Sutton's Locomotive Works class 24

[Regularity]

Exactly, I remember buying a pair for £70, putting them on the track and thinking how well they ran. As "layout" locos they were a very welcome addition. Now we know a bit better, and expect a bit more accuracy.

 

A “bit more accuracy”?

Given that Hornby nearly got the body right (they were going through a phase of raising the buffer height, but not the overall height, hence the body itself was squashed), and that the front end is quite distinctive, the errors in the Bachmann Models, including their Brassworks Models in 0 gauge were fairly unforgivable. (And Heljan’s Recent flatter than it should be front end really is inexcusable - but not as inexcusable as some fawning “mustn’t upset the advertising revenue” reviews in the press...)

 

There was a lot of fuss over the 37s, which took 4 attempts for Bachmann to get right, yet this always looked closer to prototype than the 24/25s, yet there was much less fuss over the Derby type 2s. That was my point: some models received more criticism than others. There seemed to be one rule for some, another for others.

 

Yes, a good runner, but that merely provided a good reason to create Bachby conversions, and ultimately the beautiful SLW models came into being, which is presumably of interest despite the higher cost, else why be reading this thread?

[Pandora]

Exactly, I remember buying a pair for £70, putting them on the track and thinking how well they ran. As "layout" locos they were a very welcome addition. Now we know a bit better, and expect a bit more accuracy.

 

John.

I recall eagerly buying a pair as soon as they arrived in the shops, £35 each, the first shipment released,  later they went up to £39,  I set one running on a circle of track at shunting speed and marvelled over the noiseless progress,  I had to leave the house in a hurry  and forgot to switch off the controller, returned several hours later to find the locomotive still happily crawling around the test track

[John Tomlinson]

A “bit more accuracy”?

Given that Hornby nearly got the body right (they were going through a phase of raising the buffer height, but not the overall height, hence the body itself was squashed), and that the front end is quite distinctive, the errors in the Bachmann Models, including their Brassworks Models in 0 gauge were fairly unforgivable. (And Heljan’s Recent flatter than it should be front end really is inexcusable - but not as inexcusable as some fawning “mustn’t upset the advertising revenue” reviews in the press...)

 

There was a lot of fuss over the 37s, which took 4 attempts for Bachmann to get right, yet this always looked closer to prototype than the 24/25s, yet there was much less fuss over the Derby type 2s. That was my point: some models received more criticism than others. There seemed to be one rule for some, another for others.

 

Yes, a good runner, but that merely provided a good reason to create Bachby conversions, and ultimately the beautiful SLW models came into being, which is presumably of interest despite the higher cost, else why be reading this thread?

 

I find most new releases of this era to be of interest, this isn't any different, which doesn't mean to say I'm going to buy them.

 

Obviously your standards and expectations are higher than mine, which is your privilege.

 

John.

[Jamiel]

Could I suggest it would be helpful to adjust underexposed photos, especially if linking to Private 3rd party sites before posting. I couldn't see the differences fully until I did this myself.

Image1.jpg

Interesting how subjective exposure and contrast is.

 

I nearly always process photos through Photoshop before posting, but personally I would take the image BWs Trains posted and add in more contrast to make it look like Robertcwp's original.

 

I don't like a wash of grey at the bottom end of 8-bit images, perhaps that is personal taste. Had Robertcwp been making specific comments about the detail on the bogies I would agree with BWs Trains, but the original comment did not specify that.

 

Here is a quick comparison of the two images with a Photoshop 'levels' tool sampling the brightness and contrast.

 

 

I work in film, and it is always interesting to see what the final grade looks like, sometimes very different from the images we work on during visual effects. Sometimes much better, sometimes much worse, sometimes so bad that I have asked my name to removed from the films credits.

 

There is also how people have their monitor setup/balanced, so a bright image on one persons computer may be dark on another.

 

Each to their own I suppose.

 

Jamie

 

Edited to add the image to make my comments clearer.

Edited March 5, 2018 by Jamiel

[John Tomlinson]

Interesting how subjective exposure and contrast is.

 

I nearly always process photos through Photoshop before posting, but personally I would take the image BWs Trains posted and add in more contrast to make it look like Robertcwp's original.

 

I don't like a wash of grey at the bottom end of 8-bit images, perhaps that is personal taste. Had Robertcwp been making specific comments about the detail on the bogies I would agree with BWs Trains, but the original comment did not specify that.

 

Here is a quick comparison of the two images with a Photoshop 'levels' tool sampling the brightness and contrast.

 

 

I work in film, and it is always interesting to see what the final grade looks like, sometimes very different from the images we work on during visual effects. Sometimes much better, sometimes much worse, sometimes so bad that I have asked my name to removed from the films credits.

 

There is also how people have their monitor setup/balanced, so a bright image on one persons computer may be dark on another.

 

Each to their own I suppose.

 

Jamie

 

Edited to add the image to make my comments clearer.

 

I think people underestimate the impact of how the monitor is set up, and offer a snippet of anecdotal evidence from my own experience.

 

Last year I bought a new computer, tower and monitor. I replaced a Dell product, 24 inch screen, with the same Dell product, albeit with 9 years of technical improvement. Setting them up side by side, on the same levels of brightness and contrast, the difference in appearance of any picture from my files was astonishing. The old monitor was much darker than the new, maybe in part due to degenerating pixels, or whatever screens are made of. I immediately understood why a number of friends pictures on Flickr seemed a bit dark, presumably to them mine looked somewhat light.

 

As I wish to use both machines, I've compromised by having different settings on the two monitors, to bring them roughly into line, so I assume my pictures will still look a bit light to others, if less so than before.

 

John.

[37081LochLong]

I find the original image perfect on laptop, ipad & samsung phone, but the adjusted photo by BWsTrains looks extremely flat, lacking detail and washed out on all three devices!

Edited March 5, 2018 by 37081LochLong

[Regularity]

Obviously your standards and expectations are higher than mine, which is your privilege.

Not higher: just different.

The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s - a bit like the Playcraft “not really a 21/22 or 29” - rather than looking like the real thing. I’d rather play about improving the mechanism than correcting fundamental body errors, but that’s my preference.

 

Diesels are hard to get right with all their subtle bends and curves: harder than steam, which is often straight lines and circles.

[John Tomlinson]

Not higher: just different.

The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s - a bit like the Playcraft “not really a 21/22 or 29” - rather than looking like the real thing. I’d rather play about improving the mechanism than correcting fundamental body errors, but that’s my preference.

 

Diesels are hard to get right with all their subtle bends and curves: harder than steam, which is often straight lines and circles.

 

Sorry, can't remotely agree with the comparison to the Playcraft 21/29, one of us needs a visit to Specsavers.

 

I do agree with you that diesels seem very difficult to get just right, umpteen variants of 37 and 40 spring to mind, none of which seem to quite hit the spot for the "cognescenti".

 

I do however know what works for me, and time to leave it there I think!

 

John.

[cctransuk]

The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s - a bit like the Playcraft “not really a 21/22 or 29” - rather than looking like the real thing.

 

That has got to be the most wildly overstated sentence ever posted on this group - and that really is saying something !!!

 

I know that a certain section of the membership regard SLW products as the Holy Grail, but please .......

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Regularity]

I was using hyperbole. I was actually struggling to find an example, but I suppose the Triang 37, which ran on class 31 or class 47 bogies (depending on the motor) and has a few issues with such things as the cab windows, might have been a better comparison.

 

For me, the Bachmann type 2s simply didn’t cut it, visually, and was worse than their 37, which produced lots of clamours for change.

 

But I don’t regard the SLW Model as the Holy Grail, either: better glazing is needed, for a start, but I accept the economics of the situation.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Regularity

[Regularity]

I do agree with you that diesels seem very difficult to get just right, umpteen variants of 37 and 40 spring to mind, none of which seem to quite hit the spot for the "cognescenti".

 

Git nothing to do with the cognoscenti, just an ability to look at the real thing, either directly or indirectly (photos) and make a decision on whether or not it looks right.

One can apply Weber’s Law about “just noticeable differences” to this. If, when you look at it, it looks wrong 50% or more of the time, then it is wrong, otherwise it isn't. It might be possible to adjust that threshold, too: if more than 5% of a model is not right, then the model as a whole is wrong. We each have our own sensitivities to this, and it will vary not only by person, but on particular facets. As an example, with fine wheels, then diesel locos and the appropriate stock look great in EM and 00, so many don’t go for the P4 option, but to those with a keen interest in pointwork, even EM looks wrong around the crossing vee, so it “has” to be P4 - for them.

 

There is probably a whole PhD in psychology and perception around that point, and it defines when “near enough” becomes “good enough”, but the concept is helpful in turning “degrees of rightness” into a binary good/bad, on which later fulcrum, the Bachhy type 2 is in the same league as the Playcraft NBL type 2.

[cctransuk]

I was using hyperbole. I was actually struggling to find an example, but I suppose the Triang 37, which ran on class 31 or class 47 bogies (depending on the motor) and has a few issues with such things as the cab windows, might have been a better comparison.

 

For me, the Bachmann type 2s simply didn’t cut it, visually, and was worse than their 37, which produced lots of clamours for change.

 

But I don’t regard the SLW Model as the Holy Grail, either: better glazing is needed, for a start, but I accept the economics of the situation.

 

No - you were hugely overstating the case.

 

Setting aside the Playcraft example, "The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s...." is over-the-top.

 

A good toy from the 1960s might be a Hornby Dublo EE Type 1, and the Bachmann Derby Type 2 looks way better than that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Regularity]

Whatever.

No - you were hugely overstating the case.

 

And that differs from hyperbole, how?

[cctransuk]

Whatever.

And that differs from hyperbole, how?

 

"exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally".

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Regularity]

"exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally".

And your problem is...?

Keep importing those lively motors!

[Porcy Mane]

Horse will be along in moment with the popcorn.

[John Tomlinson]

Git nothing to do with the cognoscenti, just an ability to look at the real thing, either directly or indirectly (photos) and make a decision on whether or not it looks right.

One can apply Weber’s Law about “just noticeable differences” to this. If, when you look at it, it looks wrong 50% or more of the time, then it is wrong, otherwise it isn't. It might be possible to adjust that threshold, too: if more than 5% of a model is not right, then the model as a whole is wrong. We each have our own sensitivities to this, and it will vary not only by person, but on particular facets. As an example, with fine wheels, then diesel locos and the appropriate stock look great in EM and 00, so many don’t go for the P4 option, but to those with a keen interest in pointwork, even EM looks wrong around the crossing vee, so it “has” to be P4 - for them.

 

There is probably a whole PhD in psychology and perception around that point, and it defines when “near enough” becomes “good enough”, but the concept is helpful in turning “degrees of rightness” into a binary good/bad, on which later fulcrum, the Bachhy type 2 is in the same league as the Playcraft NBL type 2.

 

"...if more than 5% of a model is not right, then the model as a whole is wrong."

 

Pity all my fellow peasants on here who model in "OO", with our 12% error in track gauge.

 

As I said, I know what works for me, I'm sure it wouldn't for you, but there you go. 

 

John.

[Covkid]

Not higher: just different.

The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s - a bit like the Playcraft “not really a 21/22 or 29” - rather than looking like the real thing. I’d rather play about improving the mechanism than correcting fundamental body errors, but that’s my preference.

 

Diesels are hard to get right with all their subtle bends and curves: harder than steam, which is often straight lines and circles.

 

 

Sorry, can't remotely agree with the comparison to the Playcraft 21/29, one of us needs a visit to Specsavers.

 

I do agree with you that diesels seem very difficult to get just right, umpteen variants of 37 and 40 spring to mind, none of which seem to quite hit the spot for the "cognescenti".

 

I do however know what works for me, and time to leave it there I think!

 

John.

 

 

That has got to be the most wildly overstated sentence ever posted on this group - and that really is saying something !!!

 

I know that a certain section of the membership regard SLW products as the Holy Grail, but please .......

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

 

No - you were hugely overstating the case.

 

Setting aside the Playcraft example, "The Bachmann Derby type 2s looked like a poor toy from the 60s...." is over-the-top.

 

A good toy from the 1960s might be a Hornby Dublo EE Type 1, and the Bachmann Derby Type 2 looks way better than that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

I totally agree with John Isherwood here.

Yes, the Bachmann Sulzer twos have issues, the 25 moreso than the 24, but they really are a curates egg.

The mechanism is still a fantastic runner and the bogies look good enough for me.

Yes there are issues with the bodyshell but I have to say that the bodysides between the bulkheads of the 24 are really not bad. Thre mistake many people make is to assune that the bodyside air grilles are identical on the 24 and the 25. They are not. The class 24 has cast alloy grilles which stand out proud, whereas the fabricated louvres on the 25 are practically flush save for the frame around. By Bachmann using this portion of bodyside for their 25 it would naturally be an error, but the large bodyside radiator grilles are also different, The class 24 again had cast alloy radiator grilles whereas the later class 25 had a steel mesh across the framed aperture.

Frankly, this is what lets the SLW model down in my opinion. 

[Regularity]

"...if more than 5% of a model is not right, then the model as a whole is wrong."

 

Pity all my fellow peasants on here who model in "OO", with our 12% error in track gauge.

 

You have put words in my mouth there by selectively quoting me, twisting what I said to imply something contrary to it.

 

The quote you take was not me saying that a 5% error in a measurement meant a model is wrong: I said if more than 5% of a model is not right, then for some people the model as a whole is wrong. I never mentioned 00, and I don’t know where you got that from, but your link between the two is as disingenuous as it is entirely fictional. My point was, we each have our own personal thresholds for tolerating number of errors, and the degree of those errors.

 

In fact, if you look at what I actually said, I was speaking in generalisations to provide examples of how personal leanings affect choices.

Not once did I denigrate the choices others have made.

I personally find 00 gauge to be too compromised, but there is no denying that I have seen some absolutely stunning 00 layouts which I found totally absorbing, just as I have seen some awful P4 layouts. I am not inclined towards building a busy layout with lots going on, and lots of models on it, so I can afford to take my time gently ambling along backwaters far away from the mainstream and engage in things that simply are of no interest to most people. That doesn’t name me any better than anyone else, it just makes me different.

 

On the other hand, you seem to have some need to make personal attacks based on imaginative leaps from what I said to what you seem to want me to have said. I have no idea why you would engage in such action, but there you go.

 

As I said, I know what works for me, I'm sure it wouldn't for you, but there you go. 

 

Your assumption, not mine. I don’t presume to know your standards: as long as you are happy with the choices you have made, then who cares?

If it works for you, then it works for you. End of story.

I genuinely don’t care what your standards of accuracy/tolerance of errors are. I have seen some examples of your modelling, and it struck me that it was made to a high standard of workmanship (to me, that is far more important than whether you have adopted 00, EM or P4) and if you are happy working in 00, then that’s great.

 

Enjoy your modelling. But please stop presuming to know what I think.

Horse will be along in moment with the popcorn.

But not any examples of his own modelling.

[royaloak]

 if more than 5% of a model is not right, then the model as a whole is wrong. 

In your opinion, others will disagree with you!

[Regularity]

In your opinion, others will disagree with you!

Another one.

I never said that was the case for me.

[37081LochLong]

Anyway...

It's a great model this SLW class 24 isn't it...

[royaloak]

Another one.

I never said that was the case for me.

Having read the further replies I agree, but that wasnt what you posted in the post I quoted was it.

[royaloak]

Anyway...

 

It's a great model this SLW class 24 isn't it...

 

It is indeed.

[LBRJ]

Interesting that in the latter part of this thread (The model is wonderful by the way!) ther is no mention of soul or atmosphere - Its rather  like in some of the D&E thread...........

 

Do D/e enthusiasts put exactitude before spirit?