Ready to run but not quite right.

[Captain Kernow]

One other observation on what's really important in a RTR model (or any model, for that matter), for those who have layouts - if a loco doesn't run properly, no matter how nice it looks and how authentic the rivet detail is, the only place it can serve any useful purpose is as a display item in a glass case. Poor running locos don't help in terms of operating a layout.

[woodenhead]

RTR is always a compromise, as the good Captain says the mechanism is really important.

 

If it looks like Dean Goods it is a Dean Goods, ditto a Well Tank, an O2 an M7 etc.

 

I hear what people say about the Bachmann 24/25 and all these new models from SLW and Heljan are probably releasing good quality secondhand Bachman models for those who don't mind them.

 

There are good GW and N class moguls out there with solid split chassis mechanisms that look perfectly good for those who don't use fancy electronics.

[Clive Mortimore]

 With respect, no it isn't for some of us at least. The operation capability is inseperably part of the 100% assessment. I believe that is reasonable because including a working mechanism is a significant factor affecting appearance on many models. 'Ready to Run' - per thread title - carries the implication of operation capability in addition to appearance, or so it seems to me.

Operational capability, if it runs badly then that is as bad as looking wrong.

 

But ".... vacuum only diesels hauling Freightliner trains, no block trains with every wagon having the same number, and no sidings accessed by facing points from running lines, or with no trap protection from running lines." have nothing to do with how a RTR model locomotive, coach or wagon appear or run. They are to do with the modellers lack or disregard to available knowledge of how a railway works.

[caradoc]

Operational capability, if it runs badly then that is as bad as looking wrong.

 

But ".... vacuum only diesels hauling Freightliner trains, no block trains with every wagon having the same number, and no sidings accessed by facing points from running lines, or with no trap protection from running lines." have nothing to do with how a RTR model locomotive, coach or wagon appear or run. They are to do with the modellers lack or disregard to available knowledge of how a railway works.

 

The point I was trying, and obviously failed, to make, despite my second paragraph, was that what to some are imperfect RTR models are (shock, horror) acceptable to me, as long as other criteria are met. However, I humbly apologise and grovel for having gone so far off topic, I promise it won't happen again sir.

[4069]

For me, the criterion is does it bother me, and can I fix it? Both are entirely arbitrary. I bought the Hornby "Caerphilly Castle" because I could, and did, move the upper lamp iron from the smokebox door to in front of the chimney, and in doing so made a huge difference to the look of the loco. That mattered to me. I bought a Bachmann pannier in LT livery even though it doesn't have the LT modifications. I can't explain why that didn't matter!

 

Although the Rapido GNR SIngle is an exquisite model, I didn't buy it because the handrail knobs are overscale* to the extent that the whole appearance is made toy-like, and it would be way beyond my abilities to fix.

 

 

*I'm baffled as to why, seeing what the other major manufacturers can do these days- just compare it with the Bachmann GNR Atlantic.

[Steamport Southport]

For me, the criterion is does it bother me, and can I fix it? Both are entirely arbitrary. I bought the Hornby "Caerphilly Castle" because I could, and did, move the upper lamp iron from the smokebox door to in front of the chimney, and in doing so made a huge difference to the look of the loco. That mattered to me. I bought a Bachmann pannier in LT livery even though it doesn't have the LT modifications. I can't explain why that didn't matter!

 

Although the Rapido GNR SIngle is an exquisite model, I didn't buy it because the handrail knobs are overscale* to the extent that the whole appearance is made toy-like, and it would be way beyond my abilities to fix.

 

 

*I'm baffled as to why, seeing what the other major manufacturers can do these days- just compare it with the Bachmann GNR Atlantic.

 

It is funny what puts people off certain models and not others.

 

 

An example there, I was put off the Atlantic because of the bent valve gear. I'm still in two minds whether to get an LBSC version (BR Lined Black).

 

I'm not totally put off, but I'll have to see what it's like in the flesh before purchase.

 

 

 

Jason

Edited July 7, 2018 by Steamport Southport

[Reorte]

One other observation on what's really important in a RTR model (or any model, for that matter), for those who have layouts - if a loco doesn't run properly, no matter how nice it looks and how authentic the rivet detail is, the only place it can serve any useful purpose is as a display item in a glass case. Poor running locos don't help in terms of operating a layout.

I suppose everyone who wants a model wants one that runs properly, both those concerned about the details and those who aren't, so if a choice has to be made then that's what a manufacturer should choose. Most people have only a vague idea about details, so will be satisfied as long as they're not glaring even to the non-expert. My mistake is finding out - in modelling ignorance really is bliss!

[brianusa]

In my OO days, 1970s ish, I bought mostly GW from various manufacturers.  Some ran better than others and after reading experiences from this forum, more or less agree.  Lima didn't run well, Mainline looked like the real thing and Hornby.......... was Hornby!  To my untrained(!) eye, they all looked like the real thing but after reading the same experiences as above, they were hopeless runners, lacking in detail, too short or too wide, etc.  So why did I think they were OK?

       Then for some reason, age probably, I made the great change to tinplate, where one might say all the problems noted were acceptable;  they still looked like trains, some like no real prototype and others trying to resemble the real thing.  My contemporary US trains were more realistic; the old Lionel less so but they all ran on the same three rails which looked nothing like reality

        Things are much simpler now having returned to playing trains, even Great Western still.  I watch them going round and round, do a bit of shunting now and again and enjoy them all.  I don't operate miniature railways or worry about time tabling, leaving that to those who know about such things.  We all enjoy our trains in different ways!

 

Brian.

Edited July 7, 2018 by brianusa

[Northmoor]

I think there is a glass half full or glass half empty dynamic here. 

 

I find in any hobby or interest there are some who look on the sunny side and are generally happy and others who never seem to be happy because they're looking for a perfection that they will never find. I'm a little bit of a hi-fi enthusiast and some of the obsessive behaviour and propensity to spend ££££££££££'s on snake oil whilst being wilfully obnoxious about 99.9% of music equipment and any I-fi not costing more than a new family car turns me right off and is full on swivel eyed bonkersness. Equally, I like cycling and there are some cycling enthusiasts who are obsessed with certain Italian brands and who retreat into rather unpleasant denunciations of anything outside there own little bubble (whilst being wilfully ignorant of who actually makes frames and OEM frames......). I suspect all hobbies and interests are the same. 

Totally agree.  For some people, a hobby is something that it is not only important to take seriously, but important to take more seriously than others; "You are prepared to compromise, I'm not, therefore I am superior to you on this subject".  They feel it makes them the "bigger man"; the rest of us think they are a bigger "something else".

 

Some time ago I started a thread about models from the 70s-80s which we thought had stood the test of time.  There was a surprising consensus that while mechanisms have improved a great deal, many bodies from 40 years ago still "look right".  Those who are never satisfied probably didn't reply to the thread.....

[Jeff Smith]

Yes, I don't think die-casting or polystyrene injection moulding techniques have significantly improved in the last 50 years.

[DCB]

Totally agree.  For some people, a hobby is something that it is not only important to take seriously, but important to take more seriously than others; "You are prepared to compromise, I'm not, therefore I am superior to you on this subject".  They feel it makes them the "bigger man"; the rest of us think they are a bigger "something else".

 

Some time ago I started a thread about models from the 70s-80s which we thought had stood the test of time.  There was a surprising consensus that while mechanisms have improved a great deal, many bodies from 40 years ago still "look right".  Those who are never satisfied probably didn't reply to the thread.....

Most RTR is not fit for purpose if that purpose is pulling trains.  Its fine for sticking in a display cabinet but that is RTD.

Mechanisms may have improved a great deal since 40 years ago, but only if you discount the Wrenn and Triang based Hornby mechs and just focus on Mainline and Airfix, but the Wrenn and Triang mechs were good solid reliable bits of kit.  The wheels didn't fall off after 30 minutes use, or 30 years come to that. Chassis did not snap in half or swell with mazak rot, within 10 years. They didn't rock, derail or stop on their traction tyres.  They stayed on the rails by and large.

The Hattons mechs look good but the Kernow 02 sets new standards of awfulness with its chunky plastic coupling rods.  I have just found my Hornby 14XX chassis has snapped in half and I have been gluing a wheel back on to a virtually unused Bachmann Mogul  while planning how to fit a 60 yar old Hornby Dublo  0-6-0 chassis to a Bachmann 57XX which has loose wheels a split axle and a burned out motor.

[Finsbury]

Deleted.

I am of drink, and I daren't upset the so-called 'modellers'.

 

Bernie

Edited July 8, 2018 by Finsbury

[johnlambert]

It's an interesting topic to ponder, and especially relevant to my latest RtR purchase.  I model in N gauge and yesterday I bought the latest release of the Graham Farish ex-GWR AEC railcar.  Since the latest production run was announced a couple of years ago I've bought a few examples of the railcar; even though it's a fairly crude model by today's standards as it dates back to the Ark (or so it seems).  Mainly because I "need" some for the line on which my layout is based and there isn't much choice apart from Graham Farish, or a fairly ropey whitemetal body kit that's even older and designed for an obscure and probably no longer available mechanism.

 

I was determined that I had enough AEC railcars (one each in GWR, Crimson/Cream and BR Green, plus one with vinyl sides as a parcels car and one as a donor for a two-car unit) that I wasn't going to buy another.  The ones I own were nearly all cheap, having been sold as spares or repair due to the dreaded Farish split gears (easily replaced).  So I was determined that I didn't want or need one of the latest production run.

 

That lasted about five minutes once I saw the new model in my local model shop.  It's still a very basic set of mouldings, at some point I need to add vacuum pipes and dummy coupling hooks to all mine, but it's the right shape, the decoration looks good (that's something that seems to have improved greatly over the years) and it runs beautifully.  For a few pence over £80 it seemed like a bargain (used ones are about £40 for ones with split gears to £60 for running ones).

 

The cost and fragility of RTR N gauge comes up quite frequently (and seems to be the same for OO) without consideration for ways that it can be done for less. Someone new to N gauge could do far worse that go for a Graham Farish Railcar (about £80), an Union Mills GWR 22xx 0-6-0 Collett goods loco (not sure but I think about £80 too), maybe a Dapol B-set (my latest ones cost £26 each) and some Peco wagon kits (under £5 a time) or even the RTR ones for a little more.  Maybe look out for an older GWR Toad brake van or cough up for the fancy modern offering at about £10.  You could probably get enough to populate a small layout for under £250 (which might otherwise buy two N-gauge Pacific locomotives that look impressive but will be much more fragile and really need a long rake of coaches at £25-30 each).

[bike2steam]

Oh dear, so sad, another grump and groan thread - NEXT!!!

[jonny777]

I thought we used to have a moaners and whingers thread, but now it seems every thread seems to end up like this.

 

(Mind you, I suppose that I am moaning about the moaners - so I should be on the other thread as well)   

[Big James]

I model the BR south western region so a lot of ex LSWR protypies, so being only 29 I’ll never get the chance to see a 700, a mainland 02 etc so I won’t be able to tell what is wrong with them. So if it looks like a 700 and it runs well it’s good enough for me.

 

Big James

[Steamport Southport]

I thought we used to have a moaners and whingers thread, but now it seems every thread seems to end up like this.

 

(Mind you, I suppose that I am moaning about the moaners - so I should be on the other thread as well)   

 

I think the problem is many people don't read previous posts or even the OP.

 

 

 

Jason

[Steamport Southport]

I model the BR south western region so a lot of ex LSWR protypies, so being only 29 I’ll never get the chance to see a 700, a mainland 02 etc so I won’t be able to tell what is wrong with them. So if it looks like a 700 and it runs well it’s good enough for me.

 

Big James

 

Books? Google? You would be surprised by the amount of information now on the internet.

 

Possibly much more reliable than the memory of someone who saw them first hand in 1955. No offence intended.

 

 

 

Jason

[jonny777]

Deleted.

I am of drink, and I daren't upset the so-called 'modellers'.

 

Bernie

 

 

I wouldn't worry about it Bernie. I think a number of us have sounded off while under the influence - I know I have. Sometimes it is a release to get everything off your chest; but it does need understanding and thick skinned readers to recognise the symptoms and give people a little leeway. 

 

(Sorry, going O/T again). 

[jjb1970]

Some time ago I started a thread about models from the 70s-80s which we thought had stood the test of time.  There was a surprising consensus that while mechanisms have improved a great deal, many bodies from 40 years ago still "look right".  Those who are never satisfied probably didn't reply to the thread.....

 

Something I think is often lost is that a model doesn't stop being a good model just because a newer model comes out. Not everything newer is better, but even when newer is better it doesn't mean that the older alternative is bad or unworthy or that people should rush out to dump perfectly good models. I still have a lot of Roco European HO models from the late 80's and 90's which still run well, are still nicely detailed and although they may lack the finery of the latest releases are still excellent models. As you say, many older models just look right.

[newbryford]

Something I think is often lost is that a model doesn't stop being a good model just because a newer model comes out. 

 

Agreed.

Since Hattons announced their class 66, suddenly the Bachmann model is now "bad" according to some............................... and that's before any plastic is moulded.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[gc4946]

I own a pair of Hornby 4VEPs which were slated on this forum.

I'm aware of the model's deficiencies, but owning them as RTR models were far less hassle than trying to knock them up from MTK kits or attaching etched sides to Mk1s.

 

For the foreseeable future they're be my only examples of slam-door Southern Region 3rd rail stock.

 

[jjb1970]

Agreed.

Since Hattons announced their class 66, suddenly the Bachmann model is now "bad" according to some............................... and that's before any plastic is moulded.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

 

I must admit when I read some of the comments about the Bachmann Class 66 I really wonder if I'm looking at the same model. OK, a brand new model should have a little more finesse and Hattons may be going for a lot of trick features but the Bachmann model is still fundamentally a good model and is far from Railroad level. I must admit I've often looked at it and thought if you wanted to have another go it's one of the models that could be improved but that is not the same as calling it a bad model.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

It is funny what puts people off certain models and not others...

 My first question of any RTR model that is a fit for my interest but doesn't in some respect accurately represent the prototype is  'can I do better than this myself with available resources?'. If the answer is 'no' then purchase will likely follow when I can afford it. I do detect dragging of my feet when it's not really as good as I would like. Still no Hornby Black 5 purchase for example, there's always something superior that wants the money.

 

No way would I purchase Heljan's Brush 4, or Hornby's Brush 2 and Gresley gangwayed stock as seen at introduction. Models of more accurate appearance were already possible using earlier RTR body shells and kits.

 

Most of the last dozen years BR(ER) applicable OO introductions have me beat, comfortably exceeding what I can achieve. It's fun correcting the niggles that detract, when the model constitutes a fundamentally sound canvas on which to do what is necessary.

[Dunsignalling]

However good a model may look and however accurately dimensioned and detailed it may be, if it doesn't run well, at speeds and with loads generally representative of the prototype, that's a far bigger issue than (for instance) whether the buffers should be a millimetre bigger or smaller.

 

There's nothing fundamentally wrong about the Bachmann 66, it's just that Hatton's have raised expectations that theirs will be "better" in various respects. That may well turn out to be the case, but that will not change anything that went before one iota. Bachmann's model may become less desirable overnight, and it's quite possible it might disappear altogether if the (reduced) price necessary for it to compete with the new model doesn't provide a sufficient return.

 

However, it hasn't changed, so if it's "bad" now, it always was.

 

John

Edited July 8, 2018 by Dunsignalling