The Golden Pup

[Trevellan]

 

I did wonder about a 'still rumbling on' category.

I think you mean "crumbling"...

[m0rris]

EDIT: well maybe it should, but look everybody, here's R6547

 

 

Doesn't even come with the ladder...

[kevinlms]

 

I do like that summary sentence!

 

I do feel that cynical re-hashes and spurious reliveries of existing models are fair game though and produce some of the most amusing content.

 

 

Exactly so, otherwise the aforementioned Peco Royal Wedding coal hopper would be disqualified, as it is merely an imaginary repaint - at least I assume its imaginary.

 

Kevin Martin

[Guest Belgian]

How about a sub-category for the most irrelevant and negative post on RMweb for the year? (This one could be the first nomination!)

 

JE

[Guest dilbert]

Dear Mr. York,

 

I am writing this letter to you regarding your initiative for the introduction of the annual 'Golden Pup' award, for the most tacky piece of railway modelling equipment produced in the year in question.

 

I object to the use of 'golden' as a part of the award title as the usage of this adjective isn't a true reflection ot th" majestic material element AU. I am concerned that the eventual winner of the award will continue their journey along a misguided path of mediocrity under the impression there is a goldmine awaiting at the destination.

 

This may sound picky, but why not call the award 'The Plumbum Rivet' or something along that line of thought.

 

I suspect there maybe others disposed to the same school of thought and more radical. They could launch an e-petition and I'm certain they could muster at least ten votes.

 

I am also a dog owner.

 

Yours etc...,

 

Major Paynes

[trisonic]

 

 

Just for a bit of positive, honourable mentions go to Bachmannl. They are giving us the models to a standard we want and are benefitting hugely from that in terms of reputation.

 

Pity they can't do that with their American Diesels (though their steam locos are fine). Perhaps they will send some of their UK team over here..........They don't have such a good name here, unfortunately.

 

Best, Pete.

[Bernard Lamb]

Has to be the blue/grey Gresley Buffet.

One can forgive the odd fault if the model is cheap.This is beyond a joke.

 

Bernard

[Mike W]

I'd have to say it is the Hornby 4-VEP, given what I've read on here and seen from the model (motor etc).

 

However, speaking about something closer to home (or what in the gauge/era I actually model) and also of a model which isn't cheap - Dapol's Executive HST bookset which was only 50% Executive and had a 253 set number on the box which was nowhere to be seen on the power cars. A super model but the livery/set description was a big let down when it appeared.

[Xerces Fobe2]

I'd have to say it is the Hornby 4-VEP, given what I've read on here and seen from the model (motor etc).

 

However, speaking about something closer to home (or what in the gauge/era I actually model) and also of a model which isn't cheap - Dapol's Executive HST bookset which was only 50% Executive and had a 253 set number on the box which was nowhere to be seen on the power cars. A super model but the livery/set description was a big let down when it appeared.

 

To be fair to Dapol the quality of their models has increased expedientialy this year

 

XF

[298]

I'd agree with the Limby Warship, grotty livery and a waste of materials and plastic of a re-release that wasn't even as good as the Mainline one. It's just a shameless attempt to jump on the Hydraulic bandwagon, and I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with the upcoming AC electric resurgence.

 

Of models I've brought (which wasn't many), It'd have to be the GWR 175 Holden "101" tank engine. It was a strange prototype when I got one for Christmas in 1979 but became a favourite when I saved up my pocket money for the GWR 150 edition in 1985, so last year's loco (which I think arrived in early 2011) has some bittersweet irony to it.

 

Just to add a balanced view, I'd also nominate the Heljan/Olivia's class 76. It's certainly other manufacturers loss when they finally realised they could have sold many thousands more if priced better, but £150 for something with holes in the front isn't my cup of tea.

[Andy Y]

I'd agree with the Limby Warship,

 

Me too but I think that may have to be a nominee for next year as it's down for Q1 of 2012. Hopefully the container falls off the ship or gets hijacked by Somali pirates.

 

I'd say the Danish contingent is better represented by the EM1 than the Baby Deltic when the VFM element is considered (£160).

[m0rris]

 

Me too but I think that may have to be a nominee for next year as it's down for Q1 of 2012. Hopefully the container falls off the ship or gets hijacked by Somali pirates.

 

 

Ah shame it can't breeze through to the top of the polls. How about an RMweb welcoming committee armed with crow bars and a large bonfire?

[Mike W]

 

To be fair to Dapol the quality of their models has increased expedientialy this year

 

XF

 

The quality of the tooling and the motors is absolutely top notch. The accuracy of their paint finishes, less so, in my opinion.

[298]

 

 

Ah shame it can't breeze through to the top of the polls. How about an RMweb welcoming committee armed with crow bars and a large bonfire?

 

My first ever post on RMweb 1.0 mentioned building an exhibition layout in the style of one from 30 years ago, a generic GWR style flat earth "Ashburton" with card buildings, dyed luminous sawdust and faded Peco backscenes. Maybe we should build such a "Formidable" layout for R3068 to run on, and exhibit it around the country as a warning from history....

[S.A.C Martin]

Maybe it's just me, but if you were going to have a Golden Pup award for a specific company, who but Hornby are you going to give it to? Bachmann - replaced a whole batch of 2EPB bodies. Dapol? DapolDave's sterling customer service on here. Heljan? They've had a quiet year, for sure, but no real PR gaffes as yet.

 

I respect Simon Kohler hugely for his contribution to the hobby and the response I garnered from him when I wrote to Hornby RE the 4VEP, but to date I have never had a response from Frank Martin - who got the same letter - and I certainly have not seen anything the like a response to the problems of the 4VEP, that we saw from Dapol who THE INSTANT problems were found on the class 22s, were sending round notifications, an explanation of how to clip the 22 pin plug, etc etc.

 

Overall, there's no doubt Hornby can put out superb, top notch quality stuff, and that's why I am going to be buying a lot of their suburban coaches when my pay cheque clears at the end of the month, but their customer service and reluctance to say anything about anything drives me to distraction.

 

So Golden Pup for manufacturer - Hornby. And I'd happily go on record saying that. I've not been satisfied with them at all this year, and no doubt there's more like me out there feeling particularly burned and rather infuriated with the dealings regarding one specific product.

[Jamie]

Yay, 4mm RtR manufacturer-bashing again.

Last month it could have been Heljan, now it's Hornby, next month it'll be Bachmann. The internet is fickle.

 

As a bit of fun, go ahead. But if the forum aims to bring more manufacturers on-side, at some stage we/you are going to have to change the tone to a more concilliatory note.

[Andy Y]

As I said we do a lot to recognise the positives.

[Barry O]

Bachy 3F tender underframe WHY????? Part of the flat spring society!

 

But really to all 4mm Manufacturers - stop giving us huge flanges on steam loco models - honestly guys and gals we can do without so much metal!

[Dagworth]

I'm surprised not to see the Hj 86 listed yet, or was that last year's winner?

 

Andi

[Legend]

What about the Limby mechanism in general, admittedly with its starring roll in the 4VEP. But if you make it specific it might stop its reappearance in the 5BEL, although I suspect its too late!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Yay, 4mm RtR manufacturer-bashing again.

Last month it could have been Heljan, now it's Hornby, next month it'll be Bachmann. The internet is fickle.

 

As a bit of fun, go ahead. But if the forum aims to bring more manufacturers on-side, at some stage we/you are going to have to change the tone to a more concilliatory note.

Not necessarily, in respect of those two elements picked out in red.

 

It isn't bashing to recognise a genuinely poor product, assessed against some reasonable criteria; to put a line in the sand and make the statement 'this just isn't of a good enough standard'.

 

Secondly, we are customers. Reasonable criticism of product we have purchased, right up to 'unfit for purpose' is happily a right enshrined in law, and also something which a good business does well to listen to.

 

Done well, this could help kill the perception of internet forums as the home of fickle hotheads and highly opinionated vociferous narrow interest groups. Here's a reasoned argument why this product really ain't up to it, and finishes bottom of the table this year...

[Guest dilbert]

I respect Simon Kohler hugely for his contribution to the hobby and the response I garnered from him when I wrote to Hornby RE the 4VEP, but to date I have never had a response from Frank Martin - who got the same letter - and I certainly have not seen anything the like a response to the problems of the 4VEP, that we saw from Dapol who THE INSTANT problems were found on the class 22s, were sending round notifications, an explanation of how to clip the 22 pin plug, etc etc.

 

Too emotional, keep cool man

 

I would bet that Frank Martin has not even seen the note you sent him - his admin team should be effectively covering the bases and ensuring that the response is dealt with appropriately. You state (if I understood correctly) that SK had replied to you - do you think that Frank Martin should send you an identical reply ?

 

If you held a 10% stake in Hornby, you wouldn't even have to write a letter - only need to pick up the phone and say 'Hi Frank, this is the SAC (remember the Fonz?), WTF are you doing man?'.

 

There are several people on this forum who share the same amazement at the variability of Hornby product from a quality & price perspective. If the 4VEP was being sold at £40 I'm pretty sure that there would be few disgruntled people -OK, so this isn't the case, so you'll use your wallet power.

 

I thought this award was about a specific model that underwhelmed because of whatever reason(s) voters would believe to be valid - and nothing else - or maybe I misread the intent?.... dilbert

[dseagull]

Not necessarily, in respect of those two elements picked out in red.

 

It isn't bashing to recognise a genuinely poor product, assessed against some reasonable criteria; to put a line in the sand and make the statement 'this just isn't of a good enough standard'.

 

Secondly, we are customers. Reasonable criticism of product we have purchased, right up to 'unfit for purpose' is happily a right enshrined in law, and also something which a good business does well to listen to.

 

Done well, this could help kill the perception of internet forums as the home of fickle hotheads and highly opinionated vociferous narrow interest groups. Here's a reasoned argument why this product really ain't up to it, and finishes bottom of the table this year...

 

Both fair enough comments IMHO.

 

My only issue is that the 'mocking' style of critiquing models, which this could (my emphasis) be construed as (by those outside RMweb/those who have an axe to grind against the forum/Andy/the internet in general), was critisiced by a lot of people when Steve Jones used to do it on Electricnose. Just wonder if those who complained then are now sitting on the other side of the fence, and if so, why? - Not a critisicm of anyone involved, just an observation/question really!

[S.A.C Martin]

Not necessarily, in respect of those two elements picked out in red.

 

It isn't bashing to recognise a genuinely poor product, assessed against some reasonable criteria; to put a line in the sand and make the statement 'this just isn't of a good enough standard'.

 

Secondly, we are customers. Reasonable criticism of product we have purchased, right up to 'unfit for purpose' is happily a right enshrined in law, and also something which a good business does well to listen to.

 

Done well, this could help kill the perception of internet forums as the home of fickle hotheads and highly opinionated vociferous narrow interest groups. Here's a reasoned argument why this product really ain't up to it, and finishes bottom of the table this year...

 

^This.

 

Too emotional, keep cool man

 

Angry young man syndrome!

I would bet that Frank Martin has not even seen the note you sent him - his admin team should be effectively covering the bases and ensuring that the response is dealt with appropriately. You state (if I understood correctly) that SK had replied to you - do you think that Frank Martin should send you an identical reply ?

 

No, but an acknowledgement of receiving the letter would have been courteous. I would have been happy with that.

If you held a 10% stake in Hornby, you wouldn't even have to write a letter - only need to pick up the phone and say 'Hi Frank, this is the SAC (remember the Fonz?), WTF are you doing man?'.

 

Ah, I can but dream...

[rob D2]

I just respect the fact that Andy has the balls to start this....there are some other internet sites who just insist everything is perfect, it's as if they believe Hornyheljanmann is run by Saddam and if they say anything negative the secret police will be round with the waterboard.

 

So, I haven't bought much this year, but reading the in depth MR reviews, I didn't like the blooming great screws on the side of that there Dapol steamie. And I must say the Hornby 4VEP did look a bit ...gash.

 

On the plus side, Bachmann I want to marry you.