Bachmann Peppercorn A2

[atom3624]

Thanks for keeping this thread alive - just reminded me - I received some 8- and 21-pin blanking plates this last week and have now removed the DCC chip and inserted and tested with the blanking plate - works perfectly now.

 

Al.

[Captain_Mumbles]

I missed the train on these when they came out.

 

I managed to find one near me 2nd hand.

A very beautiful locomotive even in 2022

Edited November 21, 2022 by Captain_Mumbles

[No Decorum]

On 21/11/2022 at 07:25, Captain_Mumbles said:

I missed the train on these when they came out.

 

I managed to find one near me 2nd hand.

A very beautiful locomotive even in 2022

Absolutely.

 

[G-BOAF]

the ARE fine models, except for:

lack of bearings on wheels (and square axle cutouts - even worse than the round ones on the A1)

over-sized washout plugs on the firebox

Centre Cylinder front end set too far back.

 

I do hope Bachmann tweak these in due course, and also add tender pickups.

 

[No Decorum]

5 minutes ago, G-BOAF said:

the ARE fine models, except for:

lack of bearings on wheels (and square axle cutouts - even worse than the round ones on the A1)

over-sized washout plugs on the firebox

Centre Cylinder front end set too far back.

 

I do hope Bachmann tweak these in due course, and also add tender pickups.

 

The way things are going, Bachmann probably won’t update these – I hope not. Bachmann has been keen on updating diesels but has shown a reluctance to update steamers, even going so far as to cancel an updated Parallel Scot. The reaction to the recent update of the V2 has probably not encouraged retooling. The announcements of the V1 and V3 show an updated chassis under the existing body, which is likely to be the future pattern. A revised body tooling would be nice but I would far rather Bachmann put its effort into producing things which haven’t been produced in RTR before. It isn’t as if there are only obscure classes of steamers to model – there are plenty of prominent types.

[micklner]

20 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

The way things are going, Bachmann probably won’t update these – I hope not. Bachmann has been keen on updating diesels but has shown a reluctance to update steamers, even going so far as to cancel an updated Parallel Scot. The reaction to the recent update of the V2 has probably not encouraged retooling. The announcements of the V1 and V3 show an updated chassis under the existing body, which is likely to be the future pattern. A revised body tooling would be nice but I would far rather Bachmann put its effort into producing things which haven’t been produced in RTR before. It isn’t as if there are only obscure classes of steamers to model – there are plenty of prominent types.

The V1/V3 is just another re release, the chassis was already done about ten years ago.

[No Decorum]

2 hours ago, micklner said:

The V1/V3 is just another re release, the chassis was already done about ten years ago.

Sorry for my confusion. The V1 I have isn’t DCC ready. I passed over the more recent releases because they weren’t in LNER livery. With two LNER versions emerging, I got too excited.

[G-BOAF]

3 hours ago, No Decorum said:

The way things are going, Bachmann probably won’t update these – I hope not. Bachmann has been keen on updating diesels but has shown a reluctance to update steamers, even going so far as to cancel an updated Parallel Scot. The reaction to the recent update of the V2 has probably not encouraged retooling. The announcements of the V1 and V3 show an updated chassis under the existing body, which is likely to be the future pattern. A revised body tooling would be nice but I would far rather Bachmann put its effort into producing things which haven’t been produced in RTR before. It isn’t as if there are only obscure classes of steamers to model – there are plenty of prominent types.

The reaction to the V2 is because they have tried to be too innovative (loco-tender cam and electrical connection) and because of some silly errors in design and production (smokebox door ring, cab front flashing and LNER decoration to name but two). Otherwise it could have been a very fine model, up there with the best.

Edited November 22, 2022 by G-BOAF

[MikeParkin65]

4 hours ago, G-BOAF said:

the ARE fine models, except for:

lack of bearings on wheels (and square axle cutouts - even worse than the round ones on the A1)

 

 

Agree it appears to be penny-pinching to not provide bearings for the driving axles, it doesnt feel right. But I've got a couple of A1's, an A2 and also 9F's, all several years old and well used on a layout that allows for extended periods of running (a circle!) and I've yet to see any negative consequence of the 'square' bearings in any of them. In  fact all are sweet and silent runners.

 

If and when problems arise I'll have to look at a fix (Comet chassis?, a replacement chassis from Bachmann? , some 'botchery' masquerading as engineering etc).

 

I dont get the impression though that the 'square axle cutouts' are proving a problem in the real world - in fact a few days ago @Tony Wrightwas showing one he runs on Little Bytham - thats a much bigger 'circle' than most of us have!

[G-BOAF]

1 hour ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Agree it appears to be penny-pinching to not provide bearings for the driving axles, it doesnt feel right. But I've got a couple of A1's, an A2 and also 9F's, all several years old and well used on a layout that allows for extended periods of running (a circle!) and I've yet to see any negative consequence of the 'square' bearings in any of them. In  fact all are sweet and silent runners.

 

If and when problems arise I'll have to look at a fix (Comet chassis?, a replacement chassis from Bachmann? , some 'botchery' masquerading as engineering etc).

 

I dont get the impression though that the 'square axle cutouts' are proving a problem in the real world - in fact a few days ago @Tony Wrightwas showing one he runs on Little Bytham - thats a much bigger 'circle' than most of us have!

 

the interfaces are generally finer with bearings. This might be weird by psycologically I like the idea I can run a loco indefinitely (even with additional weight), and if mechanical wear occurs, drop in a replacement set of wheels and everything is returned to factory interfaces. Hornby have been doing it since the 1990s (even the last iteration of the tender drive A1/A3/A4 around 1998 had bearings on their drivers)...

OK the Hornby main drive DOES run directly onto the chassis, but easier to ream and fit a bearing if required in future, AND even this part is better protected from a wear perspective as its often caked in thick grease which is not an option for the wheels.

[NZRedBaron]

Hope no one minds if I bring this back, but I recently got two A2's second hand (A H Peppercorn and Sugar Palm, both in LNER livery); and I'm baffled about how to connect the tenders to the engines- the posts under the tender for the drawbar both seem way too short to hold onto the drawbar.

[John Tomlinson]

57 minutes ago, NZRedBaron said:

Hope no one minds if I bring this back, but I recently got two A2's second hand (A H Peppercorn and Sugar Palm, both in LNER livery); and I'm baffled about how to connect the tenders to the engines- the posts under the tender for the drawbar both seem way too short to hold onto the drawbar.

 

IIRC the drawbar goes through a space in the lower front of the tender, so that it is roughly horizontal when attached. It is a fiddle to connect. It doesn't go under all the tender front.

 

John.

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, John Tomlinson said:

 

IIRC the drawbar goes through a space in the lower front of the tender, so that it is roughly horizontal when attached. It is a fiddle to connect. It doesn't go under all the tender front.

 

John.

 

Bachmann tenders are always a fiddle to couple-up. The peg is JUST long enough to engage in the hole in the drawbar, and has a sloping end to enable the drawbar to be forced over it.

 

The drawbar is poked through the hole in the tender bufferbeam, then angled such that it will JUST slide over the peg.

 

When the peg enters the hole in the drawbar, the loco and tender can be aligned, ready for placing on the track. This must be done carefully, or the drawbar will disengage from the peg; (B*GGER)!!

 

Simples (NOT)!!

 

CJI.

[Dominion]

It is a bit fiddley but I prefer it to the complex recent “dynamic” types.

If you bought them second had it is possible the draw bar has been bent downwards and perhaps that is preventing it from engaging properly.

As-new the draw bars are straight.

If you do need to straighten yours it can be removed from the loco by loosening the rear mounting screws and creating a small gap between the loco body and chassis.

[John Tomlinson]

12 minutes ago, Dominion said:

It is a bit fiddley but I prefer it to the complex recent “dynamic” types.

If you bought them second had it is possible the draw bar has been bent downwards and perhaps that is preventing it from engaging properly.

As-new the draw bars are straight.

If you do need to straighten yours it can be removed from the loco by loosening the rear mounting screws and creating a small gap between the loco body and chassis.

 

On some of my Bachmann locos I've bent the far end of the drawbar down a tiny bit to make the engagement with the pin a bit easier. On some locos, the Jubilee IIRC for one, it is quite easy to crack the lower tender front piece, that sits below the drawbar, if this isn't done.

 

As you imply, this has to be done very carefully, as too much bend means it won't engage at all.

 

John.

[No Decorum]

One of my Jubilees was spontaneously uncoupling from its tender and towing the tender along by the wires only, in spite of my layout having no inclines. Fortunately, the wires came to no harm and I solved the problem by bending the drawbar slightly upwards. Another problem which can arise is the nut which holds the screw of the adjustable drawbar in place. This can come out of its seating. Provided it is still rattling around inside the tender, it can be glued back into place, taking care not to glue up the thread.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

1 hour ago, John Tomlinson said:

On some of my Bachmann locos I've bent the far end of the drawbar down a tiny bit to make the engagement with the pin a bit easier.

I suspect most owners of Bachmann steam tender locos have fiddled around with the simple drawbar and peg under the tender job. Most of mine have had the peg removed, and a hole drilled to take a suitably postioned self tapper. (Sometimes this requires the screw secured tender weight to be released so that the self tapper can engage properly.)

 

It would be good if they got around to upgrading earlier models using the more recent  drawbar engaging a longer peg on a screw locked slide arrangement, best thing of its type in RTR OO - which was sadly not employed on the new V2.

On 22/11/2022 at 14:32, MikeParkin65 said:

I've got a couple of A1's, an A2 and also 9F's, all several years old and well used on a layout that allows for extended periods of running (a circle!) and I've yet to see any negative consequence of the 'square' bearings in any of them.

Same here. Something that is possible is to fill the well between the square axle locators with cast in place whitemetal (from old K's kit parts received too mangled to ever make a good model). I did this experimentally on an A1 and WD 2-8-0 over 20 years ago after upweighting them. No discernable benefit compared to the untreated mechanisms, also upweighted .

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On 22/10/2011 at 13:10, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

it is my determined plan to hold off for the Kylchap fitted Happy Knight, Bronzino and Velocity...

Stiil holding off Bachmann, you have only taken 33.3% of the cash on offer...