junglejames, the comments regarding the Class 92s were obviously engineered towards a more serious debate about performance and I think with a loading of 16-18 carriages then the 92 would be superior to a 90.
The comments I made about 47s were tongue in cheek; I reckoned you had your Brush-tinted specs on so thought I'd wind you up a bit.
Has anyone else noticed it?
Im sure its not intentional, but it made me chuckle. I had my Brush tinted specs on (possible, but 47s are still the best, Brush or no Brush), then whilst im going on about how amazing the 90s are, he assures me that Brush (92) is better!!!
Thanks Mumrar, you made me chuckle.
Nearly as much as the one who prefers GMs to Sulzers!!! LOL
Mr 57 man, we wont agree on whats best between sulzers and GMs, as your a self proclaimed GM fanatic!
GMs improved the reliability of the freight 47s, as they were much more modern engines. However the passenger 57s, Im not sure theyve improved at all. They could well have been a waste.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Not wishing to interject, and you guys can get back to your "what's-the-best-AC-electric-fest" as soon as you like, but is there any truth in the rumour that the sleeper could end up being duffs and 86s (electric duffs as we called them then, but probably wouldn't now)? That's what the thread's actually about.
Surely an 86 wouldn't be able to match the performance of an 87/2
-)) anyway? I've had some storming runs with them in my time, but never with 16 bogies.
Dont know if there is or not. I cant see it though. If 87s were still in regular service, then perhaps. But not now.
An 87 would out perform an 86. A 90 would out perform an 87. A 92, would apparently outperform a 90. But thats not me saying that. Thats Mumrar, the non Brush tinted spectacle wearer!!