What N gauge do you want to see from Accurascale?

[Padishar Creel]

Hallo Accurascale Team,

another vote for MK2Cs from me

es grüßt

pc 

[Steven B]

How many of the calls for non-air-con Mk2s are simply because of the lack of production coming from Farish?

 

I wonder if there's much interest in any of Accurascale/IRM's Irish range being reduced. Accurascale/IRM could model to 1:177.777 scale and get the scale/gauge combination correct for 9mm track. N177.77 perhaps?

 

Steven B.

[woodenhead]

1 minute ago, Steven B said:

How many of the calls for non-air-con Mk2s are simply because of the lack of production coming from Farish?

 

I wonder if there's much interest in any of Accurascale/IRM's Irish range being reduced. Accurascale/IRM could model to 1:177.777 scale and get the scale/gauge combination correct for 9mm track. N177.77 perhaps?

 

Steven B.

We do like new models you know, it's not just about a vacuum of coaches.

 

N gauge modellers don't simply turn to something else because they cannot get what they need.

 

No, they become very vocal on RmWeb at each quarterly announcement about the lack of Mk1 coaches, and Mk2 and Mk2f etc etc etc.😄

 

The Accurascale Mk2b/c are not available from Farish so offer variety, the same variety that OO modellers get but in larger volumes.

[Steven B]

I do share the desire for variation, but I still suspect the majority would be just as happy with more regular batches of Mk2a as they would a new Mk2b or c.

 

Steven B.

[frobisher]

1 minute ago, Steven B said:

I do share the desire for variation, but I still suspect the majority would be just as happy with more regular batches of Mk2a as they would a new Mk2b or c.

 

Nope, more MK2's full stop across all sub marks would be good.  Farish haven't produced anything resembling (word used pointedly...) a MK2c in over ten years.  The b and the c were the mainstay of the non-aircon MK2 stock.  More 2z/a's would be appreciated as well of course.

[Darlington_Shed]

My vote would be for coaches, obviously, but also a heartfelt plea for any of the P7 hoppers.

[woodenhead]

11 minutes ago, Steven B said:

I do share the desire for variation, but I still suspect the majority would be just as happy with more regular batches of Mk2a as they would a new Mk2b or c.

 

Steven B.

There are two elements at play here;

 

First a general grumpiness from N gauge modellers that not enough is being produced of anything by Farish but a lack coaches are the biggest barrier to ongoing development of the gauge as it discourages new entrants and leaves existing modellers thinking they are in the wrong gauge.

 

Secondly, competition has been reduced in recent years.  Farish was at it's most productive when Dapol when it was very focussed on N gauge with regular new models which were well received and it drove Farish to improve it's own offerings and volume of models.  Once Dapol cut back after trying to grab everything (well one person at Dapol!) then Farish seemed to similarly cut back.  In reality it is probably a lot more complicated and other economic / competitive pressure / production challenges  will have played a large part as well.

 

But for N gauge modellers what we have is a situation where Dapol are producing more of the same, which is great if you want HSTs, Gresleys, Maunsells or Colletts (and something to haul them).  But if you want to play with your Dapol McRats or even Cromptons you are going to need Mk1s and Mk2s and Mk2s are a lot more than just the models produced by Farish though I agree you can get away with just Farish models.  But if Farish are going to have production problems i.e. not enough slots for the foreseeable then we need the others to deliver models too so that the N gauge range does not stagnate or lose market share which will only make it harder to produce more models.

 

We now have RevolutioN producing less niche models in N (128, 120, 313), Rapido have arrived with models so it is time I think that Accurascale also start producing under their own name in N too.

 

Bachmann Farish are clearly aware of the direction of travel and despite the lack of mass competition from others has done sterling work upgrading models to Next18 with Speakers plus the recent regional models mimicking the OO initiative.  A nice set of batches of coaches would be really welcomed from Farish alongside anything Accurascale could offer, it's not one or the other, it's both that the scale need and perhaps, just perhaps, N gauge is on the cusp of another evolution.

[PeterStiles]

Lets see if we had "KUA Nuclear Carrier" would you be able to add some power to pull them with and some barrier coaches? A great "Train pack" would be a Full Nuclear Train :)

 

(and some N scale Royal Marines... might need to outsource to modulu for those)

Edited February 23, 2023 by PeterStiles
added marines

[woodenhead]

1 minute ago, PeterStiles said:

Lets see if we had "KUA Nuclear Carrier" would you be able to add some power to pull them with and some barrier coaches? A great "Train pack" would be a Full Nuclear Train :)

 

(and some N scale Royal Marines... might need to outsource to modulu for those)

Nuclear powered locomotives, now there is an idea that would both solve and make problems, mind a lead lined loco would have absolutely no need for rubber traction tyres 🤣

[jpendle]

38 minutes ago, PeterStiles said:

Lets see if we had "KUA Nuclear Carrier" would you be able to add some power to pull them with and some barrier coaches? A great "Train pack" would be a Full Nuclear Train :)

 

(and some N scale Royal Marines... might need to outsource to modulu for those)

Already been done by Revolution, I've got my 2, plus two CL68's and two (not barrier) coaches. They are accommodation for said Royal Marines.

 

Regards,

 

John P

[jpendle]

37 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Nuclear powered locomotives, now there is an idea that would both solve and make problems, mind a lead lined loco would have absolutely no need for rubber traction tyres 🤣

"A Transatlantic Tunnel, Hurrah" trainset would be very nice 😁

 

John P

[Roy L S]

Simply and succinctly I would welcome a bang up to date Class 37 with Next 18 socket and fitted speaker. 

 

True, the Farish model is OK and continues to be produced, but it remains in 6 pin form and without any provision for sound. 

 

Duplication is always a risk, but the Farish one is also quite an old model now to add to the other reasons above.

 

Roy

[Accurascale Fran]

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks so much for the suggestions, and the interest! It seems that there is plenty, which is heartening. As you know we are at Model Rail Scotland this weekend, stand A37, and wo of our crew (both called Steve!) are passionate about the scale and model it. So if you're attending, come by, say hi and give us your thoughts!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Accurascale Fran

[Covkid]

8 hours ago, Accurascale Fran said:

Hi everyone,

 

Thanks so much for the suggestions, and the interest! It seems that there is plenty, which is heartening. As you know we are at Model Rail Scotland this weekend, stand A37, and wo of our crew (both called Steve!) are passionate about the scale and model it. So if you're attending, come by, say hi and give us your thoughts!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

 

Did you get to pick your own stand number Fran ?  Just askin !!!

[masonc61]

Hi,

 

@Accurascale Fran

 

NER 21T Hoppers and NER Chaldrons I would definitely be purchasing if you produce.

 

What is the MOQ required to go to production?

 

Cheers,

 

Colin.

[McC]

5 hours ago, masonc61 said:

Hi,

 

@Accurascale Fran

 

NER 21T Hoppers and NER Chaldrons I would definitely be purchasing if you produce.

 

What is the MOQ required to go to production?

 

Cheers,

 

Colin.

 

Generally the less you make the higher the price to recoup the tooling cost. 

[Suffolk Rob]

This morning's  OO announcement as a bells and whistles (and sound) entry into N would be an excellent first step

 

Rob

[woodenhead]

17 minutes ago, Suffolk Rob said:

This morning's  OO announcement as a bells and whistles (and sound) entry into N would be an excellent first step

 

Rob

Despite being a dyed in the wool BR blue modeller, I concur, it's an obvious target for N - two iffy models from a decade ago.

Edited February 24, 2023 by woodenhead

[Brian-1c]

The 66 is definitely one for consideration in N gauge. It really is time for a top class version with Next 18, built in dual speakers and stay alive. In fact that also applies to any loco you do in N gauge.

[37114]

On 20/02/2023 at 12:08, Accurascale Fran said:

Hi everyone,

 

We would only canvass opinions if we were serious about something. We have designed and made N gauge models for 3rd party outfits previously but now we would do them under our own branding. We also have a couple of die hard N gauge modellers in our ranks these days who are banging the drum internally. So, you guys have that going in your favour too! It will take time to develop of course, but having a healthy response will help persuade us. So, let your N gauge friends know to tell us what they would like to see too, under the premise of what is in our existing 4mm range.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran  

Hi Fran, I am conscious this thread is about N gauge but are you interested in any O gauge suggestions? Conscious you guys have done one O gauge wagon so presume that will have given you a view as to whether you want to do anything else in O, however if it is on the cards then happy to give some suggestions in a different thread? 

Edited February 24, 2023 by 37114
clarity

[McC]

2 minutes ago, 37114 said:

Hi Fran, I am conscious this thread is about N gauge but are you interested in any O gauge suggestions? Conscious you guys have done one O gauge wagon so presume that will have given you a view as to whether you want to do anything else in O, however if it is on the cards then happy to give some suggestions in a different thread? 

 

As you know we've done our own 7mm wagon, and a few more for others (some even award winning :) ) Perhaps another thread...

[The Pilotman]

From your current OO range, I’d definitely be interested in:

Class 50s 

Mark 2C coaches (I’d be in for blue/grey and NSE, plus the InterCity BFK)

I’m sure you’d do a brilliant 31 and 37 too but the current Farish models are just about good enough for me.

 

Edited February 25, 2023 by The Pilotman

[TomE]

Ahead of a chat with Accurascale about their thoughts and plans for N Gauge, there is a poll running over on NGN to get a clear picture of which models in the Accurascale range people would like to see: https://bit.ly/3IJOS5I

 

Head over and cast your votes, then watch out for the chat sometime in the next couple of weeks. 

 

Tom. 

Edited March 1, 2023 by TomE

[Dr Al]

As a long time N gauge modeller, whose dealt with and seen more N gauge models than I should admit to, I'd like to add to this, but in a different way.

 

All Accurascale's existing models (well locos, certainly) are already available from the main N Gauge manufacturers, they need to distinguish themselves by other means. One such, would be a real step up in design and testing and quality, and less of the 'jumping on the list of features bandwagon'.

Specifically, any N gauge loco that could cover the following would have a very strong basis going forward:

 

- kinematic mounts. Do not use kinematic mounted couplers on locos, instead having bogie mounted NEM sockets. Now woaaaahh I hear everyone squeal - that's a retrograde step. But actually consider the real usage of these, and quickly the answer becomes: no it's not. Manufacturers have all recently jumped on this bandwagon, and have clearly not fully functionally tested these systems . No kinematically mounted coupler loco can actually couple reliably, and often never at all on a curve, because these systems point the coupler in completely the wrong direction:

 

 

This will not couple, quite simply. This has been a retrograde step for the models that have it. [Yes, here that's on a tight setrack curve, but the same problem occurs on less tight curves]. Same is true of other manufacturer's models - it's no recognition of this model's manufacturer (EFE cl17) or execution - it's the basic geometry and concept of the system that fails in this instance, which is always worse for locos which have longer front overhangs/bogies.

 

For rolling stock, if these are used (and I'm not against them being used here, with careful design, as when coupled they work well to close the gaps), then they need to be designed so they are turned by the bogies, such that the coupler follows the track centre, such that they can then couple on curves.

 

- motors. Recently again the trend has been for everyone to go sealed can or sealed coreless. No big problem with this in many ways, and certainly they are smooth credible performers. However, the problems come after a few years - wear to commutation and brushes and they are dead - they can't be repaired, giving an expensive repair or replacement (many Farish motors are £20+ not including cost of getting them fitted). This may sound hypothetical and "you'd need to run it for ages", but actually motor failures just because of worn down brushes on both can and coreless motors are becoming increasingly common given even the number I've seen, in many cases on models that really aren't that old (2, 3, 5 years). While this, I'm sure is something manufacturers don't hugely care about, it does not help the scale's reputation for reliability.

 

Beyond that, even Dapol who do use an open frame motor, which runs well and is 5 pole/skew wound, but it has one part of the design that is poorly thought out - there's no easy access to the commutator for cleaning (something that should be considered basic maintenance IMHO). Again this is being seen in a large number of motors performing poorly (I've seen a lot) when all that's going on is the comm slots are clogged [aside: the can motors Farish use also have this problem - binning motors just because the commutators are clogged is madness, as it can happen after only a relatively few hours of running]. As such, choice of a solid, tested, 5 pole, skew wound, open frame motor, with accessible commutator for easy maintenance would alone distinguish Accurascale as a step up, and give the indication they have really considered their designs from a pragmatic standpoint.

 

Also, recently Farish have scaled all their mechanisms such that the full power top speed is the scale top speed of the loco. This sounds intelligent and a great idea, but again it misses the pragmatic reality - put 10 coaches on behind the model, add some curves or a slight gradient and the scale top speed cannot be reached. Also to then get to top speed you are hammering the motor at its top end. So again careful design thought would go a long way here.

 

- access. Some manufacturers are starting to catch onto this, but easy body removal is a must. We've seen some horrors in N - the Farish DMUs are not easy to get into as the clips are too vicious, the Revolution 320's centre car is a nightmare [worse as there's a functional item in there - the interior lighting switch!]. All use plastic clip type attachments, and all have clearly been designed on a computer and never actually given to someone to test [I've seen several models with big scratches up their sides from slipped tools from poor owners just trying to get the shell off to put a decoder in]. As such, moving to some simple screwed attachments, with easy access to the full chassis for DCC fitment or maintenance would be a simple boon that seems to have been overlooked for so many years. Certainly the removable roof sections on the OO models are a good idea, but making the full body easily removable is also highly desirable.

 

- pickups. Again, the bandwagon had a number of N Gauge models move to axle mounted bearing pickup systems. These can work ok if there's enough wheels and weight, but often are less consistent that traditional systems, and are a nightmare to maintain. Wiper pickups are far better as their positive spring contact ensures good electrical contact. The bearing pickups are often poor in this respect - anyone who's had a Dapol 57xx or some Farish models can attest - the 57xx's can often only be fixed by completely stripping down to the level of wheels off axles to clean the pickups! Wipers are a doddle to clean by comparison. With the right pickups, the need for stuff like stay-alive evaporates, and solves the problem at source.

 

- Rapido coupler. Here, the number of poor renditions of this is amazing. Often with a big mould line across the centre of the coupler, flash, as well as poor toleranced NEM sockets that give stiff operation, loose operation, couplers that droop/stick up high [the primary problem that causes uncoupling is level coupler heads and coupler heights]. Getting these done to a higher standard is something that nobody will shout about, but will actually make a real difference - and in terms of the best coupler rendition - look at a Farish coupler head dating from 1984-2000 - these have a subtle design change that means when coupled to each other they almost never come apart, even if the heights aren't quite perfect and the trackwork is...wandering. I'll admit, it took me a while to discover this, but when I did I was amazed that nobody has kept on doing it!

 

- availability. A big problem in N right now is the scarcity of re-runs, meaning it's almost impossible to get some models. While we all know batch production is the current way, when models have had one batch produced and never another for up to a decade [e.g. Farish Black 5, A1, A2, as well as the coaches], it gets difficult for many to see the scale as credible. 

 

Hopefully those at Accurascale are reading, and this makes a somewhat different viewpoint from the usual "I want X, with features R,S,T; but do not want to pay more than Y for it". For a new manufacturer to push things forward, a step change again in quality, and maybe considering some of the above would make them stand out, over and above all the usual DCC, lights, sound gubbins, which we all know will be present in any new model.

 

Cheers,

Alan - clearly needs to get out more given he has observed all this over the years....

 

P.s. for what it's worth, of the list of what Accurascale do, the likely most enticing is the class 37.

[N_gauge_uk_user]

I would like to see a Class 23 "baby deltic". Wanting to get one in OO was the only thing that stopped me going to n gauge originally, but I had to sacrifice it for the  the chance to make the layout I wanted in the space I have available.