Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

The current due to be re-released Bachmann pannier is over 100 sheets and that’s a model from over 25 years ago. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, paulbb said:

It would be interesting to know the price for this small panier had it been produced by Hornby or Bachmann. At £150.00 I am able to afford it but unwilling to pay. This company undoubtedly produces high quality/high spec locos but their prices are always eye watering -see their RDC in HO scale. Had the 16xx  been closer to  £100 i would have bought two!

Obviously, I can't comment on Stationmaster's estimates and calculations. I'm not actually privy to that information anyway. I will simply make a couple of general points. Firstly, choice of prototype for any model requires an up-front 'guesstimate' of how many you might sell. None of the 'main stream' manufacturers had shown any interest in the 16XX. In Bachmann's case they already have two pannier tanks in their range (57XX and 64XX) plus a third (94XX) in preparation. At a guess, if Hornby does a pannier tank, they'll take the opportunity to re-do the half-cab, as it offers some wonderful opportunities for cab detail, which is a Hornby speciality. 

Secondly, fluctuations in the exchange rate can play havoc with costs and, already tight margins, to the extent that I think it unlikely that - post Covid-19 - any locomotive other than the most basic train-set 0-4-0 will come in at £100 retail, especially when post, packing, handling and VAT have to be taken into account. (CJL)

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, paulbb said:

It would be interesting to know the price for this small panier had it been produced by Hornby or Bachmann.

 

Well, somewhat easy to say £0.00 - because neither of them have shown any interest in the 1600.

 

Thus if you want a 1600 then it is Model Rail or no model.

 

But in addition to the much delayed Bachmann 94xx coming in at £130 (and would likely be higher if announced today), consider the Hornby Class 91 announced this year which comes in at £170 and will be much easier to tool and make than a steam loco.

 

Might also want to consider that those prices aren't necessarily producing a profit either - Hornby has been losing money for several years now and though more difficult Bachmann's parent Kader was losing money hence their recent troubles delivering new stuff.

 

Quote

At £150.00 I am able to afford it but unwilling to pay.

 

Certainly your choice.

 

Quote

This company undoubtedly produces high quality/high spec locos but their prices are always eye watering -see their RDC in HO scale.

 

Since you specifically mention North American HO you might want to consider the following, that shows that Rapido's pricing isn't out of line in North America:

 

Rapido H16-44 or RDC - $225 -> £179 plus VAT -> £215

ScaleTrains SD45 - $230 -> £183 plus VAT -> £220

Athearn GP18 - $210 -> £167 plus VAT -> £200

 

Note that unlike the first two, Athearn has an extensive catalog of tooling that allows them to generate sales (and hence cash flow) at little cost to the extent that Athearn announce 4 to 5 items a month.

 

But either way, despite what some people think it is obvious that the UK modeller is getting their models at a very good price - even at £150.

Edited by mdvle
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

Well, somewhat easy to say £0.00 - because neither of them have shown any interest in the 1600.

 

Thus if you want a 1600 then it is Model Rail or no model.

 

But in addition to the much delayed Bachmann 94xx coming in at £130 (and would likely be higher if announced today), consider the Hornby Class 91 announced this year which comes in at £170 and will be much easier to tool and make than a steam loco.

 

Might also want to consider that those prices aren't necessarily producing a profit either - Hornby has been losing money for several years now and though more difficult Bachmann's parent Kader was losing money hence their recent troubles delivering new stuff.

 

 

Certainly your choice.

 

 

But either way, despite what some people think it is obvious that the UK modeller is getting their models at a very good price - even at £150.

 

Do you have any evidence that no one has shown any interest in a 16XX?  I would think that most of the major manufacturers have probably looked at it. Don't forget two manufacturers announced projects to make a 1366 which is a pretty insignificant class of six which spent all their lives in a handful of locations. Two also looked at the 94XX with one being canned.

 

Maybe Hornby or Bachmann had it on their list of future models and dropped it when Model Rail announced theirs. We don't know and probably never will. But I would think that a major manufacturer would be looking at every possible prototype. Especially one which has a preserved example and numbered 70 examples.

 

Also worth considering when Model Rail asked us in the survey what we wanted as the next model, the Terrier was on that. Since then there have been two versions of the Terrier come to market. No one was looking at Terriers were they....

 

 

Only way to get a 16XX? Nope. One available from NuCast. We aren't all totally dependant on RTR. Captain Kernow has a rather excellent model presently on the go.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/155952-sutherland-16xx-pannier-trying-to-get-there-ahead-of-r-r-r-rapido/

 

 

 

But isn't it up to us whether we consider a price is good value or not? Personally I think it's about £20 to £30 over price (note over price not overpriced). But being a subscriber with a discount that softens the blow a bit to make the price acceptable. YMMV.

 

Also worth bearing in mind the Bachmann 94XX Pannier is currently available for £106.21 with free postage. So really you are comparing that price rather than RRP.

 

 

 

Jason

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Do you have any evidence that no one has shown any interest in a 16XX?

 

Only the fact that no one else announced one.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

I would think that most of the major manufacturers have probably looked at it.

 

I would go further and say that I expect them to be looking at, and at least doing some minor research, on almost every prototype.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Don't forget two manufacturers announced projects to make a 1366 which is a pretty insignificant class of six which spent all their lives in a handful of locations.

 

No, one manufacturer (Heljan) and one retailer (Kernow) announced it - and it was clearly an example of bad timing by both of them.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Two also looked at the 94XX with one being canned.

 

Not a surprise.  Limited market means likely only 1 is financially viable.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Maybe Hornby or Bachmann had it on their list of future models and dropped it when Model Rail announced theirs. We don't know and probably never will.

 

Anything is possible, but more realistically it was no where near close to be done by either as if either had significant money invested in a 1600 they either would have continued and they would have had a word with Model Rail.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

But I would think that a major manufacturer would be looking at every possible prototype. Especially one which has a preserved example and numbered 70 examples.

 

Not as simple as that.

 

Yes, most of us on RMweb (and some other forums) know and care about the differences between various locos.  But more realistically the 80%+ of the market that generates most of the sales don't care about such differences, and to them (to use this example) one GWR pannier tank is the same as any other.  This reality influences the decision making - because the market in general doesn't care that your fancy new pannier is subtly different in appearance and was used in an entirely different part of the network - they just see another pannier and no reason to buy it instead of the existing model.

 

We see this all the time, particularly with DMUs - for example a Class 107 is unlikely because the very similar Class 108 is available (hence the 108 model painted as a 107 for a retailer).  Or the (likely correct) fear of many that Bachmann, having made the the Class 117, are unlikely to also do the Class 118 - and it is unlikely anyone else will either.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Also worth considering when Model Rail asked us in the survey what we wanted as the next model, the Terrier was on that. Since then there have been two versions of the Terrier come to market. No one was looking at Terriers were they....

 

Which is why Rails of Sheffield decided to have Dapol make a model - at which point Hornby got territorial (confirmed in an interview by Hornby) and rushed "their Terrier" to market.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Only way to get a 16XX? Nope.

 

Look, I think it's great that there are kits available - by this discussion was about RTR not kits and thus the availability of a kit isn't relevant.

 

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

But isn't it up to us whether we consider a price is good value or not?

 

I did indicate that in my reply.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Do you have any evidence that no one has shown any interest in a 16XX?  I would think that most of the major manufacturers have probably looked at it. Don't forget two manufacturers announced projects to make a 1366 which is a pretty insignificant class of six which spent all their lives in a handful of locations. Two also looked at the 94XX with one being canned.

 

Maybe Hornby or Bachmann had it on their list of future models and dropped it when Model Rail announced theirs. We don't know and probably never will. But I would think that a major manufacturer would be looking at every possible prototype. Especially one which has a preserved example and numbered 70 examples.

 

Also worth considering when Model Rail asked us in the survey what we wanted as the next model, the Terrier was on that. Since then there have been two versions of the Terrier come to market. No one was looking at Terriers were they....

 

 

Only way to get a 16XX? Nope. One available from NuCast. We aren't all totally dependant on RTR. Captain Kernow has a rather excellent model presently on the go.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/155952-sutherland-16xx-pannier-trying-to-get-there-ahead-of-r-r-r-rapido/

 

 

 

But isn't it up to us whether we consider a price is good value or not? Personally I think it's about £20 to £30 over price (note over price not overpriced). But being a subscriber with a discount that softens the blow a bit to make the price acceptable. YMMV.

 

Also worth bearing in mind the Bachmann 94XX Pannier is currently available for £106.21 with free postage. So really you are comparing that price rather than RRP.

 

 

 

Jason

No one in this business can afford duplication. Model Rail does its homework before making an announcement. That's why you have a 'USA' and not a Dean Goods, and why we announced an E1 and not a Terrier. No one else was working on a 16XX. Apart from the fact that it's a pannier tank, there is little comparison between the 16XX and the Bachmann 94XX. The 94XX is an in-house production, the 16XX is designed and built by a specialist contractor, so there is immediately another layer of cost which is unavoidable. The 94XX is likely to have a larger production run and to be available for some years, allowing the tooling and set-up costs to be spread much more thinly. However, if you want a small, lightweight pannier tank for your rural branchline, the 16XX is more appropriate than the 94XX so the two aren't really interchangeable. (CJL)

  • Like 4
  • Agree 6
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
18 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Do you have any evidence that no one has shown any interest in a 16XX?  I would think that most of the major manufacturers have probably looked at it. Don't forget two manufacturers announced projects to make a 1366 which is a pretty insignificant class of six which spent all their lives in a handful of locations. Two also looked at the 94XX with one being canned.

Jason

If you look at surveys and wishlists I think you will inevitably find that 'someone' has 'shown an interest' in all sorts of things.  But just because 'someone has shown an interest' doesn't necessarily mean very much to a major manufacturer - they want a model where their investment of, nowadays, as much as £200,000 or more, is going to keep on giving them a return for the foreseeable future, effectively until the tooling wears out.   That then has to be considered against their existing range and whether it would take away sales from any of the other models or not stand up against the competition.  Bachmann have rather cleverly over an extended period produced what will amount to a complementary range of 'modern' (i.e 1930s onwards) pannier tanks  small, medium, and now adding large.   Logically why do another 'small' one when they've already got one (which covers a much longer period in traffic)?

 

Hornby seem to steer clear and be happy - for now - with their rather aged 2721.   Logically if they ever do a 'new' pannier tank  then an updated to contemporary standards 2721 would make sense for them because Bachmann has largely cornered the modern pannier market.  Hornby buyers might still want a pannier because they are Hornby buyers and don't know much about Bachmann so there is a marketing effect to consider there.

 

Now let's move to the 1600 and it starts with one big disadvantage - it's very 'modern' and while preservation offers something it never ran in GWR days so there is an immediate loss of a market sector.  Livery was always plain black in BR hands and lots of r-t-r buyers want a bit of colour (ok they can have NCB green but that won't do on a West Country branchline).  So in many respects apart from that well known and oft quoted 'someone' the size of the market for a 1600 is likely to be constrained and, by its very nature, more than likely 'specialised' to WR and ScR modellers plus those who like to collect special editions and limited run models (although i think that market is much smaller than it once was).  Overall that really makes it an ideal target for a commissioned model which suits limited production numbers and potentially only a single run, albeit with a price penalty as we've seen.  If it sells very well in every version there might possibly be a second run but that is not normally the nature of commissioned models - they serve a market which the big boys usually aren't interested in so we have to pay for what we get.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 6
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2019 at 15:59, Miss Prism said:

Polished safety valve covers at Swansea East Dock, 1961:

 

1614-swansea-east-dock-1961.jpg

 

This picture neatly sums up the 16XX's problem with sales to the majority (?) of modellers who don't model the WR circa 1957/62 in that an OO 16XX does tend to look like an HO scale 8750, just like the 8750 and 16XX together do look like an overweight middle age Father and his teenage son.  Come to think of it I have a Hornby 8751, a Hacksaw and a set of 16mm 10 spoke wheels so maybe I can build myself a 16XX before every WR modeller and his dog can buy a Model Rail one.  I will build 1677 as allocated to Llanbobble from new in 1956.

Edited by DavidCBroad
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

I have a Hornby 8751, a Hacksaw and a set of 16mm 10 spoke wheels so maybe I can build myself a 16XX before every WR modeller and his dog can buy a Model Rail one.  I will build 1677 as allocated to Llanbobble from new in 1956.

I wondered about the similarity of the cabs of the 8750, the 64XX et al and the 16XX, so I compared drawings and they are all slightly different in key dimensions, so I wasn't in a position to cannibalise the cab from a spare Bachmann body, to use in my cast whitemetal kit build, so I used the cast cab components originally provided in the kit.

 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DavidCBroad said:

 

This picture neatly sums up the 16XX's problem with sales to the majority (?) of modellers who don't model the WR circa 1957/62 in that an OO 16XX does tend to look like an HO scale 8750, just like the 8750 and 16XX together do look like an overweight middle age Father and his teenage son.  Come to think of it I have a Hornby 8751, a Hacksaw and a set of 16mm 10 spoke wheels so maybe I can build myself a 16XX before every WR modeller and his dog can buy a Model Rail one.  I will build 1677 as allocated to Llanbobble from new in 1956.

Here's a Mainline 57xx (with M&L cab conversion and Bachmann chassis) alongside a Nu-Cast 16xx:

 

624240694_201807080013705and1664onNancegwitheyViaduct.JPG.df41722a28e8ccdcaa1ae669e6ef4e03.JPG

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
On 08/07/2020 at 11:14, dibber25 said:

Moving the coupler mount would have involved major redesign of the cast chassis block and the cost would have scuppered the project. My personal view - and I stress that it is just my view -  is that anyone with major concerns about the front end appearance of any loco will be using a scale screw coupling anyway.

If it was just the tension lock coupler itself and this was easily removable (which I assume NEM makes so) then I think I would agree with you. However if removing the tension lock leaves the coupler mount very visible anyone fitting a scale screw coupling will still have the front end appearance of their loco effected by the coupler mount unless that mount is also easily removable or the modeller hacks it off. I have read descriptions of other model recently which state that the NEM pocket pivots, so presumably is a separately fitted part. I've not seen whether the Model Rail 16xx NEM pockets will pivot, if they do hopefully the coupler mount / NEM pockets will be easily removable so that anyone fitting a scale coupling does not have to take a hacksaw to the model. I'm not currently planning on fitting a scale coupling myself if I do buy one of these models, but if I find the coupler mount too ugly if/when I see it in the flesh I'd like the option of removing it and just using the rear coupling (and making sure my layout has a turntable at both ends).

 

In short, if the NEM pocket / coupler mount is a separate piece that can be removed by unscrewing it that's probably fine. If it's a moulded part of the chassis block that has to be hacked off if anyone doesn't like it on the other hand... That's not something one should have to consider on a £150 model in my opinion.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rhydgaled said:

If it was just the tension lock coupler itself and this was easily removable (which I assume NEM makes so) then I think I would agree with you. However if removing the tension lock leaves the coupler mount very visible anyone fitting a scale screw coupling will still have the front end appearance of their loco effected by the coupler mount unless that mount is also easily removable or the modeller hacks it off. I have read descriptions of other model recently which state that the NEM pocket pivots, so presumably is a separately fitted part. I've not seen whether the Model Rail 16xx NEM pockets will pivot, if they do hopefully the coupler mount / NEM pockets will be easily removable so that anyone fitting a scale coupling does not have to take a hacksaw to the model. I'm not currently planning on fitting a scale coupling myself if I do buy one of these models, but if I find the coupler mount too ugly if/when I see it in the flesh I'd like the option of removing it and just using the rear coupling (and making sure my layout has a turntable at both ends).

 

In short, if the NEM pocket / coupler mount is a separate piece that can be removed by unscrewing it that's probably fine. If it's a moulded part of the chassis block that has to be hacked off if anyone doesn't like it on the other hand... That's not something one should have to consider on a £150 model in my opinion.

From memory - I no longer have any samples on hand to check - The NEM pocket is a standard plastic moulding with a flexible, wedge-shaped mounting at the back, it slots into a similar shaped slot in the cast chassis block. The complete pocket is easily removable and you can't see the mounting from any normal viewing angles. I took the lot off before I shot my movie. Chris Nevard took the coupler out but left the pocket in place when he shot his. There's certainly no need to 'hack' anything off and there's nothing to unscrew. (CJL)

Edited by dibber25
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

May I ask what the specification of the motor and gearing arrangements are, please and whether the back to back measurements are confirmed as 14.5mm?

 

Thanks.

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/08/2020 at 16:39, Rhydgaled said:
6 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

May I ask what the specification of the motor and gearing arrangements are, please and whether the back to back measurements are confirmed as 14.5mm?

 

Thanks.

 

As I said previously, I don't have any of the samples here any more and I can't answer those questions other than to say that 14.5mm is the BRMSB standard back-to-back measurement for 'OO' gauge. (CJL)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • RMweb Gold
21 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Delivery Q4 2020 is now expected. (CJL)


But have you settled on the "guises" yet? The latest Model Rail advert suggests not, and given the changes that have already occurred, I'm reluctant to order until they are settled. If it's any help, my main interest is in the Dornoch pair…

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:


But have you settled on the "guises" yet? The latest Model Rail advert suggests not, and given the changes that have already occurred, I'm reluctant to order until they are settled. If it's any help, my main interest is in the Dornoch pair…

 

Why is this particular model the subject of so much indecision - it doen't seem to be a problem to others?

 

I agree that the uncertainty as to exactly what will be produced, in what livery, with what markings, somewhat unsettling.

 

I have ordered one, but I feel that I have to keep checking that the product number / spec. hasn't changed (again).

 

John Isherwood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:


But have you settled on the "guises" yet? The latest Model Rail advert suggests not, and given the changes that have already occurred, I'm reluctant to order until they are settled. If it's any help, my main interest is in the Dornoch pair…

We have one, at least, of the Scottish ones in the listing and always have had. (CJL)

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Why is this particular model the subject of so much indecision - it doen't seem to be a problem to others?

 

I agree that the uncertainty as to exactly what will be produced, in what livery, with what markings, somewhat unsettling.

 

I have ordered one, but I feel that I have to keep checking that the product number / spec. hasn't changed (again).

 

John Isherwood.

There was one re-arrangement' of the catalogue numbers/guises late in 2019 in light of ongoing research and in order to group the liveries/detail combinations/catalogue numbers more logically, so that the factory could better organise the potentially small quantities of some guises. We were initially taken by surprise that the most support was for the non-authentic GWR green preserved example. I don't think anyone has attempted to give this much choice within a small production run before and we are trying to satisfy as many potential customers as possible. (CJL)

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/09/2020 at 16:45, D9020 Nimbus said:


But have you settled on the "guises" yet? The latest Model Rail advert suggests not, and given the changes that have already occurred, I'm reluctant to order until they are settled. If it's any help, my main interest is in the Dornoch pair…

When the 'guises' are settled, will images of each version replace the photos of the real thing on the 'shop' web pages? I'm interested in one model, the preserved 1638 in either the 'semi-fictitious' GWR green or entirely fictitious BR lined black (with early crest). I'd rather have the latter, but it would mean lining it myself (scary thought) and probably renumbering so I haven't decided yet. If I do go for black, I'd be after an unweathered model with a brass safety valve cover and given the use of the same real photo on several of the products offered it's not obvious which ones are in that condition.

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.