Powered/Unpowered locos

[woodbury22uk]

I have a couple of dummy Class 121s, a Hymek and a Class 67 in Wrexham & Shropshire livery. The first three were bought direct from Dapol at shows at remaindered prices. They had loads of them which suggests they were not great sellers. These have lights but not much else.

The 67 was bought on Ebay at a higher price but still not anywhere near what would be paid for a powered loco. It does not have provision for lights.

None of these will be needed to work for me as they are intended as static items in dioramas.

Dapol have openly stated that they will not be producing dummy locomotives for separate sale in future, although, of course, there will still be some unpowered and seemiomngly identical driving vehicles in HST and DMU sets.

[Calnefoxile]

So potentially a gap in the market for dummy chassis, ala Ian Stoates versions from a few years ago, of which I have a selection.

They're not the straightest, but being resin a good dunking in boiling hot water should straighten them up 

Cheers

Neal.

[Steven B]

Ian Stoates dummy chassis were great but did rely on Poole era Farish having massive stocks of spair parts. Sadly getting bogie side frames and belly tanks for current "Blue Ribbon" standard class 37s, 20s etc is nearly impossible.

That said, I do have bodies and a sets of bogie frames for the old Farish class 25 and class 31 whish will be put to good use under a 3d printed rolling chassis.

Steven B.

[Dr Al]

Controversial opinion....

Forgetting the manufacturers costs for producing a 'dummy', as a user, I simply can't see the point. They have to be dragged, and can't be used on their own, can't be moved in a depot scenario, etc, etc.

Even models like class 20, where they were commonly or mostly used in multiples, I'd always have both powered. Then I can swap around, move on depot scenes, etc etc. For things like the class 17, if I had 2 then they'd be more useful as powered.

There's no functional reason as modern motors are so well matched (look at those models with dual motor cars now as compared the past).

Each to their own, but to me the concept of a 'dummy' is just useless really - it may be cheaper than a functional model, but the loss in usefulness far far outweighs the saving.

Cheers,
Alan

P.s. As for those who actually strip fully functional locos down to make dummies ......facepalm..... 

[jamespetts]

I have a number of dummy class 121s. They are useful for running in multiple with other multiple units in a fixed formation.

[johnlambert]

The only dummys that I'll be using are two dummy CL156's to form 4 car units with my two powered versions.

Multiple units are interesting. The underframe from a powered half of a class 156 is externally the same as the non-powered half - both cars on the real thing have engines fitted.

If you're tooling a dummy chassis then producing a larger batch of them to make a non-powered two-car unit.

Interestingly when Bachmann/Farish made the class 101 parcels unit it was fitted with two motors - the real thing was a power twin (i.e. engines in both cars) so Farish fitted motors to both on the model rather than tool a dummy powered unit. The price difference between a power/trailer class 101 and the power twin wasn't that much.

There's still the question of selling them though...

Steven B.

From memory, the Graham Farish 10x DMUs have the motor in the vehicle with the guard's compartment. This helps to conceal the motor. The other driving vehicle could either be a driving trailer composite or a driving motor composite, which had no electric motor.

The 101 parcel unit was made of two driving motor brake vehicles. Rather than building one on a dummy chassis these were both powered. I think Bachmann said it wasn't economic to build one on a dummy chassis.

[Newportnobby]

As a DC user I've found it rare for motors to match close enough for double heading. Also, as a steam/early diesel era modeller many diesels were, shall we say, temperamental so I like the idea of a steamer loco rescuing a diesel. If double heading, I always have the dummy being pushed rather than add it to the load being hauled. Whether there's any benefit to that I just haven't a clue
Interesting to see some of the opinions. If Dapol are going to knock the practice on the head, and with Farish/RevolutioN totally discounting the possibility it looks like my only recourse will be to keep an eye open for non runners.