Jump to content
 

Bachmann 64xx Panniers


Mikkel
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

There are an awful lot of tank engines left Ian - all with 'preserved' examples and mostly in a measurable or scannable state.  I think the main reason the 64XX has been picked up is the poll emphasis over the years (plus I've kept mentioning it and pushing it whenever I've had the chance as have others so there's a bit of an 'opinion in favour of' that has grown up) and maybe that's what encouraged Bachmann plus the flexibility for using it as a 54XX as well.  

 

The other 'difficulty' in the r-t-r area is that some existing models are long in the tooth and need a major re-work  - especially the 'Manor' and 43XX although seemingly there might be a bit of internal pressure within Bachmann to tackle the first of those.  Meanwhile we just do our best to encourage and assist manufacturers etc in the hope that our lobbying will press the right buttons (and I suppose the instant I start on my long squirrelled away 16XX kit someone will announce one!).

I can agree with most of that. However... If you look at the market, then the odds start to diminish. WE know the difference between a 16xx and a 64xx. Do you really expect an ordinary person, without in-depth research, to make the same valued judgement? After all, 2 pannier tank locomotives, one with slightly larger wheels. Both painted black, late crest. Hmmmm....

 

We are the market for less than mainstream stuff, and that's why I'm pleased to see the 64xx coming along. I just can't see any further additions, that's all.

 

I now stand back, and get proved royally wrong......

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I can agree with most of that. However... If you look at the market, then the odds start to diminish. WE know the difference between a 16xx and a 64xx. Do you really expect an ordinary person, without in-depth research, to make the same valued judgement? After all, 2 pannier tank locomotives, one with slightly larger wheels. Both painted black, late crest. Hmmmm....

 

We are the market for less than mainstream stuff, and that's why I'm pleased to see the 64xx coming along. I just can't see any further additions, that's all.

 

I now stand back, and get proved royally wrong......

 

Ian

In many respects I think you are absolutely right - only a 94XX or 15XX or a 1361 is going to look noticeably different in the 'yet another pannier' syndrome.  However if we look at the 'more seriously interested' modeller we are into a slightly different market as it is more discerning but at the same time almost certainly limited in numbers compared with, say, Hornby's idea of the size of production runs.  Thus I think there is market for the commissioners to exploit especially if manufacturers will accept batch sizes of only 500 - and surely the market could absorb a couple of batches (of 500) 16XX for example?

 

I think the appearance of an independent David Jones in the marketplace could well create an ideal situation for commissioning models as he appears to be offering capacity for exactly that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

WE know the difference between a 16xx and a 64xx. Do you really expect an ordinary person, without in-depth research, to make the same valued judgement? After all, 2 pannier tank locomotives, one with slightly larger wheels. Both painted black, late crest. Hmmmm....

In many respects I think you are absolutely right - only a 94XX or 15XX or a 1361 is going to look noticeably different in the 'yet another pannier' syndrome.  However if we look at the 'more seriously interested' modeller we are into a slightly different market as it is more discerning but at the same time almost certainly limited in numbers compared with, say, Hornby's idea of the size of production runs.  Thus I think there is market for the commissioners to exploit especially if manufacturers will accept batch sizes of only 500 - and surely the market could absorb a couple of batches (of 500) 16XX for example?

Ian, I agree with Mike regarding commissions, but regarding the 'less discriminating' enthusiast - someone who just wants 'something to run' even in this space they don't necessarily want exactly the same red boxed 0-6-0PT that has been available for about 32 years.

 

I think we have reached a point where doing 'representative' models (think Polly/Connie/Nellie* etc) is the wrong approach from a contemporary business standpoint - not from a manufacturing standpoint mind you, but from a market standpoint. In my opinion, in these days, it's far more profitable to tool an accurate model of a real locomotive.

 

Short-cuts in livery and and-on details can be used to reduce the cost for 'train-set' customers and this is exactly the strategy we see from Hornby.

 

I don't expect us to see new GWR six-coupled tanks released in rapid succession but that doesn't mean we'll never see a 16xx. Meanwhile the engineering sample photographs for the 64xx look really nice.

 

 

* And yes I understand that lots of people have an enormous amount of nostalgia for these locomotives and they are great as a starting point for modifications, but they belong to the toy-shop era.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yes, once again, I can agree with most of that. However....

 

A limited run of, say, 500 16xx's will undoubtedly sell, and quickly. However, we're in a forum thread, talking about mass produced r-t-r. If someone like Kernow (for instance) commission a 16xx, then I'm in for that, twice over. But, taking the marketing stance here, I will refer you to my earlier post, namely that it would be a bold move to produce a very similar (at least, to Joe Public) steam locomotive to one which you also currently produce, especially if you are not using commission capital to fund the project.

 

There's nothing to stop Hornby picking it up. Given their track record (pun intended), would you want them to? Actually, now I've written that, I would like to see another of the larger 3 producers going for it. At least it will go a long way to getting them out of the 'toy' rut they seem to currently endure.

 

Who knows? Perhaps even Heljan....

 

Regards,

Ian

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

However....A limited run of, say, 500 16xx's will undoubtedly sell, and quickly. However, we're in a forum thread, talking about mass produced r-t-r. If someone like Kernow (for instance) commission a 16xx, then I'm in for that, twice over.

Yes please!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Short-cuts in livery and and-on details can be used to reduce the cost for 'train-set' customers and this is exactly the strategy we see from Hornby.

 

Not perhaps for a Bachmann thread, but I wish Hornby would stop mixing "high-fi" and "low-fi" items in the same train set, particularly when it's not clear what you're getting until you actually see what's in the box. I would have thought lower priced Railroad branded train sets with only Railroad items in them would be a good way of encouraging newcomers to the hobby.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

How about a Rhymney Railway 0-6-2T or two? Several classes of these had the same wheelbase as the GWR 56xx 0-6-2T (or rather it's the other way around as they came first) so only a new body would be required.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • RMweb Premium

In the Jan 2014 Model Rail magazine page 9 I read that "Bachmann has revised the specification of its forthcoming 00 gauge GWR 64xx 0-6-0PT. The model will have a 6 pin DCC socket rather than the 8 pin socket previously advertised".

 

I saw that and wondered why, when the current 57xx/8750 panniers have 8-pin sockets. No big deal; Bachmann's latest 6-pin decoder is fine for my needs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are about a year away from this little gem hitting the outlets. I know I want 2 at least.

 

If they come with detachable top feed, then I come with detachable pound notes, to relieve Bachmann of their burden....

 

Ian

But it isn't just the top feed that needs removing if you are in the pre-war period.  Also the pipework along the tops of the panniers and down the rear sides.  It would be nearly impossible to make that as separately fitted. items.  It would be nice to have a pannier in pre-war condition and let the post war modellers add the top feed and pipework.  But pre war modellers are in a minority.

 

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be stretching the point but as a modeller of a South Wales valley line I'd also like to see an 0-6-2T in rtr, but of the Crewe variety - the coal tank.

 

that said, looking forward to the 64xx as it was the motive power for the Lewis School auto train from Pontypool Crane Street to Hengoed.

regards

 

 

How about a Rhymney Railway 0-6-2T or two? Several classes of these had the same wheelbase as the GWR 56xx 0-6-2T (or rather it's the other way around as they came first) so only a new body would be required.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

But it isn't just the top feed that needs removing if you are in the pre-war period.  Also the pipework along the tops of the panniers and down the rear sides.  It would be nearly impossible to make that as separately fitted. items.  It would be nice to have a pannier in pre-war condition and let the post war modellers add the top feed and pipework.  But pre war modellers are in a minority.

 

Mike

I agree Mike, but I've got photos of 6425, which show a late liveried 64, without top feed. Not all of the smaller panniers had top feed....

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

This may be stretching the point but as a modeller of a South Wales valley line I'd also like to see an 0-6-2T in rtr, but of the Crewe variety - the coal tank.

 

that said, looking forward to the 64xx as it was the motive power for the Lewis School auto train from Pontypool Crane Street to Hengoed.

regards

I'd like a coal tank as well. I've seen photos of them on Abercynon shed, when BR lent some to a colliery. I've posted about this on the DJM pages, as I reckon it would work across 3 major scales. We can only hope....

 

Ian

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...