Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge 4-plank wagons

[Garethp8873]

Saw the 4 North British Four Plank Wagons in the latest issue of the Railway Modeller today. I can definately say though following me seeing the four wagons, the North British example is what I thought it was when they were first announced; North British Diagram 26 (LNER 16B) built from 1896 by the RLY Pickering & Co LTD builders. Wagon number for this model is 55605. Roll on the July release now...

[BG John]

North British Diagram 26 (LNER 16B) built from 1896 by the RLY Pickering & Co LTD builders.

Right for my period (1905ish) then, but did any find their way down to private owners operating in the West Country, or at least southern England?

Edited June 9, 2016 by BG John

[Garethp8873]

Right for my period (1905ish) then, but did any find their way down to private owners operating in the West Country, or at least southern England?

 

The North British liveried one I'd imagine so. As to the Private Owners, despite looking all the PO Wagon books I've not been able to find a single example of this type of wagon at all. With that being the case, can anyone else answer the question as my knowledge on Private Owners isn't as good as that on Pre-Grouping or Grouping wagons...

Edited June 9, 2016 by Garethp8873

[Edwardian]

The North British liveried one I'd imagine so. As to the Private Owners, despite looking all the PO Wagon books I've not been able to find a single example of this type of wagon at all. With that being the case, can anyone else answer the question as my knowledge on Private Owners isn't as good as that on Pre-Grouping or Grouping wagons...

 

Well, I am not going to let the improbability of pre-pooled wagons going anywhere I choose stop me from having the North British ones.

 

The POs I would not have a use for in any event, but could this be Oxford applying liveries to wagons that never wore them again?

 

It would be interesting to get a feel for whether Hornby Train-set levels of integrity are to be expected from Oxford!

Edited June 12, 2016 by Edwardian

[BG John]

Well, I am not going to let the improbability of pre-pooled wagons going anywhere I choose stop me from having the North British ones.

I've got an O gauge Parkside Dundas one that will be putting in an appearance on the Kent & East Sussex Railway one day. It didn't actually cost that much more than the Oxford one, as it was secondhand on eBay.

[CME and Bottlewasher]

There appears to be some interesting stuff (comments and info) on here;

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.lner.info/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj69LztkaPNAhXqK8AKHUH1AsYQFggOMAA&usg=AFQjCNGnd-Xc8m6qzya9mXCzlHIdTUWneg

 

Hope that helps.

 

Kind regards,

 

CME

[BG John]

There appears to be some interesting stuff (comments and info) on here;

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.lner.info/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj69LztkaPNAhXqK8AKHUH1AsYQFggOMAA&usg=AFQjCNGnd-Xc8m6qzya9mXCzlHIdTUWneg

 

Hope that helps.

 

Kind regards,

 

CME

Adrian Swain isn't impressed! I think I'll give a miss, so that solves my problem!

 

I must admit I've just ordered a Bachmann PO wagon that is probably just as inaccurate, but looks rather nice! At the moment I'm happy to buy a few things that are wrong but look nice to help me get my various layouts up and running, but not too many, and I needed something to make up a small Gaugemaster order to get free postage!

[Dunsignalling]

Adrian Swain isn't impressed! I think I'll give a miss, so that solves my problem!

 

I must admit I've just ordered a Bachmann PO wagon that is probably just as inaccurate, but looks rather nice! At the moment I'm happy to buy a few things that are wrong but look nice to help me get my various layouts up and running, but not too many, and I needed something to make up a small Gaugemaster order to get free postage!

The Bachmann one is way out of period for you - it barely qualifies as pre-grouping at all.

 

John

[BG John]

The Bachmann one is way out of period for you - it barely qualifies as pre-grouping at all.

 

John

Violence may be done to it one day!

[Edwardian]

There appears to be some interesting stuff (comments and info) on here;

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.lner.info/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj69LztkaPNAhXqK8AKHUH1AsYQFggOMAA&usg=AFQjCNGnd-Xc8m6qzya9mXCzlHIdTUWneg

 

Hope that helps.

 

Kind regards,

 

CME

 

Worth quoting in full, I think:

 

"Hi All Sadly, like all the previous models by OR, they seem to have made their own interpretation of the prototype with only an overall passing resemblance to the actual wagons. The finer details such as the positioning of most of the bolts and the end door hinge loop design seem to have been left to the discretion of someone without access to either Mr Hooper's or Mr Tatlow's excellent publications or the General arrangement drawing.

The cost of correctly positioning these details can hardly be much more than getting them wrong but fortunately the Wizard Models version appears to be far better, albeit only in kit form. From what has been said by OR there appears to be very little likelihood of any changes so the more enlightened LNER or NBR enthusiast will be back to kit building for the foreseeable future. They will no doubt sell in droves to those who do not worry about the standards of models they buy but just want pretty wagons at low prices. Not really a great step forward for Scottish or pregroup modellers especially as those with such specialised interests are more likely to want models of at least the quality of existing kits."

 

Oh dear.

 

There's more:

 

"Hi All Having completed my research into these 4 OR models. as the pre-pros currently stand, my opinion is that they are all, in the words of another contributor, "A Total Dog" The base model has only a passing resemblance to the NBR Diagram 26 (16b) incorporating, as it does, various features of the NBR diagram 1. The large numbers of detail and dimensional errors have spoilt what would have been an interesting but not important 4mm wagon."

Edited June 13, 2016 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

Well, I am not going to let the improbability of pre-pooled wagons going anywhere I choose stop me from having the North British ones.

 

The POs I would not have a use for in any event, but could this be Oxford applying liveries to wagons that never wore them again?

 

It would be interesting to get a feel for whether Hornby Train-set levels of integrity are to be expected from Oxford!

 

Oh my prophetic soul!

 

"Hi All Having checked the actual PO liveries on offer at least two have been produced before by Hornby or Bachmann and, as previously, they are not liveries found on this design of wagon. The Hamilton Palace version I cannot source but my suspicions have obviously been aroused which is more than I can say for my enthusiasm towards this 19th century design wagon. Once again they have ignored the potential of accurate pre group or even pre 1907 RCH PO designs in favour of freelance models of even earlier vintage.

Edit. The Hamilton Palace livery has now been checked and again is not on a wagon of this design so apart from the NB livery and possible other liveries these PO styles do not apply. If OR had made an accurate model of a different NBR wagon things might have been different. This livery has also been produced on a model by Hornby. So, NOT authentic, NOT accurate and NOT original.

 

"The 3 private owner versions certainly have 4 wheels and buffers, end doors, axleboxes etc in common with the prototypes on which they are based but since they should be Caledonian Railway wagons to diagrams 22 or 46 that is where the similarity ends.

 

"Two new 4 plank PO liveries have been announced by Oxfordrail but alas, like the previous 3, they are no more authentic, neither looking much like the prototypes on which they are based."

 

 

http://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=11368

 

I can see that Oxford's output is likely, at best, to prove to be something of a Curate's Egg through which we will have to pick very carefully indeed.

Edited June 13, 2016 by Edwardian

[black and decker boy]

Well if the worst crime our ex-beloved rivet counter general can find is the positioning of bolts then that's excellent news and I will certainly be buying them in droves. 99% of people viewing our layout at shows really won't know / see the difference.

[Edwardian]

Well if the worst crime our ex-beloved rivet counter general can find is the positioning of bolts then that's excellent news and I will certainly be buying them in droves. 99% of people viewing our layout at shows really won't know / see the difference.

 

Well, whether any given error is sufficiently egregious to deter a purchase is very much an individual choice, and, yes, from 3' away on a moving train whether it is going to matter is a very different matter.

 

I quoted this gentleman's remarks because he does seem to know what he's talking about, and I leave it to others to decide for themselves if, assuming the criticisms are well-founded, they matter. All I can say is that he knows way more than I do and, apparently, more than Oxford, about these wagons. 

 

And not wanting to deny the Junior Messrs Black & Decker's entirely reasonable inclination not to mind the errors, in fairness to the "Rivet Counter General", he did conclude that there was rather more than misplaced bolts in issue; he said, "large numbers of detail and dimensional errors".   

 

In fairness to Mr Oxford Rail, I have not decided against this model, but I must confess, a purchase is now less likely than it was.  I will have to reach my own view, based on prototype photographs, as to whether the model captures the appearance of the subject sufficiently well.

 

The one point I would offer here as my own opinion is that the errors, born whether of corner-cutting or, in many cases, apparent carelessness, appear to be mounting across this nascent range.  There may be commercial imperatives for some compromises on accuracy.  Some, though, like the detail on the 4-plank and the misshapen firebox on the Dean Goods are very much "you may as well get them right as get them wrong" issues, which is frustrating.

 

I would like to be able to trust Oxford to get the details right where reasonably possible.  Moreover, I like to believe that Oxford cares enough to do so.

 

As things are at the moment, I feel that with anything this company announces or offers I will have to research thoroughly before deciding whether it's "hit or miss".

 

Come on Oxford, you're close, but you need to go all the way!

Edited June 13, 2016 by Edwardian

[BG John]

- I've started spending the money I could have spent on the Dean Goods on decent chassis for several locos, probably including my Mainline Dean Goods

- I didn't buy a Radial as I got seduced by O gauge Terriers into building my Colonel Stephens layout in 7mm

- I won't be buying any NB opens as they're obviously out of place in the West Country, AND they're inaccurate

- I was tempted by a couple of 7 plank opens in the new BR livery for my modern image OO layout, but having seen the pictures of the weathered version, I wasn't impressed

 

I don't think Oxford will be getting any of my money!

[GWRtrainman]

Well, whether any given error is sufficiently egregious to deter a purchase is very much an individual choice, and, yes, from 3' away on a moving train whether it is going to matter is a very different matter.

 

I quoted this gentleman's remarks because he does seem to know what he's talking about, and I leave it to others to decide for themselves if, assuming the criticisms are well-founded, they matter. All I can say is that he knows way more than I do and, apparently, more than Oxford, about these wagons. 

 

And not wanting to deny the Junior Messrs Black & Decker's entirely reasonable inclination not to mind the errors, in fairness to the "Rivet Counter General", he did conclude that there was rather more than misplaced bolts in issue; he said, "large numbers of detail and dimensional errors".   

 

In fairness to Mr Oxford Rail, I have not decided against this model, but I must confess, a purchase is now less likely than it was.  I will have to reach my own view, based on prototype photographs, as to whether the model captures the appearance of the subject sufficiently well.

 

The one point I would offer here as my own opinion is that the errors, born whether of corner-cutting or, in many cases, apparent carelessness, appear to be mounting across this nascent range.  There may be commercial imperatives for some compromises on accuracy.  Some, though, like the detail on the 4-plank and the misshapen firebox on the Dean Goods are very much "you may as well get them right as get them wrong" issues, which is frustrating.

 

I would like to be able to trust Oxford to get the details right where reasonably possible.  Moreover, I like to believe that Oxford cares enough to do so.

 

As things are at the moment, I feel that with anything this company announces or offers I will have to research thoroughly before deciding whether it's "hit or miss".

 

Come on Oxford, you're close, but you need to go all the way!

Do take care re-posting comments out of context.

 

This gent also says he's reviewed the model based on one photo - but seemingly from that he is able to accurately determine dimensions....

[Edwardian]

Do take care re-posting comments out of context.

 

This gent also says he's reviewed the model based on one photo - but seemingly from that he is able to accurately determine dimensions....

 

Fair point in principle, but here I quoted more or less the full critique, not selectively.

 

please note the earlier disclaimer: "I quoted this gentleman's remarks because he does seem to know what he's talking about, and I leave it to others to decide for themselves if, assuming the criticisms are well-founded, they matter"!

[Quarryscapes]

Do take care re-posting comments out of context.

 

This gent also says he's reviewed the model based on one photo - but seemingly from that he is able to accurately determine dimensions....

 

Precisely what I was thinking, how the hell can anyone determine incorrect bolt spacings from one rather low resolution photo perspective affected photo? He also says the Wizard model is better, despite being for a different diagram? I think he may be a bit of a Ken Rockwell (Photographers will know who I mean!) 

 

From what I can see, for an RTR wagon this looks very good compared to what photos I have been able to find online of the real thing, with some impressive fine details. The only thing that seems to be wrong is the omission of the loop catch at the bottom of the end doors, and I can't even be sure it's meant to be there! 

[BG John]

I may be wrong, but I assume it's the same wagon as the O gauge Parkside Dundas kit. If so, it certainly looks different to the Parkside one, and although I haven't checked its accuracy, the Parkside looks more convincing. I'll be using it on my O gauge layout because it looks nice, even if it is out of place!

[Edwardian]

Precisely what I was thinking, how the hell can anyone determine incorrect bolt spacings from one rather low resolution photo perspective affected photo? He also says the Wizard model is better, despite being for a different diagram? I think he may be a bit of a Ken Rockwell (Photographers will know who I mean!) 

 

From what I can see, for an RTR wagon this looks very good compared to what photos I have been able to find online of the real thing, with some impressive fine details. The only thing that seems to be wrong is the omission of the loop catch at the bottom of the end doors, and I can't even be sure it's meant to be there! 

 

Well, that would seem to be good news.

 

Let me be frank.  I am a returnee.  I am not afraid to confess my ignorance.

 

What detailed, as opposed to general, knowledge I have of the prototype is limited to the research undertaken in relation to specific potential projects.  So, I know quite a bit about the Great Western in South Devon the 1930s, which might cause me to run the LNER 6-plank or, even, the LNER Cattle Wagon, but I lack the knowledge of that company that I have of the GWR.  I have a number of pre-Grouping ideas, and am interested in the possibility of running the NBR 4-plank.  I am unlikely, however, to acquire a detailed knowledge of NBR wagons unless I contemplate a project centred on the NBR, and I have not that knowledge yet, at any rate. 

 

In other words, like many modellers, I rely upon expert guidance in one form or another.  If I felt I could unquestioningly trust Oxford's research and execution of the model, that would be fine, but there have been too many documented inaccuracies in relation to tooling and livery application for me to feel the necessary degree of confidence.

 

The gentleman I quoted seems to know his stuff.  His comments are persuasive.  If his conclusions are unreliable, if he is wrong, or is right only to the extent of minor inaccuracies reasonably overlooked, then I, for one, would be delighted.  I'd rather have this wagon than not.  My point is simply that I am not in a position to gainsay him.

 

If I have inadvertently propagated 'duff gen', then I will do my best to make up for that, and apologise publically to Oxford.  Truth is, I don't know the answer, so looking at both sides of the debate and a little research for my own part would seem to be the way forward.

 

I hope this is a reasonable representation of its prototype.  If it is I will buy it, and celebrate a win for Oxford.

 

EDIT: Apropos of Ken Rockwell, this cautionary advice is something I would doubtless benefit from applying to the world of model railway products:

 

"If you’re a young or new photographer reading this, please read other websites like CameraLabs or DP Review. Most importantly, look at more than one source and do not take anything you read online for granted. Also remember: camera reviews always have a part of personal preference."

Edited June 13, 2016 by Edwardian

[CME and Bottlewasher]

I am glad to see that my previous Post has been of some help.       

 

Suffice to say, when I was researching back-dating some inter-regional stock for some 'funnies' (using David Jenkinson's parlance) on the layout, I came across the LNER Encyclopaedia. A small site which seemed to have wealth of knowledge, disseminated - without commercial restraints and bias - with openness, expertise and candour, very refreshing!

 

With reference to the likes of Adrian Swain, Martin Finney et al. nice, approachable, friendly, honourable fellows, who know their onions and thank God for that. Why do I say such? If we relied on the likes of Dapol and OR to lead us to the land of milk and honey in terms of quality and accuracy (ie with POWs), we would, in some instances, have made a 'U' turn and returned to multi-coloured tinplate toy wagons and clock-work locos so it would seem      . I would ask; without critique etc. then how can continuous improvement ever take place? Swain, Finney et al are skilled model-makers and manufacturers of excellent kits and RTR models, some would argue, the best, their ability to look at photos and drawings and scale such in their minds eye is exceptional - wish I could do that! My relationship with either of these fellows or the LNER Encyclopaedia? Just a happy - previous - customer and the usual caveats apply.

 

Whilst I am very forgiving of others' models and model-making (I, when time permits, model 7mm FS and SM32 'caricature modelling', I still dabble in OO, although the 7mm bug has bitten hard and the latter is becoming a lesser interest - but when it was LNER/ER was a big interest in my teens), when spending our hard won £s, the manufacturers, such as OR et al, are Subject Matter Experts and should really know better. With modern resources to hand, for these manufacturers, perhaps even a google search such as mine, asking eg. The LNER Encyclopaedia for help and advice, Oxford Rail, really have no excuses. OR introduced its previous wagons with a fanfare and some grandiose claims - which reviews in BRM et al soon took issue with.

 

Each to their own of course, one man's meat is another's poison etc. and we, still, almost, in the world of big-business and brand manipulation have a choice as to where and how to spend our £s, but I am glad that there are those such as Messrs Swain and Finney et al to lead the way-thus helping us make informed decisions with their writings. BTW, I doubt very much if these fellows had merely looked a one photo or drawing of the new OR wagons.

 

The Dean Goods? Dont get me started! Im no expert, however; dome incorrect for loco modelled, issues with smokebox and door, not to mention that the chimney is in the wrong place, cab-sides wrong, thus affecting plates, lining etc, whistles wrong size and wrong way around, wheel flanges too big, splashers over-sized etc etc etc.

 

As I say each to their own, but if one just wants to watch wagons run around a layout, then I have found that at model-railway exhibitions, under traders' tables, there are lots of old Triang wagons to be had cheap    

 

Kindest regards to all,

 

CME

Edited June 13, 2016 by CME and Bottlewasher

[Edwardian]

 

The Dean Goods? Dont get me started! Im no expert, however; dome incorrect for loco modelled, issues with smokebox and door, not to mention that the chimney is in the wrong place, cab-sides wrong, thus affecting plates, lining etc, whistles wrong size and wrong way around, wheel flanges too big, splashers over-sized etc etc etc.

 

 

 

Can we tell all that from the photographs and videos of the sample?

 

Genuine question (not trying to make a point)

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Can we tell all that from the photographs and videos of the sample?

 

Genuine question (not trying to make a point)

Thats okay Edwardian - no offence taken.

 

From what others and I have seen yes - makes me think that it would be worse in the flesh and up against a plethora of photos and against a drawing. As I say, each to their own though and I dont want to cause offence.

 

Kindest regards,

 

CME 

[The Stationmaster]

Can we tell all that from the photographs and videos of the sample?

 

Genuine question (not trying to make a point)

 

In the case of some of it very easily (e.g whistles wrong and the wrong way round).  But on some things it does depend on the angle of view and comparing the model pictures (as processed by digital photography plus the settings and quality of your 'puter monitor but sometimes things will stand out like a sore thumb to those familiar with the whatever is being modelled.

 

The interesting thing about all this is how what we think we are seeing differs from what those who approved the CADs thought they were seeing because the CAD will be visible in far greater detail and from far more angles than any view we are likely to get of the model.  But that does of course assume that care was taken when looking at the CADs - where it isn't all that difficult to miss things hence you ideally need several people doing it independently and it also assumes you have got all the prototype information at your fingers tips with masses of photos and drawings at your disposal.  It also then assumes that having got the CADs right the various 3-d prints and EPs and test shots etc prove that the model is following what was approved on the CADs. If any of those stages are skimped or rushed then the result could be a dismal failure in whatever areas you didn't pay attention to.

Edited June 13, 2016 by The Stationmaster

[autocoach]

I would agree that none of these wagons would have been seen in the Southern reaches of the withered arm before pooling. But when the 4 plank PO wagons were pooled say from 1940-8 would they have been seen in the sunny South?  Are there any photographic references? I model 1947 so the BR repaints and ex-PO markings are not really my interest. 

 

I don't expect OR to be that sophisticated to cater to my personal taste but would like some references to postwar pre-BR photo's of the wagons.

 

I would love to have the MOT pre BR version of PO markings available. White lettering with the PO owners name, location and the owners wagon number to go on the lower left bottom 3 planks. 

[Edwardian]

Well, when I get a moment, I will trawl through what data I can find on the class.  I have not got the RCTS volume that covers the class, unfortunately.  I will try to assess matters better for myself. 

 

It worries me that I might be being unfair to Oxford, and that I should have more confidence, both as to the extent they have got things right and to the extent that they can fix things they haven't.  I still cannot see that the firebox profile is correct, because the sample images clearly show a different profile from that of every prototype belpaire for the class that I have seen.

 

I would vastly prefer it if this (and the 4-plank) turned out to be good representations of the prototype than not.  I take no pleasure at all in picking faults and saying upon release "told you so, rubbish model".

 

With the greatest respect for all the learned contributors here and elsewhere, I think the newbie lesson I have learnt today is that I need to educate myself to the extent necessary to form my own judgment.