Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[The Stationmaster]

That makes no economic sense. If you’re expecting Hattons to supply body only, they’ve got to produce a batch of each detail variation, package and sell them. If you want Hattons or DJM to dismantle returns to supply body only, you have to pay someone to do it. If the requirement for body only is because it’s a bit awkward for someone to get apart, then that individual probably hasn’t got the skill set to build and adapt the body or replacement chassis to fit anyway. The easiest route and almost certainly cheapest is to buy a complete model and discard the components that aren’t required.

 

In some respects it depends how the various parts are distributed on the moulding sprues so it would probably be cheapest simply to put the whole lot in a plastic bag and leave sorting to the customer - perhaps even adding some truly comprehensive notes on detail variations.  However I think that we are very unlikely to see even this approach as it seems surplus stocks might still be around along with a few returns which would be a possibly appropriate starting point for a major rebuild job.  

[Butler Henderson]

I cannot see any of the involved parties accepting responsibility for producing/signing off a duff chassis.

The chassis is obviously a DJM design - the same arrangement that has been inflicted on their other OO steam models.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Butler Henderson

[chuffinghell]

Well I’ve had first hand experience with good ones and bad ones but I couldn’t resist treating myself to a 58xx while they were £20 cheaper

 

Runs okay but at worst case it’ll make a nice looking stationary loco

 

Shame about the rivet detail distorting the ‘N’ but I don’t know if they are all like this or if I’ve been sold another dodgy one? I’d be interested to know if all the weathered 58xx are like this

Edited December 31, 2018 by chuffinghell

[boxbrownie]

Bit difficult for the tampo printing over such pronounced raised details.

 

Then again I'd be surprised if many Panniers in service had perfect livery anyway, call it authentic and be happy

[chuffinghell]

........I'd be surprised if many Panniers in service had perfect livery anyway, call it authentic and be happy

Good point, I’d not considered that

[Sir TophamHatt]

Shame about the rivet detail distorting the ‘N’ but I don’t know if they are all like this or if I’ve been sold another dodgy one? I’d be interested to know if all the weathered 58xx are like this

Yes, mine is the same:

 

 

I hadn't noticed that much until you pointed it out

[57xx]

Well I’ve had first hand experience with good ones and bad ones but I couldn’t resist treating myself to a 58xx while they were £20 cheaper

 

Runs okay but at worst case it’ll make a nice looking stationary loco

 

Shame about the rivet detail distorting the ‘N’ but I don’t know if they are all like this or if I’ve been sold another dodgy one? I’d be interested to know if all the weathered 58xx are like this

 

Can't say I've noticed that. My eye is always drawn to the sunken number plates and seamless blend of the dome into the boiler casing. At that point I have to look away.

[K14]

Shame about the rivet detail distorting the ‘N’ but I don’t know if they are all like this or if I’ve been sold another dodgy one? I’d be interested to know if all the weathered 58xx are like this

Not dodgy at all, in fact it's historically accurate. That column of rivets between the E and R means that there's nowhere else for the N to go.

 

Crop of the official photo of 4800:—

 

 

The letters themselves look a bit undernourished though... should be a scale 6-1/2" tall overall (5" Yellow, 7/8" Red, 5/8" Black) - although I suspect they're a tad condensed too.

 

Pete S.

[chuffinghell]

Yes, mine is the same:

 

IMG_20190104_160033.jpg

 

I hadn't noticed that much until you pointed it out

oops 

[woodenhead]

Comes back to giving Dave his due as a maker of models, the application of that lettering on his model versus the prototype is spot on.

[Captain Kernow]

Comes back to giving Dave his due as a maker of models, the application of that lettering on his model versus the prototype is spot on.

In fairness, the body of these locos is generally very good.

[Tom F]

In fairness, the body of these locos is generally very good.

 

 

Indeed, but that was all Hatton's work in the body design wasn't it.

[Captain Kernow]

Indeed, but that was all Hatton's work in the body design wasn't it.

That's very interesting. I had assumed that DJM had done all the design work. But if the excellent body work was all by Hattons, that does now make sense.

[Ian Hargrave]

That's very interesting. I had assumed that DJM had done all the design work. But if the excellent body work was all by Hattons, that does now make sense.

Indeed.An intriguing combination.In vehicle design analogous to Ferrari body powered by Trabant engine.Didn’t realise Hattons did their own R&D .

[Tom F]

That's very interesting. I had assumed that DJM had done all the design work. But if the excellent body work was all by Hattons, that does now make sense.

 

I'm sure I read in the early stages of this thread, all the CAD design was done by Hattons themselves.

Edited January 9, 2019 by 9793

[PMP]

It would be very unusual and inefficient to have two separate ‘Design houses’ working on a model like this. Hattons refers to ‘receiving latest CADs’ which indicates the design was not in house, and DJM refers to themselves as being ‘commissioned to produce’ the model for Hattons.

Hattons staff certainly did huge amounts of research to gather the initial data, and subsequent checks of the design to the specifications.

[Tom F]

That's fair enough.
Apologies for my inaccurate comments.

[jjb1970]

I am guessing that the credit for the very nice body as well as the opprobrium for the poor chassis should actually rest with the factory. It seems that they do the CAD and technical design as well as making the tools, manufacture, decoration etc.

[Captain Kernow]

I am guessing that the credit for the very nice body as well as the opprobrium for the poor chassis should actually rest with the factory. It seems that they do the CAD and technical design as well as making the tools, manufacture, decoration etc.

I would agree that the credit and opprobrium should rest with the same party, but if this wasn't D. Jones and the factory was responsible, what was the nature of his involvement, I wonder?

Edited January 10, 2019 by Captain Kernow

[jjb1970]

I would agree that the credit and opprobrium should rest with the same party, but if this wasn't D. Jones and the factory was responsible, what was the nature of his involvement, I wonder?

 

I suspect to be an intermediary between Hattons and the factory and to manage the project on behalf of Hattons. Initially I'm guessing the idea of outsourcing project management to somebody with good connections with factories and having done the same job for a manufacturer like Dapol was probably very attractive for shops like Hattons and Kernow. They then seem to have realised that they could manage project themselves and build their own relationship with factories, looking at the major acceleration in project delivery the shops seem to be doing a good job. From what I can gather those parties commissioning directly from the factories are generally positive about the Chinese manufacturers and with a high degree of confidence in their capabilities.

[NHY 581]

The mechanical aspects of the chassis of the 14xx are in keeping with other Dave Jones releases, either his own or those in conjunction with other retailers.

 

The Beattie Well tank released from Kernow/Dapol is down to Dave Jones as is the 1361 from Kernow and the 02 from the same source. Add to this the Austerity from DJM and the similarities of chassis design are very apparent.

 

No other British RTR manfacturer has chosen the same design of drive for their steam outline models and there will be a reason for this. All have examples where running or longevity has been or subsequently become an issue.

 

Given these similarities, I would venture that he has had some involvement in the Andrew Barclay from Hattons and possibly the P class. This is speculation as I have not seen their respective internals. However, based on the identical packaging utilised on all of these models I don't think I am too wide of the mark here and would suggest that they share a common source.

 

However, some are reporting issues with their P class locos which were previously okay.......

 

I of course wait to be corrected.

 

 

 

Rob.

[Porcy Mane]

I of course wait to be corrected.

Wouldn't dream of it.

 

The DJM Austerity gear train (The only one I have experience of) seems to follow 2mm (or should I say "N Gauge) practice.

 

The motor & gear train of the Hattons Barclay closely follows Hornby practice but the wheel design is more akin to Bachmann with the coupling and connecting rods being electrically live.

 

Hth,

 

P Dent

[NHY 581]

Ah! Thanks P.

 

Wasn't sure re the Barclay. Suspected it might be different as mine works fine.......for now...

 

 

Rob.

[Porcy Mane]

Wasn't sure re the Barclay. Suspected it might be different as mine works fine.......for now...

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/126141-andrew-barclay-14-16-0-4-0st-in-oo-gauge/page-42&do=findComment&comment=3136657

 

P.E. Dant

[NHY 581]

Thank you once again. I do hope Kevin got better after such a big sneeze.