Beyond the Class 85

[GordonC]

I see a lot disagreed with my view electrics are not popular...

 

So if they are, in Delia Smiths words to Norwich fans "where are you ???"

 

We have a 40+ year old class81 by triang and liliput.

We have a 30 year old 86 from Hornby

We have 20 year old versions of 90,91,92 from Hornby, and similar Lima87 and 92.

 

In the 21st century we have 2 new OHLE models ? -and how many diesels ?

 

If there are so much pent demand, why don't we have an 82,83,84, a reworked long over due class 81 or even th gap which is the class 89 ?

We have afterall a good set of diesel prototype one offs, and any number of pilot era diesels... Indeed there are hardly any gaps in diesel classes left to fill... Classes 20, 31, 33, 37, 47 have been done, redone and redone a 3rd. 4th, even 5th manufacturer in some cases.

Heljan seems confident people will pay £100 for a diesel shunter..so that must be more optimistic than a class 85 sitting on shelves at £80.

 

Strange fact of life, but Riko intls failure was largely put down to over optimistic class 92 sales.. They started out at £49.99 and dropped to £32 for years following, some even made it into that great £19.99 sell off in the early 90's.. Selling electrics in the 1990s was a real hard sell I don't see any change now.

 

No drinking the overhead juice on this one.

 

A class 71/74 however would be a very different prospect... It afterall doesn't need the OHLE to look sensible. After that the class 89 has potential (if it returned to mainline) and then onto the class 81.. Which was the master of all trade in its years and been off the shelf for 40 years. As for a new class 90.. More chance Hornby doing an 87 in Bulgarian colour scheme first.

 

It's not purely a UK thing either, looking across Europe, whilst Austria/Germany fairs well (afterall most of it is electrified), the rest of Europe is a bit of an electric wasteland dominated by diesel and steam... Dutch, French apart from an ICE/TGV there is little new or recent.. Eastern Europe electrics are almost non-existent.. Ok we have the all encompassing Taurus ...

 

Manufacturers build according to demand, its 1st place steam, 2nd place diesel and 3rd place electric.. If it were different they are either not making money or the market has changed.. As neither are true the order must be correct.

 

I think your logic is a bit flawed. If DC locos are so popular like the Class 71 and 74, well why has it taken so long to get a Class 73 up to modern standards? They dont even need third rail track to run on when on diesel. Would a 73 not have far better sales potential (time period, lifespan, number of livery variations) than 71/74's? Is the same Lima/Hornby Class 73 any newer than the Hornby 90/91/92 models and its been getting rolled out for the past 20 years too? It may have been one of the better Lima models, but it still hasn't been replaced until the planned Dapol model.

 

Its a big assumption to make that Heljans shunter will sell at £100. I've got 3 85's but absolutely no plans to get a Class 05

 

And you're forgetting the Class 92's are overhead and third rail, they would look perfectly sensible on third rail tracks on their own too.

 

It wasn't just the model Class 92's expectations that were over-optimistic - how many years did it take to get the real ones in service and have some of them not still to do a days work now 20 years later? Had the real ones been more visible and better travelled, the models may have sold better too.

 

I cant disagree with your assessment of the manufacturers priorities, but when you look at some of the things that have been produced and seeing the steam and diesel classes getting ticked off, I am amazed that more of the AC locos and units haven't been produced in all this time. I'm not saying every AC loco class should be produced, but some of the larger classes have to have potential for long-term sales. It has got to be an untapped market while the rest get increasingly crowded

[ThaneofFife]

and if anybody wants to play the argument card on ac locos further........whats to stop the likes of Heljan having another bash but on a limited run basis as per many other locos that have gone before?  My trust in Heljan to get another AC right took a hit after the 86 attempt. 

 

I wonder if that was a great model if it would have spawned a Class 87 using the same basic chassis.........I think it stood a good chance.

 

with the excellent mk1 coaches and the aircon mk2es and f's coming, the class 85 and the new catenary you can start to see the possibility of putting together a pretty decent WCML scene to modern standards-it just needs at least one more loco to broaden the appeal and then I think electrics might see a bit of a renaissance (or at least thats my wishful thinking kicking in).

 

Ideally with the Class 85 now established and Dapols welcome news about further catenary being added to their catalogue there is a perceived pent up demand out there to warrant another AC.   My gut tells me that from Bachmann it could well be the Class 81 due to the similarities to the 85 but maybe they will throw a curve ball and leave the 81 for another time if indeed they are planning on adding to their electric fleet.  I cant see them just producing the 85 and then calling it a day......ive said it elsewhere though that I reckon the next AC from Bachmann will be a Farish N gauge version of the 85.  Not that thats a bad thing.......

Edited March 27, 2014 by ThaneofFife

[PieGuyRob]

So, eight years later.

Heljan have redone the 86 in orignal form and the 4 and 6 variant.

Bachmann went with the class 90.

Hornby the class 87, 91, and 370.

Accurascale is about to release the 92, and possibly is about to announce the 89 in conjunction with Rails of Sheffield.

Rails also have the class 80 announced.

 

But, still no units in 00 gauge. N has the class 314, 319, 320 and 321 all about to be released at the time of typing this. As well as the 92.

 

Looking forward, only the early AL classes 81-84 are left, to produce to a modern standard. No doubt at some point, Heljan will relook at the 86/2, hopefully. That means nearly all the AC electric locomotives are available rtr. That's not bad going. It would be nice if the 81 was looked at next for Bachmann's next electric locomotive, fingers crossed.

 

In terms of a unit, I would like to see the class 323. But, from a manufacturers point of view, surely the classes 304, 305 and 308 would surely be the best. In their various guises they had a large operational area and lots of liveries. Of the top of my head they wore BR green, blue, blue and grey, network southeast, regional railways and west Yorkshire PTE red and cream. You could also do the class 504 as well.

Edited April 4, 2022 by PieGuyRob

[Pete the Elaner]

There are lots of possibilities for AC EMUs but how well did the 350s sell? Bachmann will know the answer but we have not seen them repeated regularly like some locos.

The way prices have gone up recently makes a 4 car EMU pricey. Too pricey for many, so would this make a manufacturer even more hesitant to produce one?

How easy would it be to scale up & amend the artwork for an N gauge unit to OO? With the way manufacturers are keeping things under wraps until shortly before release, somebody could well have something under development...or maybe not?

[Pandora]

The Hornby retooled 91 , when will it be available? Has it slipped due to lockdown?

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

The Hornby retooled 91 , when will it be available? Has it slipped due to lockdown?

 

I believe some liveries have already been released.

[Legend]

On 04/04/2022 at 15:11, PieGuyRob said:

So, eight years later.

Heljan have redone the 86 in orignal form and the 4 and 6 variant.

Bachmann went with the class 90.

Hornby the class 87, 91, and 370.

Accurascale is about to release the 92, and possibly is about to announce the 89 in conjunction with Rails of Sheffield.

Rails also have the class 80 announced.

 

But, still no units in 00 gauge. N has the class 314, 319, 320 and 321 all about to be released at the time of typing this. As well as the 92.

 

Looking forward, only the early AL classes 81-84 are left, to produce to a modern standard. No doubt at some point, Heljan will relook at the 86/2, hopefully. That means nearly all the AC electric locomotives are available rtr. That's not bad going. It would be nice if the 81 was looked at next for Bachmann's next electric locomotive, fingers crossed.

 

In terms of a unit, I would like to see the class 323. But, from a manufacturers point of view, surely the classes 304, 305 and 308 would surely be the best. In their various guises they had a large operational area and lots of liveries. Of the top of my head they wore BR green, blue, blue and grey, network southeast, regional railways and west Yorkshire PTE red and cream. You could also do the class 504 as well.

 

 I think the issue may well be cost . 4 car emus seem to be approaching £500 (using 4- BEP as datum ) from the big boys .  I think one of the issues is complexity of through electrical connections so that only one decoder needed for DCCers 

 

The obvious low hanging fruit to me is 313/314/315/507/508 family . I still hope Revolution might scale up their N 313/314 (or even their 320) but I'd love if Accurascale would do it . Bachmann would turn out a great model but just be too expensive , judging by their 150/158 pricing .

 

So I'm not sure what is beyond the 85 for Bachmann except maybe to revisit an 81 . I still have my Tri-ang Hornby ones 

 

82/83/84 maybe more Heljan or KR territory 

Edited April 13, 2022 by Legend

[wombatofludham]

People talk about cost yet it hasn't stopped companies bringing out new multi-car units or, in the case of Hornby, correcting past mistakes (4-VEP) despite the price point.  Presumably neither Bachmann nor Hornby (or Heljan) are so clueless as to waste money on setting up production for 3 and 4 car units that won't sell because they are priced above £300?

 

I can see an argument for the PEP derived units, virtually identical body components for both three and four car units would help for production, however, they are of limited use for anyone modelling West Coast electrics.  Until the 313s were allocated to the North London Lines the PEP derived units only ran alongside the Classes 81-90 in and around the greater Glasgow area (class 314), and given the 313s only ran to Watford, I suspect the number of OO gauge modellers running the four-six track WCML out of London is vanishingly small.  When the Norwich route gained 86s (and later, the 90s) then they will have rubbed shoulders with the 315s but again only on London area multi-track lines.  So for me a 304 or 310 would be arguably more complementary to the range of locos now available, covering a wider area of the original WCML electrification scheme and both classes have a wide range of liveries.  So if the key is to have something that sits alongside the current range of WCML traction available to buy, it does really come down to a 304 or 310.

[Pete the Elaner]

32 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

People talk about cost yet it hasn't stopped companies bringing out new multi-car units or, in the case of Hornby, correcting past mistakes (4-VEP) despite the price point.  Presumably neither Bachmann nor Hornby (or Heljan) are so clueless as to waste money on setting up production for 3 and 4 car units that won't sell because they are priced above £300?

 

I can see an argument for the PEP derived units, virtually identical body components for both three and four car units would help for production, however, they are of limited use for anyone modelling West Coast electrics.  Until the 313s were allocated to the North London Lines the PEP derived units only ran alongside the Classes 81-90 in and around the greater Glasgow area (class 314), and given the 313s only ran to Watford, I suspect the number of OO gauge modellers running the four-six track WCML out of London is vanishingly small.  When the Norwich route gained 86s (and later, the 90s) then they will have rubbed shoulders with the 315s but again only on London area multi-track lines.  So for me a 304 or 310 would be arguably more complementary to the range of locos now available, covering a wider area of the original WCML electrification scheme and both classes have a wide range of liveries.  So if the key is to have something that sits alongside the current range of WCML traction available to buy, it does really come down to a 304 or 310.

 

I would be that minority! A 313 is spot on for the AC era I model (I also model it in the 30s/40s too).

 

Something missing which could be very flexible are the Mk3 derived units, 317-322. Bratchell makes excellent kits, but there are several different variations. 317s ran on BedPan & the /1s ran on the WCML for a while. 321s on the GE, then WCML & also around Leeds. 320s around Glasgow, 319s on Thameslink & there are 3rd rail equivalents but I don't know their class numbers (455/456).

319s give them another dimension though: they ran on the 3rd rail network alongside EPBs, CEPs & VEPs which are existing models.

The bodies of the above classes all have similarities but the ends look different. I believe these used to be separate components anyway.

 

As for the 304/310: The 305s & 308s were visually very similar to 304 & ran on the GE. It is currently not possible to consider the GE for anything in the last 60 years because it has been dominated by EMUs which are not available RTR.

The 304 also had a similar DC equivalent: the 504.

The 312 was visually similar to the 310, especially after the earlier class lost their wrap-around windows.

[97406]

On 13/04/2022 at 14:57, Pete the Elaner said:

 

I would be that minority! A 313 is spot on for the AC era I model (I also model it in the 30s/40s too).

 

Something missing which could be very flexible are the Mk3 derived units, 317-322. Bratchell makes excellent kits, but there are several different variations. 317s ran on BedPan & the /1s ran on the WCML for a while. 321s on the GE, then WCML & also around Leeds. 320s around Glasgow, 319s on Thameslink & there are 3rd rail equivalents but I don't know their class numbers (455/456).

319s give them another dimension though: they ran on the 3rd rail network alongside EPBs, CEPs & VEPs which are existing models.

The bodies of the above classes all have similarities but the ends look different. I believe these used to be separate components anyway.

 

As for the 304/310: The 305s & 308s were visually very similar to 304 & ran on the GE. It is currently not possible to consider the GE for anything in the last 60 years because it has been dominated by EMUs which are not available RTR.

The 304 also had a similar DC equivalent: the 504.

The 312 was visually similar to the 310, especially after the earlier class lost their wrap-around windows.

Well-designed tooling with differing inserts would cover the AM4/5/8/Bury units, as well as the same approach being used for other families of EMU. I'd love an RTR 304, as the cab windscreens are a nightmare to perfect.

 

It's also a shame the DC kits 303 is no longer available, as it was a good'un, so an RTR one of those would also be welcome.

[wombatofludham]

On 04/04/2022 at 16:21, Pete the Elaner said:

There are lots of possibilities for AC EMUs but how well did the 350s sell? Bachmann will know the answer but we have not seen them repeated regularly like some locos.

 

Thing is the 350 is to an extent an outlier on its own.  They entered service in 2006 (as passenger units, testing began in 2005) right at the very end of loco haulage for Virgin, and so really lacks any relevance to other electric ranges unless you count the Hornby Mussolino (which is a Marmite model and hard to get hold of in Virgin livery) or possibly the Virgin 87 and 90, which have only just been released in decent model form.  So, if it has been a sales lemon, then it was a self fulfilling act.  I suspect the 350 got produced due to the commonality with the 450.

A 304 or 310 to modern standards, and despite the likely price which doesn't seem to be putting off other unit purchasers, would at least have commonality with the whole range of currently available RTR electrics from the 85 through to the 90 and with multiple livery options which would make a more sensible sales "spread bet".  Cost will be an issue for many, but I suspect there would be enough sales, albeit slower than a more celebrity unit like the Blue Pullman or diesel like a 47, at current pricing to make a reasonable return.

Not that I'm privvy to any information, but companies are not backing away from 3 and 4 car units, and even Hornby have realised that with the prices being achieved second hand for their woeful VEP they could invest in a retool and charge "modern" prices to recoup the investment.  That suggests the business model for multi-car units hasn't been broken by price rises.

[adb968008]

The 350 was cheap enough when it came out, the 450 was a bit of leap, however all of them are not the easiest now to find.

 

interestingly, a 350 has roughly doubled from its £100 lows to circa £250 now, I suspect aging liveries is to blame.

 

But whilst many baulked at the “high” price of £300 on the 450 a few years back, it wasn't really discounted, however good luck with finding one under £500 now on ebay, which means its value is in the range you could expect a re-run for now.

 

A 450 in new SWR and a 350 in LNW would be nice (though personally a TPE one would fit the current vogue, even if they've moved on). Even better if an SWR 159 popped up around it.

Edited April 19, 2022 by adb968008

[GordonC]

On 13/04/2022 at 14:06, wombatofludham said:

People talk about cost yet it hasn't stopped companies bringing out new multi-car units or, in the case of Hornby, correcting past mistakes (4-VEP) despite the price point.  Presumably neither Bachmann nor Hornby (or Heljan) are so clueless as to waste money on setting up production for 3 and 4 car units that won't sell because they are priced above £300?

 

I can see an argument for the PEP derived units, virtually identical body components for both three and four car units would help for production, however, they are of limited use for anyone modelling West Coast electrics.  Until the 313s were allocated to the North London Lines the PEP derived units only ran alongside the Classes 81-90 in and around the greater Glasgow area (class 314), and given the 313s only ran to Watford, I suspect the number of OO gauge modellers running the four-six track WCML out of London is vanishingly small.  When the Norwich route gained 86s (and later, the 90s) then they will have rubbed shoulders with the 315s but again only on London area multi-track lines.  So for me a 304 or 310 would be arguably more complementary to the range of locos now available, covering a wider area of the original WCML electrification scheme and both classes have a wide range of liveries.  So if the key is to have something that sits alongside the current range of WCML traction available to buy, it does really come down to a 304 or 310.

 

While I'd definitely buy a 304 or 310 or 314, I'd suggest there could also be 317/318, 320-322. The 317s and 321s were both used on the London Euston - Birmingham New Street via Northampton services and would also fit into the era between the 310s and 350s.

 

Although it was the early Class 317s with the different front end and window vent arrangement, those units actually got about a bit on outer suburban services - BedPan, ECML, WCML, Anglia and there could be some overlap with 455s.

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, GordonC said:

 

While I'd definitely buy a 304 or 310 or 314, I'd suggest there could also be 317/318, 320-322. The 317s and 321s were both used on the London Euston - Birmingham New Street via Northampton services and would also fit into the era between the 310s and 350s.

 

Although it was the early Class 317s with the different front end and window vent arrangement, those units actually got about a bit on outer suburban services - BedPan, ECML, WCML, Anglia and there could be some overlap with 455s.

 

I'm curious as to why you omitted 319s? Apart from the cab ends, they shared a lot with 317/8 & 320-322. They look perfectly at home on 3rd rail and have ventured further in the last few years too.

[GordonC]

31 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

I'm curious as to why you omitted 319s? Apart from the cab ends, they shared a lot with 317/8 & 320-322. They look perfectly at home on 3rd rail and have ventured further in the last few years too.

 

True, I had started by thinking of the 317 and 321 being WCML units, but extended with the closely related ones, but thought the 319s would complicate things with several different body-styles already in 317/1, 317/2 & 318, 319, 320, 321, 322 and the minor window variations at cab ends especially. I would really have thought Bachmann wouldn't be too far off the 317/2 and 318s with their Class 150 tooling that they would have had a head-start

 

The 319s must be due scaling up from Bachmann at some point from N to OO anyway. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they appeared in one of the quarterly updates

Edited April 29, 2022 by GordonC

[adb968008]

7 hours ago, GordonC said:

 

True, I had started by thinking of the 317 and 321 being WCML units, but extended with the closely related ones, but thought the 319s would complicate things with several different body-styles already in 317/1, 317/2 & 318, 319, 320, 321, 322 and the minor window variations at cab ends especially. I would really have thought Bachmann wouldn't be too far off the 317/2 and 318s with their Class 150 tooling that they would have had a head-start

 

The 319s must be due scaling up from Bachmann at some point from N to OO anyway. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they appeared in one of the quarterly updates

I’m very surprised the 150 toolings werent variable enough to turn out things like a 317, 318 or even a 455/9…unless the best is yet to come.

[Ravenser]

21 hours ago, GordonC said:

 

True, I had started by thinking of the 317 and 321 being WCML units, but extended with the closely related ones, but thought the 319s would complicate things with several different body-styles already in 317/1, 317/2 & 318, 319, 320, 321, 322 and the minor window variations at cab ends especially. I would really have thought Bachmann wouldn't be too far off the 317/2 and 318s with their Class 150 tooling that they would have had a head-start

 

The 319s must be due scaling up from Bachmann at some point from N to OO anyway. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they appeared in one of the quarterly updates

 

 

Some of us think of 321s as bread and butter GE units  - much of my commuting was done on them

 

Add in the West Yorks units, and wherever the GE's offcasts end up , and you have a strong case. 

 

If you dare to do a 4 car EMU , then 319 and 321 are the ones to go for amongst the Mk3 derivative 25kV units . 322 might be a spinoff