KR Models announce the Fell in OO and N.

[Matt C]

55 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

As I said some time back in this thread different people approach models in different ways - some want visual authenticity (to the extent that it can be achieved in a small scale mode) and various of the model railway magazines hammered on for years in reviews about manufacturers falling short in that respect.  Thus cries from magazines, and the attitude of many purchasers have led to a massive improvement over the past few decades and take us streets ahead of where we were before even Mainline and Airfix took us, on what was for that time, a huge leap forward.

 

One result of this in today's market is that models which fall short, or are perceived by someone to fall short, are invariably the subject of criticism - whoever happens to 'make'/market them.  And many modellers who have grown used to continually improving standards aren't happy to see things take any sort of step backwards.  The key to getting it right is extensive and intensive research and continuous checking of what is going into a design and that takes time and, often, more than a soupçon knowledge about how things work on the railway or in model engineering terms, especially where Chinese factories have some very different ideas from the long established European and US ways of doing things.   

 

If you don't want that then fair enough - that is your personal choice; just as it is the personal choice of others to want it.  As far as I'm concerned in the early 21st century with vast amounts of information readily available, plus people with specialist knowledge who can assist or are prepared to sell on their own extensive research and knowledge there is no real excuse for producing a mish-mash that results in a pastiche of the thing being modelled.  All that does is queer the pitch for someone to ever come up with an accurate model - which might be what a lot of folk want - just as happened not so long back with a certain EM1 model.

 

Equally I definitely wouldn't be prepared to pay today's sort of prices for something which doesn't reach today's usual standards.  But, as ever, it is up to people to do what they want with their own money and if they are happy with something that is their choice.  But don't go round criticising those who are not happy (and are prepared to say so) because that too is their choice.  Equally unless I like what I can see of the standard of model being produced there is no way on earth I would pay any sort of advanced payment for it - but that again is a matter of personal choice.   If a company cannot fund its own investment I always tend to ask questions about that company and why they appear to not be financially committed to their business  - others might not of course; again a matter of personal choice.

 

 

 

 

I was going to compose a lengthy reply to some of your points but there really IS no point. They have been debated to death many, many times over the lifetime of this and other threads. Let those who have ordered one enjoy it and those who haven't for whatever reason just move on and let it go.

Life is much too short and there are far worse things happening in the world that SHOULD be the focus of our attention

 

Signing off

 

Matt

 

[Phil Parker]

10 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

How the media handles this model will be very interesting.  

 

I can assure you that you won't be happy.

 

[cctransuk]

13 minutes ago, Matt C said:

 

 

 

Then Drop Michael an Email and ask him if he has someone on the books who would be happy to take over your order. I saw a few candidates on Saturday at MRS who were disapointed that they couldn't get one so I'm sure someone would be happy to take it on. No you won't be happy with it as you will always see it as flawed. Others will be delighted to own one I'm sure.

 

I assessed  the model in the flesh at MRS, it looked great, it looked just like the FEW photos ive seen on here, it looked UGLY which in a sense is what gave it its charm. Is it 100% Accurate ? No bloomin idea but I would be MORE than happy to have one of the 1000 + (?no idea how many actually) that will be out there ( No I Can't afford one). 

 

 

I have done exactly that, and will be interested to learn of the response.

 

John Isherwood.

[PMP]

Anyone (UK regs), whom is unhappy with a product they’ve bought (any manufacturer) can legally return it for any reason.

https://www.gov.uk/online-and-distance-selling-for-businesses
 

I’d recommend returning a product to the original shop/manufacturer. That way a vendor will get a true picture of the dissatisfaction with the item, if there’s a significant number affected.

 

If you want to sell it privately you might lose more money through transaction fees, and further complications if that purchaser returns it to ‘you’.

[cctransuk]

13 minutes ago, PMP said:

Anyone (UK regs), whom is unhappy with a product they’ve bought (any manufacturer) can legally return it for any reason.

https://www.gov.uk/online-and-distance-selling-for-businesses
 

I’d recommend returning a product to the original shop/manufacturer. That way a vendor will get a true picture of the dissatisfaction with the item, if there’s a significant number affected.

 

If you want to sell it privately you might lose more money through transaction fees, and further complications if that purchaser returns it to ‘you’.

 

Is that the case when 'non-returnable' deposits or full payment have been taken?

 

John Isherwood.

[PMP]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Is that the case when 'non-returnable' deposits or full payment have been taken?

 

John Isherwood.

I don’t know re the deposit, the legislation implies that a full refund is applicable within 14 days of receipt of goods, subject to them being returned as new. Non refundable deposits are a red flag for me unless I know the organisation well enough to feel it’s worth the risk.

 

This link indicates that you should get your non refundable deposit back if you uphold your end of the contract. I.e. pay in full and take delivery of an item. If you cancel early you’re breaking the contract, and deposit can be retained.

Once you taken delivery of an item, then as I understand it, the legal UK position is you may return it (as new) within 14 days without giving a reason for full refund under the (UK) distance selling regs.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/can-i-claim-back-a-non-refundable-deposit-aHwOj3S21AWP#when-can-a-deposit-be-kept

 

Local trading standards teams can certainly give better advice.

Edited February 27, 2022 by PMP
Addition

[chris p bacon]

14 hours ago, Matt C said:

But thats my point. 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy.

 

I've searched but been unable to find any facts that back up your assertion, can you provide some evidence or a link.

[Matt C]

8 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

I've searched but been unable to find any facts that back up your assertion, can you provide some evidence or a link.

Ok, Ok just to keep you happy  I'll amend it here

 

 :- But thats my point. I BELIEVE that 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 :- But thats my point. IMHO 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 :- But thats my point. I ASSUME 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 

There, pick any one, hopefully I've saved you a lot of research time that you can use elswhere

 

 

Sheesh !

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

18 hours ago, 96701 said:

So when it arrives at your house, simply sell it on straight away advertised as never opened. Who knows, you might get more than you paid for it.

 

 

He could sell both of them 

 

As I can only see one side at any one time, then I don't see the problem.

 

It's not long ago that it was a common suggestion to paint both sides of carriages in different liveries so that "more trains" could be run. Same here with the Fell

[chris p bacon]

23 minutes ago, Matt C said:

Ok, Ok just to keep you happy  I'll amend it here

 

 :- But thats my point. I BELIEVE that 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 :- But thats my point. IMHO 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 :- But thats my point. I ASSUME 98-99% of the purchasers WILL be happy

 

 

There, pick any one, hopefully I've saved you a lot of research time that you can use elswhere

 

 

Sheesh !

 

 

You don't have to keep me happy, I'm fine.  

 

But you could have saved yourself some time and said "I plucked a figure out of the air with no evidence to back it up, but it looked as though I knew what I was talking about when I don't actually know the sum of diddly squat about sales figures and returns for a model which hasn't been produced yet"

 

[chris p bacon]

2 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

It's not long ago that it was a common suggestion to paint both sides of carriages in different liveries so that "more trains" could be run

I've seen it a few times on private layouts (not exhibition), but I'm not so sure that purchasing a £150 brand new locomotive that was touted as being accurate is in the same vein.

[Matt C]

12 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

You don't have to keep me happy, I'm fine.  

 

But you could have saved yourself some time and said "I plucked a figure out of the air with no evidence to back it up, but it looked as though I knew what I was talking about when I don't actually know the sum of diddly squat about sales figures and returns for a model which hasn't been produced yet"

 

 

 

I can probably save myself a LOT of time by ignoring comments like yours. IMHO I believe/ assume/ suspect that 98% of RmWebbers reading my comment understood I was trying to make a point, not score one and that my figure was hypothetical. I wonder what the satifaction % was for the GT 3 ? didn't that go through a simular grilling ? Anyway I'm missing the Rugby by taking part in a pointless debate about hypothetical figures

 

So I'm moving on thanks

[dagrizz]

7 minutes ago, Matt C said:

IMHO I believe/ assume/ suspect that 98% of RmWebbers

 

Matt, the problem with your comments is that you use numbers like 98% as if they have some factual basis, whereas it is just a number off the top of your head. It doesn't give credibility to your views.

 

Graham       

[chris p bacon]

3 minutes ago, Matt C said:

taking part in a pointless debate about hypothetical figures

 

Probably best if you don't use them in future then.

 

4 minutes ago, Matt C said:

I wonder what the satifaction % was for the GT 3 ?

 

 I know of 6 purchasers personally. 1 was unhappy within a few days*, the others have changed their opinion as either performance has decreased due to issues with the pick ups, or details have fell off.  All were annoyed that after being promised a buffer beam and front bogie to correct mistakes were only sent the bogie and expected to rectify the buffer beams themselves.

* detailed in another thread, new pick ups were made and fitted to get running.

[GWR-fan]

Perhaps those who have seen the model in question may comment on the location of the loco numbering.

 

On the tooled side with only two grilles/vents in each hood,  is the numbering to the outboard end of the loco hood as on the prototype,  or is it located behind the cab doors to replicate the location of the numbering on the opposite side with the four grilles in each hood?

 

In future I will think an appropriate name for the loco,  the Fell'con'.   The pre-payment plan for the model was GBP125.00 if purchased before the order books closed.  This, I believe, left no margin for error to correct any tooling issues should they arise.  If the manufacturer had of been more diligent in his research then he could have realised several variations of the model thus increasing the life of the model run.  With suitable,  but more expensive tooling (and shock horror a more expensive pre-payment plan),  I feel that at least three versions could have been realised,  all with a high degree of accuracy utilising the same running platform.  Alas,  that horse has bolted and we will now not have a locomotive worthy of being called a model being released in the future as the KR Models release has most likely satisfied the bulk of the demand for the type,  leaving the chance of a successful more accurate release from another manufacturer being less likely. 

 

If there is a rerun of the model then I feel that the modelling fraternity has no credibility,  but then there was sufficient interest in a BR blue GT3 for a rerun (to what extent did Rails involvement allow the run to proceed?).

 

I,  like many others,  wanted a RTR Fell and was excited when the model was announced.  When the CAD's were released I was not aware that I was looking at the sides of the same loco and not the mods carried out post release of the prototype.  It is common for manufacturers to print a test model showing all variations of tooling on the one model.  The first release images were possibly of the test model showing the loco to be asymmetrical.  Little did we know that this was the final form. 

 

 I would have happily purchased two models in black depicting both the loco as released and the loco in a later guise.  In hindsight the model as released would have saved me the cost of another model as I would be getting both in the same model.

[Nova Scotian]

"Con" is an extremely loaded suggestion, one that doesn't fit the scenario you're describing and is certainly something that can not only cause offence, but also commercial damage.

[Flittersnoop]

23 hours ago, Les1952 said:

 

As an afterthought- try counting the number of models from the major manufacturers with details "wrong"..........

The most obvious candidate is the Bachmann Modified Hall, which had the glaringly wrong running plate shape beneath the smokebox door. I hadn't ordered one in advance and didn't buy one until the recent (corrected) batch became available. If I had ordered one and paid I think I would have been very annoyed, and would have tried to return the loco and get my money back, but that's because there are lots of pictures of Modified Halls, and also an earlier model version to compare it to.

 

Another example would be the Bachmann model of Class 24 D5000 which I bought and only later became aware that it had bodyside grilles missing, as it was a non-standard loco. When the SLW model with the correct details was announced, I bought one, having sold the Bachmann version at a small loss.

 

I suspect I have ordered a Fell - and I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't read the comments on here I would never have noticed any discrepancies. i was expecting a model of a ridiculously ugly diesel loco, and I suspect that is what will be supplied.

 

Surely the real problem is the 21st century model railway business model, where you have to order locos sight unseen, or else run the risk of not being able to lay your hands on one at all? The buyer bears some risk in that if the model turns out to be a real turkey, its re-sale value will be much less than the purchase price. However, if the model bears a convincing resemblance to the prototype, then any ultra-picky (or "knowledgable") buyer will most likely be able to resell the loco at a profit to some hapless ignoramus who hasn't had the good fortune to be educated by the good folk on RMWeb. But since this seems to be the way things work these days, we apparently have a choice to order and take one kind of risk, or delay and take a different risk. The choice, as they say, is ours. As far as I know, other hobbies are available...

[GWR-fan]

6 hours ago, Nova Scotian said:

"Con" is an extremely loaded suggestion, one that doesn't fit the scenario you're describing and is certainly something that can not only cause offence, but also commercial damage.

 

The manufacturer was aware sometime ago after committing to tooling that there was an issue with the model and to avoid a personal financial collapse they chose to continue production knowing full well that the model lacked accuracy.  Look back over the last eight to nine months and only two liveried images have been released (September, 2021) showing just the side of the model with the later service modifications.  Back in June last year the company stated the model was near to production and basically crickets since. 

 

The company chose to release the model as it is.  Those who pre-paid are not responsible for less than diligent research being carried out resulting in an inaccurate model.  It would seem though that most are prepared to accept the model with all its flaws and the manufacturer has saved financial ruin.  Why then in the future should the likes of Accurascale, Revolution, Sonic and the major manufacturers waste resources on accurate research when the market has shown the level of accuracy that it is prepared to accept? 

 

Edit: for comparison

Rails pre-order price the KR Models Fell  GBP150.00

                                            Accurascale class 55  GBP160.00

                                                                 class  31  GBP169.99

                                                                 class  92  GBP189.99

 

I am sure that the Accurascale will be highly detailed models for little more than the cost of the Fell.  Of cause there is a lot more information available for the models that Accurascale chose to manufacture and the locomotives were available in multiple numbers and liveries so cost may be spread over a number of variations.  The Fell was a one-off prototype with seemingly little information available and yet those who chose to diligently  research the locomotive were able to source that information.  Was the manufacturer open to paid consultation with these experts or did the manufacturer choose its own lines of inquiry and not get all the facts?  

Edited February 28, 2022 by GWR-fan
Price change on the Fell from Rails

[Flittersnoop]

3 minutes ago, GWR-fan said:

 

The manufacturer was aware sometime ago after committing to tooling that there was an issue with the model and to avoid a personal financial collapse they chose to continue production knowing full well that the model lacked accuracy.  Look back over the last eight to nine months and only two liveried images have been released (September, 2021) showing just the side of the model with the later service modifications.  Back in June last year the company stated the model was near to production and basically crickets since. 

 

The company chose to release the model as it is.  Those who pre-paid are not responsible for less than diligent research being carried out resulting in an inaccurate model.  It would seem though that most are prepared to accept the model with all its flaws and the manufacturer has saved financial ruin.  Why then in the future should the likes of Accurascale, Revolution, Sonic and the major manufacturers waste resources on accurate research when the market has shown the level of accuracy that it is prepared to accept? 

No-one is ever forced to buy a model train. If anyone is unhappy with a model they can sell it and not order again from that manufacturer. If enough people do this, the manufacturer will cease to trade, and your problem will have disappeared, along with your hobby.

Edited February 27, 2022 by Flittersnoop

[Budgie]

1 hour ago, Flittersnoop said:

The most obvious candidate is the Bachmann Modified Hall, which had the glaringly wrong running plate shape beneath the smokebox door. I hadn't ordered one in advance and didn't buy one until the recent (corrected) batch became available. If I had ordered one and paid I think I would have been very annoyed, and would have tried to return the loco and get my money back, but that's because there are lots of pictures of Modified Halls, and also an earlier model version to compare it to.

 

Another example would be the Bachmann model of Class 24 D5000 which I bought and only later became aware that it had bodyside grilles missing, as it was a non-standard loco. When the SLW model with the correct details was announced, I bought one, having sold the Bachmann version at a small loss.

 

Yet another one was the Bachmann 2EPB in blue livery which had the coach numbers interchanged between the coaches.

[46444]

Did anyone take any photographs of the Fell at Model Rail Scotland?

 

It would be great to see them. 

 

I'm looking forwards to this model from KR Models. 

 

Cheers, 

 

Mark

[96701]

14 minutes ago, 46444 said:

Did anyone take any photographs of the Fell at Model Rail Scotland?

 

It would be great to see them. 

 

I'm looking forwards to this model from KR Models. 

 

Cheers, 

 

Mark

I saw it. I've ordered it. I'm looking forward to receiving it. I didn't take any photos of either the black one or the green one. The black one was sitting on a chassis with all coupling rods present, the green one was body only. I have ordered a green one and I asked Michael if I could remove the centre coupling rods and he confirmed that I could.

[eldomtom2]

3 hours ago, Nova Scotian said:

"Con" is an extremely loaded suggestion, one that doesn't fit the scenario you're describing and is certainly something that can not only cause offence, but also commercial damage.

I strongly doubt you could mount a libel case based on just the use of the word "con".

[The Stationmaster]

12 hours ago, Flittersnoop said:

The most obvious candidate is the Bachmann Modified Hall, which had the glaringly wrong running plate shape beneath the smokebox door. I hadn't ordered one in advance and didn't buy one until the recent (corrected) batch became available. If I had ordered one and paid I think I would have been very annoyed, and would have tried to return the loco and get my money back, but that's because there are lots of pictures of Modified Halls, and also an earlier model version to compare it to.

 

Another example would be the Bachmann model of Class 24 D5000 which I bought and only later became aware that it had bodyside grilles missing, as it was a non-standard loco. When the SLW model with the correct details was announced, I bought one, having sold the Bachmann version at a small loss.

 

I suspect I have ordered a Fell - and I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't read the comments on here I would never have noticed any discrepancies. i was expecting a model of a ridiculously ugly diesel loco, and I suspect that is what will be supplied.

 

Surely the real problem is the 21st century model railway business model, where you have to order locos sight unseen, or else run the risk of not being able to lay your hands on one at all? The buyer bears some risk in that if the model turns out to be a real turkey, its re-sale value will be much less than the purchase price. However, if the model bears a convincing resemblance to the prototype, then any ultra-picky (or "knowledgable") buyer will most likely be able to resell the loco at a profit to some hapless ignoramus who hasn't had the good fortune to be educated by the good folk on RMWeb. But since this seems to be the way things work these days, we apparently have a choice to order and take one kind of risk, or delay and take a different risk. The choice, as they say, is ours. As far as I know, other hobbies are available...

But hardly a problem with financial pain.  I pre-ordered a Bachmann 'Modified Hall' from my local(ish) retailer but cancelled it - and told him why - immediately I saw a picture.  fortunately for him his entire stock sold quickly to obviously less knowledgeable (or discerning?) customers so we were both happy.  I don't like leaving a retailer in the lurch with a pre-order I cancel but there was no choice as far as I was concerned - the model was very obviously wrong even at ac casual glance.

 

But, and it is a big but, I had paid out no money let alone the full purchase price in advance even with a manufacturer with a generally good track record.  Your final comment of course very much parallels my earlier comments in this thread and it all depends on the extent to which we are individually prepared to accept or reject visual errors in a model.  And at the end of the day it is our own money we are spending - not someone else.  

 

Generally we have lived over the past quarter of a century through a period of massive improvement in the visual authenticity of British outline r-t-r and prices have risen accordingly.  That is what many of us spent years clamouring for and we have got used to it and many find it hard to accept in 2022 r-t-r models which don't rise to that standard - that is choice.  Others are less pernickety or concerned with such things and that is their choice.

 

As for pre-orders we can judge by CADs - but really they are useless without a proper viewing programme or if presented with misleading perspective.   The only halfway decent guide is a 3-D print made from a CAD but really it needs an EP to get a proper idea of how a model is going to look while still realising that change can occur/is possible if attention is drawn to any shortcomings.  I would certainly not commit my money until at least that stage - others take a different view, that, again, is a matter of personal choice.

[Phil Parker]

13 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

The company chose to release the model as it is.  Those who pre-paid are not responsible for less than diligent research being carried out resulting in an inaccurate model.  It would seem though that most are prepared to accept the model with all its flaws and the manufacturer has saved financial ruin.  Why then in the future should the likes of Accurascale, Revolution, Sonic and the major manufacturers waste resources on accurate research when the market has shown the level of accuracy that it is prepared to accept? 

 

You make it sound like "the market" is wrong. It isn't, this is a descretionary, luxury product. People can vote with their wallets. If other manufacturers look and decide they can do less research and reduce prices, that is their call, and something that, if you look at other threads, much of the market would be very pleased with.

 

I had an interesting chat with one of the other manufacturers, who had recieved a complaint that all the nuts on a loco were orientated the same way "ruining the model" apparenlty. Exactly how much accuracy you want differs between modellers. Some are happy with an Oxford cattle wagon with one side wrong. Others want the bolt heads spun around.

 

If you are really picky, you'll notice the gauge is wrong anyway...

 

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

As for pre-orders we can judge by CADs - but really they are useless without a proper viewing programme or if presented with misleading perspective.   The only halfway decent guide is a 3-D print made from a CAD but really it needs an EP to get a proper idea of how a model is going to look while still realising that change can occur/is possible if attention is drawn to any shortcomings.  I would certainly not commit my money until at least that stage - others take a different view, that, again, is a matter of personal choice.

 

Spot on. You have the same information as everyone else. If you don't feel confident, don't buy.

 

14 hours ago, Flittersnoop said:

If anyone is unhappy with a model they can sell it and not order again from that manufacturer. If enough people do this, the manufacturer will cease to trade, and your problem will have disappeared, along with your hobby.