Jump to content
 

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


Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
27 minutes ago, sulzer71 said:

Do like that but the yellow is a bit bright!

 

In reality it's not that bright; it's a pleasing slightly-faded shade of warning panel yellow on this exclusive edition for TMC.

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

24 minutes ago, sulzer71 said:

Do like that but the yellow is a bit bright! also it wouldn't fit my Far North layout :rolleyes:

I agree the yellow is a bit bright but so are the greens and grey and even the black! A good layer of Midland Grime is what it needs.

Lovely model.

 

Brian.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AY Mod said:

I don't care if Monday's blue
Tuesday's grey and Wednesday too
Thursday, I don't care about you
It's Friday, I'm in love

 

1.jpg

25102_ManVic_3-3-76

 

That’s a useful comparison, it clearly shows how they’ve messed up the cab door! The headcode box looks a little odd where it connects with the rain strip as well. 
 

Hard to tell with the B&W pic but is the fuzzy wonky paint line around the cab/door prototypical or poorly finished?  
 

When another manufacturer is showing off pictures of their latest model, that already looks amazing, and yet they’re still trying to improve it you can’t help but feel Heljan are taking the p a bit. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the cab door on the model looks quite similar to the full size in those pics.

I would have thought if you really were determined to play spot the difference, you might have noticed that the blue stars were in the wrong place on the model...

I'm not convinced by some people's criticism of this model.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 minutes ago, Bedlington North said:

Actually the cab door on the model looks quite similar to the full size in those pics.

I would have thought if you really were determined to play spot the difference, you might have noticed that the blue stars were in the wrong place on the model...

I'm not convinced by some people's criticism of this model.


What? The cab door is totally wrong as I have raised since the first EP. Class 25 cab door windows extend to the same height as the cab window, the model does not. On a real 25 the door shuts under an overhang, the model door is well below the gutter line.


Edit: I am not sure how Hornby got it rights so many years ago, as have Bachmann, yet Heljan get it so wrong. 

 

Roy

Edited by Roy Langridge
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
24 minutes ago, Global said:

That’s a useful comparison, it clearly shows how they’ve messed up the cab door! The headcode box looks a little odd where it connects with the rain strip as well. 
 

Hard to tell with the B&W pic but is the fuzzy wonky paint line around the cab/door prototypical or poorly finished?  
 

When another manufacturer is showing off pictures of their latest model, that already looks amazing, and yet they’re still trying to improve it you can’t help but feel Heljan are taking the p a bit. 

 

I think that you're going overboard (for effect or glory?). I don't see much wrong in any of those areas and I have the benefit of looking at the actual model. I have discussed my impressions of the door handrails with Ben and I'm satisfied with the answer (which I will cover in the review in BRM). It's an excellent model and it does annoy me when there's stupid nit-picking. I won't bother posting the images in future.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
4 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

The cab door is totally wrong

 

Totally? As in around 1mm?

 

There are many aspects where this model is even better than Bachmann's recent 24.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
33 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Totally? As in around 1mm?

 

There are many aspects where this model is even better than Bachmann's recent 24.


Sorry Andy, it is very wrong. The window is too short, the door too short and a 25 door shuts against the frame, you can’t see the edges. There is little right with the door as represented.
 

Yes, there are many aspects that are good in that model, but the door and Heljan’s lack of action to correct it are disappointing. 
 

Roy

Edited by Roy Langridge
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to seeing this in the plastic, having 50-odd Heljan Bo-Bos on fleet strength they're naturally very welcome here.

 

With an established fleet of the late body type BR-Sulzer running well into double figures, however, the uplift is going to have to be fairly substantial to justify any expenditure; it's not quite so cut and dried as the SLW Highland Baby Sulzer.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

I think that you're going overboard (for effect or glory?). I don't see much wrong in any of those areas and I have the benefit of looking at the actual model. I have discussed my impressions of the door handrails with Ben and I'm satisfied with the answer (which I will cover in the review in BRM). It's an excellent model and it does annoy me when there's stupid nit-picking. I won't bother posting the images in future.


It’s not my intention to annoy you but on the flip side I find reviews that gloss over obvious errors to be quite irritating myself. 
 

I don’t doubt that underneath it’s a far superior model and I was dearly hoping that they would correct the exterior so that I could buy a few to replace the Bachmann ones I have. 
 

But these silly errors just keep coming from Heljan - it’s not like it’s difficult to find reference material these days. A quick google search will show the door window should be the same level as that on the cab. 
 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Bedlington North said:

Actually the cab door on the model looks quite similar to the full size in those pics.

I would have thought if you really were determined to play spot the difference, you might have noticed that the blue stars were in the wrong place on the model...

I'm not convinced by some people's criticism of this model.

Its got the wrong number of cab bogie steps, non-flat sandbox and no strengthener behind the body grill, 4 holes rather than six in the bottom of the bogie frame, missing pipe behind the engine room window,cab handrails that point across the door, rather than outwards, extra set of steps on the bogie, to the now plated over boiler access port, BR logo looks to big, ohle flashes should be higher, and no driver in the cab... but all of that is doable in an evening.

 

for real spot the difference try this..


flickr url/not mine.

25102

Same rat (25102), same place, same issues, looks like same driver too... though note the blue star is in the right place now... 3 years 1 month later..(its lost its steam heat pipe in this image since the prior).

 

I think 25’s are the only locos BR painted to make them look weathered and knackered. By all accounts it seems the real 102 was a right bag of nails, transferred about, BR database lists 20 locations in its 16 years, plus 4 works visits, the 1976 one being a full gut/rebuild no one wanted it, and by 1980 it was gone.

if its regular role was Vic banker that could be a clue too.

 

But its a man vic banker, its the last 25 to wear green...

I still like it.

 

:D

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
9 hours ago, 'CHARD said:

Looking forward to seeing this in the plastic, having 50-odd Heljan Bo-Bos on fleet strength they're naturally very welcome here.

 

With an established fleet of the late body type BR-Sulzer running well into double figures, however, the uplift is going to have to be fairly substantial to justify any expenditure; it's not quite so cut and dried as the SLW Highland Baby Sulzer.


Hammer, nail, head and all that. This is not a model without competition and it needed to be right to make me upgrade / expand my fleet and what I am seeing is not doing that. It is a pity, I love Heljan locos when they are right (I have another two arriving Monday) but it seems there is a lack of attention paid to detail at a stage where there is an ability/desire to fix it, and by the time metal is cut, few changes seem to get made.

 

I know Andy Y gets frustrated by us identifying errors, but as both competition and the price of models increases, details matter. I will happily pay for an expensive model if it is right, so no problems with price, but I want to feel I am getting value for that. For me, the side view of a loco is more important than the face as we typically spend more time looking at the side than the front. 
 

Roy

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:


What? The cab door is totally wrong as I have raised since the first EP. Class 25 cab door windows extend to the same height as the cab window, the model does not. On a real 25 the door shuts under an overhang, the model door is well below the gutter line.


Edit: I am not sure how Hornby got it rights so many years ago, as have Bachmann, yet Heljan get it so wrong. 

 

Roy

Have you actually looked at the comparison picture of the model against the prototype up thread? They don't bear out your 'expert' view I'm afraid. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Its got the wrong number of cab bogie steps, non-flat sandbox and no strengthener behind the body grill, 4 holes rather than six in the bottom of the bogie frame, missing pipe behind the engine room window,cab handrails that point across the door, rather than outwards, extra set of steps on the bogie, to the now plated over boiler access port, BR logo looks to big, ohle flashes should be higher, and no driver in the cab... but all of that is doable in an evening.

 

for real spot the difference try this..


flickr url/not mine.

25102

Same rat (25102), same place, same issues, looks like same driver too... though note the blue star is in the right place now... 3 years 1 month later..(its lost its steam heat pipe in this image since the prior).

 

I think 25’s are the only locos BR painted to make them look weathered and knackered. By all accounts it seems the real 102 was a right bag of nails, transferred about, BR database lists 20 locations in its 16 years, plus 4 works visits, the 1976 one being a full gut/rebuild no one wanted it, and by 1980 it was gone.

if its regular role was Vic banker that could be a clue too.

 

But its a man vic banker, its the last 25 to wear green...

I still like it.

 

:D

My point to Global was that he was pointing out 'obvious' errors in the model compared with the full size picture - errors which I can't detect. And yet he was so quick to point that out that he missed an easy nitpick like the blue star mw codes on the nose end. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
36 minutes ago, Bedlington North said:

My point to Global was that he was pointing out 'obvious' errors in the model compared with the full size picture - errors which I can't detect. And yet he was so quick to point that out that he missed an easy nitpick like the blue star mw codes on the nose end. 

 

What is obvious to people may differ. I would also point out that the blue star is a livery error, other issues highlighted are more fundamental.


Roy

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Bedlington North said:

Have you actually looked at the comparison picture of the model against the prototype up thread? They don't bear out your 'expert' view I'm afraid. 


Roy is correct, I’m not sure what you’re looking at but if you can’t see the cab door window is significantly lower than the cab window beside it, when they should be level, perhaps a visit to a certain well known tv eyesight specialist is required?! ;-)

Edited by Global
  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
40 minutes ago, Bedlington North said:

Have you actually looked at the comparison picture of the model against the prototype up thread? They don't bear out your 'expert' view I'm afraid. 

 

That is quite frankly rubbish - I have compared hundreds of photos and the door is plain wrong. It looked wrong the moment I saw it at EP 1 stage, and it is still wrong.

 

Roy

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Bedlington North said:

My point to Global was that he was pointing out 'obvious' errors in the model compared with the full size picture - errors which I can't detect. And yet he was so quick to point that out that he missed an easy nitpick like the blue star mw codes on the nose end. 


That star is purely decoration, still annoying yes, but is correctable unlike the physical shape problems. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
1 hour ago, Roy Langridge said:

I know Andy Y gets frustrated by us identifying errors, but as both competition and the price of models increases, details matter.

 

It's not pointing out errors that is a problem, it's the increasingly vitriolic posts full of hyperbole (this looks NOTHING like a Class whatever) that are the issue. Even this morning, tempers have been raised I see. 

 

As was once said of one regular pedant, you've hit the nail on the head. Stop hammering. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 4
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For Gods sake, if you want to nitpick at anything can I point out that it is powered by an electric supply and not a diesel power unit.

Will I be buying one, yes. Will I be binning my Bachmann ones, no. Will even keep my Hornby couple.

 

Cant wait to have one in my hands to see whats it's like and yes there will be errors but to me in general it looks good. Having spent way too much time on the real things I will hold finial judgement til then.  

 

One last point I will make is that all the debate seems to be about the body. Do we know the chassis won't turn banana in a few years, will it make horrid noises when running and will the lights work correctly ie no two red marker lights on at the same time (pet hate).

 

Heljan could have taken the easy route and not produced the model in which case all the haters would now be on the Bachmann page.

 

Anyway I 'll leave it at that and all of you stay safe.

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

The door is wrong......but the loco as a whole is so significantly better than the old Bachmann 25s in my fleet that I personally think its well worth upgrading to this Heljan version.  In an ideal world both new models would be released at the same time and we could pick our favourite, but thats not going to happen, so there's three choices, stick with the very outdated bachy 25, suspend disbelief and while squinting convince yourself that it does look like a 25 even though you know that its only good point is the motor, which is both hidden and 100% incorrect and save your money for the next wonder model from accura, which will probably be far more accurate, but not in any way a 25, or gamble that the new Bachmann will be the better of the two, and probably miss the chance to get the Heljan when you realise that the new Bachmann is also TOTALLY WRONG because it is 0.5mm out in some vital dimension.

I'm being facetious,  but some of this criticism is somewhat histrionic, and reading the constant bleating is a drag.

It looks like its a good model, I'm buying several.

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Heljan’s new 25 is definitely an improvement on previous models and I do like their mechanisms but, since for now my older Bachmann models work fine and there are some errors on this new one, I shall wait to see Bachmann’s new effort and compare before deciding which to buy.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

As was once said of one regular pedant, you've hit the nail on the head. Stop hammering. 

 

Given it is rare (at least in my experience) to connect so well that one lusty blow is sufficient, perhaps a better analogy here would be to point out that hammering away unnecessarily risks damaging the surrounding surface... :)

 

Based on this recent photo and the earlier head on shot, I'd be interested to see the improvement in the face from filing a bit off the bottom of the cab which would make it look a bit less long and thin. This would open up the gap above the buffers which is fine as there is scope for that. I think you might be able to get away with only moving the lamp irons up and the rest of the detail would still work.

 

Edited by Hal Nail
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not looked at all the smaller errors so i can't comment but the face of the loco looks wrong. The rake of the front looks to be too steep. I thought this when i saw the EP and I still think it now having seen the TMC model. That makes it a no from me. The Hornby model is still the best in terms of overall body shape. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, peak experience said:

The Hornby model is still the best in terms of overall body shape. 

B9F196E9-44B0-448A-8814-3777FD0592A0.jpeg.d1530f9892a6c526228c09f2d0b4d656.jpeg
There’s plenty here in the overall shape that is nowhere near as good  as either the Bachmann or Hj EP. I can only assume the Hornby chassis is invisible.

Edited by PMP
Image copyright Hattons
  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
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...