Dapol 56 Dapol Class 56 - Photo Review

[richierich]

I saw it too.

[Robert Shrives]

Hi gang,

Hattons advised just now of the arrival of the Uk class 56  in construction livery along with some more coaches! Great timing in time for Christmas. Just hope livery is right after earlier discussions- the delay does suggest a time for correction, hopefully spare bodies as well to come...

Robert

[Steadfast]

Morning all,

From the photos on Hattons the livery application of the triple grey looks ok, they greys look better than previously and the black lines up with the bottom of the grey. It looks like they've managed this by putting extra black under the cab side windows to mask their under-size appearance.

Unfortunately it looks like the tooling is just a Romanian bodyshell with new lights and horn grill. The early style cab side windows (with a rubber grommet around the front non opening part) have been retained, though the black of the livery on 56056 helps disguise this. It's the front end that really disappoints me though, I was hoping what I thought I could see was due to low resolution images taken through glass and a small image in magazine adverts. Sadly not.

The top of the yellow panel should be a dead straight line, due to the cab being fabricated from sheet steel, whereas the earlier cast cabs have a curve to this line, following the bottom of the windscreens. It completely changes the face of the loco. These two pictures show what a fabricated cab should look like

Please excuse the crudeness of the Photoshop work, but this illustrates effectively what the Dapol model has in terms of features from various builds.

On the left is a Romanian cab with added lights and horn grill from a British built, fabricated cab loco, on the right is the original picture I worked from.

I'm in two minds now whether to cancel my Colas pre order. Over £100 is a lot of money to take a file to the front end of to get it looking right. And that's before even considering the cab roof dome. I may sound fussy by saying this, but cabs apart, the 56 is a great model - particularly the underframe which is packed with detail, it's such a shame, in my opinion anyway, for the 'face' of the model to let it down.

For comparison, here's the Hatton's images I was using http://www.ehattons.com/62439/Dapol_2D_004_008_Class_56_diesel_56056_in_Construction_livery_Doncaster_built_/StockDetail.aspx

And the real 56056 http://www.hondawanderer.com/56056_56103_Croome_2002.htm

 

jo

[Revolution Mike]

I don't think you are being fussy at all - seems like a bit of a mess (and the cab dome is still the wrong shape).

 

Cheers, Mike

[Carl. H.]

Morning all,

From the photos on Hattons the livery application of the triple grey looks ok, they greys look better than previously and the black lines up with the bottom of the grey. It looks like they've managed this by putting extra black under the cab side windows to mask their under-size appearance.

Unfortunately it looks like the tooling is just a Romanian bodyshell with new lights and horn grill. The early style cab side windows (with a rubber grommet around the front non opening part) have been retained, though the black of the livery on 56056 helps disguise this. It's the front end that really disappoints me though, I was hoping what I thought I could see was due to low resolution images taken through glass and a small image in magazine adverts. Sadly not.

The top of the yellow panel should be a dead straight line, due to the cab being fabricated from sheet steel, whereas the earlier cast cabs have a curve to this line, following the bottom of the windscreens. It completely changes the face of the loco. These two pictures show what a fabricated cab should look like

IMG_6739-56105-6Z56.jpg

IMG_6701-56311-6Z48.jpg

Please excuse the crudeness of the Photoshop work, but this illustrates effectively what the Dapol model has in terms of features from various builds.

IMG_7610dapolgridfront.jpg

On the left is a Romanian cab with added lights and horn grill from a British built, fabricated cab loco, on the right is the original picture I worked from.

I'm in two minds now whether to cancel my Colas pre order. Over £100 is a lot of money to take a file to the front end of to get it looking right. And that's before even considering the cab roof dome. I may sound fussy by saying this, but cabs apart, the 56 is a great model - particularly the underframe which is packed with detail, it's such a shame, in my opinion anyway, for the 'face' of the model to let it down.

For comparison, here's the Hatton's images I was using http://www.ehattons.com/62439/Dapol_2D_004_008_Class_56_diesel_56056_in_Construction_livery_Doncaster_built_/StockDetail.aspx

And the real 56056 http://www.hondawanderer.com/56056_56103_Croome_2002.htm

 

jo

You are absolutely right. I noticed at the time of the pre production models were shown but felt if I flagged it up at the time, I'd be met with cries of "its' ok from 6 foot away." and the like  Looks like the 56 has been a victim of cost cutting and if costs for tooling were an issue why not do the most numerous version of the class - and do it properly. Having said that, I've heard people say they'd be happy for Dapol's proposed 59 to be a 66 in appropriate liveries ! So perhaps Dapol know what they're doing and the market they're aiming for.

 

If only every N gauge loco Dapol did was as good as the 22. Such a shame. If only we were flies on the wall's of Colin Allbright's or David Jones' office right now....

 

Carl

[njee20]

Even having read your post and looked at the photos of the real thing I'm struggling to spot the difference in the nose profile. I'm perfectly happy with them changing the grille and horns on the Romanian built body. Sure that makes me a complete heathen. I'd buy a Hanson liveried '66' painted as a 59 too, even more so if they did appropriate wagons.

[Steadfast]

Thanks for the comments and agreement guys, I was half expecting to get in from work to a list of 'it's ok from 6 feet' and 'it's better than the Farish one'!

Personally I'm hoping I'll be able to pick some up cheap in the future to do some heavy work to the front ends and respray into DCR and Colas colours. Failing that, I'll just remain grid less.

It'll be interesting to see the reviews of these Doncaster 56s in the magazines.

As for the 59, I really hope it's more like the Western and 22 than the 56, FEA and 153. I've lost count of the times I've been asked isn't a 59 just a more powerful 66! I'd like a small fleet of maybe five 59s for a layout plan I have, so here's hoping it is a winner

 

jo

[Steadfast]

Njee20, thanks for your reply. I think its one of those things where once you know something is there, it's more noticeable in its absence. The cast cabs (Romanian and early Brit) are lot rounder and softer looking than the angular later cabs.

I guess whether it matters or not is down to the individual, as I said before these are just my thoughts on the aesthetics on the model, and I think the most disappointing thing for me is the so near, yet so far aspect of the model.

 

jo

[njee20]

I can appreciate why folk want it to be absolutely perfect, I'm just not one of those folk, 99% of the way there will be fine for me! I suspect I'm not in a minority there, which is perhaps a driver. I'd rather they got things like the livery application right, as that does annoy me far far more than subtle variations between models. Damned if they do and damned if they don't I guess, like so many of these things.

[Carl. H.]

Even having read your post and looked at the photos of the real thing I'm struggling to spot the difference in the nose profile. I'm perfectly happy with them changing the grille and horns on the Romanian built body. Sure that makes me a complete heathen. I'd buy a Hanson liveried '66' painted as a 59 too, even more so if they did appropriate wagons.

If you look at early 56's which have had replacement cabs you'll notice the difference. The power of the 56's published by OPC is a good starting point;- lots of good side and front shots. I wouldn't say you're a heathen, I think its just a shame you'd be happy to settle for that and pay in excess of £100 RRP!  If it was £50 RRP pitched like a Hornby "railroad" range model, then maybe. But then again I don't run Dapol.

 

Way, way, off topic, it raises an interesting question. I've detailed N gauge rolling stock and exhibited a layout in the past, partly for my own satisfaction, to entertain modellers and public alike, but also to demonstrate it's possible to create realism and atmosphere in N. I'm beginning to think the latter is somewhat academic. Is it a wasted effort?  Particularly when I see more poor N layouts than good to be blunt.

 

It's made me think about the next modelling project.

 

Carl

[Revolution Mike]

I can appreciate why folk want it to be absolutely perfect, I'm just not one of those folk, 99% of the way there will be fine for me! I suspect I'm not in a minority there, which is perhaps a driver. I'd rather they got things like the livery application right, as that does annoy me far far more than subtle variations between models. Damned if they do and damned if they don't I guess, like so many of these things.

 

The problem is that it isn't really even 99%! The cab roof dome is wrong (though better than the Farish effort) and then all the detail errors start to mount up - prime example look at the cab side windows for 056 (they are the wrong type!).

 

The really frustrating thing is that manufacturers go to substantial lengths to create adaptable tooling (as Dapol have done for the 56) and then don't look properly at photos of the real thing and end up mixing and matching the details incorrectly.  Dapol could have done a construction Romanian 56 eg 56001!

 

Cheers, Mike

Edited December 7, 2013 by red death

[oreamnos]

I can appreciate why folk want it to be absolutely perfect, I'm just not one of those folk, 99% of the way there will be fine for me! I suspect I'm not in a minority there, which is perhaps a driver. I'd rather they got things like the livery application right, as that does annoy me far far more than subtle variations between models. Damned if they do and damned if they don't I guess, like so many of these things.

 

I don't think you are in the minority at all.  "Close" is good enough for me and many others and I don't care if this attitude of the majority doesn't encourage the manufacturers to make even more realistic models.  I model because it's fun for me to do and while I would like my modelling to be of a standard to appear in RM or MR it's not going to be and I don't lose sleep over this.  Different people have different levels of what is good enough in models and in layouts.  If they want to turn making layouts into a pissing contest they are welcome to and I will admire their efforts that result.  But having fun, not striving for realism, is why I'm in this hobby (along with many others) and that doesn't make me any less of a railway modeller than those who do.

 

Matt

[njee20]

but also to demonstrate it's possible to create realism and atmosphere in N. I'm beginning to think the latter is somewhat academic. Is it a wasted effort? Particularly when I see more poor N layouts than good to be blunt.

I think elitist attitudes like that are a real shame, and far more damaging to the hobby than incorrectly profiles noses! Whilst I was being slightly facetious about not being able to see the differences I really couldn't tell if they're not pointed out. Hence why I'm happy to pay.

 

I'd never post my work on here for fear of it not meeting the exacting standards certain people (and Carl I'm not singling you out) choose to judge everything by. Enough people get put off and it's fairly irrelevant whether the nose is correct for each sub class of whatever you won't have a manufacturer making them at all! You want to encourage people to the hobby so it prospers? Telling people their layouts are unrealistic and poor won't do that.

 

But anyway... We digress. I'll happily have a Colas 56 and enjoy it in my naïvety of the detail inaccuracies.

Edited December 8, 2013 by njee20

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

 

I think I am going to reserve judgement until I can actually see the model.  It may be that they haven't quite done justice to the flat "shelf" below the windscreens on the later versions, but it's hard to tell from the photographs, especially with the black window surrounds.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[mercig studios]

I think elitist attitudes like that are a real shame, and far more damaging to the hobby than incorrectly profiles noses! Whilst I was being slightly facetious about not being able to see the differences I really couldn't tell if they're not pointed out. Hence why I'm happy to pay.

 

I'd never post my work on here for fear of it not meeting the exacting standards certain people (and Carl I'm not singling you out) choose to judge everything by. Enough people get put off and it's fairly irrelevant whether the nose is correct for each sub class of whatever you won't have a manufacturer making them at all! You want to encourage people to the hobby so it prospers? Telling people their layouts are unrealistic and poor won't do that.

 

But anyway... We digress. I'll happily have a Colas 56 and enjoy it in my naïvety of the detail inaccuracies.

Hi Njee

 

I think 'elitist' is a bit strong and I would say it was more a sense of frustration that Dapol have chosen to do two types with neither being correct. They could have done just the Doncaster version and produced the perfect model and then everybody would have been happy but instead we have a hotch potch model that suits no period or prototype.  

 

Most things can be modified and altered but the one area that is very hard to do is the cab side windows which are incredibly difficult to do in a way that blends seamlessly.....in fact it would be allot easier to have modified Doncaster windows to Romanian.

 

M 

[Revolution Mike]

I think elitist attitudes like that are a real shame, and far more damaging to the hobby than incorrectly profiles noses! Whilst I was being slightly facetious about not being able to see the differences I really couldn't tell if they're not pointed out. Hence why I'm happy to pay.

 

I'd never post my work on here for fear of it not meeting the exacting standards certain people (and Carl I'm not singling you out) choose to judge everything by. Enough people get put off and it's fairly irrelevant whether the nose is correct for each sub class of whatever you won't have a manufacturer making them at all! You want to encourage people to the hobby so it prospers? Telling people their layouts are unrealistic and poor won't do that.

 

But anyway... We digress. I'll happily have a Colas 56 and enjoy it in my naïvety of the detail inaccuracies.

 

Njee

 

There is nothing elitist about saying whether something is correct or incorrect (that is down to observation).

 

I agree with you that (unless asked for honest feedback) I would never dream of telling someone their work is poor, but equally the flip side of that is people have to be honest (I know my modelling is rubbish!).

 

I can understand Carl's frustration if you go to a reasonable degree of effort to make things more realistic - it is as disheartening to be called an elitist rivet-counter (with the intent being that it is somehow unnecessary to get details correct) as it is  to be told your work is poor or unrealistic. 

 

As Matt points out, we all find different enjoyment in all the various aspects of the hobby and long may that continue, but we shouldn't let manufacturers off the hook when we are handing over our hard-earned cash for products which could have been better.

 

Cheers, Mike

[Steadfast]

Evening everyone,

Elitist? Naive? Fear of not meeting standards? Why should any modeller feel as though any of these terms apply to themselves or others that are looking down on them? Surely this is a creative hobby that we all do for enjoyment? That's the thing I love about RMweb, modellers of all tastes and disciplines can share, inspire and help each other. Most days I visit I pick up a new technique, material to use or historical fact.

 

The whole point of my posting wasn't to start some kind of gentry vs the working classes class war, but to see if anyone else agreed that for the price point the model was below par. Simply, my opinion. If from the outset Dapol had said they're doing one common body, most liveries will thus have some form of compromise, then fair enough, that's life and money talks. But to be told it's an accurate model when actually it's a bodge between two costing over £100 really grates on me. There are compromises across a whole range of models, still it hasn't stopped people buying them. By no means am I saying any individual should produce museum standard models. If someone is happy to run Thomas the tank on a rake of Freightliner coal hoppers, who am I to argue. At the end of the day, the old adage of "it's my train set" is true to this day.

 

What I would like, is for the manufacturers to produce RTR models that are fundamentally the correct shape. We've seen it in 4mm where gimmicks and play value have been deemed more important than a correctly shaped model. Moulded handrails not wire? No LED lights? No etched fan grill? Fine by me, so long as the model is the right shape! If I or anyone else wants to add these refinements, they're not too hard to add. However correcting a more fundamental shape or detail flaw?...

 

Way, way, off topic, it raises an interesting question. I've detailed N gauge rolling stock and exhibited a layout in the past, partly for my own satisfaction, to entertain modellers and public alike, but also to demonstrate it's possible to create realism and atmosphere in N. I'm beginning to think the latter is somewhat academic. Is it a wasted effort?  Particularly when I see more poor N layouts than good to be blunt.

 

It's made me think about the next modelling project.

 

Carl

For what it's worth Carl I'd say stick with it. As I've said, why worry what others think, model what suits you and most of all pleases you. To contradict myself now (lol!) I would be interested to see where you go with the next project

 

jo

[njee20]

I think 'elitist' is a bit strong and I would say it was more a sense of frustration that Dapol have chosen to do two types with neither being correct. They could have done just the Doncaster version and produced the perfect model and then everybody would have been happy but instead we have a hotch potch model that suits no period or prototype.

Sorry, my comments were related to the part of the post I quoted - ie that Carl is questioning the value of carrying on his own modelling because he thinks more n gauge layouts are poor than good. It's like David Beckham saying he's quitting football because the kids he sees having a kick about in the park aren't good enough. If anything I'd be encouraged if I thought others efforts were inferior.

 

I agree that wanting 100% accurate locos isn't elitist in any way, I haven't said so, and have no issues with those who do.

[Rods_of_Revolution]

Dapol are on to a winner, because the reality is that their product looks better than the previous Farish one. They effectively have the N scale Class 56 monopoly, so 95% of people who want a grid will buy the Dapol one because it's effectively the only option. When that's the case, you can afford to be lax with regards to how prototypically correct it is, so long as it is sufficiently better than the previous offering, it will sell; the money saved on research, CAD time and Tooling ultimately translates to a better profit margin. Having recently worked for a small firm (not model railways) where I was often party to such discussions, that's all too frequently the attitude that comes across, but from a business perspective it works. At the end of the day it supports Dapol as a firm and keeps them in business to create gems like the Class 22.

 

With regards to the roof shape, the cab types and strange choices of prototypes for the tooling, I agree with what has been said above by Mike, Jo and others.

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

[bridgiesimon]

Time to upset everybody, although it looks rubbish, I still keep and run my Grafar Loadhaul class 56 because it is one of the most powerful models available!!

 

Yes guys I am ducking hehehe.

 

Seriously though, I agree with many comments on here, when companies such as Bachmann and Dapol are spending so much time researching it is a shame when the howlers appear for want of a few minutes looking at piccies or choosing an alternative number. I still like the Dapol class 56 and have a couple as well as planning to acquire the Colas one when available. If I could get a Dapol class 56 in Loadhaul at a sensible price then I would maybe swap mine but for now, I am happy. I think that there is a balance between getting as high a standard as possible and recognising your modelling limits and the constraints of time,a balance that is very different for each of us. If I did not have to work etc then i could spend more time getting my models to a higher standard than I can with the time I have to dedicate at the moment. As previously mentioned, the strength of tis hobby is that it encompasses all from the total beninner to individuals modelling to a very professional standard and long may it do so!!

 

 

 

best wishes and MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!

Simon

[Crepello]

I'm sure Dave wouldn't have allowed any really unacceptable details to go through on the Doncaster version--he's a modeller too. I think most people will be satisfied with it. In my view we're jolly lucky to have the choice of both versions. Can't wait for the blue one!

[jbqfc]

I don't mind the cab front as this can not be seen from normal viewing distance

but the use of the later modified cant rail grills on all locos is annoying as this is very noticeable

the livery on 56056 is one of the best I have seen from Dapol apart from the missing cast BR arrow

I don't think we will ever get a 100% right loco

john

[jbqfc]

just got 56070 in blue and the number is on the wrong end on one side how do you get something so simple wrong

[Wayne 56089]

just got 56070 in blue and the number is on the wrong end on one side how do you get something so simple wrong

Or use the wrong typeface on 56089!! P*sspoor to be honest

[Robert Shrives]

Hi My blue 56 arrived today , well about to go under alteration , pop off grills add Taylor first batch grills - finer than Dapols and renumber as 56004 with rebuilt cabs job done with altered grills as well. I can see a load of DCR engines as well off these models!

Runs well on test as did the EW&R model.

Hopefully large logo and Colas models make the mark.

Robert