Graham Farish coaches.

[Vanders]

FWIW a quick photographical comparison of N gauge Mk1 models through the ages

"We've come a long way, baby"

[Bob G]

@Rail Squid left out the inlay Farish coaches.

The first Farish Mk 1s had window inlay glazing that had raised window frames - in my view better than the clear bodies with printed window frames unless you ran a livery like BR (S) green which then had a moulding line half way down the body. Even maroon was OK because of the lining.

But these were great for swapping window frames (and coach inserts) to make SR Mk 1 EMUs and missing coaching stock like BSKs, FOs, SOs etc thanks to Bernard Taylor's (TPM) inserts.

I have 4-BIGs/4-CIGs/4-VEPs and used to have a 4-CEP until the lovely Farish version came out - but the others still rule for me in Mk 1-shire.

HTH
Bob

[railsquid]

@Rail Squid left out the inlay Farish coaches.

The first Farish Mk 1s had window inlay glazing that had raised window frames - in my view better than the clear bodies with printed window frames unless you ran a livery like BR (S) green which then had a moulding line half way down the body. Even maroon was OK because of the lining.

Don't have any of those (only beein doing N gauge for 3 years  ), will see if I can find one for the collection.

[Steven B]

Don't have any of those (only beein doing N gauge for 3 years  ), will see if I can find one for the collection.

The fourth picture down of the buffet car is one of the early Farish Mk1s with the removable window insert:


The finish on the window strip is more matt that the satin finish on the lower half of the coach - this is easier to see on the single colour coaches (i.e. Marron and Green); It's less noticeable on the Crimson/Cream, Chocolate/Cream and Blue/Grey liveries. There's also a characteristic moulding pip in the middle of the centre door window.


Steven B.

[silly moo]

Here are two of the older Poole Farish coaches, I don't think they look bad at all and they run well on well laid track.

[silly moo]

The colour of the coaches looks a bit dull in the photo, they are much better in real life. They have sprung couplers and metal wheels. I have one earlier version with plastic wheels and an unsprung coupler. The widow 'glass' consists of a sheet of acetate.

[Portpatrick]

I still use one rake each of those "old" Farish Corr  and Non Corr.  The Corridor coaches have a similarity to LMS Period 1 and early Mansell on the Southern.  Mine now run on modern wheel sets - worth making the change.

Yes the Mk 1s went through 2 manifestations at Poole.  I found the (2nd) fully printed maroon versions tended to be almost translucent which was a pity.  Their reincarnation from China were very much better - bolder colouring and totally opaque.  Somehow  the transparency was less obvious on Blood and Custard and Chocolate and Cream.  Don't know about SR green.

[silly moo]

There are the old Pullman coaches too, of which I have 9, the mouldings aren't too bad but the printing looks as if it has been done with a John Bull Printing Set. Still there's no alternative for the older type Pullmans yet.

[Dorsetmike]

I sometimes wonder if we are being too picky when it comes to fine detail, at the normal viewing distance at an exhibition not as much is realy discernable. OK it may be nice to know it's there, but for me a big thing. about N gauge is seeing trains in the scenery, the overall effect. If we want detail down to the last rivet, then we should be working in 0 gauge or larger where the detail is obvious and not as fragile as N gauge detail. It's reflected in the cost too, compare a Union Mills loco with a current Farish or Dapol steamer, UM between £60 - £80, Farish and Dapol £100 and upward.

I would be quite happy to see a range with a bit less detail, thus less fragile and cheaper, do we really need brake rodding? Moulded handrails and coach door handles etc are quite adequate and don't bend. Fine detail may be OK for the glass case collections where it doesn't get handled but less so for running working models.

Pass me my tin hat and I'll retire to my slit trench  

[dannyboy]

There are people who need every detail to be spot on and there are others, like Mike and myself, who are more into the overall effect. I do not know enough about any engine to be able to look at it and say "That's not right". As far as I am concerned, if it looks right, it will do me. Each to his/her own - that is what makes life interesting. 

[Portpatrick]

 The fine detail v simple robustness question has been much debated.   With the entire spectrum having its adherents.   For myself I would have no problem with being closer to UM if things were that sort off price.   But I don't see that happening.

[Vanders]

The idea of a "Railroad" style low-end range has been floated multiple times, but the fact is that there isn't the market for both ranges. Nor is there an easy source of "low-end" tools that could be used to produce them (as Hornby did with the ex-Lima tools); so any such range would have to be tooled from scratch, and then where's the return on that investment?

[Old Crow]

Well! I'm going into "N" to be able to have "big" layout in limited space and I really like the very compact nature of the items. From a normal viewing distance I'm not going to see ultimate detail; in fact I'm very pleased with the detail there is on my Poole items considering the small scale. And yes, it's the whole thing, the setting and scenery and opportunity for quiet and compact modelling. I like small scale stuff; I used to make 19th century sailing ships to a scale of 32 feet per inch, rigged with several hundred pieces of hair-fine enamelled copper wire.
One thing I've learned about small scale modelling is that colours really need to be lightened to look right. It's all very well having "accurate computer-matched paint" but that's as full size and as new. When was it ever pristine? I also note the slight sheen, that says "plastic" to me. One of the areas I want to do, is the dirty old brickyard where I worked in 19th century conditions during my student holidays of almost fifty years ago. It was truly filthy - matt most certainly.

[Portpatrick]

The problem seems to be too many want "GOLD STANDARD" but only want to pay "BRASS" prices.

I think there is a lot of truth in that.  Though getting as much as you can for as little as possible is a natural desire.   We do need to be realistic, though until recently at least, there has been a trend for technical things to be cheaper sometimes in cash and certainly in real terms than a few years ago.  A trend which is perhaps less obvious now.  My normal example is to compare my Minitrix Brit purchase for c £13 in 1976 with my Dapol version which cost me £95 in 2011.  In real terms the Dapol cost me less and is a vastly superior if fragile model.  But recent price rises mean you are now starting to "pay" for the improvement in visual quality.

My own sense is that the tension is strongest for steam locos.  The details are very small so are fragile, and not always able to sustain the handling required by those of us whose stock is regularly moved between our own and club layouts, at home and exhibitions,.  A prime example is the valve gear on Farish LNER locos, A1s B1s etc.  With 5 such locos, I have needed to repair 3 sets of valve gear so far.  My  diesels and coaches, no such issue to date.  And I really like my latest release Mk1s - worth the money.

Anyway as others have said, the UK N gauge market is far too small to sustain a dual approach.  We are where we are.  I will continue to run my mix of Poole designs and the latest models.

[silly moo]

For those that like more robust models there are still plenty of the older Poole Farish models around, some of them are good models and they are much easier to work on and service with no fiddly bits to break off. I think they are a bit like Hornby Dublo locos and will probably last a few more decades.,

I think we are going a bit      though, there are already lots of quality/detail vs. price topics on the forum.