Dapol 'Western'

[Guest Phil]

It doesn't look as accurate as dapols own class 22 so while it looks really good I'm not sure you can really claim its the best rtr diesel ever to be honest. The 22 is definitely better in my humble opinion.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

 

 

Not seen a Dapol D1000 in the flesh yet so perhaps I shouldn't comment, but I agree with you on the class 22 Jim. I liked it so much I bought one, even though I struggle to justify it.

 

The class 22 will be a very hard act to follow, and I really hope the level of research expended on the hydraulic type 2 will be be currently taking place for those lucky chaps who model Scottish and the GN.

 

I am really looking forward to seeing the two tone green NBLs - which will doubtless bolster many Scottish layout loco allocations

Edited February 13, 2013 by Phil

[Allegheny1600]

Well there's a good review in this coming Model Rail which i received today.

 

92% though as it apparently has fragile parts and easy detachment of brake rigging!  (oh and isnt branded on the box 'Heljornbymann" either.  ), What do we have to do to get a higher mark?

Seriously though, the brake rigging is a loose interference fit to allow re-wheeling and a blob of glue when you get yours is advised,

and fragile detail parts!  design proper or design stupid? Do you want (as modellers) detail parts or dont you?

 

It seems that possibly MR think that all detail parts should be solidly affixed (with all that implies regarding heavy looks etc) at any price, and that modellers arent willing to pay the retail price for 'fragile detail parts' as thats a poor design feature and have marked us down because of the latter.

 

I'd appreciate opinions please.

cheers

Dave

You can't please all the people all the time!!!

I too would suspect this review is looking at it from the PoV of the 'average modeller', to borrow a term, rather than the super-detail enthusiast.

Personally, I have found on some European models that even with all the detail attached, you can't then 'handle' the model so it has to go onto the layout and be more or less permanently stuck on one train (the flagship?). I often leave the fiddly details off, not because I can't add them but because they will get knocked off at some point - it's all a compromise.

Some people will be happy with a model with all details added, some just want something the can "play with" - me? I want something that looks like the prototype and works well.

I think we've got that so thank you, Dave!

John E.

[Guest Max Stafford]

You and me both Phil. Dave, you do realise the rebuild into Class 29 was a BR/Paxman project, don't you? Those two sources might yield some more useful information; I really like this to be every bit as good as the 22.

 

Dave.

[dibber25]

I don't normally discuss reviews but since the comment about the brake rigging was actually mine, I'm happy to defend my thoughts. Frankly, for the few hours that I had the model in my possession, the loose brake rigging drove me nuts! Some had already fallen off in the box. In refitting one bit, another would fall off. After running it, I found brake rigging on my layout and - 24 hours later, I found a piece on the stairs leading up to the layout. The model was on loan from Dapol - hence the fact that we didn't fit the nameplates etc and in the circumstances I didn't feel that I should glue the brake gear. I found it fiddly to refit and once refitted it would remain loose. Sorry, but if a model is going to be sent for review, the reviewers comments have to be accepted as valid findings. Whilst Dave asks what he has to do to get a higher mark, I might equally ask what a reviewer has to say in order NOT to be accused of bias. It's a superb model and we said so, and 92% is a very high score. Personally, I don't like scoring systems and I never used them, for this very reason. What do you do for an encore when you've given a model 100%? The Western scored higher than the NRM Deltic and only the Hornby 60 has scored higher I seem to recall that had extra features (whether you like them or not, and no loose parts). As I understand the Westerns are on their way from China, it is reasonable to assume that the brake rigging on them will be similiar, but even so, I reported a problem which afflicted the sample I reviewed and that was made plain. I have a Western on order from STEAM and we had already agreed that we will follow up the review with pictures of D1000 with the plates fitted etc (and I'll glue the brake gear - and I'll check that it is made of a 'glue-able' plastic). 

CHRIS LEIGH

[Downendian]

Thanks Chris

92% or not- I hope with my additional work to windscreen pillars /headcodes and brake rigging it will be 99%. It still will be a better base point to start modelling rather than Heljan.

 

Of course the 22 (and forthcoming NBL Warships and 21/29) are much more challenging as there is nothing left to laser scan. Phil's point on the 22 is that it is a very fine model without having any surviving prototype, underlining what an excellent piece of work it is (well from photos!).

 

Peer review is incredibly important (I'm a scientist that lives with it daily), sometimes you don't hear what you were expecting, and I'm sure the MR review is unbiased and hence valued.

 

Neil 

Edited February 13, 2013 by Downendian

[Rugd1022]

Nidge - would that be Bachmann Mk1s or the cleverly designed Railroad ones with the moulded handrails and vents ?

 

Wouldn't you like a blue one on the front of some Bachmann pressurevents ?

 

Oh it'll be the Barwell Johhnies Phil, I already have a rake in maroon and am building up another with the odd chocolate and cream 'left over' floating about, plus I've still got some maroon and crimson NPCCS vehicles to finish off. Still got nowhere to run 'em though!

 

I might at some point plump for an early '70s blue one, despite saying this week that all my other blue era stuff has had it's marching orders... I honestly think I won't be able to resist the temptation once I've actually seen one in the flesh... ;O)

[DapolDave]

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Recently there has been a spate of products reviewed with shall we say 'interesting' % marks.

 

For example one got 99% and the reviewer failed to note that although it is a super model (i have 2), the lit table lamps were not in the right place at each table, or have lamp shades painted etc (ala the pullmanns) and were merely crude clear plastic dowels through the middle of each table.

 

Another gave us 8 out of 10 for the 2884 loco performance but readily noted in the text it couldnt be tested!

 

I see some models in MR with predominantly high marks but others (not just Dapol's i must add) with quite low marks.

The 22 was a great case in point. it got lower than another model (albeit a special comission) and while the 22 has had and still gets rave review for it's accuracy and detail, the special commission one doesnt and gets poor comments on this forum. (same reviewer by the way).

 

Although i think the % mark needs to be scrapped, it certainly effects me when i know we have a good product (or not, read below) which some view as terrific but it gets marked down a 'huge' by most standards out of 100% for quite a minor thing.

 

As for the Western i'm now slightly mortified that people on RMWEB are saying the face is wrong, the cab windows are wrong and it needs work to make it look correct.

I'm also dissapointed that some of those very same people have seen the model in the flesh, in pictures and cad/cams here and at shows for the last 12 months or so and have sat back and said nothing.

 

Guys, if there was a problem then you should have spoken up. The reason i ask for comments is that i truly want us all to have the best we can make, but i hate the idea that i've goofed and gotten the face wrong. If only you'd have shouted out earlier i could have done something about it.

 

Edited for clarity

[dibber25]

You only have to look at the photos to see that this is probably the best r-t-r diesel there has ever been in 4mm scale.

 

When a review starts criticising fragile detail you have to wonder who on earth they think their audience is - the train set market?

 

I say take it with a pinch of salt - reviews are often written to stir controversy and sell magazines. I have three of these gorgeous 52s on order and am tempted to order another.

I certainly HAVE NEVER written a review "to stir controversy and sell magazines' and I find the suggestion very unfair. I write for one purpose and one purpose only - to inform the reader. I may not always be right and the reader always has the option to decide for himself. What I find alarming is that, based on DapolDave's reaction, other people on here are jumping to conclusions about the review and assuming that we've criticised things that we actually haven't criticised at all. Read the review!! It's a good review - a very good review of a very good model. And please don't put words in our mouths or suggest that we have motives that we don't.

CHRIS LEIGH

[DapolDave]

I fully back Chris here guys,

 

I think that there is a problem with the marking of the models in general though, but i doubt, even though i joke about it, that it's affected by other manufacturers etc.

More like an inconsistency of review and pressure of publication dates.

 

For those that have them on order the D1000 "Western Enterprise" models arrived at Dapol this afternoon but wont be shipped to Steam museum tomorrow by courier arriving Friday.

I've contacted Steam to let them know about the delivery and they inform me that there's less than 10 left.

 

cheers

Dave

[dibber25]

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Recently there has been a spate of products reviewed with shall we say 'interesting' % marks.

 

For example one got 99% and the reviewer failed to note that although it is a super model (i have 2), the lit table lamps were not in the right place at each table, or have lamp shades painted etc (ala the pullmanns) and were merely crude clear plastic dowels through the middle of each table.

 

Another gave us 8 out of 10 for the 2884 loco performance but readily noted in the text it couldnt be tested!

 

I see some models in MR with predominantly high marks but others (not just Dapol's i must add) with quite low marks.

The 22 was a great case in point. it got lower than another model (albeit a special comission) and while the 22 has had and still gets rave review for it's accuracy and detail, the special commission one doesnt and gets poor comments on this forum. (same reviewer by the way).

 

Although i think the % mark needs to be scrapped, it certainly effects me when i know we have a good product (or not, read below) which some view as terrific but it gets marked down a 'huge' by most standards out of 100% for quite a minor thing.

 

As for the Western i'm now slightly mortified that people are saying the face is wrong, the cab windows are wrong and it needs work to make it look correct.

I'm also dissapointed that some of those very same people have seen the model in the flesh, in pictures and cad/cams here and at shows for the last 12 months or so and have sat back and said nothing.

 

Guys, if there was a problem then you should have spoken up. The reason i ask for comments is that i truly want us all to have the best we can make, but i hate the idea that i've goofed and gotten the face wrong. If only you'd have shouted out earlier i could have done something about it.

 

I must point out that the references in Dave's post to comments about the face, cab windows etc relate to comments here on RMWEB they do NOT reflect any comments made in the Model Rail review. We are more than happy with the looks of the model and we have said so. In order that I can get on with doing my job, rather than monitoring this thread, I would respectfully ask that everyone who intends to comment on here in response to Dave's comments, READS the review first and refrains from speculative comments about it.

CHRIS LEIGH

[S.A.C Martin]

I have read the review, and I have to question the reactions to it in this thread. It's a very positive, fair and balanced review.

 

The brake rigging on most modern models is a tight push fit, and I don't know about the rest of you, but I've never come across any model with brake rigging that was so loose as to literally fall off. This is the sort of thing you'd expect a reviewer to pick up on, and that it was picked up on should be considered beneficial to the consumer. It's a potential pitfall of the detail, and the review picking up on that will remind people to drop a bit of glue onto a piece of detail they wouldn't normally be expected to glue.

 

Case in point: Hornby's B17 and O1 models I've picked up recently. Both sets of rigging were tight push fits into the locating holes on the models. The B17's tender rigging in particular was an utter pig to fit, but once fitted was extremely unlikely to fall out! You wouldn't necessarily put glue on those features. You would however expect a reviewer to note any difficulties in fitting extra detail on model: so why not expect them to comment on the quality of the fitting and if there are any problems?

 

The 28xx review - which I have in front of me, by the way, in the March edition - is one of Richard Foster's reviews and it is extremely fair to Dapol. The model was described as an "excellent rendition of a fine locomotive" and is a four page spread which goes into commendable detail. The model appears to have lost marks for several livery errors and the potential for the cardan shaft to pop out.

 

I'm skeptical that it's entirely fair to criticise Model Rail in this instance where they've actually been very balanced and positive about Dapol in both of the mentioned reviews. There are some portions of the 2884 review which absolutely hit the nail on the head (no GWR loco should have BR shedplates fitted, for example) and the Western review: well, why is there an argument about what remains a very positive overall review?

 

The next thing you know is that we'll be having complaints about reviewers daring to make any negative commentary on any model whatsoever: and the hobby will be the poorer for it.

[Downendian]

As for the Western i'm now slightly mortified that people on RMWEB are saying the face is wrong, the cab windows are wrong and it needs work to make it look correct.

I'm also dissapointed that some of those very same people have seen the model in the flesh, in pictures and cad/cams here and at shows for the last 12 months or so and have sat back and said nothing.

Headcodes and windscreen pillars only  (minor) issue here Dave. the rest of the face is spot on. i'm certainly not changing my preorders because of this.

The first time I'd seen those issues with the model was in this thread and yes would have very certainly have commented if there was anything you can have done about it (CAD/CAM stage discussions).

 

Neil

Edited February 13, 2013 by Downendian

[Andy1963]

I've watched this forum over the months, seen the CAD, the comments, the photo's of the prototypes and the colour issues with the maroon 1000.  My comment is, it looks the dogs dangly bits to me, and I can't wait to get my hands on my maroon version when it arrives.  I don't take a great deal of notice of reviews, I read and if I like and want, I buy.  I think the way this model has been developed with the input from people on this forum is fantastic, and I take my hat off (I would if I had one on) to Dave for his patience with all the comments. It must be difficult to sort the sensible comments from the rest and not to get disheartened by negative remarks. Perhaps that's why no other manufacturer goes to this trouble.  When are you doing the Warship Dave?

[DapolDave]

Hi Neil,

 

I think the headcode windows are a 'nadgers' (excuse the technical term here guys) too small, and as such the correctly sized numbers don't fit correctly within the window area.

 

Are you referring to the central pillar visible behind the glass? If so it should bean easy fix or even remove?

Cheers

Dave

 

I understand a Warship may be announced next month and not from Dapol :-(

[D1030western musketeer]

I for one await this model with excitement faults or no faults which to me seem easy to amend.

Lets not forget what we have had to put up with over the years and in my eyes the best ever looking diesel ever to run on our railways is getting that  treatment at last and thank Dave and Dapol for this.

 

richard.

[Downendian]

Dave

can't really tell from the images but there appears to be an "additional" pillar behind the main windscreen pillar- it looks like part of the glazing unit. If so a relatively easy fix.

Good new re Warship (43?) - but not for Dapol I guess 

Neil

Edited February 13, 2013 by Downendian

[Gavvy2]

In the days of steam I saw all manner of locos at Wilmslow on running-in turns from Crewe. Britannias and Duchesses spring to mind and I even saw a Clan, but were diesels ever run-in like this?

 

I am looking for a plausible excuse to run one of these fabulous models. It has leap frogged to the front of my wanted diesel list,ahead of 10001 ~(which I saw on the Mancunian with its twin)! I remember seeing the first Crewe batch under construction at the works so I guess that will have to do!

 

Well done Dave

 

Gavin

[Andy Y]

As for the Western i'm now slightly mortified that people on RMWEB are saying the face is wrong, the cab windows are wrong and it needs work to make it look correct.

I'm also dissapointed that some of those very same people have seen the model in the flesh, in pictures and cad/cams here and at shows for the last 12 months or so and have sat back and said nothing.

 

Guys, if there was a problem then you should have spoken up. The reason i ask for comments is that i truly want us all to have the best we can make, but i hate the idea that i've goofed and gotten the face wrong. If only you'd have shouted out earlier i could have done something about it.

It's worth bearing in mind that it's highly likely that anyone who's passed comments on the windscreen is basing it on my enlarged images rather than the real model on their workbench. I've even discussed it with Brian Hanson and it's not a particularly significant issue, quite a few of us had a good look at the weekend in Doncaster and it's had a universal thumbs-up.

 

It's fair to say that all of the manufacturers have passed comment (in negative form) to me about the marking system and the MR issue of finding something to mark down (Lightweights with no passengers, BPs without sound etc etc). CL contacted me to castigate me for joining in with "extreme posters" and suggesting the topic should be moderated. For clarity I've posted my response here too and ask people to consider any further replies and base it on evidence and anyone in possession of the article.

 

 

 

Hi Chris, thanks for the PM and I hope you're well.

 

As I said I haven't seen the review as the subs copy hasn't arrived here yet but I chose to make comment on my findings that, all things considered, the brake-rigging isn't an issue for me (surely I'm allowed to say that?) but I've already said my piece on any negatives and "your apparent eagerness to join in with the more extreme of your posters" seems to have more than an air of disdain about it. I'd deduce that as you haven't fitted the plates that you haven't tackled the roof eyes.

 

I won't be closing the (my) topic off but I will suggest that they should consider their comments about the MR review before posting, I'm surprised by that considering you chose to post in my review that you promoted MR and that you'd be doing a full review (inferring I'd missed information). That's not particularly fair I'm afraid.

 

Thanks,

 

Andy

[queensquare]

 

 

 

I think the headcode windows are a 'nadgers' (excuse the technical term here guys) too small.........

 

In the interests of accuracy Dave, is a 'nadgers' bigger or smaller than a 'smidgen'. In 2FS I work to the nearest smidgen and generally find that quite acceptable

 

Jerry

[Guest jim s-w]

I'm also dissapointed that some of those very same people have seen the model in the flesh, in pictures and cad/cams here and at shows for the last 12 months or so and have sat back and said nothing.

 

Seeing a model at a show with nothing to compare it too is never going to result in any meaningful conclusions or feedback. It looks like a wessie to me and i have to admit id never have spotted the windscreen if it hadnt been mentioned on another (admittedly more critical) forum. I then compared the model pics to the real thing and drew my own conclusions. Its just that i have no interest in the real thing but lets face it modellers will take a perfect model and always look to improve it. Thats where forums excell, showing others where they can improve stuff (ive had several people tell me they have had a go at the god awful Dapol* 155 since i posted about it on this very forum). Thats what some of us choose to do and its why forums like this exist

 

Cheers

 

Jim

 

* note for any newbies, the Dapol 155 is an old model from essentially a very different Dapol to the current one.

Edited February 13, 2013 by jim s-w

[TheCromptonParkinson]

I love the fact I login to have a look at a few bits, to see any new models and the initial reaction. Then Log back on about 50 hours later to see people moaning, Andy Y stepping in and people doing handbags at dawn.

 

Crazy.

 

I like the Western BTW - Well done!

Edited February 13, 2013 by TheCromptonParkinson

[owentherail]

Did you say a new warship in March.......... From someone who releases what they are doing next year in march. (Or did I miss understand) !!!

[Geoff Endacott]

I know - why can't we have a thread where people can write reviews of reviews?

 

The we can have reviews of the reviews of reviews, followed by...

 

Geoff Endacott

[Rugd1022]

Dave

can't really tell from the images but there appears to be an "additional" pillar behind the main windscreen pillar- it looks like part of the glazing unit. If so a relatively easy fix.

Good new re Warship (43?) - but not for Dapol I guess 

Neil

 

Neil - the 'additional pillar' will be as per the real McCoy, internally it's quite substantial, particularly so when compared with most other BR diesel and electric cab interiors.... as I alluded to before, I think the larger than (model!) life size of Andy's photos back on page one of the thread might be exagerating it a bit, I'm sure when you see the 4mm machine in front of you it won't be so noticable, if at all....

 

 

Dave - please don't lose heart over this - for my tuppence you've captured some wonderful childhood memories in three dimensional form and that takes some doing. Getting to this point has been an education in itself and I hope we can repeat the process with each new model you announce.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Rugd1022

[Downendian]

Excellent pic Nidge and just underlines that evidence based approaches are critical. Ive obviously spent not enough time looking out of 52 windscreens but into the loco through them.

Puts my mind at rest.

Neil