Jump to content
 

Planned Farish release schedule April 2019 - January 2020


lindi
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

I wouldn't let that be a stumbling block. A little consideration, fiddling, fettling and constructive effort, possibly with a bit of flexi track, and you could adapt to fit.

 

Paddy, it wasn't meant to be funny but a serious suggestion. Andy Calvert wrote in the NGS Journal how to alter Peco points including radius (and hence to some extent geometry). Check it out.

 

 

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

  • RMweb Gold

To my own mind, there are two main things that are key to maintaining/improving/promoting British N-Gauge's standing.  Good quality (well made and well operated) layouts, both home-based and exhibition-based, and good supply of stock. 

 

The former is largely down to us, the latter is largely down to the manufacturer/supplier (we can't buy what isn't on the shelf).

 

Best

 

Scott.

Edited by scottystitch
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

As far as the quality of models go, I'm very satisfied with the detail level we are at with rolling stock, In particular, Farish coaches (and some of Dapol's for that matter, their Gresley coaches still look very good) and Revolution's wagons.  as far as locomotives go, again I can't say I see a need for much more detail.  Dapol's 68, 50 and Farish's 40, for instance look fantastic.  How much more can we do?   Refinement of certain areas perhaps might be a good avenue to go down (more use of etches for grills and bogie sides for instance). 

 

Personally, things like lights and sound have less appeal, so I'd rather the investment went into the mechanisms.  Whilst I completely see where Nick is coming from, in terms of his layout and his use of his models, I still think that good low speed movement and control is a must.  I have a couple of Rapido's GMD-1s and you can watch them creep at speed step 1 (of 128), and very smoothly at that.  This is useful not just for shunting but for more general acceleration and deceleration on approach to stations, signals, sidings, etc. , coupling up to stock more authentically and operating the railway as the real one is.  

 

I think for what we get, pricing is not an issue.  For what we pay, I think we do get a very very good product (in most cases, and in my experience).  And, I'd happily pay Rapido prices for Rapido-like mechanisms.

 

As for Peco, altering the sleeper spacing to match that of the UK prototype would go a long way to improving it's look.  As it stands it's a compromise to everyone, wherever in the world they are modelling.  At least with UK spacing it's correct for at least one area.  Everywhere else already compromises (and buys it) now, so where's the difference?  As for their turnouts, i'd have much preferred the'd tried to correct the switch blades to match something approaching prototype than gone down the unifrog route.  Switchblades without that hinge and without the increased depth, again would go a long way to improve the look and, I daresay, operation.  Maybe a couple more, longer turnouts in the range would help too, particularly for modern image layouts.  I can't say that I've encountered too many problems with Code 55 track, that some in the thread have reported.  The biggest issue I find is that the turnout basis can be bowed.  But I've never had a problem assembling and laying it.

 

Best

 

Scott.

Edited by scottystitch
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scottystitch said:

To my own mind, there are two main things that are key to maintaining/improving/promoting British N-Gauge's standing.  Good quality (well made and well operated) layouts, both home-based and exhibition-based, and good supply of stock. 

 

 

Yep, as I wrote on another thread last year: "For it [the N gauge market] to grow it needs greater exposure, promotional support and a decent range of innovative new products, and people to build and showcase great quality N gauge layouts."

 

G

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

As far as the quality of models go, I'm very satisfied with the detail level we are at with rolling stock, In particular, Farish coaches (and some of Dapol's for that matter, their Gresley coaches still look very good) and Revolution's wagons.  as far as locomotives go, again I can't say I see a need for much more detail.  Dapol's 68, 50 and Farish's 40, for instance look fantastic.  How much more can we do?   Refinement of certain areas perhaps might be a good avenue to go down (more use of etches for grills and bogie sides for instance). 

Indeed, the first thing I recalled when handling an M7 in OO against my N gauge models was how easy it was to knock bits of - side step went within a week.

 

N gauge has always remained that bit easier to handle despite increases in added on bits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
27 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Indeed, the first thing I recalled when handling an M7 in OO against my N gauge models was how easy it was to knock bits of - side step went within a week.

 

N gauge has always remained that bit easier to handle despite increases in added on bits.

The old M7 mechanism is exactly the kind of thing that gives N Gauge a bad name.  It has two speeds. Stop and Gone.  I exaggerate, of course, but it's not that far from the truth and it's impossible to decelerate to a stop in anything approaching a prototypical manner.

 

That said, I understand Dapol are retooling and updating the mechanism.

 

Best


Scott

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

The old M7 mechanism is exactly the kind of thing that gives N Gauge a bad name.  It has two speeds. Stop and Gone.  I exaggerate, of course, but it's not that far from the truth and it's impossible to decelerate to a stop in anything approaching a prototypical manner.

 

That said, I understand Dapol are retooling and updating the mechanism.

 

Best


Scott

Yes it is a bit of a Lima throwback isn't it though my N gauge one ended up being quite smooth if I gave it a good run in, it's the 14xx mechanism in a slightly bigger body.  So there is also hope that perhaps the 14xx may also see a makeover if they do a good job on the M7.  The 45xx has to also be up there for a re-run with a new chassis.

 

I must get my Dapol M7 out soon and see how sensitive it is hauling a couple of Bulleids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
48 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

Personally, things like lights and sound have less appeal, so I'd rather the investment went into the mechanisms.  Whilst I completely see where Nick is coming from, in terms of his layout and his use of his models, I still think that good low speed movement and control is a must.  I have a couple of Rapido's GMD-1s and you can watch them creep at speed step 1 (of 128), and very smoothly at that.  This is useful not just for shunting but for more general acceleration and deceleration on approach to stations, signals, sidings, etc. , coupling up to stock more authentically and operating the railway as the real one is. 

To be clear I do value slow speed running, definitely, what I was refuting was Fezza's assertion that we "need" reviews to somehow quantify this, whether it's a scale minimum perceptible speed or something. That won't make a jot of difference to me. I don't feel the scale needs that at all. Others may find it useful, but would it really change anything?

 

Lights are definitely a nice to have, I think they're better on modern (as in era 9+) models, as they can often be too cold and bright for early prototypes. I don't like over bright interior lighting, and consider cab lights a gimick, but I accept that a lot of people want them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, njee20 said:

To be clear I do value slow speed running, definitely, what I was refuting was Fezza's assertion that we "need" reviews to somehow quantify this, whether it's a scale minimum perceptible speed or something. That won't make a jot of difference to me. I don't feel the scale needs that at all. Others may find it useful, but would it really change anything?

 

Lights are definitely a nice to have, I think they're better on modern (as in era 9+) models, as they can often be too cold and bright for early prototypes. I don't like over bright interior lighting, and consider cab lights a gimick, but I accept that a lot of people want them.

Apart from an illuminated headcode panel lights were not that visible iirc when I were a wee spotter in the 70s.

 

It's only since headlights came to be fitted that the locos became so very visible which followed on from the HSTs which had headlights from new given their greater speed potential on the mainline.

 

Internally easy to fit DCC sound is where I think most people would want N gauge to go along with product availability.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yes, that's my point, but you still get very bright lights on transition era models, where they're less prototypical.

 

Agree that sound compatibility would definitely be welcome. I think we will continue to see more of that. The newest Dapol 66s look to be an improvement on that front, having upgraded to a Next-18 PCB, and I reckon there's space for a speaker in there too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 minute ago, njee20 said:

To be clear I do value slow speed running, definitely, what I was refuting was Fezza's assertion that we "need" reviews to somehow quantify this, whether it's a scale minimum perceptible speed or something. That won't make a jot of difference to me. I don't feel the scale needs that at all. Others may find it useful, but would it really change anything?

 

Lights are definitely a nice to have, I think they're better on modern (as in era 9+) models, as they can often be too cold and bright for early prototypes. I don't like over bright interior lighting, and consider cab lights a gimick, but I accept that a lot of people want them.

 

Apologies, Nick, I thought you meant for a "watching trains trundle by" layout slow speed was not relevant, but I understand what you mean now, you're talking about quantifying the speed of the model. And I agree.

 

Best


Scott

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

it's nice to be back in the N gauge chat and now that B&Q have reopened near me I can consider buying some 'emergency fencing' in the form of some finished planks and posts that may have some excess left over to build the frame for under my new baseboards.

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

  • RMweb Gold
17 hours ago, grahame said:

I don't think detail is likely to disappear. After all it's what the market has demanded.


Where's there any evidence that "the market" has demanded more detail? Evidence would suggest it's what the manufacturers want—bigger margins—not the market, whatever that is (sounds like it means modellers, actually it's just meaningless ad-speak.)

 

The evidence suggests even in OO that extra detail is not demanded. Years ago, when the current Bachmann OO class 03 was introduced, one of the proprietors of a local model shop told me that it had sold very badly, particularly compared to the 2EPB. This in an area of the country (NE England) where 03s were common and 2EPBs not (except the South Tyneside ones—not covered by the Bachmann model). He put this down to the previous Bachmann (nee Mainline) model having been "good enough".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think how far you "need" more detail partly depend on what you are trying to model and the size of the layout.

 

When I was temporarily working abroad I built a small N gauge steam terminus and the rather crude detail on the 14XX  and the B set seemed rather too obvious.  I also found the Peco track very ugly (Easitrac wasn't available).

 

Since then I've been building a modest, but larger, model of the GCR mainline in the 1980s.  Here I am running 8 coach express and semi-fasts in a larger space and am far less worried about the detail of individual pieces of rolling stock (even though I am using some Mk2d coaches which are the older Farish of many years ago).  I am more concerned about consistency of train presentation and the overall look of the layout.

 

What is common to both is that I demand decent slow running. Anything that can't stays in its box or is traded for something that does.  Yes, maybe I am going too far in demanding that Railway Modeller does what Model Railroader does and actually measures starting and slow speed in reviews, but for me reliable slow running is important for realistic operation of all facets of the railway (looping stopping trains, setting back, shunting).  So now I am not quite so bothered about the accuracy of the curve on the lower bodyside of the Dapol 50s - I am just really pleased they run so well.  

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

  • RMweb Gold
30 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:


Where's there any evidence that "the market" has demanded more detail?

 

Surely if the market had been content with N Gauge as it was before Bachmann bought out Farish then we wouldn't have seen the improvements to detail that we have, nor would we have seen Dapol making an entrance with Bachmann subsequently shifting up a another gear and now RevolutioN facilitating the detailed models they are. If it hadn't demanded more detail, we'd still be running (I say that, nudging might be a better word!) stock around with solid wheels and cast metal bodies that are used to represent different types, the old Farish BoB/West Country/Merchant Navy for example, and surely no-one wants to go back to those days? N Gauge really would die on it's feet. 

 

We've probably reached peak detail levels in the scale now anyway, and so the focus appears to be shifting to providing better value for money via improvements to mechanisms, reliability and options like DCC Sound fitted versions and pre-installed speakers. Like @fezza above, slow speed performance is essential for me to the extent I'm squeezing in stay alive to everything where possible. I'd really like to see Bachmann incorporate that into future models to save me the hassle! 

 

Tom.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:


Where's there any evidence that "the market" has demanded more detail? Evidence would suggest it's what the manufacturers want—bigger margins—not the market, whatever that is (sounds like it means modellers, actually it's just meaningless ad-speak.

 

Speak with manufactuers and they'll no doubt tell you about focus groups and all the enthusiasts who talk to them at exhibitions asking for more detail. And at the trade/press events (I used attend) many retailers mentioned and provided feedback to manufacturers that their customers were asking for better and more accurate detail.

 

In fact more detail demands are documented in old NGSJs where things like wire handrails (rather than moulded), see through spoked wheels (instead of solid) and even etched grilles have been suggested and requested as improvements by members. 

 

I have certainly talked about more detail and improving models directly with Bachmann and their development engineers, and appreciate that is what they have provided. So it is not just what manufacturers want and have provided on their own volition (although it might be of benefit to them) but is what the market has collaborated in.

 

 

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

  • RMweb Gold
27 minutes ago, John M Upton said:

Despite all this there is one thing that needs saying about Farish, that all new Class 40 is quite simply a work of art!!!


Agreed.

 

I took four of the first batch and intending to take four of the second batch, whenever they appear. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scottystitch said:

Personally, things like lights and sound have less appeal, so I'd rather the investment went into the mechanisms.

 

Generally speaking, the younger the modeller the more they want light and sound - they have grown up with electronics and thus want them to be part of their hobby.  Given tooling will be expected to last say 10 years it would be foolish to omit what is going to be a growing part of the hobby.

 

2 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

Where's there any evidence that "the market" has demanded more detail? Evidence would suggest it's what the manufacturers want—bigger margins—not the market, whatever that is (sounds like it means modellers, actually it's just meaningless ad-speak.)

 

With the caveat that it is North American modelling, and in HO - ScaleTrains had a recent Facebook Live Q&A and the issue came up - they offer many of their models in a Rivet Counter (aka detailed) and Operator (less detail, more generic) choices.  The sales of those models are 85% Rivet Counter vs 15% Operator.  As the saying goes the market has spoken, and I really doubt the UK market is that much different.

 

2 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

The evidence suggests even in OO that extra detail is not demanded. Years ago, when the current Bachmann OO class 03 was introduced, one of the proprietors of a local model shop told me that it had sold very badly, particularly compared to the 2EPB. This in an area of the country (NE England) where 03s were common and 2EPBs not (except the South Tyneside ones—not covered by the Bachmann model). He put this down to the previous Bachmann (nee Mainline) model having been "good enough".

 

Or maybe there simply wasn't that much demand for an oddball like the class 03?  At least at that one particular retailer.

 

And commonality isn't relevant if people aren't making layouts that need that model...

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

16 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

 

With the caveat that it is North American modelling, and in HO - ScaleTrains had a recent Facebook Live Q&A and the issue came up - they offer many of their models in a Rivet Counter (aka detailed) and Operator (less detail, more generic) choices.  The sales of those models are 85% Rivet Counter vs 15% Operator.  As the saying goes the market has spoken, and I really doubt the UK market is that much different. 

 

Although I'm more of an operator I suspect the British aren't much different. It's also the case that good looks are easier to showcase in magazines and in marketing material than good operation. 

 

Also once you are used to detailed models it is hard to go back. 

 

As a Hoover fan I am sometimes tempted by Lima OO 50s at shows for just £40. But having bought a couple of sound fitted Hornby 50s for £200 each, the Lima stuff looks too crude today alongside the modern offerings. 

 

One day I might build an OO retro layout using Lima and Hornby stock from the 1990s. That might work as consistency of standards, even if they are low, is what is most important for overall effect. I always enjoy the Hornby tinplate layouts at exhibitions. They are crude but no one minds as they are great fun. Maybe we forget it is meant to be fun sometimes... 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

Hello all,

 

Revolution usually attends at least 5 shows each year, including The International N Gauge Show and the Warley National Model Railway Exhibition at the NEC.

 

Those we speak to are almost unanimous in welcoming the improvements in accuracy, fidelity and detail in N.

 

 

In the past I have heard enthusiasts (usually in larger scales) dismiss N gauge models as “cake decorations.”  Not any more.

 

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

  • Like 6
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ben A said:

 

 

In the past I have heard enthusiasts (usually in larger scales) dismiss N gauge models as “cake decorations.”  Not any more.

 

I know what you mean Ben but there were some fantastic proprietary-based N gauge layouts in the 1980s and 1990s before the latest innovations from manufactuters. If anyone dismisses layouts like Ronsthorpe and City Central then they are just revealing their own ignorance I'm afraid. 

 

Conversely I've seen modern layouts with highly detailed stock which no doubt please their owners. but operate nothing like a real railway and have no atmosphere. Detail on stock alone does not create greatness - especially if the rest of the layout has received little thought. In fact highly detailed stock can cruelty expose poorly made platforms and buildings due to a lack of overall consistency. 

 

Horses for courses I guess.?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, fezza said:

Horses for courses I guess.?

 

It definitely is. I mean, we are talking model railways where for most , the main focus is on the trains. So more highly detailed stock would be the preference for the majority. But then there are those that like a highly detailed scene, where the buildings also become as, if not more important to them. That might also include operational road vehicles too. Then there are others who would just prefer to operate a railway, and they might want operational signaling, but detail is less important. Some want sounds, others lights, and some both.

 

It's a broad church, and to produce two ranges of models (a la Hornby) would dilute the sales in N even further. So a range of detailed models where lights are included and sound an easy fit option, because it simplifies production, is the way to go.

 

Of course,  scale regardless, we all have to compromise, because there are very few who have the space to use scale curves, and most of us use out of true gauge track to boot.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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...