You can reserve your ready-to-run Bachmann quarry Hunslet, 'Alice', 'Britomart', 'Nesta' or 'Dorothea' on the Hattons web site:
009 http://www.hattons.co.uk/stocklist/1000592/1000640/OO9_Narrow_Gauge_Steam_locos/prodlistbyscaleandtype.aspx
.....as well as the GVT and black Ashover 'Bridget' versions of the Baldwin 4-6-0.
Brian Meldon
Call me wishful, but Hattons statuses on the Hunslets says they are at the decorated sample stage. ???
http://www.hattons.co.uk/projectupdates
Antics also says Delivery April 25th.
https://anticsonline.uk/N425/N1598/N1553_OO9-gauge-ready-to-run-rtr-locos/index.html
Is this an error? It seems really early unless they've had it in planning for a while. If not, my wallet better prepare itself. :laugh:
Quote from: M.Melton on February 26, 2018, 00:57
Call me wishful, but Hattons statuses on the Hunslets says they are at the decorated sample stage. ???
http://www.hattons.co.uk/projectupdates
Antics also says Delivery April 25th.
https://anticsonline.uk/N425/N1598/N1553_OO9-gauge-ready-to-run-rtr-locos/index.html
Is this an error? It seems really early unless they've had it in planning for a while. If not, my wallet better prepare itself. :laugh:
My view, for what it's worth, is that both statements are, shall we say, "misleading".
The Baldwin was announced 4 years ago and maybe available soon, to expect the quarry hunslet anytime before 2020 seems to me over optimistic, all we have had from Bachmann so far is the announcement supported by photographs of the real locos. I think it may well be next year before it even reaches the mock-up stage.
Garry
I have NO inside knowledge here but I do think there might be more going on than we realise. Although everyone goes to great pains to tell us that there is no tie-up between Bachmann UK and Bachmann US, clearly there is as the new Bachmann UK slate wagons are the same product as marketed by Bachmann US. Now we know Bachmann US are introducing 'Rusty', their catalogue shows it as a 2018 release with a retail price of $135. It seems to me just possible that the basic chassis for 'Rusty' could be used for the Hunslets with the addition of flycranks and siderods. The wheelbase would be a pretty good compromise, being between those for the Velin and Penrhyn Large Quarry classes, can we really see Bachmann doing different chassis for all these locos? So that would just leave the bodywork to be done, not the most involved part of the design process and one which does not really need to be mechanically tested. I think May this year is still highly unlikely but I do think they might still be here a lot sooner than many are expecting.
I agree. With Bachmann US making Talyllyn coaches, I think we may see RTR Talyllyn stock soon.
Of course, I am not too hopeful of a 2018 release of the Hunselts, as I have found dundas.co.uk to say the slate wagons are due in 2019, despite their tooling already existing. It was confirmed by a USA Bachmann rep that they went to the Talyllyn and measured everything there (even Tom Rolt). I find it strange they measured Tom Rolt, as he doesn't exist in the Thomas world. While it may be in the RWS as Ivo Hugh, I don't see Bachmann USA making a RWS character. That leads me to believe there is something going on!
Back to the Hunslets, I agree with Garry that they are misleading. I'll eat my hat if it turns out to be true, but Bachmann usually takes 2-4 years to release new toolings of products. For example, the new J72 and crane!
They also lazered all the WHR/Nog locos at the same time. But who knows what they will produce?
Potentially the market for Tom Rolt could be more limited as well, since it is a relatively new loco so couldn't feature on pre- or early preservation layouts. Surely Douglas could be a good choice because as well as Talyllyn and Thomas versions, they could do military livery as originally operating at Calshot, and a few industrial liveries as it is basically a standard industrial design.
Danny
Myself, I tend to think there is quite a bit of collaboration going on between Bachmann Branchlines (UK) and Bachmann US. As Bachmann US has been involved in N scale for decades, and has developed and released remarkably well detailed and excellent running N scale locos (steam in particular), I would think Bachmann UK would make use of that small scale expertise, as opposed to trying to 're-invent the wheel".
I would guess the parent company (Kadar?) would have some say in the process, and would be inclined to encourage the of use talented people already well versed in the smaller scale.
As the US releases are actually to OO 1/76 scale verses HO 1/87 scale, perhaps the idea is to get as much mileage out of the Thomas connection over here 1st, then release non Thomas items in the UK.
Just some thoughts.
Jim F
Just keep your powder dry, I think a lot of people will be excited with Bachmanns plans for UK narrow gauge.
Just a pity the rtr never arrived 15 to 20 years ago.
Stan.
For UK non-industrial NG prototypes I think there is always going to be a bit of a problem with how specific vehicles are to a particular line.
Danny
"Antics also says Delivery April 25th."
Yeeeees. But what year? The release of the Baldwin has become farcical. This year, next year, sometime, never.
Review samples of the Baldwins are already here. I was running one last Saturday.
Lets hope they are not so long in production as the Heljans, if they are, the chances are that I'll be long gone before you ever see one.
Today I received the Bachmann Baldwin 4-6-0 that was ordered a very long time ago. I ran it on an oval of track. All OK. Then I tried to couple it to some rolling stock. It doesn't couple to Peco RTR rolling stock. The coupling on the loco is too thick to allow the loop on the rolling stock to engage. I had a similar problem with the Heljan 2-6-2 I received last year and was returned on the same day that I received it, after waiting literally years to get it. The press had been saying that the item had been "developed in conjunction with Peco".
These locos are not cheap, but the makers release items that are simply not fit for purpose.
I feel that i'm being taken for a mug.
The 4-6-0 has NEM coupler pockets correct? Change out the factory fitted couplers for Peco style ones. Problem hopefully solved.
Should we have to do such a thing? No but it sure beats the alternative.
I think the comments aimed at Bachmann are unreasonable. Yes, it would be nice if all worked perfectly together but with respect I have to say that I have had similar problems with all the odd Peco vehicles I have encountered so I suspect the problems lie with their couplings rather than Bachmann's product. Bachmann's loco works perfectly with their own products and also all other vehicles I have with the standard 009 type coupling except the moulded Peco ones. The problem seems to me to be related to the dimensions and shape
of the Peco coupling loop and the material it is made from, which to my mind is just not heavy enough.
True. When I fit the NEM pockets to kits, the PECO couplings snag points and require snipping.
Really, since RTR OO9 is fairly new, we can expect a few minor things like this, especially when they are coming from three different manufacturers.
I pre-ordered 590 and have heard several good remarks about the Baldwins. I'm pretty stoked!
Coupling issues are not confined to one manufacture, in fact there are no manufactures that always get it correct.
Here are some examples:
Some of the Minitrains locos have couplings that are too high to couple up to their own wagons without manual intervention.
Liliput NEM couplings sag so do not couple with their previous non NEM couplings.
The 1980's Roco H0e steam locos couplings were too low so would uncouple with the Roco wagons.
The early Egger-bahn couplings locked up with each other when propelling on the tight curves on Egger's own track.
The Minitrains Brigadelok's rear coupling will lock up and de-rail wagons on Minitrains own track.
The old Peco non NEM coupling face and pin was too deep and would not couple with other makers couplings.
I could go on and on but in short all the H0e ready to run manufactures have had coupling issues at one time or another.
I use the Bemo/Egger type couplings on all my layouts and to get reliable shunting I often have to adjust and adapt the couplings on a great many ready to run items.
There is no universal 'standard' for these couplings so each manufacture is slightly different, so none are 'right' but also none are 'wrong'.
I don't think this sort of problem is confined to 009. I have recently been fitting some standard N gauge couplings to the new Society waggons (building a small layout for a small boy, this seemed the best coupling to use). I got some Peco NEM mounting brackets and some Farish NEM couplings. The brackets did not hold the couplings securely enough to stand up to shunting. However having studied the brackets I have managed to build NEM pockets out of styrene sheet that seem to work fine.
Frank
Quote from: stevebar on May 10, 2018, 19:43
Today I received the Bachmann Baldwin 4-6-0 that was ordered a very long time ago. I ran it on an oval of track. All OK. Then I tried to couple it to some rolling stock. It doesn't couple to Peco RTR rolling stock. The coupling on the loco is too thick to allow the loop on the rolling stock to engage. I had a similar problem with the Heljan 2-6-2 I received last year and was returned on the same day that I received it, after waiting literally years to get it. The press had been saying that the item had been "developed in conjunction with Peco".
These locos are not cheap, but the makers release items that are simply not fit for purpose.
I feel that i'm being taken for a mug.
Not sure what all the fuss is about! I have never run any OO9 loco with loops on the loco. I have always removed them as a matter of course. I then rely on the loops on the rolling stock - surely, problem solved
Quote from: jimowers on May 14, 2018, 21:36
Not sure what all the fuss is about! I have never run any OO9 loco with loops on the loco. I have always removed them as a matter of corse. I then rely on the loops on the rolling stock - surely, problem solved
I'm with Jim on this, on the majority of locos, the coupling loops are not necessary.
Garry
Quote from: garrywhiting on May 15, 2018, 08:12
Quote from: jimowers on May 14, 2018, 21:36
Not sure what all the fuss is about! I have never run any OO9 loco with loops on the loco. I have always removed them as a matter of corse. I then rely on the loops on the rolling stock - surely, problem solved
I'm with Jim on this, on the majority of locos, the coupling loops are not necessary.
Garry
I've never felt the need to use loops for locos and never had an RTR loco with them. I'm not sure where the idea of having only the hook for locos started but it seems to work (is it to stop a derailing loco taking the train down with it as with some old 00 couplings?). For use with uncoupling ramps I also remove the loops from one end of the wagons to make uncoupling smoother.
Quote from: danny on May 15, 2018, 11:18
I've never felt the need to use loops for locos and never had an RTR loco with them. I'm not sure where the idea of having only the hook for locos started but it seems to work (is it to stop a derailing loco taking the train down with it as with some old 00 couplings?). For use with uncoupling ramps I also remove the loops from one end of the wagons to make uncoupling smoother.
Hmm. Your locos don't have loops, and your wagons only have loops at one end. So how do you couple a loco to the non-hook end of a wagon? Or do your trains never go back from whence they came?
Quote from: duttonbay on May 15, 2018, 11:58
Quote from: danny on May 15, 2018, 11:18
I've never felt the need to use loops for locos and never had an RTR loco with them. I'm not sure where the idea of having only the hook for locos started but it seems to work (is it to stop a derailing loco taking the train down with it as with some old 00 couplings?). For use with uncoupling ramps I also remove the loops from one end of the wagons to make uncoupling smoother.
Hmm. Your locos don't have loops, and your wagons only have loops at one end. So how do you couple a loco to the non-hook end of a wagon? Or do your trains never go back from whence they came?
Sorry I should have made it clear - this is on a specific layout so it works on there - elsewhere I have them on both ends. But I think Greenwich couplings have loops on only one end. I'm curious as to how the idea of only having the hook on locos originated.
Danny
Quote from: danny on May 15, 2018, 21:55
I'm curious as to how the idea of only having the hook on locos originated.
Danny
Probably with the original Egger-bahn locos, they all only had a hook and no loop.
Garry
Greenwich couplings, which are self-assembly, are supplied with a loop for each hook. Whether or not you fit them is your choice.
I also have no loops on the locos and loops at both ends of all rolling stock. However the coupling height still has to be correct on the locos. Too high, like with several Minitrains locos and the loop on the next vehicle will not slip up the pin with out intervention.
The critical height is that of the loop or if no loop is fitted the lower end off where the pin has a slope.
I use the small Roco wagons as a height guide as these are virtually impossible to change, they are also the same as the height use by Egger-bahn who were the first to use these couplings on 9mm gauge starting in 1963.
The issue with both loops lifting at the same time can be cured by making sure every loop is exactly horizontal with the rails. Again this is critical and is often incorrect on RTR items.
Brian Meldon
Getting back 'on theme', any further news on expected delivery dates ?