Kernow Adams O2

[mevaman]

I myself was looking at getting an early /BR without the pump and having seen more photo of this loco and one thing kept bothering me about it, and that was the rods.

​

One they looked over scale and the crank pins are to and the color of the finish on the rods did not look like metal (and the coupling rods look plastic) as someone else has now commented about them.

 

Can anyone say what they are made from?, also a bit concerned about them flapping a bit when running which has also been brought up.

 

Don't get me wrong it is a fantastic model,but in my eye the rods and cranks let it down.

 

Darren

 

Darren the rods metal but coloured graphite grey as opposed to the bright silver we are used to.

 

If you want to be more realistic these can be weathered.

[Bulleidboy100]

Following on from Posting 698 - is there a favoured decoder for this model?

[autocoach]

Following on from Posting 698 - is there a favoured decoder for this model?

Both silent and sound advice  wanted from those who now have the O2 in hand....

[The Stationmaster]

OOCL Berlin is in the vicinity of the Channel Light Vessel making 14.2 knots so won't be far adrift for its 18.00 ETA at Southampton.

 

Or putting it another way if I was taking the photo below right now (instead of back in August)  the Berlin would probably be visible in the background  

 

 

 

[Fireline]

Ok, so who else's heart sank on reading the Model Rail review?

[St Enodoc]

OOCL Berlin is in the vicinity of the Channel Light Vessel making 14.2 knots so won't be far adrift for its 18.00 ETA at Southampton.

 

Or putting it another way if I was taking the photo below right now (instead of back in August)  the Berlin would probably be visible in the background  

 

DSCF8652.jpg

A wonderful signpost for night passages to Dartmouth from the Channel Islands. Before you lost the loom of the Casquets light, Channel LV was coming up, then before you lost that Start Point was visible. On a good night with a steady SW breeze you wouldn't need to trim the sails for about 12 hours. All before the days of Satnav and its ilk...

[DJM Dave]

I'm not sure there's much to worry about to be honest.

The situation as I understand it is that so far, with 1000+ models out there, and some must be running on layouts, 0 (zero) have been returned for running issues.

Now, this isn't to say none will be. Of course there will be damages or a bust motor. It happens with all.

But, and this is the strange thing, only 1 person has complained of running. That was a magazine reviewer. I would love to know the code track used, the cleanliness, the laying of it etc.
However, like most of us, we will never admit to our track laying skills being 'off', and every other loco we own goes over that point or round that radius correctly and without problems.

During the QC stage, the very thing that has been picked up on is checked and checked again to make extra sure all is well.
I'm not saying that the model isn't at fault, as yes it could be, but to 'get concerned' given the math involved is scare monger in I feel.

No one else is saying they have this fault so I would advise to rest easy and enjoy your model.
If it's any help too, I understand there is photographic proof of certain details mentioned as being incorrect actually being correct too, but we can't let a poor story get in the way of facts huh? Lol

Cheers from a hot Singapore.
Dave

[PaulRhB]

Ok, so who else's heart sank on reading the Model Rail review?

Well as I've read two other reviews plus all the stuff on here, not mine the balance seems to be good running and detail so I'm happily waiting for mine to arrive.

Don't panic on one review it may have a piece of flash or something restricting movement for instance. I had to return on of my Heljan Metropolitans as the motor died but the other one was perfect, as is the seconds replacement. If yours has an issue Kernow will sort it, there's plenty of evidence of their commitment to that promise

Edited October 20, 2015 by PaulRhB

[Gwiwer]

Can't comment on the running as mine are yet a long way off.  But I do make due allowance for a number of matters when it comes to reviews.  The reviewer having a rogue item is one.  The reviewer having some sort of mismatch between item and testbed is another.  The reviewer possibly having a beef with some part of the supply and production process is a possible issue though I would sincerely hope our magazines were above that; it's worth noting however than certain internet-based reviews are now attracting the attention of legal eyes when there is a suggestion of intentional falsification or of deliberate misleading and again I am quite sure our journals are above that.

 

My track is no billiard table.  It's been out in the Australian weather for 10 years now.  Yet almost everything copes with its undulations which increase somewhat every year despite occasional "smoothing" efforts.  And almost everything runs happily through the smallest radius curves and points even when the manufacturer suggests it might not.  Ironically the worst offenders are the old Lima vans which retain chunky wheels and are due for retirement, plus a single Mainline-style (Bachmann-badged) class 46 also on chunky wheels.  Steam locos of all shapes and sizes and from all the major manufacturers manage the course and I have every confidence that the DJModels O2s will happily join the fleet likewise.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Gwiwer

[mevaman]

I concur with Dave as I know how much pre-production testing took place. We even had one running on old Hornby setback with second radius curves and short points (with plastic frogs).

 

Unfortunately, there might have been a fault with the Model Rail sample. I suppose 1,000 sold with no returns is a useful balance to the Model Rail review.

 

Andrew

[Andy Y]

I had a fairly lengthy chat with Chris Leigh at the weekend where he explained what was happening and discussed what may be the cause. Now mine has arrived (a completely random sample as the boss didn't know I'd ordered one) I wanted to take the opportunity to see if it could be replicated so I went down to my local, Topp Trains, today to give it a try on their shop test track of 2nd and 1st radii curves and Peco Settrack short radius pointwork without any previous running-in.

 

 

We couldn't replicate the issue and there didn't seem to be any undue lateral forces that we could detect. I would check the back-t-backs too if there'd been any issue.

[petrox]

I concur with Dave as I know how much pre-production testing took place. We even had one running on old Hornby setback with second radius curves and short points (with plastic frogs).

 

Unfortunately, there might have been a fault with the Model Rail sample. I suppose 1,000 sold with no returns is a useful balance to the Model Rail review.

 

Andrew

 

I concur with Dave as I know how much pre-production testing took place. We even had one running on old Hornby setback with second radius curves and short points (with plastic frogs).

 

Unfortunately, there might have been a fault with the Model Rail sample. I suppose 1,000 sold with no returns is a useful balance to the Model Rail review.

 

Andrew

As more of these models are delivered and run on layouts, I will be interested to see if any other problems are experienced. I have just taken delivery of K2103 / 30182 loco, and the loco runs erratically around curves - it's fine on the straight bits, and over Peco electrofrog points (track is Peco code 100, minimum radius 24"), and also better in reverse (when the bogie wheels are leading). My thoughts are that, because a) the driving wheels appear to have a lot of lateral play and b) the inevitable tight clearances, that the driving wheels are binding against the coupling rods and/or the brake gear - however it's a theory only at the moment. Loco also is quite noisy. Inevitably other locos operating on this section of the layout (Hornby M7, Hornby 14xx, Bachmann 64xx), run without any problems, so even my mediocre track laying doesn't appear to be the culprit.

I guess it's possible that I have a slight case of "rogue" loco, and no doubt I could approach Kernow to see if an exchange could be made. However I'm reluctant to do this if this loco can be sorted - I have to say that, having waited 5 years for the model, visually it is superb - also I have the Gate stock set on order, and the O2 is clearly the ideal motive power for this.

I'll be interested to hear others experience of the O2.

 

Petrox

[dibber25]

I'm not sure there's much to worry about to be honest.

 

The situation as I understand it is that so far, with 1000+ models out there, and some must be running on layouts, 0 (zero) have been returned for running issues.

 

Now, this isn't to say none will be. Of course there will be damages or a bust motor. It happens with all.

 

But, and this is the strange thing, only 1 person has complained of running. That was a magazine reviewer. I would love to know the code track used, the cleanliness, the laying of it etc.

However, like most of us, we will never admit to our track laying skills being 'off', and every other loco we own goes over that point or round that radius correctly and without problems.

 

During the QC stage, the very thing that has been picked up on is checked and checked again to make extra sure all is well.

I'm not saying that the model isn't at fault, as yes it could be, but to 'get concerned' given the math involved is scare monger in I feel.

 

No one else is saying they have this fault so I would advise to rest easy and enjoy your model.

If it's any help too, I understand there is photographic proof of certain details mentioned as being incorrect actually being correct too, but we can't let a poor story get in the way of facts huh? Lol

 

Cheers from a hot Singapore.

Dave

If you read the review you will know the code of the rail I use. It is Peco code 83. 

I went to great lengths - even obtaining a second loco, because I did not want to have to write any 'negative' comments. However, I reported exactly what I found with not one but two locomotives. I watched this forum to see if anyone else reported a problem but nothing showed up. The Editor consulted with Chris Trerise. A second loco was tested but although it was better it still tended to bind on curves and derailed twice in six circuits. Throughout, I suspected a combination of factors - my layout and the arrangement of the trailing bogie pivot. Virtually every OO review model for the past 18 months has been tested on my layout. As stated in the review, they range from the Heljan Garratt to the Hornby Sentinel. None has had any problem with my track. As a 'control' test, I ran a brand-new Hornby 'M7'. Again, it ran faultlessly. I'm sure my track is not the best in the land and I'm equally certain it's not the worst. 

In anticipation of posts like this I have again tested the original sample. The second sample went back to Kernow and Chris Trerise assures me that it runs perfectly through Setrack second radius curves and points. Therefore, no one need have any worries on that score and and despite Dave Jones' snipe at me (the old press insult about the facts getting in the way of a story) I have NEVER fabricated a story or distorted a review. I DID REPORT THE FACTS. I have nothing to gain from lying about test results and a great deal to lose by writing a negative report (hours on here answering posts for a start). 

I retested the original sample today and after a deal more running-in it now operates smoothly. With four coaches in tow it performed well on the outer circuit of my layout which has wider curves and only one turnout. My previous test was on the inner circuit which has three turnouts and curves of 600mmplus radius. It still slowed substantially on the curves and appeared to be binding and it derailed repeatedly on the straight side of one facing turnout then rerailed itself on the curved side of a trailing turnout. I still believe that the rear bogie pivot does not allow sufficient sideplay and that the code 83 rail makes it a little easier for the leading outside driving wheel to climb over the railhead. The motor on the model appears to be extremely powerful and may well be overcoming the tendency for the flanges to bind on rail with more generous dimensions. Following these tests, I believe that the model may not be entirely happy on code 83 track and points, but I suspect that there are also few modellers who will be using code 83 flat-bottom on a British steam-era layout. My layout is unusual in that respect.

I am quite prepared to accept that my experience with the O2 is unusual or even unique and therefore no one else should be deterred from purchasing the model.

Should Messrs Jones or Trerise be in Northamptonshire any time, I'm happy for them to come and inspect my layout and I'll demonstrate the 'O2' to them - doubtless it will perform faultlessly at that time!

CHRIS LEIGH

[PaulRhB]

I have no doubt you and the magazine reported the facts you found Chris, identifying what did cause it would be useful too but it does seem to be unusual so far. It's possible code 83 contributed but if say unlikely simply because it's a taller profile than the common code 75. I don't discount the MR review but I do balance it against the other magazines and I'd be worried if it was common but otherwise I'd return it as you did. It would be interesting to run some of the ones people are happy with on your line to eliminate that factor.

My easy curves hopefully mean I won't have to worry regardless.

[Bluebell Model Railway]

It certainly has and Kernow have responded by the modern wonders of Facebook... and Youtube:

"This is the model that Model Rail magazine returned having found it derailed on Chris Leigh's track. Here we show it running on a circle of Bachmann 2nd Radius track, taken from the St Blazey Haulier Train Set. The track has been loosely laid on a pallet that was in our back yard. The pallet is not flat because the ground in our yard slopes towards the drain. As such, you can see the O2 slow as it climbs the gradient in the top right and accelerate as it comes down the other side. As an added bonus, we have attached the first EP sample of the Gate Stock!

Model Rail did tell us that if we found the returned model did not derail on our test track they would add this to their review, but did not do so. This is possibly because it was close to the deadline and they may not have had time to include our response.

To date nobody has returned an O2 for constantly derailing."

http://youtu.be/Lev9VighQu8

.................................................................................................................
Also know that Andy Y has posted a small clip on his channel also.
 

Edited October 20, 2015 by Bluebell Model Railway

[andyram]

I have not read the Model Rail review, but the two reviews in the Hornby Magazine have been very complimentary about the model. I suppose if two models derailed on the same layout, but the returned model ran well elsewhere - and there are no further issues with other people's models, then the problem must lie with the layout it ran on. Probably just one of those things. I have one particular model in my collection that will just not run on my layout and derails all of the time. Yet it runs smoothly on the club layout and on both of my father in law's layouts. I have no issue with any other loco in my collection. These model trains can be funny things sometimes!

[Martin_R]

I'm keeping an open mind on this but it would have been better to show the O2 doing both clockwise and anticlockwise circuits running forward and reverse. Hopefully mine will arrive soon and will run on my track formations with no problems.

 

What I don't want to see is bad feeling developing between reviewers/retailers/manufacturers yet again.................

[mevaman]

As an ex Kernow employee and having seen the development of the loco I am probably biased. However, it could be a problem with Code 83 track?

 

The loco was tested on code 100 and code 75.

 

We used to sell very little code 83 and this mainly went to US customers so I cannot blame Kernow if they didn't test on code 83.

[dibber25]

I'm keeping an open mind on this but it would have been better to show the O2 doing both clockwise and anticlockwise circuits running forward and reverse. Hopefully mine will arrive soon and will run on my track formations with no problems.

 

What I don't want to see is bad feeling developing between reviewers/retailers/manufacturers yet again.................

No fear of that - the last thing I want to do is upset a manufacturer.  Model Rail has a close working relationship with Kernow. That's why they were advised of the problem I'd had, and that's why they rushed us a second sample to test. I'm happy to report that I'm getting good running out of the original sample on my outer circuit and with a 4-coach load on the tail. Light engine on the inner circuit it still misbehaves and I'm putting that down to my code 83 track and points. It is clearly OK on code 100 Setrack and that will be what most modellers use. My code 83 is an anomaly as it was built for Canadian 'HO' and not really as a test track - although I've tested lots of models on it in recent months and this is the first problem I've had. 

CHRIS LEIGH

Edited October 20, 2015 by dibber25

[Les1952]

I'm afraid as someone who doesn't have an O2 the review and the comments posted here make me raise one question.

 

Given that Code 83 is a non-UK track unlikely to be used by the vast majority of UK modellers in OO-

 

is it actually appropriate or fair to be testing any UK outline model on Code 83 track?

 

The fact that this is being used does give me concern over trusting reviews in Model Rail. 

 

Les

[alfsboy]

I run code 83 as its an American layout .I d however play with British  stuff as well and it all seems OK.being insullfrog it soon sorts out the poor pickups on some  .I have had trouble with a Wainwright C .This derailed ,jumped points and launched its tender skyward through frogs .It turned out the locos  centre wheelset bearings were not  seated properly so  not only no side play but out of  line to the rest .Soon corrected .The Wainwright needed tender pickups really on this track where as my Bachmann USA Richmond 4-4-0 runs like a dream through insullfrog due to tender pickups as well .

In the 70's one of my model soldier figures was  subjected to a bad review in a mag  .Fair do's but the guy praised someone elses figure with different size legs  as a superb effort .I suspected fowl play as the guy was  a known poor modeller and a chicken brain .In fact I had a pullet with his name on it. Turns out he hated the guy  who commissioned the model soldier from me .Fortunately it didn t have my name on it .Of course I never bought the magazine again and slagged the guy off ever chance I got      .Bitch...moi  ?

PS The Insullfrog was a deliberate choice as I run mainly 8 wheel diesels.

Edited October 20, 2015 by alfsboy

[Gwiwer]

Track code raises an interesting issue.

 

I have a small amount of code 83 rail including points for an Australian-themed project which has yet to be built.  I don't have an O2 yet but the closest I could test was a Kernow-Commissioned Beattie well-tank.  All three of my models ran perfectly.  A Dave Jones-style Dapol 52 ran likewise but a Hornby 50 persistently derailed at the frog on a large radius point.  All run perfectly on my code 100 main layout and code 75 future project fully-laid track including around a very tight sub-small radius curve on the latter.

 

It's not a definitive test and the track was laid and the test conducted in similar conditions to that on the Kernow MRC video but it suggests there might be something about using items designed for UK-style track on other codes.  I note that it's not the height of the rail which is the issue as code 75 users are not reporting problems; there must be something else about the way code 83 is designed and manufactured.

Edited October 20, 2015 by Gwiwer

[mevaman]

I suggest that Model Rail may consider printing something about the issue with code 83 in the November magazine.

 

There are a lot of customers who rely upon the MR reviews and do not read forums. My worry is that the review will adversely affect sales, despite the model running well on code 75 and code 100.

 

Sorry Chris, nothing personal but I am, obviously, concerned.

 

Andrew

[Bill]

There is some Tillig Elite Code 83 track on my layout including a H0/H0e crossover.

When my O2 arrives - which I hope is soon...

(It is hard to know these days as Canada Post, for some unknown reason, has stopped tracking registered parcels!)

         ... It will be given a thorough workout over this part of the layout.. 

I really don't expect there to be any problems at all.

 

In my opinion a review is a review - any experienced operator of a model railway can do one  - just because it appears in this or that magazine is the luck of the draw.

 

And to tell you the truth I have stopped being over concerned or too fussed about whether or not a particular model engine works as advertised or not.

(I stopped being concerned when my Hornby T9 fell apart from Mazak rot - (And I am still waiting for them to get back to me...)

 

If it runs well it'll get a lot of use - And if it performs badly? - well then it won't get used and I won't be that bothered....

[Fireline]

I'm going to do a very unusual thing on here, and say THANK YOU. The various comments on here, expecially from those involved, have shoved Acrows under my heart, and pushed it back up to where it should be.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Fireline