Revolution announce 320/321 in 00

[ruggedpeak]

Great news.

 

Greater Anglia and Renatus for me, spent several decades commuting on them,

[Dennis2000]

This is brilliant, hopefully they do the Greater Anglia livery!

[nickb4141]

On 26/02/2024 at 22:08, Adam1701D said:

OO Sales are three to four times those in N, so some of the liveries that didn't make the cut originally may well do so this time!

Don’t disagree with you on that Adam, although not sure the Revolution guys see it that way, hence there are more livery options in N gauge for the Class 175’s and 180’s than there are for the 00 gauge versions! 

[Legend]

25 minutes ago, nickb4141 said:

Don’t disagree with you on that Adam, although not sure the Revolution guys see it that way, hence there are more livery options in N gauge for the Class 175’s and 180’s than there are for the 00 gauge versions! 

 Interesting thought .  It could be that actually you need more liveries the less sales there are to maximise the potential of the tooling, hence more liveries in N which must have smaller sales than OO. Never thought of it that way . My thinking was the more popular the loco and more units sold then the more liveries would be available . 
 

I know the Crimson and Cream 320 was slower to sell , but I think it was only marketed by AMRSS , so maybe that was the reason . 

Edited February 28 by Legend

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hi all,

 

We haven't finalised exactly which variants we will be offering. 

 

Strathclyde PTE red/black and Scotrail Saltire are definites for the 320, and Network Southeast and London Midland for the 321.  In N we were able to produce carmine and cream 320s thanks to the AMRSS, and the Silverlink 321s thanks to a successful expressions of interest exercise.

 

Before the models go up for pre-order we will be considering realistic options for other variants while keeping in mind that we do not want to over-produce.  Shelves of unsold models help neither retailers nor Revolution.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Matt]

If it helps at all I would take a 320 in each SPT orange, carmine and cream, and spotrail - I.e. you’ll increase your sales to me 50% if you produce a third Scottish livery:-)

[puffmeister-general]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

If it helps at all I would take a 320 in each SPT orange, carmine and cream, and spotrail - I.e. you’ll increase your sales to me 50% if you produce a third Scottish livery:-)

Likewise with myself - carmine and cream is my era of modelling but I can’t resist the orange & black and saltire also. I’m hoping AMRSS will commission 320 306 model rail Scotland in OO as they did for N.

[taliesin]

A change of interior gives the Class 322 originally built for the Stansted Express, they later migrated to Manchester Airport.

[90136]

I would be up for several in Silverlink. Nice looking livery and wore by the units for a long time. Same for First Great Eastern.

[mken1861]

Great to hear from Ben that a London Midland version is on the cards. As I model the WCML, a definite must (or two) for me.

 

Wondering whether an unpowered LMid version might be available to enable the running of 8 and 12 car sets without the need to run powered sets in consists?

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hi all,

 

We won't be doing unpowered sets.

 

I think the only reason they are ever suggested is because it is thought they might be cheaper.  But that is a myth.   When modern features like lights, PCBs, decoder sockets etc are considered the only real difference is a $5 electric motor, and that saving is so paltry it's frankly not worth the extra admin and design time.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[mken1861]

Thanks Ben. Fully support the justification... makes commercial sense... 👍

[Sweetling Park]

This is an interesting announcement and I would be interested in a FCC or GN liveried set if one were produced.

[stewartingram]

2 hours ago, Sweetling Park said:

This is an interesting announcement and I would be interested in a FCC or GN liveried set if one were produced.

No No NO! I suffered those dratted things too long as a commuter. Marginally better than a 317 was, but they replaced our 365s with both 317 & 321 - an upgrade?

[Sweetling Park]

16 hours ago, stewartingram said:

No No NO! I suffered those dratted things too long as a commuter. Marginally better than a 317 was, but they replaced our 365s with both 317 & 321 - an upgrade?

I didn't realise that as I haven't (yet) travelled on them.  I was just looking for something for the London end of the layout and thought a 321 would be OK.  I take it that the 365s were better?

Edited March 12 by Sweetling Park

[stewartingram]

Much better. Modern trains though, I would have preferred Mk1 coaches, but I grew to them quite rapidly. Good lookers too.

Edited March 12 by stewartingram

[Sweetling Park]

Yes, I remember seeing the 365s with their smiley front ends.  Something for me to consider if they were produced in OO gauge.  (Sorry if I've gone off-topic.)

[Legend]

38 minutes ago, Sweetling Park said:

Yes, I remember seeing the 365s with their smiley front ends.  Something for me to consider if they were produced in OO gauge.  (Sorry if I've gone off-topic.)

You could even run them in Scotland as they did Edinburgh - Glasgow before the 385s arrived . Still looking forward to the 320 though

[YT-1300]

3 hours ago, Legend said:

You could even run them in Scotland as they did Edinburgh - Glasgow before the 385s arrived . Still looking forward to the 320 though

I remember the acceleration on them up the Cowlairs incline, quite an eye opener!!!

[Legend]

19 hours ago, YT-1300 said:

I remember the acceleration on them up the Cowlairs incline, quite an eye opener!!!

Yes the few times I was on one they did seem lively performers . It was a shame we couldn’t have kept a few as I understand they are currently out of use 

[Sweetling Park]

40 minutes ago, Legend said:

Yes the few times I was on one they did seem lively performers . It was a shame we couldn’t have kept a few as I understand they are currently out of use 

Unfortunately I never got to experience them before they met their demise.  A number of them could have been stored for redeployment to electrified areas to bolster existing services, or reused for other purposes such as freight (like the recent 321 conversions for parcels etc.), but I guess there was lack of interest in them.

 

I could be wrong, but I believe most if not all of the units have now been scrapped, with only three vehicles being kept for preservation.  However, I understand that a suite of sound recordings were taken from an operaonal unit before it was withdrawn.

Edited March 13 by Sweetling Park

[ruggedpeak]

On 02/03/2024 at 13:34, Revolution Ben said:

 

Hi all,

 

We won't be doing unpowered sets.

 

I think the only reason they are ever suggested is because it is thought they might be cheaper.  But that is a myth.   When modern features like lights, PCBs, decoder sockets etc are considered the only real difference is a $5 electric motor, and that saving is so paltry it's frankly not worth the extra admin and design time.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

I know this has been done to death elsewhere, but note that Heljan have produced their Class 25 ETHEL's without a motor. They are the same price as the motorised Class 25's. I haven't seen anything kicking off over this solution even with the unchanged price, indeed the 'kicking off' was over Heljan and SLW models being powered in the first place.

 

My suggestion/thought is that at the design stage, making it relatively easy for multiple unit models that regularly ran in multiples (like 320/321's) to be 'de-motored' so that they have the potential to become trailed units. This assumes suitable pulling power in a single unit, but might assist sales since it becomes a lot easier to run an 8 or 12 car set on the layout. Less faff, no need for DCC consisting etc, maybe more tempting for the average modeller to buy an extra set or two. Given the availability of suitable locos to drag them to storage or the scrap yard for the contemporary scene, this is a futher benefit.

 

Just a thought, no response required.

[Northerngirl]

I don't see the point of non motorised sets, the price can't be reduced enough to make it a worthwhile saving, it creates more variation to manufacture, and I would have thought someone spend around £1k on a 12 car set would have the knowledge how to give a couple of decoders the same adress

[mken1861]

The issue is not about giving a couple of decoders the same address or creating a consist...      ...it's about some of us reaching the limit on our controller in relation to the number of chips the system can support.

By not needing decoders in unmotorised units, you can shunt them in the fiddleyard; and be able to add only a single decoder onto the controller.

For me, if I were to buy three motorised units, then I would exceed the capacity of my control system. Therefore, i would need to buy a new control system, which is a huge unwanted cost.

Taking a system design approach, I'm not looking for a cheaper four car 321, but a solution that I can run/shunt as a 12 car set with one decoder! 😀

Note: I'm also wanting to ensure that @Revolution Ben can stay in business and provide us with more great models! Hence supportive of @ruggedpeak's comments about designing in the lack of motorised unit at the development stage.

Edited March 22 by mken1861

[Shaun66]

1 hour ago, mken1861 said:

Taking a system design approach, I'm not looking for a cheaper four car 321, but a solution that I can run/shunt as a 12 car set with one decoder!

 

But you would still need a decoder to control the directional lights and any other lighting functions in the dummy units though so they will still need decoders.