Mk III / Mk IV Compatibility

[Royston Vasey]

Hmm, not convinced, sorry. Similarities and lineage yes, but they arent the same. Like I said in the other thread, a Mk 2F and Mk 3 coach are more similar than a 156 and a Mk 4, IMHO, but you wouldn't call them the same!

Some good points though, and interesting article, I must admit I wasn't totally aware of their similarities.

 

[dubscottie]

Hmm, not convinced, sorry. Similarities and lineage yes, but they arent the same. Like I said in the other thread, a Mk 2F and Mk 3 coach are more similar than a 156 and a Mk 4, IMHO, but you wouldn't call them the same!

Some good points though, and interesting article, I must admit I wasn't totally aware of their similarities.

If you are still not convinced ask Roger Ford at Ian Allan.. He wrote the article.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The problem is people often confuse looking alike as to being constructed similarly, and conversly looking different as to being totally different construction. For many with BR stock if it's got slam doors it's a Mk1, if it's got sliding doors it's a Mk3 and if it's got plug doors it's a Mk4, with a few exceptions. In reality things can look quite different yet be near identical under the skin, or look identical yet be of very different construction.
The 1st generation DMUs were great examples of the latter, they all looked similar (with ovious exceptions) but were built by different manufacturers using different techniques. Few had much in common with Mk1s structurally.

As you say.. Take a Swindon class 120/124/126. They look like Mk1's but have integral bodies so are not Mk1's.
They are also the origins of the Mk 2! (anyone that has the book "British Rail Mk2 Coaches" by Michael Harris could vouch for me!!)