MatthewCarty

I seem to remember at the time (around 2013) the chassis used for the modified hall was the same as the one used for the Collett halls introduced a few year earlier (around 2005?). When the first modified halls were sent back to China (due to the numerous errors on the first lot) it was discovered that the front end under the smokebox could not be corrected due to the shape of the chassis and the location of the front screw mounting location. As such major changes would be needed to enable a correct modified hall, I would be very hopeful of a completely new chassis. The 2005 one has the really silly design for DCC fitting (taking out most of the engine's weight), no easy option for sound fitting and as many people have found has a tendency to have very rough running characteristics. If Bachmann have completely redone the chassis I would be in the market for quite a few new halls and modified halls. The body on the hall is very good (about even with the Hornby one in my opinion) and with the last few corrections the same will be true for the modified halls, but I can't emphasis enough how disappointed I have been by the chassis under all the hall variants I've used since the 2005 release.

1) sounds like you’re describing the sound of the vacuum pump (used to maintain vacuum in the vacuum brake pipe through the journey rather than using an ejector). If so it should definitely be there whenever the loco is moving. I don’t have the sound version so can’t be absolutely sure. 2) mine had the same problem and I decided I couldn’t live with so have sent it back. It’s likely to improve over time, but I decided having payed the money I wanted one which was smooth at slow speeds and didn’t want to risk it not getting better. Good to hear that the motor is capable of slower running. Having only had it for a short time I didn’t spend time playing with the CVs to try and achieve this, but did notice speed step 1 was much faster than I would have liked.

Can I ask how others have found their 94xx's to run at crawling speed? I must admit to being very disappointed with this aspect of the model. I have tried on both DC and DCC and I cannot get it to run anywhere near as slowly as other recent releases from several manufacturers. For example the much debated Dapol mogul at speed step 1 on DCC (using an out of the box Lenz next 18) will crawl along very smoothly with no hesitation at all. Using the same setup with the 94xx, it runs about 4 times faster and with noticeable lurches at certain points of the wheel revolution. Can anyone else give a comparison between the running qualities of the 94xx and mogul?

Should be possible to hide the area with some careful placement of fireirons as well

Looks like Dapol have competition for the manor

Plenty of all 3 versions at Hereford Model Centre (my finger also just slipped)!

It would appear the email I sent with links to multiple photos did get passed on to the development team, and the website page for R3850 would appear to have been duly updated with a picture of 6147 in green! Full credit to Hornby for listening and adjusting accordingly. Website appears to be running very slowly at present due to a big design update...

The more you look the more you find! Two photos for sale on ebay show 6147 in lined green at Oxford Station: www.ebay.co.uk/itm/pu2442-Oxfordshire-Engine-No-6147-at-Oxford-Station-photograph-6x4/392694737424?hash=item5b6e6e2a10:g:gTsAAOSwkGJcbDrV www.ebay.co.uk/itm/pu2441-Oxfordshire-Engine-No-6147-at-Oxford-Station-photograph-6x4/293485387951?hash=item445517a0af:g:RV0AAOSwGMFcbDrV Also possible the same one as Miss Prism's above, but the view of 6147's bunker at Swindon: www.flickr.com/photos/16749798@N08/2970921073

I have emailed Hornby, and have also found another image of 5189 on Pinterest. Don't know if it's the same one as Irwell as I seem to have mislaid that volume of the Prairie papers, but interestingly it seems quite a few of the large prairies managed to get the small emblem. 5189 Class 51XX 2-6-2T | Train route, British rail, Steam railway (pinterest.co.uk)

Are you talking about the colour rail image of 6147? If so, having just bought a copy to download it is definitely in green (in fact lined green!) despite my earlier thoughts, unfortunately I think this means Hornby are much more likely to be wrong with their black, and I will probably write to ask. I have also just found the reference to 6147 being black on 26th April 1964 in The Prairie Papers and as you say the bunker is the only real clue to the true colour, and this combined with another image which on first appearances can be taken as black, and this is probably a fairly easy error to make.

Thank you for everyone's replies, it has really given plenty of information and lots to think about before I decide whether to try it or not! Hearing all the opinions really is an unbeatable resource when it comes to these sort of decisions!

Has anyone on here fitted a mogul with sound and/or can anyone comment on different sound projects available? I am considering my first 'try' with sound and want to do this with the mogul. I have not purchased one yet as I'm still trying to decide if there are advantages to fitting the sound myself rather than buying with sound fitted. I volunteer on a preserved line on the footplate so am likely to be more critical than most on the results so want give it the best shot of impressing me! Can anyone help with any advice for this first attempt?!

You could if someone wanted to do a traditional Hornby loco now would be a good time to announce as there's little chance of Hornby announcing until next year! Black 5 or 8f anyone?

There are however two pictures claiming to be of a black 6147 on colourrail.co.uk. One 3rd May 1958 which is clearly black but with no emblem visible, the second at Paddington (no date) but clearly in black with a late crest. (Also another couple at Swindon showing the April 64 green paint)

I have seen pictures of 6109 lined out with the small one so it definitely happened (see colourrail.co.uk for a couple of examples), but can't find any picture of 5189 at all (interestingly 5199 was outshopped like this unprototypically after restoration). Usually Hornby have been very good at basing the detail differences and livery details off examples so don't feel a need to challenge Hornby unless others have evidence to suggest it didn't happen. A more useful combination might have been unlined green late logo but maybe that's one Dapol can before Hornby!

Two new versions announced by Hornby yesterday, 6147 unlined black with late crest (R3850), and 5189 lined green with small early emblem (R3851). The cynic in me wonders whether these two coming so soon after the first batch has something to do with the Dapol version, but either way I will probably look to get one of these. I'm hoping someone here may be able to help fill in some of the information as to what time periods these two locos will satisfy. I have a couple of picture 6147 having been outshopped in green in April 64, and with withdrawal in December 65 Hornby's model must depict it prior to this works visit. So does anyone have any idea when it might have gained the late crest? 5189 was withdrawn August 59 so might not have got the late crest at all, but I'm struggling to find any picture of 5189 so would appreciate any knowledge on this one too!

I have also tried using the pipe couplings and find they work fine with some of the Bachmann MK1s, but (for a reason I've never been able to work out) cause problems with others. I have a set of Western Region coaches which I can run all over my layout with no problems, another set where they derail on various points and crossings, and a set of Crimson and Cream MK1s where I can't fit them at all because the pipe just seems too short and the gangway ends touch even on a straight (my layout is all flat). If anyone has had this problem and/or can work out what the problem is I would be very grateful because I have stopped using them because of their unreliability.

When the Bachmann model was first produced were there deficiencies which were noted then and have been forgotten over time? I have two Bachmann 9fs which I rate as some of the best engines I have. This is mainly based on running quality which in my opinion beats examples from most major manufacturers (including Hornby) built in the last few years. This will have to be a fairly impressive machine to make me consider additions/changes. Over to you Hornby to produce something good enough to override my disappointment in duplication of a model which I rate as one of the best. (I would have been very interested in seeing upgrades of the Black 5 and 8f as I feel these have problems serious enough to warrant the '2021 treatment', but my Bachmann 9fs are infinitely better models than both of these...)

Do you have any more details on these visits? Would love an excuse for one of these!

I have just found a photo and must offer my sincere apologies to Dapol as it does appear to be an anomaly of the subject which has been modelled correctly. Impressive that this is right and it wasn't just a case of BR black = lamp iron on the door for them.

Is it just me, or do all the online pictures of the black one seem to show two smokebox lamp brackets (one on top and one on the door)? I guess there's an outside chance this is prototypical, but seems unlikely.... Hopefully someone will be able to explain it to me! The bracket on the door also look massive, must be made for very big lamps!

Thanks for looking, it’s very helpful as I’ve struggled to find many photos of that section of the station. Almost all photos I’ve seen have been looking out towards the approaches or taken from the south looking at the footbridge with mainly the trailing crossover between the two loop lines in view (scissor crossing almost never in view). if anyone can point me in the direction of books/websites with some better photos of this middle section of the station I would be very grateful!

I did see that one, but hadn’t quite joined the dots in terms of understanding it was showing the proposed changes (should have read more carefully)! I’m looking quite a bit earlier (somewhere around 1958) so I guess the changes aren’t particularly relevant but still interesting. Have you seen any photos with the full scissor crossover in place as the plans seem to suggest existed (at least at some point). thanks again, Matthew

Sorry to bring back this old thread, but there seems to be a fair amount of knowledge on Wolverhampton low level. Does anybody know when the scissor crossing (between what I think was platform 3 and the loop line) existed? I can’t find any pictures of it close up and from what I can see at some point it was switched to just a single facing crossover. Thanks!

Not just the Modified Hall, but I think there is still room for a definitive original Hall. Hornby's is the design clever era compromise and I've found Bachmann's to be the one of the least good runners of recent times, as well as needing to take out a large chunk of the weight to convert to digital (and it's not particularly heavy to start with). You would hope a Hall/Modified Hall would take 8 (Bachmann MK1s) on the flat without any problems, my Bachmann Hall will take 6 with the weight still in, and 4 once dcc fitted. If a manufacturer (unlikely to be Bachmann now) could do tooling that catered for both Hall and Modified Hall to the standard we see from Accurascale, Sutton's etc I think it would sell well.