Mophead45143

I think it very much depends on your region and era. If you model MML or anywhere on the NE/SW in the late 1970's for instance, then the volume and variety of peaks was enormous. Ok they were all BR blue, but there were plenty of notable differences: - Cl 44's: 44008, 44009 & 44010 had unique features in either grilles or nose ends - or both in the case of 44009! Admittedly these locos were geographically limited to Midlands. - Cl 45's: Four different nose end variety's (not including the odd-balls) including sealed beam, centre-headcode, centre-split headcode and split headcodes. Each of which were either named or unnamed, and headcode variants either had domino's or '0000' displayed. Then factor in all of the above for both steam heat 45/0's and ETH 45/1's. - Cl 46's: Two different nose end variety's (not including the odd-balls) including sealed beam and centre-headcode, again with either domino's or '0000' displayed. 46026 was named. If you're going off standard variants, then you could have over 20 locos which even the most disinterested peak avoider would admit did not look the same. And if you really wanted to represent it the way things were, you'd need a fair few locos to paint the picture. Granted that as the 80's progressed, apart from a few Tinsley embellishments etc., the loco's all started looking very similar as the remaining fleet got marker lights. Cameron

I'd never spotted this detail difference before. Does the tooling allow for the as-built condition without the longer handrail? Regards, Cameron

Some of the Bachmann models can be found discounted to around that though, the Intercity Swallow one is £169.99 on the class 37 LG shop - only one left though!

Indeed. While 'if you've got nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all' is generally a principle I try and abide by, that Blue FYE model really shows up how 'off' the proportions are on the front end. The broadside view doesn't look quite right either.

Fran, I don't think you need to apologise or justify yourself, I thought your response was quite refrained considering! Accurascale are doing wonders for the hobby, and the class 50 was the obvious next choice for a new tooling, although sadly I have no need for one (some 31's and a 37 are on order however!). As others have hinted, every mainline diesel locomotive (including nearly all the prototypes) has either been done, or is currently in progress by various manufacturers. Sure there are some electrics, shunters, and DMU's/EMU's that have never been made rtr, but most are niche and will have limited appeal. Keep up the good work, and I'll be up for some 40's when they are announced! ;) Cameron

To be honest, you can only see them when looking directly down from above. My layout, like most, is between waist and chest height, so if the train is halfway across the baseboard, you'll only see part way into the hopper anyway. Obviously if you're planning on running them loaded, you don't need to worry!!! Cameron

Thank you for the kind offer and customer service, but it's something I'm happy to tidy up myself. They'll be getting weathered eventually anyway, so one imperfection won't be noticeable. Cameron

You've done a lovely job with them overall, and I am certainly very satisfied! I would be interested in more runs of the early HOP AB, both Pre-TOPs and TOPS! Regards, Cameron

A couple more photos showing the two side by side (Accurascale left, Cavalex right). The seam line and wheel arch on the Accurascale model is visible here. Finally, an image of the two types together in a short rake. The closest three to the camera are Accurascale, the rest Cavalex. Regards, Cameron

Detailing Both wagons, as expected, are very well detailed. However, I would say that in some areas the Accurascale model has a little bit more finesse and relief. Accurascale have made more use of separately fitted parts, whereas Cavalex have used moulded detail in a few places (such as pipes along the chassis), albeit it's been well executed. The OLEO buffer shanks are slightly finer on the Accurascale model too. These observations do not change perceptions of either model overall, as you would need to be holding them in your hands to notice the difference. Someone with more knowledge on these wagons might be able to explain here, but it's noticeable that the bufferbeam detail is not the same on these models, and that also the pipes on the Accurascale model are fitted to the chassis underneath / behind the bufferbeam, whereas the Cavalex pipes fit directly into the bufferbeam. Is one wrong? Or were there two different versions? It's hard to tell from most of the pictures on Paul Bartlett's website, as once fitted, the pipes will be in roughly the same position. Another thing I noticed was the brake arrangement in the opposing corners of the wagon. As far as I can tell, both are supposed to represent the same design, yet the Cavalex version (top) has more plastic 'flash' around the detail, whereas the Accurascale version (bottom) is clearly defined. This was the case on all of my Cavalex models. Rivet detail is really nicely picked out on both models, both inside and out. However, Cavalex have missed the rivets on the cradle at the ends of the wagon, whereas the Accurascale model includes these. Shape / Compromises Both models really capture the look of these wagons, gone are the days of the inferior Hornby products! Both models aren’t exactly the same however, the Accurascale model having a slightly more pronounced curvature to the top ends of the hopper, and the overall internal diameter of the hopper on the Cavalex model being ever so slightly longer. I would suggest that Cavalex have got the proportions slightly more accurate here. Both hoppers work out at approx. 102mm long, despite these minor differences. However once inside the hopper, the Accurascale model starts to let itself down a bit. There is a seam line along the upper edge on both sides, which is not present on the Cavalex model or the real thing. This is presumably to aid manufacturing of the different varieties of wagon in the MGR family? The other issue which has caused comment before is the fictitious wheel arch on the Accurascale model, which was designed in to accommodate the under scale back to back dimensions of 00 gauge wheels. However, Cavalex have not had to do this on their wagon, and the wheels appear to be the same size (I didn’t have a set of calipers to hand to confirm). Looking underneath the wagon, you can see how the two manufacturers have taken on the challenge. Have Cavalex (bottom) adjusted the dimensions of the bottom of the hopper to suit 00 gauge wheels? If so, it’s not really apparent, and looking back inside the hopper, everything looks correct, with the slight taper in the bottom edge at both ends. It’s hard to say with the wheel arches present if the Accurascale (top) model actually has this taper. Either way, the Cavalex model definitely wins here. Interestingly, I noticed some of the levers / linkages on the chassis sides have been modelled in differing positions by each manufacturer. Again, someone with more knowledge may be able to add more info here. Running Both models have a good weight, with my Accurascale hopper weighing in at 53g and the Cavalex at 56g, so not much in it between them. Both hold the road really well. Except for a couple of the Cavalex models which will need some adjustment, both models are free running. However, the Accurascale model is definitely the best. They will start rolling by themselves on even the slightest of gradients, and my Bachmann 08 was capable of hauling 27 with ease! The 08 could never manage 15 of the 1970’s Hornby hoppers without slipping! Rest assured though, videos posted by Cavalex recently have shown that their new class 56 is very capable of hauling a full rake of 36 of their hoppers, and I’m sure other mainline loco classes from different manufacturers will be able to do the same. The Cavalex model wins on close coupling, as can be seen in the pictures (Accurascale above, Cavalex below). That being said, some of the Cavalex coupling weren’t that straight, and didn’t naturally line up properly. The Accurascale ones have a lot more play, but they always return ‘home’. However, I haven’t noticed issues with either model on my points / curves when being pulled or propelled. Price Price wise, the Accurascale model is clearly cheaper when buying in bulk, with a saving of about £225 on a rake of 30 when buying direct off their website (they offer a 10% discount on multiple purchases). However, as for which model offers the best value for money, that is really subjective, as I know some people are quite put off with the compromises that Accurascale have adopted inside the hopper for example. That being said, the Accurascale model has better decoration in my opinion, and in one or two areas only, slightly better detail. Summary In summary, they are both great models that you can run together on your layout. At normal viewing angles the only subtle difference is the shinier finish on the Accurascale wagons, and that won't show up with weathering. I have purchased both, and I am happy with both. Both models have pros and cons, but I can honestly recommend them both to anyone! Cameron

Since my Cavalex HOP AB's arrived yesterday, I thought I would have a go at a comparison with the Accurascale equivalents. Since these sort of things can generate quite a bit of debate and even emotion, keep in mind that I have no affiliation with either manufacturer, this is just my own honest assessment. I think both Accurascale and Cavalex are doing wonderful things for the hobby, and I wish both of them well with these, and future projects. Please excuse the quality of the photos as at times, they aren't great. Packaging Both models come in packs of three in very smart boxes. The Accurascale models are all grouped together in one large box, whereas the Cavalex ones have their own individual smaller boxes, held together by an outer sleeve. In the box comes a bag of detailing parts. Again the Accurascale ones are all bunched together, whereas the Cavalex ones have an individual bag for each wagon. Of note is that Cavalex have only painted the two brake two pipes (red), whereas the other two pipes are left in black. Accurascale have painted both the brake pipes (red) and the main res pipes (yellow). The Cavalex pipes are curved to represent being secured to the dummy coupling, whereas the Accuracscale ones are more straight to represent an unsecured pipe. First Impressions Both wagons look very smart and sit well next to each other. It's clear straight away that Cavalex have gone for a more matt finish than Accurascale, the latter looking more like a brand new wagon, a condition that didn't last long! After weathering I doubt this will be noticeable though. Both really capture the look and bulk of these hoppers. Decoration As far as decoration is concerned, the Accurascale model (below) wins on the wealth of printed detail. Everything from lamp irons to builders plates have been picked out and text is clearly legible. The only minor thing, and it's minor, is that the OHLE flashes appear slightly larger and perhaps over scale than the Cavalex ones, but that's being really picky. By contrast, the Cavalex model (below) is more modestly decorated, the builders plates for example have been left all black. But in all honesty, anyone planning to weather these will not need to be concerned by this, as all these details were pretty well hidden under a layer of filth! Of note is that in their first run, Cavalex have produced all three of their packs in the original mid 1960's style of Pre-TOPs lettering. Accurascale have produced this version too, but each pack is slightly different in application of livery details, and they have also produced some TOPs versions too. Each Accurascale pack models the changes in decoration that could be found on these wagons from the mid 1960's to the late 1970's. As such, if you model the mid - late 70's, they are all suitable, as it it was a mix of both Pre-TOPs and TOPs markings then. Fit & Finish Not much to choose between the two here. When my Accurascale hoppers arrived a few months back, there were only two parts that had fallen off in the box in total, not bad given I ordered a whole rake! Likewise, one piece of the internal door apparatus within the hopper body had come loose on just one of the Cavalex models. Another Cavalex model seemed to be a bit misfortunate however, and suffered from a few defects. Namely, a cradle that didn't quite sit in the chassis properly, a slightly bent buffer, and a slightly larger whole in the hopper body below one of the supporting struts (picture below), and through this could be seen the brown cradle. This was just ONE wagon though, so not indicative of the standards set across the batch, the rest being very well put together. Part 2 to follow..........

All 9 of my HOPAB's arrived from Trains4U today, and very nice they are too! Cameron

Trains 4U got in touch at the weekend looking for payment, my HOPAB's should be arriving tomorrow they said!

E're, I'm not quite that old yet and I remember Intercity alright!!! 😁

I'll bet! Never really thought about it before but I suppose every single peak with any variation of headcode in preservation has had this reinstated after withdrawal by preservationists, as any 45's / 46's that still had them at withdrawal in the were cut up. Am I right in thinking Sherwood's boxes came from 45053 on the scrap line, so these didn't have to be made from scratch? Cameron

I've been thinking the exact same thing. As off putting as the cab window profile on the new Heljan 45 appears, I can't help but think the centre-split headcode on the Bachmann 45 does more to ruin the 'face' of the loco. If only extreme etchings made headcode frames that could be used with a bit of filling etc. Cameron

Joining in on the weathering act, here's my stab at 55013 'The Black Watch' in 1975-1976 condition. A simple renumber / rename of 55001. Regards, Cameron

Certainly looks like how I remember them in their later years, some looked pretty dark. All depends on the era being modelled etc.

The thing is though, the recent regional exclusive sealed beam 45's were partly retooled bodies on the original chassis, which makes me very skeptical that Bachmann would do a complete re-tool of their peaks any time soon after a recent 'upgrade'. It's almost as if they're saying, "that's all your getting for now......." Hope I'm wrong though!!! Cameron

Finally, a close up of the catch point which was located on the up slow which I have scratch built. Again, no points for accuracy here, this is just a practical representation, and to avoid derailment risk, it is always in the position seen here, rather than actually protecting the junction. That said, any feedback is certainly welcome! For this I used the blades of a surplus Code 75 'Y' point', and the rest was made up of parts from some flexi track. One copper clad sleeper was used to solder the end of the point blades to give rigidity. Regards, Cameron

Morning all, Another milestone has now passed, that being the completion of the scenic track work. It's not perfect, but I'm quite pleased with how it looks, bearing in mind the challenges involved that made it not quite as simple as just slapping track down. Specifically: - The ladder junction has been built into the start of a gentle curve - Crossovers have been trimmed where applicable to bring running lines closer together - Sleepers have all been individually spaced except for on points - Card has been carefully positioned where applicable to induce cant on curves, including transition on slow line reverse curves - Dropper wires have been soldered t the underside of the rail before laying track, and holes had to measured and be drilled to accommodate these It was always going to be a compromised using Peco streamline track (as is 00 gauge in general), but I think you can get away with it on a simplistic track layout such as Chesterfield. Needless to say, I'm glad this bit is done, as it has taken months to get to this point from when I first started cutting sleeper webbing! Note that as per the time period, track work within the station area is still flat bottom 60' sections on wooden sleepers. This photo is taken at the north end of the layout looking south towards the station, about where the scenic break will be. The cant on the tracks here was so slight in real life, and therefore a maximum of 1mm card was used on the fast lines for this. I've not actually bothered with the slow lines on this part of the layout as photo and video evidence shows these to be even less discernable at this point, and given the lower line speed and approach to the junction it wasn't really needed. Looking north at the south end of the crossovers. Looking north from the end of platform 2. Looking north from the end of platform 1. A high view above the station and road / river bridges. A low view looking north of the freight lines sweeping around the back of the station and over the road / river. These have been canted, again to a maximum of 1mm. Looking south as the freight lines swing in parallel to the fast lines. Looking south above the station area. Looking south from the footbridge above the slow lines. Looking south from the footbridge above the down fast. A close up view showing how I have placed sleepers to smoothly transition from point to standard track. I have trimmed and positioned four wooden sleepers on each piece of flexi that mates to the side of the adjacent point, this giving the illusion that the sleepers are longer and part of the crossover. I'm not saying it's accurate, but it looks far more convincing than just trimming concrete sleepers so they don't foul, which I've seen on some layouts.

Was it common to find these in partially fitted mixed freights in the 1970's, bearing in mind that defeated the object of them being air braked! Regards, Cameron

Sorry, my point was that 47003 WAS grey rather than silver, I wasn't questioning the authenticity of the model. 47003 wasn't painted until some time in 1978, but it's possible that earlier paint jobs may have been silver. 47130 had the roof painted in the summer of 1977, and I think it may have been silver rather than grey. By comparison, here is 47009 in August 1977 which certainly seems more silver than grey. Cameron

I was tempted by Atlas, as I have fond memories of that loco taking me to Plymouth and back in the last summer of Virgin XC workings. However, the loco is not a match for the 47012 model used, as 012 was a Brush built one and 082 was built at Crewe. Plus, 012 had a Spanner boiler, while the 082 had a Clayton type. Cameron

To be fair, the 'sealed beam' 45/0's that Bachmann did recently had these as part of the moulding and they looked pretty good. Cameron