Sails Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, 37114 said: Personally I am hoping Bachmann and SLW crack on with their model. This one is good but not good enough for me so will hold off at this stage. Did SLW commit to making a class 25? Don't recall reading that, but certainly I'd be more than happy if they did with one 24 already purchased and waiting for two more to arrive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 Never thought something could create so much controversy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueeighties Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) Error post sorry! Edited July 12, 2019 by blueeighties Posted in error 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbos Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 5 hours ago, Sails said: Did SLW commit to making a class 25? Don't recall reading that, but certainly I'd be more than happy if they did with one 24 already purchased and waiting for two more to arrive. I don’t think SLW have committed to a 25, they appear to be busy with the 24 in various incarnations, they’re committed to doing a 24/1 (Bachmann are as well) which would then be getting close to a 25/0. Which is quite different from the 25/3. Only time will tell what SLW do. I can certainly see myself getting one of these Heljan 25/3 based on the ep sample (nice paint job as well), one of the great things about Heljan is there willingness to correct faults if able to. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted July 12, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 12, 2019 5 hours ago, Sails said: Did SLW commit to making a class 25? Don't recall reading that, but certainly I'd be more than happy if they did with one 24 already purchased and waiting for two more to arrive. If you are brave enough to take the body off a SLW Bo-Bo you will see it has what look like engine room gubbins on the main chassis casting and off the PCB internal lights to show off the engine room. No good for a 24, 25/0 or even a 25/1 or early 25/2 as they have no side windows. Now a late 25/2 and 25/3 have side windows so my guess is????????? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iak Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 Oh dear me... This beastie is a wee disappointing, which is a shame... As for SLW? Who knows what is afoot. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave47549 Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) . Edited October 1, 2021 by Dave47549 Removed pointless guff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Roy Langridge Posted July 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2019 14 minutes ago, Dave47549 said: There's been something bugging me about the 25 cab. I think i've 'narrowed' down (frame zit infestation aside) to the cab front & side windows being too tall. Having just now for the first time taken a look at their earlier 'O' gauge model, i see the same glitch present there... See my post: The side windows were spot on when overlaid over a photo. Just done the same with the front view, and again the windows look pretty good - what is very obvious though is the recess around the window is not right and that changes the whole appearance. As for the cab doors, they are another matter all together with the window being all wrong, the threshold wrong and the handrails way to deep (the latter possibly just a hand assembly problem). I really hope Heljan and Ben get this one right. Not so much for the 25 (although I do have an ETHEL on order) but it will give more confidence in the 11, 47 etc. whch follow and which excite me very much. Roy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 51 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said: If you are brave enough to take the body off a SLW Bo-Bo you will see it has what look like engine room gubbins on the main chassis casting and off the PCB internal lights to show off the engine room. No good for a 24, 25/0 or even a 25/1 or early 25/2 as they have no side windows. Now a late 25/2 and 25/3 have side windows so my guess is????????? Maybe at the time the 24 was designed, but that was a long time ago and things have moved on since then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Roy Langridge said: See my post: The side windows were spot on when overlaid over a photo. Just done the same with the front view, and again the windows look pretty good - what is very obvious though is the recess around the window is not right and that changes the whole appearance. As for the cab doors, they are another matter all together with the window being all wrong, the threshold wrong and the handrails way to deep (the latter possibly just a hand assembly problem). I really hope Heljan and Ben get this one right. Not so much for the 25 (although I do have an ETHEL on order) but it will give more confidence in the 11, 47 etc. whch follow and which excite me very much. Roy Very often, I read the remark that (insert manufacturer of choice) needs to get something right, when it would be more accurate to say that we need manufacturer X to get something right. However, in this case, Heljan does need to get this right because there will be a rival product. Not only that, but the 25 has been done before, however much it might need an upgrade. A case in point – I was looking forward to the new Hornby bathtub Coronation but there was enough wrong with it that I did without. In my view (divergent views exist) there is no point in getting a new model unless it is free of obvious errors. If the Heljan model is good, I’ll buy. If it isn’t, I’ll wait for Bachmann. If that has flaws too, I’ll make do with what I have. Much the same goes for the 47 but the 11 and 12 are exciting. Model Rail takes care. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted July 12, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 12, 2019 4 hours ago, royaloak said: Maybe at the time the 24 was designed, but that was a long time ago and things have moved on since then. 4 hours ago, iak said: Oh dear me... This beastie is a wee disappointing, which is a shame... As for SLW? Who knows what is afoot. As Iak says, who knows what is a foot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said: As Iak says, who knows what is a foot. Indeed. Metric is becoming increasingly subversive. The latest addition to the family was reported to be 6.2 lb. Ever wary, I sat on the chest of the messenger until he confessed that he meant 6 lb. 2 oz. – not the same thing at all. Sorry to wander OT. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porcy Mane Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 7 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said: If you are brave enough to take the body off a SLW Bo-Bo you will see it has what look like engine room gubbins Sort of like this. Simple good practice & common sense as non of that Internal gubbins can be see when using a 24 body shell, Whether it ever gets used for a 25 only time will tell. 32 minutes ago, No Decorum said: Indeed. Metric is becoming increasingly subversive. Nah. this is a foot. P 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 3 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said: Nah. this is a foot. P Unusual scale. 50' 6" to the foot. Makes 00 seem almost sensible. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of IKB Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 (edited) Somehow, and i have no evidence at all for this, i dont think we will see another 25 of any type from slw. Just look at the long protracted saga of the reliveries. Therd were many people of which i was one, hoping slw would be the saviour of 4mm diesels, now this hope has moved on...probably to accurascale. In regards to the 25, I'm praying Heljan can ammend this, especially the fake rivet thing thats going on, the more you look at them the worse they get. Edited July 13, 2019 by The Ghost of IKB 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonC Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 It seems odd adding in extra details where there shouldn't be. Those rivets do stand out as an error 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted July 13, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 13, 2019 This post (from Thursday, here) shows no rivets around the windows, and a better cab door. So if the date of that post is in line with the images in it, can we take it these have been fixed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porcy Mane Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 7 minutes ago, GordonC said: It seems odd adding in extra details where there shouldn't be. Those rivets do stand out as an error S'pose it depends on which prototype you'r modelling and when. They're quite visible when you zoom into to this image but when new and filled with stopper/filler would hardly have been visible. 0082 25209 withdrawn Toton by Paul Hunter-Higgins, on Flickr. To me it's the lack of definition of the recessed frames of windscreen glasses that's the bigger error. From a purely personal point of view I'd rather remove rivets than add them. (If needed). P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold stovepipe Posted July 13, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 13, 2019 48 minutes ago, Ian J. said: This post (from Thursday, here) shows no rivets around the windows, and a better cab door. So if the date of that post is in line with the images in it, can we take it these have been fixed? Where have those photos come from? They don't appear to be from Heljan's facebook page. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted July 13, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Porcy Mane said: S'pose it depends on which prototype you'r modelling and when. They're quite visible when you zoom into to this image but when new and filled with stopper/filler would hardly have been visible. 0082 25209 withdrawn Toton by Paul Hunter-Higgins, on Flickr. To me it's the lack of definition of the recessed frames of windscreen glasses that's the bigger error. From a purely personal point of view I'd rather remove rivets than add them. (If needed). P The screw heads may be visible but they don't stick out if the loco was taking part in a wet tee shirt contest.....they are counter sink screws. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gridwatcher Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 On 11/07/2019 at 16:03, Legend said: These Rivets round the cab windows are a bit severe , you can hardly see them, if at all , on the real thing . That would certainly put me off buying. Would it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25901 Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said: The screw heads may be visible but they don't stick out if the loco was taking part in a wet tee shirt contest.....they are counter sink screws. The front window are not screw heads but "pop rivets". If the correct counter sunk flat ones are use they are not visible but sometimes domed ones were used. While the side windows are counter sunk screw which again shouldn't be seen if correct size is used and after a bit of paint. There are 4 bolt heads that show on the side windows but they are part of the window slide arrangement First pic shows slightly domed ones on the front that were ground down and second pic shows the mandrels heads that remain, and are a pain to paint round inside the cab. Edited July 13, 2019 by 25901 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted July 13, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 13, 2019 49 minutes ago, 25901 said: The front window are not screw heads but "pop rivets". If the correct counter sunk flat ones are use they are not visible but sometimes domed ones were used. While the side windows are counter sunk screw which again shouldn't be seen if correct size is used and after a bit of paint. There are 4 bolt heads that show on the side windows but they are part of the window slide arrangement First pic shows slightly domed ones on the front that were ground down and second pic shows the mandrels heads that remain, and are a pain to paint round inside the cab. Someone earlier had quoted what size screws, so I remain confused. But one thing for certain in BR service they were not visible. Unlike the body side support strut that is visible through the radiator intake grille. Cannot be seen on the etched grille but it is etched so that makes all the difference. It looks wrong in many ways, all I hope it is sorted so I would be willing to part with my money....and not repaint my second hand DJH kit (purchased in this livery). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25901 Posted July 13, 2019 Share Posted July 13, 2019 Front are defo pop rivets as I have had to replace all the windows in the above pic of D7612 after a nice person smashed every one while parked up the dreaded "Quarter mile" siding at Bury. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Daddyman Posted July 14, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 14, 2019 21 hours ago, Porcy Mane said: To me it's the lack of definition of the recessed frames of windscreen glasses that's the bigger error. Agreed. The front-end view looks totally wrong at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now