101 Bachmann Vs Hornby/Lima

[Derekstuart]

Hi all

 

I can find plenty of posts about the Bachmann 101 and also about the Hornby/Lima 101, but nothing comparing the two.

 

I took if for granted that Bachmann was infallible in everything it does (I have been out of this for over 20 years) and that Lima/Hornby were no better than toy makers. However, it seems that things have changed since 1990something.

 

I read that the Bachmann 101 has incorrectly proportioned windows (door drop lights?) I know the Bachmann has the superior running and has a more detailed under frame, but does this window issue spoil the look? I must admit that I hadn't even spotted it, but now that I know... Also the Lima version has a centre car and Bachmann have not yet announced one let alone started its inevitable several year development. I am not bothered about wheels (Ultrascale replacement) and DCC readiness (a 3 year build project- I've a long way to go before I'm ready for that).

 

Question is- what is more acceptable to the eye- the Bachmann with it's incorrectly aligned windows or the Hornby with it's mk3-like under frame? Because of the layout area under development (North Eastern) I expect to buy several of these and would rather make the right choice to start with.

 

No doubt this has already been discussed, so if anyone could point me to the right thread to read/ask then I would appreciate it. I don't know if my search terminology was wrong but I couldn't find anyone directly comparing the two and I would be surprised if this has not happened.

 

Many thanks
Derek

 

['CHARD]

The key stuff is probably covered in here:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78974-decorated-samples-of-class-101/

[Derekstuart]

Thank you, you're a gent.

 

I had found this thread already and although it doesn't answer my question directly, I think it points in the general direction. I think the dodgy under frame is less noticeable than the dodgy Bachmann body.

 

It's one of the things about this forum- it's got so many threads in it and each one can have so many pages that it is like trying to find a piece of hay in a big stack of needles. So much information but you have to hunt for specific things.

 

Cheers.
Derek

[Bernard Lamb]

Thank you, you're a gent.

 

I had found this thread already and although it doesn't answer my question directly, I think it points in the general direction. I think the dodgy under frame is less noticeable than the dodgy Bachmann body.

 

Cheers.

Derek

That depends to some extent by your understanding of dodgy.

What period are you modelling?

Hornby/Lima is only suitable for a refurb. version.

Unless you want to have a go at the rain strips. 

Bernard

[Derekstuart]

Hello Bernard

 

Perhaps my use of the word "dodgy" was an unfortunate choice.

 

I think everyone is already aware of the shortcomings in each of the models. By chance I have just found a local shop that has both in stock- so I can go and decide for myself.

 

As for era- blue/grey.

 

As an aside (and I know others have commented the same principle with other models) I still think the Hornby 110 makes for a good representation even if it isn't as detailed and sits alongside the Bachmann 105 quite well. Oddly I think the 110 captures its look better than the 105. But that's personal opinion.

[BR(S)]

Always a good idea to see one in-the-flesh.  While constructive criticism on a forum can be both interesting and useful, it can also focus attention away from the overall model.  I was aware of the door window issue from the RMweb thread linked to above, but when I saw the 101 in the cabinet at Peterborough a few weeks ago I liked what I saw and the door windows didn't draw my focus at all.

 

I've just added these few pics of my newly acquired one to the 101 thread:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bernard Lamb]

 

 

I think everyone is already aware of the shortcomings in each of the models. By chance I have just found a local shop that has both in stock- so I can go and decide for myself.

 

As for era- blue/grey.

 

 

That makes the decision more difficult.

The electrical coupling might swing the balance if you use DCC

But see previous comments about it being too long.

Bernard

[Derekstuart]

BR(S) I think you make a very valid point there- it is easy to study the bark and forget the tree, let alone the forest. I have to admit that I wouldn't have spotted it myself had it not been for reading about it on the web. It certainly doesn't detract from the overall appearance when you see it on a layout- especially on such a quality layout.

 

Bernard, I am using normal DC for the moment. I have a bit of a way to go yet before I'm ready to move up to DCC. At the moment I am just acquiring a few items to use to test my track building skills really- and as when I'm finished building, 101's will be the main item, it seems natural to start with one. I think that once I can get a WD280, class 40 and then a longer bogie vehicle such as the 101 to all run through without problems then I know I'm somewhere there.... though I draw the line at getting a Pacer through.

 

Thanks again for the guidance. I have to say that the knowledge here is as wise as it is in depth. I cannot believe how much I have learned in a little over a month. I have become a historian/archaeologist, an architect, a map maker, 3d modeller, electronics engineer all in one. It is important to me to get this right and I really value people's comments.

 

Derek

[Derekstuart]

I thought those who kindly responded to my question might like to know that I bought the Bachmann version today.

 

I can see why there was some criticism on here of the windows, but seen in person it isn't as bad as I expected.

 

But I have to say that I was also impressed by the Hornby/ Lima version.

 

The decider was quite frankly that they had the b/g version in stock from Bachmann and only the Strathclyde Hornby/Lima version. To take such an old model and have it compare so well to a much newer one is a credit to Lima. Also the sprung buffers did help.

 

Thanks all for advice.