andyman7 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Given the recent knowledgable responses on the Tri-ang A1A, I thought I'd share an observation on the venerable Tri-ang Hornby class 37 Co-Co (R751) and see if I can glean any more information. This was a very long-lived model, appearing in 1966, and in production until a few years ago having undergone innumerable updates. Those familiar with this model will know that it started life using the (incorrect) A1A bogies before gaining a new chassis with the Ringfield motor and (also incorrect but visually closer) Class 47 bogies. My query concerns the models with the A1A bogies, made from 1966-77. As originally issued in green livery, the chassis was located via a screw through to a roof boss in the bodyshell at the radiator end. At the opposite end, the chassis was secured to the body by means of the headcode box, the headcode actually being moulded into the chassis and fitting into the body headcode 'slot' at the non-radiator end. This was at some point altered so that a separate slot was cut into the cab front below the headcode. I have a model made around 1972 which has this slot at the radiator end, which means that the chassis is reversed. Inside the body, a new roof boss is moulded at the opposite end of the original, which is still present, and the screw is therefore at the non-radiator end. I have 1975 and 1977 issues which now have the screw located back at the radiator end and the slot relocated to the non-radiator end. These have only one roof boss at the original location at the radiator end, with no obvious signs of the mould being gated or modified to remove the extra boss.. The questions I have always wondered are 1) why was the headcode slot (which was visually much more elegant) replaced by the hideous extra slot lower doen in the nose? The Hymek had a similar chassis attachment method which it retained throughout its life. 2) Why do some blue versions have this slot at the opposite end? 3) Was there one body tool that was modified 3 times, or did two tools exist, one with the reverse slot and two roof bosses? Any input would be appreciated! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted July 24, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 24, 2012 Interesting stuff.sorry can't help except to say that I too have wondered why they had that hideous slot inserted.wasn't aware of the variants that you have seen . I don't think Pat Hammonds book has anything about this either Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewartingram Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I wonder if it was for a potential modification to allow headcode box lighting. Triang/Hornby often included gimmicks like this (personally I still regard it a gimmick today!) but these things come with a cost so may not have been pursued. One example I can think of is the class 25; when introduced, it hadn inner clear plastic moulding (windows) which incorporated a space for a smoke unit under the exhaust. Stewart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted July 25, 2012 Author Share Posted July 25, 2012 I wonder if it was for a potential modification to allow headcode box lighting. That's an interesting hypothesis which could make sense. Incidentally, it's interesting that for a period in the 1970s, several new models came with lights only for the feature to fall out of favour (Brush Type 4 - 1974; reissued Met-Camm DMU 1975; HST, Class 25 & Duchess 1977); and then apart from the APT that was it until the new generation super detail models started to appear a decade or so ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 Having examined one of the revised chassis, I realise that at each end two holes have been moulded in, so I am now convinced that Stewart is right and the mod from headcode slot to slot above the bufferbeam was to permit working lights to be fitted. It seems unlikely that this ever actually got beyond the preliminary stage as to my knowledge the body moulding always featured filled in panels (well at least the end that wasn't the slot). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spet0114 Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 Hi Andy, Pat Hammond's book does address the variations in body fixing, but I've not got the book to hand to quote from. I'll have a look later on tonight, if I remember!! Cheers Adrian Ps. For what it's worth, I think the original A1A bogies look a lot better under the 37 than the 47-esque ones that followed. A minority opinion, but never mind!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallmodelspares Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 The class 37 was later on remolded a couple of times. Because the demand was high on this body mold they made two tools later on they made a third which addressed the issue of split headcode boxes finally (only done on a ringfield chassis) Also of note is the cut down of the sides on the triang model and the Hornby issues chassis and unlike the class 31 they updated the mold details on the underframe as well. I have seen a factory made sample with class 47 style lights fitted and located with the pegs fitting well Another variant i can report on is one ringfield version around 1978-79 with old screw hole fixing present in the roof no collar fitted and the holes below the doors open Going back to the br green 37 model i have also noted a full yelow ended one was tried but never put into widescale production Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.