Jump to content
 

Model Rail announce GWR Class 1600 0-6-0PT via Rapido


sem34090
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
13 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

It looks like a 64xx and mine runs well. What will happen if I have a chassis problem, I don’t yet know and will have to address when the time comes.

I assume the reference to 64XX was a typo.

 

Most people will probably not have a chassis problem, unless the loco actually becomes worn out due to a lot of use over time. If you've already got one that runs well, then (in my books) you are lucky.

 

13 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

It may not be assembled the way you are used to and would like and everyone out there has their own expectations.

No, it isn't assembled in the way that I am used to. I am from the generation that grew up with Triang and Hornby Dublo and their successors. I am used to what I am used to. Perhaps you are from the same generation or possibly younger?

 

Either way, some people of my age can adapt to new things, others find that harder and I am in the latter group, whether it's accepting new designs of model railway products or new technology, which my brain mostly finds very confusing and consequently irritating.

 

It's not to say that the new way of designing a model railway locomotive is bad per se, but what you cannot argue with, is the fact that it discourages modellers (aka 'consumers') from tinkering with the product. If there's a problem, it has to go back to the manufacturer (and Rapido is to be commended for their engagement) or to an 'authorised servicing agent'. That seems to be in common with so many consumer goods these days and it ultimately encourages people not to be self-reliant if something needs attention, that they would otherwise have been able to tackle. We even see this trend expressed (on this very forum) by some folk saying that they wish a certain loco would be produced with their favoured number on the side. What's wrong with having a go with a sheet of transfers??!!

 

14 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

But to call it an abomination is hyperbole and overly dramatic and possibly drifting into the realms of libelous description.

Well, that's your opinion and clearly different to mine. I call the design an abomination as a reflection of the extreme disappointment that I felt, when I discovered just how difficult it would be to convert to P4. I had already bought the etched chassis kit etc. for the job.

 

This disappointment was amplified by the fact that a contemporary Bachmann model (the 94XX) featured an easy to remove chassis, yet just as much fine detail etc. as the 16XX.

 

My disappointment is a personal feeling, but one that I am absolutely entitled to feel and express under the circumstances, regardless of whether you or anyone else feels that it is not justified.

 

You will note throughout my posts on the subject, however (not that I would expect anyone to trawl through to check) that I do not criticise the appearance of the model, which I think looks very nice with good amounts of detail.

 

14 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

For those of us operating in non standard scales such as EM or P4, S scale or OO9, we have to accept that we are very much a minority and will not necessarily be catered for in the greater mass market scheme of things.

I agree and I have never, never implied anything to the contrary. In 4mm scale, P4 and EM are a tiny, tiny portion of the ultimate market. We have to be more self-reliant in terms of modifying models etc., to achieve our chosen gauge.

 

You will also note (in that hypothetical trawl through my previous posts) that I commend Rapido for engaging with the Scalefour Society in terms of future 'convertibility' of future releases. They have already achieved that with much of their rolling stock, with is amongst the best that you can now get in 4mm scale.

 

14 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

It’s becoming plainly apparent that you appear to dislike Rapido models, which is certainly your prerogative

The hypothetical trawl of posts referred to above would certainly confirm that opinion a while back, but I think my views on Rapido are sufficiently balanced to give credit where credit is due.

 

Even in the realm of the locos, I have recently stated publicly (on this forum again), that I am prepared to give them another chance, having had a rethink on what kind of controllers may best suit the coreless motors (in DC).

 

14 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

your initial points regarding chassis conversion / modification were certainly of interest

Thank you for that. My criticisms are not just based on theoretical prejudice, but on a long experience of modelling in 4mm scale and trying to improve RTR models as best I can.

 

14 hours ago, PhilMortimer said:

the constant repetition is now becoming a bit boring and irritating. 

 Well, that again is your opinion. The opinion of one person (and no doubt shared by some others as well).

 

I did lay off the condemnation of the design for a while, having felt that I had expressed myself enough, but the introduction of the 15XX seems to have stimulated more debate on the 16XX thread, so perhaps that is why I have felt the need to once more use the above term that you don't like.

 

But I will not apologise for expressing my genuinely held viewpoint.

 

  • Round of applause 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Given this discussion I have re-uploaded my photos (which disappeared in RMweb's Great Image Loss) from when I took apart the 16xx chassis. It begins here and continues on the following page:

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/134707-model-rail-announce-gwr-class-1600-0-6-0pt-via-rapido/?do=findComment&comment=4336708

 

My own experience with the loco is that it is a very good runner indeed, but as you can see it requires quite some time and determination to take fully apart.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Mikkel said:

Given this discussion I have re-uploaded my photos (which disappeared in RMweb's Great Image Loss) from when I took apart the 16xx chassis. It begins here and continues on the following page:

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/134707-model-rail-announce-gwr-class-1600-0-6-0pt-via-rapido/?do=findComment&comment=4336708

 

My own experience with the loco is that it is a very good runner indeed, but as you can see it requires quite some time and determination to take fully apart.

 

Full respect to you, Mikkel, for such an undertaking!

 

I came to the conclusion that taking the loco apart, in order to arrive at a situation where I could fit my own etched chassis and motor/gearbox combination in P4, would take so much time, that I might just as well build the Nu Cast Partners kit (having built one in OO a couple of years ago).

 

  • Round of applause 1
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

During an unscrewing of Rapidos this morning, to deal with Decoders/Blanking Plates, I found I had an unused Zimo Next 18 in my Box of Blanking Plates from Decoder fitted Engines!

Thus my 1608 is now running in on DCC! Tweaking to suit will take place later.

It still runs almost in silence and sooooooo smoothly. Excellent.

Phil

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
17 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:


Ah,,sorry it’s no longer there . But Rapido have posted that both the 16XX & the 15XX are conventional 5 pole can motors.

That's most interesting, Ian, re the 16XX being a conventional cored motor. I was previously 100% certain it was a coreless one, based on previous statements by others. As such, I will have to rescind my advice to Re6/6, not to use his P4 converted 16XX with any of my feedback controllers on Marsh Sidings...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
51 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

That's most interesting, Ian, re the 16XX being a conventional cored motor. I was previously 100% certain it was a coreless one, based on previous statements by others. As such, I will have to rescind my advice to Re6/6, not to use his P4 converted 16XX with any of my feedback controllers on Marsh Sidings...

 


I’ve taken a look at the little hand book in the box and there is no information concerning the type of motor used .I appreciate your concern and why on earth we continue to have this controversy over can v coreless I simply do not understand. We are warned over the use of feedback units….this some 25 years ago caused me to junk mine ( I was running Trix HO with a Faulhaber coreless which was rated as state of the art ) and switch to Gaugemaster. I currently have 3,only one of which is in use .The other two are in the loft which I don’t access often due to a recent close encounter with the Grim Reaper. I have never had a moment’s problem with any of them I have to add.

 

Why our august band of manufacturers seem to fight shy of openness with regard to the type of motor they install in their little treasures I simply do not understand.This is a conversation on this particular subject I have had endless times over at  least the last decade. Or is it simply that they don’t know until boxes are off the boat and in….and out…of the warehouse ?  Hence the punters are left in some state of confusion. I’m afraid that this has certainly been the case with more than a few.Why ?   Is it that they take what the factory gives them and fingers crossed with a warning not to use certain types of controllers? Do they not specify the type of component to be used ? 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

In my recent purchase Box for the 16XX, it had a little card from hardyshobbies.co.uk/16xx.

Pannier personalities! I looked on the Hardy's site and none were there. Probably all sold? I have contacted them with no response, but I'm not that fussed.

So, any suggestions as to Crew for the 16XX from existing figures, either from Hardy's or Modleu  et. al?

Incidentally, I find some of the modern 3d Printed Figures in 1.76, are too tall for Cabs! Modern folk are often Taller it would seem. I've used HO sizes from Modelu (as they can do so many sizes) and they are usually better on many Engines.

Thanks.

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon folks,

All this talk of Panniers has got me searching through the current rolling stock 'stash', awaiting the building of my retirement layout (Chelwood Road, as it will be named in best G/WR fashion).

I currently have 2-off Bachmann 8750 types, 9653 (LC) and 9654 (EE). Both are renumbered from 9735 and 9736 and are OXF-based locos. 

I also have 2-off 'warmed-over' Hornby 8750s, detailed and renumbered as 3751 (DID) and 4630 (Salisbury). 4630 has the more detailed makeover, including an attempt some 20 years ago to make the sanding operating levers and cab rear grilles. I wasn't aware at the time of the Riceworks cab grilles/spectacles, so made my own from wire bent to shape (approximately!)

To complete the running BR Panniers is a Bachmann 64xx, numbered 6421 (EC) (BAN) and the only green one of the lot. This needs running-in and then the detail parts, as fitted to 9653 & 9654, adding. 9653 & 9654 also have lamps fitted but no crew yet (Modelu to the rescue there).

The most recent example to join Team Pannier is the Rapido 15xx, 1509 as used at Coventry Colliery. As a Coventry Kid it was the only choice, although the BR ones do look very inviting. Mine has been an okay runner so far, initial 'hunting' has now reduced with running in. There are some glue spots but nothing a dash of matt varnish (Revell Aqua) won't hide.

Finally, in the 'tuit' pile are a Nu-Cast 54/64/74xx and a Wills 94xx panniers. Construction on the bodies is due to commence this coming Autumn, chassis still TBA.

I have attached some poor iPhone photos of the brood.

The good reports in this forum of the 16xx performance mean one of those is in the frame to join the collection; perhaps ought to start putting the baseboard kit together first though :)

Cheers, Nigel.

image2 (1).jpeg

CIMG1540.JPG

CIMG1542.JPG

IMG_1979.jpg

Edited by GMKAT7
Missing info (doh!) The shedplates on 9653 and 9654 will need changing to the correct BR code for Oxf, probably using some old Modelmaster decals. The chassis under 4630 currently runs like a three -legged dog with ricketts, so needs some work.
  • Like 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

That's most interesting, Ian, re the 16XX being a conventional cored motor. I was previously 100% certain it was a coreless one, based on previous statements by others. As such, I will have to rescind my advice to Re6/6, not to use his P4 converted 16XX with any of my feedback controllers on Marsh Sidings...

 


Just had another look at page 8 on the little book and the eyesight destroying diagram of parts and yes there they are..the can motor and flywheel. Success at last.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
23 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:


Just had another look at page 8 on the little book and the eyesight destroying diagram of parts and yes there they are..the can motor and flywheel. Success at last.

Yup, Iv'e just come back from a long Therapy Session having looked at that Diagram.

I'm now in a darkened Room until Sundown.

P

  • Funny 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

In my recent purchase Box for the 16XX, it had a little card from hardyshobbies.co.uk/16xx.

Pannier personalities! I looked on the Hardy's site and none were there. Probably all sold? I have contacted them with no response, but I'm not that fussed.

So, any suggestions as to Crew for the 16XX from existing figures, either from Hardy's or Modleu  et. al?

Incidentally, I find some of the modern 3d Printed Figures in 1.76, are too tall for Cabs! Modern folk are often Taller it would seem. I've used HO sizes from Modelu (as they can do so many sizes) and they are usually better on many Engines.

Thanks.

 

We are trying to produce more custom figures for new engines to make sure we can have a perfect fitting crew for each engine. We are aware that some of our older figures may be a bit tall for some engines, this is something we are now changing. With regards to a crew for the 16xx, Alan has a 16xx himself and we will be making a custom crew for them very soon. 

 

Please note regarding Hardies hobbies, this is from their website "Sad news: Hardy’s Hobbies is winding down a bit sooner than I had planned due to unforeseen circumstances. I am no longer able to print new items but have well stocked all OO and most O gauge figures, crews and packs. Once it is gone it is gone. " I would imagine that the inbox probably isn't as monitored as it once was. I hope this is helpful.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/09/2023 at 10:28, Captain Kernow said:

We even see this trend expressed (on this very forum) by some folk saying that they wish a certain loco would be produced with their favoured number on the side. What's wrong with having a go with a sheet of transfers??!!

'Having a go' with transfers isn't the issue, at least for me. Repairing the damage if it goes wrong is - remembering that most RTR models are quite expensive and not exactly throw-away items if one messes it up. For models with painted numbers (unlike most (G)WR locomotives), the original number needs to be removed which runs the risk of damaging the base paintwork and, should that happen, there is then a (possibly very difficult) job of trying to colour-match extactly to patch the damage. As a result, I've never tried renumbering anything other than my 16xx.

 

My 16xx was done using Railtec 3D transfers but this was relatively simple since I have an unweathered example and the transfers all just cover over the old printed numbers with no need to remove them. Even now I'm afraid that I could be in for trouble in future, since the instructions recommend a spray of acrylic varnish to seal the transfer after application but I won't dare do that for fear of ruining the finish of the model.

 

On 26/09/2023 at 09:56, Captain Kernow said:

That's most interesting, Ian, re the 16XX being a conventional cored motor. I was previously 100% certain it was a coreless one, based on previous statements by others. As such, I will have to rescind my advice to Re6/6, not to use his P4 converted 16XX with any of my feedback controllers on Marsh Sidings...

 

There were some comments on the motor back in Jan/Feb 2021 - some claiming coreless and some claiming otherwise. I found them again today by searching this topic for the word 'coreless'. I must have been convinced that it was a conventional cored motor at the time because I bought one (only to find that my old Hornby train set controller was putting out over 21v - well above the recommended maximum in Rapido's booklet included with the 16xx model - so it hasn't been run much since).

Edited by Rhydgaled
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rhydgaled said:

'Having a go' with transfers isn't the issue, at least for me. Repairing the damage if it goes wrong is - remembering that most RTR models are quite expensive and not exactly throw-away items if one messes it up. For models with painted numbers (unlike most (G)WR locomotives), the original number needs to be removed which runs the risk of damaging the base paintwork and, should that happen, there is then a (possibly very difficult) job of trying to colour-match extactly to patch the damage. As a result, I've never tried renumbering anything other than my 16xx.

 

My 16xx was done using Railtec 3D transfers but this was relatively simple since I have an unweathered example and the transfers all just cover over the old printed numbers with no need to remove them. Even now I'm afraid that I could be in for trouble in future, since the instructions recommend a spray of acrylic varnish to seal the transfer after application but I won't dare do that for fear of ruining the finish of the model.

 

None of us were able to undertake these tasks from birth; nor did we acquire our renumbering skills by working on brand-new, expensive models.

 

Buy some scrap loco bodies - there's plenty on Ebay or in the junk boxes in model shops and at exhibitions - and practice to your heart's content. Any failures will come at minimal cost until you, (quite quickly), find that it is not a 'nightmare' job. At which point, you can confidently graduate to more important models; no modelling task comes with guarantees, but it's amazing what can be achieved after a little confidence-building practice.

 

There is no excuse whatsoever for moans of 'Why don't they produce it with such-and such-a-number'; either practice and acquire the necessary skill or, be honest and say 'I can't be a*rsed to renumber a model'.

 

CJI.

Edited by cctransuk
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 26/09/2023 at 16:14, Modelu Chris said:

 

We are trying to produce more custom figures for new engines to make sure we can have a perfect fitting crew for each engine. We are aware that some of our older figures may be a bit tall for some engines, this is something we are now changing. With regards to a crew for the 16xx, Alan has a 16xx himself and we will be making a custom crew for them very soon. 

 

Please note regarding Hardies hobbies, this is from their website "Sad news: Hardy’s Hobbies is winding down a bit sooner than I had planned due to unforeseen circumstances. I am no longer able to print new items but have well stocked all OO and most O gauge figures, crews and packs. Once it is gone it is gone. " I would imagine that the inbox probably isn't as monitored as it once was. I hope this is helpful.

Thanks Chris. That answers a question (Hardy's) and I shall look out for your versions as I really like the quality of your prints. 

STB

Phil

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...