KR Models announce the Fell in OO and N.

[jjb1970]

59 minutes ago, Pandora said:

Putting the problem of the roof fillers aside, I believe the issue with side grilles  may be a factory error at the plastic injection moulding stage.

There should be tooling pieces known as Sliders.  Sliders with four grills/no doors,  Sliders with two grills/two doors. The  correct Sliders are fitted to the Injection Tool for the version required.

I believe the Operator got it wrong on the day. 

I wait for a statement from KR,  perhaps the Factory may admit to the error on their part, and (I hope) agree to produce replacement bodies with the correct grille arrangement for KR to supply free of charge to customers.

Recall the first Heljan Clayton, the motor issue,  we received new chassis free of charge.

Perhaps we will have new Fell bodies too.

 

I'm not sure how likely that is given that the errors are largely consistent with earlier samples. A factory error (and the factories in China are highly competent at what they do, if you produce tooling with slides the tool makers understand the importance of selecting the right combination) is possible, but it would be much more likely if we'd seen a correct sample early on.

Edited October 5, 2022 by jjb1970

[Legend]

3 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

 

I'm afraid I disagree, I rather hope they leave it to others who can do a better job.

 

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

I believe that Michael will be manning the KR stand at GETS so I think he's still in the set up.  

[adb968008]

Although there was some delay in communication, my  fell order is in the mail from Canada to the UK… (Canada post sent me details etc).

 

Confirms after support is available, albeit from Canada. But if it works out and its taken care if then I can’t really complain… just got to wait 2 weeks now..

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by adb968008

[cctransuk]

3 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

...... it looks more like the company has shifted all to Canada, with nothing here in the UK except the use of a logistics company to send orders out ......

 

When I emailed KRM to tell them that I had returned my Fell to the logistics company, and to ask for a refund, the response came from Michael.

 

The refund, which has now appeared on my CC statement, came from Edmonton, Canada.

 

CJI.

 

[Ian Hargrave]

11 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

I believe that Michael will be manning the KR stand at GETS so I think he's still in the set up.  

Heljan ?   They have produced OO models of one -off prototypes : viz Brush Falcon,BRC&W Lion. 

   “Decent Price” ?  Well now,that’s a matter of personal judgment is it not ?  And is the collective wisdom of this forum 

that a model’s acceptability is ultimately down to price  ? I couldn’t hazard a guess on that.

 

I’m hoping to go to GETS this weekend and curiosity alone will drive me to the KR stand to do an up close etc. on what all the fuss is about. 

[Phil Parker]

18 minutes ago, Legend said:

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

3 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

One reason this annoys me so much is that KR are doing two holy grail models, the Fell and the Leader.

 

Holy grail? Hardly. As @Legend says, no-one (Not even DJM, in the case of the Fell) has wanted to touch these in the past. If either were likely to sell in quantity, they would have been out ages ago. Let's face it, even Hornby hasn't shown an interesting in trumping these with a quickly released model. 😆

 

2 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I kind of hoped Kernow or Heljan might do them, as they're both up to doing difficult subjects.

 

Because no-one finds fault with Heljan products?

 

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

As others have said no doubt some people won't know what is wrong, some as we have seen are happy because it's the only r-t-r Fell in town, while some will send it back and get a refund.  The final choice is with the customer and that is as it should be.  

 

Spot on. If you don't like it, ultimatly, don't buy it. If the model doesn't sell, there might be a load of chassis (In his review, Chris Lea says these are good once the pickups are sorted) appearing in the market cheaply, that might fit under the Judith Edge kit body that everyone desperate for a perfect Fell is busy building.

[jjb1970]

22 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

I believe that Michael will be manning the KR stand at GETS so I think he's still in the set up.  

 

Yet Heljan were the company that really established the viability of producing one off prototypes as RTR with models of Kestrel, Falcon and Lion, they've done several models few expected in RTR and are doing the NBL 10800. Rails have also done some niche models, they worked with Bachmann on 10000/10001 and with Heljan on 18000. Rapid did the APT-E. So KR aren't unique in doing oddball prototypes.

[jjb1970]

7 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

 

Holy grail? Hardly. As @Legend says, no-one (Not even DJM, in the case of the Fell) has wanted to touch these in the past. If either were likely to sell in quantity, they would have been out ages ago. Let's face it, even Hornby hasn't shown an interesting in trumping these with a quickly released model. 😆

 

 

Because no-one finds fault with Heljan products?

 

 

Apologies, perhaps I should have been explicit in making clear the holy grail comment was related to my own wish list.

On Heljan, I am not sure anyone has ever said they are faultless. On the contrary I think most people familiar with their models would identify less than stellar models. However I am struggling to think of anything they have done that approaches the level of inaccuracies of this Fell.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

Putting the problem of the roof fillers aside, I believe the issue with side grilles  may be a factory error at the plastic injection moulding stage.

There should be tooling pieces known as Sliders.  Sliders with four grills/no doors,  Sliders with two grills/two doors. The  correct Sliders are fitted to the Injection Tool for the version required.

I believe the Operator got it wrong on the day. 

I wait for a statement from KR,  perhaps the Factory may admit to the error on their part, and (I hope) agree to produce replacement bodies with the correct grille arrangement for KR to supply free of charge to customers.

Recall the first Heljan Clayton, the motor issue,  we received new chassis free of charge.

Perhaps we will have new Fell bodies too.

 

You make one big assumption - that KRM specified slides for alternative versions; what evidence do you have for this?

 

In fact, I'm pretty sure that KRM indicated that they were only producing a single version; which makes sense, as tool slides are very expensive.

 

Moreover, why would you have a tool slide for a detail that is incorrect for both versions?

 

Finally, the EP had the same errors as the production models - did the operator make the same c*ck-up twice?!?

 

The irony is, had KRM specified both sides to be exactly the same as the correct side of the model produced, 10100 would have been correct for much of the prototype's existence, in both black and green liveries!

 

CJI.

[jjb1970]

The factories in China no doubt make mistakes but it always seems too easy to default to blaming the factories when things go wrong. For the most part the factories appear to deliver the product as signed off by the customer to the agreed quantity and quality.

[Railsnail]

I haven't spotted any on eBay yet.

 

I await the first listing with interest as 'the market' usually decides a product's desirability/worth.

 

FWIW, my own BR green version is a keeper.  I would have preferred the correct grille and water filler details, but I am pragmatic and contented with what I have received.

[zr2498]

54 minutes ago, Railsnail said:

I haven't spotted any on eBay yet.

 

 

Just the one version (with sound) currently available form Rails

 

https://railsofsheffield.com/search?tags_availability_ovs8irlcu1it987sg6v9cr6a=In%20Stock&q=the fell

 

[big jim]

45 minutes ago, zr2498 said:

Just the one version (with sound) currently available form Rails

 

https://railsofsheffield.com/search?tags_availability_ovs8irlcu1it987sg6v9cr6a=In%20Stock&q=the fell

 

they are obviously selling as this morning there were non sound ones available too (only black ones) 

[adb968008]

when I get it, I’m going to keep it. However i’m not over happy with it.

 

I will concede it looks nice, but it doesnt taste nice.

The communications arent great, but the service is honoured.

 

GT3.. Exactly what was said on the tin. Round 2 upgraded issues from v1.

Consetts.. Exactly what was said on the tin, issues from the EP were corrected ahead of time…

Fell… it is a Fell, you cant argue that, it works, you cant argue that, it looks nice you cant argue that either.
 

But its sits with me like pineapple in a trifle…it looks nice but the jelly wont set.

It is relatively speaking, cheap all things considered, you get what you pay for and KR have held up their side of the deal.

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by adb968008

[chris p bacon]

6 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

 

True, but then there was nothing stopping anyone else from doing them RTR up to now, yet they didn't. 😥

 

Just over 7 years ago the expected take up for a model of the Fell was around 500, this was not enough. It was seen as akin to anything pre-grouping. 

 

6 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

Whilst I can understand some of the ire from some members in this thread who pointed out (for many people) minor inaccuracies (even if it is a boiler filler position) on this thread - it appears it was too late to alter it, and I think people ought to know facts before jumping to the conclusion it was simply the proprietor being bloody minded or whatever and ignoring them (which most likely isn’t the case).

 

And yet there was plenty of time to alter it. All of the changes that would have made it a good model could  have been carried out in early on in its production

 

6 hours ago, Pandora said:

Putting the problem of the roof fillers aside, I believe the issue with side grilles  may be a factory error at the plastic injection moulding stage.

 

I wait for a statement from KR,  perhaps the Factory may admit to the error on their part, and (I hope) agree to produce replacement bodies with the correct grille arrangement for KR to supply free of charge to customers.

 

 

The factory were certainly not at fault here, it's not as if this is the first one they've made.

It was a c*ck up in the research (or lack of) and an inability to look at CADS/EP and actually spot that something isn't right. It's not an easy task,  so if you don't get someone with experience or knowledge of the prototype to cast their eye over it you are setting yourself up for a failure. 

I would not wait for a replacement body as KR senior has admitted himself during a Jenny Kirk 'interview'* the body shell 'is what it is' as it was a prototype it can be anything and he can't see the problem, anyone that doesn't agree is a rivet counter. 

 

4 hours ago, Legend said:

 

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

 

You answer your own question within your post, it's not as if KR are the first to do prototypes.

 

KR could do it as they didn't spend money on getting it right, either you want a Fell or an approximation of a Fell.

 

 

4 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

When I emailed KRM to tell them that I had returned my Fell to the logistics company, and to ask for a refund, the response came from Michael.

 

The refund, which has now appeared on my CC statement, came from Edmonton, Canada.

 

CJI.

 

Thank you John, It was just a thought after some things didn't seem to make sense.

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, Railsnail said:

I haven't spotted any on eBay yet.

 

I await the first listing with interest as 'the market' usually decides a product's desirability/worth.

 

Its a sad day when the measure of a models success is how much it sells for on ebay, rather than the models technical, engineering and aesthetic merits.

 

I suspect that people ordering Fell are those that want it, and they have ordered it.

Those that missed it, will probably await a second run, but i’d be surprised if many missed out.

 

GT3 is probably more popular as it was built after the Fell was scrapped, but also after 92220 was built, ..its 1961… therefore representing the last built loco to look somewhat like a steam loco… it survived to until near the end of steam, at the time thousands of enthusiasts were capturing the last of “classes” coming to their ends… A lot more enthusiasts may relate to it, even though they never saw much of it either… the closest equivalent to it I could imagine today is the Battery powered class 230.

 

Buying multiples to make a killing are probably not for this one, as its niche, very niche,  very few people under 75 have ever seen this loco, and those whom did probably didnt see it very often.

 

I suppose next up will be a BR Blue version, RTC red version and an LMS black version… at least with those theres no argument about accuracy.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by adb968008

[GWR-fan]

7 hours ago, Pandora said:

Putting the problem of the roof fillers aside, I believe the issue with side grilles  may be a factory error at the plastic injection moulding stage.

There should be tooling pieces known as Sliders.  Sliders with four grills/no doors,  Sliders with two grills/two doors. The  correct Sliders are fitted to the Injection Tool for the version required.

I believe the Operator got it wrong on the day. 

I wait for a statement from KR,  perhaps the Factory may admit to the error on their part, and (I hope) agree to produce replacement bodies with the correct grille arrangement for KR to supply free of charge to customers.

...........................................................................................................

 

Suppose it was a factory production issue then explain how the company were aware of it back around April 2020 and the company has had the "flawed" EP since..  KR Snr. signed off on the CAD, the tooling and the EP.  He was aware of the faults yet continued to production.  He bears full responsibility.  You really think that a manufacturer who was not prepared to do the due diligence in getting the design correct (most likely due cost saving) is going to retool the body and offer it as a replacement.  He already has a sold out market for the current model with its "few" apparently "minor" issues so why would he correctly retool it.  If the majority of the market are happy with his abominable creation then he has created a model even uglier than the prototype.

 

I see that the manufacturer had a potential market, with a little clever tooling,  to offer two versions of the BR black (pre- and post-1954) and one version of the green plus sound options.  If it had of been an acceptable model then I would have opted for two versions of the DCC ready black model.  There was a far greater market out there,  now diminished.

 

The issues with the model are far greater than a little rivet counting.  Many here criticise Sam's Trains channel for Sam's lack of knowledge of the models he reviews.  Well,  it seems that there are a lot of Sam's who are happy with this model.  Good for you if second best is as good as you want.  Based on the sales of the Fell (basically sold out) then why would the manufacturer correct the flaws so far detected in the Leader and 4DD projects?  Making the manufacturer accountable for HIS mistakes will make him stride to do better next time.  Surely this would be to our advantage. 

[corsair]

found this drawing on kr face book site in the early stages how ever no pics of sides grils etc 

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, GWR-fan said:

 

Suppose it was a factory production issue then explain how the company were aware of it back around April 2020 and the company has had the "flawed" EP since..  KR Snr. signed off on the CAD, the tooling and the EP.  He was aware of the faults yet continued to production.  He bears full responsibility.  You really think that a manufacturer who was not prepared to do the due diligence in getting the design correct (most likely due cost saving) is going to retool the body and offer it as a replacement.  He already has a sold out market for the current model with its "few" apparently "minor" issues so why would he correctly retool it.  If the majority of the market are happy with his abominable creation then he has created a model even uglier than the prototype.

 

The issues with the model are far greater than a little rivet counting.  Many here criticise Sam's Trains channel for Sam's lack of knowledge of the models he reviews.  Well,  it seems that there are a lot of Sam's who are happy with this model.  Good for you if second best is as good as you want.  Based on the sales of the Fell (basically sold out) then why would the manufacturer correct the flaws so far detected in the Leader and 4DD projects?  Making the manufacturer accountable for HIS mistakes will make him stride to do better next time.  Surely this would be to our advantage. 

And therein lies the problem - there are more people happy with a substandard representation of the prototype than there are a Michael Edge level kit standard one done as RTR.  Ditto GT3, 4DD and Leader - enough people are generally happy with something that has the shape of the prototype so there is no need for the KR Models to go back and spend more money retooling something when the additional cost will result in zero additional sales.

 

These models are still way way better than the stuff Hornby and Lima were turning out back in the day, better even than Mainline and Airfix.   Peoples expectations are much higher, but those wanting the really accurate models are only a small subset and not enough to make KR Models to do the extra research for the CAD before the tooling starts.  At the end of the day these are niche models with very limited sales scope, there's not much scope beyond a limited second run with or without fictitious liveries.

 

Perhaps we should look on these as a pastiche of the model they could be.

[adb968008]

56 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Perhaps we should look on these as a pastiche of the model they could be.

But i’m not sure I subscribe to that.

 

To make a wrong fell is actually harder than making a correct fell.

 

In CAD terms, all they needed to do was make one side, and mirror it for the other.

 

Whats apparently happened is theyve drawn an early version of Fell, and a later version of Fell… then used one version on one side, and another version on the other.
 

I suspect that mirroring is  how the filler cap ended up on the wrong side, as for the most part Fell is actually 1/4 of a loco, then mirrored to make one whole side, with adjustments, and then flipped entirely to do the other side.

My theory (and it is just theory), is maybe the factory did do the research, produced two outlines, but to save cost a decision was made to only tool one side of each… in the same way were were offered two sets of connecting rod options… I suppose nothing stops the missing sides being done in the future to make two closer to accurate versions ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by adb968008

[Pandora]

15 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

You make one big assumption - that KRM specified slides for alternative versions; what evidence do you have for this?

 

In fact, I'm pretty sure that KRM indicated that they were only producing a single version; which makes sense, as tool slides are very expensive.

 

Moreover, why would you have a tool slide for a detail that is incorrect for both versions?

 

Finally, the EP had the same errors as the production models - did the operator make the same c*ck-up twice?!?

 

The irony is, had KRM specified both sides to be exactly the same as the correct side of the model produced, 10100 would have been correct for much of the prototype's existence, in both black and green liveries!

 

CJI.

I checked several old images and videos of the KR Fell and drew an incorrect conclusion, checking some images and videos again I do not think there are Sliders in the grill tooling

[woodenhead]

8 hours ago, adb968008 said:

In CAD terms, all they needed to do was make one side, and mirror it for the other.

 

Whats apparently happened is theyve drawn an early version of Fell, and a later version of Fell… then used one version on one side, and another version on the other.

 

Sounds to me like they chose that option - one model to cover all the bases - as you only ever see one side of a loco generally when operating a layout then simply switching the loco around will let you run it to a different period.

 

Not saying it is right, but perhaps it was a conscious decision to try and please everyone with a single mould.  Of course we all know the saying, 'you can't please all of the people all of the time'.

 

Or of course it was a massive c*ck up and the drawings got combined in error and you ended up with one side from one drawing and one side from the other.  Don't suppose we will know, KR Models are not about to admit to an error of this magnitude and most people are happy probably with their model and it's two era set up.

[cctransuk]

9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

But i’m not sure I subscribe to that.

 

To make a wrong fell is actually harder than making a correct fell.

 

In CAD terms, all they needed to do was make one side, and mirror it for the other.

 

Whats apparently happened is theyve drawn an early version of Fell, and a later version of Fell… then used one version on one side, and another version on the other.
 

I suspect that mirroring is  how the filler cap ended up on the wrong side, as for the most part Fell is actually 1/4 of a loco, then mirrored to make one whole side, with adjustments, and then flipped entirely to do the other side.

My theory (and it is just theory), is maybe the factory did do the research, produced two outlines, but to save cost a decision was made to only tool one side of each… in the same way were were offered two sets of connecting rod options… I suppose nothing stops the missing sides being done in the future to make two closer to accurate versions ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They didn't even need to mirror it - both sides are identical, reading from left to right.

 

That's why you can't tell which side you are looking at!

 

CJI.

[The Stationmaster]

18 hours ago, Legend said:

 

And just who would take this on?   Reality check. The Fell was a weird short-lived prototype.  Who exactly was going to produce a readily available OO model at a decent price?  Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, Rapido? Well, they haven't exactly been falling over themselves. For years the Fell had been the butt of jokes. KR models specialise in marketing these one off prototypes. I really don't think anyone else would touch it with a bargepole. 

 

I believe that Michael will be manning the KR stand at GETS so I think he's still in the set up.  

One important difference between most of those you have mentioned and KR is that they, the commissioner or 'manufacturer', invest their money to create the model.  Even Rapido are doing that to a greater extent by selling through retailers as well as direct with pre-payments.  There is quite a big difference between making a commercial and financial decision of where you should best invest in a new model in order to improve or sustain your bottom line and using somebody else's money to do it.  And, especially if your investment capital or borrowings etc are limited, you are inevitably going to go for what you decide will make the best return, -you wouldn't be in business for long if you didn't do that.

 

But if you're using somebody else's money, by obtaining payments in advance against a promise of what you will produce, you are transferring a significant part of the financial risk to the end customer.  You can afford to go for the more oddball items and if sufficient orders don't come in you simply cancel the project with out having lost much money (and anything you do lose you can probably write off against tax in some way).  But in this situation your flexibility to make alterations, especially once tooling is underway, would be limited unless you put in your own money (or you have a supportive deal with the factory where they are effectively sharing risk).

 

Incidentally Heljan, albeit working from a much broader and varied market base, long ago started to specialise in one-off prototypes  and they are continuing that with 10800.  But - as ever - some things will inevitably be better sellers than others because of where and when they were used.  I think Heljan chose wisely and they were probably sufficiently capitalised to take a certain degree of risk.  But noticeably they still didn't go for the Fell and maybe one reason is that it would be something of a moving target to properly and economically research in order to create a model to their standards.

[The Stationmaster]

17 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

They didn't even need to mirror it - both sides are identical, reading from left to right.

 

That's why you can't tell which side you are looking at!

 

CJI.

Here are the only two photos I can find online which really do show the two sides of the loco albeit they were taken about a year(?) apart

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_10100#/media/File:Derby_works_fell_diesel_geograph-2390424-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg

 

https://www.anistr.com/media/6c975350-8346-440d-928a-af8c162fb6f7-diesel-loco-fell-2-d-2-10100-derby

 

How do we know they are the two opposite sides - look at the lion in the BR crest.  in the first photo it is facing left but in the second photo it is facing right.  Yes, the Fell got one of the short lived right facing lions when it was repainted into green livery and that was never corrected.