Jump to content

Mark 2b, By Accurascale and IRM!


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, AY Mod said:

 

By how much?

 

I've posted images that answer your question; there's negligible difference (look at the heights of the ends where they adjoin!) and I'm getting a bit narked that you're inventing stuff. I just won't bother providing information next time.

By the amount shown in the photos. Another forum user commented that this difference may also increase once the skewed bogies are rectified so (depending on whether or not this question is valid) there may be a greater height difference than pictured

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
10 minutes ago, Henners84 said:

By the amount shown in the photos.

 

I give in; never mind the fact I've looked at it in the flesh and there's stuff all difference even in an enlarged image you seem to know far more. :no:

  • Like 3
  • Agree 3
  • Funny 2
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Going slightly off topic the Bachmann Mk2 pressure vent stock needed packing out between the bogies and the underframes to make them the correct height. The buffer height was too low which showed that the bodies were correct but the height to the bottom of the underframe was not.

 

The photos suggest to me that the Accurascale Mk2B stock are the correct height.

 

Regardless, I've just ordered nine Mk2B coaches anyway.

Edited by Flood
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have I just had to read half a page of what sounds like a bunch of drivel over a none existing problem. We are still seeing images of prototypes. The image show what looks like half to one millimetre difference in rid hight.  

 

If that’s the case well I’m just going to have to throw all my toys out as I can’t cope with these inadequacies! 
 

The personally I can’t wait to get some to put behind my Deltic. Because there’s no way on gods green earth could I ever produce a model to such high standards has a rtr manufacturer can. even with half a mm or not. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

I give in; never mind the fact I've looked at it in the flesh and there's stuff all difference even in an enlarged image you seem to know far more. :no:

I am not sure how a well meaning question can blow up into quite such negative comments. I have a question that I think is reasonable. That question is aimed at ascertaining whether or not I can run these new mk2bs with Bachmann mk2as and mk1s without noticeable height differences. Given that some of accurascale's suggested rakes include both mk1s and mk2as, I think it legitimate to consider many may want to run prototypical mixed rakes. 

The photos show a height difference between all three coaches with accurascale's coaches sitting between the height of Bachmann's mk1 and mk2 offerings. It is easy to raise the height of the mk2a to match, but how can I reduce the height of the mk1 to match (or increase the height of accurascales mk2b to match). I find it a little surprising why (for what is a reasonable question) there is pushback. Yes it may be that you do not think the difference in the picture is significant, but (if the picture is accurate) i do. We are all entitled to our opinions but cannot I (hopefully) politely suggest that if you opinion differs your refrain from providing a response that is not helpful to the question. Whilst you are entitled to respond I would prefer that responses are constructive to the original question so as to keep this thread on topic and to not let it degenerate into conflict as this has no rightful place in this thread. 

If anyone has any constructive help they could provide on this question it would be appreciated here. If not, then I will take it as a sign that I am the only person who sees this height difference as a potential issue. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 minutes ago, Henners84 said:

Whilst you are entitled to respond

 

Of course I am; I run the site.

 

You keep banging on about something that isn't an issue to the point it's embarrassing. So I'll 'politely suggest' you leave it there. I'm sure others will be able to tell what I'm actually saying at this end of the keyboard without the benefit of audio.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 4
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

Thanks for going to the trouble of posting these, even taking into account the early EP nature of the Mk2b it's clearly close enough to be virtually impossible to detect from normal viewing angles.  

And certainly less noticeable than a Bachmann Mk1 and Mk2a coupled together. So the Mk2b can arguably be used to smooth the transition. For me as well there is so little difference I shan’t be concerned.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The Mark 1 is close enough as makes no difference, especially when passenger loading affects ride height anyway. The Mark 2s will need a bit of jacking up on their bogies as mentioned to bring them into line, and not a hard thing to do.

 

These aren't the 'droids you're looking for, move along, move along.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I'm running Lima and Mainline mk1s with 4ft between coaches and dirty great coupling bars in the middle , so I think a little context is required here .  Surely whether its visible will depend on where the blue/grey is painted, which obviously we can't see on the Accurascale EPs . I think that will be much more importand and possibly more visibly jarring  than the actual hight of the coaches.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Oh well I am going to be bankrupted by these.

 

I have um a large amount of Lima 2B and 2C detailed, glazing not yet done as the prototype Laserglaze was too small for the EE frames. The Lima model is compromised on dimensions.

 

2B is easy TSO BFK FK

 

Now 2C you have two body designs for toilets, I THINK the early are same shells as 2B.

 

As to usage 2B and 2C tended to work together a lot, also with 2A.

 

I will probably finish off the two sets with Lima or merge into one and replace the other (leaves 1 FK excess) but then add to with these. I have also converted Airfix to 2C, that will stay as rest of set is too.

 

AFAIR 2B were mainly WR and some MR, 2C mainly MR and some WR (BSO and FKs).

 

And I was going to produce some 2C toilets on the Cameo 4!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Legend said:

...where the blue/grey is painted...

 

Which, presuming Accurascale get that right, will show up the blue/grey error on the earlier releases Bachmann Mark 2s as wasn't that wrong...?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The phrase is "let sleeping dogs lie" but I would like to comment on this. 

 

First of all I'm sure that Henners84 is not alone in being frustrated with bogie ride hide issues, quite a lot of people in the market for these wonderful Mk2b's will want to run them in prototypical rakes and the uniformity of train liveries and ride hide is quite important to me also. 

 

It was always going to be a big gamble for Accurascale to make product that many will want to use with another manufacture's products and I am certain Fran and guys at Accurascale are well aware of this, the Oxford Rail Mk3s strike me as a good example - they should have sold like hot cakes but many won't buy them because the livery doesn't match their other stock (regardless of who is "right" or "wrong").  But they've taken that gamble and power to their elbow for doing so! 

 

The key thing though is no one is criticising Accurascale or their product - it is obviously fantastic and built to highest possible standards - indeed a few have expressed their desire for Accurascale to duplicate the other Mk1/2s to ensure a matching rake which speaks volumes about the praise people have for the company, but understandably Fran and the guys are being cautious (and I don't blame them!). They obviously have no control over what "the competition" do so lets just see what happens and help them by supporting their products and coming up with solutions to problems with other manufacturers issues that relate to this. 

 

I will be waiting the decorated samples with baited breath to see what they do about the thorny issue of livery (BR blue and NSE blue will no do spark debate whatever they do!) .

 

...and yes I have ordered several, and will probably be making a second order at some point... and then if 2cs follow (please!!) then well...! 

 

Bruce 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Henners84 said:

I am not sure how a well meaning question can blow up into quite such negative comments. I have a question that I think is reasonable. That question is aimed at ascertaining whether or not I can run these new mk2bs with Bachmann mk2as and mk1s without noticeable height differences. Given that some of accurascale's suggested rakes include both mk1s and mk2as, I think it legitimate to consider many may want to run prototypical mixed rakes. 

The photos show a height difference between all three coaches with accurascale's coaches sitting between the height of Bachmann's mk1 and mk2 offerings. It is easy to raise the height of the mk2a to match, but how can I reduce the height of the mk1 to match (or increase the height of accurascales mk2b to match). I find it a little surprising why (for what is a reasonable question) there is pushback. Yes it may be that you do not think the difference in the picture is significant, but (if the picture is accurate) i do. We are all entitled to our opinions but cannot I (hopefully) politely suggest that if you opinion differs your refrain from providing a response that is not helpful to the question. Whilst you are entitled to respond I would prefer that responses are constructive to the original question so as to keep this thread on topic and to not let it degenerate into conflict as this has no rightful place in this thread. 

If anyone has any constructive help they could provide on this question it would be appreciated here. If not, then I will take it as a sign that I am the only person who sees this height difference as a potential issue. Thanks

 

At the risk of offending anyone, I can see the height difference clearly. The buffers only match because the Accurascale buffers are drooping, but as this is an EP we can't really tell until the final model is produced.

 

 

I was unable to react to Henners84's post.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MJI said:

 

 

AFAIR 2B were mainly WR and some MR, 2C mainly MR and some WR (BSO and FKs).

 

Depends on what period you are thinking of. When new, 11 2b FK went to the Eastern and the other 100 to the Western, which also had 30 2c BSOs. The other 220 2cs all went to the LMR. It wasn't until much later that they moved around a lot although some 2c BSOs were loaned to the ER in 1971 or thereabouts. 2a stock initially went 80 WR and rest ER but around 100 moved ER to WR from 1971 then as the WR introduced air-con stock some 2as migrated to the LMR.

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Flood said:

Going slightly off topic the Bachmann Mk2 pressure vent stock needed packing out between the bogies and the underframes to make them the correct height. The buffer height was too low which showed that the bodies were correct but the height to the bottom of the underframe was not.

 

The photos suggest to me that the Accurascale Mk2B stock are the correct height.

 

Regardless, I've just ordered nine Mk2B coaches anyway.

Coincidentally, I have ordered nine as well!

 

As for ride height and buffer height, my view is that Accurascale should live up to their name and get these things right and not worry about Bachmann being different because they are in error in some way. Same goes for livery, but the big issue there is the appalling Hornby rendition of blue/grey on their Mark 1 stock, including the RB and FO that would otherwise go well with 2b stock. Bachmann messed up the blue/grey on their early Mark 2 and 2a releases but later production runs were better.

 

Don't forget that Bachmann Mark 1 stock ride height is not uniform. It varies according to type of bogie and also seems to vary over time depending on when models were produced.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

Depends on what period you are thinking of. When new, 11 2b FK went to the Eastern and the other 100 to the Western, which also had 30 2c BSOs. The other 220 2cs all went to the LMR. It wasn't until much later that they moved around a lot although some 2c BSOs were loaned to the ER in 1971 or thereabouts. 2a stock initially went 80 WR and rest ER but around 100 moved ER to WR from 1971 then as the WR introduced air-con stock some 2as migrated to the LMR.

 

 

Most of my information is from spotting notes.

 

I even had marks in the book where the toilets changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Henners84 said:

I am not sure how a well meaning question can blow up into quite such negative comments. I have a question that I think is reasonable. That question is aimed at ascertaining whether or not I can run these new mk2bs with Bachmann mk2as and mk1s without noticeable height differences. Given that some of accurascale's suggested rakes include both mk1s and mk2as, I think it legitimate to consider many may want to run prototypical mixed rakes. 

The photos show a height difference between all three coaches with accurascale's coaches sitting between the height of Bachmann's mk1 and mk2 offerings. It is easy to raise the height of the mk2a to match, but how can I reduce the height of the mk1 to match (or increase the height of accurascales mk2b to match). I find it a little surprising why (for what is a reasonable question) there is pushback. Yes it may be that you do not think the difference in the picture is significant, but (if the picture is accurate) i do. We are all entitled to our opinions but cannot I (hopefully) politely suggest that if you opinion differs your refrain from providing a response that is not helpful to the question. Whilst you are entitled to respond I would prefer that responses are constructive to the original question so as to keep this thread on topic and to not let it degenerate into conflict as this has no rightful place in this thread. 

If anyone has any constructive help they could provide on this question it would be appreciated here. If not, then I will take it as a sign that I am the only person who sees this height difference as a potential issue. Thanks

 

9 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

And certainly less noticeable than a Bachmann Mk1 and Mk2a coupled together. So the Mk2b can arguably be used to smooth the transition. For me as well there is so little difference I shan’t be concerned.

 

9 hours ago, Ian J. said:

The Mark 1 is close enough as makes no difference, especially when passenger loading affects ride height anyway. The Mark 2s will need a bit of jacking up on their bogies as mentioned to bring them into line, and not a hard thing to do.

 

These aren't the 'droids you're looking for, move along, move along.

 

9 hours ago, Legend said:

I'm running Lima and Mainline mk1s with 4ft between coaches and dirty great coupling bars in the middle , so I think a little context is required here .  Surely whether its visible will depend on where the blue/grey is painted, which obviously we can't see on the Accurascale EPs . I think that will be much more importand and possibly more visibly jarring  than the actual hight of the coaches.

 

3 hours ago, D400 said:

The phrase is "let sleeping dogs lie" but I would like to comment on this. 

 

First of all I'm sure that Henners84 is not alone in being frustrated with bogie ride hide issues, quite a lot of people in the market for these wonderful Mk2b's will want to run them in prototypical rakes and the uniformity of train liveries and ride hide is quite important to me also. 

 

It was always going to be a big gamble for Accurascale to make product that many will want to use with another manufacture's products and I am certain Fran and guys at Accurascale are well aware of this, the Oxford Rail Mk3s strike me as a good example - they should have sold like hot cakes but many won't buy them because the livery doesn't match their other stock (regardless of who is "right" or "wrong").  But they've taken that gamble and power to their elbow for doing so! 

 

The key thing though is no one is criticising Accurascale or their product - it is obviously fantastic and built to highest possible standards - indeed a few have expressed their desire for Accurascale to duplicate the other Mk1/2s to ensure a matching rake which speaks volumes about the praise people have for the company, but understandably Fran and the guys are being cautious (and I don't blame them!). They obviously have no control over what "the competition" do so lets just see what happens and help them by supporting their products and coming up with solutions to problems with other manufacturers issues that relate to this. 

 

I will be waiting the decorated samples with baited breath to see what they do about the thorny issue of livery (BR blue and NSE blue will no do spark debate whatever they do!) .

 

...and yes I have ordered several, and will probably be making a second order at some point... and then if 2cs follow (please!!) then well...! 

 

Bruce 

 

 

For heavens sake.  The Accurascale Mk2b models shown are first engineering prototypes with deformed bogie frames. Some of the posts here are generally hinting at Accurascale's vehicles being right, whe nyou are suggesting they are made wrong to match up to other manufacturers products. This is not how Accurascsale work, so just be patient.  You don't have to buy them after all  

  • Like 4
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Covkid said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

For heavens sake.  The Accurascale Mk2b models shown are first engineering prototypes with deformed bogie frames. Some of the posts here are generally hinting at Accurascale's vehicles being right, whe nyou are suggesting they are made wrong to match up to other manufacturers products. This is not how Accurascsale work, so just be patient.  You don't have to buy them after all  

I really agree with you. Some people aren't happy unless they have something to moan about. These models look absolutely fantastic at a great price too considering all the features.

  • Agree 5
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...