Noel

Me neither. But having re-read my original thoughts below on Lima CL33, I guess there would be less work assembling an SF model then butchering one of my Lima CIE 33s which have hideous running chassis. Your Lima 33s look about 20 years younger than mine so I guess they may have better motor/drives than mine. Mine run so badly below 40% throttle they are unusable over points at low speeds. "If I can re-chassis mine to co-co and run well, I may keep them and convert the front of the cab to look more like a 001 class. Convert to two windows, remove overhead cab box, put lights on facia above centre panel between windows, remove drip rail and put a buffer beam on each end. The doors will still be in the wrong position, but for nostalgia reasons it might be nice to retain locos from my childhood if I can get it to look half like a 001 class and run well enough for DCC." In the final analysis I am very content for the time being with the MM locos I have, and happy to wait a number of years to see if precision motor/drive versions of 001 or 121 class emerge with MM quality plastic injection moulded body detail.

Hi Rich. I am with you on virtually all of the above. I wouldn't put the SF on the same page as MM. Despite its weaknesses it does make a reasonable stab at resembling an A class unlike the Lima class 33 which looks nothing like an A class and should not be on the same planet as MM. Most resin and white metal kits can look pretty poor when finished compared to the accuracy and detail of high quality injection moulded plastic. However if the SF ran on a Bachmann center drive chassis one might forgive the lack of detail commonly found on injection moulded plastic models. Cheers. Noel

If my old Lima 33s ran as well as the video below, I might consider hacking them to look more like A class (i.e. change windows and buffer beam), but they run like 1970s toy rubbish so I just would not be bothered. These babes below purr like GM cats and crawl like cats about to pounce! Running is important.

Hi Rich, I think we may have crossed wires due to my poor use of english. I do place scale running authenticity ahead of 'looks' but only very marginally. I agree scale appearance is very important, but I suppose my point is having a great looker that doesn't run like a real train seems pointless unless some folks preference is for display case models, which I accept and respect some do. To pass the "duck test" it needs both. The A classes I've seen running so far did not have impressive running chassis and did not run well at crawl speeds over point work. "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck." Same applies to operating model trains, especially now that DCC sound is available "If it looks like a 141, moves like a 141 and sounds like a 141, then it probably is an 141" In fairness too each of us are drawn by different aspects of the hobby and will have different emphasis in each area. The SF A class model looks enough like a real A class to pass the first part of the duck test, but for me personally, fails on the second due to the limited old style hornby or lima chassis used by most to run them. My old Lima A class fails the entire duck test! It quacks like a BR class 33, and looks like a Class 33 with orange paint. Cheers Noel

Comprende. Many thanks for explaining that.

You've lost me Ted - (A confused Fr Doughal)

Sorry Fran, I'm confused. Were Kader the sub-contractor for Bachmann when the 141 was manufactured, but subsequently the manufacturer contracted directly by MM for the 071? Also, who manufactured the 201s? Thanks. Noel PS: If it was the same source sub-contractor, I wonder what the difference was in the motor/drive.

No pics, but for me quality of running is more important than quality of looks. "what's a quality A Class?" A Bachmann or Murphy model A class running on a center drive double flywheel chassis, all wheel drive, all wheel pickup, that runs smoothly at crawl speeds over insulfrog points, is DCC ready, built in speaker and has all the lights. Someday!!! If a loco looks stunning but runs poorly over track work its just a dust collector imho!

Is it just my imagination or do MM 141/181 have the smoothest and quietest running chassis used on MM diesels, with the best crawl speed performance? I've now had a lot of time to run 141/181, 071 and 201 class Murphy model locos. All superb models and excellent runners, but the little 141/181 do seem to have a significantly better quality chassis with smoother quieter running, and unbelievable crawl performance, including over insulfrog points. They just never stall. I've experimented with DC, and DCC using a variety of decoders from Lenz, Bachmann, ESU and Zimo. Am I correct in the assumption that 141/181s have Bachmann chassis but 071 and 201 chassis are made by another manufacturer/sub-contractor for MM?

Wow - Thanks Dave for the pics of those two fabulous cranes. GWR heaven. I can just feel the weight looking at the pics. You can sense a Mecanno influence. GWR is also my favourite livery. The weathered CIE crane looks superb and slightly different. Presume it was a repaint, good job too. HD & Wrenn built model machines rather than toys.

Your absolutely right. It looks great, has great scenery and a lovely balance of buildings and scenes. Enjoy operating it.

Looking good Dave. Sensible to drop the turntable too if no steam ops. Forgive one minor suggestion, moving the fuel point to the 1st road rather than the 2nd so locos have direct access and tanker wagons can easily be shunted into to supply the fuel depot, if not supplied by road. Look forward to seeing the layout evolve.

Classic scene - mixed traffic and an A class in black livery. One wiper blade broken off too. Oh if I could only source an A class model powered by a centre drive chassis like MMs. BTW, enjoyed watching some of your youtube videos. with the 'long haul freights' was very impressive. Did they actually run trains that long with only one brake van and loose coupled stock? How did they marshall them?

Thanks Eoin. Looking good. The smaller dia wheels may make traction at lower speeds even better. What is she like running over points at crawl speeds?

Loco shed sketch I designed a looooong time ago, and started some year ago Now that it has some 1960s Irish stock I will have to finish it! Poor attempt to match the scene from Ciaran Cooney's wonderful photo from Eiretrains ©

Looks great Nelson. Mind you it reminds when Fr Ted visited Father Fitzpatrick's war memorabilia and asked "Nothing from the Allied side?" and got the response "No, that sort of thing wouldn't interest me at all." Superb modelling.

These are interesting photos, but it would be really nice if you could rotate them right way up before attaching them to the forum. It's doing my head in turning my mac upside down to view them Its really easy to do on Windows or Mac.

Hi Eoin. Thanks for taking the time and effort to make this excellent data video. The chassis looks very promising. I presume the wheel slip can be cured by adding weight. I guess the C class rarely hauled more than 4/5 coaches in real life. As you pointed out its pretty fast as even at half throttle she looks to be doing 75mph or more scale speed. What dia wheels are you planning to change to for DCC? That may change her characteristics significantly. If re videoing under DCC I'd love to see how she runs at scale 4mph crawling over track work such as popular Peco code 100 insulfrog points and long Peco diamond crossing which are a great test of smooth power pickups. Good night. Noel

Fab - you caught my attention as soon as I saw the black 181 and 141. Alive with nostalgic atmosphere.

+1 That is just a fabulous treat

Thanks, will look forward to that, and yes totally agree about 'octopus'. The LokSound and Zimo chips I've played with can play up to 8 simultaneous tracks, BUT I've never used more that two at a time (e.g. engine sound + one of: horn, or brakes, or curve squeal, or guards whistle, or station announce, etc). Haven't Bachmann also announced some sort of low cost sound system as well?

Great to hear this. A little bit of weathering and those 'railroad' models could look as good as any of their fine scale counterparts. Anyway few folks over the age of 40 have eyesight good enough to notice the difference between fine scale and railroad models. (e.g. HD v SD on TV for the over 40s makes little real difference). If you get a chance please post a video. Would like to see how the steam sounds match speeds, especially things like coasting. Does the TTS decoder support brake sounds, curve squeal, etc? If it does the days of €120 sound decoders are numbered.

PM sent this morning

Hi Guys, what type of board do you mount your back scenes on? e.g: 1/4" Plywood, 1/4" hard board, etc, or more modern light weight materials such as the white plastic honeycomb board used for conference, marketing/exhibition posters, election posters, etc? Thanks in advance. Noel

Looks like a great project to sink your teeth into until the shed is sorted. Nice track plan too. I'm interested in the points because I hate the idea of controlling points by typing silly numbers into a key pad, but love the idea of also having analog lever switches to control the points even if DCC is the means of transmitting the change of states. Lever switches offer the playability and tactile feel of a signal box, and most importantly visual feedback as to how how roads, points and signals are set. Having a few clusters of point lever switches like a mini signal box also has the advantage that they can be sited near the yards they will control. I see you have a turn table, is that for steam ops, or for turning future 121s? If the former, could I suggest considering direct access to the TT without having to enter the shed, or route via an ash pit (e.g. end of day steam loco shunted to ash pit for cool down and servicing, before recoaling, rewatering and returning to shed ready for next days service). Anyway looking forward to seeing it develop. Like the spur for modular hookup.