Oxford Rail Annouce 4-Wheel Toad

[dibber25]

Not surprised. Fair plays to Exmoor National Park. The recently-built Lyn is a classic example, mechanically different to the original, can't keep its feet and the livery an 'approximation' of the loco in its final guise. On a similar vein, the chimneys on various preserved locos (1450 and SECR 263 spring to mind) are of a subtly different pattern to those carried when the loco was withdrawn.

 

Historical accuracy always has to give way to modern regulations and standards. The new Lyn looks and sounds good and when I travelled (on a very wet weekend) it had no trouble keeping its feet. The important thing is that people actually put their money time and effort into building it. They deserve whole-hearted support. I once subscribed to the late Andrew Dow's view that if you couldn't create a perfect replica of the L&B, you should do nothing at all. Things move on in half a century and we now need to recognize that 'near enough' is as close as we'll get. Modeling-wise, however, and returning to the subject of this topic manufacturers need to beware that what they scan, measure or photograph may well not reflect the level of historical fidelity that many modelers will expect. (CJL)

[cctransuk]

But John, follow your logic onward, and 'living in the present', a bogie diesel would be the logical end result! By all means have a technologically-advanced steam loco, but don't confuse it with a historically-accurate example. Leaving aside the difference in performance, it ultimately degrades the integrity of those examples that show us exactly how railways were in the 1930's/40's/50's.

If commercial interests are really uppermost, then why not go the whole hog and slap a 'Thomas' face on it?  That'd bring in the kids...

There is a parallel here with the subject of this thread.  Model Railways and Heritage Railways have similar markets, the historical buff, the 'I don't care as long as it's steam' and then the day trippers.  Oxford's Toad will surely satisfy the latter two groups as much as a 'look-alike' loco would on a 12" to 1' scale model.

I think the point is, if you care about historical accuracy, would you feel short-changed by both?

 

I think that we're going round in circles here.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt about my position, I am not confusing a new-build steam loco that complies with current standards with an 'historically accurate' one - I am saying that the latter could not operate economically under current regulations.

 

When you are spending the kind of money that it takes to new-build, commercial interests will ALWAYS apply - unless someone with very deep pockets is willing to fund a white elephant.

 

You can care about, and hopefully be satisfied with, the historical accuracy of a model, (provided that the point in history which is depicted is declared), and the manufacturer can be bothered / afford to get the research, toolmaking and decoration correct.

 

Historical accuracy in new build operational locos is not achievable, and criticising the groups who put so much money and effort into making these new builds a reality will not change that fact.

 

To be absolutely frank, new build locos do nothing for me - somehow they don't seem to have that authenticity of the genuine article; (even if the latter have historically inaccurate fittings and / or liveries). That being the case, we are quite close in our preferences; but I will defend to the last the right of individuals and groups to produce new builds if that is how they choose to spend their time and money.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[coachmann]

To be absolutely frank, new build locos do nothing for me - somehow they don't seem to have that authenticity of the genuine article; (even if the latter have historically inaccurate fittings and / or liveries). That being the case, we are quite close in our preferences; but I will defend to the last the right of individuals and groups to produce new builds if that is how they choose to spend their time and money.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Most of today's preserved working locos have brandnew platework.....new tanks, cabs, bunkers, running plates and the rest. This was inevitable when the loco was rusted right through at the time of purchase from a breakers yard. But you are right......They don't have the authenticity of the locos we saw as young men. In those days, the platework had been rubbed down or simply painted over and one could see flaking paint under new paint on smokebox doors and workaday scrapes under the paintwork. This is not a criticism, merely an observation. I still go down to heritage sites for a steam 'fix' and yes....They still turn me on!

 

So as not to wander too far off topic, I like the Oxford products and was happy to use them. Looks like the 0 gauge equivalent is a Peco.

Edited January 29, 2018 by coachmann

[tomparryharry]

I think that we're going round in circles here.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt about my position, I am not confusing a new-build steam loco that complies with current standards with an 'historically accurate' one - I am saying that the latter could not operate economically under current regulations.

 

When you are spending the kind of money that it takes to new-build, commercial interests will ALWAYS apply - unless someone with very deep pockets is willing to fund a white elephant.

 

You can care about, and hopefully be satisfied with, the historical accuracy of a model, (provided that the point in history which is depicted is declared), and the manufacturer can be bothered / afford to get the research, toolmaking and decoration correct.

 

Historical accuracy in new build operational locos is not achievable, and criticising the groups who put so much money and effort into making these new builds a reality will not change that fact.

 

To be absolutely frank, new build locos do nothing for me - somehow they don't seem to have that authenticity of the genuine article; (even if the latter have historically inaccurate fittings and / or liveries). That being the case, we are quite close in our preferences; but I will defend to the last the right of individuals and groups to produce new builds if that is how they choose to spend their time and money.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Please describe a white elephant within the context of your statement.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[cctransuk]

Please describe a white elephant within the context of your statement.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

A white elephant in the context that any new build loco constructed exactly to the original spec. is unlikely to meet modern regulations; be more expensive to construct; and / or be as efficient in operation as one that incorporated modern manufacturing and operational techniques. Thus, in one way or another, it would be financially desirable to build to current regulations and constructional / operational best practice.

 

I would agree that a restored locomotive should be rebuilt to as near as is possible to a particular period in its operational life - though not necessarily to its condition as withdrawn.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[The Johnster]

Back on planet toad, my new Ox got it's first 'revenue earning' duty on the pick up yesterday, the weathering, which I thought might be a bit extreme as I'd given it the beans a bit to suit a van surviving in late GW livery into the 50s, looks good on the layout and the vehicle does not draw attention to itself in any bad way.  It looks as if it's been rostered to this duty for years, which is what I wanted!  If anything the white handrails, though weathered, stand out a bit and next time I've got the weathering wash out I will tone them down further.  The detailed and painted interior is more or less invisible, even the added stove pipe, but I know it is there!

 

Happy with my purchase; thanks Ox!

[Covkid]

I think that we're going round in circles here.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt about my position, I am not confusing a new-build steam loco that complies with current standards with an 'historically accurate' one - I am saying that the latter could not operate economically under current regulations.

 

When you are spending the kind of money that it takes to new-build, commercial interests will ALWAYS apply - unless someone with very deep pockets is willing to fund a white elephant.

 

You can care about, and hopefully be satisfied with, the historical accuracy of a model, (provided that the point in history which is depicted is declared), and the manufacturer can be bothered / afford to get the research, toolmaking and decoration correct.

 

Historical accuracy in new build operational locos is not achievable, and criticising the groups who put so much money and effort into making these new builds a reality will not change that fact.

 

To be absolutely frank, new build locos do nothing for me - somehow they don't seem to have that authenticity of the genuine article; (even if the latter have historically inaccurate fittings and / or liveries). That being the case, we are quite close in our preferences; but I will defend to the last the right of individuals and groups to produce new builds if that is how they choose to spend their time and money.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

 

I think it depends which particular replica you look at. 

For me "Tornado" does still look like a new build loco but is fine and I have no problem with it. 

The replica "Lew" based on the Festiniog obviously has to wear it's Festiniog gauge slimline cab whilst on that line and just does not look right - but it is out of necessity.

 

The replica which I am really looking forward to is 82045 on the SVR and al lthe pics I have seen so far give me a fuzzy feeling.

I suppose some of you will be criticising the Dubdee on the Worth Valley line - probably because it is not "falling apart filthy" but I reckon has new platework around the cab as well as perhaps "English boiler fittings"

 

 

Anyway back to the Oxford Toad.  I picked a plated one up today and it looks rather nice, but will have to have BR markings and liberal filth. 

What  . 

[Castle]

Hi All,

 

Turns out you CAN do an AA7 but it’s a LOT of scratchbuilding...

 

 

Further updates as they occur!

 

All the best,

 

Castle

[TheGunslinger]

My 2c on the whole "easily found inaccuracies"/china thing.

Oxford may or may not own the factory in China. The Chinese are very fond of leasing floor space and equipment on a fairly long-term basis; the only thing Oxford may own is the tooling, and exclusivity is something that costs extra in China so I wouldn't even count on that.

Continuing on that trend, when you commission a product from the Chinese, you don't get a lot of say in the design process. You tell them the end product, they do the majority of the design work in-house, and you negotiate with them on how high or low quality the end product will be. Generally speaking they will try and replicate exactly what you've commissioned of them. Flicking design files back and forth to check accuracy may not be feasible; Oxford probably don't have a drafter/designer on hand because that's what they hired the Chinese for. I've seen plenty of accusations that Oxford products are 75% accurate and 25% cartoonish filler, and that sounds like exactly what a foreign design firm would do with incomplete data to go off, especially one on another continent.
Oxford may know better, and they could crowd-source accurate information, but that kind of design process costs money. If you want a product for cheap you let the Chinese do it their way and don't meddle. If you want a stringent design process that lets you go back and forth with the rivet-counters, you pay for the factory lease and the design team sitting around doing nothing. If you try and do all your design work before hand, inevitably they will come back and say "that's impractical to tool"; you can hire consultants on tool design or a drafter who knows exactly how injection moulding works and you will still hit snags because it's virtually impossible that your designer's experience perfectly meshes with the process the Chinese use. Western designers that know the ins and outs of Chinese manufacturing can command mega salaries, and for good reason.

The long and short of it, is it all comes down to the mighty dollar. Oxford are in a pretty tidy spot here, the products are good quality and handsome (if inaccurate), and most of all they're cheap. They could go for stringent accuracy but the higher price would mean they'd be chasing the big spender "whales" rather than trawling the masses, which is being proven as an increasingly risky business model. I bought both a 4 and 6 wheel toad because there is nothing better RTR, and certainly not for cheaper than a pub lunch. I can't say the same if they'd been 100% diagram accurate but double the price.

[Craigw]

" I can't say the same if they'd been 100% diagram accurate but double the price."

 

Of course, if they had done their research properly in the first place and supplied accurate information they could have produced a low cost and accurate model.

 

All the oxford "own goals" so far have been a result of poor research.

 

Do that properly in the first place as others manage to do.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[TheGunslinger]

" I can't say the same if they'd been 100% diagram accurate but double the price."

 

Of course, if they had done their research properly in the first place and supplied accurate information they could have produced a low cost and accurate model.

 

All the oxford "own goals" so far have been a result of poor research.

 

Do that properly in the first place as others manage to do.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

Did you even read my post or just regurgitate the same old "well they should have done their research!" ?

 

The point was that there are a variety of circumstances that can prevent Oxford from producing these models cheap and accurate. You may not get to have it both ways.

 

Until six months ago the other RTR toads on the market were more expensive and fictitious in design, so even the claim that "others manage to do their research" is bogus, because it took Hornby 50+ years to get it right.

[Craigw]

Did you even read my post or just regurgitate the same old "well they should have done their research!" ?

 

The point was that there are a variety of circumstances that can prevent Oxford from producing these models cheap and accurate. You may not get to have it both ways.

 

Until six months ago the other RTR toads on the market were more expensive and fictitious in design, so even the claim that "others manage to do their research" is bogus, because it took Hornby 50+ years to get it right.

 

I did read your post. I have assisted a number of local manufacturers in the production of models in China so i do have an idea of the process and what is involved. The companies work off information you send them to produce drawings which you then check over prior to dies even being cut. Yes, they can ignore corrections totally but that is more the exception than the rule.

 

The only other toads on the market are the recent Hornby one and the old Mainline one.

 

if you do your research properly you can do cheap and accurate, when you start doing corrections you add cost.

 

Something Oxford may eventually realise.

 

Craig W

[TheGunslinger]

...The only other toads on the market are the recent Hornby one...

 

Which was precluded by a god-awful toad (interpret that use of 'toad' however you like) they inherited from Tri-ang and did nothing to improve for over fifty years, and as I mentioned costs more than Oxford's offering. So apparently Hornby disagree that you can do accurate for as cheap as Oxford.

 

 

...and the old Mainline one.

 

Which passed hands from Palitoy to Dapol to Replica to Bachmann and none of them bothered updating it, but apparently they get a free pass on charging more money for an inferior model as well. Since the 2017/18 Toad is just an alternate livery I'd say Bachmann still don't think it's cost effective for them to update their model; either because they wouldn't be able to offer it at a price that would rival Hornby (let alone Oxford), or they just don't care because people continue to pay full price for their current mediocre RTR model.

[Craigw]

Which was precluded by a god-awful toad (interpret that use of 'toad' however you like) they inherited from Tri-ang and did nothing to improve for over fifty years, and as I mentioned costs more than Oxford's offering. So apparently Hornby disagree that you can do accurate for as cheap as Oxford.

 

 

 

Which passed hands from Palitoy to Dapol to Replica to Bachmann and none of them bothered updating it, but apparently they get a free pass on charging more money for an inferior model as well. Since the 2017/18 Toad is just an alternate livery I'd say Bachmann still don't think it's cost effective for them to update their model; either because they wouldn't be able to offer it at a price that would rival Hornby (let alone Oxford), or they just don't care because people continue to pay full price for their current mediocre RTR model.

 

Just because a company does not update a model, it does not mean they cannot. It most certainly does not mean that they cannot do it to price point either. That really is stretching the point and then doubling it again for good measure.

 

"If" a company wants to do research properly then they can produce models at a price. Preparing a data pack and properly checking drawings has to be done regardless. Oxford may be "cheap" but each and everyone of their models I am aware of has had certain accuracy issues that proper planning would have removed in the first place and not altered costings either.

 

In my opinion, using price to excuse errors is counter productive to both the hobby and Oxford.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[tomparryharry]

We've been part way there before. there was a poll to establish what we would like. The result is the AA13/15 variant by Hornby.

 

It's pretty well known that we will ask for ever increasing fidelity models. It's also well known that we will choose to pay extra (within reason) to achieve that. The onus remains with any producer (not just Oxford) to raise the bar, and possibly reap the rewards.

 

If you want better quality or fidelity, you will need to lead the producer to the water. Pushing the beast is like a stubborn mule; it won't work. Education is the key. Above all, tell them when they get things right. Nothing acts more than a bit of positive encouragement.

 

If, on the other hand, your pleas fall on deaf ears, not to worry. There are lots of other avenues to pursue. you can always compare quality & fidelity across the labels, and make your choice accordingly. Caveat Emptor!

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[Miss Prism]

One for the Welsh fans (no, I didn't know where Ferndale was either until I googled it):

http://www.gwr.org.uk/brakes/aa3-56378.jpg

 

(I've updated the brakeallocations doc.)

[tomparryharry]

One for the Welsh fans (no, I didn't know where Ferndale was either until I googled it):

http://www.gwr.org.uk/brakes/aa3-56378.jpg

 

(I've updated the brakeallocations doc.)

Ho Ho Ho! You're such a wag!

 

Ian.

[The Stationmaster]

One for the Welsh fans (no, I didn't know where Ferndale was either until I googled it):

http://www.gwr.org.uk/brakes/aa3-56378.jpg

 

(I've updated the brakeallocations doc.)

 

Shame on you!    Next you'll be telling us you didn't know it had an engine shed  

[Pteremy]

Hi All,

 

If it’s of any interest to readers of this thread, I have posted my build using the Oxford TOAD on my Little Didcot thread here:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51212-little-didcot/page-44&do=findComment&comment=3017181

 

75E27AD2-8DA1-45A4-BBBB-DB748D13708D.jpeg

 

All the best,

 

Castle

 

I think that this conversion is inspirational! At least it has inspired me to buy two brake vans, to do something similar. I see in Russell that there were also similar conversions based on plated sided vehicles. And - for variety - tunnel inspection vehicles. So some scope for 'what if'. That is, it is just as valid to reproduce railway practice (i.e. vehicles for particular tasks) as it is to reproduce specific vehicles. 

[Dunsignalling]

Which was precluded by a god-awful toad (interpret that use of 'toad' however you like) they inherited from Tri-ang and did nothing to improve for over fifty years, and as I mentioned costs more than Oxford's offering. So apparently Hornby disagree that you can do accurate for as cheap as Oxford.

 

 

 

Which passed hands from Palitoy to Dapol to Replica to Bachmann and none of them bothered updating it, but apparently they get a free pass on charging more money for an inferior model as well. Since the 2017/18 Toad is just an alternate livery I'd say Bachmann still don't think it's cost effective for them to update their model; either because they wouldn't be able to offer it at a price that would rival Hornby (let alone Oxford), or they just don't care because people continue to pay full price for their current mediocre RTR model.

The ex-Triang one was quietly dumped when Hornby acquired the ex-Airfix, ex-Dapol, tooling back in the nineties, IIRC.

 

Neither the ex-Mainline Toads currently produced by Bachmann or the ex-Airfix ones nowadays used as set-fodder by Hornby, are anything like bad enough to qualify as "god-awful" (though recent prices of the Bachmann ones do). Check out Bachmann's LMS cattle wagon if you want to see what "god-awful" really looks like.

 

All other r-t-r Toads are well and truly left for dead by the new Hornby one, though.

 

John

Edited February 26, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[TheGunslinger]

It most certainly does not mean that they cannot do it to price point either.

That remains to be proven until they actually do so. So far we're 0-1 with Hornby's accurate AA15 costing a tidy 50-80% more at retail. Granted this isn't be reflective of true production costs but we still don't have a better model for a similar price, so my point still holds water.

 

 

In my opinion, using price to excuse errors is counter productive to both the hobby and Oxford.

Valid as that may be the hobby has suffered appalling model accuracy for premium prices for decades, with the big players seemingly thumbing their nose in a "take it or leave it" attitude, so suddenly having standards when it comes to an Oxford release seems a tad hypocritical to me.

[sem34090]

Shame on you!    Next you'll be telling us you didn't know it had an engine shed  

Then he'll say he doesn't know where Maerdy, Tylorstown or Ynshir are either, or Porth for that matter!

 

Some A nice gradient on that branch - no wonder Ferndale had an allocation of brake vans, for the full coal trains heading down to Porth.

[The Stationmaster]

 

 

Valid as that may be the hobby has suffered appalling model accuracy for premium prices for decades, with the big players seemingly thumbing their nose in a "take it or leave it" attitude, so suddenly having standards when it comes to an Oxford release seems a tad hypocritical to me.

 

Hardly hypocritical at all when you consider the way Oxford were promoting what they would be offering in terms of the standards of their model railway range.  One thing to aim low and deliver high - quite another to shout about how high you will be then under deliver.

 

This is what they said about their forthcoming models back in 2014 prior to release of any of them -

 

 

extract from next paragraph

 

[tomparryharry]

Hardly hypocritical at all when you consider the way Oxford were promoting what they would be offering in terms of the standards of their model railway range.  One thing to aim low and deliver high - quite another to shout about how high you will be then under deliver.

 

This is what they said about their forthcoming models back in 2014 prior to release of any of them -

 

Oxfd 1.jpg

 

extract from next paragraph

 

Oxfd 2.jpg

 Oh dear! Listening?

 

That old phrase springs to mind...."Hoist by your own petard......"

 

By the way, some ones cribbing. The Hornby "Phillips, George, Aberdare" is also the Oxford "Phillips George, Aberdare" Both with the number 251, both in the same livery. Oh, I see! The tampo machine had a drink, and is seeing double!

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[mikeharvey22]

Hardly hypocritical at all when you consider the way Oxford were promoting what they would be offering in terms of the standards of their model railway range.  One thing to aim low and deliver high - quite another to shout about how high you will be then under deliver.

 

This is what they said about their forthcoming models back in 2014 prior to release of any of them -

 

Oxfd 1.jpg

 

extract from next paragraph

 

Oxfd 2.jpg

Where's the bit about £350 million per week for the NHS?

Edited February 26, 2018 by mikeharvey22