Wright writes.....

[Chamby]

An interesting question, Tim,

 

Thanks for asking it.

 

Some of the following images have appeared before, but in a different context. All show modified Bachmann RTR (other manufacturers to follow) and some have recently featured in Bachmann Times............

 

Bachmann 4F 43937.jpg

 

This 4F has had very little spent on it by me, making it 'acceptable' for service on LB. A new chimney and front coupling, new numbers and weathering; that's all. 

 

Bachmann 9F 92044.jpg

 

This 9F hasn't even been renumbered. All I've done is to weather it (more) and add a few extra pipes (fusewire). Much of the stock in this picture is modified RTR - weathering, some renumbering and different couplings - not much, really. 

 

Bachmann 9F on fitted freight.jpg

 

This one hasn't been renumbered, either. Again, just a few additions in the way of pipework, and I've weathered it. Apart from one or two vehicles in its train, the rest are modified RTR.

 

Bachmann A1 60125 Scottish Union.jpg

 

This A1 has had a bit more work done to it. I've fitted new bogie wheels, new etched brass smoke deflectors (DJH, free in the firm's A2/2 and A2/3 kits), several wiggly pipes, renumbered/renamed it, jacked up the end beneath the cab (two washers) and close-coupled the loco to tender (brass wire). Ian Rathbone weathered it as a favour. Not much, really, in terms of costs. 

 

Bachmann A1 on express.jpg

 

On an express on LB, it fits in very well.

 

Bachmann A2 60538 on express.jpg

 

As does this A2. Again, apart from the costs of new 'plates and replacement bogie wheels, plus a bit of wiggly pipework, I've spent very little on its improvements. Tom Foster weathered it as part of our bartering. 

 

Bachmann Austerity 90607.jpg

 

This Austerity was altered by the late Dave Shakespeare (I just fitted the Ian Wilson - Pacific Models - front numberplate. Its train, apart from three or four kit-built wagons, is all modified/new couplings/weathered RTR.

 

 Bachmann K3 61975.jpg

 

Tony Geary 'fiddled' with this K3, and I just added more wiggly pipework and a scale shackle. Again, precious little in the way of extra money was spent on it.

 

Bachmann Standard Five 73159.jpg

 

Ian Wilson renumbered this Standard Five, I detailed it (not much) and Tom Foster weathered it. 

 

Bachmann V2.jpg

 

I fitted a new dome to this V2, detailed it (front coupling, replacement pony wheels and wiggly pipes) and Tom Foster weathered it. Apart from one kit-built car, all its train is modified RTR Mk.1s.

 

I think what the above show is that one doesn't need to spend a lot of cash in bringing RTR locos/stock up to an 'acceptable' standard. That is, if one does the work for oneself or barters skills. Ask the work to be done by others, and the costs can spiral. Even relatively simple weathering can cost a fair bit. I suppose it depends on how much of a 'modeller' one (the generic 'one') considers oneself. 

 

Apart from things like replacement wheels, 'plates and couplings, much of the detailing stuff can be worked out in pence. Things like paints for weathering are in every modeller's workplace (or should be). 

 

All the above see infrequent use on LB, not because of extreme limitations (although, other than the 9Fs, they won't pull the same weight of trains as my kit-built equivalents), but because (out of pomposity?) I run the locos I've made when visitors come.

 

More to follow.

 

.... and lamps!

[Clive Mortimore]

On Saturday I mentioned to Tony that I was bashing some MTK DMUs into shape claiming it was an art form. Well Tony being a ex-art teacher took a wee while to come back with they could only be abstract art. I have had a little think on this and I think surrealism is more the style intended.

[grahame]

Helps to know the right people to barter with!

And to have something of value that you can barter with.

 

G

[Tony Wright]

On Saturday I mentioned to Tony that I was bashing some MTK DMUs into shape claiming it was an art form. Well Tony being a ex-art teacher took a wee while to come back with they could only be abstract art. I have had a little think on this and I think surrealism is more the style intended.

Abstract Expressionism, I think.................

 

Rather you than me!

[Tony Wright]

.... and lamps!

Thanks Phil,

 

I didn't really mention lamps specifically, because some of those shown aren't entirely right (the codes are, but not the lamps themselves). He who pays the piper................................

 

And, I'm glad nobody has noticed that ghastly coupling on the 'van to the right of the V2. It's not there now!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited June 18, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Lecorbusier]

An interesting question, Tim,

 

 

I think what the above show is that one doesn't need to spend a lot of cash in bringing RTR locos/stock up to an 'acceptable' standard. That is, if one does the work for oneself or barters skills. Ask the work to be done by others, and the costs can spiral. Even relatively simple weathering can cost a fair bit. I suppose it depends on how much of a 'modeller' one (the generic 'one') considers oneself. 

 

Apart from things like replacement wheels, 'plates and couplings, much of the detailing stuff can be worked out in pence. Things like paints for weathering are in every modeller's workplace (or should be). 

 

 

More to follow. 

That is interesting .... so if modelling in 00 and if the primary objective is to have trains to run rather than build, or if building kits is not your thing, then in cost terms you can create a pretty good fleet. Of course there needs to be a suitable RTR to personalise which often isn't the case. There is on the face of it a fair amount of reward to be had from the personalisation of the locos and the weathering.

 

Another way of looking at is of course is that if an RTR is ±£130 and the kit is ±£250, then that is £140 for the pleasure derived from making something which given the hours involved is pretty good value. For myself I enjoy taking my time and indulging.

[Mark Forrest]

That is interesting .... so if modelling in 00 and if the primary objective is to have trains to run rather than build, or if building kits is not your thing, then in cost terms you can create a pretty good fleet. Of course there needs to be a suitable RTR to personalise which often isn't the case. There is on the face of it a fair amount of reward to be had from the personalisation of the locos and the weathering.

Not just in 00, it's possible in P4 (& EM), if you model diesels. The stock for my Fryers Lane (link in my signature below) is almost entirely modified RTR. The locos have had simple wheel swaps, probably spending £20 per loco. Some wagons have had suspension fitted, but others have just had their wheels swapped.

[Headstock]

The way I look at it, one B16 is worth ten Hornby A4's. Thus it must be cheaper to kit build.

[Clive Mortimore]

Not just in 00, it's possible in P4 (& EM), if you model diesels. The stock for my Fryers Lane (link in my signature below) is almost entirely modified RTR. The locos have had simple wheel swaps, probably spending £20 per loco. Some wagons have had suspension fitted, but others have just had their wheels swapped.

Having spent a weekend next to Fryers Lane it proves what can be done with RTR to create the right atmosphere. Many layouts can be technically brilliant but can lack that little something that makes things believable.  

[Headstock]

I would hazard a guess, as it's a Taunton mogul on a short(ish?) iron-ore train, I'd say it's on it's way to the old Stewarts & Lloyds steelworks at Bilston, usually a 'shuttle service' worked by 56xx or 72xx classes. If it'd been a 28, I'd of said Brymbo or South Wales. With the mogul  probably on it's way to Stafford Road works ( just a short 'hop' from Bilston) for attention, as I said, just a guess !!

 

That sounds logical, did you see anything of the service up the GC?

[jamie92208]

Even though I've now moved to France progress has continued on the artwork for the LB M & G N viaduct.   I have achieved a milestone today and have finished all the individual pieces and have actually started to build up the actual etch sheet.  I am of course carefully ticking them off on the parts list as they are inserted into the sheet.

 

It's coming on.

 

Jamie

[Lecorbusier]

Not just in 00, it's possible in P4 (& EM), if you model diesels. The stock for my Fryers Lane (link in my signature below) is almost entirely modified RTR. The locos have had simple wheel swaps, probably spending £20 per loco. Some wagons have had suspension fitted, but others have just had their wheels swapped.

I can't work out if I'm jealous or not. It certainly gives you a good option.

 

To convert the kind of steam loco Tony uses to P4 I suspect you are into a whole new chassis for both loco and tender (comet or something similar) coupled to all new wheels  gearbox and motor .... which is a pretty large outlay.

 

For myself I have to pretty much kit or scratch build as pre-grouping RTR offerings on the Midland are few and far between.

[Northmoor]

One chap expressed an interest, but complained about there being no couplings. 'I'd have bought the lot, had they had couplings' said he. 'They'd be a bit more than that if they had' said I. When I also pointed out that the couplings, including the collars, were available as spares from Bachmann, his responses were 'unusual' in my view. 'How about £5.00 each?' was the first. When I politely (not wishing to offend) pointed out that they were for Cancer Research, he made no comment, other than to suggest that couplings from Bachmann were very expensive. Now, I have no idea how much the spare couplings are, but since brand new Bachmann Mk.1s are over £30.00 (?), I thought these were still a bargain at a tenner each. He actually did buy one (at a tenner), but then said he wasn't sure how to fit the replacement couplings. As to my question 'What kind of a 'modeller' are you?', he gave no response. Could I have offended him? 

 

My next surprise was in answering a question about my latest 9F I had on show. 'How much is that, please?'. 'It's not for sale'. 'Is it a kit?'. 'Yes'. 'How much does the kit cost?'. 'About £250.00 complete'. 'What! There's a Bachmann one over there for £130.00. Why do you want to make one?' I didn't think I had the time to explain, so didn't bother. Is this what railway modelling is coming to I wonder? 

1. The guy was a chancer and that coach is probably on eBay by now.  He just didn't want to actually do anything to make his money.

2. A Bachmann 9F is no doubt very nice but won't do the job your kit 9F does (attempt to pull the end wall of the building down, by the sound of things). He probably doesn't care because his loco will if he's lucky, populate a small loco depot of more likely, never leave the display cabinet (and possibly even the box).  Next time you meet this chap, give him my details.  For £30 I can build him a finished Dapol 9F that won't run anywhere either.

Edited June 18, 2018 by Northmoor

[Tony Wright]

Some more 'personalised' RTR examples (in OO).

 

 

Having just built a BEC D11, it's probably safe to say that this Bachmann example I renumbered/renamed/detailed/weathered is probably superior, though it's held in nowhere near the same affection. 

 

 

This detailed/modified Hornby A3 has appeared before. It looks as if its tender doesn't ride too high as well. Tom Foster's weathering does bring it to life, but its ability to haul really heavy trains is limited. Still, it takes this mainly-modified Bachmann Mk.1 rake with little bother.

 

 

Despite some reservations, Heljan's O2 can be made very presentable. A new chimney, renumbering and weathering (the last-mentioned by Geoff Haynes) makes it into a 'proper' LB layout loco, especially since it's capable of hauling 50 modified RTR wagons with ease. 

 

 

With very little work/expenditure, Hornby's K1 looks well. All I've done with this example is to renumber it, weather it, add coal and a crew (as I do with all my locos), and change the angle of the return crank on this side. I've since sold this example, because I have two kit-built K1s. Those weathered RTR cattle wagons don't look bad, either. 

 

 

Unlike Clive Mortimer, I'd never contemplate building a diesel. All I've done with this Heljan Baby Deltic is to weather it. 

 

 

Such is the excellence of many of today's RTR carriages that it makes sense to exploit what they have to offer. All I've done with this pair of Bachmann Thompsons is to detail the rear end, alter the couplings, weather the underframes and roof and fit destination boards - all at little cost. These are as good, if not superior, to any Thompson carriage I've ever built from kits.

 

It would seem then that improving RTR items costs very little as a percentage of the original cost of the model; providing, that is, you (the generic 'you') are prepared to do the work yourself - thus having the satisfaction of being able to say 'I did that' and saving money at the same time. After all, personalising RTR items by oneself is just as much 'modelling' in my book as building kits. 

Edited June 18, 2018 by Tony Wright

[bike2steam]

That sounds logical, did you see anything of the service up the GC?

 

I'm afraid not.

Edited June 18, 2018 by bike2steam

[St Enodoc]

On Saturday I mentioned to Tony that I was bashing some MTK DMUs into shape claiming it was an art form. Well Tony being a ex-art teacher took a wee while to come back with they could only be abstract art. I have had a little think on this and I think surrealism is more the style intended.

I hope that Captain Kernow doesn't read this...

[Headstock]

I'm afraid not.

 

It was a daily service to Newport in the North East that ran from Woodford. The train would be assembled from various feeder trains originating in the Banbury area. In the post-war period and early BR days, the train would be worked north up the GC by WR motive power. The locomotive would then return later in the day with the empties.

[Headstock]

Some more 'personalised' RTR examples (in OO).

 

B Times 29.jpg

 

Having just built a BEC D11, it's probably safe to say that this Bachmann example I renumbered/renamed/detailed/weathered is probably superior, though it's held in nowhere near the same affection. 

 

A3 60054 PRINCE OF WALES.jpg

 

This detailed/modified Hornby A3 has appeared before. It looks as if its tender doesn't ride too high as well. Tom Foster's weathering does bring it to life, but its ability to haul really heavy trains is limited. Still, it takes this mainly-modified Bachmann Mk.1 rake with little bother.

 

Heljan O2 modifications 25.jpg

 

Despite some reservations, Heljan's O2 can be made very presentable. A new chimney, renumbering and weathering (the last-mentioned by Geoff Haynes) makes it into a 'proper' LB layout loco, especially since it's capable of hauling 50 modified RTR wagons with ease. 

 

Hornby K1 R3242 improvements 14.jpg

 

With very little work/expenditure, Hornby's K1 looks well. All I've done with this example is to renumber it, weather it, add coal and a crew (as I do with all my locos), and change the angle of the return crank on this side. I've since sold this example, because I have two kit-built K1s. Those weathered RTR cattle wagons don't look bad, either. 

 

Heljan Baby Deltic weathered.jpg

 

Unlike Clive Mortimer, I'd never contemplate building a diesel. All I've done with this Heljan Baby Deltic is to weather it. 

 

Thompson mods 14.jpg

 

Such is the excellence of many of today's RTR carriages that it makes sense to exploit what they have to offer. All I've done with this pair of Bachmann Thompsons is to detail the rear end, alter the couplings, weather the underframes and roof and fit destination boards - all at little cost. These are as good, if not superior, to any Thompson carriage I've ever built from kits.

 

It would seem then that improving RTR items costs very little as a percentage of the original cost of the model; providing, that is, you (the generic 'you') are prepared to do the work yourself - thus having the satisfaction of being able to say 'I did that' and saving money at the same time. After all, personalising RTR items by oneself is just as much 'modelling' in my book as building kits. 

 

Very nice, can we see your kit built examples instead?

[Mark Forrest]

I can't work out if I'm jealous or not. It certainly gives you a good option.

 

To convert the kind of steam loco Tony uses to P4 I suspect you are into a whole new chassis for both loco and tender (comet or something similar) coupled to all new wheels  gearbox and motor .... which is a pretty large outlay.

 

For myself I have to pretty much kit or scratch build as pre-grouping RTR offerings on the Midland are few and far between.

 

Agreed, the (almost) instant gratification of P4 diesels has allowed me to spend time on other things, such as improving my track building and structure modelling.  I like explaining to people at shows I've done with Fryers Lane that P4 doesn't need to mean a massive outlay in costs, but I do enjoy the satisfaction of building a kit.  For that reason my modelling time is divided between 1980s diesels for Fryers and a longer term project to model ex-LNWR circa 1930, using almost entirely kit built stock (also P4).  Depending on what mood I'm in (and what free time I have available) I go to whichever suits me at the time.

[Atso]

Good morning Tony,

 

I thoroughly enjoyed the show, it is one of my favourite shows of the year - where else can you travel behind a steam locomotive to different parts of an exhibition? I also managed to catch up with quite a few people, including my best friend who (despite not being a railway modeller or enthusiast) had made the trip and also enjoyed the visit.

 

I think the sound 'chip' was of a 9F an not the Brit or 5MT. Even so, it was a most impressive demonstration coupled with very realistic sound effects (albeit of the wrong class of locomotive!).

[Clem]

Hi Tony, As always, it was good to see and chat to you and Mo at the show on Saturday. I obviously missed your sound chip demo, but it 'sounds' interesting (any chance of expanding a bit about it?). It was also nice to see your latest beautifully smooth running J6. As mentioned, it would be great to visit you and Mo (and Little Bytham) again and I'll contact you when Chris has fully recovered from her cold/bad chest.

 

I've been enjoying looking at your posts above of your RTR 'upgrades' whether by weather, wiggly wire, chimney or dome. It's amazing how just one or two changes can enhance and bring to life RTR locos. I've also done a few but, of course, the big issue for me is the re-gaugeing to EM. The trickiest one so far has been the K3 which has larger wheels. After a lot of hard thinking, I decided that to use the proprietary chassis and maintain the gear meshing, the chassis would have to be raised by just under a millimetre  which also meant lowering the cylinders in by the same amount in the chassis. It was a bit of a slog but I got there in the end. I must admit to not being very happy with my paint/weathering job with it and it's down for some further work in the paint shop when it gets to the top of the priority list. Anyway, here's a picture. Sorry that the background is a bit monotonous. I'm slowly trying to work westwards (North in real terms) on the scenery/buildings.

 

Cheers for now

 

Clem

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony, As always, it was good to see and chat to you and Mo at the show on Saturday. I obviously missed your sound chip demo, but it 'sounds' interesting (any chance of expanding a bit about it?). It was also nice to see your latest beautifully smooth running J6. As mentioned, it would be great to visit you and Mo (and Little Bytham) again and I'll contact you when Chris has fully recovered from her cold/bad chest.

 

I've been enjoying looking at your posts above of your RTR 'upgrades' whether by weather, wiggly wire, chimney or dome. It's amazing how just one or two changes can enhance and bring to life RTR locos. I've also done a few but, of course, the big issue for me is the re-gaugeing to EM. The trickiest one so far has been the K3 which has larger wheels. After a lot of hard thinking, I decided that to use the proprietary chassis and maintain the gear meshing, the chassis would have to be raised by just under a millimetre  which also meant lowering the cylinders in by the same amount in the chassis. It was a bit of a slog but I got there in the end. I must admit to not being very happy with my paint/weathering job with it and it's down for some further work in the paint shop when it gets to the top of the priority list. Anyway, here's a picture. Sorry that the background is a bit monotonous. I'm slowly trying to work westwards (North in real terms) on the scenery/buildings.

 

Cheers for now

 

Clem

Thanks for posting the picture of the K3, Clem,

 

It looks very good. 

 

When I 'upgraded' a Bachmann K3, I substituted a SE Finecast chassis, fitted the correct-diameter drivers and had to gouge out 'semi circles' underneath the cast footplate to accommodate the flanges.

 

Good to see you on Saturday as well. The 'sound chip demo' was really a bit of a gag between Atso and me. Just as I was running one of my locos, a real steam loco started outside - in perfect harmony! The best DCC-sound I've ever heard.

 

Thanks for your comments about the improving of RTR items. 

 

 

This is a Hornby Britannia which I've detailed/renumbered/renamed/fiddled with. The new bogie wheels do make a difference, as does close-coupling the tender to the loco. Our elder son, Tom, weathered it. One thing I should have changed is the chimney, which is not good. 

 

 

I took this ex-tender-drive Hornby Brit a stage further, building a Comet chassis for it and its tender. I also fitted etched-brass deflectors, renumbered/renamed it, added loads of wiggly - and straight - pipes and weathered it. There's a considerable difference between the domes!

 

 

This is still my preference, though - built from a DJH kit. Bob Alderman started it, converted himself to O Gauge and sold it to me, and I completed it by finishing off the bodywork, completing the chassis and erecting the motion. Ian Rathbone's perfect painting lifts it into the 'quite good' bracket. I don't know whether DJH Brits are still available; if they are, for all the bits, you're looking at probably twice the price of the RTR equivalent. Worth it? I think so, but that's me. Should I also fit a better chimney? 

 

 

A day or two ago I posted a picture of a modified Hornby A3 hauling this self-same rake. I built this one from a SE Finecast kit, and Ian painted it. Whether it's 'better' than the touched-up RTR equivalent is a moot point. It'll certainly pull more.

 

 

 

I also posted a picture of a Bachmann Thompson BCK. This Comet one was built and painted by John Houlden. Apart from this one having separate wire handrails, is it better than the RTR one, especially as it's more expensive? I suppose it comes down to whether an individual prefers (and is able) to make things rather than just buy them or have others make things for them. I didn't ask John to build me this, but when he changed to O Gauge and sold-off his 4mm stuff, lovely items like this were too good to miss. 

 

 

 

By way of a direct comparison between a kit for a model and an RTR equivalent, how about these two LNER four-wheeled CCTs? The top one was built, painted and weathered by Rob Davey, using a Parkside kit. All I did to the Hornby one below was to lose the tension-locks and weather it. Which end should the lettering/numbering go? 

 

 

Of course, despite the inexorable rise in RTR quality, not all locos/stock will ever be available. That's why (and it's good that it is) kit-building will always be necessary. Never say never, but I doubt if an LNER bogie CCT will ever be offered RTR, but who knows? I built this from a Chivers kit (no longer available), painted/numbered/lettered it and Geoff Haynes weathered it. 

 

 

 

When Bachmann's new Thompsons appeared, there was talk of the possibility of a catering car to follow, but nothing has emerged (as yet). No matter, because the answer is to adapt/kit-build, as I did with this Thompson Pantry Third (later Second), using Southern Pride sides, stuck on to a Bachmann donor (the earlier Thompson type) and fitting cast-metal HD bogies. I painted this. 

 

I think the 'wise' answer (not that anyone has ever considered me that) is to exploit what the RTR boys/girls have to offer, freeing up time where appropriate to build what isn't available straight from the box. Just what you're doing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited June 19, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello Tony

 

By way of a direct comparison between a kit for a model and an RTR equivalent, how about these two LNER four-wheeled CCTs? The top one was built, painted and weathered by Rob Davey, using a Parkside kit. All I did to the Hornby one below was to lose the tension-locks and weather it. Which end should the lettering/numbering go?

 

According to BR's document Lettering and Numbering of Coaching Stock, the right hand end. I have seen photos of the lettering on the left where an open door would obscure the number. I think it is a case of check a dated photo if you can find one.

 

 

Lettering drawing from the above mentioned document which is available from the top shelf of my library or the Barrowmore Model Railway Group website

 

Edit, number on the door was also to be seen.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[Hollar]

Thanks for posting the picture of the K3, Clem,

 

It looks very good. 

 

When I 'upgraded' a Bachmann K3, I substituted a SE Finecast chassis, fitted the correct-diameter drivers and had to gouge out 'semi circles' underneath the cast footplate to accommodate the flanges.

 

Good to see you on Saturday as well. The 'sound chip demo' was really a bit of a gag between Atso and me. Just as I was running one of my locos, a real steam loco started outside - in perfect harmony! The best DCC-sound I've ever heard.

 

Thanks for your comments about the improving of RTR items. 

 

Hornby Britannia 70036.jpg

 

This is a Hornby Britannia which I've detailed/renumbered/renamed/fiddled with. The new bogie wheels do make a difference, as does close-coupling the tender to the loco. Our elder son, Tom, weathered it. One thing I should have changed is the chimney, which is not good. 

 

Hornby Britannia 70054.jpg

 

I took this ex-tender-drive Hornby Brit a stage further, building a Comet chassis for it and its tender. I also fitted etched-brass deflectors, renumbered/renamed it, added loads of wiggly - and straight - pipes and weathered it. There's a considerable difference between the domes!

 

DJH Britannia 70003.jpg

 

This is still my preference, though - built from a DJH kit. Bob Alderman started it, converted himself to O Gauge and sold it to me, and I completed it by finishing off the bodywork, completing the chassis and erecting the motion. Ian Rathbone's perfect painting lifts it into the 'quite good' bracket. I don't know whether DJH Brits are still available; if they are, for all the bits, you're looking at probably twice the price of the RTR equivalent. Worth it? I think so, but that's me. Should I also fit a better chimney? 

 

SE Finecast A3 60063.jpg

 

A day or two ago I posted a picture of a modified Hornby A3 hauling this self-same rake. I built this one from a SE Finecast kit, and Ian painted it. Whether it's 'better' than the touched-up RTR equivalent is a moot point. It'll certainly pull more.

 

 Comet Thompson BCK.jpg

 

I also posted a picture of a Bachmann Thompson BCK. This Comet one was built and painted by John Houlden. Apart from this one having separate wire handrails, is it better than the RTR one, especially as it's more expensive? I suppose it comes down to whether an individual prefers (and is able) to make things rather than just buy them or have others make things for them. I didn't ask John to build me this, but when he changed to O Gauge and sold-off his 4mm stuff, lovely items like this were too good to miss. 

 

Parkside LNER CCT.jpg

 

Hornby LNER CCT.jpg

 

By way of a direct comparison between a kit for a model and an RTR equivalent, how about these two LNER four-wheeled CCTs? The top one was built, painted and weathered by Rob Davey, using a Parkside kit. All I did to the Hornby one below was to lose the tension-locks and weather it. Which end should the lettering/numbering go? 

 

Chivers LNER bogie CCT.jpg

 

Of course, despite the inexorable rise in RTR quality, not all locos/stock will ever be available. That's why (and it's good that it is) kit-building will always be necessary. Never say never, but I doubt if an LNER bogie CCT will ever be offered RTR, but who knows? I built this from a Chivers kit (no longer available), painted/numbered/lettered it and Geoff Haynes weathered it. 

 

 Southern Pride RTP.jpg

 

When Bachmann's new Thompsons appeared, there was talk of the possibility of a catering car to follow, but nothing has emerged (as yet). No matter, because the answer is to adapt/kit-build, as I did with this Thompson Pantry Third (later Second), using Southern Pride sides, stuck on to a Bachmann donor (the earlier Thompson type) and fitting cast-metal HD bogies. I painted this. 

 

I think the 'wise' answer (not that anyone has ever considered me that) is to exploit what the RTR boys/girls have to offer, freeing up time where appropriate to build what isn't available straight from the box. Just what you're doing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Lovely pics as always.  And a question: where can you buy the best replacement chimney for a Brit?

 

Tone

[Lecorbusier]

 

 

DJH Britannia 70003.jpg

 

This is still my preference, though - built from a DJH kit. Bob Alderman started it, converted himself to O Gauge and sold it to me, and I completed it by finishing off the bodywork, completing the chassis and erecting the motion. Ian Rathbone's perfect painting lifts it into the 'quite good' bracket. I don't know whether DJH Brits are still available; if they are, for all the bits, you're looking at probably twice the price of the RTR equivalent. Worth it? I think so, but that's me. Should I also fit a better chimney? 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

A question Tony .... certainly when viewed close up and when handled metal kits feel weightier in more ways than one ... more substantial and I think higher quality just in terms of materiality. When they run do you think this sense of mass translates at all into how they look running .... can you sense a greater mass?

 

I was watching an episode of  QI last night by way of relaxation and they played the sound of water being poured into a cup. One recording was of boiling water and one of cold water. Almost everyone listening could tell the difference between the two although it was very subtle and all chose correctly as to which was the hot water - it really was quite clear. Can you tell in a similar way with the locos? I have always believed that properly weighted metal kit built locos look different when running, but have never been able to make a direct comparison.