Oxford Rail announces - OO gauge GWR Dean Goods

[Edwardian]

Your "irate gatekeeper" wishes you to read Locomotion's latest post on the subject which can be found on their thread.

 

Encouraging.  I note the quote "Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!".

 

I hope they get considerably closer than that.

 

Mind you "a mile off with one eye closed" might well have been Oxford's procedure for checking its EPs.

 

[only joking: inset smiley face here]

[Fat Lieutenant]

Encouraging.  I note the quote "Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!".

 

I hope they get considerably closer than that.

 

Mind you "a mile off with one eye closed" might well have been Oxford's procedure for checking its EPs.

 

[only joking: inset smiley face here]

 

Well done mate!  I hope it was worth being roughed up.

 

It may be that the NRM curators would have taken Oxford to task anyway - but we started posting on the Locomotion thread on the basis that the curators had approved this monstrousity - that's what the OP said.

 

I'm damn sure Oxford wouldn't have listened without the informed and constructive posts of Miss Prism, Quarryscapes, Mad Carew, your good self, and those other brave souls who stood up to have their rivets counted!

 

We shall see what we shall see!

[Miss Prism]

The smokebox door is OK Oxford have already tooled the dished type

 

Why has Oxford done that?

 

Oh, you mean the '2516' thing on display at Warley is now looking even less like 2516 than before? (And presumably, that Oxford will put a Dean dish on a Churchward box and call it '2309'?)

 

Is any of this intentional, or just designed to wind us up?

Edited November 30, 2016 by Miss Prism

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

Encouraging.  I note the quote "Both can spot an error a mile off with one eye closed!".

 

I hope they get considerably closer than that.

 

Mind you "a mile off with one eye closed" might well have been Oxford's procedure for checking its EPs.

 

[only joking: inset smiley face here]

Perhaps a little too far Mr E?

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

Why has Oxford done that?

Yes, seems odd!

[Mikkel]

An S4 would require a new smokebox (pressed-ring fronts were a Churchward-ism, and didn't appear on the Dean Goods until c 1922??), plus new smokebox door 

 

You mean like this?

 

 

This is the Shapeways print from Alan's own Coast Line Models, made to backdate the Mainline Dean Goods: http://www.shapeways.com/product/FMGMUDUNW/dean-goods-stella-smokebox-front-style-1?optionId=59212344

 

It is  an excellent push-fit in the Mainline body (thanks, Alan). Whether it would fit the Oxford body I do not know. 

[Miss Prism]

You mean like this?

 

Yes. The rim of the Dean dished smokebox door was very thin.

 

[Edwardian]

Perhaps a little too far Mr E?

 

Quite.  No more than quarter of a mile to be on the safe side.

 

And I'd try both eyes.

 

Seriously, Locomotion's curator review may give Oxford the opportunity it needs (and might not otherwise have taken?) to get these models right.  I hope it does.  I don't doubt that the quality of the model will be fine; they just need to get those all important details right. 

 

Remember, Oxford told me it was unaware of the creased firebox issue before I pointed it out.  If it were not for people pointing out the errors, Oxford may have remained genuinely ignorant of a number of mistakes.  Now their work is being inspected by NRM curators.  This has 2 advantages.  First, their knowledge of the prototype and the authority of their judgment should be above question.  Second, they're writing the cheque for this one.

[jjb1970]

I think that it is entirely right to highlight flaws in a model in a constructive way and to provide honest feedback provided it stays the right side of becoming a polemical rant. And I think the comments about this model (including the ones offered on the NRM Locomotion thread) are balanced and constructive. I think people here are doing Oxford and Locomotion a favour.

 

In todays market, with standards as they are, Oxford will need to do better if they want to be held in the same regard as Bachmann, Hornby, Rapido, DJM etc. The alternative is to find their own niche somewhere between Railroad and full fat models (and I actually think there may be a very attractive space there) where they offer good models without going to prototype specific detailing and economising on the more esoteric features of high end models. Oxford are certainly aggressively priced however they are not selling themselves as a good value Railroad+ product.

 

This is not to say that I wouldn't buy their models if it is a type I want and there is no competing product which I'd rate higher. Lets be honest, not that long ago this model would have seemed rather splendid as a OO RTR model. However standards have improved hugely and just as I still like a lot of the old Lima diesel era tooling but wouldn't rate it as being as good as modern main range tooling so it isn't really much of an accolade to say a new release would have delighted us 15 years ago.

 

Maybe I'm the odd one out, but I don't actually mind compromised models if they capture the look of the prototype. I have a lot of good words for the better Railroad tooling. That's not because I'm oblivious to faults or flaws but rather I find that for a running model if it is a sweet runner and looks good on a layout then I can live with faults. That does not mean that I do not support improvement and robust reviews, and my expectations are linked to price. Put simply I have different expectations and acceptability criteria for a sub-£100 model if compared to a £200 model. So I can forgive some visual flaws as I buy with my own eyes and make my own decision. What I cannot accept is a model that does not work, as there is no excuse for a model not working. I should stress I am not casting doubt on Oxford quality here in any way, just pointing out that whilst I can live with a model that may not be that accurate if I like it, there is no way I'd live with, or offer any excuses for, a model that doesn't work (such as the infamous Hattons/Heljan BG). That said, I also do not agree with the oft proffered opinion that if a model looks rubbish then it is our job to address all the faults and make it into a new model and if we don't want to do that then we're not true modellers. To me that is just rationalising poor fidelity to prototype.

 

Apologies for a rambling post which is effectively just sitting on the fence. I value and appreciate the comments of Edwardian, Bertie Dog, Mad Carew and others and think it an important part of product improvement. I also would say if you like the model then buy it and don't worry about the faults if you are comfortable with them.

[Quarryscapes]

You mean like this?

 

IMAG1112.jpg

 

This is the Shapeways print from Alan's own Coast Line Models, made to backdate the Mainline Dean Goods: http://www.shapeways.com/product/FMGMUDUNW/dean-goods-stella-smokebox-front-style-1?optionId=59212344

 

It is  an excellent push-fit in the Mainline body (thanks, Alan). Whether it would fit the Oxford body I do not know. 

 

That accidentally looks just like the Locomotion one! :-)

 

 

I think I might need to alter the profile of the door slightly after seeing Miss P's pic there. 

[SDJR7F88]

A short video taking a look at the Oxford Rail Stand, during the Warley National Model Railway Exhibition.
On show, as well a huge display of Diecast Vehicles, was a number of up and coming and prototype Oxford Rail items, featuring the all new GWR Dean Goods (including the new limited Edition NRM Version), a selection of BR Mk3 coaches and Carflat.
On top of this there was also running samples of the new Sound Fitted Adams Radial Tanks, as well as the all new Golden Valley Hobbies, YE Janus 0-6-0DE.
Filmed Saturday 26th November 2016, we take a closer look at these new models, plus more. 
Hope you enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIalnjuuW4U

[coachmann]

Thanks for posting Callum. That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances and would have been welcomes by all before the advent of the digital microscope! I'm another who wishes is were available in 7mm scale.

[Mad Carew Too]

That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances

 

That's right "from half a mile away with one eye closed"!

[Edwardian]

That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances and would have been welcomes by all before the advent of the digital microscope! I'm another who wishes is were available in 7mm scale.

 

Does this mean you are withdrawing your newly instituted "Oxford award for bollox", Coach?

 

(http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/117259-Hornby-princess-coronation-class-duchess/page-4&do=findComment&comment=2521511)

[Adams442T]

Does this mean you are withdrawing your newly instituted "Oxford award for bollox", Coach?

 

(http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/117259-Hornby-princess-coronation-class-duchess/page-4&do=findComment&comment=2521511)

 

Dear Ed, I think you may have misplaced your link, either that or I'm more dense than usual even for a sober Friday night................

[Edwardian]

Dear Ed, I think you may have misplaced your link, either that or I'm more dense than usual even for a sober Friday night................

 

No, see Larry the Coachman's post #87 - "If Athol has utility front, Hornby will be in line for the Oxford award for bollox."

 

Perhaps the scale of Coach's "Bollox" is in inverse proportion to the size of the model, so they actually shrink when enlarged to 7mm scale?  I don't know!

[Hroth]

Thanks for posting Callum. That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances and would have been welcomes by all before the advent of the digital microscope! I'm another who wishes is were available in 7mm scale.

Our family expression for such circumstances is "It looks ok to a blind man on a galloping horse".  Dunno where that came from, but its very useful!

[bgman]

Does this mean you are withdrawing your newly instituted "Oxford award for bollox",

 

Oops! I read this far too quickly, I thought it said Botox !

 

Mind you ........

[Craigw]

Thanks for posting Callum. That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances and would have been welcomes by all before the advent of the digital microscope! I'm another who wishes is were available in 7mm scale.

 

Coach,

You missed typing in part of your sentence.

 

"That 4mm Dean Goods is the bee's knees from normal viewing distances if you know nothing about the Dean Goods"

 

Virtually all of the modern RTR looks impressive when you first look at it. However, when you know a little about the Dean Goods - things like the two different footplate widths, different cabs, coupling rods - all tied in to when they were built and the further cab variations and smokebox fronts tied in to the rebuilding process then you realise they are a minefield. It would be fair to say Oxford have not negotiated that very well at all - as the fiction that is 2309 shows.

 

These are errors that are very obvious if you understand the evolution of this loco at all and this totally ignores the things like wash out plugs behind the hand rails and other own goals.

 

I do not look at the RTR sections all that much, being more inclined to kit building (I have a Finney Dean Goods built and one in kit form). However, if I wanted a third one this might have tempted me. Going on what I have seen though, it would be another Finney kit or a ex Mainline body on a High Level chassis.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[wombatofludham]

Just to put a slightly different view on the issues with the loco.  I know I (tongue in cheek) say GWR "copper kettles" bring me out in hives, but actually, I am involved with the former Liverpool Model Railway Club "Dolgellau" layout which the LMRC generously sold to the town's Heritage Society and assembled it in the vestry of one of the chapels in the town.  We have run two public open days running a variety of stock based around the date of the layout which thanks to the proper Welsh spelling on the signs is post 1960.  However, as the signs are relatively small, we have "stretched the point" and run GWR stock on the layout supplied by one of our supporters, Bob Crump, who has a lovely rake of detailed GWR four and six wheelers made up from kits.  So, when I saw that Oxford were planning a fully lined, brass domed example of their new model, and knowing the Deans ran through Dolgellau until the early 50s, on both freight and passenger, I thought it might be nice to pair the lined out example with Bob's four wheelers to demonstrate a typical early 20th Century local train of the area.

 

Then I read the comments.

 

I can fully understand and sympathise with the sense of crashing disappointment that those who were looking forward to this model must have felt when the deficiencies became apparent, as I felt a similar "yoyo" response (Yoyo?  "Why oh why oh...) when Heljan released their flawed Class 86 electric (a modern thing with a coathanger on the roof for those of you who don't know).  To be looking forward to a keenly priced, modern spec well used and widely allocated small goods loco only to see defeat snatched from the jaws of victory by a firebox crease, a cab problem, rivets that have spread like measles and other faults that affect the overall look must be quite annoying and I must admit has made me think about investing in one.

 

However, as we are operating the layout as a public tourist entertainment aimed at Joe and Joanna Normal and the Little Normals, I'm still tempted.  The Normals love to see any train moving and especially ones that make a noise.  Luckily I had a personal Bachmann Std 4 tank with very loud Olivia's sound that was extremely reliable, didn't derail and amused the grockles enormously, so despite not being completely convinced of DCC sound in steam (I don't think it accurately represents the complex spectrum of sound a real steam loco emits, unlike DCC diesel and electric sound chips) I think we will be acquiring a few more DCC sound locos.  And this is where the faulty Dean does come into play.  For the cost of a normal DCC equipped loco from other manufacturers I can get a sound equipped, pretty little Edwardian loco that when viewed by non-specialist audiences running along a 30ft by 8ft layout amongst quite detailed scenery, will look and sound the business.  I would venture to suggest it will probably be a bit of a "wow" factor to many.  In fact for the cost of one sound converted loco from some retailers, I could probably get two sound equipped Deans, one in BR black and one in GWR green, and so long as they don't throw themselves off the points (unlike our Bachmann Collett Goods) will be viewed by our non-technical visitors as "lovely" and "quaint" and excite the kids, especially those big ones who've dragged their wives down the steps to look at the model.

 

I accept our needs are specific and although I have strived to use appropriate stock where possible, the primary interest is the detailed model of the station, Penmaenpool and the surrounding scenery which has been accurately modelled by the Liverpool guys and draws in people who are fascinated by recognising some features whilst not recognising the fact the station is now the town by-pass.  The trains are moving scenery, extras in a one act play and if they make a noise then that just makes their visit.  So, at the risk of sounding a heretic and giving support to a flawed model, I think it's likely I'll be getting at least one for the new season of open days starting in April.  I'll know it's not perfect at all, thanks to the very informed and clear discussion on here by those who are more familiar with the prototype, but as I am usually too busy to notice details trying to check the progress of the trains, operate the points and signals, and making sure we don't lose a wagon or derail when operating the layout, I probably won't be too upset, and the public will think it's a lovely pretty old engine, and leave us a generous donation as they leave!

[Edwardian]

Just to put a slightly different view on the issues with the loco.  I know I (tongue in cheek) say GWR "copper kettles" bring me out in hives, but actually, I am involved with the former Liverpool Model Railway Club "Dolgellau" layout which the LMRC generously sold to the town's Heritage Society and assembled it in the vestry of one of the chapels in the town.  We have run two public open days running a variety of stock based around the date of the layout which thanks to the proper Welsh spelling on the signs is post 1960.  However, as the signs are relatively small, we have "stretched the point" and run GWR stock on the layout supplied by one of our supporters, Bob Crump, who has a lovely rake of detailed GWR four and six wheelers made up from kits.  So, when I saw that Oxford were planning a fully lined, brass domed example of their new model, and knowing the Deans ran through Dolgellau until the early 50s, on both freight and passenger, I thought it might be nice to pair the lined out example with Bob's four wheelers to demonstrate a typical early 20th Century local train of the area.

 

Then I read the comments.

 

I can fully understand and sympathise with the sense of crashing disappointment that those who were looking forward to this model must have felt when the deficiencies became apparent, as I felt a similar "yoyo" response (Yoyo?  "Why oh why oh...) when Heljan released their flawed Class 86 electric (a modern thing with a coathanger on the roof for those of you who don't know).  To be looking forward to a keenly priced, modern spec well used and widely allocated small goods loco only to see defeat snatched from the jaws of victory by a firebox crease, a cab problem, rivets that have spread like measles and other faults that affect the overall look must be quite annoying and I must admit has made me think about investing in one.

 

However, as we are operating the layout as a public tourist entertainment aimed at Joe and Joanna Normal and the Little Normals, I'm still tempted.  The Normals love to see any train moving and especially ones that make a noise.  Luckily I had a personal Bachmann Std 4 tank with very loud Olivia's sound that was extremely reliable, didn't derail and amused the grockles enormously, so despite not being completely convinced of DCC sound in steam (I don't think it accurately represents the complex spectrum of sound a real steam loco emits, unlike DCC diesel and electric sound chips) I think we will be acquiring a few more DCC sound locos.  And this is where the faulty Dean does come into play.  For the cost of a normal DCC equipped loco from other manufacturers I can get a sound equipped, pretty little Edwardian loco that when viewed by non-specialist audiences running along a 30ft by 8ft layout amongst quite detailed scenery, will look and sound the business.  I would venture to suggest it will probably be a bit of a "wow" factor to many.  In fact for the cost of one sound converted loco from some retailers, I could probably get two sound equipped Deans, one in BR black and one in GWR green, and so long as they don't throw themselves off the points (unlike our Bachmann Collett Goods) will be viewed by our non-technical visitors as "lovely" and "quaint" and excite the kids, especially those big ones who've dragged their wives down the steps to look at the model.

 

I accept our needs are specific and although I have strived to use appropriate stock where possible, the primary interest is the detailed model of the station, Penmaenpool and the surrounding scenery which has been accurately modelled by the Liverpool guys and draws in people who are fascinated by recognising some features whilst not recognising the fact the station is now the town by-pass.  The trains are moving scenery, extras in a one act play and if they make a noise then that just makes their visit.  So, at the risk of sounding a heretic and giving support to a flawed model, I think it's likely I'll be getting at least one for the new season of open days starting in April.  I'll know it's not perfect at all, thanks to the very informed and clear discussion on here by those who are more familiar with the prototype, but as I am usually too busy to notice details trying to check the progress of the trains, operate the points and signals, and making sure we don't lose a wagon or derail when operating the layout, I probably won't be too upset, and the public will think it's a lovely pretty old engine, and leave us a generous donation as they leave!

 

A thoughtful and interesting post, if I may say so.

 

And you're right.  Many visitors will not see beyond the superficial attraction of the model.  This will apply to many modellers, too.  No doubt both the stripey 2309 and the glossy Locomotion 2516 samples drew forth many "oohs" and "ahs" at Warley from the (dare I say?) less well-informed potential purchasers (which, frankly, is a category that includes me until I trouble to look something up). 

 

These are not unattractive models, despite the inaccuracies.

 

IMHO, this does nothing to excuse an inaccurate model.  The Dean will now cost a lot to get right, but that is only because Oxford got so far down the line with a model plagued by accuracy faults.  Starting from scratch, I do not believe that an accurate model is fundamentally or significantly harder or more expensive to make than an inaccurate one. 

 

And that is certainly the root of my frustration; Oxford could have produced an accurate model.  It would have superficially been as attractive as the inaccurate one, but, it would also have been accurate.  The more knowledgeable modellers and critics would have been satisfied and Oxford's sales would be better and its reputation enhanced instead of nose-diving.    Mr and Mrs Normal and the Little Normals would have enjoyed the sight of the model locomotive just as much had it been accurate.

 

Though, I confess, I wince somewhat at the thought of The Angry Caterpillar processing through the wonderfully modelled scene you describe at the head of hand-built and accurate coaches, but that merely goes to show that there is something of the snob in all of us, and, I accept your point that the model will fulfil its brief.

 

May I simply end with best wishes for your Heritage Society and 'thanks' for bringing the Dolgellau layout to our attention.  I hope it thrives.

[wombatofludham]

A thoughtful and interesting post, if I may say so.

 

And you're right.  Many visitors will not see beyond the superficial attraction of the model.  This will apply to many modellers, too.  No doubt both the stripey 2309 and the glossy Locomotion 2516 samples drew forth many "oohs" and "ahs" at Warley from the (dare I say?) less well-informed potential purchasers (which, frankly, is a category that includes me until I trouble to look something up). 

 

These are not unattractive models, despite the inaccuracies.

 

IMHO, this does nothing to excuse an inaccurate model.  The Dean will now cost a lot to get right, but that is only because Oxford got so far down the line with a model plagued by accuracy faults.  Starting from scratch, I do not believe that an accurate model is fundamentally or significantly harder or more expensive to make than an inaccurate one. 

 

And that is certainly the root of my frustration; Oxford could have produced an accurate model.  It would have superficially been as attractive as the inaccurate one, but, it would also have been accurate.  The more knowledgeable modellers and critics would have been satisfied and Oxford's sales would be better and its reputation enhanced instead of nose-diving.    Mr and Mrs Normal and the Little Normals would have enjoyed the sight of the model locomotive just as much had it been accurate.

 

Though, I confess, I wince somewhat at the thought of The Angry Caterpillar processing through the wonderfully modelled scene you describe at the head of hand-built and accurate coaches, but that merely goes to show that there is something of the snob in all of us, and, I accept your point that the model will fulfil its brief.

 

May I simply end with best wishes for your Heritage Society and 'thanks' for bringing the Dolgellau layout to our attention.  I hope it thrives.

 

I completely agree with the point that a flawed model actually costs more to produce than an acceptably more accurate one, in terms of lost sales, and any future re-tool costs.  Again, my main interest is post-1968 and it took Bachmann more than one attempt to get their 37 to a standard that buyers would accept.  That must have been approaching the thick end of half a million all told.  And, as you say, our visitors would be just as happy seeing something the serious modeller finds acceptable tooting and chuffing it's way past the Afon Wnion en-route to Penmaenpool.  To be honest if it was painted blue with a face on the front they would be just as excited, and I'm talking the parents here.

 

You may be slightly less pained to hear that if I do proceed with a purchase (and to be honest a 14XX and a 45XX are higher priorities as the 14XX was a regular on the Dol-Barmouth auto-train shuttles) I probably would stick with a plain GWR one rather than the "angry caterpillar" as it is less "niche" but just as pretty to non-experts.

 

Thanks for the good wishes too, it's been a bit of aversion therapy for a died in the wool LMS and modern image fan to have to learn about the various types of superficially identical GWR copper kettles but I think I'm getting there.  And the very good news is it does give me the perfect excuse to buy one of Dapols GWR railcars when they've turned down the uranium levels in their cream paint, I know they were not a regular sight along the line but they did work specials up the coast route for the Ffestiniog Society in the late 50s so rule 1, with some circumstantial back-up, will come into play.  I do like the early streamlined GWR railcars but justifying one on an LMS or West Coast Electric layout put me in danger of losing my modellers licence.

[bertiedog]

I think that this matter is getting too complex with a string of minor faults to the Dean, none of which appear very serious except the firebox, which seems to have been corrected a bit.

 

The matter of whether a particular loco had particular features is important, but not to most buyers of RTR 00 locomotives.

 

The question to ask Oxford is where they got the information and drawings from.

 

I suspect that in this case drawings were used, plus a scan, and the differences averaged out.

 

The GWR were a minefields for exact details on locos, Swindon built locos, outside contractors built locos and Wolverhampton serviced them to their ideas.

 

We obviously have members here who can state that the number used matches no known prototype, but unless Oxford have dreamt up their own design features, it must match a known drawing, or come from the scan.

 

With good grace, I would have expected Oxford to have connected the Museums and Societies involved and got advice on the variations that are well known to the expert modellers.

 

But it has grown out of all proportion to expect the details to match just the locos that interest your tastes, it is far more concern that basic flaws are corrected like the firebox and the lining being oversize.

 

Surely at least one of the class had the riveted firebox, I expect with a feature that does not match the model, but you cannot commercially make all the variants that the GWR had.

 

We must distinguish between basis design errors and detail variants within the class, and as it stands the new loco covers most types at various points in their history.

 

Oxford have not helped with the claims made for the whole range as to standards and accuracy, perhaps they should consider better contact with modellers before new projects, to sort this out.

 

As they are working with the National Museum now, on a Dean release, hopefully such mistake risks will be reduced on future models.

 

What staggers me is that Hornby missed the boat completely in using the old model they had inherited, and not up dating it several years ago. I hope that the lack of interest by them was not due to lack of interest in the Dean Goods generally, and that the Oxford sells well.

 

Manufacturers have to move away from the well trodden choices to make and move on, there is still a large number of modellers who want early steam locos and coaches. I had hoped Oxford would be such a maker but so far a duplication and a loco that has problems.

 

Stephen

[bertiedog]

Ohh , ...............

  I forgot to query with those who have seen the Loco at Warley, are the handrails knobs to the correct radial type, and has any effort gone into making the washout plugs in the right place ?

  The handrail issue has got to be corrected with all makers, they are simply wrong on this point, as basic as which side the steering wheel is on a car in the UK. A compromise simply will not do.

 

Stephen.

 

Seem to have answered the question for the video very kindly posted a few posts earlier by SDJR7F88

...they have not addressed it......

Edited December 3, 2016 by bertiedog

[bertiedog]

Going over the dimensions of the firebox it can only be the miss placing of the wash outs that is wrong, the handrail level seems correct. I have not got a photo of the lower washouts to see if they are thee or not.

The trouble is minor corrections this will involve a major repaint job after the work is complete, not cheap and very time consuming.

I think I would correct the knobs, that is easy, although they might have to be cranked slightly on each base, and it should not affect the paint.

Personally I am not bothered about the rivets, or indeed the whole smokebox, which is best left alone.

Stephen