OO Gauge class 71 Electric Locomotive

[JSpencer]

As a buyer who wishes to have models showing detailed differences, I just need to know what they are in order to correctly place my pre orders.

 

It will be no good telling everyone once the deadline has passed, although for the 71, we have not reached that stage yet.

 

With DJM we have 5 announced liveries going from E5004 to 71013 while for Hornby, we do not know which locos nor at what price. Personally I do not care who is front or behind.

The spec and CADs of the DJM model is very impressive. I have ordered one and have been thinking about a second since before Christmas.

 

I know the detailed differences Hornby have tooled up for the Adams Radial. I have not got a clue what Oxford will be capable of. We know that with certain models, if you do not pre order, you miss out. Consequently I have 2 Hornby Radials on order vs 1 Oxford (and this is thanks to Oxford doing a loco that Hornby is not).

Edited June 14, 2015 by JSpencer

[rembrow]

Your only competitor is Hornby, and they've already tooled their model up to a running sample Hornby Class 71 - May Update. So, with respect, they are going to be first to market. Why would they take notice of your CAD drawings any more than they've taken notice of Oxford Rail's Radial Tank in the development of theirs?

 

I think it's great you're doing variations and the CAD drawings look good. Some in fact look excellent - and there have been some fair and critical observations too.

 

But let's call a spade a spade, Hornby are in front of you on development of a model of this prototype. They have in fact tooled theirs up a number of months ago. They're not going to change their tooling at great cost now. So what do you have to gain by hiding anything at this late stage of the game?

 

Big assumption made that  Hornby are going to be first to market with this model. Although they are ahead in terms of R&D, it doesn't mean they will get their model into production before DJM. Recent history has shown that for motorised models, Hornby still has significant production delay problems, with all but one of their new motorised models from 2014 being significantly delayed, well after final EPs were shown, with 3 still outstanding and still being put back later into 2015. Bearing in mind Hornby pre advised this model, as a 2016 catalogue item, are they going to try and leapfrog it into 2015, even if they could, with such a significant back catalogue issue.

The announcements already made by DJM on the samples of the CAD drawings and the technical specification are already more detailed than Hornby has released about their model, we know little if anything about the Hornby models motor system or electronics; lighting;pantograph;cab layout;DCC sound capability etc etc. As someone who has invested in this model with DJM I am very pleased with the progress and the detail supplied about its spec, which is sufficient to keep me interested and with the belief on information supplied so far, that it will be technically superior to the rival model. We should also remember that one of the key technical parts of all DJM models, announced at the beginning of the business, was to have circuit boards designed in the UK and manufactured in Japan, rather than Chinese manufactured, in order to mitigate the level of failures that have occurred previously.

Dave is wise to keep back some details of his model, as the other manufacturer is still only at first EP stage, which enables them to change the tools or technical spec of the model without serious cost. But at the end of the day, we still know a significant amount more about the proposed features of the DJM model than we do about the Hornby model.

[DJM Dave]

As a buyer who wishes to have models showing detailed differences, I just need to know what they are in order to correctly place my pre orders.

It will be no good telling everyone once the deadline has passed, although for the 71, we have not reached that stage yet.

I know the detailed differences Hornby have tooled up for the Adams Radial. I have not got a clue what Oxford will be capable of. We know that with certain models, if you do not pre order, you miss out. Consequently I have 2 Hornby Radials on order vs 1 Oxford (and this is thanks to Oxford doing a Model that Hornby is not).

As a buyer who wishes to have models showing detailed differences, I just need to know what they are in order to correctly place my pre orders.

It will be no good telling everyone once the deadline has passed, although for the 71, we have not reached that stage yet.

I know the detailed differences Hornby have tooled up for the Adams Radial. I have not got a clue what Oxford will be capable of. We know that with certain models, if you do not pre order, you miss out. Consequently I have 2 Hornby Radials on order vs 1 Oxford (and this is thanks to Oxford doing a Model that Hornby is not).

Hi mate,

 

I'm leaving this a month so that when I do let this info out, the competitor will either have to go with what they have ( assuming they havnt spotted what I'm alluding to) or spend time and money correcting to do the same.

 

It's only June and you will have plenty of time to decide which model , detail and finish wise fits your needs before the cut off date.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Dave

[DJM Dave]

Yes, let's call a spade a spade Simon, you never miss an opportunity to have a dig or snipe at at DJM do you?

Essentially Simon, because Dave's project managing it, and he makes the decisions on releasing information as he sees best.

I've got one on order, I still expect Dave to do what is in the best interest of the model, not inform me of every step on the way because of a bout of ranting.

Have you got one on order?

Unfortunately it's the order of the day with some.

[S.A.C Martin]

Big assumption made that  Hornby are going to be first to market with this model. 

 

It seems to be a fair assumption: they have a working Class 71 model and they have cut metal for the tooling. Would you not agree that their development is further ahead?

 

Although they are ahead in terms of R&D, it doesn't mean they will get their model into production before DJM. Recent history has shown that for motorised models, Hornby still has significant production delay problems, with all but one of their new motorised models from 2014 being significantly delayed, well after final EPs were shown, with 3 still outstanding and still being put back later into 2015. Bearing in mind Hornby pre advised this model, as a 2016 catalogue item, are they going to try and leapfrog it into 2015, even if they could, with such a significant back catalogue issue.

 

 

And Dave Jones has just announced a six month delay on the J94 model too. I'd everyone has production problems. But being first to tool their model up puts them at an advantage to getting to market. Given the priority given to newer models than catalogue models currently Hornby's Class 71 will come out sooner rather than later, if we look at the overall releases recently.

 

The announcements already made by DJM on the samples of the CAD drawings and the technical specification are already more detailed than Hornby has released about their model, we know little if anything about the Hornby models motor system or electronics; lighting;pantograph;cab layout;DCC sound capability etc etc.

 

 

I did not deny that in any way, shape or form. 

 

As someone who has invested in this model with DJM I am very pleased with the progress and the detail supplied about its spec, which is sufficient to keep me interested and with the belief on information supplied so far, that it will be technically superior to the rival model. We should also remember that one of the key technical parts of all DJM models, announced at the beginning of the business, was to have circuit boards designed in the UK and manufactured in Japan, rather than Chinese manufactured, in order to mitigate the level of failures that have occurred previously.

 

Dave is wise to keep back some details of his model, as the other manufacturer is still only at first EP stage, which enables them to change the tools or technical spec of the model without serious cost. But at the end of the day, we still know a significant amount more about the proposed features of the DJM model than we do about the Hornby model.

 

 

But they're not at the first EP stage - they've cut metal for the tools. They are past the EP stage and I can't see Hornby making any tooling changes now - because very rarely have they done so in the past.

 

So again - to who does it benefit not putting forward all of the information now? Based on the info being held back it could change people's minds.

 

Of more concern to me is that it's okay to say that Hornby would copy Dave Jones' work to better their own? Is that a fair comment for anyone to make? I don't believe it is.

 

Yes, let's call a spade a spade Simon, you never miss an opportunity to have a dig or snipe at at DJM do you?

Essentially Simon, because Dave's project managing it, and he makes the decisions on releasing information as he sees best.

I've got one on order, I still expect Dave to do what is in the best interest of the model, not inform me of every step on the way because of a bout of ranting.

Have you got one on order?[/quote

 

Unfortunately it's the order of the day with some.

 

A very disappointing response to what is a fair question, put constructively.

[Andy Y]

 

 

Of more concern to me is that it's okay to say that Hornby would copy Dave Jones' work to better their own? Is that a fair comment for anyone to make? I don't believe it is.

 

 

Simon, nobody has actually said that is the case (but your statements "you are implying that Hornby do copy/gain inspiration from/or similar other manufacturers in the development of new products" was actually potentially injurious (by proxy) to Hornby which is why the comments were not approved for publication).

 

I am perfectly prepared to accept that there are sound commercial reasons for not showing some very specific details at this stage and I'm afraid you will have to do the same, rather than keep questioning why.

[Tricky-CRS]

First EP stage is the first rough casting off the tooling a lot of extra work can be done to the tooling after this stage. First EP is to check the overall dimensions and joins in the mold, most detail like rivets etc is added after this stage. Metal can be re-added and then cut again as DJ has mentioned in the J94 thread.

[10800]

Going back to headcode options for subscribers Dave, I'm not sure if it's too late but 8- (or -8 ) and 16 would be handy   

Edited June 14, 2015 by 10800

[JSpencer]

Hi mate,

I'm leaving this a month so that when I do let this info out, the competitor will either have to go with what they have ( assuming they havnt spotted what I'm alluding to) or spend time and money correcting to do the same.

It's only June and you will have plenty of time to decide which model , detail and finish wise fits your needs before the cut off date.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Dave

Perfect - that will be fine for me.

 

While understand the concern that the competition might adapt and overcome. Mine is missing out.

 

For example, If we take Bachmann's recent E4, I initially ordered only one of them as there were no real hints physical differences when first announced.

 

Later it became obvious that the LBSC version would differ in detail to the other three. So I ordered a second (although this only months before it came out).

 

Finally, I found out the early BR version too had detail differences (notably the smokebox door). So I brought a third.

 

However I could have missed out, had sales been more rapid than what they actually were. Equally Bachmann would have had 1 sale instead of 3. My wish of course, is for manufacturers to point out the differences before it is too late. Afterall, I think it something they should be proud to boast about, gives us consumers excuses to buy more than 1.

 

I hope my previous remarks were not taken as negatives, quite the reverse in fact. I feel it will be these differences that will increase sales (at least from me anyway).

Edited June 14, 2015 by JSpencer

[DavidH]

David H, I politely suggest looking more closely at prototype photos.....

 

I spent ages on a split screen, and my posting was an honest appraisal of what I thought I could see. Yes, I can see a slight prow on the real locos, but only from side-ish on. From the front, the roofline looks like goes straight across. The CAD shows a peak from the angle it is shown.

Similarly, the bend in the roofline - from the angle the CAD images are shown at - looks wrong.

But, I may be wrong, I make no claims at infallibility, and if Dave is withholding part of the image for commercial reasons, that's entirely and legitimately his call to make.

[Southernman46]

I just cannot flippin' wait ..............................

 

Sorry...............

[YesTor]

Your only competitor is Hornby. They're not going to change their tooling at great cost now. So what do you have to gain by hiding anything at this late stage of the game?

 

...to state that the only competitor is Hornby, is quite frankly nothing short of ridiculous - it's a bit like telling your local corner shop grocer that his only competitor is Tesco. 

 

You also seem one-hundred percent certain of whether Hornby can or cannot adapt their plans at this stage, when again, quite frankly you have no true idea.  If I were DJM I'd be doing exactly the same, ie. playing one's cards firmly against one's chest.  After all, business-is-business, and I wouldn't risk a huge financial investment simply because of one or two hysterical and uninformed outbursts via any given forum.

 

 

It seems to be a fair assumption: they have a working Class 71 model and they have cut metal for the tooling. Would you not agree that their development is further ahead?

 

Hornby's development may well be further ahead, but again, business is business, whereby any sensible investor knows never to assume anything...

 

I have two DJM Class 71s on pre-order and to be fair am quite happy with the information presented thus far.  Sometimes in life we simply have to sit back and accept that we aren't able to stamp our feet, throw a frenzied tantrum and declare, "I want, I want, I want...!"  A lesson I learned well before my seventh birthday, I might add...  

Edited June 19, 2015 by darkjunglemung

[S.A.C Martin]

...to state that the only competitor is Hornby, is quite frankly nothing short of ridiculous - it's a bit like telling your local corner shop grocer that his only competitor is Tesco. 

 

You also seem one-hundred percent certain of whether Hornby can or cannot adapt their plans at this stage, when again, quite frankly you have no true idea.  If I were DJM I'd be doing exactly the same, ie. playing one's cards firmly against one's chest.  After all, business-is-business, and I wouldn't risk a huge financial investment simply because of one or two hysterical and uninformed outbursts via any given forum.

 

 

 

Hornby's development may well be further ahead, but again, business is business, whereby any sensible investor knows never to assume anything...

 

I have two DJM Class 71s on pre-order and to be fair am quite happy with the information presented thus far.  Sometimes in life we simply have to sit back and accept that we aren't able to stamp our feet, throw a frenzied tantrum and declare, "I want, I want, I want...!"  A lesson I learned well before my seventh birthday, I might add...  

 

I base my view quite firmly on the fact that are very few and far between examples of Hornby retooling models at this stage of the game and this is much less likely after release. The heavy tanks are the exception to the rule.

 

In any event, only Hornby and DJ Models are producing the Class 71.

 

So Hornby are DJ Models' only competitors for would-be purchasers of that model.

 

They are the only games in town if you want a class 71.

 

They are competitors for people buying a class 71. Hornby is DJ Model's only competitor in this area: and vice versa.  

 

What exactly is not factual about that?

Edited June 20, 2015 by Andy Y
Adverse comments removed.

[Mike Storey]

Never mind all that. Just make sure you all buy these quirky things in droves, so I can can get my 74 eventually, before Hornby twigs that that was the right loco to start with.....

[Vistisen]

 

You also seem one-hundred percent certain of whether Hornby can or cannot adapt their plans at this stage, when again, quite frankly you have no true idea.  If I were DJM I'd be doing exactly the same, ie. playing one's cards firmly against one's chest.  After all, business-is-business, and I wouldn't risk a huge financial investment simply because of one or two hysterical and uninformed outbursts via any given forum.

 

 

 

Hornby's development may well be further ahead, but again, business is business, whereby any sensible investor knows never to assume anything...

 

I have two DJM Class 71s on pre-order and to be fair am quite happy with the information presented thus far.  Sometimes in life we simply have to sit back and accept that we aren't able to stamp our feet, throw a frenzied tantrum and declare, "I want, I want, I want...!"  A lesson I learned well before my seventh birthday, I might add...  

I might have misunderstood something here. But as far as I can see Dave's Class71 is in a different situation than all his other projects. It is crowd sourced, ie. people have already paid for it and can not as far as I know back out financially. So there is no loss to DJM if they choose to buy a Hornby model instead. Quite the reverse, he will be able to sell the extra models a second time! So there is no competitive reason not to show a similar level of info to that which has just surfaced  for the Kings, where there IS a risk of tipping off a rival.

 

Judging by my own reactions and those of others to the fantastic cad's for his 14xx, which I have already ordered the day it was announced, and the kings, which I don't need and therefore have not ordered(yet). I would imaging that similar information on the 71's would only start a black market for tradings of 'shares' in the project.

[rembrow]

I might have misunderstood something here. But as far as I can see Dave's Class71 is in a different situation than all his other projects. It is crowd sourced, ie. people have already paid for it and can not as far as I know back out financially. So there is no loss to DJM if they choose to buy a Hornby model instead. Quite the reverse, he will be able to sell the extra models a second time! So there is no competitive reason not to show a similar level of info to that which has just surfaced  for the Kings, where there IS a risk of tipping off a rival.

 

Judging by my own reactions and those of others to the fantastic cad's for his 14xx, which I have already ordered the day it was announced, and the kings, which I don't need and therefore have not ordered(yet). I would imaging that similar information on the 71's would only start a black market for tradings of 'shares' in the project.

This post, relating to the financial arrangements for the funding of the Class 71 project, is completely incorrect and defeats the assertion made as a result. The payments made by the investors are fully refundable at any stage up until the models are ready for despatch, so DJM does not have a 'captive' audience and risks losing funds below the level of their investment if investors decide to back out. This is all covered in the  Project material on the Kernow Models website, which is easily looked up . Further, DJM has not yet completed the crowd sourcing final target, but it has achieved a level to enable development of the model to take place. Finally, the intention was to have a later production run of models with different running numbers, to be sold via normal retail means, which would be the potential profit return on the tooling for DJM. So DJM have every reason to wish to keep aspects of their model away from a competitor producing the same model, as they hope to be able to sell a later run of their model to those who have not taken part in the crowd sourcing, where any technical or scale superiority could be an advantage in capturing sales.  

[Arthur]

So there is no loss to DJM if they choose to buy a Hornby model instead. Quite the reverse, he will be able to sell the extra models a second time!

 

Despite being wrong anyway, even if that were the case, do you really think locked in investors (as already said, they're not) purchasing the Hornby model would then not collect their pre-paid one from DJM allowing it to be sold twice?

[Vistisen]

This post, relating to the financial arrangements for the funding of the Class 71 project, is completely incorrect and defeats the assertion made as a result. The payments made by the investors are fully refundable at any stage up until the models are ready for despatch, so DJM does not have a 'captive' audience and risks losing funds below the level of their investment if investors decide to back out. This is all covered in the  Project material on the Kernow Models website, which is easily looked up . Further, DJM has not yet completed the crowd sourcing final target, but it has achieved a level to enable development of the model to take place. Finally, the intention was to have a later production run of models with different running numbers, to be sold via normal retail means, which would be the potential profit return on the tooling for DJM. So DJM have every reason to wish to keep aspects of their model away from a competitor producing the same model, as they hope to be able to sell a later run of their model to those who have not taken part in the crowd sourcing, where any technical or scale superiority could be an advantage in capturing sales.  

I stand corrected, thank you for the information.

 

I assumed that as a Kick-starter project their normal rules applied. Straight from their home page:

 

Can Kickstarter refund the money if a project is unable to fulfill?

No, Kickstarter doesn't issue refunds. Transactions are between backers and creators directly. Creators receive all funds (less fees) soon after their campaign ends.

Edited June 20, 2015 by Vistiaen

[rembrow]

 

I stand corrected, thank you for the information.

 

I assumed that as a Kick-starter project their normal rules applied. Straight from their home page:

 

Can Kickstarter refund the money if a project is unable to fulfill?

No, Kickstarter doesn't issue refunds. Transactions are between backers and creators directly. Creators receive all funds (less fees) soon after their campaign ends.

 

The difference is that this is not a Kickstarter project, it is being sourced by investors with funds held in trust by Kernow Model Rail, who release funds to DJM as they are satisfied that specified milestones in the R&D have been completed. The return for investors is a completed model, if they maintain their investment.

[frobisher]

The difference is that this is not a Kickstarter project, it is being sourced by investors with funds held in trust by Kernow Model Rail, who release funds to DJM as they are satisfied that specified milestones in the R&D have been completed. The return for investors is a completed model, if they maintain their investment.

Sorry to be pedantic here, they are NOT investors (in either case). The investment regulatory commission in the UK is quite specific on that. With an investment there is an expectation of a return on the investment but a risk that there will not be. With Kickstarter the only "risk" is that the fully funded project breeches the implied contract to supply the agreed rewards for donations (and they are donations...) to the project, and Kernow is operating a pre-order scheme with no attached risk apart from their own financial viability.

[mikesndbs]

Sheesh all this clatter!

 

Can't we just be pleased that the model is on its way?

 

Loads of notifications and all political clatter, get enough of that in every day life.

 

Simple fact, you pay your money and take your choice.

 

I made mine before Hornby announced, had they done so I would still have gone for Dave's one because we are getting what we want and I feel proud to be part of bringing a iconic SR loco to life.

 

Come on this is a hobby and meant to be fun.

[JSpencer]

In simple terms, if the CADs were rubbish, there would be lot of people claiming there money back and the Kernow site is quite clear about being able to drop out anytime.

 

I signed on within days of it bring announced and can see myself pre paying a second when the time is ripe. If I thought Dave's stuff really was below standard or vapourware, I would have cancelled my orders by now. The fact that I ordered a second O2 and look to be about to order a King means quite the reverse.

[royaloak]

All this talk of competition with H----y is rather tiresome, I am sure the H----y model will be to their usual 'modern' era standards (mk3 buffet roof vents etc) so I don't really see that DJM have any competition in the scale model category.

 

First to market wont necessarily be the best, me personally, I want an accurate scale model not a toy and I am willing to wait for it.

Edited June 20, 2015 by royaloak

[47164]

Interesting debate, and my money would be on David's being the better of the two....however if I was a school master I would bang heads together and get one of them to produce a 74 !!! To complement rather than compete !!

[Andrew F]

I would bang heads  together and make people build their own 74. Bang bang (smile)