Lack of realism in "N" Gauge Locos

[spamcan61]

A quick check of the Model Rail index reveals the BachFar V2 was reviewed in March 2005.

[Karhedron]

What I am saying is that the N gaugers of today KNOW the quality of rtr that is available. It seems to me that they are not pushing the standards up, but a pace or two back.

And how precisely do you suggest that we as individuals push up the standards? Boycot older models? What about GWR modellers who want an express engine? The Farish Castle and King are pretty dated but they are the only option and I have seen people make excellent models by adding extra detailing parts.

 

Short of setting up your own company to make locos what do you suggest? Not all of us have the resources to set up our own company like Ixion have done.

 

If you read the threads from new N gauge modellers you usually do not have to read far before a few old hands turn up to advise them on the pedigree of the different locos available.

[spamcan61]

I agree that this electricnose style proposition that anyone who buys less than state of the art models is holding the hobby back is ridiculous.

[pirouets]

I think there is also a key point that goes with the comment of N gaugers holding the hobby back because of what they buy.

 

Once Farish had been moved to China, Bachmann's first step was not to invest in new models, but to start getting a return on their investment. That meant start producing the old models, but with improvements such as better motors than before. Sure you could not see this on the outside but it was clear from the running quality. I certainly noticed that with the new panniers I bought.

 

Since 2005 (a mere 5 years) we have seen a drastic improvement and N gaugers holding manufacturers to account. Else where in this thread I believe someone mentioned the new class 47 with the high body which has now been rectified, thus producing a better model. Unless someone was waving a huge pile of cash, then it will take time to introduce new, upgrade and phase out older models plus I don't have a budget that can cope with all the changes in 1 go.

 

Over time we will see more and more new models appear and less of the old, but its not going to happen in one go because the investment is too risky.

 

Finally. is N gauge perfect, no. But should I choose to buy an older model then please don't accuse me of holding the scale back because I am not. Its a journey with many steps and whilst we all know where this started from, nobody knows just how far it will go yet and what the next 5 years has to hold.

[Ruston]

It seems to me that we are hyper-critical of the rtr 00, most of which would have won prizes if they had been scratch or kit-builds not so long ago, but we seem to have a drool-fest when a new n gauge howler is released. I believe we are accepting below par models, is it just due to the small size?

 

I can' say I've been hyper-critical of RTR anything. It appears to me that those who are the most critical never actually have any modelling to show. Anyone can criticise a particular RTR model from the comfort of their computer chair but when the rest of their layout and other work isn't up to scratch then why moan about particular aspects of any particular model?

 

Consistency is the name of the game - if the rest of one's modelling is poor then the absolutely correct profile of a diesel cab, the right sort of rivets on a loco tender, or a true-scale tyre tread width isn't going to make a show-stopping layout is it? So it doesn't really matter, does it? If the rest of someone's layout and modelling is that good then they will get on and adapt the model or even be already doing 2mmFS. What they won't be doing is moaning about it on internet forums.

[Edwin_m]

I don't think it was before 2004 as it was definitely after I started getting back into the hobby. I've not heard of it being a pre-existing tooling but it's entirely possible.

[grahame]

What I am saying is that the N gaugers of today KNOW the quality of rtr that is available. It seems to me that they are not pushing the standards up, but a pace or two back.

 

Eh, just how should they be pushing standards up and in what way are they pushing them back?

 

I agree that this electricnose style proposition that anyone who buys less than state of the art models is holding the hobby back is ridiculous.

 

Exactly.

 

G.

[mercig studios]

What I am saying is that the N gaugers of today KNOW the quality of rtr that is available. It seems to me that they are not pushing the standards up, but a pace or two back.

 

There are plenty of recent examples on this forum of people criticising minute detail such as crank-pin screws et al.... see the Britannia and B1 threads for endless posts on the subject.

 

Also recently Dapol have put back the release of their HST because they did listen to criticism made about the front of the model.... how is that taking a pace back? They could easily have gone down the route of releasing the model into the Christmas market for maximum financial gain..... to me that says allot about, at least Dapol's perception, of what the N Gauge modeller expects nowadays. On a similar note the first batch of retooled Farish 47's with the terrible gap have been sold off cheaply in many model shops..... does that not also show you that N Gauge modellers will not now accept second best.

[Michael Delamar]

If we forget how all scales look in a close up photograph for a moment, where N gauge has the advantage is the layout itself allows for realism in the fact that you can have more scenery for less space, ie something like that large N gauge layout of the ladykillers location which names escapes me at the moment

 

an N gauge loco in the flesh will never have the presence or detail as an O gauge or larger in the flesh. theres no way it can.

 

Mike

[Allegheny1600]

May I make an observation, Gents?

So far as I can tell (not being a 'true' N gauge modeller, merely a helper on an N layout at times and having been an N gauger some 25 years ago!) British N gauge has made the most amazing strides forward over the past five years. From what I have seen regarding body shapes, detailing, printing and performance wise - the very latest British N is truly comparable to anything else in the world except, perhaps the very best Japanese stuff.

This is more than can be said for 00 gauge rtr!

Therefore, every N gauge modeller in Britian - by supporting the manufacturers of British outline, are indeed pushing the boundaries of all of our modelling abilities - even if they were to only buy examples of the 30 year old stuff! (which is certainly far improved from what it was 30 years ago!).

The modellers demand higher/finer standards, the manufacturers provide such models and THEY SELL!!!!!

This is a good thing but no-one can expect everything which does not meet the highest standards to be dropped overnight, the manufacturers have to make a profit so they can then produce new models for us all!

So, for me - I applaud what has been achieved in British N - Hip, Hip, Hooray!

John E.

[Pennine MC]

... something like that large N gauge layout of the ladykillers location which names escapes me at the moment

 

 

 

Copenhagen Fields

[roythebus]

I've not followed all this thread, but may I suggest a look back through the Railway Modeller sometime in the late 1960's, when the RM reviewed the Lima BR standard 2-6-4T and an Arnold DB steam loco on the same page. The Arnold loco looked the part, whilst we all know what the Lima standard looked like, and absolute pile of poo, horrendous. Luckily things HAVE changed since then.

 

The other thing to remember is the matter of scale. Speaking to Charlie Skelton of W&H Models many years ago at a toy fair in Earls Court about the then dearth of decent British N and OO models, his reasoning was that of scale. In Europe, "collectors" buy one of everything in HO or N, they are all to the same scale, 1:87 or 1:160 or whatever. British OO 1:76 would not appeal to an HO collector because it is the wrong size.

 

He went on to say about a manufacturer, maybe Roco, making a Belgian diesel loco. Belgium, with a smaller population than the UK and a smaller railway system, the initial order was say 28,000 units BECAUSE they would be bought by collectors. A British loco, such as the class 47, would only sell 5,000 if you are lucky because it would not be bought by the same collectors.

 

Luckily things have changed a lot since those days with the advent of much better model making in the far east, producing decent models in all sizes that do actually look like the real thing. But what I said above gives an insight as to why some of the early British N gauge stuff was crap!

 

BTW Copenhagen Fields is fine scale 2mm, not N gauge as Tim Watson would point out!!

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Again picking up on the comment about N Gauge modellers pushing back. Some of have...

 

Yes there have been dramatic improvements to N Gauge over the last few years...however there have still been issues. The Bachmann V2 was a travesty for example. Those flares at the bottom of the boiler looked ridiculous, and gave the impression that Bachmann were just releasing any old tat onto the market. I still have a number of Bachmann diesels laid-up with split gears (Chinese ones, not the notorious Poole examples), and we still had little details like lazy research (50037 never carried all-over BR blue with a headlight; neither did 50033 for that matter), or short cuts (why both to add a head light at all, if all you're going to do is add a transfer?)...

 

Dapol had dubious QC, leading to all manner of issues with some of their engines - the steam locos suffering particularly with extremely poor haulage capacity (may well have changed with the Brit and the B1, but certainly effected locos like the Q1. Haulage also did for the beautiful, but pathetically feeble PECO 2251.

 

My response? I got so fed up with this that I changed to Japanese models. Granted, things have improved over the last few years for UK outline, but by which time some N gaugers had had enough...mainly taking up US modelling.

 

I come back to this word perception. A lot of N gaugers who model overseas prototypes have the opinion that UK outline is cr*p. It will take a lot of consistently good releases – which in fairness have been taking place over recent times – to break this perception. It seems that every time there is a new release it is heralded as ‘The Best British N Gauge Locomotive Ever’, which no doubt it is. But it will take time to achieve that consistency.

 

 

[PGN]

I think that by and large the N gauge manufacturers are providing what the N gauge modellers want to buy; and that's what it's about, isn't it?

 

Sure, you can look towards the summit of perfection and say "there's still a fair bit of the mountain to climb"; or, as the majority of N gauge posters to this thread have done, you can instead look back and see how far up the same mountain we have climbed, and say "gee, what progress!"

 

Bear in mind, however, that the N gauge market is a broad church, made up of a lot of different modellers with a lot of different takes on the hobby, all trying to do different things.

 

My personal take is that maybe the manufacturers have actually gone too far, since I want to handle and run my locomotives rather than just stand them in a display case and admire them. At normal viewing distance, much of the fine detail is not observed and much of the small print is impossible to see, never mind read. Fine detail is easily damaged with handling. From my point of view, I would be just as well with models that don't have this detail and fine printing.

 

So should I resent having to pay for detailing that I don't want?

 

Well, I'm not sure I should - because if there is a high level of market demand for it, then I fancy that a more detailed model which sells 15,000 units may actually be a cheaper proposition for the manufacturer to produce than a less detailed model which sells only 5,000 units. Ironic, perhaps, but that's market economics for you!

 

What is observable, however, is that - especially with the modern trend for insisting on "consistency" across the whole of a modelling project - the ever increasing detail of the RTR offerings appears to be impacting on the kit market. With a fair wind, I can build and finish a white metal kit to a standard sufficinet to stand alongside a Poole built Farish loco. But I could never build and finish it to a standard to stand alongside the latest offerings from Bachmann-Farish and Dapol. The kit manufacturers have certainly upped their game of late (and I am looking forward to building N Brass Locomotives' latest offering) but however good the kit, the quality of the finish is in the hands of the builder.

 

I personally am not that bothered, because I don't insist on "consistency" and will happily run locomotives of different standards fo finish alongside one another; but that's my choice, and I think it's one which fewer and fewer modellers are making. So my impression is that the raised standards of the RTR models have stimulated market demand for those very models, whilst damaging the N gauge kit market ... which, in turn, is going to lead to greater homogenisation of the N gauge layouts we see at exhibitions, with all stock being more or less identical out-of-the-box RTR stuff.

 

Will this be damaging in the long term?

 

I don't know. What I DO know, however, is that the less restricted the range of RTR locomotives on offer, the less damaging this trend will be. SO I for one would far rather that, as long as they are still selling, the manufacturers continue to churn out the older, less finely detailed models alongside the newer, more finely detailed offerings; and that their development budgets be devoted to the production of new models of prototypes not previously available in N (J72, anybody??) rather than going back and upgrading models from the (still rather limited) existing range. There is, after all, nothing stopping the modeller who insists on consistency from "super-detailling" the less finely detailed models (or, if he lacks the skills and wishes neither to develop them nor pay somebody else to exercise them, yet still he insists on "consistency", he can always remove some of the fine detail from the newer models ... it is, after all, his train set and he can choose how he's going to play with it ... )

[Steven B]

1) Close up photography is very cruel when it comes to such small models and IMHO there is a great deal of difference in seeing the actual model in the flesh. To my eyes the recent Farish offerings have been lovely little models.

 

Agreed.

 

Typically, the likes of Railway Modeller and Model Rail print photos of the new models at roughly the same size on the page. This means that a photos of a new N Gauge models are effectively being shown at twice the size of the OO gauge models. It's not too suprising that some of the model's warts show up more!

 

N gauge has come on in leaps and bounds in recent years. How often on this forum do you see the words "I thought it was OO Gauge" when a N Gauge model or layout isn't labelled as such from the start of the thread. It's not often you see OO gauge models being mistaken for O gauge...

 

The future's bright, the future's N Gauge!

 

Happy modelling.

 

Steven B.

(N Gauge modeller and proud of it!)

[grahame]

the N gauge market is a broad church, made up of a lot of different modellers with a lot of different takes on the hobby, all trying to do different things.

 

This, of course is true, and additionally the British N gauge market is still considerably smaller than that of British OO. Once you take out the collectors, those who aren't paticularly interested in the fidelity of models, the kids to whom they're only toys, and the fact that N gauge seems affliced with a large proportion of either those reluctant to spend much or those with restricted disposable incomes, there are not a great deal of discerning N gauge modellers left to significantly affect the market and manufacturers. But nonetheless the market is developing and manufcaturers are producing improved models.

 

My personal take is that maybe the manufacturers have actually gone too far, since I want to handle and run my locomotives rather than just stand them in a display case and admire them. At normal viewing distance, much of the fine detail is not observed and much of the small print is impossible to see, never mind read. Fine detail is easily damaged with handling.

 

Yep, sure fine details can get damaged with inconsiderate handling, but we're talking about very small scale delicate models and they should be treated with great care - not roughly handled. If detail it not important does it really matter if it gets damaged - why not just cut it all off. And if robustness is a requirement then perhaps N gauge isn't the answer and simple large scale wooden models might be more appropriate.

 

snip - especially with the modern trend for insisting on "consistency" across the whole of a modelling project - snip - I personally am not that bothered, because I don't insist on "consistency" and will happily run locomotives of different standards fo finish alongside one another; but that's my choice, and I think it's one which fewer and fewer modellers are making.

 

I'm glad to hear that more and more (N Gauge) modellers consider consistancy is the path to better and finer project standards. IMO 'consistancy' is probably one of the most important elements in achieving atmospheric and realistic looking layouts. And to do that you need decent consistantly high quality rolling stock produced by the manufacturers. Long may they continue to improve their output.

 

G.

[Pennine MC]

What is observable, however, is that - especially with the modern trend for insisting on "consistency" across the whole of a modelling project -

 

I dont think anybody 'insists' on it, do they? All I've ever seen anybody say (as in Grahame's post) is that it helps, towards portraying a convincing total picture. Nobody's obliged to model that way if they dont wish to, any more than the other folk are obliged to like it.

[woodenhead]

I personally think the Bach-Far V2 was the watershed moment in N modelling - it was a lot better than the old Poole stuff but not where modellers were expecting Bach-Far to go. Their next steam new release was the Jubilee and we've not looked back (I'll let the gap between the loco and tender on the 2-6-0 go).

 

Clearly the entry of Dapol to give competition had a big impact on things, but I have noticed more and more N gauge layout appearing on RMWeb and other forums so clearly things are looking up and as more people are drawn to the gauge then the impetus to get even better becomes greater as there is a growing market to justify the investment.

 

O gauge is probably getting a similar lift at present with Heljan's RTR efforts.

[edcayton]

How many years since the Peco Jubilee? ISTR that was made for them by Rivarossi. How well would that stand comparison with the new releases?

 

Ed

[Revolution Mike]

How many years since the Peco Jubilee? ISTR that was made for them by Rivarossi. How well would that stand comparison with the new releases?

 

Not my thing, but the Peco Jubilee was very well regarded for its time, but it isn't in the class of the Farish Jubilee.

[woodenhead]

The Peco Jubilee was always better than everything around it (UK) at the time, but compared to modern releases is quite basic. Moulded body with no extra fittings, fairly basic valve gear. It was tender drive like the modern stuff and had see through wheels.

[Stuart A]

and we still had little details like lazy research (50037 never carried all-over BR blue with a headlight; neither did 50033 for that matter), or short cuts (why both to add a head light at all, if all you're going to do is add a transfer?)...

 

 

 

Well you are right on 037, but Glorious finished it's career in Blue http://www.class50.com/c50_zoom.php?img=0113020045000

 

As for this argument, new release N gauge locos have never been better, diesels look better than steam, but the recent Farish standards and the Jubilee look tremendous. With N you do loose the "presence" of the loco- especially with kettles, however the massive gain is scale length trains in the landscape.

 

As for the coupling thing, I've never been able to understand the argument OO people have about the rapido. Once the front one is removed, it is hard to notice between the stock on the move. Shunting is a problem, but should be solved with the new on under development by Bachmann.

 

There is something about OO models which still makes me think they are toys as opposed to models, however there are some fantastic OO layouts on here, so I'm not a OO basher. Anyhow its N for me.

 

 

 

[Karhedron]

Haulage also did for the beautiful, but pathetically feeble PECO 2251.

The second batch are fitted with traction tyres and are reputed to be much better haulers.

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Well you are right on 037, but Glorious finished it's career in Blue http://www.class50.c...g=0113020045000

 

 

Good point...I forgot about that. It was, however, for a very short period of time...

[Karhedron]

So my impression is that the raised standards of the RTR models have stimulated market demand for those very models, whilst damaging the N gauge kit market ... which, in turn, is going to lead to greater homogenisation of the N gauge layouts we see at exhibitions, with all stock being more or less identical out-of-the-box RTR stuff.

I do not think that this is necessarily the case. The problem is that many of the kits available for N gauge are as dated as the old Poole models whose chassis they are designed to run on. We are only just starting to see a new generation of kits emerge to take advantage of the newer mechanisms.

 

I made a brave start on a PD Marsh mogul but found it a slog and gave up when Ixion announced their model. On the other hand I have just finished a D600 hundred kit which does not look too bad at all from normal viewing distances.

 

Give the kit manufacturers time to dream up creations to sit on some of the new mechanisms coming out we may see the kit building side of N gauge flourish too. The thing to remember is that 00 and larger scales can feasibly build the chassis as well. This is far harder in N due to the small size of the components, thus most kits are restricted to bodyshell replacements.