OO Gauge class 71 Electric Locomotive

[gardenwall]

From those perspectives, I would agree, however I found a photo of a 74 (cab shape is the same as a 71 but there are lots of detail differences, especially with the valences) which would imply the DJM one

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/8708923@N03/10440706616/in/pool-1541906@N21/

 

The problem with such shape comparisons, is that photos of the real thing and the models are not taken at the exact same angles. The Models being photoed slightly from above, the real from just below or a 1/3 from up the height of the loco.

 

And those yellow fronts on blue ones don't make it easier...

It would not surprise me if the there was some variation from real one to real one, they were after all basically hand built.

[JSpencer]

But which one is right? Neither but I'd say the Hornby one is closest there (or it could be the angle of the photo ... which is slightly off centre). 

I'm doing E5000 (I only do prototypes and first of class for display) so I'm going to have to do a bit of filing on the rain guttering which looks a bit too proud on the DJM version anyway. 

Good and bad points on both but if I'm going to have to hack one about, repaint and renumber, I might get the Hornby one and sell the crowdfunded one. 

The overall look of the DJM version is better so hopefully it will become available as E5000 without guttering at a later date.

 

Earlier in the thread, DJM did say that costs prevented additional tooling for a gutter less version which was just for a very brief period at the start of their lives. The liveries carried on those versions were also carried with guttering.

Hornby have done the gutter less version but the cab is flawed due to having both corner and roof vents (roof vents were removed and replaced with corner vents long after the gutters were added).

[Roy Langridge]

Unless we are prepared to pay significantly more than we already do models will always have to be a compromise. I think the manufacturers generally get it about right, but for some that will never be good enough, hence the threads with a few people being very vociferous.

 

Roy

[bigherb]

I'm an novice, I know nothing about the class 71, and I do not know which one of the models in the  photos in #1542 is Hornby and which is the DJM model. So this is a double blind observation, but comparing both these models to the photo in #1547  then the model to the right in the last photo of post #1542 best captures the complex curving slope of the cab, now someone please tell me which model I have just declared the winner?

Hornby is to the right.

[DJM Dave]

Earlier in the thread, DJM did say that costs prevented additional tooling for a gutter less version which was just for a very brief period at the start of their lives. The liveries carried on those versions were also carried with guttering.

Hornby have done the gutter less version but the cab is flawed due to having both corner and roof vents (roof vents were removed and replaced with corner vents long after the gutters were added).

Forgive me for asking this but I truly don't know now, looking at the comparison pics above it looks like the Hornby one has got rain gutters, just very fine ones. Can anyone confirm?

[SRman]

The Hornby ones without rain gutters have a fine trace of the position where they were added. It is clearly visible in some photos, particularly in the topic on the Hornby model. It isn't meant to be there but appears to be a part of the compromise Hornby have in the tooling that gives them the option of gutters or no gutters.

[ColinK]

What about running qualities, ease of fitting DCC and sound?

[SGP]

I can see why the guttering was fitted as an afterthought to the real Class 71's. The driver would get a waterfall down the back of his neck without them, BUT .... when they were converted to 74, the gutters were removed. Very strange.

[Budgie]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm !

 

They're both good - it's just a shame H couldn't have used their vast resource to have done something else like a 4-CIG

... or even an Electrostar.

[Gwiwer]

Very much looking forward to my 71 arriving. Or possibly, if it's ready, being collected from Camborne next weekend. The order was a late one as I have very limited use for a 71 and indeed nowhere to run anything at all for a couple of months.

 

I saw it as an investment in the hobby and a stepping stone to getting the 74 which I am rather interested in. And there is always Rule 1.

 

From the pictures above it would seem that Dave has captured in precision model form everything that has eluded Hornby. I never had any doubts about which would prove the better-looking model. And which should prove also to be the best runner.

[JSpencer]

What about running qualities, ease of fitting DCC and sound?

 

For running qualities, we will have to wait and see until an owner comments on them (my pair have yet to arrive). However for DCC sound conversion, the DJM model is designed for it with an actual dedicated speaker space. Hornby barely leave room to fit a chip. Charlie P, a couple of pages back, do a DCC sound conversion pack for the DJM model with Legomanbiffo sounds. Once my crowd soucer arrives, I think I'll order one (the other being Hattons -- hmm, I wonder who will be first to send me it?).

[DJM Dave]

Hi everyone,

 

As promised i've uploaded to my zenfolio site the detail pics i took of the class 71 during the laser scanning session, way back yonder.

 

It should give you all a baseline of detail to be able to check and re check, and believe me, there are some 'bones of contention' if you look hard enough. lol

 

For those that want to add extra detail they are handy, for those that want to detail paint their cab's more fully, they are invaluable, for those that want to put a crew in the cabs, be warned the cab has the drivers side seat down and the second mans seat up (they are spring loaded to go up like in a cinema) but i decided that the driver seat needed to be down for those that want a driver in.

 

The link to the main folder is ....   http://davejonesphotography.zenfolio.com/f138835414

 

Simply click  'UK trains' then 'class 71'

 

Hope these help?

cheers

Dave

[andybuttterworth1962]

Hi everyone,

 

As promised i've uploaded to my zenfolio site the detail pics i took of the class 71 during the laser scanning session, way back yonder.

 

It should give you all a baseline of detail to be able to check and re check, and believe me, there are some 'bones of contention' if you look hard enough. lol

 

For those that want to add extra detail they are handy, for those that want to detail paint their cab's more fully, they are invaluable, for those that want to put a crew in the cabs, be warned the cab has the drivers side seat down and the second mans seat up (they are spring loaded to go up like in a cinema) but i decided that the driver seat needed to be down for those that want a driver in.

 

The link to the main folder is ....   http://davejonesphotography.zenfolio.com/f138835414

 

Simply click  'UK trains' then 'class 71'

 

Hope these help?

cheers

Dave

 

and I thought this was a preserved locomotive of the national collection - shame on the NRM!

 

 

Can't wait for my weathered blue one to turn up - must be soon

[Wigan Wallgate OO Gauge]

I can't wait to see the other livery variants! I'm still shocked at how pale the Hornby versions paint scheme is in comparison. *this is not slanderous*

[DJM Dave]

and I thought this was a preserved locomotive of the national collection - shame on the NRM!

 

 

Can't wait for my weathered blue one to turn up - must be soon

Politics mate, politics. From someone who claims to have the good of the NRM at heart too.

[No Decorum]

For running qualities, we will have to wait and see until an owner comments on them (my pair have yet to arrive). However for DCC sound conversion, the DJM model is designed for it with an actual dedicated speaker space. Hornby barely leave room to fit a chip. Charlie P, a couple of pages back, do a DCC sound conversion pack for the DJM model with Legomanbiffo sounds. Once my crowd soucer arrives, I think I'll order one (the other being Hattons -- hmm, I wonder who will be first to send me it?).

I may have missed it but I don’t recall mention of the Hornby having provision for a sugar-cube speaker underneath. It just doesn’t seem to have enough space for a decoder. Allegedly.

[New Haven Neil]

I don't have much of an interest in 71's, but I find this thread fascinating! Both models are superb, and yet both models have errors, some being different errors on the same part!

 

A few examples - the rain gutter on the DJM model is a bit too pronounced, but on the Hornby model is almost non-existent! The beading around the cab windows is a little heavy on the DJM model, but again almost non-existent on the Hornby model. The buffer beam detail is far superior on the DJM model, except the draw hook is too high - should be on the centre line of the buffers like the Hornby model. The bogie detail on the DJM model is breathtaking - yet it is missing the body to bogie brackets that the Hornby model has. I am sure there will be many other differences apart from those already mentioned that will come to light as the locos are inevitably compared.

 

Now the above is hopefully my unbiased opinion, others will no doubt differ. In short there is enough differences on both models such that I expect there will be strong advocates of either and the arguments over which is best could be never ending!

 

 

Looking at the photos on Dave's zenfolio site, you have your comment about the couplings the wrong way around - DJM one looks right.

 

The shape of the cab looks different in every photo you look at, the light direction seems to change the shape of it, I'd not wish to say either was right or wrong.  DJM's angle of the bufferbeam fairing does look a little too steep though, but its marginal. In the 3rd photo of the prototype it looks right.....the light again.(edit - in Dave's photo 151 it looks right....but in other prototype phots it looks less steep - as someone says above, they're probably all different!)   As Dave said, the brackets are in the bag. But....the bogie detail...oh the bogie detail......oh yesss!!

Edited May 12, 2017 by New Haven Neil

[mikesndbs]

Assume we need to remove the body to add headcodes?

 

Few questions:

 

What headcodes are provided.

 

How easy is it to get the body off?

 

Thanks

[DJM Dave]

Assume we need to remove the body to add headcodes?

 

Few questions:

 

What headcodes are provided.

 

How easy is it to get the body off?

 

Thanks

Hi,

 

Nope, you can slide the headcode in behind the front of the loco as it's on a tab,

This means firstly it's behind the glass, and secondly you can change them without removing the cab.

 

I'm out at the minute so can't tell you the head codes off hand, sorry, but the body is a very easy removal.

 

Cheers

Dave

[dibber25]

I don't have much of an interest in 71's, but I find this thread fascinating! Both models are superb, and yet both models have errors, some being different errors on the same part!

 

A few examples - the rain gutter on the DJM model is a bit too pronounced, but on the Hornby model is almost non-existent! The beading around the cab windows is a little heavy on the DJM model, but again almost non-existent on the Hornby model. The buffer beam detail is far superior on the DJM model, except the draw hook is too high - should be on the centre line of the buffers like the Hornby model. The bogie detail on the DJM model is breathtaking - yet it is missing the body to bogie brackets that the Hornby model has. I am sure there will be many other differences apart from those already mentioned that will come to light as the locos are inevitably compared.

 

Now the above is hopefully my unbiased opinion, others will no doubt differ. In short there is enough differences on both models such that I expect there will be strong advocates of either and the arguments over which is best could be never ending!

The curved rain strip on the real thing was absent when new. It was a later addition. Yes, the DJM one is too prominent but the question is, "Is the Hornby one just the ghost of a rainstrip resulting from a tooling which needs to have rainstrips on some models but not others" - in other words, a separate slide that fits into the tool and actually shouldn't show up, but does, very slightly. (CJL)

[gz3xzf]

Having looked at the photos of the real thing and the photos of the models in the earlier post, I cannot say I am bothered about the rain strip. I am interested that the green on the "one from the other manufacturer" does look a bit pale.

 

The one thing I was interested in though was, I didn't realise that the pantograph pit in the roof doubled-up as a swimming pool, is the chlorinator, filter and pump hidden in the equipment room?

(I'm guessing the moisture drain is blocked on E5001 )

 

BTW, I received my E-mail from Kernow yesterday afternoon, how long have people been waiting for the post to arrive?

Edited May 12, 2017 by gz3xzf

[skin_2]

Politics mate, politics. From someone who claims to have the good of the NRM at heart too.

I don't think any of the Class 71s were named 'Flying Scotsman'...

[bigherb]

 

BTW, I received my E-mail from Kernow yesterday afternoon, how long have people been waiting for the post to arrive?

My dispatch email was Tuesday it arrived Thursday by Royal Mail.

[New Haven Neil]

Mine took two days also.

 

re the colour- it looks spot on to me, on my original livery version.  I don't have a Hornby version myself but we sell them, and it looks a little 'chalky' in comparison to me.

 

However, I want to know why there isn't a bag of scale water with my loco, to put in the panto well.....

Edited May 12, 2017 by New Haven Neil

[BR(S)]

However, I want to know why there isn't a bag of scale water with my loco, to put in the panto well.....

 

Must have evaporated along with all the vapourware Dave was allegedly going to be selling in the early days . . .