srihaggis

Careful now, you are starting to sound like Bachmann with that reply

I reckon the tooling could be adapted to allow a 153 and 155 (blanked cab window inserts etc) to be produced. I refuse to buy the Hornby 153 because it just does not look right, particularly around the cab end. Also, aren't the bogies on a 153/155 the same as those used on a 156? One less item to tool up

What is the actual 'depth' of the unit incl the green connector type thing on the end? I saw Rails of Sheff listing the depth as 20mm, but I suspect that is just the cylindrical part?

Have you tried taking a decoder out of one of your locos that are not affected by this issue and put it into the Dapol 52, just to make sure it's not the decoder doing it?

That is some desperation for a model! Maybe postage stamps are cheaper over there - i'm sure if we did the same to a UK manufacturer let alone to Canada, i'm sure we could perhaps have covered the cost of tooling in postage stamps

Thanks for clarifying - I don't have any of the models you mention, so hopefully i'll be fine.

Interestingly I was planning to re-space the sleepers on the straight sections of the layout scenic parts anyway for the more realistic photo opportunity - I wouldn't ever look too closely on a tight bend. I'll be at Warley next week so i'll see if I can grab a piece of code 75 for testing purposes. @TRAILRAGE - which Hornby stock in particular have issues with the wheels rubbing?

All interesting comments. For pointwork, I only use large radius anyway so that won't be a problem, i'd sooner it look right than to be accurate, if that makes sense. The layout i'm doing is totally fictitious location wise, but utilising rolling stock of the Derby area from 1990-2005, so I can get away with modellers licence as to the type of rail used for that part - I'm struggling to think of anywhere locally with bullhead, i'll have to look on flickr - I seem to recall Derby station area having bullhead in the very early 90s.

Thanks for the info chaps. I'm only changing because I need to buy all my trackwork again anyway, so thought i'd give it a try and to my eye it looks marginally better, though it'll be a couple of months before buying physical rail because I am rebuilding the boards too, but i'll certainly buy a sample of track next time i'm in town. Fortunately I don't own any Lima stuff (at all), though I do have some ex Lima, now Hornby branded MK3s from 2015 (Midland Mainline Teal release).

Hi all I have decided to scrap my previous layout (actually gave it all away to a friend), which was all code 100. On the new project, i'm looking to go down the route of code 75. (00 Scale) Now trackwork isn't something I've ever really took a great deal of interest in, I understand 75 looks more prototypical, but I understand that it can cause running issues with certain types of stock, typically much older stock. How would I know if there were some items of stock I own that would be incompatible with code 75 rail? Is there a certain flange size I need to look at or is there more to it, eg the need to re-wheel everything? Most of my stock has been produced in the last 10-15 years. Sorry if this sounds an odd question but i'd sooner ask than go and buy a load of track and nothing work. Many thanks Kyle

Central Trains Green would be sweet.

Only just discovered this scheme, looks to be great value, though I do have to ask, are future magazines sent to us in paper or digital format? Should it be digital then that would be the only thing stopping me from signing up, unless theres an option to receive paper format? I'm just between jobs at the moment, so once i'm sorted out i'll get a subscription sorted subject to the above clarification.

I've been away from the whole DJM threads for a while, just skim reading the last few pages of this thread - are we now saying that you can claim for debit card refunds? I'm not going to worry if we can't.

£30 for a class 92.