Hornby Mk2e coaches

[MJI]

I'd rather see the 2e next to a Bachmann Mk2 to check the tumblehome. Remember most of us see our trains from above. Only scale worms see rolling stock from this angle. Weathering may help.

 

Am I correct in saying that early days air con stock had darker windows? I remember as a boy my first mk2 ac trip on the east coast on a dull day. I could hardly see out! Did they replace the windows with lighter shaded ones as time went by? 

 

 

Aircons normally work with other aircons, a Mk 1 buffet and a BG.

 

However had a Mk1 FO once in a air con train.

 

Usually within type but DEF s were mixed on the WR and MR

[YK 50A]

Hi,

 

I've been following the thread with interest, but the above is a bit over simplistic.  It was train air brakes and in most cases ETH and 100mph footwear that were important.

 

I can't claim to be an expert with other regions (or any region), but Mk2Ds and Mk2Fs were mixed up on the ECML.  Also, it wasn't unusual to see 2 catering cars (for example, an RB adjacent to 2nd class and an RU adjacent to 1st class) or an RB or RKB with a Mk1 RUO.  Further, there are plenty of pictures around with more than 1 BG, and although there was clearly an effort to keep aircon stock together, an earlier Mk2 BSO, BFK, TSO or FK was often seen in an otherwise aircon rake.

 

Deltics and Generator class 47s couldn't power the motor alternator sets on Mk2Es, but they were used on the ER, interregional trains from circa 1980 with 45/1s, class 47/4 conversions and class 50s.

 

All the best,

 

Alun

 

*** EDIT - I see the typos after I hit the post button! ***

Edited November 15, 2014 by alunhughes

[Redford73]

On a related topic has anyone seen the Railroad MK2es (images or otherwise)?  What are the reductions in quality?  Have they used inferior MK2e moulds or just the old MK2d moulds?  Are the bogies/couplings different?

[andyman7]

OK, so here are some pictures of the new Railroad Mk2E FO (on the right) next to a Hornby issue ex-Airfix/Dapol Mk2D. The Mk2D (which is actually incorrectly numbered by Hornby as a Mk2E) has a higher standard of decoration but the new model acquits itself well - the windows are actually much nicer. The tint matches between the two. The solebar issue mentioned above isn't particularly noticeable and the coach certainly doesn't ride any higher. There is no rib detail on the roof, which I think is better than any moulded rib as that will always be overscale compared to the subtle panel joins in real life.

 

 

 

I've only got the FO but I presume that the divide between the blue and the grey must be slightly lower on the SO and BSO as it looks right on this one but wrong on the pictures I've seen of those - and I'm assuming the windows are moulded at the same height! 

Edited November 15, 2014 by andyman7

[andyman7]

Hi,

 

I've been following the thread with interest, but the above is a bit over simplistic.  It was train air brakes and in most cases ETH and 100mph footwear that were important.

 

I can't claim to be an expert with other regions (or any region), but Mk2Ds and Mk2Fs were mixed up on the ECML.  Also, it wasn't unusual to see 2 catering cars (for example, an RB adjacent to 2nd class and an RU adjacent to 1st class) or an RB or RKB with a Mk1 RUO.  Further, there are plenty of pictures around with more than 1 BG, and although there was clearly an effort to keep aircon stock together, the occasional earlier Mk2 BSO, BFK, TSO or FK.

 

Deltics and Generator class 47s couldn't be power the motor alternator sets on Mk2Es, but they were seen on the ER, used on interregional trains from circa 1980 with 45/1s, class 47/4 conversions and class 50s.

 

All the best,

 

Alun

 

Adding to Alun's post, I recall in the late 70s the WCML sets were all Mk2Fs but certainly on cross-country and WR sets, Mk2Ds and Es were marshalled in the same sets. 

[ifitlooksright]

Mk2e definitely the best so far but go for metal wheels and printed details. Be prepared to paint a thicker blue line above windows. Paint pen?

[MJI]

I see no reason to retire my 4 2E TSOs nor to not complete number 5, not enough gain.

 

For less I can Extreme etch them. And tidy up the joins!

[Brian Kirby]

I've worked out an initial fix for this 1mm fictitious solebar problem, it involves cutting back the interior, and also cutting off the end vestibules of the chassis with the buffers and steps, so not for the squeamish. We shouldn't need to do this, but whatever the cure, it mustn't take up too much precious time either, especially if converting a whole rake. I'll do some pics later this afternoon.           BK

[jonathan452]

Aircons normally work with other aircons, a Mk 1 buffet and a BG.

 

However had a Mk1 FO once in a air con train.

 

Usually within type but DEF s were mixed on the WR and MR

Not forgetting that Mk2 air cons were also mixed up with Mk3a's on the WCML until the advent of fixed formation sets in the mid to late eighties.

 

Also many an occasion where a Mk2a/2b/2c vehicle was used to substitute for a non avaliable air con, as well as being used as 'strengtheners'.

Edited November 16, 2014 by jonathan452

[Brian Kirby]

Using a Railroad 2E TSO as a guinea pig, i've unclipped the body from the chassis, and removed the interior. Next i've cut off the end vestibules of the interior, then cut across the chassis at the inside of the end steps at each end.

 

 

These chassis ends, complete with steps and buffers, are attached to the body and glued in, part of that "1mm solebar" can also be removed from under the steps. The pics show how the end sections are already at the correct height. The cut-off ends of interior can be re-attached, but their tops will need cropping, as will the main interior around the toilets, to allow for their 1mm higher position.

 

 

The main section of interior was slightly banana-shaped and is only held by one centre screw, so with a bit of effort, can be straightened out and glued to the chassis, along with the single screw. I did away with the central body and floor clips, and modified the end corner clips, which can be retained. Here's a little dodge to improve the look of the door windows, i've just applied black ink to the moulded insert which represents the pushbar, i may add a new silver line above the black to represent the new higher position, this avoids any physical alteration. More to follow . .. . .  BK

 

[MJI]

I am a bit fed up of filing the Airfix window apertures to fit Laserglaze, the BFK is a pain and two door windows are missing

 

FK is ready for paint

 

How good are the 2E frames compared to Airfix Lima and Extreme Etching?

[Brian Kirby]

Here's the main chassis and interior ready to be re-inserted into the body.

 

 

These pics show the body in it's one millimetre lowered position, the 1mm solebar has disappeared behind the body side. As supplied, these RR versions with black plastic wheels have a buffer height from rail of 14mm, which is a fraction over at 3'6", nominal buffer height should be 3'5.5" or lower, but it's near enough. This chassis mod has reduced the buffer height to 13mm (3'3"), which again is not too bad, i could add some packing between chassis and bogies, but only after i've changed the wheels to 12mm (Bachmann 36-034) and re-checked the buffer height. I've already changed the couplings to Bachmann and shortened them for close-coupling.

 

                                                                               Cheers, Brian.

 

[Brian Kirby]

I am a bit fed up of filing the Airfix window apertures to fit Laserglaze, the BFK is a pain and two door windows are missing

 

FK is ready for paint

 

How good are the 2E frames compared to Airfix Lima and Extreme Etching?

I only ever used two packs of Laserglaze as an experiment, i too found the filing tedious (necessary to avoid brittle Lima shells splitting), so i went back to cutting my own by hand, saving a fortune at the same time. I didn't like the thickness of the window inserts either. I can't comment on the etched frames, since i've never used them, i just glazed the albeit slightly oversize Airfix outer frames.     BK  (BTW, one eye on RMweb, one eye on War Horse film at mo.)

[ifitlooksright]

Take a look at this and tell me if you can see the bottom of the tumblehome?

 

 

"Mk2 colbert" by Original uploader was Dawgz at en.wikipedia - Transferred from en.wikipedia; Transfer was stated to be made by User:oxyman.. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mk2_colbert.JPG#mediaviewer/File:Mk2_colbert.JPG

[Bob Reid]

Yes, why?

[ifitlooksright]

Yes, why?

Just think it might be worthwhile getting some weathering on the coaches before hacking them?  I agree the solebar is an own goal for Hornby as is the livery, probably the lighting too but otherwise no roof ribs, good windows, scale gangways. Remember that we mostly observe from 2ft or more when actually running trains.

[Bob Reid]

Thanks.  For me though the modifications that Brian has done have altered the whole look of the thing making all the difference.  In theory that should make them look better whether viewed from eye level or from above.

[MJI]

I only ever used two packs of Laserglaze as an experiment, i too found the filing tedious (necessary to avoid brittle Lima shells splitting), so i went back to cutting my own by hand, saving a fortune at the same time. I didn't like the thickness of the window inserts either. I can't comment on the etched frames, since i've never used them, i just glazed the albeit slightly oversize Airfix outer frames.     BK  (BTW, one eye on RMweb, one eye on War Horse film at mo.)

 

 

Wasn't too bad for my 116 but the 2DEFs seem to be quite easy.

 

Will sort the main appearance missmatches with Lima 2Fs as well

[jonathan452]

FYI - Saw this letter in today's MREMag

 

Hornby Mk2e coaches

I was pleased when Hornby announced its Mk2e coaches because it would give me the opportunity to create new air-con rakes of coaches made up of models to current standards. When Hornby showed us the first, undecorated versions, I was pleased with what I saw.

However, the Railroad TSO, FO and BSO and the main range TSO have now appeared in the shops and I have to say I am very disappointed. Whilst the model looks like a reasonable representation of the prototypes, the same cannot be said for the livery application. Whilst the FO doesn't look too bad, the grey band on both TSOs and the BSO is completely out of proportion. The grey band above the windows is too shallow, which to me appears to be because the upper blue band is too deep. In addition, the corridor end doors should be cream not white.

So easy to get right with so many photos available of the prototypes. Personally I will be giving these models a miss until Hornby does an additional run with the correct decoration.

Andrew Crawford

[61661]

Bought a Railroad Mk 2e FO and a 'red box' TSO from Rails on Saturday to review for January's BRM (Hornby is a bit 'hit and miss' with review samples these days, and we couldn't rely on them arriving in time for the next issue). Conclusions are similar to some already shared above, particularly by Brian Kirby (hello Brian!)

QC of the Railroad models varies quite widely in terms of decoration, so check before you buy. I found a couple of good ones, but others were fairly poorly finished. Standard range TSOs appeared to be better in this respect and I got a good one first time.

Briefly, I was pleased with the overall body shape, underframe equipment and bogies. The glazing is far superior to anything we've had before from Airfix/Dapol/Hornby or Lima, being nice and flat, non-prismatic and suitably smoked. Windowframes are subtly done too. I'll have to look at some more photos before I make up my mind about the blue/grey bands. There's something not quite right, but it may only be a fraction of a mm out. More noticeable though is the shade of grey used, which appears to have a yellow tinge on both our models (more so on the FO). I like the matt finish though, and the inclusion of the white key line around the grey band. Not picking the top bar of the droplights out in silver is one clear way of saving money as it eliminates a colour, and a tricky printing process that would almost certainly result in a higher rejection rate for the bodyshells.

Visually, the most disappointing aspect for me is the invented 'solebar', which looks as though it will take some major surgery to correct.

 

To confirm, the standard range models differ in that they have metal wheels (slightly oversize at 12.5mm), more complete external decoration (vehicle end data, red bogie springs, OHLE warning flashes) and 'No Smoking' signs on the inside the glazing. All have NEM couplers.

Quick conclusion though is that, for the price, they're not bad at all. Perfection costs a little more these days...

 

Just a small comment about one of the earlier posts. Hornby's Railroad range isn't really aimed at kids - it's aimed at modellers on tighter budgets who perhaps aren't as concerned about the minutiae of droplight sizes, vent positions and tumblehomes as the experts here. There are a lot more of them out there than we perhaps realise, which is why the Railroad range has done so well over the last few years.

 

Look out for more in the January issue.

 

Ben

[brushman47544]

Bought a Railroad Mk 2e FO and a 'red box' TSO from Rails on Saturday to review for January's BRM (Hornby is a bit 'hit and miss' with review samples these days, and we couldn't rely on them arriving in time for the next issue). Conclusions are similar to some already shared above, particularly by Brian Kirby (hello Brian!)

QC of the Railroad models varies quite widely in terms of decoration, so check before you buy. I found a couple of good ones, but others were fairly poorly finished. Standard range TSOs appeared to be better in this respect and I got a good one first time.

Briefly, I was pleased with the overall body shape, underframe equipment and bogies. The glazing is far superior to anything we've had before from Airfix/Dapol/Hornby or Lima, being nice and flat, non-prismatic and suitably smoked. Windowframes are subtly done too. I'll have to look at some more photos before I make up my mind about the blue/grey bands. There's something not quite right, but it may only be a fraction of a mm out. More noticeable though is the shade of grey used, which appears to have a yellow tinge on both our models (more so on the FO). I like the matt finish though, and the inclusion of the white key line around the grey band. Not picking the top bar of the droplights out in silver is one clear way of saving money as it eliminates a colour, and a tricky printing process that would almost certainly result in a higher rejection rate for the bodyshells.

Visually, the most disappointing aspect for me is the invented 'solebar', which looks as though it will take some major surgery to correct.

 

To confirm, the standard range models differ in that they have metal wheels (slightly oversize at 12.5mm), more complete external decoration (vehicle end data, red bogie springs, OHLE warning flashes) and 'No Smoking' signs on the inside the glazing. All have NEM couplers.

Quick conclusion though is that, for the price, they're not bad at all. Perfection costs a little more these days...

 

Just a small comment about one of the earlier posts. Hornby's Railroad range isn't really aimed at kids - it's aimed at modellers on tighter budgets who perhaps aren't as concerned about the minutiae of droplight sizes, vent positions and tumblehomes as the experts here. There are a lot more of them out there than we perhaps realise, which is why the Railroad range has done so well over the last few years.

 

Look out for more in the January issue.

 

Ben

 

Thanks Ben. Funnily enough, despite it's being completely wrong, I can live with the fictitious solebar because for me from normal viewing distance it's not overly distracting. Like some others what really jars is the livery; on the TSO in particular. It may only be a mm or so out, but wow don't you notice. Don't forget Bachmann's first run of Mk2 TSOs had a similar issue, with insufficient depth of grey below the windows. Again only a minor error in terms of mm, but it completely spoilt the looks of the models. What is a shame is that it's so obvious when married up to a photo of the prototype it makes you wonder if Hornby actually saw and approved a livery sample before authorising the production run.

 

I have the added "issue" that I want to model WR rakes, which in general had Mk2 PV FKs instead of air-con BSOs to provide the brake van, so haw they look with the Bachmann product also matters. Ho Hum.

Edited November 17, 2014 by brushman47544

[MJI]

Thanks Ben. Funnily enough, despite it's being completely wrong, I can live with the fictitious solebar because for me from normal viewing distance it's not overly distracting. Like some others what really jars is the livery; on the TSO in particular. It may only be a mm or so out, but wow don't you notice. Don't forget Bachmann's first run of Mk2 TSOs had a similar issue, with insufficient depth of grey below the windows. Again only a minor error in terms of mm, but it completely spoilt the looks of the models. What is a shame is that it's so obvious when married up to a photo of the prototype it makes you wonder if Hornby actually saw and approved a livery sample before authorising the production run.

 

I have the added "issue" that I want to model WR rakes, which in general had Mk2 PV FKs instead of air-con BSOs to provide the brake van, so haw they look with the Bachmann product also matters. Ho Hum.

 

 

I will have to look it up but I think they were 2B rather than 2A so may need to use Lima!!!!! However you may get away with vent changes filling and rescribing Bachmann doors.

 

I will check my books later as I am going by memory, but I do remember seeing rakes with 2x 2 or 2A BFKs next to each other.

[robertcwp]

I have the added "issue" that I want to model WR rakes, which in general had Mk2 PV FKs instead of air-con BSOs to provide the brake van, so haw they look with the Bachmann product also matters. Ho Hum.

WR rakes in the 1970s most typically had a BG or sometimes a Mark IIc BSO.  The WR had no air-con brakes from new but acquired some 2d BFKs later on.  A typical early WR set was BG, 5TSO, RB, 3 FO - note that the BG was at the Bristol end.  Like this image:

 

1937_WhiteWaltham_0807-WSM-Pad_31-1-73 by robertcwp, on Flickr

 

Here is a set with a 2c BSO, although some of the stock may be 2f rather than 2e:

 

47513_BPark_1600-Padd-Swan_19-8-76 by robertcwp, on Flickr

Edited November 17, 2014 by robertcwp

[Brian Kirby]

Hi Ben and Everyone,

     Remembering the aforementioned Bachmann Mk2/2A waist lining at the wrong height, i have it on very good authority, that the problem was caused by the moulded door bump stops sticking out (should have left 'em off?). Their white line printing doo-dah machine couldn't print over them and keep a straight line, so it  was moved to above the bump stops. They seem to have solved the problem with the second production run, but i would have been happy with bump stops just marked as a black ink dot.

     Hornby seem to have printed over their rather deep door vents quite well, although some have a slight wobble. This can't have affected the incorrect top line on the TSOs, cos the FOs have the line about right. Anyone got a posh fully-decorated TSO yet, mine don't arrive till tomorrow? So far i've built up a WR 1973 3FO/RB/5TSO/BG rake for my 09-15 to Weston-Super-Mare, my one BSO is to go, like all 2E BSOs, with WCML Mk2D/E and later 2F and Mk3As. When new, roughly two-thirds of 2E FOs and TSOs went to LMR, one third went to WR. From 1973 the 2Fs appeared, and ER/GN, LMR and WR all got top-ups of FOs and TSOs. Don't forget, the Mk2E/Fs were the nasty coaches that killed off the WR Blue Pullmans. (hankies at the ready!)

 

                                                                          Cheers, Brian.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Brian Kirby

[ifitlooksright]

Quick conclusion though is that, for the price, they're not bad at all. Perfection costs a little more these days...

 

Just a small comment about one of the earlier posts. Hornby's Railroad range isn't really aimed at kids - it's aimed at modellers on tighter budgets who perhaps aren't as concerned about the minutiae of droplight sizes, vent positions and tumblehomes as the experts here. There are a lot more of them out there than we perhaps realise, which is why the Railroad range has done so well over the last few years.

 

Look out for more in the January issue.

 

Ben

Massively agree. I don't want to offend anyone but not everybody wants (or can) hack up their new models. Models at this scale seldom look like the real thing even if they have all the correct bits in the correct places (more so in N scale). It's an impression more to do with perception. That is why I think the "railroad" Mk1 looks so good. Its just right.

Now if the blue / grey Mk1s are badly painted like these Mk2es I'll be very disappointed (presuming we get them)?

 

I'd like to see a weathered example by some airbrush wizard, hint ,hint!