Class 86

[Simon Moore]

Although their are certain bits on this loco missing out i think the model is really decent & hopefully will be the base for a really well detailed model. I think the Alstom Heritage version is very nice & the livery looks decent too. The freightliner version is decent too hopefully the model in the flesh will look even better. My wife has got me one for my birthday not sure which although she has followed the request for a modern image one.

 

Simon.

[298]

Very nice chassis! I would be interested if anyone has the chance to see if the Heljan chassis fits inside the Hornby body. From the photos posted by Gareth it looks as if it should but height could well be critical.

 

A cheaper option would be to use a Bachmann Warship chassis with Hornby bits and Jim S-W's custom etches, as described in his workbench thread.

['CHARD]

Cheaper perhaps, but surely the intention is to re-use the Heljan bogies and underframe, or am I missing some glaring inaccuracy on these elements too?

 

What we've managed to do here is to very cleverly talk a thread that's about the merits of a new RTR loco into one about how to home-make the same class of loco from recycled bits from the parts-bin. Is it just me, or have we reached a new low of collective churlishness?

 

Anyway, I've heard the box that Heljan's 86 comes in is very good, it looks exactly like the prototype when I squint and peer at it through an old sheet of cloudy perspex.

[Morphaniel]

Thanks for everyone posting reviews and info so far, but as an ex Round Table Chairman and Area Chairman with a non electric, northern based 'shelf' I will probably be buying the Anglian for sentimental reasons. The rondel appears to be accurate...B)

[brian daniels]

 

Anyway, I've heard the box that Heljan's 86 comes in is very good, it looks exactly like the prototype when I squint and peer at it through an old sheet of cloudy perspex.

 

Nice one

[emdpowerrules]

Cheaper perhaps, but surely the intention is to re-use the Heljan bogies and underframe,

 

Correct, plus mech of course.

 

merits of a new RTR loco

 

Merits? Nice looking chassis and a quality drive mech. Was going to order two Freightliner 86/6s yesterday but didn't get past the pics on Hattons website. But if I can make use of the chassis then I'll still buy two, bodies can be sold on.

[37023]

HAs anyone attempted renumbering one yet? im a tad torn as to as when i had a bash at a 47 of their it took the paint off too :/ wasnt funny. if anyone has/is doing can you PM me with your method of renumbering and out come!

[Guest jim s-w]

Hiya

 

let me just ask this - how long have you waited for the Heljan model to come out? Yes it might be a good idea to fit the Hornby body to the Heljan chassis but why the rush? Do you really want to pay a premium for the chassis. You are looking to sell the worst bit on and you wont get a lot for it. My advice - wait - they will get cheaper and they will start to appear second hand.

 

Who knows there might be a revised version that fixes the errors yet? Personally for my needs (fleet quantities) I will be happier combining Hornby and Warships and all the work that involves than use the Heljan ones. If they revise the tooling then I might go for Heljan but...

 

I appreciate what Gareth says about damaging sales through negative comment but no comment has made my mind up for me. Its the problems with the models and my personal opinion that this is the worst new RTR model we have seen for years means that traders over the years has lost several grand (just from myself). Although the figures he quotes makes me think he may get similar profit from the Hornby one for less outlay anyway!

 

Cheers

 

Jim

['CHARD]

Not wishing to descend into the usual, but that's a bit harsh Jim. It's no badge of honour to appear in the D&E rogues' gallery tis true, but the tippy-toes 40, porch-fitted 37, baseball-cap wearing Western, Tubby 47, and the compromised early-style 25 can no way leave the field open for the assertion that the Danes' electro-duff is 'the worst RTR model...'

 

Granted you need fleet quantities of this signature WCML traction, but by your own admission prices will fall and at that point surely a smaller number of etches (windscreens, vents) will cure the errors on what's basically a fundamentally more correct body-in-white than the Margate veteran?

[emdpowerrules]

My advice - wait - they will get cheaper and they will start to appear second hand.

 

That's the plan Jim :icon_thumbsup2:

[298]

Cheaper perhaps, but surely the intention is to re-use the Heljan bogies and underframe, or am I missing some glaring inaccuracy on these elements too?

 

What we've managed to do here is to very cleverly talk a thread that's about the merits of a new RTR loco into one about how to home-make the same class of loco from recycled bits from the parts-bin. Is it just me, or have we reached a new low of collective churlishness?

 

No, the buyer needs to make an informed choice as to which loco best suits their needs. If I had pre-ordered one i'd be very disappointed, as to me the model contains errors that aren't easily correctable and spoil the look of the locomotive. And this is before considerations such as paint finish and accuracy are taken into consideration.

 

It does seem ironic that 15 years ago the height of D&E modelling was sticking bits from a Craftsman detailing kit on a Hornby or Lima body, but the efforts from the manufacturers since have certainly been recieved with mixed responses. Maybe we have been spoilt by some of the Bachmann diesels selling at prices a few pounds more than Hornby can throw the same ancient tooling we detailed all those years ago, but for some, a £20 battered model of 86219 from a swapmeet and a bit of time has more merit than £100 of Heljan loco, even before the vast price difference is considered.

 

We'll just have to wait and see what the magazines make of the 86, but don't forget other manufacturers have re-tooled locos after poor reviews and Heljan have replaced incorrectly liveried bodies and badly manufactured chassis before. Would it be churlish for me to spend alot of money on a loco I don't like, purely on the basis that I might be sent a replacement body at some point in the future...?

[ClikC]

Surely a smaller number of etches (windscreens, vents) will cure the errors on what's basically a fundamentally more correct body-in-white than the Margate veteran?

 

Like wise not wishing to descend the level of debate in anyway, but surely the typical answer applies here. With a brand new model, certainly fetching a higher than average price, you should not have to.

 

Anyway, more to the point. A set of etched windscreens cannot fix the overly raked back cab windscreens (Hence nothing similar being ever produced for the Bachy 25), or the profile of the cab roof. They would however increase the size of the windscreens, which are probably the models biggest blow.

 

Please compare Trains4U's photo's to for example to this photo of a Class 86 in profile.

 

A set of etched side grilles are no easy fix to the dimensional error of the existing grilles being too tall for the inset panel. As highlighted in Trains4U's photo's.

 

Personally, I think the old margate model captures the look the look of a real 86, if a rather dated moulding with cut outs for body retaining clips and the hole in the roof for the switch etc.

 

My plans will most likely consist of cut and shutting bit's and pieces of both models together to produce an accurate and backdated 86 suitable for my chosen era. I hope to evaluate the Heljan model with a set of calipers in comparison to the collection of drawings I have on file also.

 

Regards

 

Matt

[S.A.C Martin]

I appreciate what Gareth says about damaging sales through negative comment but no comment has made my mind up for me. Its the problems with the models and my personal opinion that this is the worst new RTR model we have seen for years means that traders over the years has lost several grand (just from myself).

 

I'm just going to throw this out there...how much on the Hornby bodyshell is either moulded plastic, or rather not separately fitted, compared to the Heljan 86? Does the Hornby model have a chassis that is up to spec with the Heljan mechanism? Which of the two models has better haulage capacity, for scale, and of the two models, which of the two looks more toy like?

 

It's seems incredible to say, but I don't think comparing the Hornby 86 to the Heljan 86 is a fair comparison on either of the two brands. The 86 was designed and made in a time when the possibilty of exact details, down to rivets and scale seize (and readable!) worksplates was unthinkable. The Heljan 86 is being made in the present day where many components are separately fitted as opposed moulded onto a one piece bodyshell. The change in the way manufacturers think about using the chassis, for example - where before, a one-size-fits-all Hornby tender mechanism powered many different models of the same range...whereas now each model is so accurate a new chassis is tooled up each time to make it. The Hornby 86 is an old model - not sure when it first came out but I remember seeing it in a catalogue in 1994...

 

Compare the Heljan class 86 to current models, by all means. Of the current crop, it may not be the most accurate RTR model that has come out recently. That would be a fair criticism to make of it - I don't know my 86s well enough so cannot say either way. But if you take the class 15 and say it is a better representation of its prototype than the class 86 is of its prototype, and why, then that is a fairer and more constructive criticism in terms of comparing RTR models.

 

Looking at the comparison pics of the Heljan 86 to the older Hornby 86 - you can tell they come from two different trains of thought in manufacturing, and different eras of making model trains. Any comparison to the prototype could be well founded, but saying the Heljan 86 is the worst RTR model out and out, when all of the above detail considerations have to be made for a modern model, and comparing it thus to the old Hornby model seems overly harsh on Heljan, and not really productive, either.

[Ian J.]

This is a comment for a new topic really, but as the 86 is the current subject of people's attentions, I'm posting here. A declaration of (non)interest though: I'm not an 86 afficionado, I don't model overhead lines and have no plans to be purchasing any class 86s.

 

My main reason for posting is to reiterate the oft repeated desire for all model railway manufacturers (of any scale/gauge/geography) to take their time to do their R&D right and ensure that before committing to production, a sense check has been done on the basic 'rightness' of a model. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets a feeling of disappointment when any model comes out with sufficiently significant flaws (however big or small) that the wish to purchase just dissolves. This isn't good for the manufacturers or us as modellers.

 

To be fully supportive of the manufacturers I will add this: I want to buy your models! Well, some of them anyway, but faithfullness to a prototype's basic shape is not optional, it's required. Lima got most of their diesels basically right during the 80s when technology was less 'easy' than it is now, so it is not impossible to do today. It might take a little longer, it might take a bit more money, it might sometimes mean going back to the drawing board, but surely it is more cost effective to produce something right for the first production run than to have to 'scrap' an incorrect tool and have a new one designed and cut?

[Guest jim s-w]

Not wishing to descend into the usual, but that's a bit harsh Jim. It's no badge of honour to appear in the D&E rogues' gallery tis true, but the tippy-toes 40, porch-fitted 37, baseball-cap wearing Western, Tubby 47, and the compromised early-style 25 can no way leave the field open for the assertion that the Danes' electro-duff is 'the worst RTR model...'

 

Granted you need fleet quantities of this signature WCML traction, but by your own admission prices will fall and at that point surely a smaller number of etches (windscreens, vents) will cure the errors on what's basically a fundamentally more correct body-in-white than the Margate veteran?

 

I did say IMHO the worst new RTR model in years - the ones you list were years ago so I have to say you have indirectly agreed with me. A small number of etches is one thing but are you proposing new Windscreens, new cab roof and WHOLE new sides are are less than what required to 'fix' the Hornby one? Having drawn up the etch I need to fix the Hornby one to something I am happy with I know perhaps a little bit about what is required - With the Heljan model you would be practically doing an etched body kit. Just my opinion.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Guest jim s-w]

Looking at the comparison pics of the Heljan 86 to the older Hornby 86 - you can tell they come from two different trains of thought in manufacturing, and different eras of making model trains. Any comparison to the prototype could be well founded, but saying the Heljan 86 is the worst RTR model out and out, when all of the above detail considerations have to be made for a modern model, and comparing it thus to the old Hornby model seems overly harsh on Heljan, and not really productive, either.

 

Hi

 

I dont think anyone has said that its the worst RTR model but I stand by my belief that its the worst NEW rtr model for several years. Just because something has lots of separate bits fitted to it doesnt make it good and if thats someones mark on what makes something good then thats for them to decide but I just cant see things that way.

 

For me modelling is about recreating something in minature and not buying things that have lots of bits fitted. (it it was all about separate bits I'd buy lego!) I still believe that the Heljan model is nigh on uncorrectable where as the Hornby model isn't. Sure the Heljan model will run better and is going to be more popular but it comes down to a simple choice

 

Spend the money and live with it's faults

 

Or spend less money and a lot more time on the Hornby one and a Bachmann Warship and end up with a better looking model.

 

Only the individual can decide but like the class 25 before it if your goal is something that looks like a model of the real loco then the ancient Hornby tooling is a better start point.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

If I modelled overhead electrics, I would buy one, but I don't

 

As with any model I like, I don't care about whether it's 0.2mm over scale length or there aren't enough fins on the grill, there just isn't enough time to worry about those sort's of things! I quote what I said in the Bachmann Tornado Thread:

 

Bear in mind that a manufacturer can only detail a locomotive so far before the price gets too high. No model is ever a perfect minuature replica of a locomotive, if it was the price would be too high and nobody would buy it

 

There's one major factor for me when it comes to buying a model: Does it look like what it's supposed to look like?

 

My verdict for the Heljan 86, well it does.

 

For that reason I think it's a great model!

 

Simon

[Guest Phil]

The one factor which modellers and potential purchasers of a new model are unaware of is how the manufacturer obtained their information to produce their latest development. I'm not going to draw comparisons between different manufacturers here, but will leave you to draw your own conclusions.

 

Class 86s have been around for over 40 years and are still around today working for a number of companies as well as stored at various locations. It is safe to say that apart from minor details such as the bogie frames, headlights, headcode boxes and the different MU connections, the bodyshell and windows have remained "as built". There are thousands of images available in books, online and in personal collections as well very up close and personal visits available at certain times of the year at Network Rail stations. In fact, I'd say that even now 86s are still probably one of the easiest non EMD locos to photograph on Network Rail - in their own geographical environment of course.

[Red Baron]

Well I am going to buy one.... but it will make the Horby one i have look a bit naff. ho hum.

 

still is another reason to dig out the catenery

[Simon Moore]

Hi,

 

If I modelled overhead electrics, I would buy one, but I don't

 

As with any model I like, I don't care about whether it's 0.2mm over scale length or there aren't enough fins on the grill, there just isn't enough time to worry about those sort's of things! I quote what I said in the Bachmann Tornado Thread:

 

 

 

There's one major factor for me when it comes to buying a model: Does it look like what it's supposed to look like?

 

My verdict for the Heljan 86, well it does.

 

For that reason I think it's a great model!

 

Simon

 

Well said i think it looks like a class 86 & although their are certain bits missing or not correct they are light years ahead of the old Hornby model & i'm looknig forward to seeing mine on thursday.

 

Simon.

[craigwelsh]

Hi,

 

If I modelled overhead electrics, I would buy one, but I don't

 

As with any model I like, I don't care about whether it's 0.2mm over scale length or there aren't enough fins on the grill, there just isn't enough time to worry about those sort's of things! I quote what I said in the Bachmann Tornado Thread:

Bear in mind that a manufacturer can only detail a locomotive so far before the price gets too high. No model is ever a perfect minuature replica of a locomotive, if it was the price would be too high and nobody would buy it

 

There's one major factor for me when it comes to buying a model: Does it look like what it's supposed to look like?

 

My verdict for the Heljan 86, well it does.

 

For that reason I think it's a great model!

 

Simon

Actually Bachmann did make a miniature replica of DP1 by laser scanning it and shrinking it correctly by 76.2. Some of the small detail may be slightly compromised in plastic but the shape is spot on. Its not massively expensive either..

 

Most of the points on this thread aren't 'has it got 3 warning flashes?' 'this loco has one extra step' types but basic structural elements on the main body shell.

 

As Phil said above, the class has been around a while to go see one, even scan it in a depot or preservation site..

 

The underheight windscreens could be etched but the rake of the cab windows is still too much. Its a bit like fixing the brow on the Heljan Western, not a quick etch job!

 

With moulded on front-end detail and 1/2 etch roof tanks it is a bit disappointing in 2010 and it'll be interesting to see what Bachmann do now they have committed to an overhead electric. SAC Martin, the complaint about comparing it to the Hornby is a bit confusing when Heljan have moulded on detail that you wouldn't expect them to, its also the older model that comes out pretty well at the basic stage. Stick a Warship under it and its looking good (no Jim, you still can't have my Warship's chassis ).

[Taigatrommel]

I find the level of debate here interesting, as it suggests to me a high level of interest in this model, and correspondingly perhaps the level of interest in AC electrics in general. It also illustrates a potential conflict of interests any of us might find ourselves in- buy the model with its innaccuracies in the hope of encouraging further AC electric locomotive models, or not buying to signal that one wishes the manufacturer to "get it right". Although Bachmann have announced an 85, I wouldn't say that any further AC locos are a given at this moment- although I would argue that an 86-87-90 progession would be logical for a manufacturer. Of course, we could end up with a situation akin to the HJ BRCWs, whereby the the initial model (33/0, 86/2/4/6) has issues, but later members of the family (33/1/2, 86/0/3, 87) are much better. Heljan aren't know for retooling models even with known faults which have been pointed out to them.

 

My position? I can perch happily on this comfy fence and say "If I wanted an 86 at this moment, I'd buy a Heljan one warts and all, but I don't, so I won't".

[298]

The one factor which modellers and potential purchasers of a new model are unaware of is how the manufacturer obtained their information to produce their latest development. I'm not going to draw comparisons between different manufacturers here, but will leave you to draw your own conclusions.

 

 

To answer your question, I was reliably informed they measured one up at Long Marston.

[Guest jim s-w]

 

Most of the points on this thread aren't 'has it got 3 warning flashes?' 'this loco has one extra step' types but basic structural elements on the main body shell.

 

 

Ant that is the crux of it isnt it? Uts the Shape thats wrong - doesnt matter about the details and how many extra bits there are.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Morphaniel]

My Anglian Round Tabler has turned up. I'm pleased to say the paint job is in better condition than the photos earlier in the thread, though in the light of my earlier comment it's ironic that the RT rondel doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. From viewing distance though, I'm very pleased with it. The wife is getting fed up with 'big engines' coming through the door though - better put the credit card away until the MR Sentinel is launched