Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

So there is a buyer somewhere.

 

 

For info this is what to expect sometimes on Ebay, listed at present is

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DJH-K74-KIT-BUILT-LNER-ex-GNR-4-4-2-CLASS-C2-ATLANTIC-LOCO-3990-HENRY-OAKLEY-ng-/331825390384?hash=item4d4255a330:g:GN0AAOSw8RJXBqEh

 

It says "professionally  assembled and painted" and yet if you zoom in on the pics there is paint on the rail face of the tyres and the lining is . . . .I'll let the pictures tell the story. You have no idea how it will run if at all and as a minor point to note I can't believe that a "professional" would not put some sleeving on the pickups.

 

All for the princely sum of £450, the seller will pay the postage though so there is a bonus.

Thanks Dave,

 

I'm puzzled that you appear to believe that a very-well-made and finished model of a Thompson Pacific was difficult to sell. 

 

The DJH Klondike doesn't look very good at all, though full marks to the potential seller for taking so many pictures of it. The kit itself must be around the £130-40 mark, wheelset around £30.00-40 and a decent motor/gearbox £40.00-50, so, say, £225.00-ish. Thus, the seller is asking twice that for the finished model. Who knows, he/she might get it. 

 

It makes me wonder, though, how much research has been done by the builder/painter. Though 12-spoke bogie wheels are illustrated on the kit's box, anyone who can count will know that that's two too many. The lining all round is really crude, especially on the wheels and the buffer stocks should be black. As far as I can tell, the hinges on the smokebox door hinges on the C2s were never painted silver, either; if they were shiny, it was burnished metal. The red piping on the frames above the footplate should extend further than it does, as well. The tender has one too many coal rails.

 

Returning to the price, on face value asking 'just' £225.00 to build and paint a tender loco (though not of the greatest size), especially in a complex livery is very good value for money. However, it's only good value if the workmanship and the finishing is of a high order - then it's outstanding!. Though I'd readily make such a loco, I'd farm out the painting to one who could do it properly. In that case, £225.00 would not go very far at all. 

 

 

Though I think this image has appeared before, this is what a decent LNER green paint finish should look like on a 4mm model. This is the work of Geoff Haynes, but it won't be far off £200.00 (nor should it). Contrast the lining, particularly on the wheels, with the Ebay Klondike. No professional painter (if he/she) wishes to pursue such a career would paint so poorly, at least as far as I'm concerned. 

 

 

This model has also appeared before (it'll feature later this year in BRM). I built it, counted the right number of spokes and Geoff painted it. What price this model (though it's not for sale)? Were I to sell it I'd have to come clean and state that the rear framing is that of a later-built loco, so it would be renumbered to a more suitable one (only Graeme King has noticed this!). It would be substantially more that £450.00!

 

Did the potential seller indicate the provenance of the model? 

Edited April 15, 2016 by Tony Wright

[polybear]

The seller in this instance is "Gostude", well-known for trying to peddle overpriced cr*p (sorry - "Antique Toys") via Ebay.  He regularly gets a mention in the "Ebay Madness" section of RMWeb; unfortunately his "name" is often mis-spelt as "Gosturd" for some strange reason....

[chris p bacon]

Thanks Dave,

 

I'm puzzled that you appear to believe that a very-well-made and finished model of a Thompson Pacific was difficult to sell. 

 

 

Sorry Tony, just a tease about the man himself not being the most popular of engineers. Don't worry at the club they look at me with blank faces a lot of the time, Bern especially.

 

The difference in the paintwork between the Klondike and the V2 says it all, if the builder is known then a model can achieve a more realistic price,  but for modellers who aren't aware of some of the good builders names  when they see "professionally built" on sites such as Ebay it can mean nothing to them. You then throw a few models like the Klondike into the mix and buyers can become very sceptical even if the model is from a top quality bona fide builder.

 

I have an N2 Comet chassis on the bench at present but this has reminded me to dig out the Klondike I have that needs rewheeling after.

[MJI]

This business of putting a price on things fascinates me. After all, there are paintings out there going for hundreds of thousands of pounds, even millions, for which I would not give sixpence.

 

However, we are in an age where a commercially produced A4 Pacific in OO is being offered for just shy of £500, so a few hundred quid for a well made Thompson Pacific (which is a much rarer model) seems eminently reasonable to me.

 

As for small LNER engines going for buttons, if anyone has small GC locos in 7mm scale going for buttons please let me know, as I have access to an excellent button shop.

 

(Actually, the low estimation people have for small engines in general always rather puzzles me. Railways had lots of small engines, which did useful work, and such locos were seen every day hauling short trains in obscure locations, the sort of places, in fact, most of us model. While an A4 or a P2 is all very well, the truth is a little engine is much more useful to most of us. Unless we are simply collectors of express engines, of course.)

 

Small locos are interesting, I do like the wide variety of Diesel shunters, and the small Bo Bos are full of character.

 

But for sheer spectacle a big type 4 or a type 5 on full power is something to behold.

[Focalplane]

Talking of small locos, there is tremendous interest in the Hattons/DJ Models 14XX offering, due to be released this year.  20 pages and 54,000 views on the appropriate RMWeb topic.  But most of the entries are about pleas for a particular model set in a particular period which I find very dull.  So why do I look?  Well, the Collett 14XX is one of my favourites, usually seen on branch line autotrains but apparently capable of 70 mph on the main line.  A free steaming, very efficient loco much liked across GWR territory.  I grew up taking the Oswestry-Gobowen "Rattler" but also spotted the Dudley Dodgers at Snow Hill.  No. 1438 worked both so that would be my choice - not that I would expect an RTR manufacturer to make me one "just because".  No, I would make it.

 

My 1438 would be Gauge O, from a kit (Modern Outline) and would be paired with a single autocoach from Lionheart.  And it would run a shuttle service up and down a garden I don't have.  Notwithstanding this constraint, I am going to do it, and soon - has anyone got a spare garden?

[sp1]

Talking of small locos, there is tremendous interest in the Hattons/DJ Models 14XX offering, due to be released this year. 20 pages and 54,000 views on the appropriate RMWeb topic. But most of the entries are about pleas for a particular model set in a particular period which I find very dull. So why do I look? Well, the Collett 14XX is one of my favourites, usually seen on branch line autotrains but apparently capable of 70 mph on the main line. A free steaming, very efficient loco much liked across GWR territory. I grew up taking the Oswestry-Gobowen "Rattler" but also spotted the Dudley Dodgers at Snow Hill. No. 1438 worked both so that would be my choice - not that I would expect an RTR manufacturer to make me one "just because". No, I would make it.

 

My 1438 would be Gauge O, from a kit (Modern Outline) and would be paired with a single autocoach from Lionheart. And it would run a shuttle service up and down a garden I don't have. Notwithstanding this constraint, I am going to do it, and soon - has anyone got a spare garden?

Dudley Dodger? .... Well I'm in Dudley, and I do have a big garden - keep thinking about a nice big 'roundy roundy' to watch the (00) trains go by.....

[micklner]

I see an overwhelming need for a "Modellers Guide to Creating an accurate A1 (also A2, A3, A4..... hey, there could be a series of books......) which identifies all the class detail variations, suppliers of bits, techniques etc. etc.

 

All that is needed is someone eminently qualified and knowledgeable to pen such books.  Ideas on a postcard, please.....

 

There are shedloads of books on the Pacifics best in my experience are RCTS Part 2A for photos and technical data ,Yeadon  volumes 1-3  for photos and there many others.

[johnarcher]

Talking of small locos, there is tremendous interest in the Hattons/DJ Models 14XX offering, due to be released this year.  20 pages and 54,000 views on the appropriate RMWeb topic.  But most of the entries are about pleas for a particular model set in a particular period which I find very dull.  So why do I look?  Well, the Collett 14XX is one of my favourites, usually seen on branch line autotrains but apparently capable of 70 mph on the main line.  A free steaming, very efficient loco much liked across GWR territory.  I grew up taking the Oswestry-Gobowen "Rattler" but also spotted the Dudley Dodgers at Snow Hill.  No. 1438 worked both so that would be my choice - not that I would expect an RTR manufacturer to make me one "just because".  No, I would make it.

 

My 1438 would be Gauge O, from a kit (Modern Outline) and would be paired with a single autocoach from Lionheart.  And it would run a shuttle service up and down a garden I don't have.  Notwithstanding this constraint, I am going to do it, and soon - has anyone got a spare garden?

Sorry, can't help with the garden, just agreeing with you about the 14XX (well 48XX/58XX in my period). I just remember black 14XXs in Devon c1960.

Relevant to things discussed here in the past I prefer to make, even with two RTR versions now in 4mm, so I've finally got hold of a Perseverance etched kit, and, although Percy chassis are fine but just because I've always wanted to try their well-reviewed stuff, it will use a HIgh Level chassis - it will, I hope, probably end up as 5818 (the Golden Valley engine) (unless I change my mind again). I just have to get back into good enough health to make a serious start.

Good luck with yours.

[Horsetan]

....I've finally got hold of a Perseverance etched kit, and, although Percy chassis are fine but just because I've always wanted to try their well-reviewed stuff, it will use a HIgh Level chassis.....

Ah, you as well. The High Level chassis makes a very good update for the Perseverance body etch, which might still be available from Chris Parrish.

[johnarcher]

Ah, you as well. The High Level chassis makes a very good update for the Perseverance body etch, which might still be available from Chris Parrish.

I got my kit from Chris quite recently, I don't know if he has any left or is producing another batch.

[sandra]

Tony, I've always been an admirer of the 14XX tank engines. In 1961, together with my cousin, we travelled from Chester Northgate to Wrexham Central and when we arrived at Wrexham, in the Ellesmere platform was 1458 and a single Hawkesworth autocoach. The locomotive looked absolutely lovely, she was spotless, in lined green with early crest and she sparkled even though it was a very wet day. I think she may have been just out of the works for the locomotives on the Wrexham to Ellesmere service were rarely kept clean.

 

I too have a Perseverance kit to build. The trouble is I model Andover Junction which is at the southern end of the MSWJR. I wonder in anyone knows if the 14XX class ever worked on that line. Certainly small prairies and pannier tanks worked to Andover but I have no record of the 14XX ever venturing on to the MSWJR.

 

Sandra

[Poggy1165]

I am a bad person, because I like the 14xxs too, although they are the wrong company and the wrong period for me. Very attractive little engines.

[Focalplane]

Sandra

 

1458 was an Oswestry engine and was often seen on the Gobowen Rattler along with 1438, 1432 and 1449.  Perhaps because Oswestry Works was just about extant in 1961 they were pulling out all the stops to keep their locomotives smart.  It is part of 89A folklore that the Works Manager kept 9017, 822 and 823 hidden from Swindon.  All three still survive as a result, the Dukedog on the Bluebell Railway and the two Welshpool and Llanfair tank engines back in their old haunts.  How many other places did much the same thing in the early 1960s?

 

As to the MSWJR, it is quite possible that a 14XX could be seen in Andover as of all GWR classes the 14XX was seen just about anywhere on the system.  One excuse could be that your engine might have been running in ex-works from Swindon, in which case you could also re-live your memories of Wrexham with a nice clean one!  Though getting from the Works on to the MSWJR would have been somewhat contrived.

 

Paul

[Focalplane]

I should add that I also have an Airfix 14XX and a half built Comet chassis.  Its progress has stalled due to stiff fingers but I am hoping the stiffness is going to go away (cod liver oil, copper wrist band, other mumbo jumbo prescriptions, etc.)  Damn it, I haven't come this far in life not to build at least two 14XXs!

[Barry Ten]

Here's my stab at a 14xx, using the Mainly Trains detailing parts but with the original RTR chassis:

 

 

 

The engine was later painted black and numbered 1440, and then permanently wired to an autocoach for improved pickup:

 

[sandra]

Sandra

 

1458 was an Oswestry engine and was often seen on the Gobowen Rattler along with 1438, 1432 and 1449.  Perhaps because Oswestry Works was just about extant in 1961 they were pulling out all the stops to keep their locomotives smart.  It is part of 89A folklore that the Works Manager kept 9017, 822 and 823 hidden from Swindon.  All three still survive as a result, the Dukedog on the Bluebell Railway and the two Welshpool and Llanfair tank engines back in their old haunts.  How many other places did much the same thing in the early 1960s?

 

As to the MSWJR, it is quite possible that a 14XX could be seen in Andover as of all GWR classes the 14XX was seen just about anywhere on the system.  One excuse could be that your engine might have been running in ex-works from Swindon, in which case you could also re-live your memories of Wrexham with a nice clean one!  Though getting from the Works on to the MSWJR would have been somewhat contrived.

 

Paul

Paul,

 

Thanks for your comments, I think the idea of a 14XX working on the MSWJR when running in from Swindon is an excellant idea. In fact locomotives running in after works visits probably gives an excuse for the sighting of unusual locomotives in unexpected locations all over the country as works liked to keep such engines close to them for a short time to make sure that all was well with the loco.

 

In fact I do know that in the mid fifties there was a sighting of a standard class 3MT 2-6-0 of the 77XXX class on the MSWJR and this may have been running in after having been built at Swindon.

 

Sandra

[Focalplane]

Another thought.  Reading (81D) had a few 14XXs.  Where did they work?  One possible place would be the Marlborough Branch from Savernake Junction.  A quick search did not find any useful references.  However, there were other branch lines within the 81D sphere of influence (Lambourn, for example) but I would think a 14XX at Savernake could be real possibility.

[Willie Whizz]

There are shedloads of books on the Pacifics best in my experience are RCTS Part 2A for photos and technical data ,Yeadon  volumes 1-3  for photos and there many others.

 

Undoubtedly there are, but that's not what the OP was getting at, I suspect.

 

Some of us - me included - can look at two pictures of similar but non-identical prototypes for an hour and not spot more than one or two out of six or seven key differences.  Brains just aren't wired that way, perhaps ...  Until someone puts a great big arrow up to the points at issue, when I immediately go "Oooh!!  Aaahh!!  Gottit!!"

 

I knew about the tender variations, but it was only quite recently - probably from somewhere earlier on Tony's thread - that I came to realise some of the A3s had been given different boilers with a different number of boiler bands (a major issue hard to overlook, once one knows); nor that the whole business of banjo domes was a complete 'boojum' in BR days at least.

 

A few months back I was finally enlightened on here regarding the differences in Gresley standard and heavy carriage bogies, which are often mention in passing but seldom described, and I'd never been able to see much difference just by looking at photographs.  Indeed, on learning that for all practical purposes the differences when reduced to 4mm scale and observed from normal viewing distances are actually minimal, I was able to conclude it isn't an issue most of us need to worry about (certainly in terms of changing the stock we already have); which in itself is just as valuable a result.

 

So yes, I think a book or bookazine ('orrible word!) of the nature suggested - whether by Tony or some other knowledgeable person who could point out appropriate issues in the major LNER/BR (ER) classes from a modeller's perspective and suggest how they could be addressed, would actually be good, and should find a market.

[The Stationmaster]

Another thought.  Reading (81D) had a few 14XXs.  Where did they work?  One possible place would be the Marlborough Branch from Savernake Junction.  A quick search did not find any useful references.  However, there were other branch lines within the 81D sphere of influence (Lambourn, for example) but I would think a 14XX at Savernake could be real possibility.

 

The Reading engines definitely worked the Wallingford branch (which would have effectively required an allocation of two 14XX to Reading), they occasionally substituted for GWR railcars on the Henley branch and I suspect they probably saw use on Reading - Newbury stoppers.  Published photos suggest that they weren't used on the Lambourn branch where tender engines seems to have been preferred for a lot of the work although 57XX and railcars also put in appearances.

[Clive Mortimore]

Undoubtedly there are, but that's not what the OP was getting at, I suspect.

 

Some of us - me included - can look at two pictures of similar but non-identical prototypes for an hour and not spot more than one or two out of six or seven key differences.  Brains just aren't wired that way, perhaps ...  Until someone puts a great big arrow up to the points at issue, when I immediately go "Oooh!!  Aaahh!!  Gottit!!"

 

I knew about the tender variations, but it was only quite recently - probably from somewhere earlier on Tony's thread - that I came to realise some of the A3s had been given different boilers with a different number of boiler bands (a major issue hard to overlook, once one knows); nor that the whole business of banjo domes was a complete 'boojum' in BR days at least.

 

A few months back I was finally enlightened on here regarding the differences in Gresley standard and heavy carriage bogies, which are often mention in passing but seldom described, and I'd never been able to see much difference just by looking at photographs.  Indeed, on learning that for all practical purposes the differences when reduced to 4mm scale and observed from normal viewing distances are actually minimal, I was able to conclude it isn't an issue most of us need to worry about (certainly in terms of changing the stock we already have); which in itself is just as valuable a result.

 

So yes, I think a book or bookazine ('orrible word!) of the nature suggested - whether by Tony or some other knowledgeable person who could point out appropriate issues in the major LNER/BR (ER) classes from a modeller's perspective and suggest how they could be addressed, would actually be good, and should find a market.

Hi Willie

 

How much does it matter that a model of an A3 has the right dome or right tender if the person who is operating it on the layout is enjoying him/herself?   Not a lot to many people.

 

I enjoy finding the differences between what are supposed to be a "class" of engines and then go and model those differences, not everyone else does. Does it matter?   No , I just hold back what ever emotion a "wrong" model makes me feel. How ever I do not give the same licence when it is a manufacturer who makes a huge error. Take for instance the new Peco OLE system, it will get great reviews in all the magazines but looks much more wrong than a Thompson Pacific with a banjo dome.

 

Better jump off me soap box before someone lobs a P4 grenade at this 00 modeller.

[Horsetan]

Now where did I put that box of grenades....?

[Tony Wright]

There are shedloads of books on the Pacifics best in my experience are RCTS Part 2A for photos and technical data ,Yeadon  volumes 1-3  for photos and there many others.

Ah,

 

But have you spotted the 'mistakes on every page'? Though immensely valuable, the RCTS green books are riddled with errors, as too is Yeadon. 

 

Just as an example, on page 87 of Pt. 6A in the RCTS green series it's stated that the K2s worked diverted trains via Barnsley and Mexborough to points east because of the underpass being constructed at Retford. Considering that the last K2 went in 1962 and the Retford dive-under was constructed in 1965, then how, and why? Willie also states that the U1 was the longest loco ever to operate on a British railway. Did he never measure an LMS Garratt?

 

Nit-picking? Perhaps, but there are loads more. Peter Coster gets hopelessly muddled with A3 boilers, as does the RCTS.

 

Never believe dates, either. Take the identical V2 pictures on page 53 of Peter Coster's Book of the V2s and page 61 of Willie Yeadon's volume on the V2s. Peter suggests 1957, yet Willie states 1959. Looking at the loco and stock, I'd say the former.

 

Never take as gospel anything I write, either!  

[Tony Wright]

Tony, I've always been an admirer of the 14XX tank engines. In 1961, together with my cousin, we travelled from Chester Northgate to Wrexham Central and when we arrived at Wrexham, in the Ellesmere platform was 1458 and a single Hawkesworth autocoach. The locomotive looked absolutely lovely, she was spotless, in lined green with early crest and she sparkled even though it was a very wet day. I think she may have been just out of the works for the locomotives on the Wrexham to Ellesmere service were rarely kept clean.

 

I too have a Perseverance kit to build. The trouble is I model Andover Junction which is at the southern end of the MSWJR. I wonder in anyone knows if the 14XX class ever worked on that line. Certainly small prairies and pannier tanks worked to Andover but I have no record of the 14XX ever venturing on to the MSWJR.

 

Sandra

Sandra,

 

I'm afraid I paid the little 0-4-2Ts no heed at all. Several are underlined in my mouldering 1957 Combined Volume, but I have not much in the way of recollections of them. One used to scoot out of the Western bays at Chester General on a push-pull set but where it went to I have no idea. Llangollen and beyond, or just to Wrexham? I must have seen a few at Gobowen and Oswestry but took no notice. A real Philistine! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited April 16, 2016 by Tony Wright

[MJI]

Sorry, can't help with the garden, just agreeing with you about the 14XX (well 48XX/58XX in my period). I just remember black 14XXs in Devon c1960.

Relevant to things discussed here in the past I prefer to make, even with two RTR versions now in 4mm, so I've finally got hold of a Perseverance etched kit, and, although Percy chassis are fine but just because I've always wanted to try their well-reviewed stuff, it will use a HIgh Level chassis - it will, I hope, probably end up as 5818 (the Golden Valley engine) (unless I change my mind again). I just have to get back into good enough health to make a serious start.

Good luck with yours.

 

Ilike the 14xx as well, and they used to race the LMS expresses as far as Standish junction

[Tony Wright]

Hi Willie

 

How much does it matter that a model of an A3 has the right dome or right tender if the person who is operating it on the layout is enjoying him/herself?   Not a lot to many people.

 

I enjoy finding the differences between what are supposed to be a "class" of engines and then go and model those differences, not everyone else does. Does it matter?   No , I just hold back what ever emotion a "wrong" model makes me feel. How ever I do not give the same licence when it is a manufacturer who makes a huge error. Take for instance the new Peco OLE system, it will get great reviews in all the magazines but looks much more wrong than a Thompson Pacific with a banjo dome.

 

Better jump off me soap box before someone lobs a P4 grenade at this 00 modeller.

Clive, 

 

Whilst I agree in principle with your points of view, coming at it from the angle of one who has been commissioned to write books and is being commissioned to write books which mention the minutiae of detail on the LNER RA9 stuff, I can tell you that it DOES matter (a great deal!) to those who buy the books (not just mine) and use them as sources of reference, for history or model-making. Though not steam, but definitely RA9, my recent Irwell books featuring more modern motive power contained the odd error - some due to ignorance, others to a 'hostage to fortune' situation. Quite rightly, I received corrective correspondence.

 

What modellers do on their own systems is entirely up to them but there is a responsibility if work is published or exhibited to get it as right as possible.