Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge GWR Dean Goods

[tomparryharry]

Structurally, they differ. So Oxford probably booked a slot for the lined version with its top feed and dished smokebox door.

 

Picture the scene. A factory floor, somewhere in the middle of England...

 

"Whaddya mean, they're painted green? Oh Christ, I've just finished them in maroon........".

 

Happy weekend everybody. Tootle pip!

 

Ian

[Hilux5972]

Picture the scene. A factory floor, somewhere in the middle of England...

 

"Whaddya mean, they're painted green? Oh Christ, I've just finished them in maroon........".

 

Happy weekend everybody. Tootle pip!

 

Ian

Now a Maroon one would work very well for the shunting loco I need for my Hogwarts layout haha.

[KymN]

Picture the scene. A factory floor, somewhere in the middle of England...

 

"Whaddya mean, they're painted green? Oh Christ, I've just finished them in maroon........".

 

Happy weekend everybody. Tootle pip!

 

Ian

 

 

John Harrison of Torpoint (GWR) famously wrote:

‘Ooever eard of a red engine? Tes vlyin in the faace of natur…. Everybody knaws the praaper colour vur an engine is green and braassen.  Even they Zouth Western people knaws that an they dawn knaw much’.

Harrison J. (1963). ‘Progress Report’. Railway Modeller. December 1963 pp290f.

[Brassey]

In July 1909 the GWR painted County Tank 2225 Crimson Lake "like Midland Railway engines but a little lighter" RCTS.  The was 3 years before the colour was supposedly adopted for coaching stock in 1912.

[The Johnster]

In July 1909 the GWR painted County Tank 2225 Crimson Lake "like Midland Railway engines but a little lighter" RCTS.  The was 3 years before the colour was supposedly adopted for coaching stock in 1912.

 

They also supplied 3 brand new 45xx to the Rhondda and Swansea Bay, which were delivered from Swindon in that company's very attractive dark red livery; they were, of course, re-absorbed into GWR stock and given their originally intended number in 1923.

[dthead]

I got my Oxford Dean Goods here in Melbourne, Australia several weeks ago - to me it looks great ! But that is because I are not familiar in any way with it and take it as I see it.

 

But the loco shorts my DCC system  - it's a sound equipped version. It Is a DCC loco, it does make noise, but when not shorting, that is all it does. No loco movement at all.  I have NCE Powerpro 5 Amp system, and all locos on the layout still work. But this loco shorts on, off, on etc. If I select say the whistle it will whistle, short, whistle short etc whether I have the functin on or off until I remove the loco off the track.

 

I tried to reset the decoder with no effect.

 

I wonder from those who have the loco, be it DC or DCC are there anything on the loco that might sort it out ?

 

Regards,

David Head

[melmerby]

They also supplied 3 brand new 45xx to the Rhondda and Swansea Bay, which were delivered from Swindon in that company's very attractive dark red livery; they were, of course, re-absorbed into GWR stock and given their originally intended number in 1923.

Your account differs somewhat to that in the RCTS volumes

 

Locos allotted GWR Nos 2165-7 went brand new in April 1907 straight from Wolverhampton Works to the R&SB and were given R&SB Nos 31-33.

31 & 32 (2165 & 2166) were then transferred to Port Talbot Ry in March 1909 and given their originally allotted GWR numbers, returning to the GWR in 1912.

33 (2167) returned from the R&SB to the GWR in Jan 1914 and was renumbered 4506. (By then the locos had been re-allocated 45XX series numbers)

There is no mention of R&SB livery being applied!

 

Keith

 

EDIT

2167/4506 is believed never have carried it's original allocated 21XX number

Second EDIT

"Great Western Way" says locos at the R&SB were painted Black.

After 1906 the R&SB was effectively part of the GWR and locos were transferred between the two companies as and when required but were numbered into the R&SB series.

 

Re-written for better clarity

Edited August 17, 2017 by melmerby

[Hroth]

I found something this weekend that puts the accuracy of the Oxford DG in context.....

 

It was in a little booklet in the Project Book series from 1973, called "Build A Model Railway".  Its not a bad book, its full of ideas for the novice and even includes a brief description of building a Ks locomotive kit.  There is also a section on modifying RTR models and an example given of modifying a Triang 3F tender loco to produce a Dean Goods, with the aid of an Airfix City of Truro kit...

 

 

Now, I've suitable parts left over from the Dapol CoT kits I used for my Dean 4-6-0 project, I suppose I could get a cheap Triang 3F from ebay..... 

[The Johnster]

Your account differs somewhat to that in the RCTS volumes

 

Locos allotted GWR Nos 2165-7 went brand new in April 1907 straight from Wolverhampton Works to the R&SB and were given R&SB Nos 31-33.

31 & 32 (2165 & 2166) were then transferred to Port Talbot Ry in March 1909 and given their originally allotted GWR numbers, returning to the GWR in 1912.

33 (2167) returned from the R&SB to the GWR in Jan 1914 and was renumbered 4506. (By then the locos had been re-allocated 45XX series numbers)

There is no mention of R&SB livery being applied!

 

Keith

 

EDIT

2167/4506 is believed never have carried it's original allocated 21XX number

Second EDIT

"Great Western Way" says locos at the R&SB were painted Black.

After 1906 the R&SB was effectively part of the GWR and locos were transferred between the two companies as and when required but were numbered into the R&SB series.

 

Re-written for better clarity

 

Thank you for the clarification, Keith.  I am sure I saw a showcase 7mm of an R & SB 45xx many years ago at a show in the red livery and it looked very smart indeed; a shame if the livery was never carried, but there you go!

 

The GW also lent some 31xx (original Churchward large prairies) to the Barry Railway for it's through service to Cardiff; I have no idea what livery these carried, but the Barry was known for the turnout of it's locos even in an age when loco were generally kept pretty clean, and they'd have looked marvellous in a Barry livery!

[melmerby]

I'm not saying that they didn't carry red livery but RCTS do not mention any livery change from the works so they could easily be GWR green as they were effectively "On Loan" and the Great Western Way" says the R&SBs own locos were painted black with lining out.

 

Many of the South Wales railways were closely allied to the GWR in some form or other and the grouping just regularised the situation.

As always the records are incomplete for events 110 years ago!

 

Keith

Edited August 18, 2017 by melmerby

[The Johnster]

By the grouping, and arguably by the turn of the century, most of the South Wales railways had 'aligned' themselves in some way with one or other of the big players, by which I mean the GW, LNW, or Midland.  The TVR maintained a stout independence, despite having been founded by Bristol money and having many of it's original board in common with the GW, including Brunel who was it's engineer, and Guppy, who was prominent on both boards in the 1830s and 40s.  It was the first railway into Cardiff, beating the South Wales, which nobody was ever fooled about in terms of it's allegiances as it was broad gauge and worked by GW stock, by 12 years.  

 

Returning to the situation at the turn of the 20th century, the Rhymney had bankrupted itself in the attempt to build the Caerphilly Tunnel and remove it's dependence on the Taff Vale, and was more or less a proxy for the LNW (which maintained a goods depot at Cardiff and a loco to service it, based at the Rhymney's East Dock shed) which had bailed it out, the Barry for all it's independent and anti-Cardiff/Bute trumpetings was closely allied to the GW, as was the R & SB which enjoyed cordial relationships with the TVR as well, and the Neath and Brecon was pretty much owned outright by the Midland, whose influence had allowed it running rights from Hereford into Brecon.  The Newport (Alexandra Dock and Railway) and the Port Talbot Railway were effectively proxies for the GW, and the Brecon and Merthyr had very close links to the Cambrian.  The nearest thing to an independent concern was the Cardiff, and that was blocked at every turn by it's various neighbours.  That these railways operated more or less under their own management and used their own stock in their own liveries was a fiction in order to satisfy the monopolies commission, and not that difficult to see through!

 

The GW, handed all this on a plate at the grouping and aware that only a few years earlier the Taff Vale had declared the highest ever dividend on ordinary shares in history (I believe this still holds) and was rumoured to have celebrated with the installation of a solid gold rail chair at a mystery location (I've never found it!), must have been rubbing it's hands in anticipation of the profits, and spent a lot of money updating and upgrading the South Wales infrastructure, which had never in half a century stopped creaking under the weight of what must at the time have looked like a permanent exponential increase in coal traffic though the truth was that the rot had already set in as the easily won coal was running out.  The coal strike in 1926 and the depression of the 30s ensured that it never saw a penny back, but to the company's credit it never really gave up on South Wales and did it's best for the area even when it was clear that the golden chalice was poisoned.

 

Not only are records from 110 years ago incomplete, they were incomplete and a bit shady 110 years ago, and never a reflection of the realpolitik on the ground, which was a lot more to do with shady deals and nods and winks between shareholder groups and management cabals which never breathed the oxygen of publicity.  These were people who regarded themselves as gentlemen, whatever we think of them, and gentlemen kept their secrets, especially if they were lining each other's pockets...

[lofty1966]

I found something this weekend that puts the accuracy of the Oxford DG in context.....

 

It was in a little booklet in the Project Book series from 1973, called "Build A Model Railway".  Its not a bad book, its full of ideas for the novice and even includes a brief description of building a Ks locomotive kit.  There is also a section on modifying RTR models and an example given of modifying a Triang 3F tender loco to produce a Dean Goods, with the aid of an Airfix City of Truro kit...

 

triang 3f dean goods.jpg

 

Now, I've suitable parts left over from the Dapol CoT kits I used for my Dean 4-6-0 project, I suppose I could get a cheap Triang 3F from ebay..... 

 

Send the pic to Oxford Rail.....could be the basis for their next tooling.

[The Johnster]

I found something this weekend that puts the accuracy of the Oxford DG in context.....

 

It was in a little booklet in the Project Book series from 1973, called "Build A Model Railway".  Its not a bad book, its full of ideas for the novice and even includes a brief description of building a Ks locomotive kit.  There is also a section on modifying RTR models and an example given of modifying a Triang 3F tender loco to produce a Dean Goods, with the aid of an Airfix City of Truro kit...

 

triang 3f dean goods.jpg

 

Now, I've suitable parts left over from the Dapol CoT kits I used for my Dean 4-6-0 project, I suppose I could get a cheap Triang 3F from ebay..... 

 

I would never have thought it was possible to make an 'ordinary' Triang 3F worse (actually it wasn't a bad toy for it's time and ran well enough), but this does seem to have achieved that objective.  1973 or not, I would not have tolerated it, and I ran some pretty extreme abominations in my teens only half a decade earlier than this, including a '56xx' consisting of a Triang 0-6-0 chassis and some bits from an Airfix (it meant construction kits then) 61xx, and a '43xx' which was a CoT on top of a hacksawn Triang Princess chassis, the old Rovex type with no valve gear and actually from my first loco, so dating to 1958, which featured a motor that extended into the tender which I convinced myself nobody could see beneath a canvas cab awning made of elastoplast, so I wasn't in the fine scale bracket myself!  Both these Triang chassis had solid wheels.

 

Slightly less unconvincing, but not much, was a '42xx' from a HD converted 3 rail 8F chassis with a CoT boiler and bits of, again, a 61xx; this at least had an attempt at the high curve cab roof and new tank sides in the new wonder material, plasticard, and ran well enough considering it's construction kit plastic cylinders and motion.  I even had the decency to be embarrassed about it driving the wrong axle.

 

You all have my permission to bring these crimes against sentient creation (Davros, the head Dalek, was banished to the Outer Void for eternity by the Council of Time Lords for this, and I vowed that I would never bother with a criminal career for anything less; fortunately for sentient creation my imagination is limited to bodged 56xx and 43xx) up if I get too rivet county on here, but only on condition that your own misdemeanours are revealed...

 

But this, this...

Edited August 18, 2017 by The Johnster

[Guest Midland Mole]

Yesterday we sold the last of our Dean Goods at the shop, and I'm sad because now I cant look at it in the case when I walk past.

Everyone who has had one has been very pleased with them, with the exception of the two DCC Sound versions we had....which sounded crap and ran even worse. Suffice to say they were sent back to Oxford.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the other liveries when they come out, but am very happy with my lined version.

Alex

[Caddy]

I found something this weekend that puts the accuracy of the Oxford DG in context.....

 

It was in a little booklet in the Project Book series from 1973, called "Build A Model Railway".  Its not a bad book, its full of ideas for the novice and even includes a brief description of building a Ks locomotive kit.  There is also a section on modifying RTR models and an example given of modifying a Triang 3F tender loco to produce a Dean Goods, with the aid of an Airfix City of Truro kit...

 

triang 3f dean goods.jpg

 

Now, I've suitable parts left over from the Dapol CoT kits I used for my Dean 4-6-0 project, I suppose I could get a cheap Triang 3F from ebay..... 

 

I think these pictures appeared in the old Model Railway News a year or so before the quoted booklet and I'm fairly certain the loco was made by John Flann of Hintock fame seen elswhere on RMWeb. Perhaps he may not have seen this thread? 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...the loco shorts my DCC system  - it's a sound equipped version. It Is a DCC loco, it does make noise, but when not shorting, that is all it does. No loco movement at all.  I have NCE Powerpro 5 Amp system, and all locos on the layout still work. But this loco shorts on, off, on etc. If I select say the whistle it will whistle, short, whistle short etc whether I have the functin on or off until I remove the loco off the track.

 

I tried to reset the decoder with no effect.

 

I wonder from those who have the loco, be it DC or DCC are there anything on the loco that might sort it out ?...

That's a  classic return to retailer job, but I do see you are in Oz...

 

...Everyone who has had one has been very pleased with them, with the exception of the two DCC Sound versions we had....which sounded crap and ran even worse. Suffice to say they were sent back to Oxford...

However on this evidence you are not alone.

 

Perhaps an email direct to Oxford requesting guidance?

[tetsudofan]

My sound-fitted version is on it's way back to Oxford Rail today via my local hobby shop. The sound is pathetic, whistle can hardly be heard over the running sounds .... and that's at full volume setting.

 

Looking under the tender there don't seem to be any holes for the sound to escape.... or maybe they have fitted the speaker upside down.

 

Be interesting to see what Oxford Rail say. If they say its ok then it will be exchanged for a non-sound version as I'm not paying for a sound version that does not make any decent sounds.

 

Keith

[dthead]

That's a  classic return to retailer job, but I do see you are in Oz...

 

However on this evidence you are not alone.

 

Perhaps an email direct to Oxford requesting guidance?

 

Yes the loco was reboxed and posted back to  Hattons. And it looks nice to this Aussie ! will report the eventual outcome when that occurs.

 

Regards,

David Head

[coachmann]

Is there a date for release of the Dean Goods in later GWR and BR condition I wonder....?

[tomparryharry]

Is there a date for release of the Dean Goods in later GWR and BR condition I wonder....?

According to Oxford, it's listed as 4th quarter.

[7013]

Whats in a Review?

Interesting reading two differing approaches to reviews about this loco.

It has been aknowledged that there are issues with some of the research into this particular loco and what would and would not have been part of it. There are one or two issues about build quality too.

One could say that this is not unususal in that there have aways been comments about what was and was not on a particular loco and was this or that the right shape. Take for instance the many incarnations of the Class 52 which each had good and bad points until modellers contributed to the Dapol loco which is generally accepted as the most accurate, there have been similar issues with Cl33 roof profiles, Cl47 cab profiles, and who can forget Bachmann putting the completely wrong front on its Modified Hall. The point is what we see with the Oxford rail 'Dean' is not new, it is more a matter of are those small errors/compromises acceptable?

The BRM review has taken a welcome approach by letting members of the public loose on the loco, and despite those errors/compromises it has been given a thumbs up.

The Model Rail review takes the more traditional magazine approach and for me makes uncomfortable reading. The reviewer has gone to great lengths to point out every single error rivets and all whilst virtually ignoring the running and haulage dharacteristics of the loco. 

One could argue that Model Rail was giving the most indepth and coprehensive review of the modrl versus prototype whilst ignoring the qualities that the BRM reviewers picked up on. They appear to accept the 'short comings' and concentrate on the running and haulage qualities which get a positive review.. 

It could be argued that the old adage if it looks like a Dean Goods it must be one, and if like many I suspect who can accept those compromises than they will be happy with this model.

But it does ask questions as to how models are reviewed, should the traditional magazine approach prevail, or the public scrutiny review, or do both have their merits? a bit of food for thought.

[tomparryharry]

I'd respectfully suggest that the 2 styles of review differ greatly.

 

The 'magazine' style has a degree of gravitas: It's not to say that the review isn't right. but a published contributor (or others) who sell for financial gain leave themselves open to recrimination, if it appears to be unnecessarily biased. Therefore an even-handed approach normally wins the day.

 

However... In an open forum, everybody and their dog/chicken/aunt can have an opinion, without recrimination. Some are good opinions, some are somewhat less so. It's down to self government, and moderation, that appears to have a happy medium. As long as the basic rules are kept, then an even-handed review should be forthcoming. Not by the select few, but by an interested majority.

 

I'm completely in favour of a fairly moderated forum to conduct reviews, especially if it encourages manufacturers to engage with the product-paying public. The general free-for-all is sometimes counterproductive.

 

Dean Goods, anybody?

 

Ian.

[asmay2002]

The BRM review has taken a welcome approach by letting members of the public loose on the loco, and despite those errors/compromises it has been given a thumbs up.

 

The BRM "review" was just a collation of the views expressed on this forum.  Model Rail actually did a review but rather bizarrely apologised for doing it in their editorial.

[The Stationmaster]

It's a more than fair point to remind us that over the years umpteen models have had their faults but Oxford has managed at least one thing never, I'm sure, achieved previously  in their Dean Goods and that is misreading the results of and data from a scan of the prototype and ending up with rivets where there were none.  OK so such rivets can, at the cost of paint damage, probably be removed should a purchaser so incline but to me it's a sign of a simple and rather amateurish mistake which could, and should, have been corrected in any review of CADs which implies a rather slapdash, or maybe 'quickie', approach to development.  

 

And it goes along with the overall impression of 'something from here' and 'a bit from there' - which can be an inevitable outcome if a subject, especially a Dean Goods, is not adequately researched and model development is not carefully controlled.  If you were going to pick any GW loco as one of your early models the last you would probably tackle is a Dean Goods - because of their complex history and years of detail changes.  So net result is you come up with something which overall looks like a Dean Goods but has detail shortcomings although with careful matching to particular running numbers the impact could be probably be lessened - which again needs careful research and not just a scan and a pile of ill-matched photos.  So I think the MR review is pretty fair as they have judged it within the contemporary market place and have supported that approach in their editorial in order to make very clear where they have come from.

 

But don't forget that in the same issue MR gave Oxford's Carflat very good marks and a positive review which I read as meaning that Oxford can do it when they try (and hopefully the Carflat isn't a fluke).  Overall I remain very much in favour of MR's reviewing policy - occasional errors/shortcomings aside  - because they verge very much towards the objective.  The BRM approach however has to be commended for trying something different and I see nothing wrong with, and a lot to be said for, gathering a range of views as long as careful editorial control is applied to weed out the extremists and sycophants.

[coachmann]

While magazines and forum people have their opinions and facts are facts, it is the only Dean Goods we will ever get and if railway modellers cannot make something of it, I would be surprised.  

 

I have maintained it would be a good seller because it is a Dean Goods regardless of it's faults and I think reasonable people will see it isn't such a bad model, has a normal design of chassis and should present no problems when fitting DCC and sound. I know that I for one will find it easier to modify the Oxford Dean Goods than modify a so-called Modified Hall!

Edited September 24, 2017 by coachmann