royaloak Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 I wonder if the problem is caused by the double frame around the windows? The windows have the correct silver surround (albeit making the windows too small) but the bodyshell also has an incorrect blue frame as well, if the bodyside framing was painted silver and the (silver) window frames were cleaned up it would probably look okay as the windows would appear bigger and the windows would then be lower than the door windows. The review pictures do look better than the earlier pictures! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 31A Posted June 4, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 4, 2014 I wonder if the problem is caused by the double frame around the windows? The windows have the correct silver surround (albeit making the windows too small) but the bodyshell also has an incorrect blue frame as well, if the bodyside framing was painted silver and the (silver) window frames were cleaned up it would probably look okay as the windows would appear bigger and the windows would then be lower than the door windows. The review pictures do look better than the earlier pictures! I agree, it does look like that and perhaps if they had modelled the glazing in a similar way to the Derby Lightweight model (for example), where only the ventilator bars are represented on the clear plastic, the problem wouldn't have arisen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 The model features Driving Motor Brake Second E51217 and Driving Trailer Second (Lavatory) E54364 as allocated to Norwich in the late 1980s toward the end of its life. It's important to bear in mind there are variations within the corporate blue/grey livery dependent on which works carried out any refurbishment and/or livery work. As numbered and from that era the livery as applied is marginally incorrect with a large double arrow and a grey panel with white lining which extends below the line of the door bump stops - an image showing the unit numbered is here https://flic.kr/p/im5FW2 whereas the livery is correct for a differently numbered Norwich unit as shown here http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/dmu/h924A67B#h924a67b - I must address this point I'd made earlier as it's incorrect after discussing it with Bachmann as the prototype pictured in the link was E54346 not E54364. Bachmann do have a picture showing E54364 in the livery as modelled. There is a pic here E51217 which shows the livery, as modelled, appearing on the DMBS and, between the grafitti, the door stops can be seen above the white lining so my apologies to Bachmann for that error. Therefore no renumbering is needed and the livery is correct as per that specifically numbered prototype. The motor bogie assembly is visible towards the centre Having looked at the unit closely again last night I'd like to clarify that the motor is visible through the door/vestibule windows adjacent to the guard's compartment and does not intrude into the seating area. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaneofFife Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 picking up on an earlier comment about making a silk purse from a sows ear. whilst that is the free world view of an independent 3rd party i doubt its a view (if the basics are let down but the owner lavishes nice detailing parts on to try and make the best of it) that that modeller would give two hoots about. its their model not someone elses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BR(S) Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 I must address this point I'd made earlier as it's incorrect after discussing it with Bachmann as the prototype pictured in the link was E54346 not E54364. Bachmann do have a picture showing E54364 in the livery as modelled. There is a pic here E51217 which shows the livery, as modelled, appearing on the DMBS and, between the grafitti, the door stops can be seen above the white lining so my apologies to Bachmann for that error. Therefore no renumbering is needed and the livery is correct as per that specifically numbered prototype. E54364, side on view: https://flic.kr/p/nwJKzv E51217, side on view: https://flic.kr/p/nMb981 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark54 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Sorry Mark, i don't agree. Have a look at a Met-Cam in 1970s White/Blue livery, this gives a more obvious contrast. All the door windows should be more shallow and not line up at the bottom with the main side windows, there should be an equal gap at the top and at the bottom of at least 3 inches/1mm. The front cab windows should be at the same height as the main side windows, Bachmann's windows don't line up, so either the cab windows are too low, or the main side windows are too high, or both are slightly wrong? We don't hear much of the previously much-heralded laser scanning equipment these days, but surely they ran a ruler over one of the many preserved 101 units, rather than just rely on drawings? BK Brian, I agree exactly with what you are saying. When you say too deep, you mean too low down the bodyside. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark54 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 I wonder if the problem is caused by the double frame around the windows? The windows have the correct silver surround (albeit making the windows too small) but the bodyshell also has an incorrect blue frame as well, if the bodyside framing was painted silver and the (silver) window frames were cleaned up it would probably look okay as the windows would appear bigger and the windows would then be lower than the door windows. The review pictures do look better than the earlier pictures! The raised frame on the bodyside is portraying the rubber seal that the alloy window frames were mounted in (although it is moulded a little over scale by Bachmann). They should therefore be coloured black in most liveries. However later on in their lives the rubber seal would often be painted body colour as in the link that AY gave of a 2 car unit at Norwich in the mid-1980s. In blue/grey livery, the effect of painting the rubber seals makes the windows appear shallower. With the seals unpainted, it makes the windows appear deeper. https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/5897377115/ Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taigatrommel Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Don't forget, I started by stating that this was a demonstration of differing priorities, rather than that either view is "right". To each their own, and may they be happy with it. picking up on an earlier comment about making a silk purse from a sows ear. whilst that is the free world view of an independent 3rd party i doubt its a view (if the basics are let down but the owner lavishes nice detailing parts on to try and make the best of it) that that modeller would give two hoots about. its their model not someone elses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 The raised frame on the bodyside is portraying the rubber seal that the alloy window frames were mounted in (although it is moulded a little over scale by Bachmann). They should therefore be coloured black in most liveries. However later on in their lives the rubber seal would often be painted body colour as in the link that AY gave of a 2 car unit at Norwich in the mid-1980s. In blue/grey livery, the effect of painting the rubber seals makes the windows appear shallower. With the seals unpainted, it makes the windows appear deeper. https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/5897377115/ Mark Fair point but as modelled the bit that should be black would be about 4 inches thick (just by looking at the pictures) which is way too thick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 I shall be rendering one of these in due course, starting with one of my Limby twins. Dateline ...............back in the Summer of '69. http://www.railbrit.co.uk/imageenlarge/imagecomplete.php?id=26239 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted June 8, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2014 Fair point but as modelled the bit that should be black would be about 4 inches thick (just by looking at the pictures) which is way too thick. Perhaps a consequence of scaling up from the N gauge model? Maybe the seals couldn't be to scale in N for tooling reasons and in scaling up to OO they weren't reduced in thickness? Whatever, having now seen the BR blue unit review in Model Rail, I agree with those who have said the way of hiding it and making the windows look better next would be to paint the aluminium frame onto the rubber seals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DropTheTap Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Perhaps a consequence of scaling up from the N gauge model? Maybe the seals couldn't be to scale in N for tooling reasons and in scaling up to OO they weren't reduced in thickness? Whatever, having now seen the BR blue unit review in Model Rail, I agree with those who have said the way of hiding it and making the windows look better next would be to paint the aluminium frame onto the rubber seals. They really did this?? Seems very difficult to believe: the potential for magnifying a tiny, insignificant error in the smaller scale through upscaling carries *much* greater risk than anything that could possibly be introduced if downscaling OO to N (I can see the logic in this). When I worked in a (BR, ironically) drawing office years ago, we would often "downscale" drawings, albeit with many cross references. However "upscaling" required a complete re- draw from supplied or checked dimensions. It's just not good engineering practice due to the inherent risks of introducing a dimensional error. It's the blue/ grey livery I need to see. From initial observations, the window issue looks worse wearing these colours. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted June 9, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 9, 2014 They really did this??. I've no idea, but it seems unlikely they'd start again from scratch. I understood although I may be wrong that Bachmann started from the N gauge CADs rather than start completely afresh from the original drawings etc. and it might explain why the error occurred. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Adam1701D Posted June 9, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 9, 2014 I've upscaled a few of my vinyls from N to OO and they have all required massive re-working and extra detail adding. Downscaling from N to T is another matter altogether... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rembrow Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Bachmann announced the rrp for the Class 101's yesterday via their website, it will be £149.95, which is £5 more than the Derby Lightweight, which is about the same differential as the price before the recent rises. Still not showing on the 60day list. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard w Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 It looks good enough to me and should sit well with my existing 108s. I'll be spraying it into NSE and will also attempt to change the destination blinds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted June 25, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 25, 2014 It looks good enough to me and should sit well with my existing 108s. I'll be spraying it into NSE and will also attempt to change the destination blinds. Don't forget you'll want the Blue/Grey version to repaint; the earlier versions/liveries don't have the rain strip along the full length of the vehicles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Bachmann announced the rrp for the Class 101's yesterday via their website, it will be £149.95 ... That makes my £96 pre-order look like a bargain... Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesthecat Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 According to the Bachmann website the first 101 is now at Barwell. (All over blue version)! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rembrow Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Now showing as 'in stock' by Kernow. Must have been delivered with the C Class locos. Where are the green uns? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted June 27, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 27, 2014 Blue one instock tomorrow from Rails.Invitation to pre-order....but no price tag to date! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Blue one instock tomorrow from Rails.Invitation to pre-order....but no price tag to date! £127.46 is what they told me. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Blue one instock tomorrow from Rails.Invitation to pre-order....but no price tag to date! Just scroll up this page a little to here. RRP is £149.95, so it's going to be no more than that... Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 £127.46 is what they told me. Bernard Sounds about right £149.95 - 15%, oddly Kernow make the same calculation as coming out at £127.99. Of course theres p&p to add and with prices getting so high its probably well worth looking what else Kernow have that you want as they are post free over £150. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lymer Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 £127.46 is what they told me. Bernard Hatton's have altered their price to £127.46 for these, glad I ordered mine last week when I noticed price was still at £110.46 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.