RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted June 10, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 10, 2015 I really am a bit flummoxed by this post. What exactly are you criticising Ian? The criticism on this thread was towards a review video. You've intimated that owning the model is the only way to review it. Which basically describes the video in question. In fact we should be encouraging more review videos like the one in question because it was: 1) honest 2) fair 3) informative and 4) detailed. It was 27 minutes long and he covered almost everyone bar taking the body shell off to look at the chassis. It wasn't aimed at a specific audience, it wasn't attacking anyone or unduly criticising the manufacturer and spouting diatribe. It was a video made by a young man, who is passionate about model trains, talking about one he'd bought, and how he wanted to share his experience with other like minded people on social media. He was polite, he was apologetic where he didn't know something or where he had a criticism, and it was - as far as I can see by own yardstick of how I'd like someone to criticise products I make (model railway and children's books) - absolutely fair and balanced. Now, if you're saying I can't or I'm not allowed to form an opinion on DJmodels' products because I don't currently own any, then you're very much mistaken. I intend to form my view based on that I read and observe of other's experiences and whatever I can muster myself. A spade is a spade - if something is wrong, it is wrong, and it does not matter who's saying it or what intent is behind it - a salient point is a salient point, and that is something Mr Simpson did very well I feel in his review. I will get off my soap box In reply,Simon ( and here's me thinking that you no longer had the inclination to post on the forum...at least that's the impression you gave last time we "met",is it not ?),my position has nothing whatsoever to do with the anonymous young man in question but rather with the attitude of some members of the forum to what he says.I couldn't give two hoots for what he put up on the tube but a meal has been made of it here,for sure. And yes,if you really want a balanced assessment of a model,the proper way of so doing is to get your hands on one....which you yourself recently did in reviewing Locomotion's C 1 elsewhere. Returning to the little Kernow model,this has now been in the market for quite some time and many of us here have run them with pleasure and satisfaction for a long time.I cannot remember any cries of alarm over it on this forum.....until now. We've all had plenty of time here for critical gripes. Not as if it's hot off the presses,is it? Yet now there appears to be an "issue".One which is imported onto this forum from elsewhere. If those members have had an issue,why have they not aired it previously ?.Opinion on something is all very well. Couple it with experience makes a better mix. So what other issue is going to tempt you to return from self-imposed exile,Simon ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWR1450 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Hello all First of all my apologies that I am late in commenting on this post, I forgot I had an RMWeb account until earlier this morning so I've spent the majority of my day trying to gain access.Secondly a massive thank you to you all for taking the time to view my review, I'm honoured that the likes of Simon Martin and Dave Jones have viewed it. Simon your a huge inspiration to me and your modelling is just outstanding and Dave the Beattie Well Tank really is a superb model, I do stand by when I first got it I wasn't too pleased with the wonky axle however after the repair she has been running sweet as a nut (not a surprise with such a great motor in it) and after a small amount of weathering she really is just outstanding. I meant no disrespect when reviewing the model and I would like to apologise if I had upset anyone in the process.Also thank you to all who have commented regarding corrections and general discussion, also thank you Mike for telling me about the discusion.All the bestJames Simpson 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Hello all First of all my apologies that I am late in commenting on this post, I forgot I had an RMWeb account until earlier this morning so I've spent the majority of my day trying to gain access. Secondly a massive thank you to you all for taking the time to view my review, I'm honoured that the likes of Simon Martin and Dave Jones have viewed it. Simon your a huge inspiration to me and your modelling is just outstanding and Dave the Beattie Well Tank really is a superb model, I do stand by when I first got it I wasn't too pleased with the wonky axle however after the repair she has been running sweet as a nut (not a surprise with such a great motor in it) and after a small amount of weathering she really is just outstanding. I meant no disrespect when reviewing the model and I would like to apologise if I had upset anyone in the process. Also thank you to all who have commented regarding corrections and general discussion, also thank you Mike for telling me about the discusion. All the best James Simpson James you are very welcome, and kind. Please keep up the reviews. May I say, more power to your elbow. A better first post on a forum you could not have. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Quite, but one of the issues with 'reviews' such as this, on the internet, is that some people will take what is said as matter of fact, as opposed to matter of opinion. We all enjoy the exuberance of youth, and indeed it is good to see young people modelling and of course posting. The opinion re cost is a personal subjective matter, but to make comment that there is room for improvement without say factual support well you enter into a bit of a minefield. Improvement in what way, how, why etc. Absolutely - but, being fair to Mr Simpson (who has posted a very polite and fair comment above) he never actually said in 27 minutes of footage anything approaching "there is room for improvement". If he had done, I would agree with you in principle that producing a statement like that without evidence is wrong. But he never actually did that, so it's disingenuous to state that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted June 10, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 10, 2015 With all that it is being said regarding the Well Tank over the last few days, perhaps it's time that Kernow, Hattons, Model Rail etc, got their own section(s) within the Products and Trade Area - rather than be topics under the various manufacturer's, as in most cases the above mentioned own the tooling - not those who are producing it for them. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Absolutely - but, being fair to Mr Simpson (who has posted a very polite and fair comment above) he never actually said in 27 minutes of footage anything approaching "there is room for improvement". If he had done, I would agree with you in principle that producing a statement like that without evidence is wrong. But he never actually did that, so it's disingenuous to state that. I do apologise, as what he says, at approx 12:50 is: It could be improved, there's a lot of room for improvement on here. I hope this clears that up, once again apologies for not giving a verbatim quote and the time of the quote on the clip. Edited June 10, 2015 by BlackRat 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I do apologise, as what he says, at approx 12:50 is: It could be improved, there's a lot of room for improvement on here. I hope this clears that up, once again apologies for not giving a verbatim quote and the time of the quote on the clip. You have my apologies in fact - gone back to listen and you are quite right, he does indeed say that. I retract the earlier statement quite happily. However - that is his view: he has quantified it to an extent in what he says, and he's entitled to express it. He's expressed it in a manner which is polite and constructive - surely there's nothing wrong in that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 ...what other issue is going to tempt you to return from self-imposed exile,Simon ? I can think of only two. 1) Exclusively LNER-based content; or 2)..... ...oh wait, hang on..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Like I have said, nothing wrong with that at all. As long as people don't confuse ( and we know they regularly do) matter of opinion with matter of fact. And with the interwebby alas, it's all to easily done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Since I sense the pitchforks are coming out, perhaps I should qualify my posting and address the points made to me. In reply,Simon ( and here's me thinking that you no longer had the inclination to post on the forum...at least that's the impression you gave last time we "met",is it not ?) We have never met; however if you are referring to a PM change then obviously I would prefer - as it was at the time - that it remains a private exchange. I gave you that courtesy, after all. My position has nothing whatsoever to do with the anonymous young man in question but rather with the attitude of some members of the forum to what he says.I couldn't give two hoots for what he put up on the tube but a meal has been made of it here,for sure. Absolutely, we agree: a meal has been made of it. To what end: I don't know, but I thought it was a rather good video and it was on the whole a very positive review. And yes,if you really want a balanced assessment of a model,the proper way of so doing is to get your hands on one....which you yourself recently did in reviewing Locomotion's C 1 elsewhere. You see, I disagree. I don't think owning a model is the only way to a balanced assessment. You can borrow one, inspect one, and you can form a viewpoint based on the observations of others. There's several different mediums and happily through the internet, models can be looked at closely and discussed. Just because I don't own a Bachmann Modified Hall, for example, does not mean I can't be objective in assessing its positives and negatives known to me: otherwise you are putting forward quite an elitist view that only those who buy models can in fact have discussions about them. Can everyone afford to buy every model to assess it for their interests? Returning to the little Kernow model,this has now been in the market for quite some time and many of us here have run them with pleasure and satisfaction for a long time.I cannot remember any cries of alarm over it on this forum.....until now. We've all had plenty of time here for critical gripes. Not as if it's hot off the presses,is it? Yet now there appears to be an "issue".One which is imported onto this forum from elsewhere. Well from the video there are a couple of minor issues, one of which the video maker rectified himself and explained how he did it in a constructive manner, and the other is a missing coupling hook (which as he said himself, is a minor issue). Unless you're suggesting Mr Simpson has an ulterior motive for making his video I really do not understand what the problem is with someone reporting his own experiences with a model he bought? Because - by your own definition Ian - that's the exact and only kind of review that has any merit: buying the model and then giving an opinion on it accordingly. If those members have had an issue,why have they not aired it previously? If you are referring to Mr Simpson again, perhaps because he didn't own the model until recently and chose to air it on his YouTube channel - which to be frank is a medium much used by other reviewers in other hobbies and in mainstream commercialism? Nothing out of the ordinary as far as I can see. However I sense I am speaking for someone out of turn - so perhaps you should direct the questions toward the gentleman in question? As he is more likely to know than I. Opinion on something is all very well. Couple it with experience makes a better mix. Indeed. You are quite capable of giving an opinion Ian. So what other issue is going to tempt you to return from self-imposed exile,Simon ? I don't believe I need to explain myself other than I think Ivan's post above is amusing 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Fight fight fight .... Everyone gather round, someone's getting a kick in... Strewth, Well, despite the 30 odd posts, I've not changed my mind, I still have 30585 / 7 and still want 30586. 30586 well worth it imho. A quick point, the receipt from Kernow for my 30586 latest version says "K2057 DJ models 2-4-0 Beattie Well Tank" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. A County Durham colliery layout does NOT need a Beattie Well Tank. "What would you like for your birthday?" A County Durham colliery layout now has a Beattie WellTank...... Les 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 And said Beattie Well tank is trundling through North Nottingham on its way to County Durham. Actually running-in on the club layout Phoenix Park before I fit a better decoder than the blue Bachmann one. Captured on a mobile phone Les 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny Emily Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Just received one of these little cuties. It's running very smoothly straight out of the box, keeping another equally unlikely siting of a class 401 company running through Bolton Trinity Road on running in turns. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 I'm going to have to rethink my coupling system The Beattie grounds on Hornby uncoupler ramps....... Les Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 26, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 26, 2015 The Beattie grounds on Hornby uncoupler ramps....... Les Which part of it? The vertical bar on the supplied coupling hook can foul objects in the "four foot" but that isn't unique to the Beattie. Dapol wagons fitted with the same coupler exhibit the same issue and I don't think the latest well tanks have had any change made to the Dapol-style coupler as per the original batches. There are solutions. I found trimming about 1.5mm off the bottom of that bar solved the problem I had which wasn't with uncouplers but was with barrow crossings and the running rail of a point or crossing as items passed over in the opposite direction. I've had to do that to the well tanks, the "silver bullet" clay wagons and various other items mostly (but not all) of Dapol origin. A swift application of the Xuron cutters is all that's needed. If you want to be sure to be sure then round the newly cut lower edge with a file so that it runs smoothly across any obstruction it meets rather than striking it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les1952 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 Hello. It is the transverse brake rigging that fouls... It may also be that my uncouplers are set a millimetre or so high.... I've not fitted the couplings to the Beattie yet as for the time being it has to return to its own box when not in use. I need to get a second stock box for locos. All the very best Les Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
moose4675 Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Hello Folks, Would anyone be able to recommend a transfer sheet to me for numbering both 30585 and 30586 into early emblem liveries. My 30585 is currently the late crest model and 30586 is the latest release with 'BRITISH RAILWAYS' on the splashers? Many thanks, Lee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted December 9, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 9, 2015 Fox transfers do 6 inch cab side number sheets. Ref FRH4008/6_16384 These are individual numbers you have to cut out and at one at a time. Currently using them to turn my two early crest BWT's to late crest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
moose4675 Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 (edited) Fox transfers do 6 inch cab side number sheets. Ref FRH4008/6_16384 These are individual numbers you have to cut out and at one at a time. Currently using them to turn my two early crest BWT's to late crest. Many thanks roundhouse I will have a look. Edited December 9, 2015 by moose4675 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Hi Dave, Any update on the progress of the next batch? I have a 30587 in L/C Black on order, and noted the release date slip from December to Jan 2016, and wondered how far off they are.Regards,Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJM Dave Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 Hi Dave, Any update on the progress of the next batch? I have a 30587 in L/C Black on order, and noted the release date slip from December to Jan 2016, and wondered how far off they are. Regards, Matt Hi Matt, Could you please contact Kernow directly on this as its info I cannot directly give out? Cheers Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 Just checked the Kernow website. Next batch is due into the UK on the 20th of this month. Regards, Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 If more batches are being produced, can we have a 19th century version please? It might tempt me to add something Bodmin & Wadebridge like (before it turned into another boring ordinary railway) to my to-do list! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PreservationModeller Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I seemed to have missed the announcement of 30585 being released... Now the question of whether I should add that to my lineup, so as to have 85, 86 & 87? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now