YesTor

Agreed x 10

One of my favourites is 66750, perhaps one of the least modified-upon-arrival 'Euro' variants... Al

Kind of - although perhaps less of a compromise than some of the Euro examples would be - but as far as 66779 is concerned (and all of the latter UK batch built for GBRf for that matter), such things as larger sandboxes and a distinct cab-front ridge between the windscreen and the front yellow warning panel can be seen on 66779: The Euro examples differ again from one machine to another - as some came from Germany, Holland etc and at different times - so expect variations in fuel tanks, horn grilles, headlight clusters, marker lights, cab front handrails, buffers, bufferbeam steps, lamp irons and bufferbeam pipework. Rarely do any pair seem to be identical, as on arrival in the UK some were modified/reverted further whilst others not so... In short, check photos for the specific machine you wish to model. Al

Bachmann do not currently manufacture a suitable model to cover 66747 - 66799 anyway without some kind of tooling modifications - and even then there are quite a few variations within the range from 66747 onwards... cheers Al

Absolutely. And it doesn't appear as though the misshaped windscreens have been corrected either. That's a huge thumbs down. Al

...and if you are really lucky you might find that some of the lugs don't line up with the holes in the chassis either.

It's one of a couple of DB 66s that are being trialled running on Hydro-treated Vegetable Oil (HVO). Al

'Controversial' perhaps *cough* , but how about getting some of the fundamentals right, such as: Correct shape bodyshells Correct shades for liveries Logos/numbers etc in the correct places Lights that work as intended Basic stuff really, but still in 2021 there are so many new models set for release that cannot even claim to meet the above criteria. If a manufacturer cannot get the basics right then any further detail/embellishments/gimmicks and the like are futile. I won't mention any specific manufacturers names regarding the above, but as they say, if the cap fits... With regard to detailing, and I'm not sure that injection-moulded plastic can be pushed much further beyond what we see already - both in terms of fidelity and strength/practicality? Similar with metal-formed parts - etching, casting can only go so far, I suppose? Where I think we might witness a big change in what types of models we see on the shelves is if/when 3D printing becomes a viable option for mass production. Speed of printing and the development and innovation in new, more robust materials will open up the possibilities for even more refined, whilst at the same time more resilient, detailing options. As soon as we see this applied on a larger scale then I think it will be quite a fast revolution/transition from injection-moulded/cast models to finished printed models. Al

Paint shades? Dapol? Not unless you are wanting '50 Shades of Rail Blue', surely...?!

There is still time...

Yes, absolutely aware of all of the above, but those are very much depicting legitimate detail differences. Again agreed, all legitimate detail differences that, in my humble opinion, would be wise to be depicted on any high-spec model. The point I am simply trying to make - without causing offence - is that I'm not sure that highlighting that one machine happens to have been photographed sitting perhaps one-inch higher than another, is evidence of a variation in build. Working on your theory, let's suppose I want a model of 66590, should I seek to reproduce the model leaning 3 degrees to the left, after all it has been photographed as such on occasion... ...and it becomes a crazy argument. They are identical. If you refer to your grid you'll also see that your GBRf blue 66 on the right has the same very slight incline in the roof, except it's *cough*, sitting half an inch higher in the photograph. Looking at the Euroshed (66793) from a different angle and to be fair I'm struggling to see any discernable difference in ride height: I just don't buy the idea that one locomotive is riding higher than the other, or that the roofline is somehow different. In fact, there is a distinct danger in that sometimes we can look so hard at things that we begin to see things that aren't really there... Best Al

Lots of plausible reasons: What you are essentially saying is that everything is approximately one-inch lower between the two machines? I'd be more inclined to think that either the track or ground isn't quite level, or maybe on a very slight incline? Or the suspension varies from one machine to the other? There will be tolerances on anything that is manufactured/built to spec. Either way, even if there is a difference, you are talking about one-third of a millimetre in 1:76? Crazy?! My guess would be that if you were to position any two locomotives end-to-end and take a photo that there would likely be some inconsistency between the two. Al

You might find that this is actually the plastic itself disintegrating? I soaked a Bachmann wagon body and unfortunately the entire moulding softened and became 'sticky' and virtually disintegrated. Use with caution.

Yeah, it is the C-Rail container. The other obvious potential livery I missed as well would be DB with large DB branding only. Al

I finally picked up the pink one myself. I wasn't convinced by the shade of pink when I saw the pre-production model on display at Warley - as it immediately struck me as being far too gaudy (which I did express to @Hattons Dave ) - and I was even less convinced when I received the model 'in the flesh'. Okay, you can search Flickr for reference and to be fair be forgiven in that there are numerous photos that could argue either to be closer, but from seeing the livery 1-on-1 my mind's eye tells me that the container is much closer in terms of accuracy. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but to me the 66 simply doesn't look right: Other liveries - Yes, it will indeed be interesting to see what new versions are selected. Plenty of celebrity liveries for sure, and to be fair, plenty of the more run-of-the-mill variants, such as: Standard EWS - with correct logos this time; and please, if you opt for any oddities such as odd-fitted/coloured doors etc then at least get those right, otherwise what's the point. The devil is in the detail.. Freightliner - original livery with later cabside logos and updated headlight clusters (as currently running on the network). Freightliner - current livery, correct shade of orange. DB - large DB logo only livery GBRf - numerous Euro 66 versions (opportunity for minor tooling variants as well there), plus we've only had one version of the 5-door variant. I'm sure many of us would like more of those... GBRf - current livery (minus Europort branding etc) - an army of those to gnaw at. GBRf - 'Evening Star' - okay, a celebrity, but worthy of a mention by itself. Yes, we know that Bachmann do a version, but they failed to update their model to the last build variant and for one it has the wrong sandboxes fitted - and is a dated model overall. DRS - original livery on 5-door variant w/ bug eye headlights. Fastline - not current, but an interesting one nonetheless. Essentially, there are lots of variations over the standard liveries with different headlights over different builds and also standard and low-emission bodied. The other factor to consider is that renumbering the ribbed bodysides (EWS, GBRf etc) is rather more tricky than renumbering a standard loco, so I'd guess that many might be reluctant to do so and instead be open to buy readily numbered versions - again, more opportunity for more releases. We could rant all day... Al

Ditto.

So Hattons are going to sit around indefinitely for the Dapol 59 to emerge before even beginning work on correcting their 66? And then blatantly 'copy' whatever method Dapol have utilised? What self-assured manufacturer would do that? Seems highly unlikely. More probable they'd want to get on with the job, resolve any issues and display confidence in one's own product and perhaps even have a second batch on the production line, I might have guessed...? Al

The trouble with this approach is that Dapol would not then have received relevant feedback regarding the several inaccuracies that appeared on the earlier pre-production examples...

It has always amazed me how the 92s have managed to retain their depot plaques for so long.

Fair comment, I hadn't paid so much attention to this aspect, and agree that that is perhaps a different debate altogether. My point really revolved around the perceived issues surrounding eBay being directly linked to the seller's bank account: For sure, I did "seemingly receive [eBay's protection]" in this instance, however eBay's support was not received without a fight. Sure, if a buyer claims non-receipt of goods, or receipt of defective goods etc and the seller can prove the case in his favour, then all well and good. However, it was pretty clear that this particular buyer had deliberately set out to deceive and obtain goods fraudulently. He knew that raising a dispute via eBay or PayPal would likely prove fruitless, so instead opted to bypass 'the system' and raise a chargeback directly with his credit card company. Reversal of charges due to "unauthorized activity" on an account is not so clear-cut in terms of protection and nine times out of ten it will be the seller that is left exposed in such an event. Having also worked with mail order for over fifteen years, and having witnessed all manner of elaborate attempts at deception, I am evermore cautious, as perhaps @ruggedpeak sums up pretty well: Anyway, to round off... there are no right or wrong ways of doing things here, and as you correctly implied earlier @hayfield, there is indeed risk in everything that we do, and it basically boils down to how much risk we (as individuals) are prepared to absorb. In this scenario, my feelings are that if as a seller you are using eBay for substantial sales and/or the linked bank account is also used for essential day-to-day expenses, then it feels to be wise practise to implement what is in fact the most basic of safeguards, ie. a parallel/independent bank account for handling those funds. Okay, this step alone will not remove any ultimate liability that may land at the seller's door, but what it will do is protect your immediate funds in the short-term and in essence buy some time while you resolve any issues with eBay, PayPal, the credit card provider, or whoever... Of course, there will be many that choose to work on having blind faith in 'the system' - and that may indeed work just fine for the majority of the time - and genuinely, good luck to those people. On the other hand, some of us prefer to "dot the i's and cross the t's", so to speak. Some might label this scaremongering. I'd say simply, common sense. Best Al

With all due respect, it is anything but "silly". It only sounds "silly" because it likely hasn't happened to you? Of course, there has to be an accepted risk in accepting online payments and naturally these bad experiences aren't the norm, but does that mean that we should take no measures whatsoever to protect ourselves against them should they occur? To illustrate, I sold £300 worth of goods to an overseas buyer: despatched, delivered and signed-for by the name on the delivery address. All fine, or so I thought. Several months later the 'buyer' decided to contact his credit card company stating that the purchase was an "unauthorized transaction", and that he supposedly had no idea how it had occurred. So, forget eBay rules, forget PayPal rules, if a buyer has funded a purchase via his/her credit card, then all that buyer has to do is report a transaction as "unauthorized" and bingo, credit card protection will step in and refund his/her funds. In the meantime, PayPal kindly informed me that the transaction had been reversed and that the funds would be refunded to the buyer. Suffice to say that I had sufficient evidence to back up the shipment and delivery of the goods, however, even despite this the buyer still received his refund, because that is how credit card protection works in the instance of a so-called "unauthorized transaction". I then had to pursue PayPal and fight it out in order to state my case. Despite having evidence of shipment and delivery, PayPal informed me that if the transaction is reported by the card owner as "unauthorized", then all proof of delivery means very little if the so-called 'buyer' supposedly did not 'authorize' the payment. Fortunately, PayPal concluded that I was not in error and I wasn't stung for the reimbursement - however, it was not clear-cut by any means and was also an incredibly time-consuming and stressful affair to deal with. I think the point that @adb968008 is stating is that for example, if that £300 in the above case were to be deducted from one's main bank account when one least expects it - as is the case with most chargebacks - then to my ear that doesn't sound quite such a "silly" potential occurrence to protect oneself against. Many of us run on a tight budget from one month to the next, and to have perhaps larger sums unexpectedly deducted from your main account - incredibly rare though that event may be - could be crippling if you happen to have a mortgage payment to settle that week. To my ear, if anything, it sounds rather more foolhardy to not want to protect oneself against such an event. Furthermore, without being alarmist about it all, it isn't as though it's difficult to set up a sub-bank account for such a purpose. If some feel that this is "silly", then so-be-it. More foolish to be caught unawares, I would argue. But then each to his own, I suppose... Al

That's a fair point and one that had crossed my mind as well. A fraudulent buyer will likely ensure that their purchase is funded via their credit card and as such can raise a chargeback at virtually any point in the future. If that happens to be a large purchase, then the knowledge that eBay can essentially tap into your bank account at any point and draw funds to cover a chargeback, is somewhat unsettling. The only way around this really is to open a separate bank account to handle eBay funds alone, and leave only a small amount in that account at any one time, with the bulk of the funds transferred to your regular bank account that has no connection with eBay whatsoever.

"On par with"? Exceeds by a nautical mile, surely?!! I'm already wishing that AS had done the 90, as very sadly, Bachmann's model left me feeling a little underwhelmed. This 92 however is clearly looking to be in a whole new league. I'm really looking forward to these. Al

Nice!