Bachmann F-7s

[Cajonpassfan]

Okay, so the consensus appears to be "great DCC mechanism / the shell, not so much". Which brings me to the next obvious (to me) question: would Kato or Intermountain shells fit the new Bachmann mech? With the Bmann units available at around $68 already equipped with DCC, and spare shells ocassionally available on eBay for a song...? (I know, it's heresy to consider Kato locomotives with Bachmann power under the hood
Anyone with the new Bachmann F unit and Kato or IM shell care to try or compare?
Thanks, Otto K.

[CBQ Fan]

I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the Bachmann pilot opening (originally designed for a truck-mounted coupler) is much larger than either Kato's or Intermountain's. I'm assuming Bachmann decided to recycle the original Plus/Spectrum shell in order to offer these new models at a lower price (since a redesigned shell would have presumably jacked up the costs quite a bit).



I think everyone gets that it's a dealbreaker for you. Do we need to kill this horse any more?

(FYI, the C&NW unit is an F3 - I don't actually own any Kato F7's).

Cheers,
-Mark

Thank you for the photo!!!!  I do feel that the whole package with DCC is a good value to the right customer.

[spookshow]

Okay, so the consensus appears to be "great DCC mechanism / the shell, not so much". Which brings me to the next obvious (to me) question: would Kato or Intermountain shells fit the new Bachmann mech? With the Bmann units available at around $68 already equipped with DCC, and spare shells ocassionally available on eBay for a song...? (I know, it's heresy to consider Kato locomotives with Bachmann power under the hood
Anyone with the new Bachmann F unit and Kato or IM shell care to try or compare?
Thanks, Otto K.

Copied from page 1 - the Bachmann chassis is a little longer than the IM chassis, so it would take a little grinding. And of course, you'd have to lose the Bachmann coupler on the front - way too big for the IM pilot. The width is good, though.

Cheers,
-Mark

[Cajonpassfan]

Doh, thanks Mark. Maybe I'll give it a try.
Otto

[garethashenden]

The B&M ran B units in consists with GP-7s,-9s and -18s without necessarily using A units. I may get a couple of B units at some point.

[sizemore]

The Bachmann chassis is a little longer than the IM chassis, so it would take a little grinding. And of course, you'd have to lose the Bachmann coupler on the front - way too big for the IM pilot. The width is good, though.

-Mark

Thanks Mark, sounds like a possible option for making some lower cost running fodder or special interest project.

The S.

[Matt Noel]

If they come out with WM ones I will be game.  I may have to do something about the pilot and the windows!

[wazzou]

If they come out with WM ones I will be game.  I may have to do something about the pilot and the windows!

...and the rivets!   

[arbomambo]

based on pics of this new Bachmann unit, I've changed my tune on my opinion...this seems to have significant improvements over the last one...corrected horns,(and arrangement), newer, nicer numberboards, and definitely better paint....if I'm not imagining things, apart from the rather large pilot opening (can be corrected w/o too much work), and the single headlight, which limits certain paint schemes, but is welcome in others (and a center headlight can also be added w/o much work).
seems like a nice release...I'd love to see more pics to see if I'm not seeing things that aren't there.
~Bruce

[Zox]

Actually, looking at this picture, I'm wondering if the large hole is to allow the shell to be readily put on and off the unit without removing the (relatively large) coupler...

[arbomambo]

Actually, looking at this picture, I'm wondering if the large hole is to allow the shell to be readily put on and off the unit without removing the (relatively large) coupler...

don't know if that is the design, but it would seem to help that very thing...can't tell without one in front of me...
Respectfully,
~Bruce

[peteski]

I don't have one of these so I'm speculating here. Even if this model runs smoothly, assuming that it similar to the 44 tonner, I don't care for that type of design.   Inside bearings with rather large-diameter axles, and wheel-back electric wipers design is so 1970s!  Why not use Kato-style wiper-less, low-friction, needle-point bearings mechanism?  If it runs well, even at slow speeds, that is most likely due to a very powerful motor (it overcomes the friction of the vintage-style mechanism.

Give Kato engine a slower speed motor (or lower gearing), and that for me would be the ideal mechanism.

[spookshow]

Actually, looking at this picture, I'm wondering if the large hole is to allow the shell to be readily put on and off the unit without removing the (relatively large) coupler...

Yeah, that makes sense. Unlike the Intermountain F7, you can't remove the pilot coupler prior to pulling the shell from the chassis. IE, that gigantic coupler has to find its way through the pilot opening when taking the shell off / putting it on.

Cheers,
-Mark

[spookshow]

I don't have one of these so I'm speculating here. Even if this model runs smoothly, assuming that it similar to the 44 tonner, I don't care for that type of design.   Inside bearings with rather large-diameter axles, and wheel-back electric wipers design is so 1970s!  Why not use Kato-style wiper-less, low-friction, needle-point bearings mechanism?  If it runs well, even at slow speeds, that is most likely due to a very powerful motor (it overcomes the friction of the vintage-style mechanism.

Give Kato engine a slower speed motor (or lower gearing), and that for me would be the ideal mechanism.

Dunno what to tell you, Pete. In the long run, I'm not a fan of wheelback wipers either. But if the models run exceptionally well out of the box, does it really matter how they got there? I suspect that most people (IE the great non-posting majority) will be very happy with these.

Cheers,
-Mark

[spookshow]

FYI, full review (with pictures) here - http://www.spookshow.net/loco/bachf7.html

Cheers,
-Mark