johnminnitt

Could you say what colours/mixtures they are? The second from the left looks quite promising to me for a somewhat faded CIE green?

I'd vote for patch 4 for newish paint, patch 3 for more worn/faded I think.  Mind you I can't claim to have a good eye for colour.

43 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

Hi John

Youre safe enough with white. No certain data exists to my knowledge, but I have seen but two colour pics only showing light green snail and / or numeral on C & L stock, and several more showing BG wagons like that - and, yes, the darker grey.

Once the stencilled snails started appearing, which seems to be mid 1950s, it was all white.

Thanks for a helpful reply. Wouldn't it be easier if the transfers were produced rather less white - a sort of weathered off-white.

Incidentally do you recall what C&L stock had the green snails, that line being of particular interest to me?

Thanks for that gentlemen, I won't risk those paints then.

A bit belated I know, but thanks for that.

Could you expand a bit on 'some wagons' having green snails pre -1955?

My interest is mainly narrow gauge, so elderly wagons and vans pre -1955 or so - the darker grey I assume, snails I have assumed white (from b&w photos of weathered stock), but should some be green?

1 hour ago, jhb171achill said:

Brilliant! I always thought that was a very attractive colour scheme, even on buses.

You can get the correct light green transfers now too. Prob best to paint the lining. 

As you'll see from the Quiet Man clips, the light green lining on the Bachmann coach is way too thick below window level.

 

By the light green transfers do you mean the Railtec 'eau de nil snails and numbers'?

Has anyone used these Cherry paints, maybe could post a picture to see what the colours are like?

Cherry paints (from Phoenix) do Dublin bus light and dark greens, I believe the first CIE coach green is supposed to be the same as they used on buses so are these colours any use?

https://www.phoenix-paints.co.uk/products/cherry-bus-eire

The website doesn't show any sample so I've no idea what sort of greens they are.

Nice to see Keadue again (it is, isn't it?)

There may not have been many CVR loco kits sold, but there were a fair few of the C&L 4-4-0T shifted, I did two and I've seen several on various other layouts, and there are those in store mentioned above.

It would be nice to see the Irish kits re-appear in some form (even etches only if necessary).

6 hours ago, Broithe said:

It's only money that would otherwise be wasted on drink and women.   

Certainly, you can always keep some of the cash for other forms of entertainment.

4 hours ago, Noel said:

I was surprised when even one of the UKs top scratch build modellers Tony Wright, admitted that in most cases nowadays where an RTR model exists it is probably finished to a higher level of detail and a more reliable standard than anything that can be scratch built, such is the standard nowadays of many RTR models. He suggests kit building is now the preserve and joy of building rare eclectic prototypes that are either not available RTR, or in increasingly rare circumstances where the quality or accuracy is not good enough. 

Price is not the only consideration, time and availability of skill experience is probably a bigger factor for many. 

There is no doubt some truth in that, but, to be fair, Tony also emphasises that one of the best reasons for kit or scratch building is simply the pleasure/satisfaction of doing so, even if there is a rtr alternative, even if it's a very good rtr alternative.

On 1/31/2018 at 9:54 AM, Mayner said:

The question of whether scratchbuilding or kit building over buying rtr is a false economy depends really on whether a person derives their satisfaction from collecting or modelling

 

Exactly - even if the kit costs more than the rtr, the extra money is simply a very reasonable price for both the entertainment of building it and the satisfaction of having built it.

On 1/25/2018 at 10:16 PM, jhb171achill said:

Another aspect to this; unless I'm missing something, nobody seems to do the "eau-de-nil" light green snails for the sides of carriages, diesel locos and steam engines. If I am mistaken, and someone does, maybe someone might enlighten me.

 

Railtec list them, I don't know how good they are I've not used any.

http://www.railtec-models.com/showitem.php?id=1205

Or did you mean lined ones, I suppose you probably know of these Railtec ones?

27 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

I suppose it depends, Roxy, on what end result you want. Austrian, German or some other mainland European theme, or Welsh narrow gauge (with or without slate mines) is easy - there's loads of RTR stuff. 

If you want to go Irish, unless you want to scratchbuild everything to a scale of 3mm to the foot, you're better off with 00n3 (12mm gauge) track. It's a bit bigger, but not much, so almost as versatile in confined spaces. As I said, 4mm Irish on 009 track looks plain ridiculous. Recent debates on this forum have examined the HO / OO / 21mm gauges for Irish models, and there's a clear advantage in 21mm from an appearance perspective, but practicalities and most people's skills, time and budgets heavily favour 00, even though it's not technically accurate.

Using 009 to represent anything Irish (or Manx) in 4mm scale is way, way worse! It's like putting the Flying Scotsman on scale 3ft gauge track, proportionately.

There are many Irish kits available - a very good selection in fact. They are all 4mm, thus making 00n3 track as good as obligatory. And now you can get Peco Streamline in 00n3, which you couldn't when I started narrow-gauging, years ago. Had it been available I'd have gone for it, and my dream of a complex Donegal or West Clare system in the attic would have come to pass....

 

As an 00n3-doing person may I say the availability of kits varies all the time. The worst thing is that the Backwoods range is gone (though may re-appear), still the Dundas T&D vans are back, and we still have Worsley and Branchlines.

Re the other comparison - 4mm Irish on 9mm track is 3mm wrong , while 5' 3" on 16.5 is 4.5mm wrong, a bigger error but possibly a little better in percentage terms I suspect.