ash39

Ludicrous was probably the wrong word to use, but it's frustrating. I can't agree that Farish have satisfied the 90 and 91 market, those models are decades old and look like Brio toys with their painted on lights! I think you've hit the nail on the head - Bachmann doing the 90 in 'OO' has basically killed off any chance of seeing them in N in the next 4-5 years becuase there's a fear Farish could be working on it (and if they are, it will take at least that long to get to market).

Interesting it's also listed as 150220 (and the photography shows this too), but it was announced as 150275 originally.

Another way at looking at this is it's ludicrous that a Class 89 is even being proposed for a model (one in existence and it hasn't ran for 20 years) when on the other hand you have 50 Class 90's and 31 Class 91's which have ran up and down the length of the UK for 30+ years. And I say that as someone who would probably buy a Class 89 (but I'd buy about 10 Class 90/91's!)

I thought the Anglian 90 on the latest newsletter email was a hint but if they're talking multiple units perhaps not! I have two guesses: Class 195/331 - large area and will be around for a number of years. Only one livery to go at for now though. Electrostar family - amazes me there's never been a model of these in any scale despite there being hundreds of them.

I've just had a quick look on Rails of Sheffield website. 2 of the 3 original batch of 90's are still available, 1 is discounted to clear. These have been on sale for 2 years. So you're proposing they make even more of each model to get the costs down, and at the same time also release more variants/liveries in each run? It just doesn't work. To use a football analogy, most top level clubs will release their new home shirt in summer so the fans flock to buy it. Then they release their away shirt a few weeks later, then the third-choice shirt after the season starts. Fans will buy the home shirt because it's available sooner and they want 'a shirt' , but had all 3 dropped at once they might have just picked the away/third kit because they preferred that one. They end up buying both or all three!

That's a fair point. The relief on the Kato fairing is fairly modest so most people wouldn't notice on the model (I didn't even notice on the real thing until after I'd looked at about 15 YouTube clips!) Personally, I've tried to force an interest in these trains as they've replaced two of my childhood favourites so they have a lot to live up to. Personally, being the strange character I am, the subtle differences are what make them interesting to me. 54 9-car bi-modes numbered 800101 to 800154 would have been pretty dull!

Just to follow up my own post, sadly after spending a bit of time observing the real thing in more detail (amazing what trivial things you notice that you never would unless modelling!) - sadly it's not possible to easily modify an 800 into an 801. The good news first - the 800/2 and 801/1 both have a driving trailer at each end with a pantograph and no underfloor engine. As far as I have been able to decipher, these vehicles (1 & 5) are identical on both types of unit. Vehicle 2 - I can't be 100% sure as I need to see more angles of the real thing but I believe these are also identical on both types (this is the vehicle on the 801/1 EMU which houses the backup power unit for low-speed rescue movement and backup power in the event of OHLE failure). What I'm not certain of is whether there are any subtle differences or whether this is a regular full-fat power unit with the same appearance as the 800/2 bi-mode. Vehicles 3 & 4 - this is what scuppers the plan to simply renumber the unit to an 801. The exhaust ports on the roof could be easily cut & filed away, The issue is the underside cowlings have a lot more vents & maintenance access detail on the 800/2 due to the diesel engines. The attached photo shows the comparison between a vehicle 4 (pulled from a useful video on YouTube showing an 800/801 combo on diversion at Carlisle, credit to the videographer). If I haven't missed anything obvious - it's relatively good news as the underbody shroud clips off easily as I found out when I had to repair my driveshaft from postage damage, so hopefully Kato have tooled for the EMU version further down the line. I'm still not optimistic about the 9-car versions as that also brings different bogies into the equation. So as lovely as the LNER 800/2 model is, it's only really useful at the moment if you're modelling Lincoln or Harrogate

If they released all of those variants in one batch, most customers would pick one or two they like the most and the rest would sit on shelves for years until the prices were dropped. If they release them in batches of 2-3 at a time, people will buy ones that they might not have bought had there been a wider selection available. It's frustrating but it's been that way for a while.

That's not correct as I understand it. The driving trailers have the pantographs as you state, but the motors are on the three intermediate carriages. Formation from Wikipedia: DPTS-MS-MS-MC-DPTF

Mine has just the faintest buzz of gear noise at very low speed in one direction - from experience with other models I think 30 mins or so running to get all the oils warmed up and distributed would clear it up.

Yep I take back what I said. Using the DCC instructions Mike kindly posted, it was a 2 min job to pop the body and underframe off and reattach the driveshaft and bogie. I had worries it would be like a Dapol 156 (most of my 156 bogies are held in by the weight of the coach!), but everything secures together with satisfying precision and grip. Makes me wonder how much of a whack it must have taken to dislodge the driveshaft, but it runs amazingly straight out of the box so I'm not too concerned. The smoothness of the mechanism is like nothing I've experienced before either in 00 or N gauge. That's before it's even run in! Very impressed.

Ah thanks a lot for that Mike. My concern with refitting it was tricky access, but if the underbody shroud comes off as easily as it appears in that picture it should be a simple fix (as long as nothing has been damaged...) Will report back later!

Mine arrived this morning with one of the motor bogies and driveshaft totally detached. A bit dissapointed considering all the hype around Kato robustness and good design. Speaking of which, it doesn't look very simple to reattach either. I'm inclined to send it back rather than risk breaking it altogether attempting to fix it. Has anyone else had the same issue?

The one good thing for anyone after a TPE or Hull Trains 802 is they are both more colourful/interesting to look at, so probably more marketable outside the UK. I can't see any 9-car or 801's coming to market any time soon though, sadly.

That's a fair assessment. I have no issues with those compromises at the reasonable price point - my only concern is with the UK being a drop in the ocean for Kato we may not see as many variations/liveries as we would if a UK based manufacturer had produced them. As a case in point, the 5 car 801's you mention have different roof detail (no exhaust on the 2 and 3 vehicles) - I'm not sure if the tooling has been designed with this in mind. I've not yet had a good enough look at the undersides to compare the two and see if there are further differences there. If anyone is out and about on the ECML today and fancies doing some extra research on this, there are at least 3 10-car formations out today formed of 1x 800/2 and 1x 801/1 !