New Models - How Realistic are We Going to Get?

[Pacific231G]

3 hours ago, Denbridge said:

One Big improvement that none of the manufacturers have got right is the rods and valve gear on steam locomotives. It is always far too 'flat without any of the substance of the real thing.

For a while I had a Rivarossi "H0" model of a 231E (a French Pacific) It was a fairly old model and its large motor intruded into the cab but the valve gear somehow captured the sense of movement of the real thing, far better than on any other mass produced steam outline loco I've ever owned. Unfortunately it was, like Rivarossi's  other offerings for European prototypes at that time,  1:80 rather than 1:87 (a  scale that some manufacturers had tried to foist on H0 ) That did make it look a bit daft towering over my other rolling stock so it had to go (to a French enthusiast who gave me a very good price for it) but I have to admit that just watching the valve gear in motion made me very reluctant to part with it. I can't even be sure how close to scale the valve gear was but it felt real and for me that's more important than what a micrometer says.

 

I do have quite a lot of secondhand rolling stock that had clearly never or almost never been run. Second hand was a lot less expensive than buying it new.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Pacific231G

[pinzaboy]

The thing I would like to see, which still seems to confound manufacturers, is the proper printing of headcodes on diesel and electric locos using the correct font and spacing. Has anyone seen the latest offering from Heljan on their Hymeks? Horrendous.

Tim

[PaulRhB]

Fundamentally all the models will have some compromises because the manufacturers need to appeal to the whole market. It needs to be cheap enough for those who just want to run and be close enough that others can detail it up from there. Things like the flat rods are because they already struggle to fit in all the gear without it fouling and it has to be easy  and fast to assemble without the type of fettling  we might do on an etched kit. 

Railroad’s basic paint option was a good idea but it’s still another model in the range that you can be left with excess stock if one or the other is more popular. 

Personally I think the balance is about right, if you do require the ultimate model then you or a builder of your choice can spend that extra time / money on achieving it. What you see and what everyone else sees though still isn’t going to match up, they’ll still ask if that’s the Hornby one  

[PaulRhB]

36 minutes ago, pinzaboy said:

The thing I would like to see, which still seems to confound manufacturers, is the proper printing of headcodes on diesel and electric locos using the correct font and spacing. Has anyone seen the latest offering from Heljan on their Hymeks? Horrendous.

Tim

With their removable headcode panels it’s an easy fix though. Another place where many can’t see the difference, no doubt including Heljan. 

[Crisis Rail]

On 04/04/2019 at 14:02, woodenhead said:

Luckily flashing lights, opening doors and spinning fans are something for diesels and electrics.

 

Steam locos are much simpler - all we want is a real coal file, boiler plus a miniature driver and fireman.

 

Subject to the melting point of Plastic of course.

[brianusa]

After reading some of the responses to this topic, the biggest problem is that one wouldn't be able to see most of them!  OO with all its compromises can only take so much detail and as for it working..........................!

The alternative of course, is O gauge.  While it also can take only so much detail, at least you can see it better.

                                                       Brian.

[Sir TophamHatt]

20 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

A large part of this hobby has become about "acquisition".

 

This is it.

 

I'd even go as far as saying the majority of the models offered for sale on ebay are listed with words such as "only taken out to test model".

 

I can't believe so many people are changing their plans just after buying stock.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

42 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

...I'd even go as far as saying the majority of the models offered for sale on ebay are listed with words such as "only taken out to test model".

 

I can't believe so many people are changing their plans just after buying stock.

Plans, what plans?

Like the pretty new thing, buy the pretty new thing.

Bored of pretty not so new thing, sell the pretty not so new thing.

 

As Jol was - correctly in my opinion - highlighting, acquisition is the hobby for many currently purchasing model railway items locos. Insofar as this activity enables RTR manufacturers to stay in business, and provides opportunities to buy economically the models I want to operate, then I have no problem. I may feel that those doing this are missing out on so much this hobby potentially has to offer, but each to their own, it would be a very strange world if we were all alike, and so on.

[PaulRhB]

Collecting and reselling for other ‘must haves’ is another part of the hobby, be glad it pays for the more obscure types that wouldn’t be touched twenty years ago

It’s just as common with classic cars etc at least ours take up less space. I’ve got a few locos only bought because I like them, completely impractical for my layouts when they typically pulled trains longer than the layout so they only see use at friends or my Fathers! Occasionally the ones I’m less attached to are let go to finance something more useful that gets run regularly  I guess I’m a partial collector. 

[RobMG]

On ‎04‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 12:48, polybear said:

But how many of the latest offerings will still be running (or fixable) in 59 years....

 

I remember people asking the same question in the 1960's when Japanese cars and motorcycles started coming in to the country.   Well the answer to that one is 'A lot'  so I would say the same applies to high tech models.  Skills to repair them?  probably not. When I read these forums (not , I must add, this one) I am constantly dismayed at the lack of mechanical knowledge and terminology displayed.   That may have always been the case of course.  It's just more evident now , because of internet forums....

Edited April 24, 2019 by RobMG
Because I made a mistake

[jonny777]

On 04/04/2019 at 23:01, YesTor said:

 

 

 

Another obvious area for improvement generally would be improved glazing, the industry standard 'fishbowl effect' just doesn't cut it any more...

 

 

 

I think the "industry standard fishbowl effect" idea is simply not true any more.

 

Below are a couple of close-ups of my Bachmann inspection saloon, and I am impressed by the quality of the glazing. The standard is well above any flush glazing attempts that I have ever managed to achieve. Ok, it's not 100% perfect - but these macro shots can be very cruel at times, and this looks far better at a viewing distance of a couple of feet. 

 

The RTR technology is obviously there, but how many people are prepared to pay for it?

 

Personally, I would rather have half a dozen coaches to this standard than sidings full of older unrealistic offerings. 

 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

37 minutes ago, jonny777 said:

...I think the "industry standard fishbowl effect" idea is simply not true any more...

 

The RTR technology is obviously there, but how many people are prepared to pay for it?

Same perception: among the more recent introductions that I own there's a readily perceptible gain in glazing over earlier product. Likewise, far exceeds what I can achieve.

 

There's more good news in this, firstly that I can see this improvement over three RTR OO manufacturer's products (this sampling driven by their making subjects useful to my modelling) so the superior technique is 'out there' in general circulation. Secondly, I would think this technique is unlikely to cost significantly more than previous methods: so it isn't going to appreciably raise production costs; and it is quite possible that one of the frequent benefits of superior technique accrues, actually lower cost than the previous method(s) once the initial investment is recovered.

[Barry O]

There is a crossover point between "extra details " and "price". In some instances we have reached that. 

But if people are willing to pay even more (over and above any increases due to the £ to $ rate and potential import duty hikes) for additional niceties which may not be visible to the viewer.

Baz

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

15 hours ago, Barry O said:

There is a crossover point between "extra details " and "price". In some instances we have reached that. 

But if people are willing to pay even more (over and above any increases due to the £ to $ rate and potential import duty hikes) for additional niceties which may not be visible to the viewer...

I am content with 'the detail' on current models that have all the practical detail that current commercial technique can provide. (In fact I would take the saving on 'no cab interior detail' like a shot.) But this is not a factor in the decision of whether it is worth the money or not. That's to do with firstly:  is it an accurate model of a subject I need for the operation? and then; is it better than I can do for myself for the money?

 

All 'well detailed' models they may be, but Hornby's Brush type 2 and Heljan's Brush type 4, Hornby's Gresley gangwayed coaches, all failed at that first question, no purchases. (Such woefully inaccurate legacy items such as Bachmann's 'Midland' van and cattle wagon, and the shower of Dapol/Hornby 10' wb steel underframe 12T wooden bodied minerals don't even get as far as being considered.)

 

I baulk at decent models from ancient tooling still offered at full price, but fortunately there is good supply of s/h, and every now and again price reductions which bring them to the 'acceptable for the money' point. (Just a few in that category now, headed by Hornby's ex-Airfix GMR N2, and Bachmann's ancient BR mk1 non-corridor coaches.)

 

I would be willing to pay more for some 'invisible' niceties, heading the list well arranged sprung driven axles which do much to enhance pick up reliability. That's the kind of good feature that has been 'squeezed out' under pressure from price containment in my opinion for a market which is 'never mind the (mechanism) quality, feel the width (applied detail)' oriented. But I can arrange that, and other pick up enhancements for myself.

[Traintresta]

I like my car to have four wheels and go. Aircon and Bluetooth might be nice but I hate paying for gadgetry and I’m certainly not going to lose any sleep over it. 

[jonny777]

6 minutes ago, Traintresta said:

I like my car to have four wheels and go. Aircon and Bluetooth might be nice but I hate paying for gadgetry and I’m certainly not going to lose any sleep over it. 

 

Agreed, but when I posted on another thread that I drove a Dacia - I was inundated with "funny" responses. 

 

Is that snobbishness? And does it continue into modelling detail preferences?

 

 

[The Johnster]

Having once owned a Yugo, which worked perfectly well and reliably and did what it said on the tin, I can sympathise.   

 

I like my RTR models to be to scale dimensions, but model in 00 in which not even the track is the right gauge, and to have detail correctly represented where I can see it; empty cabs are not for me!  By and large, modern RTR meets this spec and is way better than anything I can do (not that this prevents me detailing and improving it where I can). 

 

But I have models on my layout that are nowhere near up to my own standards, such as a Hornby 2721, which is worked up a bit but fundamentally out of scale, A28/30 auto trailers with overthick sides that can’t make up their minds what diagram they are, and a K’s A 31 trailer  with no floor as supplied, currently being worked up, which would look crude on a 1950s train set; ditto a K’s E116 B set coach only marginally better, so cannot claim any high ground in this discussion. 

 

My approach is only consistent in it’s inconsistency.  10’ wheelbase Hornby/Dapol minerals are banned, as are any wagons with moulded handbrake levers, but I use tension lock couplers and Peco code 100 track (though long term plan is to relay with chaired code 75).   I pull out perfectly scale lamp irons and replace them with Rexel no.13 staples so that I can mount Modelu or Springside lamps.  One of my locos has no cab detail and a fireman blocking the view on one side to hide it. 

 

I rather enjoy what I think of as ‘old fashioned’ modelling which some would probably consider pointless. such as the A31 and E116 projects. What I’m basically doing is making crude 1950s stuff acceptable at a push to a late 1960’s middling standard, much like the sort of thing I was doing in my teens, and having fun.  Both these coaches are headed for landfill if better RTR alternatives ever become available, though. 

 

I have to model within the limits of my ability, which is pretty limited!  

[woodenhead]

26 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Having once owned a Yugo, which worked perfectly well and reliably and did what it said on the tin, I can sympathise.   

 

 

Wow, someone else who had one!!

 

So that makes three people, ours eventually had a special drivers seat that reclined........whenever you put your weight against it.

[The Johnster]

Good lord, you mean you got yours to accelerate hard enough for that to happen!

 

Cheap ‘n cheerful, and still better than a Lada...

[Captain Kernow]

All this new RTR stuff is fine and dandy. Lots of lovely new locos, including industrial types and other cute little tank engines, some of which are more accurate depictions than others, possibly depending on manufacturer (but not necessarily), different liveries, painted and printed so superbly that even the most experienced professional model painter would be hard put to match these days. 

 

Lots of intricate, delicate detail, which may or may not accidentally get broken due to inadvertently clumsy handling (done it myself).

 

All in all, we've never had it so good, for sheer variety, quality of appearance and finish, value for money and ease of purchase.

 

But why, WHY is it so difficult for so many of these manufacturers to produce a locomotive that will run smoothly, consistently and reliably out of the box?

 

I know it can be done, I've bought some examples that do run superbly, straight out of the box. The Dapol B4 being one of the most recent purchases I've made.

 

But look at this - here are some nice-looking locos, with levels of detail and accuracy that we could only dream about when I was younger, that just don't run smoothly in a consistent way for me (no order of preference, just as they come into my head). Obviously this applies only to the examples that I have purchased:

 

- new Hornby Terrier

- Hornby W4 Peckett 'Lilleshall'

- Hornby Huntley & Palmers Peckett

- Bachmann 4F

- Heljan Hymek

- Heljan Class 33

- Hattons/DMJ 14XX - AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGG!

- Hattons 'Katie' Andrew Barclay

- Bachmann BR Standard Class 3 2-6-2T

- Bachmann 64XX (OK, this one did improve a bit with some extensive running in)

- Hornby L&Y 'Pug'

 

I don't have large layouts. I build small layouts, on which I indulge in lots of shunting, which requires excellent slow-speed control and consistency. If you apply power, you need the confidence that the locomotive will move in a smooth and acceptable manner and not jerk or stutter around.

 

Am I just  unlucky?

 

Sorry for 'shouting' in this posting, but really, I'm still very annoyed with the loco at the top of the list. None of the locos I've listed run sufficiently badly enough to warrant returning them to the retailer and I accept that I am very fussy in this regard.

 

There seems to be a quality control issue here, certainly a 'consistency' issue, as I know of people who have the same locos I've listed, which run sweetly and smoothly. Loco mechanisms, like everything else, are produced 'to a price'.

 

Again, sorry to rant. But I personally would be more than happy to pay more, if I knew that I could rely on a product to run just the way I want it to. Otherwise it's just another case of dismantling the loco, fettling the chassis or, worse still, building a completely new chassis, which I have now done to two of the locos in that list, and that's just for the OO ones (obviously, if I'm going to convert any of them to P4, I completely accept that I have to sort the chassis out).

 

 

 

[davknigh]

I have to agree with the Captain.  At the end of the day I’m prepared to sacrifice some detail for reliability and a decent motor which is why I bought the Ruston DS48 kit rather than waiting for the Hornby model and am waiting for replacement chassis for my two Pecketts because I know a HighLevel gearbox with a Mashima motor will out perform an out of the box model. Sure, there will be exceptions but at least with the kit I have control rather than waiting for a model to shuttle back and forth across the Atlantic. Well, that and the fact that most manufacturers frown on P4 conversions when it comes to warrantees.

 

Cheers,

 

David

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Surprised at the two Heljan BoBo types in the list. Large five pole motors, flywheels, plenty of weight, reliable pick up; these are models tending toward 'the right stuff'. The only problem with these in my experience is a frequent overload of a very viscous grease in the gear train, but this does not lead to any lack of smoothness.

 

I too would like a five pole skew wound motor as the minimum spec, and would be happy to be charged for that. But with the large majority of locos never operated, I feel we lose out to the dominant interest group for whom appearances are all, operating performance not of any great interest.

[ROSSPOP]

3 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

 

 

Am I just  unlucky?

 

 

 

 

No Sir Captain

Your just in the wrong scale.........

 

`ere b` a Dapol 7mm....yes Dapol.. straight out of the box on the day it arrived..... the quietest , smoothest, RTR chassis I`ve ever purchased in any scale...and all for less than £200.......  and a bucket load of detail......

 

 

Cheers

johnny Rosspop      

[Captain Kernow]

14 minutes ago, ROSSPOP said:

 

Your just in the wrong scale.........

 

`ere b` a Dapol 7mm....      

Well, Jonny Rosspop, I do be in the right scale, 'cos i's also got some 7mm stuff, including one of them right nice panniers, only wot mine's from Minerva, see, well me smaller pannier's from Dapol any road.

 

[Captain Kernow]

56 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Surprised at the two Heljan BoBo types in the list.

Cogging motors, only apparent when running very slowly. Not all my Heljan diesels exhibit this, fortunately.