Model Reviews

[LNWR18901910]

I've seen people review model railways and model railway rolling stock. Shall I give it a go?

[Ian Simpson]

I'd say yes! Your own experiences of a model will usually be very useful to others. I occasionally review obscure models that match my own minority interests, and I'm always amazed at the kind comments I get from members who have read them. 

[LNWR18901910]

Of course. I've seen several reviewers that use comedy elements in their reviews so I should do the same.

[LNWR18901910]

https://strawpoll.com/b1a7hsh7

I have made a poll to help me decide - choose carefully and PM me your choice.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

There's one new introduction in your list, which makes it easily the most useful subject in which to invest the effort.

 

Have as much comedy as you choose in the review.

 

But if you want it to be useful, then first define your reviewing standards and methods.

 

If you don't know how, or care enough to do this, then it is automatically a comedy review.

[Steamport Southport]

If you are going to review models then make sure you do some research of the real thing beforehand.

 

The most off putting thing I find with most online reviews and especially YouTube reviews is the reviewer hasn't got a clue about the thing the model is supposed to be of. Not even the basics.

 

 

 

Jason

[Legend]

59 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

If you are going to review models then make sure you do some research of the real thing beforehand.

 

The most off putting thing I find with most online reviews and especially YouTube reviews is the reviewer hasn't got a clue about the thing the model is supposed to be of. Not even the basics.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Not so bothered if the reviewer doesn't have the history to hand . For me one of the main things from YouTube is seeing how the loco runs and usually the reviewers first impressions.  Actually I quite often skate over the prototype information in mag reviews too. I don't profess to being an expert but I usually know enough about the main classes to form an opinion myself .  Sams Trains tends to tell it as it is , which I like . He also reviews older models .  There are others eg New Junction that did a piece on all 9 new Hornby 66s .

Edited April 9, 2019 by Legend

[Steamport Southport]

2 hours ago, Legend said:

 

Not so bothered if the reviewer doesn't have the history to hand . For me one of the main things from YouTube is seeing how the loco runs and usually the reviewers first impressions.  Actually I quite often skate over the prototype information in mag reviews too. I don't profess to being an expert but I usually know enough about the main classes to form an opinion myself .  Sams Trains tends to tell it as it is , which I like . He also reviews older models .  There are others eg New Junction that did a piece on all 9 new Hornby 66s .

 

It's not the history that I'm worried about. It's simple things like even knowing what it is that stumps most of them.

 

Quite a few struggled with the Dynamometer Car. I saw a few that didn't even mention the lights as they hadn't worked out the piece of plastic you get switches the lights on... 

 

There was also videos of the Stirling Single where they hadn't put the fallplate down and so hadn't noticed it has firebox glow.

 

Great telling people that something is brilliant when they don't know whether it's accurate or even painted the correct colour. Or even how to use it properly.

 

 

Jason

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

15 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

... It's simple things like even knowing what it is that stumps most of them.

...telling people that something is brilliant when they don't know whether it's accurate or even painted the correct colour. Or even how to use it properly...

This is what I was driving at with:

 

On ‎06‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 14:45, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

... if you want it to be useful, then first define your reviewing standards and methods.

 

If you don't know how, or care enough to do this, then it is automatically a comedy review.

Most reviews are simply a joke, because the reviewer provides no information about how the item is evaluated and to what standard. (Upside, video reviews do sometimes greatly exceed the usefulness of those in print form by showing the item running.)

A critical review outline would start from something like this.

Appearance. Compared to prototype, either the physical object or such photographs as are available of prototypes no longer extant or available for direct comparison. Does the model adequately represent the prototype from all normal viewing positions? And this is yes or no. If it is 'no' then it isn't a model, stop review, not worthwhile. (There are supposedly 'good' models on sale that by this criterion simply are not models.)

Dimensions. Does the model conform to a defined set of prototype dimensions? Show all deviations, with assessment of impact on appearance. (Reviewer to define how gauge:scale error is handled, choice ranging from 'ignored' to 'fixed demerit' in the rating scheme.)

And so on, with sections for Body construction evaluation, Detail and paint application, Mechanism design and construction, Mechanism performance, as the reviewer chooses. The important aspect is that they are defined for assessment

 

I do this stuff for my own amusement, with a normalised rating scheme. The best OO models I have had to evaluate run between 0.6 to 0.7 (or 60 to 70% which most people find more comprehensible). The running average for current releases is in the  45% to 55% zone , so the better models stand out from the general run, and there is clear headroom for further improvement by elimination of common defects: none of the all too common 'everything gets a 90%+ rating'.

[Silly Moo]

I’m amused by the amount of time spent reviewing the box and packaging in quite a few YouTube reviews and usually zoom straight past that bit. 

[Catkins]

Having seen your poll, I would suggest that you go for a "comparison review" of products where two (or more) manufacturers have produced something. And I would also be interested in a brief review of the box and packaging that should protect the model in transit.