Model Rail/Rapido Trains GER/LNER 'J70' 0-6-0T 'Project Toby'

[NXEA!]

We have friends in the Somerset levels. When visiting we have commented on how similar the landscape is to East Anglia.

 

I appear to have gone and ordered a second one.....Alex

 

I'm also thinking about a second one... 

[Norton Wood]

Model Rail have received a decorated sample of the J70.

 

The Facebook post also suggests to look out on Model Rail's YouTube page.

 

 

 

Photo from Model Rail's Facebook Page.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Norton Wood

[dibber25]

We've been playing with the first decorated sample of the Model Rail/Rapido Trains 'J70' this afternoon. Have a look at it here:

https://www.youtube.com/c/ModelRailMagazine

Oh - and we hadn't even had time to put on all the extra bits - doors, chains, coupling hooks etc. (CJL)

[alfsboy]

I moved to Cornwall from East Anglia 35 years ago. The Cornish take at least 50 years to accept you as one of their own, if at all. Am I now in limbo? I remain at heart East Anglian and hope this is not a bar to J70 ownership.

Alex

I have lived in East Anglia for 40 odd years .Some have been odder than others.........The funniest was the old local  who insisted I had backed into his car .We were parked at Wroxham ....no Hoveton  or was  it Wroxham? .I went to the bank and when I came out a old guy was screaming  effing and beeing at me pointing to his car .I noted no damage and asked him his problem .He insisted i had reversed into his car and showed triumphantly  me the damaged bumper on my   BMW e30 .I got  this by  reversing into a bollard and was going to fix with new parts in the boot .None of this got through to the guy  and he  threatened and summonsed a policeman who agreed with me I hadnt hit his car .This didnt not placate the old boy who still insisted I had damaged his car .The cop told me to just go which I did .The cop then marched my accuser off in the general direction of the local plod shop which amazingly  Wroham /Hoveton /Whatever   has .NFN.

Edited June 26, 2018 by alfsboy

[Corbs]

[Godfrey Glyn]

Well all I can say is that I'm very disappointed, I've watched this video of this stunning little loco, admired its looks and its pulling power and yet I cannot spot any clues whatsoever as to any future developments from Model Rail. I suppose I will just have to wait for the two I have on order its very frustrating. Thanks Chris

[dibber25]

Well all I can say is that I'm very disappointed, I've watched this video of this stunning little loco, admired its looks and its pulling power and yet I cannot spot any clues whatsoever as to any future developments from Model Rail. I suppose I will just have to wait for the two I have on order its very frustrating. Thanks Chris

 

The only future developments at present are the 16XX and the E1 and we don't have anything that we can show yet. I was going to tease by putting my old Cotswold Models 16XX in the background but it is so old and battered that it wouldn't be fair. (CJL)

Edited June 27, 2018 by dibber25

[Godfrey Glyn]

The only future developments at present are the 16XX and the E1 and we don't have anything that we can show yet. I was going to tease by putting my old Cotswold Models 16XX in the background but it is so old and battered that it wouldn't be fair. (CJL)

 

All is fair in love and the internet Chris!!

 

Many thanks

 

Godfrey

[NXEA!]

Getting excited for these. I see that the J70 has a coreless motor to allow space for a sugar cube speaker... That being the case, does anyone know if any after-market suppliers have any plans to do a J70 sound chip? I assume no sound recordings of these exist so they'd have to be generic, did they sound particularly distinctive, or were they similar to your average LNER 2-cylinder tank engine?

[2750Papyrus]

I always thought that part of the novelty of J70s was the sideskirts, but the shots showing the motion in operation are intriguing.

 

Does the coreless motor cope with feedback type DC controllers?

[Steamport Southport]

Getting excited for these. I see that the J70 has a coreless motor to allow space for a sugar cube speaker... That being the case, does anyone know if any after-market suppliers have any plans to do a J70 sound chip? I assume no sound recordings of these exist so they'd have to be generic, did they sound particularly distinctive, or were they similar to your average LNER 2-cylinder tank engine?

 

I've no idea to be honest.

 

Maybe they were like a Cockerill?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoOti9KzQcw

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NdrKchM6YY

 

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

I always thought that part of the novelty of J70s was the sideskirts, but the shots showing the motion in operation are intriguing.

 

Does the coreless motor cope with feedback type DC controllers?

 

I believe not. I also recall that they recommend that you don't use electronic track cleaners.

 

 

 

Jason

[stewartingram]

I believe not. I also recall that they recommend that you don't use electronic track cleaners.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Hopefully I can rip out the coreless & dcc provision & put a proper motor in mine.

 

Stewart

[dibber25]

Hopefully I can rip out the coreless & dcc provision & put a proper motor in mine.

 

Stewart

 

That would not be wise. The coreless motor IS a 'proper motor'. It is a small, modern, powerful, motor which has enabled the J70 to have internal detail and still be powerful enough to pull a good length train. It is damaging to Model Rail's reputation to suggest that we - or Rapido Trains - would put out a model without proper components. The 'J70' has been designed to meet modern requirements. There are kit-built tram locos available for those whose control systems require more traditional mechanisms and four-wheel motor bogies. (CJL) 

Edited July 21, 2018 by dibber25

[MarkSG]

Anyone is, of course, perfectly entitled to do what they want with a model they have bought, including modifying it, customising it or using it as the base for some other project. But, typically, RTR modification projects are about improving a model, particularly an older one, and bringing it up to modern standards - eg, adding detail components, improving the livery, etc. It's a little unusual to see someone saying they want to modify a modern model to take it back to "heritage" RTR standards

[PaulG]

I have ECM anologue controllers which work fine for all my stock including Hornby J15, B12, D16, Heljan Class 15 diesels etc and Bachmann DMUs and WD 2-8-0. Is it suggested the J70 motor is not compatible?

 

Paul

[dibber25]

Anyone is, of course, perfectly entitled to do what they want with a model they have bought, including modifying it, customising it or using it as the base for some other project. But, typically, RTR modification projects are about improving a model, particularly an older one, and bringing it up to modern standards - eg, adding detail components, improving the livery, etc. It's a little unusual to see someone saying they want to modify a modern model to take it back to "heritage" RTR standards

 

No question that the customer can do as he wishes with his model. However, modern plastic/die-cast ready-to-run models are frequently designed 'around' specific components and this makes changing items such as motors a risky operation. Replacing the coreless motor in the J70 with a 'traditional' motor would almost certainly require removal of the internal detail and revision of the drive train, which in turn may well require replacement gears, which in turn would require different axles/wheelsets. Etc. That's why I said it wouldn't be wise. If all that's going to be left is the body, a safer option would be to buy a body kit. (CJL)

Edited July 21, 2018 by dibber25

[dibber25]

So, as the trend towards coreless motors continues, it would seem that those of us who have been modelling, using traditional DC control with no problems whatsoever, are being sidelined, and fobbed off with statements such as "There are kit-built tram locos available...."; (presumably the prehistoric K's version)? If the kit-built version is considered adequate for the experienced modeller, why won't it do for the "modern" modelller who seems to value - literally - the bells and whistles more than good, reliable running.

 

Look back over postings here about the new-release locos of the past few years; (since the advent of coreless motors in model locos). The number of issues surrounding poor running of locos fitted with these 'wonder' motors, compared to those with conventional motors, is most striking. As you concede above, the introduction of coreless motors has nothing to do with superiority of performance, but simply size - so as to accommodate the current fad of sound - wholly unconvincing as it is.

 

The need to allocate as much space as possible for a speaker and decoder is also having a markedly adverse effect upon the tractive weight of recent models, with the consequent reduction in train-pulling performance. How many real modellers will be satisfied with a small low-powered loco pootling back and forth through a single track country station, just because it makes noises that vaguely approximate to those of the real thing? Certainly not those of us who actually experienced the real thing - be it a pannier tank on a country branchline or a pacific at full chat on the mainline.

 

By all means pander to the faddists, but a modelling magazine will ignore the real modeller at its peril !!

 

The sheer volume of enquiries and debates I hear about tweaking CVs, substituting speakers, the miriad of (and vast expense of) decoder chips, simply confirms my long-held suspicion that DCC was developed so that today's all-singing bit of micro-elecronics will be next years 'old hat'. As with all things electronic, DCC is a producers dream - so many modellers just have to have the latest bit of gadgetry.

 

It's not railway modelling as I understand it.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

No. As understand it (I haven't taken one to bits) the J70 has a coreless motor because - given that our spec required internal detail - it was the only thing that would fit and give adequate power. The space for a speaker is a cut-out in the frames. The motor fits - like many modern models - inside the very small boiler. I've run the engineering prototypes at home on my British layout which is analog DC and the coreless motor performed beautifully. I had 36 box vans behind it and it ran smoothly, slowly and without any problems. My controller is by no means 'new'. It's a Gaugemaster Model D which, I believe is at least 10 years and probably nearer 20 years old. I'm afraid I don't know whether or not it is a feedback controller. I suspect not, as I've run countless models  with it and its never done them any harm.

However, regardless of the type of motor being used in the model, I would not recommend trying to change it. As I've already said, this is a tiny model built around specific components. Over the years, I've built white metal, resin, etched brass and 3-D printed tram locos, so there's plenty of choice for those who prefer the traditional approach and chassis where they can choose what type of motor they want to fit. Ready-to-run is really for those who don't wish to do that, so by providing a ready-to-run tram loco Model Rail is actually increasing the choice that's available - as all except the white metal kit are, I believe still available.

I have the original H&M controller which was used to review models for Model Railway Constructor in 1963. I certainly would not expect to use it to review modern models. I have to stop now as the fire alarm is sounding and my dinner is doubtless burning. (CJL)

Edited July 21, 2018 by dibber25

[Paul Cram]

I have a Pentroller which was designed over 30 years ago to run coreless motors. Corelesss motor aren't new and I have most of my kit built locos using them.

[dibber25]

Coreless motors are perfectly compatible with modern DC controllers. They're not compatible with older "feedback" controllers. But then, neither are many modern cored motors either. Feedback controllers were a bit of a hack intended to compensate for the poor slow running qualities of many older motors. Modern motors don't need it, they will run smoothly enough on DC without it, and they can be damaged by it.

 

If you do still have a number of models using older motors, then yes, you may have to make a choice between continuing to use a controller more suited to them and having newer RTR models with more modern motors (and a controller which suits them). But, then, once upon a time people had to make a choice between upgrading their rolling stock to use modern track or sticking with older, vastly over-scale track because their models still had vastly over-scale flanges. Time moves on, and the current state of railway modelling moves on with it. And I shudder to think what the reaction of the traditionalists was when two-rail took over from three-rail. Imagine having to replace every loco just because three-rail is going out of fashion! Heck, I bet all "real" railway modellers still use clockwork. It's the only proper traditional motive power.

 

As for weight and pulling power, the former is achieved just as easily (and more reliably) with a weighted chassis than a heavier motor, and a modern motor is typically more powerful than its predecessors. Look at the video of the pre-production sample of the J70, and you'll see it hauling a lengthy train with no problems.

 

Yes, I remember very well the changeover from Hornby-Dublo three-rail to 2-rail. I made the changeover because the people at Kitmaster only produced their Blue Pullman power bogie in 2-rail, and I wanted a Blue Pullman. I sold my Duchess of Atholl and Sir Nigel Gresley at a school fete for £1 each. I'm amazed that some modellers think that technology should stand still. I can't run my modern car on four-star leaded petrol or play my CDs on a record-player. Indeed, I couldn't play my 33rpm LPs on a gramophone. Ironically, my old Hornby-Dublo models (ones that still just about work) will run on my 'modern' Gaugemaster controller. I'm not sure I would dare to even plug the old H&M into the mains! (CJL)

Edited July 21, 2018 by dibber25

[dibber25]

 

 

I also feel that some of those decrying MR's J70 motor are the same people who regard those of us who only buy RTR locos, and don't build kits, as a bit Third Division South, anyway, so am puzzled as to why they are so exercised about a plastic RTR model 

 

It's taken me a while but I think I've now figured it out. (CJL)

[dibber25]

It does help the debate if you actually read what I write - not what you THINK I write !!

 

Modern (aka coreless) motors are NOT needed for more finely detailed models  - where did you get that idea? Dibber concedes that the coreless motor is used to allow space for the sound components.

 

" why did you switch to feedback controllers in the first place"? I didn't - did you not read my posting where I stated that I do not own one, and where I listed the controllers that I do use?

 

"But you can't argue that DC is somehow a more authentic modelling experience than DCC, or that feedback controllers are the only "proper" control system"; that's good, because I didn't!

"But you can't expect to be able to mix and match with modern stuff"; but I do expect that, and it does exactly that.

 

"and nor can you expect modern control equipment to be backwards compatible with yours"; I don't - I have no desire to use DCC.

 

"You might just as well argue that the modern preference for code 75 track is a bad thing because your locos won't run on it"; but I don't - I use Peco Code 75 track, bullhead, and all my stock runs on it beautifully; including the sixty year old stuff.

 

Tender drives? Why am I in the process of building new loco chassis for three Airfix 4Fs and two Airfix 2Ps?

 

Traction tyres? The work of the devil !

 

Tension-lock couplings? Stripped them off everything that came with them - and fitted Hornby Dublo / Peco Simplex couplers.

 

I have no problem whatsoever with new technology - but no-one will convince me that coreless motors are needed in order to produce more detailed models. I have plenty of TINY cored motors in stock that make your average coreless, as used in the recent loco releases, look huge.

 

My beef is that we are being fobbed off with inferior mechanisms purely to facilitate the incorporation of sound - which bears little or no resemblance to the real thing.

 

PLEASE READ WHAT I POST AND RESPOND TO THAT - NOT WHAT YOU WISH I'D POSTED IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY YOUR OWN POSITION.

 

I love a good debate, but please post reasoned counter-arguments to what I actually post.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

No, again. I don't think I've 'conceded' anywhere that a coreless motor is used in the J70 in order to accommodate sound. In my post 437 I specifically said that the coreless motor is used because we requested internal detail and that the motor is the only one that can be accommodated inside the small boiler. I also pointed out that the space for a sound speaker is - I'm told - a cut-out in the frames (so not affecting the size or position of the motor). I guess we all need to read what each other actually wrote. I realise that some modellers will have a particular commitment to certain types of equipment, be they motors or controllers. A manufacturer in today's market has to cater for certain requirements some of which are conflicting - high levels of detail on small prototypes being one of them. Similarly accommodating modern technologies. Backwards compatibility is - like easy conversion to P4 - something which cannot always be provided. I've just had to deal with a routine decoder installation in a supposedly updated model. It has been updated from it's original to a level that would have been fine 10-15 years ago but which is not satisfactory in 2018. A new model, launching now, has to be acceptable for the next several years, in which technology will move forward again. The J70 is unusual in being a locomotive in which a substantial amount of internal detail can be seen. When the model was first put forward to Rapido, Jason said, "that'll be easy. We'll model it with the side doors closed and there's plenty of room inside the body." It was then pointed out that the J70 had no side doors, and that we wanted end doors that could be open as they often were on the real thing. Modellers comments on the samples seen so far, suggest that we were absolutely right to go for that level of detail. It was that which led to the adoption of the coreless motor, NOT the need to provide for digital control or sound. (The spelling corrector on my computer repeatedly turns 'coreless' into careless, for which I apologise if I've missed changing it back). I don't plan to comment any further on this subject. Goodnight. (CJL)

[NHY 581]

Draw breath gentlemen. Toby would be most upset by all of this.

 

Nobody is being forced to buy the model. If the specifications offend then don't buy it. Simple really.

 

Rob.

[2750Papyrus]

It would be interesting to know what was specified in terms of electrical supply, compatibility and performance for this and other new models.

 

The Rapido team seem to be sound production engineers and ingenious designers. Had the need for compatibility with ALL currently produced control systems been specified - and possibly sample systems provided - it is possible that they would have derived a different engineering solution, possibly reducing the (unrealistic?) load hauling capacity in the interests of satisfying a wider market.

 

As a matter on interest, has anybody actually tested this model on a feedback controller?

[cctransuk]

No, again. I don't think I've 'conceded' anywhere that a coreless motor is used in the J70 in order to accommodate sound. In my post 437 I specifically said that the coreless motor is used because we requested internal detail and that the motor is the only one that can be accommodated inside the small boiler. I also pointed out that the space for a sound speaker is - I'm told - a cut-out in the frames (so not affecting the size or position of the motor). I guess we all need to read what each other actually wrote. I realise that some modellers will have a particular commitment to certain types of equipment, be they motors or controllers. A manufacturer in today's market has to cater for certain requirements some of which are conflicting - high levels of detail on small prototypes being one of them. Similarly accommodating modern technologies. Backwards compatibility is - like easy conversion to P4 - something which cannot always be provided. I've just had to deal with a routine decoder installation in a supposedly updated model. It has been updated from it's original to a level that would have been fine 10-15 years ago but which is not satisfactory in 2018. A new model, launching now, has to be acceptable for the next several years, in which technology will move forward again. The J70 is unusual in being a locomotive in which a substantial amount of internal detail can be seen. When the model was first put forward to Rapido, Jason said, "that'll be easy. We'll model it with the side doors closed and there's plenty of room inside the body." It was then pointed out that the J70 had no side doors, and that we wanted end doors that could be open as they often were on the real thing. Modellers comments on the samples seen so far, suggest that we were absolutely right to go for that level of detail. It was that which led to the adoption of the coreless motor, NOT the need to provide for digital control or sound. (The spelling corrector on my computer repeatedly turns 'coreless' into careless, for which I apologise if I've missed changing it back). I don't plan to comment any further on this subject. Goodnight. (CJL)

 

Chris,

 

My apologies if I misinterpreted some of your comments - not my usual practice.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.