Wishful thinking

[Dorsetmike]

How many times do we say I wish Darish or Fapol would produce that particular loco/coach/wagon that has some special meaning to you - usually a bit on the nostalgic side. How many of us have eventually decided to scratch build, hack or bash the model of your choice, and rarely a manufacturer has produce that very item a year or so later, it's happened to me twice;I severely hacked a Dapol 14xx into an SR M7, which Dapol produced in time for the next TINGS, I also had a crude T9 way back, then UM came up with one - needless to say it was not the exact version I wanted so I made the cab and splashers narrower and used a Langley S15 tender body with Fleischmann tender drive

I've since scratch built a Drummond K10 4-4-0 and an Adams A12 0-4-2, and hacked a Nelson from a Jubilee, and played mix and match with Langley S15 and BHE N15 kits and various chassis to produce variations of other Urie and Maunsell 4-6-0s of classes H15, N15 and S15, also hacking another M7 - this time to an Adams T1

What are your attempts at "filling gaps" in what's available and what still remains in your wish lists?

[Paddy]

Hi @Dorsetmike

On my list was the MK1 TPO.  I created a rake using Robbie's coach sides and then GF released theirs.

Such is life.

Paddy

[Newportnobby]

Interestingly, we had a poll in 2013 and fed the results back to Farish and Dapol (see attached)
Note how many have been manufactured and how close to the poll they were time wise

[Dorsetmike]

True, some do eventually appear but still despite the King Arthur and Nelson being in that list - and many other similar lists - there are still no SR 4-6-0s RTR and only two dated white metal kits, both of which rely on 1970s chassis. The King Arthur is intended to use the 1970s Farish black 5, driving wheels way too small and incorrect spacing, Duchess chassis was a little better, wheels near correct size but still incorrect spacing, when it first came out the best fit chassis wise was the Peco Jubilee but then you needed to find a suitable tender drive, the only one I found then was a Rivarossi NORD pacific.
The S15 uses the Fleischmann 7160, 7161 series chassis  which is now silly money unless you can find a spares or repair on Ebay, added to which the watercart tender is only correct for less than half the class and then only from mid 1930s to mid 1950s, my solution to that is to use the BHE N15 tender kit with a UM drive with extra pair of wheels

[Paddy]

May be it would be a good idea to have a new survey?  Not just locos but rolling stock and accessories.  My vote would be for a 2nd radius Setrack point from PECO.

Kind regards

Paddy

[Train Waiting]

May be it would be a good idea to have a new survey?  Not just locos but rolling stock and accessories.  My vote would be for a 2nd radius Setrack point from PECO.

Kind regards

Paddy

Me too!  I get on well with the present 1st radius Setrack points (five of them on my little layout) but I think 2nd radius (just like the Peco '00' ones) would be better.  Maybe even with that clever new 'Unifrog' arrangement as well.

Best wishes.

John

[Paddy]

Hi John ( @Train Waiting )

If PECO wanted to get really adventurous, then why not introduce a completely new range of Setrack based on their code 55 system.  That might put the Poppy/Henry among the pigeons. 

Sadly, I suspect this is but a pipe dream... 

Kind regards

Paddy

[tutenkhamunsleeping]

If PECO wanted to get really adventurous

Proximity Alert!  "Peco"/"adventurous" in same sentence

[Paddy]

Hi Steve ( @tutenkhamunsleeping )

Sadly, glaciers melt quicker than PECO move...  I suppose they have been in business for a long time and one would assume successful?  PECO must know the market better than anyone.

Recently, I am working my way through past NGS journals (dozens of them) and one thing that surprised me is the number of layouts that use Setrack and 1st radius points.  I wonder if this is still the case or whether the N gauge community is/has moved to larger layouts with more generous curves and points?

Thinking about this, it is important.  If the "majority" of N gauge modellers are building layouts that utilise 1st/2nd radius curves/points and the manufacturers are releasing models that need 2nd radius and above then this does not bode well.  A large part of the market may end up being excluded from new RTR.

Kind regards

Paddy

[Newportnobby]

May be it would be a good idea to have a new survey?  Not just locos but rolling stock and accessories.  My vote would be for a 2nd radius Setrack point from PECO.

Kind regards

Paddy

@Paddy
My knowledge of rolling stock is very basic so I stuck with locos. RMWeb tend to have a more encompassing survey annually and maybe during the current situation it would be a timely escape from reality if they did one now.

[Bob G]

A number of us updated the RMWeb wish list list for N gauge last year. It was a pretty dynamic effort given the number of promised models that came and went last year.
The stumbling point seemed to be who would host it on line.

If any of my colleagues involved in that valiant effort were available to comment further, that would be good:

@Karhedron @NGS-PO @acko22, Noel Lever, Nick Evans, Jon Lambert (Noel is on the other Forum and Nick and Jon I forgot their tags!).

Between Karhedron and myself, we got the SR and GWR sorted! He he.

Bob

[Skyline2uk]

I like this thread, and I like the inclusion of track (well played @Paddy)

Seeing as our new inside life actually hampers me building much, I am happy to escape by participating online.

So

I think the PECO Setrack situation is a little bit self-perpetuating. People start in the hobby, see the "starter set" Peco do and either get that and their chosen stock or get it with their first train set. Train sets in my day all came with 1st radius (not sure now), so by default the loco could handle it.

In recent years lots of new locos say "2nd Radius minimum", is it a coincidence Peco launched a 2nd radius starter set?

I personally wish I hand not used Setrack for my layout, but at the time it was all I had and I didn't want to invest more in something I had no idea would last as long as it has.

Speaking of "Specific Locos we like that we tackle and then turn up RTR"; I developed a small obsession with 47 145 and made it the subject of my first re-spray (there is a photo in my gallery, can't work out how to link just now).

I am pleased with the outcome and no sign of a Bachmann one just yet. However, as I was progressing with the project I saw a version done by Mercig on his stand at that years TINGS. Not sure if motivation or not  :'(

Skyline2uk

[Paddy]

Hi @Skyline2uk

I believe Farish still use R1 curves in their train sets - not the PECO track but their own which is very similar.  They also have R1 points which again are almost an exact copy of PECOs.  If Bachmann have a range of N gauge set track available (somewhere in the World) then it is a shame they do not release it here (if it contains a wider selection of point work etc.  I believe Bachmann do have a track system similar to Kato/Tomix as well (something like EaziTrack?).

It is frustrating though as the PECO Setrack range is now rather good apart from the lack of R2 points and cross-overs.  This one change would allow people to follow the standard geometry of their OO counterparts.

As for locos, I really want an XP64 Class 47 (D1733) in original form.  I have toyed with the idea of getting a professional repaint (even went as far as getting a quote from Mercig), or having a go myself.  The donor 47 has been purchased and is ready to go.  I just have a feeling that GF may release one as Collector's Club and/or Rep special at some point.  Bachmann did release their OO 47 in this livery.

Kind regards

Paddy

[Bob G]

I have built many kits in my time that are now (or in a couple of cases have been) RTR

Rebuilt MN - Langley on Britannia chassis. Shame I messed this one up as it had great potential.
Fairburn 2-6-4T - Peco Wills on Arnold Chassis - looked like a brick!

Class 03 - Beaver and Minitrix- unsuccessful (valve gear issue on dock tank chassis)
Class 24 - Fox resin kit on Farish 25 chassis. Very characterful and similar look to the current model except no lights.
Class 33 - Hacked from Minitrix 27. Passable in its day.
Class 35 - Peco Wills - actually one of the best whitemetal kits for capturing the feel of the loco.
Class 35 - Fox resin kit on Farish 25 chassis. Actually not as good as the Peco version IMHO.
Class 44/45/46 PD Marsh on Farish 20 chassis. Whatever were they thinking of. Second worst kit ever, after the MTK class 52. Keeping those articulated bogies on the rails was impossible.
Class 50 - Anbrico - not a bad look to the loco - just that awful chassis with wiper pickups.
Class 52 - MTK - the worst kit ever made. Put a lead brick on a crap Lifelike chassis and watch it move - NOT!!!
Class 73 - BHE on Bachmann Spectrum chassis - successful. Actually one of my favourites. Faster in one direction than the other though!

Does anyone else remember these kits with as much affection?
Bob

[Paddy]

Hi Bob ( @Bob G )

That is another thing that surprised me as well from looking at older NGS journals - so many of the models people had built (locos, coaches, wagons etc.) are now available RTR.  We are in a golden age for N gauge.

Kind regards

Paddy