number plate for the GWR versions. No more Tintagel Castle déjà vu thank you Mr. Hornby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 3, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 3, 2012 Was able to have a look at some pre-production samples on the Hornby stand at Railfest today, and one thing that struck me was that the smokebox door handles appear to be solid mouldings rather than separate items as per (for eaxmple) the L1 or the B17 samples displayed adjacent. Is this a 'Tornado' legacy, and portent for the future I wonder? They clearly look like solid mouldings in the pics in this thread but if you don't like it (and provided you can still get those rather nice brass replacements??) it's an easy thing to deal with the aid of suitable sharp instruments and a drill bit in a pin vice. The price that has been quoted for these locos seems remarkably low by contemporary comparisons so I'm not at all surprised to see some economies like this in production costs. Sooner easily correctable (or even ignorable?) little things like this than errors which destroy the overall look of the loco or which mix hard to correct details or things which can only be corrected with major surgery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 31A Posted June 3, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 3, 2012 Yes, easy enough to fix. I'm sure you can buy brass ones, which would be stronger than the Hornby mouldings anyway, and less likely to fall out! It was just an observation, really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 HI Looks like they will be with us in December . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted June 3, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 3, 2012 HI Looks like they will be with us in December . Well that's great, only today my wife was talking about Christmas presents. I can't wait to tell her what I want! A 42xx, straight frames no o/s steam pipes late BR livery. Am I asking for too much? Regards Richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 3, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 3, 2012 Well that's great, only today my wife was talking about Christmas presents. I can't wait to tell her what I want! A 42xx, straight frames no o/s steam pipes late BR livery. Am I asking for too much? Regards Richard I sincerely hope not! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luton town Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Looking very closely at the photos of the 42xx,has anyone else noted that,the running board warps slightly from the edge of the water tanks? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Looking very closely at the photos of the 42xx,has anyone else noted that,the running board warps slightly from the edge of the water tanks? Bearing in mind that no one has seen a photo of a 42XX yet, I assume you mean the 5205 that was mis-labelled as a 42XX at the start of the thread? If so, look carefully and you'll see a grey tab at the bottom centre of the tank. It looks to me like this should fit into or behind the running plate and the "warping" is just an indication that it has not been assembled correctly. It is, after all, an early prototype so I doubt this feature will appear on the production versions. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 6, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 6, 2012 Bearing in mind that no one has seen a photo of a 42XX yet, I assume you mean the 5205 that was mis-labelled as a 42XX at the start of the thread? If so, look carefully and you'll see a grey tab at the bottom centre of the tank. It looks to me like this should fit into or behind the running plate and the "warping" is just an indication that it has not been assembled correctly. It is, after all, an early prototype so I doubt this feature will appear on the production versions. Nick And that tab(?) is only visible on the left hand side of the loco - nowhere to be seen on t'other side where the running plate is seemingly straight, so I reckon Nick has identified what has taken place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted June 26, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 26, 2012 If you had to choose between one because of money constraints, which one would you get? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 26, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 26, 2012 If you had to choose between one because of money constraints, which one would you get? Depends on the period you are modelling to some extent and your locale but I would go for the 42XX/5205 (less likely to derail for a kick-off if its' anything like the real things). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overground Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The Hornby facebook page has some pictures up of decorated samples of the 42xx and have to say its looking very good! Im deffiantly very tempted and im a Southern man!! (Its my trainset.....) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.