Mophead45143

The tooling has been improved since then. The recent Bachmann 45/0's with marker lights all have separately fitted handrails on the nose, improved nose end grilles with hinges, improved plated boiler access footsteps, and the access hatch on the lower bodyside (one side only) is tooled, rather than tampo printed on! I would also suggest not bothering to renumber the model before you sell it. Anyone who cares enough will sort it out themselves, and plenty of people won't even notice. Honestly, if I had a pound for the amount of times I see peaks being renumbered to a prototype that doesn't match the detail differences, even obvious things like the headcode style!!! Even with the recent peaks that cover versions with and without the trapezoid grille, you still see professional modelling websites flogging renumbered / weathered examples that get this wrong for mega £££! Cameron

Packs A - C represent the steam era wagons, early 1950's - mid 1960's. But, if you want to be pedantic and accurately model the preserved rake on the GCR, then most of these are actually vacuum braked wagons that have been painted grey to represent the unfitted trains as they appeared in steam days. For these you would have to re-spray the up and coming bauxite wagons in run two! Cameron

Sorry Fran, You may have missed Paul's original comment regarding pack C, which has at least two wagons in it which, according to his photo gallery, should have pressed doors, yet the artwork shows fabricated doors. The only pressed doors I can see in the artworks on the website are for the Dia 1/109 riveted wagons. Regards, Cameron

Can Accurascale please confirm which packs feature pressed end doors, as per Paul's comment? Keen to get an order in for several packs, but I'm not after pressed end door examples which as far as I'm aware, were getting few and far between by the late 70's. Regards, Cameron

There's a prototype for everything - the gap between the nose end and the rest of the body is represented by the dirt washed down the side of the grilles!

As Covkid has said, there are issues with the combinations of body side 'strip', steps, nose doors, boiler ports etc. which limit the models that can't be portrayed. Hornby's current 31 139 does somewhat answer the calls for a proper 1970's model however, but the bodyside 'strip' is not well defined in the tooling. Many aficionados would argue that the Lima 31 got the basic body shape better than the Hornby model, and I can see what they mean. The Hornby model looks a little flat fronted to me, yet it does capture the bulk of the loco well. See West Halton Sidings page for the work he has done on some Lima models, including using the Hornby mechanism / bogies etc. If one already has a Hornby 31 I can understand resistance to buy new. However, if you are looking for one then the Accurascale model is likely to be a no brainer given it's myriad of tooling options, not to mention the considerably cheaper RRP compared to what is now an 'old' model. Cameron

To be honest, I'd be very surprised if Bachmann decide to a 56 now just because they're doing a 69. The body would be a completely new tool. They haven't even done a new class 42 Warship since they released a newly tooled class 43 nearly ten years ago! The 42 is still essentially the old mainline body, and hasn't featured in the range for years! The external differences between the two are minimal, especially compared to the different 37's and 47's they're producing. I appreciate there is a smaller market for Warships than grids, but I would think Hornby already have it covered for an overpriced, not as good as Cavalex class 56! Cameron

Looks a pretty good match for 25057 in the period modelled to me.

I would say it's a lot easier to remove a printed data panel than it is to add one and worry about making a mess with the varnish? I'd rather have it that way round anyway. Cameron

I see, I had forgotten about the reinforcement for the couplings, and not spotted the partial skirt removal around the buffers. Maybe something in run 3 then! Cheers, Cameron

I was going to let run 2 slip by, with nothing appropriate for a late 70's machine based at either HM, IM, MR, TE or TI. But then I did a bit of digging for 37's with WR style lamp irons allocated to the ER and came up with two, 37246 & 37249. Both of which subsequently received 'standard' irons positioned by the tail lights, in addition to the WR ones. Curiously at some point, 37246 had the WR irons bent around so that they would be compatible with a standard lamp! 37249 in 1977 (John Woolley's Flickr). 37246, in later condition but clearly showing the bent lamp irons! (Kevin Robinson's Flickr). So unless any guru's can think of any issues, with the addition of the extra set of standard irons, I believe D6992 is a candidate for renumbering to 37249. Of course it'll need the decoration converting to the TOPs era style. Regards, Cameron

I see the blue version is still having an identity crisis, simultaneously listed as both 25057 & 25060!

Of course, there is the collectors market. But I'd like to think that many of those might not be so particular on the detail differences, and that there are more people that would prefer it to be correct for its BR career when it actually pulled trains. Dangerous to generalise and make assumptions on RMWeb though of course!!! Either way, the differences are fairly minor I suppose, not beyond the realms of a transfer sheet. Cameron

I can't be in the minority here, in that I would much rather that Accurascale / Locomotion did NOT match it to the condition that the loco is in now, considering that the NRM didn't quite get it right! Cameron

Just done a bit of digging and I think I can answer my own question now. Later in life, the only real external difference was the M.U. equipment on the buffer beam - fairly straightforward to model. However, there was one 31/0 which was different from the rest, in that it lacked the footsteps on the nose end and also the windscreen washer shrouds. You've guessed it, 31018!!! Oh well, not the hardest things to add with a bit of modelling I suppose! Cameron

Yes, but the artwork shown matches better to pictures in its latter days of BR condition rather than what it looks like now. The NRM have attempted to portray the loco as it appeared at the end of its career, but Accurascale are perhaps going to do a better job and get the livery details right? I'm sure Fran can confirm. Cameron

Yes very much so, it joined the collection in 1977!!! Cameron

Artwork looks like it's BR condition? Data panels and M.U. markings are present for starters, which it doesn't have at the NRM. Cameron

Externally, are there any differences between a 31/0 and production 'skinhead' 31? Wondering if 31018 is any good for a renumber? Only differences I am aware of is the multiple-working equipment. Regards, Cameron

Maybe it's just because I'm used to how they 'should' look, but I don't like that at all - it just seems weird! Even though it totally makes sense given that the cab-side windows are set in from the body side, just like on a Hymek.

Nearly, looks like a Cavalex loco attached on the rear!

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the Bachmann model, having bought 37034 and being very impressed with it. Modelling banger blue with full yellow ends, the nose seam doesn't bother me one bit. Cameron

That's like red rag to a bull for Accurascale! I'm excited to see theirs.

Bachmann haven't actually announced one yet though, they've just shown the EP of that body style at the launch. Even when they do get round to using that tooling, it might just be in green and we'll have to wait a while longer for a blue one. For all we know, Accurascale have one lined up too!

Hi Phil, Yes this was definitely a 1970's thing, as it was still in green with the doors intact at least as late as July 1970. Cameron