Il Grifone

I doubt it was routine even back then. I suspect anything much beyond changing the brushes would have involved return to the factory. My local Meccano dealer certainly sent my Dublo repairs to Binns Road and I suspect Margate got the Tri-ang ones.

Hornby Dublo 2 rail track had the same cover for the point operating mechanism. The difference is the solenoid - given away by the extra set of terminals. They all had a switch incorporated for the track electrification, (Simplec excluded of course). Dublo 2 rail used lots of wire.... MIB Märklin coaches should be worth more than a fiver. Beat up examples usually sell for that!

Those look rather like the toilet roll trains I mentioned earlier - particularly the narrow box car. They didn't have wheels though.

Tri-ang dealers could fit the smoke unit to earlier models (there is a series of instructions). Presumably there was a large charge* for this, so I doubt many were done. *Retail price of the smoke unit plus labour charge. (No VAT on the latter back then (a Common Market invention), but the spare part was liable to purchase tax. The Tarmac hopper could well be a genuine 'end of range' clear out of left over bits, though the Peco couplings must be a later 'add-on'. Wrenn had their own plastic couplings.

This item was always reknowned for her inability to pull the skin off a rice pudding. (I suspect Magnadesion helped considerably - it certainly curbed the tendecy for the locomotive to tip forward on the driving axle.) A partial solution would be be to hide a weight in the tender attached to the locomotive rear drag plate. (An alternative is to weight the tender and support the front on the rear of the locomotive, the front wheels of the tender running in a separate inside frame bogie). Complicated - my Tri-ang example was to be done like this (and converted to EM) but it is yet another of my stalled projects. The gears were replaced with Romford to allow the reducion of the excessive footplate height. Somewhere on RMweb there is a photo of this, but I suspect it was lost in the great data crash. I see the coaches still run on BR Mk1 bogies! The rest seems much the same as before, apart from traction tyres, pickups on the leading bogie, and the replacement of the XT-60 motor with something Chinese. The real thing has been reported hauling 23 vehicles (can't remember where),

The BR Mk1 bogie was fitted to everything Tri-ang back then (TC series excepted of course). Carving up the central spring unit to make it look more GW was a common procedure (not very successful). K's bogies were the easiest fix at the time, but cost nearly as much as the coach. They did solve the ride height and wheel size issues of course. Their buffers improved matters too, though they were not the correct pattern. It was rather my point that if they could produce raised mouldings in the '60s. they could have done it in the '80s, rather than spoiling the model for the proverbial 'ha'p'orth of tar'.

Two Bk/3rds will make one of these! I have to confess to leaving off the yellow/gold lining! I have a feeling the 8 compartment thirds are only 8' wide, so a bit narrow for the Bk/3rds (ignore!). It may well be deliberate to leave room for the ends/glazing, but it looks to me like too much thought would have been involved - I'll have to dig one out and Check. I think there are one or two here in Sardinia - arrived by mistake!

It's not really relevant to talk about the correct bogies for the Tri-ang clerestories as they are rather generic and not models of anything that actually ran on the GWR. For the length as modelled, a 8' 6" WB bogie would be appropriate (K's made one which mine run on). The Brake third is nearest to a D37 (IIRC) if you stick the luggage compartment from a second coach on the end (and ignore that the resut is a bit too narrow - 6" IIRC). Make two of these and the left over passenger compartments make a 10 compartment full third (C10? - this should have 10 foot WB bogies). The other coach is a full 2nd (there weren't any!) and there is not a lot one can do with it. Splicing in extra bits to make a full 1st is possible but an enormous hassle. Sides from Ratio 4 wheelers can give more variety - beware the composite has been stretched to fit the underframe of the third. (IIRC it was originally a 1st/2nd (2 of each). Apologies for any errors in this - I'm away from my library at the moment. DO NOT READ THE NEXT BIT! Once seen it can't be ignored!!!!!!!! Whoever did the tooling didn't realise the end panels should be half size - the end compartments are the same size as the others! Eliminating this is still more hassle, but well worthwhile.

The Rivarossi models were a serious lack of market research. The different scale must have meant many lost sales (mine for a start!). I suppose since no one in Italy seemed to notice the different scales.... I think Airfix etc. seriously hurt Hornby sales (could be wrong?). It certainly did in my case. The above mentioned horse box was a Hornby (or rather Tri-ang - not that there is a signicant difference (apart from the underframes - though both are bin material). This was (still is?) a reasonable model of the GWR prototype (apart from the raised planking grooves). Mine had been back dated with curved 'tumblehome on the ends. The Lima version is rather better (apart from the surfeit of roof ventilators - easily corrected - and the underframe, which is nearly as bad as the Hornby effort.

If Tri-ang could have raised mouldings in the sixties, I fail to see how Hornby could justify not having them in the eighties. This error should long since have been corrected. IMHO of course. The Midland 4-4-0 still had nothing to pull. The Midland clerestorey design is completely different from the Great Western one. (Integral with the carriage ends rather than stuck on top of the roof). What SR coaches? Not the GWR Colletts painted green? We never got the matching full third either. Farish's earlier efforts did at least look like a Maunsell coach (just don't take a ruler too close!) Or am I being too pedantic?

The brown era was only four years, so, at most, half the passenger stock would have been painted in this livery. Everyone's favourite branch line being at the end of the queue. The crimson livery brackets WW1 which everyone tends to ignore for some reason. I was undecided whether to put 'beading' or 'framing'.... (framing intended as in picture.) My EM layout was to be set 'around 1928' and a few crimson vehicles were prepared - a couple of coaches, a 6 wheel siphon (the K's metal kit*), and a horse box. Since then there has been a discussion as to whether such lowly vehicles were actually painted crimson. Modeller's licence will leave them cirimson! *It was still current production when I built it!

GWR framing was picked out in black not chocolate. This is rather irrelevant in the case of the Hornby clerestories as they don't have any, being incorrectly flush sided*. The GWR were not above treating flush sided steel coaches to full livery in the twenties of course. Strictly the Hornby composite (a 2nd/3rd IIRC) is only appropriate to the pre-1911 period as they were rebuilt as full thirds on the abolition of 2nd class - the central lavatories were converted to an additional comparment. I would assume they just qualified for the full chocolate 1908-12 livery rather than the 1912 crimson?. http://www.gwr.org.uk/liveriescoach1880.html http://www.gwr.org.uk/liveriescoach1908.html http://www.gwr.org.uk/liveriescoach1912.html http://www.gwr.org.uk/liveriescoach1922.html * My intention was to buy several of these in the '80s. The lack of framing caused me to drop this idea....

My first thoughts were Märklin, but, although the dimensions are similar, there are differences in colour and the centre rail connectors. Märklin were not usually shy in informing you of the manufacturer either!

That's a modern one! The one I havve on the train storage shelf* coffee table in front of me proudly states 'G N' on chocolate brown. Apart from that, it's much the same apart from the couplings and axleguards. The doors close with a cunning bent piece of wire that combines handle and latch. Somewhere, I've got a grey one labelled 'G W' in gold**. Otherwise just the same apart from having just one veranda as appropriate for a Western van. * SWMBO is not around! ** Fitting - but it should be white of course. Both have lamp brackets, but not the lamps which are harder to obtain (as in rarer and more expensive!) than the vans! (They used to cost 3d or 4d in the fifties IIRC Brighton toy museum has this to say: https://www.brightontoymuseum.co.uk/index/Brake_Van,_GNR_(Hornby_Series) I don't know what LMS has to do with GNR in this case, I think the pre-grouping liveries disappeared almost overnight from the Hornby range - my 1924 locomotive states LMS. Conversely it took five years for the Dublo range to recognise nationalisation!

Now that is complicated! Looking at the picture of the wheelset, it appears that the back of wheel boss is thicker on one side than the other. Could it be to compensate for this? I would agree taha the play should be greater on the centre axle.

The insulated side is normally on the right. The locomotive should go forward when this side is positive. Apart from this, apart from going the wrong way, it doesn't matter as long as the insulation is all on the same side. Obviously the pick ups must connect to the insulated side. This is no help if the device is reversible of course

It was the earlier versions that had opening doors. I remember the last series being rather a disappointment when they appeared (1954 IIRC). All the retooling must have cost a fortune for a scale that was already in serious decline. Some of the marketing decisions of Meccano Ltd. in the fiftieswere rather dubious, No new locomotive (reliveries don't count!) between 1954 and 1957 was serious. Their main competitor produced several during this period!

Reading the instructions, I noted that the beasts should start on 10 volts. No wonder they start with a jerk! (On the odd occasions that they do start of course - normally they just sit there!)

I guessed 'BING' 😃 , but there was very little in it!

I have tried adjusting these horrors. Two Airfix motors have been set aside.... (For a King and a GP5 - my Prairie has a 60's chassis. (Must get around to finishing these projects!!) I need a Bulleid Pacific to complete the set. I have a Rivarossi NYC Hudson so the Farish effort is not a priority. Zinc pest and those motors are off-putting too (though I believe the Hudson had the same motor that was fitted to the Formo 0-6-0). So many trains, so little time....

A pre-war Märklin LMS compound is worth a fortune (a junk one sold for £28,000 not so long ago IIRC). As stated, they didn't sell many, but whether this was due to politics (this would be about the "Peace in our time" period*) or the high price I don't know. 00 was still a niche market at the time. A long time ago (mid/late-fifties) I had a Märklin open wagon, for which I paid the princely sum of 4/6d. I don't know what happened to it, but I do recall it had a weird claw-like buckeye' coupling that refused to couple with anything else. They got replaced with Peco couplings and K's mounting which together cost nearly as much as the wagon (1/6d and 9d). *We were of course re-arming as fast as possible....

Masses (1000+) on eBay at the moment: https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p3519243.m570.l1311&_nkw=wrenn+wagons&_sacat=0 (I understand the "minefield", but Wrenn wagons are like that - they vary from Dublo originals to weird and wonderful pseudo private owners. (Apart from coal and tank wagons, these were not as common as model railway manufacturers would have us believe. (Blame Hornby and their biscuit vans from the 1920s!) and odd bits: https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l2632&_nkw=wrenn+spares&_sacat=180250&LH_TitleDesc=0&_odkw=wrenn+wagons&_osacat=0 There are /were even some new ones Not so long ago, I bought some Prestwin bodies (and then stuck them on Dublo chassis, but that's me!). https://www.ebay.co.uk/str/wrenngalore?_trksid=p2047675.m3561.l2563 Strictly a new' boxed example should come with Dublo type couplings* to replace the Tri-ang horror. * Not quite the same. Early ones were the same (and probably were actual ex-factory stock from Binns Road), but later on they modified the casting (several times) to take their pin point axles (a great improvement) and the push-on Dublo-type coupling. I always regret not buying a mint boxed hopper for £9 about 20 years ago, but I see there is one available now for not much more which in real terms is a considerable drop in value. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/185844065875?epid=844511545&

Adding a front pony seems a good idea. As to livery - you can have any colour you like as long as it's black! Silver/grey decorations on the smokebox are optional depending on the chosen road.

Possibly you could get a Tri-ang bogie in by replacing the pivot with something requiring a bit less height? Personally I would leave well alone and demote the whole thing to 'Shelf queen'.

As already stated, I'd check the wheel back to back dimensions and that the bogies can turn freely. A bit of weight would probably help. Vehicles of different weights is a likely cause of problems. I try for about 15 gm. per axle, though the NMRA advises rather more.