HELJAN UNVEILS ‘OO’ GAUGE 25/3 AND ‘ETHEL’ FOR 2019

[adb968008]

34 minutes ago, 25901 said:

Vince, Terry and Alan. Headboard brackets are there but under another cab front that BR had grafted on the crushed in front. You can just make out the outline of the panel. The blue star multi working not yet fully reinstalled.

And yes, the wiper did fall off as well as the BIS box covers. The horn grill is still missing today and is left off for a reason that only 25 drivers will know lol

And the body side skirting was missing, and that exposed pipe on the bufferbeam.  
A 25 looking like it truly should look ;-)

 

Didnt it go nearly 3 months daily service on works trains too that summer ?

[25901]

3 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Didnt it go nearly 3 months daily service on works trains too that summer ?

Yes as they didn’t  want to get the 14 dirty lol

[Daddyman]

22 hours ago, 25901 said:

The gaps on the 5 piece skirt at too big, the two headboard brackets lack detail and the front hand rail looks too straight. To be honest the whole front end looks too flat.

Thanks for pointing those things out. It's hard to tell if the front end is too flat or it's just the photo. The other things are all fixable. But I wonder if the inset rims round the windscreens, while better than before, are still not quite right.

 

I must say, though, it isn't quite the Heljan-up it looked like it was going to be. I might even have one... 

[Mophead45143]

1 hour ago, Daddyman said:

Thanks for pointing those things out. It's hard to tell if the front end is too flat or it's just the photo. The other things are all fixable. But I wonder if the inset rims round the windscreens, while better than before, are still not quite right.

 

I must say, though, it isn't quite the Heljan-up it looked like it was going to be. I might even have one... 

 

I'm in the same boat. 

 

If you look at a 25 in real life, the front can look very flat from some angles, but curved from others. I was studying the new multi-angle images to shots of real 25's off the web and in my mind the model appears to capture this. The model has a definite curve when viewed from above or side on. 

 

Like you say, the window frames are far better than on the original EP, but something doesn't quite look right on the full yellow end models. It may be that the thickness of the yellow paint is making the frames blend in. After all, the close up of the ETHEL clearly shows the frames are fairly well defined, so perhaps trying to pick them out in the weathering stage will help.

 

I certainly wasn't convinced from earlier samples, but I too am now starting to warm to this model. Seeing one in the flesh would definitely help. If there wasn't a new Bachmann model coming out (at some point), then there would be far less scrutiny over Heljan's effort, as it is definitely a huge improvement over what has come before. 

 

Cameron

 

[Daddyman]

11 hours ago, Mophead45143 said:

 

I'm in the same boat. 

 

If you look at a 25 in real life, the front can look very flat from some angles, but curved from others. I was studying the new multi-angle images to shots of real 25's off the web and in my mind the model appears to capture this. The model has a definite curve when viewed from above or side on. 

 

Like you say, the window frames are far better than on the original EP, but something doesn't quite look right on the full yellow end models. It may be that the thickness of the yellow paint is making the frames blend in. After all, the close up of the ETHEL clearly shows the frames are fairly well defined, so perhaps trying to pick them out in the weathering stage will help.

 

I certainly wasn't convinced from earlier samples, but I too am now starting to warm to this model. Seeing one in the flesh would definitely help. If there wasn't a new Bachmann model coming out (at some point), then there would be far less scrutiny over Heljan's effort, as it is definitely a huge improvement over what has come before. 

 

Cameron

 

The Bachmann one could be years away - it went to the drawing office in July. 

 

You could be right about the frames being gummed up with yellow paint, and the prismic effect on the edges of the glazing doesn't help with definition. However, the fact that we're not quite sure the frames are the right width is itself the problem - the photo at the start of the Bachmann thread shows that they should be loud and clear (see below). That said, the frames are easy enough to replace - we've all done it when we converted Hornby 25s into 25/3s. 

 

[adb968008]

There is another contender for a 25, aside of Bachmann and Heljan..i’m awaiting on their 24/1’s to see how they turn up.. their 24’s were very nice.

Edited November 11, 2020 by adb968008

[Mophead45143]

I've flipped the screenshot of the ETHEL and stuck it next to an image off of the Derby Sulzers website. Make of it what you will, the angles aren't quite the same.

 

One thing I have noticed (apologies if it has been mentioned before) is how the bottom of the headcode box frame stops on the model as it meets the rain strip. In real life it is continuous, and covers the rain strip (shouldn't be too hard to fix though). 

 

Edited November 11, 2020 by Mophead45143

[25901]

Highlights what I had said about the gaps in the skirting

[Covkid]

7 hours ago, adb968008 said:

There is another contender for a 25, aside of Bachmann and Heljan..i’m awaiting on their 24/1’s to see how they turn up.. their 24’s were very nice.

 

It would be possible to carve a 25 out of a Bachmann 24/1, but there would be a helluva lot to do, after you have taken the 24/1 bodyshell down to bare plastic and fiddled around with the cab doors, cabside windows, handrails and valances. Between the cab doors the grilles were all different with cast alloy units standing proud of the bodyside on the 24 and 25/0.. The class 25 air intakes were pretty much flush apart from the frame.

 

Then there are the boiler water and fuel tanks, sand boxes etc etc.  

 

Frankly a big job and probably easier continuing to butcher the Hornby shell in time honoured fashion.     

[Roy Langridge]

6 hours ago, Mophead45143 said:

I've flipped the screenshot of the ETHEL and stuck it next to an image off of the Derby Sulzers website. Make of it what you will, the angles aren't quite the same.

 

One thing I have noticed (apologies if it has been mentioned before) is how the bottom of the headcode box frame stops on the model as it meets the rain strip. In real life it is continuous, and covers the rain strip (shouldn't be too hard to fix though). 

 

Shows nicely why I am unhappy with the cab doors, all wrong...

 

Roy

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Just to show we all see different things on the same pictures, the one thing missing which stands out to me is the lack of the small white engraved panels at cantrail level which warn about the fibre glass roof, but then again, Heljan aren't the first!

 

Mike.

['CHARD]

8 hours ago, Covkid said:

 

It would be possible to carve a 25 out of a Bachmann 24/1, but there would be a helluva lot to do, after you have taken the 24/1 bodyshell down to bare plastic and fiddled around with the cab doors, cabside windows, handrails and valances. Between the cab doors the grilles were all different with cast alloy units standing proud of the bodyside on the 24 and 25/0.. The class 25 air intakes were pretty much flush apart from the frame.

 

Then there are the boiler water and fuel tanks, sand boxes etc etc.  

 

Frankly a big job and probably easier continuing to butcher the Hornby shell in time honoured fashion.     

 

I don't think he was referring to the Bachmann product - he mentioned an alternative to theirs and Heljan's Class 25.  The manufacturer being alluded-to was Sutton's Loco Works.

[Covkid]

5 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

 

I don't think he was referring to the Bachmann product - he mentioned an alternative to theirs and Heljan's Class 25.  The manufacturer being alluded-to was Sutton's Loco Works.

Doh !!!!

[Daddyman]

11 hours ago, Mophead45143 said:

I've flipped the screenshot of the ETHEL and stuck it next to an image off of the Derby Sulzers website. Make of it what you will, the angles aren't quite the same.

 

One thing I have noticed (apologies if it has been mentioned before) is how the bottom of the headcode box frame stops on the model as it meets the rain strip. In real life it is continuous, and covers the rain strip (shouldn't be too hard to fix though). 

 

Thanks. That really clinches it - the frames are totally wrong. The side window frames are also way too prominent and yes, Roy Langridge, I see your point about the doors. The seams are very obviously wrong, as you say 25901, but that's the least of its worries...   

[Mophead45143]

9 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Thanks. That really clinches it - the frames are totally wrong. The side window frames are also way too prominent and yes, Roy Langridge, I see your point about the doors. The seams are very obviously wrong, as you say 25901, but that's the least of its worries...   

 

I think the prismatic effect of the glazing is exacerbating the window frame issue, laserglaze would probably solve that. Granted, the frames are a tad undernourished. 

 

[Daddyman]

19 minutes ago, Mophead45143 said:

 

I think the prismatic effect of the glazing is exacerbating the window frame issue, laserglaze would probably solve that. Granted, the frames are a tad undernourished. 

 

Yes, I thought that the prismatic effect was a factor too.

 

Talking myself out of it again...

 

[DropTheTap]

The cab doors and front skirts are somewhat amiss, as discussed above. These wouldn't necessarily be a deal- breaker for me though.

Aside from that, there's something jarring about the shape of the cab/ windows/ headcode box mount area, and it's more prominent to my eyes on the blue version.

Unfortunately, I'm not sufficiently articulate to describe the issue, especially without examination of a model.

I wonder how the overall width compares to the prototype? Silly question perhaps, but the model looks... narrow. However this could easily be an unfair comparison based on dissimilar photographic angles.

[Hal Nail]

7 minutes ago, DropTheTap said:

but the model looks... narrow

Or tall. If you scroll the photo down so part of the offending skirt is off the bottom, it looks about right!

Edited November 13, 2020 by Hal Nail

[Mophead45143]

3 hours ago, DropTheTap said:

The cab doors and front skirts are somewhat amiss, as discussed above. These wouldn't necessarily be a deal- breaker for me though.

Aside from that, there's something jarring about the shape of the cab/ windows/ headcode box mount area, and it's more prominent to my eyes on the blue version.

Unfortunately, I'm not sufficiently articulate to describe the issue, especially without examination of a model.

I wonder how the overall width compares to the prototype? Silly question perhaps, but the model looks... narrow. However this could easily be an unfair comparison based on dissimilar photographic angles.

 

I think my side by side posting of the ETHEL's is a bit misleading in this respect, the differing angles do make a massive difference to the appearance. If you compare the model to the 'weathered' blue 25 on the ELR which is a similar angle, I would say the proportions compare pretty well. I'll try and do a side by side of those. 

 

Apart from the frames being a little undernourished and perhaps a nat's ch##f to close to the rain strip, I don't think there is anything wrong with the front cab windows. To me though, the headcode box does seem to be a fraction too tall / deep, and should be more rectangular than it is. 

 

Cameron

Edited November 13, 2020 by Mophead45143

[Roy Langridge]

17 minutes ago, Mophead45143 said:

 

I think my side by side posting of the ETHEL's is a bit misleading in this respect, the differing angles do make a massive difference to the appearance. If you compare the model to the 'weathered' blue 25 on the ELR which is a similar angle, I would say the proportions compare pretty well. I'll try and do a side by side of those. 

 

Apart from the frames being a little undernourished and perhaps a nat's ch##f to close to the rain strip, I don't think there is anything wrong with the front cab windows. To me though, the headcode box does seem to be a fraction too tall / deep, and should be more rectangular than it is. 

 

Cameron

 

I agree, I took the two images and measured a few distances and compared them to each other and they are pretty good, certainly within the tolerance that I measured at. I think the way the skirting is done makes it look wrong. Take a look at this image that removes the lines to make it match the ETHEL picture. I think it looked much closer.

Roy

 

[Mophead45143]

Another comparison. Again, angles not quite the same but better than the last one.

 

 

[Roy Langridge]

59 minutes ago, Mophead45143 said:

Another comparison. Again, angles not quite the same but better than the last one.

 

 

 

I would love to see a Heljan 25 with Laserglaze to compare against the prototype. Not going to happen before release I know, but I think it would make a huge difference.

 

Roy

[Ray M]

That Heljan model has no ETH Cable/socket ?

[Daddyman]

21 hours ago, Ray M said:

That Heljan model has no ETH Cable/socket ?

No, but that's perhaps to be expected, as they'll do a one-size-fits-all bufferbeam pack. Note also the lack of bogie sandboxes on the real 97250. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Daddyman

[Crisis Rail]

Not one to criticise manufacturers too much (it used to be a near banning offence on here) and not join in all the squabbly rivetty nit-picking but that cab front to window angle does look a little bit on the flat side.