'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[melmerby]

5 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

More like 1978, surely? The "Winter of Discontent" that ran on until March 1979 or so?

 

There wasn't a postal strike that winter though. For that, you have to go back to early 1971—a continuous all-out strike that lasted, IIRC, about 3 months.

Er?

Where did that come from?

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Er?

Where did that come from?

 

Random deviation from mention of 1979 being Hornby's "Year of the (best forgotten) Coach". But those weren't generic, just ghastly.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Compound2632

[Steamport Southport]

6 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Random deviation from mention of 1979 being Hornby's "Year of the (best forgotten) Coach". But those weren't generic, just ghastly.

 

Far better than what came before them* and in some instances after. Crude but basically accurate renditions of Collett, Maunsell, Gresley and Stanier coaches. A bit of detailing did make the difference.

 

You do know that many of the excellent layouts of the time such as Stoke Summit used detailed Hornby Gresleys and Pullmans? You can spot them a mile off. I think some might still be running on layouts today.

 

The Hornby Colletts were diagrams E127, D95 and H33.

 

 

*Not including Airfix and Mainline obviously

 

 

Jason

[JohnR]

8 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Far better than what came before them* and in some instances after. Crude but basically accurate renditions of Collett, Maunsell, Gresley and Stanier coaches. A bit of detailing did make the difference.

 

You do know that many of the excellent layouts of the time such as Stoke Summit used detailed Hornby Gresleys and Pullmans? You can spot them a mile off. I think some might still be running on layouts today.

 

The Hornby Colletts were diagrams E127, D95 and H33.

 

 

*Not including Airfix and Mainline obviously

 

 

Jason

 

The southern coaches looked nothing like Maunsell coaches. They were the GW Collets (of which they wernt a bad rendition) painted green. 

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, JohnR said:

hey were the GW Collets (of which they wernt a bad rendition) 

 

That's generous. My teenage self bought the Stanier brake third, put it next to my Mainline P1 brake third and composite, and didn't buy another Hornby item for 30 years. Ironically, I think the current Staniers were my first Hornby purchase of modern times!

[amdaley]

Has anyone got a Genesis coach with a faulty lighting unit ?

[Steamport Southport]

12 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

The southern coaches looked nothing like Maunsell coaches. They were the GW Collets (of which they wernt a bad rendition) painted green. 

 

Altered with parts to make them look like Maunsell though. Look at the roofs. Windows aren't a mile away either.

 

But were they any worse than anything RTR that came before which was what was suggested? Far from it.

 

Short BR Mark Ones and Pullmans, with generic coaches from Farish and that's your lot if you wanted something that was even remotely SR like.

 

I had hoped we had moved away from all this generic stuff. But it seems that some want more of it.

 

 

Jason

[Willie Whizz]

I think more to the point, it’s not that they explicitly want more of it as such, but that given the diversity of pre-grouping stock and the small market for any individual railway’s version of it, people who need RTR (for whatever reason) to make a plausible model of their interest are welcoming it as the best they are realistically likely to get. If it’s a straight choice between “better than nothing” or “nothing”, and making your own isn’t an option, then people will buy it. 

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

Short BR Mark Ones

Really?

I assumed the Hornby ones were derived from the Triang ones which are a scale 64' 6" over body extremes.

That appears to be pretty well dead on.

such as this one:

 

[Talltim]

10 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Really?

I assumed the Hornby ones were derived from the Triang ones which are a scale 64' 6" over body extremes.

That appears to be pretty well dead on.

such as this one:

 

Thats one appears to have been used as store by the S&T dept

[melmerby]

22 minutes ago, Talltim said:

Thats one appears to have been used as store by the S&T dept

All that gubbins is for a camera car

The camera is on a pivot at the LH end and swivels with the bogie, then there is a battery pack, then A Raspberry Pi Zero 2W, then a small circuit board with a function decoder.

It's a tight squeeze but works.

 

It's made by Triang and AFAIK it's a Mk 1 composite corridor coach, on the original Mk 1 bogies. It's about 257mm, which works out at 64' 3"

It started life Blue & Grey as can be seen by the underlying paint.

[JohnR]

21 minutes ago, melmerby said:

All that gubbins is for a camera car

The camera is on a pivot at the LH end and swivels with the bogie, then there is a battery pack, then A Raspberry Pi Zero 2W, then a small circuit board with a function decoder.

It's a tight squeeze but works.

 

It's made by Triang and AFAIK it's a Mk 1 composite corridor coach, on the original Mk 1 bogies. It's about 257mm, which works out at 64' 3"

It started life Blue & Grey as can be seen by the underlying paint.

 

The very first Triang coachs were 6" long, swiftly replaced by some that were 7" long. However, through most of the 50s and early 60s they had 9" long Mark 1s. The current Railroad Mark 1 weres introduced in 1963, and they were a scale length.

[markw]

11 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

The very first Triang coachs were 6" long, swiftly replaced by some that were 7" long. However, through most of the 50s and early 60s they had 9" long Mark 1s. The current Railroad Mark 1 weres introduced in 1963, and they were a scale length.

The first scale length MK1 was introduced in 1963 but the current Railroad MK1 was introduced in 2013.

[PhilJ W]

Thaxted 1913.

 

[barrymx5]

On 14/12/2022 at 12:14, toby_tl10 said:

That's a wild idea. First of all you need (at least) two lengths. Then the roof, clerestory/not, flat/curved profile. These two seem the most obvious to me. There is a possibility it would work I suppose...

 

Exodus coaches maybe?

Do you mean Exley?😉

[SRman]

My set of eight SECR coaches arrived Down Under at last, nicely in time for Christmas. I have to say the finish on these coaches is superb, very rich and lustrous, and the lining is very fine indeed. I took one over to DougN's place yesterday and we put it side by side with a Hornby NBR version, and while the Hornby one has nice lining, the Hatton's one is even finer still.

I received five of the Hatton's LBSC coaches a while back, and those run with four of the Hornby versions, and the colours and finishes don't clash: they differ slightly, but not enough to say either is wrong, it's more like one set has come from a different workshop or faded very slightly. The first coach, a full-brake, in the last photo is a Hatton's example, then the next four are Hornby, so you can see the slight contrast there.

 

 

 

[drt7uk]

Sorry if this has already been covered, but are any of you replacing the couplings with closer couplings or chains? 

 

Like a few on here my rake is fairly fixed and permanently on my layout so thinking about changing them...

 

Many thanks

[Compound2632]

4 minutes ago, drt7uk said:

Sorry if this has already been covered, but are any of you replacing the couplings with closer couplings or chains? 

 

Like a few on here my rake is fairly fixed and permanently on my layout so thinking about changing them...

 

There was a discussion just a few pages back, if you care to hunt for it. It did drift off into a discussion of how close-coupled fixed rakes were done on the real thing.

[drt7uk]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

There was a discussion just a few pages back, if you care to hunt for it. It did drift off into a discussion of how close-coupled fixed rakes were done on the real thing.

Great thank you, will go hunting...

[Butler Henderson]

On the subject of closer coupling my idea to run a power link from one to light my Hornby coaches failed due to the power conduting couplings I had acquired for little £ off ebay being too close coupled. Wondering is any one knows of a NEM362 socket extender - a NEM socket that plugs into the existing NEM socket. Or alteratively 362 to 363 and 363 to 362 adapters which could be combined to achieve the same.Tapping a feed is quite easy - remove the body and undo  the screws holding the pick up contacts in place at the end for the condcutive . With the contact anyway from the plastic a wire from the conductive coupler can be soldered in place and everything refitted. I did try to fit an accessory decoder into the toilet area in the centre of a 6 wheel coach to work the Hornby ones from  but that would have needed the centre wheels removing to allow for a route for the wires.

Edited December 18, 2022 by Butler Henderson

[Rowsley17D]

4 hours ago, drt7uk said:

Sorry if this has already been covered, but are any of you replacing the couplings with closer couplings or chains? 

 

Like a few on here my rake is fairly fixed and permanently on my layout so thinking about changing them...

 

Many thanks

 

I used "3-links" in mine but there're 4 links in them! I've used the hooks on the coach ends.

 

[Compound2632]

Ideally, one would have some form of rigid coupling to avoid an unrealistic back-and-forth motion between carriages, about which your little passengers would soon be complaining, once they'd picked themselves off the carriage floor or out of the arms of the passenger opposite. With bogie carriages, the Roco-type couplers are ideal for this. Has anyone experimented with these with the Hattons (or Hornby) carriages, to find the optimum combination of lengths?

[melmerby]

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Ideally, one would have some form of rigid coupling to avoid an unrealistic back-and-forth motion between carriages, about which your little passengers would soon be complaining, once they'd picked themselves off the carriage floor or out of the arms of the passenger opposite. With bogie carriages, the Roco-type couplers are ideal for this. Has anyone experimented with these with the Hattons (or Hornby) carriages, to find the optimum combination of lengths?

I've used the Roco - Hornby couplers in Hatton's rakes.

Surprisingly I needed two Hornby's as my usual 2 Roco or one Roco, one Hornby meant that I got buffer lock. No doubt due to the coupler just swinging with no CCU action.

 

Edited December 18, 2022 by melmerby

[PhilJ W]

Has anyone used the Hunt magnetic couplings?

[Rowsley17D]

12 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Ideally, one would have some form of rigid coupling to avoid an unrealistic back-and-forth motion between carriages, about which your little passengers would soon be complaining, once they'd picked themselves off the carriage floor or out of the arms of the passenger opposite. With bogie carriages, the Roco-type couplers are ideal for this. Has anyone experimented with these with the Hattons (or Hornby) carriages, to find the optimum combination of lengths?

 

Here're 2 Hatton's coaches with 2 Hornby Roco-type couplings. They look a bit bulky, though. Negotiates  26" curves.