WR ‘15XX’ 0-6-0PT - 00 Gauge

[Butler Henderson]

Long been best practice of quality model shops compared to those who are simply box shifters to test run a loco. In fact the only time a test run was not done by one shop was the Dapol N 14xx due to ridiculous hard setting grease they used.

[Chris116]

In the late 60s and early 70s when I worked on a Saturday in Platform Two Model Railway Shop in Wimbledon Broadway all second hand item were always tested in front of the customer on the oval test track. For new items we always asked the customer if they would like to see their purchase working and most said yes. A few said they did not want the box opened as they did not take their purchases out of the box and simply put them in a display cabinet. It was for that reason we never opened a box until asked to by the customer. For mail order items boxes were not opened but second hand items were tested.

Edited December 26, 2023 by Chris116
Auto corrupt at work

[stevemmm]

Has any model magazine done a review on the 15xx?

[GWR-fan]

Personally I have little faith in  a retailer tested locomotive.  One loco tested and verified by an included certificate as being tested instore was actually a non-runner when received.  Another received without a certificate but notated on the invoice as being tested was actually as poor a runner as the returned loco it replaced.

[greatcoleswoodhalt]

4 hours ago, stevemmm said:

Has any model magazine done a review on the 15xx?

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/store/back-issues/british-railway-modelling/british-railway-modelling-november-2023

[JShow]

4 hours ago, stevemmm said:

Has any model magazine done a review on the 15xx?

Railway Modeller reviewed it in its November issue (Vol. 74, No. 877.)

[spamcan61]

32 minutes ago, JShow said:

Railway Modeller reviewed it in its November issue (Vol. 74, No. 877.)

Also November Model Rail

 

[gwrrob]

2 hours ago, greatcoleswoodhalt said:

 

https://www.world-of-railways.co.uk/store/back-issues/british-railway-modelling/british-railway-modelling-november-2023

 

Yes, ugly and functional.

[Budgie]

On 27/12/2023 at 16:41, gwrrob said:

 

Yes, ugly and functional.

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

[Blandford1969]

20 hours ago, Budgie said:

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

It is a term though I have heard said of the class by some enthusiasts, compared to the traditional Pannier they are brutal. That being said they are easier and quicker to prep and being Walsherts accellerate more quickly than a traditional Pannier. However you cannot pull a 15 up to one notch off mid gear due to the 15 having a fixed lead compared to the normal one with Stephensons which has an increasing lead as the engine is pulled up, so giving an increased amount of steam as pre admission before the full Live main steam is admitted. 

[Captain Kernow]

21 hours ago, Budgie said:

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

If 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder', then perhaps the same applies for 'ugly?'

 

But as a pannier lover, I might instead use the description 'purposeful'...

 

[gwrrob]

21 hours ago, Budgie said:

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

 

Why not when it’s used tongue in cheek by the reviewer.

[AY Mod]

23 hours ago, Budgie said:

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

 

Where has this standard been laid down and by whom?

[Budgie]

46 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Where has this standard been laid down and by whom?

 

I would have thought it would be self-evident. If a review is full of the opinions of the reviewer, it is not going to be of much use to people who rely on the review to let them know what the model being reviewed is like.

[AY Mod]

33 minutes ago, Budgie said:

 

I would have thought it would be self-evident. If a review is full of the opinions of the reviewer, it is not going to be of much use to people who rely on the review to let them know what the model being reviewed is like.

 

What is a review then? 

 

Have you read the review to put context around the comment?

[NHY 581]

9 hours ago, Budgie said:

 

I would have thought it would be self-evident. If a review is full of the opinions of the reviewer, it is not going to be of much use to people who rely on the review to let them know what the model being reviewed is like.

 

I've just re-read the relevant passage in the review and I'm not seeing the issue here at all. Completely in context and appropriate to the subject........and why are you commenting on this nearly three months after the review appeared in print ? 

 

Despite the odd bits of brass and copper, as Panniers go, it's certainly a case of popping lipstick on a pig. 

 

Rob. 

[AY Mod]

5 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

as Panniers go, it's certainly a case of popping lipstick on a pig.

 

Filed for future review similes. 😁

[Gilbert]

5 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Filed for future review similes. 😁

Funny - its normally a sheep with him.....

[No Decorum]

Some reviewers try to produce objective scores. I don’t find these anything like as useful as a reviewer’s informed subjective opinion.

[Mallard60022]

On 01/01/2024 at 23:05, Budgie said:

"Ugly" is a subjective opinion, and should not appear in a review.

 

Why not? Most folk with a sense of humour can tell the difference between an adjective (and in this case a fairly well known adjective to describe this Class) and technical descriptives. If I can then anybody can. 

I think it's a Brute. Is that wrong too? (I don't mean a Luggage Trolly from the 70s).

Phil

 

[Mallard60022]

7 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

 

I've just re-read the relevant passage in the review and I'm not seeing the issue here at all. Completely in context and appropriate to the subject........and why are you commenting on this nearly three months after the review appeared in print ? 

 

Despite the odd bits of brass and copper, as Panniers go, it's certainly a case of popping lipstick on a pig. 

 

Rob. 

Is Lipstick on a Pig a similar metaphor to tipping the Velvet?

Yo

P

[NHY 581]

3 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Is Lipstick on a Pig a similar metaphor to tipping the Velvet?

Yo

P

 

No doubt there'll be a few pipe stems bitten through on reading that. 

 

( and quite a few searches made on google on reading this........those of a nervous disposition, you have been warned.......Bad Ducky) 

 

 

[Pteremy]

Whitworths describe their dried figs (on the front of the packet) as 'Naturally ugly but delicious', so maybe not unlike a 15xx?

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, Budgie said:

 

I would have thought it would be self-evident. If a review is full of the opinions of the reviewer, it is not going to be of much use to people who rely on the review to let them know what the model being reviewed is like.

Simples - know how your reviewer works in terms of what they report about a model and how they report it.  That is the review bit you should be interested in.  Our interest, in one respect, is surely whether or not the model is accurately capturing the look and 'presence' of the real thing?  

 

This thread is about Rapido's 15XX and, as it happens I think the model has brilliantly caught the appearance and presence of these engines.  I don't care if someone doesn't like the look of a real 15XX  and its rather unusual outline for a  Swindon pannier tank (but there were good reasons for that).   Whether you think they looked rather spiffing (as I did), or whether you think them weird (as many did), or even ugly, that is merely a personal opinion.  If a reviewer uses any of those words, or simlar, they will be no more than the reviewer's feeling about the way it looks and that is not a review of the model - just an opinion about the real ones.  

[Ian J.]

I find the look of the 15xx perfectly acceptable and not in any way ugly. It has beauty, but it's a very different beauty to say an Adams T3.