Tom F Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 I think I've sadly been unlucky twice, I don't intend to start fiddling with it (Hattons did say the body isn't particularly designed to come off), and I know someone else posted earlier in the thread that they had given up trying to look inside and are selling theres. Will be getting a High Level Chassis from Scale Four North. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 No better I'm afraid (actually I'd say it's worse). This is after running in for the instructed time and oiling. I'll be sending back and wont be asking for a replacement, instead a refund. I'm sure some run sweetly and I've bee unlucky in acquiring two like this. I had asked that Hattons test the loco before sending, which going off the condition of this I don't think they have (could be wrong). May test with a decoder later on the layout, but ultimately I'll be building a chassis for a detailed airfix body. Yep, quartering looks out on this one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Just to be pedantic, I don't believe Mainline ever did the 8750, only the 57XX, The 8750 was released by Bachmann in 1999. My replacement 5819 has arrived, about to go and test....wish me luck! Well, Bachmann have evolved the model a lot since Mainline - thank goodness. The feature I like best is the sprung axle missing on their 64XX. I have heard the new 14XX does not have a sprung axle either unlike the Well tank. Unfortunately few people ever make positive comments on sprung axles so manufacturers are dropping them (Hornby has from their Terriers, Bachmann from their post 2010 locos and doubtless others). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lofty1966 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Why am I not surprised to see one of our members from the spectator stand telling the few remaining railway modellers on this forum that they should take up stamp collecting! WEB GWR number plate surround.jpg I think you should take that back Ol' Froot ! Ya Cheeky fecker ! Care to clarify the spectator comment puhleeze ? You know when you get a "break" Take a peek out the workshop window (there's a good chap) and see there are others (I.E. me)making models and modifying r-t-r , may not be to an "expert" standard (like your good self) but it's being done. Spectator .....Pft. < Thrust hands in pockets and Stomps off to workshop (well dining room table) muttering obscenities > Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ROSSPOP Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2017 Anyway............................................................... I found this onthe tube......................................... Can anyone show a better performance of the coupling rods???????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) I think you should take that back Ol' Froot ! Ya Cheeky fecker ! Care to clarify the spectator comment puhleeze ? You know when you get a "break" Take a peek out the workshop window (there's a good chap) and see there are others (I.E. me)making models and modifying r-t-r , may not be to an "expert" standard (like your good self) but it's being done. Spectator .....Pft. < Thrust hands in pockets and Stomps off to workshop (well dining room table) muttering obscenities > Suggesting that everyone who disagrees with your viewpoint should take up stamp collecting is asking for a response. I took up fishing..... Edited February 22, 2017 by coachmann 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2017 Hattons did say the body isn't particularly designed to come off Absolutely unbelievable and rather alarming! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjnewitt Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Why am I not surprised to see one of our members from the spectator stand telling the few remaining railway modellers on this forum that they should take up stamp collecting! A casual glance at any GWR locomotive on a heritage line will show what a real plate looks like when mounted on the face of a cabside or bunker. The plate has an additional surround outside of the raised edge, which DJM/Hattons in no way replicates, in fact it does the opposite and sinks the plate inside a recess that is not a feature of any GWR locomotive that ever existed. But of course I shouldn't bring logic into it should I. It was a model manufacturing expediency. WEB GWR number plate surround.jpg That picture perfectly illlustrates the bulk of a GWR cabside plate! The real things are an inch deep over the beading and the beading itself just a 1/4" deep. They are substantial castings and even most etches fail to convey this. The DJM attempt looks terrible which is a shame as a lot of the model looks quite nice at first glance, if a little 'heavy' on the detail. Justin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2017 Suggesting that everyone who disagrees with your viewpoint should take up stamp collecting is asking for a response. I took up fishing..... I took up building model planes (again) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lofty1966 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Plate-gate DJM Bachmann Hornby Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Plate-gate DJM Bachmann Hornby Hmmm, Hornby and Bachmann give the you a pretty good idea as to where to put the etched plates - DJM/Hattons you don't get that option... Edited February 22, 2017 by toboldlygo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelson Jackson Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 The Bachmann model to me actually looks really good, the numbers actually look as if they stand out, look at the 3 and 9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) That picture perfectly illlustrates the bulk of a GWR cabside plate! The real things are an inch deep over the beading and the beading itself just a 1/4" deep. They are substantial castings and even most etches fail to convey this. The DJM attempt looks terrible which is a shame as a lot of the model looks quite nice at first glance, if a little 'heavy' on the detail. Justin I will admit, I am not aware of any etched plate manufacturer including the black beading. Likewise Some RTR makes don,t bother with etched plates at all. Likewise one other manufacturer is getting riddled over glue marks and non squarely fitted plates on their new release and they do not use fitting holes to help them. So can we forgive Hattons/DJM at least for that? Do we consider this experiment on an RTR model a failure in hindsight? Nice try but maybe printed numbers should be kept to sort of thing? Edited February 22, 2017 by JSpencer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom F Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Well I've tested it on DCC, and it's quieter than the last one, however it's very coggy on low speed (almost like lots of little stutters) this was after even altering CVs to match a coreless motor. Ultimately it's just not in the league of the chassis underneath my 57XX and 64XX (which were both bought for £20-£50 less than the Hattons 14XX).It will be sent back on Friday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quarryscapes Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 I will admit, I am not aware of any etched plate manufacturer including the black beading. Likewise Some RTR makes don,t bother with etched plates at all. So can we forgive Hattons/DJM at least for that? I do on my latest designs, or at least I try to. It's less than 0.1mm so it doesn't always appear. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quarryscapes Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Well I've tested it on DCC, and it's quieter than the last one, however it's very coggy on low speed (almost like lots of little stutters) this was after even altering CVs to match a coreless motor. Ultimately it's just not in the league of the chassis underneath my 57XX and 64XX (which were both bought for £20-£50 less than the Hattons 14XX). It will be sent back on Friday. That's a great shame - especially when you compare to the green ones in the video earlier which are nice and smooth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjnewitt Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 I will admit, I am not aware of any etched plate manufacturer including the black beading. Likewise Some RTR makes don,t bother with etched plates at all. So can we forgive Hattons/DJM at least for that? I don't think RTR manufacurers need to include etched cabside plates. Transfers are fine as long as they aren't bigger than they should be so that people can put etched plates over them if they like. Indeed I think it might have been more preferable for DJM to have created a raised 'mound' for the number plate and then printed on top of it, or just printed the number on the cab side. The plates on the Bachmann and Hornby models illustrated earlier look much better, DJM seem to have picked the worst possible option. My general point was that no one, RTR or etched plate maunfacturer really captures the big lump that is the GWR cab side number plate with it's quite shallow numbers and brass beading. Justin 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PenrithBeacon Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Absolutely unbelievable and rather alarming! It is too! I'm beginning to have my doubts about DJM's design approach. There seems to be a long established prejudice against the finescale 4mm scale modellers, with locos being designed to inhibit or prohibit conversion to EM and P4. Now there are design features which cause the power train to be more complex than it needs to be and oversize wheels. This latest revelation that the body is difficult and perhaps impossible to take off so making maintenance difficult if not impossible just about puts the cap on it for me. I think a reversion to traditional simplicity would be a good thing. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2017 It is too! I'm beginning to have my doubts about DJM's design approach. There seems to be a long established prejudice against the finescale 4mm scale modellers, with locos being designed to inhibit or prohibit conversion to EM and P4. Now there are design features which cause the power train to be more complex than it needs to be and oversize wheels. This latest revelation that the body is difficult and perhaps impossible to take off so making maintenance difficult if not impossible just about puts the cap on it for me. I think a reversion to traditional simplicity would be a good thing. To quote a certain fictional Scottish engineer - "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain." 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted February 22, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 22, 2017 Just to be pedantic, I don't believe Mainline ever did the 8750, only the 57XX, The 8750 was released by Bachmann in 1999. My replacement 5819 has arrived, about to go and test....wish me luck! Presumably the 8750 in 1999 had Bachmann's take on the split chassis like their 57XX. The later solid chassis, originally part of the "Blue Riband" branding, is light years better. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom F Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Presumably the 8750 in 1999 had Bachmann's take on the split chassis like their 57XX. The later solid chassis, originally part of the "Blue Riband" branding, is light years better. Keith I could be wrong, but I don't think so. I think the first 8750s had the same mechanism the current models, it just didn't have DCC ready gubbins. Edited February 22, 2017 by 9793 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleset Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) I've been following this project since the beginning. Like plenty on here I couldn't wait to get my hands on this model. Well I finally got my hands on one today so here is my verdict. If you want a smooth running, well detailed tank engine for your push pull service then you should get yourself a Bachmann 64xx and order a set of etched plates (all for less than a DJM 14xx). I'd even suggest a Hornby 14xx if you can stomach that weird pale olive colour they keep painting BR green locomotives. My reasoning is this; I expect there to be some compromises, some penny pinching in the design. Its something we unfortunately have to get used to. The problem with the DJM is I can't understand the choices they've made. Why include etch plates if your just going to fit them wonky into gouges in the body sides. Why use metal con rods then paint them to look like plastic (which I actually think is the worst part of the model and totally puts me off). It also appears they're held onto the wheels by plastic pins rather than metal as well so I'd have reservations about longevity. Finally why spend all that time developing a running mechanism to solve a problem that didn't exist, but not bother to fit the correct size wheels. The opening doors and separately fitted smoke box number plate are nice features but I could have gone without if they'd just focussed on more important parts of the locomotive. So as you can imagine my layouts still missing one of my favourite locomotives. I might also note the BR totem wasn't straight either on my example.... Edited February 22, 2017 by littleset Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 The screws in the DJM 14XX coupling rods are definitely metal. I filed the blackening off of them so that the bare metal to match the coupling rods after they had been stripped of silver paint. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleset Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 The screws in the DJM 14XX coupling rods are definitely metal. I filed the blackening off of them so that the bare metal to match the coupling rods after they had been stripped of silver paint. Cheers for this, could I enquire as to how you removed the paint from the coupling rods? Yours looks much better. No idea why they don't come like that from the factory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Cheers for this, could I enquire as to how you removed the paint from the coupling rods? Yours looks much better. No idea why they don't come like that from the factory. I removed them for a soak in cellulose thinners. If you have less than young & agile fingers and thumb (it took me ages to put the coupling rods back), it would probably be as easy to scrape off the silver paint. Edited February 22, 2017 by coachmann 1 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