Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[south_tyne]

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if another manufacturer decides that the time's just right for a definitive 14xx.

I cannot see another manufacturer going near it for a long time now. Unless I suppose Hornby simply upgraded the chassis of the ex-Dapol example.

 

There is of course the O gauge version to come from Dapol due over the coming months... I think that will be THE definitive version! (maybe too large for this discussion though! )

[ROSSPOP]

There is of course the O gauge version to come from Dapol due over the coming months... I think that will be THE definitive version! (maybe too large for this discussion though! )

 

Nah !!!

 

THE definitive version already exists, but you do need to build it.............      

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers

Edited August 18, 2018 by ROSSPOP

[melmerby]

You'll hear me banging on about topfeed. I'm sorry. It arrived in the early thirties, and was indeed an advance in boiler management. However, nothing defines an era more forcibly than this. It limits the last 10 years of the Western, and puts your locomotive choice fairly & squarely into that bracket. Little wonder, therefore, that I'll always mumble about the Baccy pannier, and Hornby shoving the blessed thing onto your pride & joy....Whether you like it or not.

 

Happy modelling,

 

Ian.

Are you talking about the 48XX specifically or the GWR generally?

 

If generally, topfeed started to appear around 1910-12 and many classes built after that date had it as standard, earlier engines were retrofitted over the years.

 

Keith

[coachmann]

One of my DJM's had a duff motor. I suspect it got burned out. Anyway I removed the motor, but the chassis was not a free runner. Brute force & ignorance was put to work yesterday and I split the chassis to remove all the intermediate gearing. Surprise-surprise, the very slack con rods do the job that con rods are intended to do and the chassis is now very free running. At least this loco is still usable if only for fake double heading.....

[Captain Kernow]

In what way is the K's kit a good runner?

It had a crap motor and the rest of it wasn't up to much.

However it was all that was available at the time.

 

My K's 14Xx runs quite happily these days, but that's because it's running with a Mashima motor on a Perseverence chassis!

 

It ran smoothly enough when it had it's K's chassis, but the ECM motor I fitted was very, very noisy and this was one of the factors that decided me to convert it to P4 a few years ago, hence the new chassis.

Edited August 18, 2018 by Captain Kernow

[Captain Kernow]

Agreed,John but why should we have to. The body on the 14xx is second to none, arguably one of the finest RTR models issued. It is therefore reasonable to expect a chassis to match. Instead we have an over complicated set of cogs and wheels for which it is a real lottery as to whether or not you get a good one.

So having spent £100 on the loco you then spend x amount of time sending them back until you get a good one, accept defeat if you don't and ask for a refund or you spend another £100 on a suitable chassis.

 

It's simply not right and it is for this reason I have not purchased these. I cannot be bothered to go through all the potential drama and hassle for this particular model.

 

I completely agree with Rob here, but the only difference is that I bought a Hattons 14Xx in the hope that I'd get a good one, but was disappointed first time around, certainly. I wasn't too sure about the replacement they sent me, but I have noticed a gradual improvement after quite a lot of running-in on a rolling road. More running-in is to follow and then I'll make the decision as to whether to either bin the chassis (or perhaps follow Coachman's example and pull it apart to see what's really going on) or, more likely, build the Perseverence chassis that I have waiting in the wings.

 

If the Hattons chassis eventually complies with my not unreasonable requests to run properly, then the Perseverence chassis can go under the old Airfix body I have.

[south_tyne]

Nah !!!

 

THE definitive version already exists, but you do need to build it.............

 

DSC04065.JPG

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_DMmFMeHic

 

 

Cheers

OK you win

[tomparryharry]

Are you talking about the 48XX specifically or the GWR generally?

 

If generally, topfeed started to appear around 1910-12 and many classes built after that date had it as standard, earlier engines were retrofitted over the years.

 

Keith

 

Hello Keith. My grimble is about 'choice'.  Not all of the panniers had top feed. Admittedly, they normally ended up with topfeed, but it was, as you say ,progressive. Some had it from new, some retrofitted. Indeed, some went to the breakers without topfeed. My humble request was choice.....My purchase was defined by choice. DJM had a large choice, Simple really. Swindon had settled on topfeed arrangements  fairly early on, so you'd always see it on a taper boiler. Parallel boilers had a bit more 'mix & match' across the classes.

 

The lack of choice resulted in my lack of purchasing a Baccy 64xx..."This is it, like it or lump it", sort of thing. Half of panniers, for instance, are well represented without topfeed, especially in earlier photos, but more common later on. However..... Rumour has it that Bachmann are re-tooling the humble pannier. Now, I'd definitely be up for one or two of the earlier flavour.....

 

Up to date.... My 48xx runs just nice. I'm pretty sure the mesh is not as we'd like it. If it goes wrong, I'll strip it down. Not yet, as it's ok. 'Tis a pity that the geartrain has thrown up some issues. I'd bet that if there were none, Dave would be up for sainthood. You can bet however that he'll get the Hudswell Clarke spot on. Next time, some brass helical gears, please, Dave...

 

Happy modelling Folks,

 

Ian..

[PMP]

The conversion to a pannier without top feed is relatively easy, be it a 57/37/87/64xx etc it’s not much more than cutting off and making good.

 

Anyway back to the 14/48xx’s

[cctransuk]

The conversion to a pannier without top feed is relatively easy, be it a 57/37/87/64xx etc it’s not much more than cutting off and making good.

7B1791C9-BC65-4F08-AD46-0A862C026625.jpeg

 

Anyway back to the 14/48xx’s

 

It never ceases to astonish me that 'modellers', who are discerning enough to bemoan the lack of their chosen variant of prototype, are unwilling to undertake even the most minor of alterations.

 

I mean, how difficult can it be to crop off a top-feed; scrape off the remains, and touch in a bit of paint???

 

No wonder the manufacturers are damned if they do - damned if they don't.

 

I despair !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited August 19, 2018 by cctransuk

[Quarryscapes]

It never ceases to astonish me that 'modellers', who are discerning enough to bemoan the lack of their chosen variant of prototype, are unwilling to undertake even the most minor of alterations.

 

I mean, how difficult can it be to crop off a top-feed; scrape of the remains, and touch in a bit of paint???

 

No wonder the manufacturers are damned if they do - damned if they don't.

 

I despair !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

It is actually pretty difficult, since the top feed is hollow (leaving a hole to be filled and shaped to match the boiler) and the pipes follow the edge of the plate that you want to keep. I wouldn't want to do another one. 

 

[Captain Kernow]

It is actually pretty difficult, since the top feed is hollow (leaving a hole to be filled and shaped to match the boiler) and the pipes follow the edge of the plate that you want to keep. I wouldn't want to do another one. 

 

_XTA8021.jpg

That's a nice job, Quarryscapes. Is that a 7mm RTR pannier, by any chance? Minerva, perhaps?

 

With regards to Paul's 4mm model of 8787, that's an equally neat and expert job and expands the possible variations you can do with a Bachmann pannier.

[PMP]

It is actually pretty difficult, since the top feed is hollow (leaving a hole to be filled and shaped to match the boiler) and the pipes follow the edge of the plate that you want to keep. I wouldn't want to do another one. 

 

I think the challenge with these is really the ‘making good’, the removal of the pipes and top feed is careful cutting, the emphasis on careful!

 

I’ve done five now, 64/57xx’s and they’re certainly time heavy to get the best finish. I find these easier than replacing the headcode box on the Bachmann 24, to make a 24/1.

 

[David Stannard]

It never ceases to astonish me that 'modellers', who are discerning enough to bemoan the lack of their chosen variant of prototype, are unwilling to undertake even the most minor of alterations.

 

I mean, how difficult can it be to crop off a top-feed; scrape off the remains, and touch in a bit of paint???

 

No wonder the manufacturers are damned if they do - damned if they don't.

 

I despair !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

It does take a bit of work but it's not too hard, I think most people have a fear of stuffing things up or breaking things in the process and therefore concede defeat before they give it a chance, or as you said there are those that will moan and groan that X or Y company doesn't make the exact model that they want.

 

 

 

Kudos to Dave in that he gave that much variety with his 14xx / 48xx and 58xx models that he satisfied pretty much everyone's needs or desires, I have one of his 58xx and it's a beautiful models which well and truly outdoes the Hornby 14xx for detail and running.

Edited August 19, 2018 by David Stannard

[Quarryscapes]

That's a nice job, Quarryscapes. Is that a 7mm RTR pannier, by any chance? Minerva, perhaps?

 

With regards to Paul's 4mm model of 8787, that's an equally neat and expert job and expands the possible variations you can do with a Bachmann pannier.

 

Mines' also Bachmann , and needs the weathering revisiting I think, though it does look worse in photos than it does in the flesh. 

[57xx]

I think the challenge with these is really the ‘making good’, the removal of the pipes and top feed is careful cutting, the emphasis on careful!

 

I’ve done five now, 64/57xx’s and they’re certainly time heavy to get the best finish. I find these easier than replacing the headcode box on the Bachmann 24, to make a 24/1.

 

55E0A63D-F4BF-4859-8C7F-194AFE1D139D.jpeg

 

Have you done any in GWR green or are they all black ones?

[PMP]

Have you done any in GWR green or are they all black ones?

Sort of, this one was GWR to start with.., I’ve not done any GWR livery, but have done a BR green one matching the green with Precision BR green. If I were doing a GW green version I’d look at the Precision colour for first match, and go from there if required. A full repaint in GWR green would be a relatively simple livery to do too.

[tomparryharry]

 

It never ceases to astonish me that 'modellers', who are discerning enough to bemoan the lack of their chosen variant of prototype, are unwilling to undertake even the most minor of alterations.

 

I mean, how difficult can it be to crop off a top-feed; scrape off the remains, and touch in a bit of paint???

 

No wonder the manufacturers are damned if they do - damned if they don't.

 

I despair !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Oh, despair away, Mr Isherwood, despair away.... Each to his own. I like watching my trains going around & around; I guess that's my prerogative. I try not to judge others too harshly: After all, you don't know me, and I don't know you. I hope we get to speak some time. It might be interesting.

 

Thank you very much for your insight, lecture & discourse.

 

Ian Smith.

It never ceases to astonish me that 'modellers', who are discerning enough to bemoan the lack of their chosen variant of prototype, are unwilling to undertake even the most minor of alterations.

 

I mean, how difficult can it be to crop off a top-feed; scrape off the remains, and touch in a bit of paint???

 

No wonder the manufacturers are damned if they do - damned if they don't.

 

I despair !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[57xx]

I have a tin of Precision GWR green and have made a start on a spare Bachmann body (one of those mis-numbered ones that appeared on ebay several years back at a silly cheap price). Was hoping just a touch up will work as it's already in the "Great Western" Livery I want.

[Captain Kernow]

Out of interest (and apologies if such a photo has already been posted on here), but has anyone who has had the top off one of the Hattons 14XXs, taken a photo, to show the space available inside the body, please?

[PMP]

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/hattons-djm-14xx-review-h1410/

 

First thoughts here Tim with pics

 

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/14xx-frustration/

Further thoughts here. Subsequently I have been pleasantly surprised however by the recent addition in this thread of film of a 14xx working without cogging downhill under load, do some of them do work well.

[Captain Kernow]

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/hattons-djm-14xx-review-h1410/

 

First thoughts here Tim with pics

 

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/14xx-frustration/

Further thoughts here. Subsequently I have been pleasantly surprised however by the recent addition in this thread of film of a 14xx working without cogging downhill under load, do some of them do work well.

Thanks Paul, very helpful.

 

One thing I've noticed already, when you remove the body and turn it upside down, is that the inside of the body seems to be full of moulded plastic bracket material and the motor and worm gear. 

 

I'm wondering how difficult this would be to remove, in order to fit an etched chassis (Perseverence in my case), plus gearbox, motor and perhaps a flywheel?

 

If it all simply unscrews or unclips, then fine. If we're looking then at a traditional 'empty' loco body shell, then there are possibilities.

 

If not, then my 14XX will have one last session on the rolling road before getting sold on.

 

Thanks.

[Porcy Mane]

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/20/14xx-frustration/

Further thoughts here. Subsequently I have been pleasantly surprised however by the recent addition in this thread of film of a 14xx working without cogging downhill under load, do some of them do work well.

 

Over the last couple of years, when our paths have crossed, P and I have discussed this cogging problem on occasion. The three (J94's) I have had through my hands have displayed similar problems

 

From your Blag

 

"It’s interesting that online comments and videos indicate no problem with the chassis on gradients under load, but apart from mine above, there are no comments or tests of this model (to date) under load, coming downhill. I find that odd, and to get a sweet running chassis in all modes of operation, I’m convinced this design isn’t where I’d be starting from…"

 

I made this yonks ago but never put it up due to low quality. It's the DJM J94 but I suspect an identical drive train, apart from two axles instead of three.

 

The meter toward the centre is measuring track voltage and the meter to the right is measuring motor current.

When pushing the load up a 1 in 30 incline current consumption remains relatively stable with the gears being in constant mesh controlling the backlash. On the down grade the loco "stutters" as the primary cog wheel bounces of the worm gear as the backlash is alternately taken up then manifests itself again. Watching the analogue portion of the ammeter the current can seen to rise and fall in time with the stuttering.

 

https://youtu.be/slM4HowKaxI

 

At the end of the video the backlash at the driving wheels is shown. This  angular backlash is increased through the gearing to be approximately 60 degrees between the motor worm wheel and primary gear cog seen here:

 

 

P

Edited August 20, 2018 by Porcy Mane

[Captain Kernow]

While I was doing some work on 'Bethesda Sidings' this afternoon, my 14XX was having some further running-in on the rolling road. To my surprise, it's almost good enough and controllable enough at slow speed, to be considered for the role I had originally envisaged for it - as 1420, working the Prestigne and Kington goods, now extended to Bethesda yard.

 

I think I'll need to tweak the pick-ups, as that seems to be a slight concern, but I'm hoping that I won't have to rip the innards our and substitute an etched chassis. I may now be able to use that chassis kit on the spare Airfix body that I have.

 

It seems reasonably controllable at slow speed now using my AMR slow-speed hand-held controller. It's still not particularly controllable using an ordinary Gaugemaster panel-mounted controller, however, but the AMR unit is what I tend to use most of the time.

[PMP]

Tim, there aren’t pick ups in the conventional sense. The pick up is via the axle bushes, both wheels fitted to central stub axles. The chassis has a plastic section which keeps both sides/poles apart.