Photos! ixion Models' HO low-frame 32 Class

 
  comtrain Chief Commissioner

Location: Near Albury Wodonga
Tom and a6et
you have some PM's you have not seen yet Smile
and Tom  look at the bottom of any posts and see reply by PM (If you don't know already Wink ) and your inbox can be found there.
otherwise a red number top right hand corner is the number of PM's waiting to be read, I think, otherwise RP can send a message via your legit email address.
Cheers
Rod

Sponsored advertisement

  CraigW Assistant Commissioner

Tom,

I thought long and hard before replying to your post, simply because most of it seems to consist of personal abuse and accusations of bias for reasons you do not elaborate on.

I have made few comments on the 35, 36, 38 and 60 class on Railpage simply because they have little interest to me and I did not do reviews on them.

I started posting about the Trainorama 32 class because I had said even before the review was published that I was going to be involved.  

Apart from the 32 and Steel S wagon, I have also done reviews of the Eureka LCH, CCH and CHG vans and the OTM BOB cars.

Can you please list the accuracy faults with these items so that my reviews can be corrected?

I have only made sporadic comments about the Ixion 32 class because I happen to like the original framed 32 class a great deal. I even suggested to another manufacturer that a model of one was worth considering before the Ixion model was announced. I looked at the model over dinner with some friends and have been looking at photographs of the real thing and the model since. But, I will not be reviewing the model and my comments are purely observations and based on a quick look as well as study of the real thing albeit from photographs, drawings and looking at 3265.

If anything I have posted about the prototype original frame 32 class is factually incorrect, then please advise what it is and correct it. I read through the comments by M636C and while we exchanged a few barbs and disagree about the importance (or otherwise) of a model of an original framed 32, I did not see any disagreement with what I wrote. Clarification on the two compound locos aside.

Finally, a small thing I would appreciate you clarifying:

"The maroon colour scheme is a faithful representation of the preserved version on the Ixion 32 but not to my memories when I was back at school and early in my life. The Trainorama 32 is slightly too deep but it is on the wrong frame anyway so it's a complete fiction. Interesting how that sold out when it was not right."

3265 was painted in Maroon about 1933 and repainted into black about 1936 - 1937. You stated earlier that you were 75 which means you were born in about 1940. How do you remember the colour of a loco that was repainted before you were even born?

"there were 32s with the thinner cab roof overhang and 3246 comes off the top of my memory as being one.Original curved frame."

3246 was a reframed loco.

regards,

Craig W
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
in all this analysis of a new loco, umm I am missing some details.

What has been done right, does it look like the loco, how does it run, how easy to DCC it, how is the tender attached, the packaging, instructions.......

We have well and truly covered some errors. I'm interested in the other things.

Regards,
David Head
  Ardglen Junior Train Controller

Hi all,
Does anyone have a photo of the 32 they can post. I'm especially interested in 3273.
Thanks & regards
Andrew
  a6et Minister for Railways

in all this analysis of a new loco, umm I am missing some details.

What has been done right, does it look like the loco, how does it run, how easy to DCC it, how is the tender attached, the packaging, instructions.......

We have well and truly covered some errors. I'm interested in the other things.

Regards,
David Head
dthead
David, while I have not had the chance to pick one up for a close look, outside of that one could say for all intended purposes, if you were to stand back from the model then one can say that it does capture the general appearance of the 2 running board variations of a low frame 32cl loco.    How it stands up to close scrutiny is another matter.  What I have picked up on the model has been simply through photo's of the model on the Ixion Blog site, & comparing it with photo's, drawings & the like, also from my memories of working on some low framed & more than a few High Framed 32's

As for its running gualities, & conversion prospects to DCC, they are unknowns to me, I have heard different things relating to their pulling abilities but seemed that the removal of the front bogie spring seems to help it out quite well.
  M636C Minister for Railways

"there were 32s with the thinner cab roof overhang and 3246 comes off the top of my memory as being one.Original curved frame."

3246 was a reframed loco.

regards,

Craig W
CraigW

If my statement about 3201 - 3250 having a different cab roof is correct, 3246 would have had it with both the original frame and the new frame, assuming that the original cab remained on the locomotive.

I think 3214 retained the original cab as well although being away from home I can't easily check photos of it.

Is it possible that the original cab design also had a flatter roof arc?

I was interested in your comments about the buffer beam being lower on the first 50 locomotives. This could have been viewed as a problem and the buffer beam had been raised on subsequent locomotives. Is it possible that the difference was three inches, which is the difference in centrelines between screw couplers and automatic couplers that follow USA standards?

While it is unlikely that USA couplers were envisaged for the 32 class, it is possible that the 32 design was prepared using details from another design for a customer who did use centre couplers.

M636C
  a6et Minister for Railways

"there were 32s with the thinner cab roof overhang and 3246 comes off the top of my memory as being one.Original curved frame."

3246 was a reframed loco.

regards,

Craig W

If my statement about 3201 - 3250 having a different cab roof is correct, 3246 would have had it with both the original frame and the new frame, assuming that the original cab remained on the locomotive.

I think 3214 retained the original cab as well although being away from home I can't easily check photos of it.

Is it possible that the original cab design also had a flatter roof arc?

I was interested in your comments about the buffer beam being lower on the first 50 locomotives. This could have been viewed as a problem and the buffer beam had been raised on subsequent locomotives. Is it possible that the difference was three inches, which is the difference in centrelines between screw couplers and automatic couplers that follow USA standards?

While it is unlikely that USA couplers were envisaged for the 32 class, it is possible that the 32 design was prepared using details from another design for a customer who did use centre couplers.

M636C
M636C
M I don't have the numbers but I distinctly recollect at least 2 of the P's that had a flatter roof, certainly not as curved as the norm.  From memory 3255 may well have been one & fairly certain it also had the very narrow overhang.
  Lambing Flat Chief Train Controller

Location: My preference....... Central West NSW, circa 1955....
Hi all,
Does anyone have a photo of the 32 they can post. I'm especially interested in 3273.
Thanks & regards
Andrew
Ardglen



Here is what a straight out of the box Ixion low-frame P class looks like at, posed in the platform at Lambing Flat. The 'school train' has just arrived and six-wheel tendered 3372 is just pretending to be the train engine, as it doesn't yet have a DCC chip. Once a chip is obtained and fitted, I'll be able to comment on how it runs! First impressions are that it isn't a bad interpretation, not quite perfect, but good enough that with a bit of extra 'tweaking' and (of course) weathering, it should fit in quite well.

If you want to see a bigger version of the photo, head on over to:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/NqYQe2exu8ilFr6_X-EkWdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
  Roachie Chief Commissioner

Location: Kadina SA (formerly NSW)
Not wanting to add fuel to the fire....but I must say that the enlarged photo of James' 32 does show the funnel to appear to have been "ring-barked" in 2 places. Nothing that a bit of bog filler stuff couldn't hide I guess, followed by a touch-up with some black paint and some weathering.

Other than that I reckon she looks like a real bottler.

The only thing I'd like to know before I shelled out my dough would be practical things like how many wheels do the electrical pick-up and what is the tractive effort like? Does anybody have any ideas about these 2 aspects please?

Roachie
  meh Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Photo I took of 3265:


https://www.instagram.com/bigdirtyfreighttrains/

From my end i think it's brilliant. I probably wouldn't have noticed the errors in it, but even now that I have, I still don't care.

Cheers,
-Mitch
  Dazz Deputy Commissioner

curious to know if anybody who has pre-ordered a 32 class has had it delivered yet?
  SA_trains Deputy Commissioner

Location: ACT
For what it is worth, I think that it looks to me to be quite a good model. I have examined James's photo and compared it to prototype photos.

Here is a photo of what I intend kit-bashing my "32" into:
http://www.comrails.com/pic_common/b07-22f.html


I picked a prototype photo that is kind of comparable to James' photo for comparison purposes.

To my mind, the only really obvious flaw is the funnel. The other comments about the headlight and clack valves may well be accurate but based on the CR headlight seem to be modestly insignificant. Interestingly, the CR loco doesn't seem to have clack valves? Should I cut them off??  

So from a project point of view, it looks like a bloody good starting point for me for a kit-bash project. Like Roachie, I'm also interested in the Ixion 32-class running and DCC prospects. BUT I'd like comments on running to be quantitative. To that end, statements like "the Ixion 32 can haul nnnn [brand name] S-wagons up a nnnn gradient without slipping" is what I'd term quantitative.

My thoughts anyway, noting I'm cutting it up anyway! Smile

EDIT: Sorry, doesn't look like I've embedded the photo, but the link is there anyway.
  M636C Minister for Railways

The two photos show up the chimney and its problems and the ugly white headlight "glass".

Even if the factory fitted a "whiter" glass than intended, fitting anything other than clear was a really bad idea and I can't imagine what they were thinking of.....

3265 appears to match the red of a Tuscan and Russet FS or BS, so one of them is the wrong colour. Unless it is a photographic artefact, 3265 doesn't look like that in any light I've seen it under. I note that it has Ross "pop" safety valves, so it is a model of the preserved 3265. Is there a 1930s version as well?

The headlight on the black loco is pointing upward. Can this be just bent back into place or is it more complicated than that?

Did James select a loco with a six wheel tender, which would be rare on a superheated engine in the country? A few had it for turning at Campbelltown, but these wouldn't have made into the bush often...


The feed pipes do look odd. It matches the preserved 3265, but rather spoils the others.

Clearly what could have been a really good model is just another model spoiled by avoidable errors.

To return to the cabs and side overhang, the photo of P 509 in the NSWGR Centenary book shows the original cab very clearly, and the original running plate referred to by CraigW.

P 509 is of course a saturated engine. I remember that at the right angle, the weld where the additional frame plates were added to support the extended smokebox was visible. No sign of that on the model...

M636C
  meh Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
The two photos show up the chimney and its problems and the ugly white headlight "glass".

Even if the factory fitted a "whiter" glass than intended, fitting anything other than clear was a really bad idea and I can't imagine what they were thinking of.....

3265 appears to match the red of a Tuscan and Russet FS or BS, so one of them is the wrong colour. Unless it is a photographic artefact, 3265 doesn't look like that in any light I've seen it under. I note that it has Ross "pop" safety valves, so it is a model of the preserved 3265. Is there a 1930s version as well?

The headlight on the black loco is pointing upward. Can this be just bent back into place or is it more complicated than that?

Did James select a loco with a six wheel tender, which would be rare on a superheated engine in the country? A few had it for turning at Campbelltown, but these wouldn't have made into the bush often...


The feed pipes do look odd. It matches the preserved 3265, but rather spoils the others.

Clearly what could have been a really good model is just another model spoiled by avoidable errors.

To return to the cabs and side overhang, the photo of P 509 in the NSWGR Centenary book shows the original cab very clearly, and the original running plate referred to by CraigW.

P 509 is of course a saturated engine. I remember that at the right angle, the weld where the additional frame plates were added to support the extended smokebox was visible. No sign of that on the model...

M636C
M636C

The colour 'match' is from lighting in the photo; I can assure you they are very different in person.

It is on their website, on the box and has been said many times, 3265 is modeled 'as preserved'.

As for everything else; whinge whinge. Simple, don't like it don't buy it.
  Dazz Deputy Commissioner

I have been looking at some previous preproduction photos, it is interesting looking at the fit and finish of the chimney, and thus the following comment, it would appear that the production run has fallen somewhat short compared to what was shown.

"The join in the chimney is commendably flush"

  railmod Chief Train Controller

I have been looking at some previous preproduction photos, it is interesting looking at the fit and finish of the chimney, and thus the following comment, it would appear that the production run has fallen somewhat short compared to what was shown.

"The join in the chimney is commendably flush"
Dazz
Also interesting that the pre-production silver model appears to have the water feed pipe to the clack vales better represented than the production model
  c3526blue Deputy Commissioner

Location: in the cuckoos nest
I have been looking at some previous preproduction photos, it is interesting looking at the fit and finish of the chimney, and thus the following comment, it would appear that the production run has fallen somewhat short compared to what was shown.

"The join in the chimney is commendably flush"
Also interesting that the pre-production silver model appears to have the water feed pipe to the clack vales better represented than the production model
railmod
............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).
  a6et Minister for Railways

I have been looking at some previous preproduction photos, it is interesting looking at the fit and finish of the chimney, and thus the following comment, it would appear that the production run has fallen somewhat short compared to what was shown.

"The join in the chimney is commendably flush"
Also interesting that the pre-production silver model appears to have the water feed pipe to the clack vales better represented than the production model
............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).
c3526blue
While it may be an optical illusion, its possible to see the green board reflection behind the LED light inside the headlight at the angle of the photo, it seems to show that the LED is very much to the front of the headlight rather that at the back as per other models such as the TOR 32 which also has a green PCB, but you cannot pick it on the TOR model unless you look almost head on.

Last night I had two Chinese friends over, & asked them to translate the word Translucent for me into either Mandarin or Cantonese, which they both spoke the two different languages. They shook their heads & could not understand the word even in English, they checked the word against a cross language translation device on their Chinese mobile phones, after some time they were able to find the word  Transparent as being the applicable Chinese description.  I then asked them what they understood the word to them mean. which they said it means to be able to able to visibly see through the item at all times Clear or light tinted Glass they said.
  comtrain Chief Commissioner

Location: Near Albury Wodonga

............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).

c3526blue
As I remember it, we might have forgotten that Bob was disappointed with the first Trainorama 32, so much so that he scrapped the plastic body and built a new cast body to give it added traction (corrected by a6et:- Bob handled the 32 Class build, under Trainorama ownership, he bought the Company later after it got into difficulties ) Perhaps your comparison is an indication that he did not waste his money, despite getting his teeth kicked in here on RP for his model?

We can only hope future small engines do come out in metal, as  Eureka also learned with the K Class, which is also going to be metal. Was the Eureka 50 supplied with a metal boiler?

And Austrains have indicated they are moving to metal as well.  

Perhaps a6et can tell us what he remembers a C32 can haul up a 1:50 grade in reality 1:1
Cheers
Rod
  a6et Minister for Railways


............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).

As I remember it, we might have forgotten that Bob was disappointed with the first Trainorama 32, so much so that he scrapped the plastic body and built a new cast body to give it added traction (after taking control of the Company) Perhaps your comparison is an indication that he did not waste his money, despite getting his teeth kicked in here on RP for his model?
We can only hope future small engines do come out in metal, as  Eureka also learned with the K Class, which is also going to be metal. Was the 50? And Austrains have indicated they are moving to metal as well.  Perhaps a6et can tell us what he remembers a C32 can haul up a 1:50 grade in reality 1:1
Cheers
Rod
comtrain
Rod, Just a correction.  The 32cl was a model that was the work of Bob Cooke, but under the TOR brand, it actually arrived well before the change of ownership when he bought out the business.

Way it was reported back then was that the factory used at the time, SDK & its engineer Ivan told BBB after some tests, that the plastic body with metal underframe would not provide enough weight & said to not be able pull much at all, even with the full geared driven wheels which after all does take up space inside the limited boiler area.
The one thing that should not have changed though was to go with the metal tender rather than ABS or plastic as it added unnecessary weight that had to be pulled. The Ixion tender though I believe is ABS, so that should not be a problem with it.
  comtrain Chief Commissioner

Location: Near Albury Wodonga

............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).

As I remember it, we might have forgotten that Bob was disappointed with the first Trainorama 32, so much so that he scrapped the plastic body and built a new cast body to give it added traction (after taking control of the Company) Perhaps your comparison is an indication that he did not waste his money, despite getting his teeth kicked in here on RP for his model?
We can only hope future small engines do come out in metal, as  Eureka also learned with the K Class, which is also going to be metal. Was the 50? And Austrains have indicated they are moving to metal as well.  Perhaps a6et can tell us what he remembers a C32 can haul up a 1:50 grade in reality 1:1
Cheers
RodRod, Just a correction.  The 32cl was a model that was the work of Bob Cooke, but under the TOR brand, it actually arrived well before the change of ownership when he bought out the business.

Way it was reported back then was that the factory used at the time, SDK & its engineer Ivan told BBB after some tests, that the plastic body with metal underframe would not provide enough weight & said to not be able pull much at all, even with the full geared driven wheels which after all does take up space inside the limited boiler area.
The one thing that should not have changed though was to go with the metal tender rather than ABS or plastic as it added unnecessary weight that had to be pulled. The Ixion tender though I believe is ABS, so that should not be a problem with it.
a6et
memory? I thought old memories became crystal clear when you reached the end of the line? Anyway you are right, but you did not tell us the loads these things could haul up 1:40-1:50 grades?
Cheers
Rod
  catchpoint Assistant Commissioner

Location: At the end of a loop
While it may be an optical illusion, its possible to see the green board reflection behind the LED light inside the headlight at the angle of the photo, it seems to show that the LED is very much to the front of the headlight rather that at the back as per other models such as the TOR 32 which also has a green PCB, but you cannot pick it on the TOR model unless you look almost head on.
a6et

So no comment on this version (brass / plastic composite) of the funnel then a6et?

shape / lip profile?

Perhaps the original intention for the funnel was good, correct shape / size taken from GA  drawings etc. but somehow this was whittled away during manufacturing (cost / assembly process)  and we (Ixion) have ended up with a three piece version instead?

Regards,

Catchpoint
  a6et Minister for Railways

While it may be an optical illusion, its possible to see the green board reflection behind the LED light inside the headlight at the angle of the photo, it seems to show that the LED is very much to the front of the headlight rather that at the back as per other models such as the TOR 32 which also has a green PCB, but you cannot pick it on the TOR model unless you look almost head on.

So no comment on this version (brass / plastic composite) of the funnel then a6et?

shape / lip profile?

Perhaps the original intention for the funnel was good, correct shape / size taken from GA  drawings etc. but somehow this was whittled away during manufacturing (cost / assembly process)  and we (Ixion) have ended up with a three piece version instead?

Regards,

Catchpoint
catchpoint
IIRC, I did comment about the profile of the funnel. Certainly the 3 bit aspect of it has likely highlighted it further.

Thing is, that anything that is pointed out seems to be simply brushed aside with accusations of being whingers.

I tend to think that with the level of tolerance that's now acceptable to so many these days, it might be an opportune time to have reruns of the Lima 38cl as they should be acceptable now.

Anyway, I guess its not right that I should be commenting on a model I am now not going to purchase, the pulling ability that John mentions makes it a further turn off.
  M636C Minister for Railways


To my mind, the only really obvious flaw is the funnel. The other comments about the headlight and clack valves may well be accurate but based on the CR headlight seem to be modestly insignificant. Interestingly, the CR loco doesn't seem to have clack valves? Should I cut them off??  
SA_trains

G4 was built by Clyde Engineering to the same drawings as they used for the P class.

All of these had the clack valves on the rear face of the firebox inside the cab. They were moved by the NSWGR to the position seen on the model, I think in the 1920s.

The CR smokebox was known in NSW as a drumhead smokebox. Two of the early superheated locomotives, P11 and P12 had very similar smokeboxes (among others). These were converted and repainted blue for the visit of the Prince of Wales in 1920, and it is a pity that they aren't available as models.

All the original frame locomotives except 3391 started out with frames that looked like those on the CR loco. I mentioned earlier that the weld along the sloping line that formed the top of the frame, to match the longer smokebox, was visible in a number of my photos of original frame locomotives.

M636C
  M636C Minister for Railways


The colour 'match' is from lighting in the photo; I can assure you they are very different in person.

It is on their website, on the box and has been said many times, 3265 is modeled 'as preserved'.

As for everything else; whinge whinge. Simple, don't like it don't buy it.
meh

How much extra effort would have been involved in making a red locomotive in 1930s condition?

Pointing out an error is only "whinging" if you disagree with it...?

One of my clear memories of riding behind 32 class in service was the distinctive noise of the Ramsbottom valves leaking slightly just below blow off pressure. I was very disappointed that the preserved locomotives lacked this feature.

I might wait for a second run with clear headlight glass....

And maybe a 1930s version to go with my green 36 and green 35 from Austrains...

M636C

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.