Coach identification help please

[CasperGriswoldBacon]

Sorry about all the annoying questions recently, but the make of this coach has really defeated me. I'm presuming its a br maroon coach but it has no markings or numbers (don't seem to have worn off) and I've compared it to mainline/bachmann/airfix/Hornby/lima coaches and it doesn't look like any of them. Any ideas?

[flying scotsman123]

That looks like the Hachette coach to me, from a "build your own model railway" magazine series a few years ago. Relatively low detail, with the underframe being a particular shocker, but dirt cheap, as I recall only £3 or £4 from the newsagents for the single copy of the magazine which included the coach.

[CasperGriswoldBacon]

Hmmm. Interesting. That name rings a bell too when I was searching on-line although it doesn't look kit built.. Thanks very much. I shall investigate further

[flying scotsman123]

Hmmm. Interesting. That name rings a bell too when I was searching on-line although it doesn't look kit built.. Thanks very much. I shall investigate further

The coach itself wasn't a kit, the "kit" in this case was an entire model railway, the coach being just one component.

[CasperGriswoldBacon]

oh right. Never came across that. I imagined it was one of those "build a coach in 52 weeks" things. What a strange/novel idea.

[Mountain]

I bought a few but dis not need them so I sold them on. I saw an article in a magazine where they wanted to improve them (They do not need improving. The magazine was being fussy). They assumed they had plastic wheels and they do look plastic, but when they went to replace the wheels for metal, they found that the ones they took off were actually metal wheels that had a thin black coating on them.
So you don't have to change the wheels. They are nice as they are.
The only thing I am less keen on is they have the modern close coupling system with nem pocket couplers. Now many of you love these features so fair enough, but peraonally I prefer to see a larger gap if it means that I get better and more eliablw running... So I prefer the older method of having the couplings fitted to the bogies if using this type of coupling.
(Most modern 00 gauge coaches now mount the couplings like the coach you have shown in the picture, as they can couple close and still allow for going round sharp curves. I like the idea, but I personally found them to not work as reliably when I tried them which were fitted to Bachmann Mk1's).

Now these Hachette coaches are actually very nice coaches, and they are an absolute bargain compared to the likes of the usual 00 gauge offerings, and I can't see how they were able to make them to such a low price when the equivalent Hornby, Bachmann or any other brand would be at least £25 each... If not even more!

[Bufferstop]

Yep I've got one just like it. I doubt very much that they had tools specially made for it, but I've never managed to work out who's tooling was modified to produce it.

[stuartp]

Wadn't it a Chinese clone of a Bachnann Mk 1 ? There are similarities. Lazer scan a Bachmann coach to get the CAD, simplify it (underframe in particular) and produce a cheap low volume mould.

Some of the Czech model aircraft/tank companies have been using short run tooling for injection moulded kits for years, when it wears out (or you've run off enough coaches to cover the print run) it gets scrapped.

[CasperGriswoldBacon]

Its a very decent coach actually. Certainly as good as the stuff I was comparing it to (80's lima, mainline, Hornby), apart from no transfer for numbers etc.. What threw me was the modern couplings as I thought it was from the same era.

[Bigmet]

Wasn't it a Chinese clone of a Bachnann Mk 1 ? There are similarities. Laser scan a Bachmann coach to get the CAD, simplify it (underframe in particular) and produce a cheap low volume mould...

Like the GBL product, though that was reported as done in Eastern Europe. That was very clearly based on tools made from scans of RTR models; simple evidence, there were features in the GBL items that directly replicated components that were nothing to do with the prototype, such as NEM pockets, reproduced as solid blocks, and dimensional compromises in the powered wheelbase required to make a working mechanism for the RTR model, reproduced precisely in the nonfunctional casting of the coupled wheelbase, where there is no requirement for dimensional compromise.

Anyone that cared to measure up could probably make a positive identification of the scanned original.

I expect it won't be the last such...

[luckymucklebackit]

I bought 3 and put them straight into the roster, some profiteers bought loads of them for £3 a pop and flogged them successfully on Ebay for a lot more.

Jim

[6C]

Yep indeed they are Hachettes.

Agree with the above comments.

You can get round the poor underframe by utilising ex-Mainline mk1 underframes - which are a great scale alternative.

Also the mainline coaches have a curious moulding line on the bodysides - so using the Hachette body on the Mainline underframe is a great (and easy) way of getting the best out of both flawed products...

[Bufferstop]

The nearest in quality and detail that they compared to were the coach kits released by Dapol under the Kitmaster name. Could they be a revamp of the tools from the Airfix GMR range, they didn't seem to resurface following the carve up between Dapol and Wrenn.