Size difference between different Graham Farish class 37

[ohlavache]

Hello all.
I have two Graham Farish class 37/0: one with centre head code (ref. 371-452) and one with split head code (ref. 371-466Z).
When placed next to each other, it appears that the spit head code version is bigger than the centre head code version.
Is there the same difference with the older split head code version under ref. 371-450(A)?
Thanks for your feedback.

[Intercity]

Do you have a picture comparing them? I know there were issues with certain 37s and 47s sitting too high, there is a fix for that, I know it was issued in one of the model magazines and believe Ben Ando of revolution was the author.

[Bob G]

All the versions you are talking about are the Bachmann versions.

There was a measurable length difference between the Farish Poole versions made in China (371-151 to 371-160), and the 2009 era 37/0 (371-450 to 371-455). The Poole ones were made to fit the 47 chassis.

I have sold my cut nose versions (371-465 to 371-469) but I think they were identical chassis to the 37/0 versions.
Similarly I have never owned any of the 37/4 or 37/5 versions, but they too would be on the same chassis, but they had a different body moulding.

I suspect there has been/should have been some discussion about the coupling boxes sticking out beyond the loco on the original 37/0 but the split box version appeared at the same time as the centre headcode box version. I have 371-450 (split box) and 371-452 (centre box) and the BR blue part of the body is the same length. The nose seems bigger on the split box version because the boxes stick out. That is the only difference I can see - apart from one roof vent plated over, roof horns, and fewer roof rivet lines on the centre box version.

These are different dies for the different locos, as is the 37/4 and /5 variant, but all use the same chassis.

I wonder if one of yours has short shank couplings and the other has standard? That makes a huge difference to the appearance.

HTH
Bob

[ohlavache]

Thank you for your two replies.
Unfortunately, I have no picture with me and the locomotives are at the place where I spend my holidays...

I remember that the 466Z looks taller than the other.
I found pictures on Hatton's web site and the feeling is the same.

371-452, centre head code


371-466Z, split head code


371-450, split head code


It seems that 450 is at the right height, while 466Z seems too high.
That's weird.

[LASteve]

@RailfreightTom of this parish mentions lowering a Class 37 (and repainting it) on his Meldon West layout thread.

Even if this isn't the solution to your issue, check out the thread - his modelling is absoutely first-class!

[njee20]

The 37 does ride too high. I've got a 'lowered' one (on the left), and it does make quite a difference. Mine has been done by brining the bogie frames up, but you can also do it by actually lowering the body, so its plausible they're riding at different heights.

[RailfreightTom]

@RailfreightTom of this parish mentions lowering a Class 37 (and repainting it) on his Meldon West layout thread.

Even if this isn't the solution to your issue, check out the thread - his modelling is absoutely first-class!

Thanks Steve!

In relation to the 37's ride height - I've got a couple of 37's and a couple of 47's and the gap on all four (before I butchered them) was completely different.  The 47's were worse than the 37's, but all of them had very un-prototypical gaps between bogies and body, and it was something that to me, made them look like N gauge in pictures.  After some trawling of the forum I did find the two solutions mentioned above and opted for the cutting of the lighting PCB's to lower the body on the 37's.  The 47's were more involved, and despite being relatively easy to lower the body, the running wheels were then catching on the buffer beam.  When I looked at prototype photos the buffer beam looked smaller so I had to remove some of the plastic carefully to allow for free running.  On the 47's it became a balance between getting the body as low as possible, taking small amounts from the buffer beam without overdoing it and allowing the running wheels clearance.

If you do opt to make some modifications, it's very easy and I would definitely recommend it.  It makes a huge difference to the model

[JanW]

The 37 does ride too high. I've got a 'lowered' one (on the left), and it does make quite a difference. Mine has been done by brining the bogie frames up, but you can also do it by actually lowering the body, so its plausible they're riding at different heights.

Looking at the picture it seems that the body of  the blue one is just a tiny bit higher but the bogie sideframe seems to be much too low. Could it be that it is not clipped on well?

[njee20]

Nah, it's how the Farish 37 is; there's a whopping gap between the side frames and the body. You can lower the body, or you can lift the bogies! was just trying to show how much scope there is for altering the ride height of the 37. I don't actually know whether it's easier to lower the body; that involves trimming the lighting PCBs IIRC, so wont have been done on a new model, but could explain a difference to the OP if bought secondhand. Or it could just be that the different tooling yields a different height body. It certainly looks taller without the cutaway buffer beam.