All-new Heljan 47 in 00 gauge

[Roy Langridge]

There needs to be some movement to stop derailments or loss of traction, especially on a change of gradient. 
 

To my mind there is a big difference between there being movement, and the loco chassis sitting evenly and at the right height on the bogies.

 

Roy

[MikeParkin65]

34 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

There needs to be some movement to stop derailments or loss of traction, especially on a change of gradient. 
 

To my mind there is a big difference between there being movement, and the loco chassis sitting evenly and at the right height on the bogies.

 

Roy

Agree with all of that. I do think though the model sits slightly low on its bogies and if there is a way to adjust that it would be an improvement. I'm surprising myself though that i am happy with the 47 but I still can't bring myself to buy the 25 even though they are now being discounted down to £150. With the Western it was £55 before I could overlook the peaked cap and big windows 🤣

[Halvarras]

3 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

There needs to be some movement to stop derailments or loss of traction, especially on a change of gradient. 

 

Agreed, but the fore & aft pivoting provided by the 'yokes' takes care of gradient changes. 

[Roy Langridge]

2 minutes ago, Halvarras said:

 

Agreed, but the fore & aft pivoting provided by the 'yokes' takes care of gradient changes. 

Fore and aft does not allow for changes in gradient on a curve if you have camber for example.
 

You don’t need a lot of movement, but gravity is your friend as locos tend to sit at their lowest natural point. 
 

Pick a real 47 up by its body and see how much movement there is in relation to the bogies. 
 

Roy

[Michael Hodgson]

2 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

Pick a real 47 up by its body and see how much movement there is in relation to the bogies. 
 

Need to call out the breakdown cranes to do that !

[Mark C]

18 hours ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Interesting review in this months RM where the 47 shares a page with the same manufacturers rereleased 57 with photos from the same angle.  Certainly the 47 sits lower on the bogies than the 57 and I think raising the new model a little would improve its look. Hornby mag meanwhile has commented on the ‘face’ being wrong - an interesting stance from they have their own Ltd ed from the tooling. 

By contrast, doesn't the face of the 47 on the front cover of the same Hornby Magazine simply look just right (I suspect it is a pre-2021 tooling Bachmann version)...

[Roy Langridge]

11 minutes ago, Mark C said:

(I suspect it is a pre-2021 tooling Bachmann version)...

Definitely not a new tooling 47 as the cab front footsteps are in the right place. 
 

Roy

[Mark C]

Just now, Roy Langridge said:

Definitely not a new tooling 47 as the cab front footsteps are in the right place. 
 

Roy

..yes, and there are no holes in the cab front for the later-style/more common ETH jumper...

 

Mark

[DropTheTap]

On 10/04/2024 at 15:11, Hal Nail said:

I've always thought it was a polite way of saying some people are staggeringly unobservant! :)

Right! A reproduction of something is either accurate or it isn't, the whole of which is measured in degrees by the beholder (or potential purchaser).

[IOW O2]

On 10/04/2024 at 14:31, adb968008 said:

 

 

 

 

One on left looks like my AS deltic, not lining up with anything, buffers to high.

Edited April 11 by IOW O2
additional info

[Michael Hodgson]

Maybe the Network South East one has simply shrunk in all the rain?

The problem with that image is that it just shows they're slightly different heights - it doesn't show which is wrong.

[Halvarras]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Maybe the Network South East one has simply shrunk in all the rain?

The problem with that image is that it just shows they're slightly different heights - it doesn't show which is wrong.

 

Maybe not, but I know which one appears to be sitting on its bogies correctly compared to the real thing.......

[MikeParkin65]

MR review also contains criticism of the shape. Interesting that the two mags which must have had sight of preproduction models (because they are doing Ltd Editions) are now picking up discrepancies. I wonder if off the record comments were made to Heljan which weren't acted upon in the same why comments get made here? I suppose I wonder what the business rationale is when a manufacturer is shown something 'could be better' but chooses to press ahead anyway.

 

Whatever it is its worked on me though hasnt it - because I've got one. 

[55020]

I've seen many comments over the years stating that magazine reviewers are afraid to be honest, as negative comments may result in advertising being pulled with an inevitable impact on revenue.

 

It was great to see AY calling out areas that aren't great with this model in the latest BRM, as well as summing up by stating "I think it a shame it's not a little better".  For me that's exactly where we are with the HJ 47, especially at this price point.

[Roy Langridge]

7 hours ago, 55020 said:

It was great to see AY calling out areas that aren't great with this model in the latest BRM, as well as summing up by stating "I think it a shame it's not a little better".  For me that's exactly where we are with the HJ 47, especially at this price point.

Indeed, it is that level of honesty in reviews that is needed. I have bought models before that had glowing reviews to spot errors instantly when unboxing them. That used to be a bit annoying, but with the cost of models / state of economy today, and with spend being more targeted, it now goes beyond that. 
 

I too wonder about the Heljan business model.  Basic errors are let “slip through” sometimes to be corrected on later models, sometimes not. Often these have been pointed out. Why so?

 

As I have said numerous times, Heljan can make some crackers and nearly always have great mechanical performance, they should be knocking others out of the park.
 

Where Heljan choose to go up against other manufacturers, they must at least get it right, aiming to be as good and able to exist alongside the competition, if not beating it. 
 

Roy

[97406]

17 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

Indeed, it is that level of honesty in reviews that is needed. I have bought models before that had glowing reviews to spot errors instantly when unboxing them. That used to be a bit annoying, but with the cost of models / state of economy today, and with spend being more targeted, it now goes beyond that. 
 

I too wonder about the Heljan business model.  Basic errors are let “slip through” sometimes to be corrected on later models, sometimes not. Often these have been pointed out. Why so?

 

As I have said numerous times, Heljan can make some crackers and nearly always have great mechanical performance, they should be knocking others out of the park.
 

Where Heljan choose to go up against other manufacturers, they must at least get it right, aiming to be as good and able to exist alongside the competition, if not beating it. 
 

Roy

 

Yes, it is a decent and fair review. After umming and aahing about getting the NSE example, I changed my mind.

 

Heljan need not worry, as instead I went for a couple of their latest batch of 25s instead which are discounted and they do look the part whilst I wait for the Bachmann and SLW examples which will be joining them. I’m also looking forward to the 86/2s and Class 104 DMU.

Edited April 13 by 97406

[Hal Nail]

54 minutes ago, 97406 said:

Heljan need not worry, as instead I went for a couple of their latest batch of 25s instead which are discounted 

I think if I got to market first but my releases were still being discounted, I'd be worrying.

 

The counter argument for some time has been that since Heljan's stuff sells well, the criticism is (perhaps) irrelevant. With more competition around focusing on detail and accurancy, that might not hold true forever.

 

 

Edited April 13 by Hal Nail

[brushman47544]

2 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

I too wonder about the Heljan business model.  Basic errors are let “slip through” sometimes to be corrected on later models, sometimes not. Often these have been pointed out. Why so?

 

As I have said numerous times, Heljan can make some crackers and nearly always have great mechanical performance, they should be knocking others out of the park.
 

Where Heljan choose to go up against other manufacturers, they must at least get it right, aiming to be as good and able to exist alongside the competition, if not beating it. 
 

Roy

I have long suspected that Heljan has a policy of going through a maximum number of iterations in making tooling changes at which point - presumably on cost grounds - no further substantive changes are made. So the accuracy of the final CAD and the ability of the toolmaker to turn that into an actual model is critical. As you say, some models are absolute crackers and other leave something to be desired. The will and the knowledge, with Ben, to get it right is clearly there, so there must be something we don’t know about that has a negative impact on the final versions of some models. 

[BR Blue]

Unfortunately, I am in the a shame is it not better camp. Having seen samples at shows I was not expecting much. I was hoping for much better. Very disappointing. It just looks wrong from many angles. I believe the shape of the old Bachmann model is better.

[Roy Langridge]

I think all the time people argue that poor models are ok the drive to do better is diminished.

 

The 45, people argued that the flat sides were ok, they are not. The 25’s cab shape and doors are incorrect. The 18100 has beading missing, the PWM was badly designed and assembled. 
 

All this, but you still get some saying there is nothing wrong. Or do some modelling. I am not against doing modelling, but at today’s prices the base model should be correct. 
 

Roy

 

[97406]

31 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

I think all the time people argue that poor models are ok the drive to do better is diminished.

 

The 45, people argued that the flat sides were ok, they are not. The 25’s cab shape and doors are incorrect. The 18100 has beading missing, the PWM was badly designed and assembled. 
 

All this, but you still get some saying there is nothing wrong. Or do some modelling. I am not against doing modelling, but at today’s prices the base model should be correct. 
 

Roy

 

 

The 25 just gets away from it, and is light years ahead of the original Bachmann 25 which doesn’t look much like a 25, cab-wise at least. The main faults with the cab on the Heljan is the 2 central windscreen pillars are a little too vertical, and the gutters are a tad close to the tops of the windscreens, but this looks to have been disguised on the second batch by the paint job. They do fulfil my ‘need’ for some Rattage and will be kept on when the SLW and new Bachmann ones arrive. They have both had sound fitted too, which is nice!

 

First and second series examples below.

 

Edited April 13 by 97406

[97406]

4 hours ago, Hal Nail said:

I think if I got to market first but my releases were still being discounted, I'd be worrying.

 

The counter argument for some time has been that since Heljan's stuff sells well, the criticism is (perhaps) irrelevant. With more competition around focusing on detail and accurancy, that might not hold true forever.

 

 

 

Much if not most of their stuff is pretty damn good.

 

The 45’s windscreen shape and the small-but-noticeable issues with the 47 are off-putting for me, but then I have a small depot layout and like to take close up pictures of the stock. I would imagine that many with larger layouts running trains in the landscape will have differing priorities and not be so obsessed with viewing stock from close quarters.

 

The Heljan 45 and 47 do look like real 45s and 47s, just not 100 percent so.

[rob D2]

Problem is , they either need the best one and I may buy it over the Bachmann , or they need to be way cheaper than the Bachmann and they may turn my head .

They are neither .

 

If I was them I’d ditch the 00 and stick to 0 , as it seems they can get away with potato shaped locos there as they are “ the only game in town “

Edited April 13 by rob D2

[YT-1300]

3 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Problem is , they either need the best one and I may buy it over the Bachmann , or they need to be way cheaper than the Bachmann and they may turn my head .

They are neither .

 

If I was them I’d ditch the 00 and stick to 0 , as it seems they can get away with potato shaped locos there as they are “ the only game in town “

I never understood why people sing the praises  of the HJ 7mm 37, it's pretty poor between the cab doors, but as you say its the only rtr 37 available. 

 

Overall I think Heljan are really good, the 4mm 26 and 27 are brilliant, just needing the suspension modules moved inboard, the original 47 is really good too, despite being a bit stout.  Their 35 is still one of the best models out there in 4mm scale.

 

Its a shame they seem to be making so many basic mistakes these days

[adb968008]

7 hours ago, BR Blue said:

Unfortunately, I am in the a shame is it not better camp. Having seen samples at shows I was not expecting much. I was hoping for much better. Very disappointing. It just looks wrong from many angles. I believe the shape of the old Bachmann model is better.

I do personally think the shape of the new Bachmann 47 is the best. The old wasnt bad but the cab angles / profile imo is much better.

Edited April 13 by adb968008