Bachmann 108

The blue and grey Bachmann Class 108 appears to be available now. Pictures here: http://www.ehattons.com/stockdetail.aspx?sid 538&img=4#imageblock if
you want to have a look.
As some the members of some forums frown on open discussion of models, I'll ask here instead: does the shape of the cab roof look OK to you?
Regards,
Stuart.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 30/11/2006 18:58, Stuart Smith said,

Hmm. I've always been one of those people who can't understand why people complain if a curve is a fraction of a millimetre out of place, or the body has an extra rivet, or whatever. So I thought "Let's see what he might be complaining about."
Well, not that DMUs are a particular area of mine, but that cab roof looks wrong! It seems to be too rounded, as if the apex of the roof is too high and the dome has to drop more to catch up. It could just be the angle of the photo, of course, but it looks the same in all photos.
The problem with all these things is that it can be very subjective. To me it looks "wrong" from an aesthetic POV, but it might well measure up exactly to drawings and the prototype. Maybe the prototype looks "wrong" as well. Without a headcode box, it would to me at any rate!
--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, that's what I thought was wrong too. It occurred to me that perhaps the destination box may be too small, and that could be accentuating the apex and curve of the roof?
Despite this, I still think it's quite an impressive piece of work.
Regards,
Stuart.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stuart Smith wrote:

My first thought was that the roof curve looked odd, but looking at the real thing, that also looks a bit odd to me:-/
http://www.railcar.co.uk/pics/100-109/108/mc22.jpg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stuart Smith wrote:

My first thought was that the roof curve looked odd, but looking at the real thing, that also looks a bit odd to me:-/
http://www.railcar.co.uk/pics/100-109/108/mc22.jpg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

models, I'll

<snip>
roof
roof is

be
photos.
I think that you might be right there, that roof looks to high, the over all height from cant rail to apex looks wrong when compared to the height of the side doors. If Bachmann has got this wrong I suspect that many people will be highly and rightly pezzed off! :~(
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry wrote:

To me, it looks like the angled part of the cab sweeps back too much.
That said, I think it's a nice looking model all the same.
PhilD
-- <><
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Stuart Smith" wrote

Here are some prototype pics, draw your own conclusions:-
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/53amodels//picture/E56005-BK-291182.jpg
http://www.53a-pix.co.uk/picture/E50604-YK-300182.jpg
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/53amodels//picture/108dmu-SP-050883.jpg
http://www.53a-pix.co.uk/picture/E53644-YK-020884.jpg
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/53amodels//picture/E53619-HU-120784.jpg
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 30/11/2006 20:56, John Turner said,

Nah - the roof profile on the prototype is definitely wrong :-)
--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"it's like that on the official drawings" :)
Fred X
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Isn't that one a 114?

This one makes the model look right.
Regards,
Stuart.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Stuart Smith" wrote

It might well be, but the cab roof would be identical - I think!
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Turner wrote:

They both look odd - and in similar ways. It's the inflexion in the roofline when you look across the cab at 45 degrees that draws my attention - but it's there in John's photos too, so it's simply wierd, not actually wrong. However, there is something about it - possibly the model roof comes to too fine a 'point' above the corners of the cab? Then again, maybe that's cleanliness and the resulting specular light effects that are highlighting that?
James Moody
--
aka: Major Denis Bloodnok | (\
ICQ: 7000473 | \ \ /)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"James Moody" wrote

I wonder whether it's that we're simply viewing the Bachmann model at an angle at which the prototype was not normally viewed?
My initial reaction to the 108 photographs was - WOW! Certainly puts the ageing Hornby 110 into the shade, and I suspect it will do the much the same to the ex-Lima 101 when that finally gets released by Hornby.
Do I assume that the BR green version of the 108 will have the 4-character headcode box? Anyone seen which version they are producing in that livery?
John.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Turner wrote:

This can have a big effect on the appearance of a model - I know the (Bratchell?) 456 kit I saw did that to me - go look at a real one in the same light, and yup, the details I could have sworn were so wrong actually are faithful to the original.

Does look like a nice model. I think the possible niggle with the roof will not be apparent when a bit of prototypical dirt is applied to that area. Most of the photos show the roof caked in the stuff...
James Moody
--
aka: Major Denis Bloodnok | (\
ICQ: 7000473 | \ \ /)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Do I assume that the BR green version of the 108 will have the 4-character headcode box? Anyone seen which version they are producing in that livery?
John.
Fropm what can be seen on the front page of the Bachmann site of the 108, the green version seems to have only 2 digits.
Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy Sollis CVMRD wrote:

Lots of photos of the green 'un in this thread now :--
http://www.rmweb2.co.uk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID '49
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

4-character
livery?
108,
Excellent review. What happened to the "concealed mechanism driving both ends and full interior detail" we were promised? (I said here at the time it wasn't possible). No mention of the running qualities. I am guessing it runs better in one direction than the other although with only two units there won't be a huge difference. Critical for me is ease of changing the destination blind to something more local.
(kim)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>

wierd,
the
cab?
Possibly, but what IS glaring to me is that the model [1] doesn't have any raised weld / rivet joints between the sections of panel work on the roof, the roof is being made to look to 'slab' like.
[1] in the Hattons photo at least, which I assume is of a production version.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

if
I'll
I'm less bothered by roofline than by the train set gap between the units.
http://www.ehattons.com/stockdetail.aspx?sid 538&img=3#imageblock
(kim)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.