Oxfordrail - Adams Radial

[teaky]

Just had an email from Oxford Rail to say that the late BR model of 30583 will be released next week!  I hope the rush to market hasn't led to the seeming flaws that we have all commented on, but I suppose the 'real thing' will confirm or dismiss that.

 

Fortunately I'm only interested in the LSWR version and I guess by the time that appears I will know if it's going to be Hornby or Oxford.

Oh goody!  Not long to wait for my prize then. 

 

(See post #35.)

[Dunsignalling]

On the whole, apart from apparently lacking any daylight under the boiler it pretty much looks "right" but for a few things that I change on most of my locos anyway. 

 

Front number plate is mounted about 1mm too high, bottom right corner should (more-or-less) touch the top corner of the hinge. Etched plate waiting anyway. Effect is exacerbated by the hinges being a tad on the skinny side and having snap-head rivets where they should be flush.

 

Smokebox door handles a bit on the chunky side as is often the case when a moulded part is used. Turned brass replacement in stock - I generally expect to do this on 3 out of 4 locos anyway.

 

Bogie wheels look rather on the coarse side, so will probably get replaced at some point, again, this is something I am fairly accustomed to doing.

 

Oxford's £20 price advantage pretty much disappears if I don't need to do any of that to the Hornby ones, but I haven't seen the handrails on theirs yet.............

 

In many late-emblem (post-1959) photos, 30583 displays a slight upward curve to the running plate on the starboard front corner, probably the result of a hard contact on running round at some point. Not sure if it still has it because none of my own Bluebell-era photos are taken from the required angle. Buffer on sample illustrated is crooked but, as they are separate parts, that is no indication that all of them will be like it

 

John  

Edited November 19, 2015 by Dunsignalling

[NHY 581]

I never knew we had a group of wise men who could undertake such a detailed review based on one PR photo!

 

Out of curiosity, perhaps they could list the reference sources they are comparing with? As I suspect until we see some more objective reviews from the magazines all we're going to get is a list of perceived faults. Am I the only one thinking it would be nice on here to have a more balanced set of comments from some one who can back up what they say. It's always so negative!

 

Personally I'm off to my local shop next week as they've just been told their stock arrives on Wednesday.

 

Oh - website has updated again this morning to say it's now being released:

http://www.oxfordrail.com/

 

 

Without getting drawn into a debate, I rely on my eyes. As

I said, to me it doesn't look right.

 

Rob.

[MikeParkin65]

I think a lot of the criticism on here is generated by the us not yet being familiar with this new manufacturers style. The model looks well finished and certainly has the character of the prototype. Hopefully it runs as well as it looks and if thats the case I reckon its a cracking first model from a new manufacturer at a competitive price.

[David Bigcheeseplant]

I don't need a radial tank or intend to buy one but like Nhj581 said I rely on my eyes and something is a miss. the fineness just is not there. the bottom of the dome where it flares into the boiler looks blobby, as are other parts of the model. It is great that others  are coming into RTR market, but if I did need one looking at what I have seen in photos I think the Hornby one looks a lot better, but the Finney one is the best if you want to build it.

 

David

[No Decorum]

Just had an email from Oxford Rail to say that the late BR model of 30583 will be released next week!  I hope the rush to market hasn't led to the seeming flaws that we have all commented on, but I suppose the 'real thing' will confirm or dismiss that.

 

Fortunately I'm only interested in the LSWR version and I guess by the time that appears I will know if it's going to be Hornby or Oxford.

I think it's going to have to be Hornby. Acording to Oxford, the green is "Southern", although it looks very LSWR (preserved) to me.

[Adams442T]

I think it's going to have to be Hornby. Acording to Oxford, the green is "Southern", although it looks very LSWR (preserved) to me.

 

I'll be repainting them to LSWR colours anyway, so that doesn't matter too much, and if the Hornby ones get discounted I could just as easily backdate a BR one to LSWR with all the Adams fittings I've got lurking around!

[Andy Y]

Here’s a teaser pic from yesterday’s studio shoot of the Oxford Rail Adams Radial for BRM.

 

If you want to see the rest of the images and read our review of the model, they’ll be in the January 2016 issue of BRM, in shops December 10th (earlier for subscribers/digital edition), or we’ll have a limited supply of advance copies for sale at the Warley NEC show on November 28/29. Come to stand A9 early if want a copy. 

 

Look out here shortly too for an exclusive video of the Adams Radial in action on Tony Wright’s ‘Little Bytham’ layout. It is just being edited now and will hopefully be uploaded tomorrow. 

 

[micklner]

Looks nice 

 

But on this sample not a production item I presume ?

 

Obvious faults/mistakes ,  Bent piston rod , prominent mould lines top of boiler/smokebox , bottom of boiler filled in by chassis ?  and a mould line as well, chrome handrails.

[Joseph_Pestell]

On the whole, I think that is a fine model which captures the look of the real thing.

 

But why the lack of space below the boiler? That really is taking us back thirty years. And it's not as though they needed a big motor on a loco which is only going to haul short trains.

[The Stationmaster]

I never knew we had a group of wise men who could undertake such a detailed review based on one PR photo!

 

Out of curiosity, perhaps they could list the reference sources they are comparing with? As I suspect until we see some more objective reviews from the magazines all we're going to get is a list of perceived faults. Am I the only one thinking it would be nice on here to have a more balanced set of comments from some one who can back up what they say. It's always so negative!

 

Personally I'm off to my local shop next week as they've just been told their stock arrives on Wednesday.

 

Oh - website has updated again this morning to say it's now being released:

http://www.oxfordrail.com/

Ah, clearly a new arrival  In the past some members (or should I say former member) have torn models to shreds on the basis of a single photo whereas at least this time there are four photos and at least one of them can be readily compared with prototype views - as a number of us have.  The conclusion of several of us is that the 'face' of the engine doesn't look right for various reasons - all of them subtle.   If that is not objective I'm not really sure what is because as a mass produced small scale model clearly cannot capture every detail of the real thing getting 'the feel' and 'right appearance' is clearly an important step and an important part of the designer's skill;  an awful lot can be done to making it look right.

 

Now it might well look different when seen in the plastic - things sometimes do - but if manufacturers put pictures on the 'net in this day and age it is inevitable that comments will be made.  One can hope - as has been the case in respect of recent comments in this thread - that they are made reasonably and with explanation, and that is then we hope making good use of a forum - a place for discussion.

 

We might or might not like this happening but it does, and that particular genie left his bottle a long time ago.   So if we are going to do it let's just do it sensibly.  It is of course not compulsory to read such comments and if you prefer to read them in a magazine that is obviously your prerogative, some of us will no doubt do both in order to sample the widest range of views, and of course every single one of us will reach his or her own conclusions which might or might not affect or purchasing decisions or decide the level of work we are prepared to undertake on something after buying it

[JSpencer]

I am surprised that there are not more and bigger photos. This is a very subtle way of promotion.

 

The fact that the Hornby one may very well be better would be justified considering the larger price.

 

It might hint of Oxford's strategy, which may be to be "not as good as the best but good enough". If so we are in interesting times although I do feel that most people are possibly more inclined to go for the better model....

 

It could also be that the final items are far superior to the sample in the photo too...... We'll see....

[asmay2002]

On the whole, I think that is a fine model which captures the look of the real thing.

 

But why the lack of space below the boiler? That really is taking us back thirty years. And it's not as though they needed a big motor on a loco which is only going to haul short trains.

 

Looking at the maintenance sheet on their website it appears to be the motor.  Too late to change it now I assume.

[Roy L S]

I think it is a very worthy first effort. It may not be totally perfect but let's get things into perspective, I've just checked Hattons website (I'm sure there are plenty of others with similar prices) this model can be ordered from them for just £88 which I personally think is pretty good value.

 

Roy

[No Decorum]

I am surprised that there are not more and bigger photos. This is a very subtle way of promotion.

 

The fact that the Hornby one may very well be better would be justified considering the larger price.

 

It might hint of Oxford's strategy, which may be to be "not as good as the best but good enough". If so we are in interesting times although I do feel that most people are possibly more inclined to go for the better model....

 

It could also be that the final items are far superior to the sample in the photo too...... We'll see....

Taking you up on "not as good as the best but good enough", I wouldn't deny the model's shortcomings. However, it comes at a Railroad price but (subject to how the model performs and looks in reality) it seems to me better than any Railroad offering. I can't make out from the photographs but has it grey lining as well as red and white?

[TheSignalEngineer]

Expanding the picture above it looks like grey, cream and red

[Oldddudders]

Given that Andy Y has taken the trouble to supply a pic from the BRM photo-shoot, which is obviously of a production version of the loco, I think that pretty much clinches how the model in the shops will look. If there are indeed significant price differences between the two manufacturers, then those who simply fancy one may make their choice on that criterion alone. Those concerned about fidelity may wish to make other judgements.

 

I'm in the former camp......

[JSpencer]

Taking you up on "not as good as the best but good enough", I wouldn't deny the model's shortcomings. However, it comes at a Railroad price but (subject to how the model performs and looks in reality) it seems to me better than any Railroad offering. I can't make out from the photographs but has it grey lining as well as red and white?

It is about the same or a tad more expensive than Bachmann's E4. I cannot think of comparable Railroad item. The tank engines being smaller and cheaper, everything else much bigger but about the same price, maybe cheaper. I agree though it is way above railroad standard.

 

A famous Royal Navy warship design (later author) often said "better is the enemy of the good enough".

[RJS1977]

 

From the operations leaflet, a seems that a weakness of the Oxford design is the DCC chip socket. While there exists some 8 pin designs that are not much bigger than the socket they replace, this limits us to plain DCC and there seems to be no proviso for a classic 8 pin chip with leads. Converting one to sound will require hard soldering a 6 pin but where will you place the chip is another question. It will probably be too big for the bunker and you still need to find space for a speaker (maybe a small zimo will squeeze in).

I doubt Hornby will be better here though. Only DJM seem to design their small tank locos with DCC sound in mind at this time.

 

Of course that's only an issue for people who run DCC... For those of us who run analogue (and have no intention of switching), this is of no consequence - indeed, if a version was available for say £5 less with the motor hardwired to the chassis (i.e. no socket and plug at all), that would be the version I would buy in preference. (In any case, if I was going to convert such a model to DCC at a later date, I have no problem snipping a couple of wires and soldering them to the wires on the chip!).

[JSpencer]

Of course that's only an issue for people who run DCC... For those of us who run analogue (and have no intention of switching), this is of no consequence - indeed, if a version was available for say £5 less with the motor hardwired to the chassis (i.e. no socket and plug at all), that would be the version I would buy in preference. (In any case, if I was going to convert such a model to DCC at a later date, I have no problem snipping a couple of wires and soldering them to the wires on the chip!).

There are many Steam models out there today stated as DCC ready but some can be in fact a real pain to convert. My point here is, if you going to offer DCC conversion choice then it needs to viable for the end user otherwise, you are quite correct, they might as well avoid the complexity and hard wire it to reduce cost.

Diesels on the other hand, often have loads of space and even working lights.

 

This model doubtless presents some challenges being a tight small tank loco, however here but another recent Adams loco release shows it can be done. I will spare this thread of a yet another pros and cons debate..,. (The vast bulk of my locos will rest analogue for me anyway). But will be interesting to see what will be feasible with this model.

[No Decorum]

It is about the same or a tad more expensive than Bachmann's E4. I cannot think of comparable Railroad item. The tank engines being smaller and cheaper, everything else much bigger but about the same price, maybe cheaper. I agree though it is way above railroad standard.

 

A famous Royal Navy warship design (later author) often said "better is the enemy of the good enough".

Veering wildly OT, in 1916 Rear Admiral Beattie had battlecruisers which outranged their German counterparts. Obligingly, Beattie moved within range of the German battle cruisers, whereupon the latter proceeded to blow up Beattie's ships.

 

Mercifully, a better Adams Radial is not going to blast us out of the water.

[newbryford]

I am surprised that there are not more and bigger photos. This is a very subtle way of promotion.

 

The fact that the Hornby one may very well be better would be justified considering the larger price.

 

It might hint of Oxford's strategy, which may be to be "not as good as the best but good enough". If so we are in interesting times although I do feel that most people are possibly more inclined to go for the better model....

 

It could also be that the final items are far superior to the sample in the photo too...... We'll see....

 

I think a large part of Oxford's strategy was to get it to the market place ahead of the competitor.

 

For the majority of modellers, they will not be bothered by a few errors unless it is radically wrong, but will take it for what it is - it LOOKS like an Adams Radial.

Because it's first in the shops ahead of the Hornby one, people will buy it and Hornby will lose sales as folk already have a Radial....... In this case, I also believe cost will be a factor - it is the cheaper of the two and is available in the next few days.

 

I think the same will happen with the King. Those that want one will buy the Hornby offering as it LOOKS like a King and it's available now. Cost won't particularly be an issue as they are similarly priced.

 

I do realise that I may be over-simplifying things.

 

Yes - there will be some brand loyalty that affects sales.

Yes, there will be those that wait for the Hornby Radial and compare before shelling out.

Yes - There will be those that will buy both manufacturers offerings jut because it represents another prototype with a different number and/or detail.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Butler Henderson]

There will be those who must have / cannot wait but frankly its difficult to see how the Hornby one will not be significantly better and its best to adopt a wait and see approach. What is pretty certain given previous duplications is that hefty reductions will no doubt follow in a few months.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Butler Henderson

[Vistisen]

To be fair I think that Oxfords biggest problem is a simple digit. In November 2014. The RMweb general opinion was that Hornby was out of it, Bachmann was god and the red team could not produce anything good or in in suitable numbers. In fact, the chances of them even surviving the year were deemed to be remote. If you don’t believe me just browse back a year. The Hornby hate gauge was in the red zone. But in November 2015, suddenly the Hornby love is everywhere, an abundant supply of good models compared to Bachmann, whose models are late and much higher in price than originally announced means that the RMweb barometer is swinging from blue to red!

It’s not Oxford’s fault that this has happened. They just caught in the crossfire. I look forwards to when we can ACTUALLY see both models beside each other and get an objective comparison.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Vistiaen

[runs as required]

A famous Royal Navy warship design (later author) often said "better is the enemy of the good enough".

Do you know the date of that quote?

I am interested because the famous psychotherapist Wilfred Bion (commander of one of those First World War early tanks) began reassuring angst ridden patients sometime in the 1930s about the "good enough mother". The danger being clearly that a mother in striving for perfection would screw up the entire family.

Just when you thought this post way OT:

I'm definitely going to get one of those Oxford Adams Radials. I've always loved pre Grouping models, so much more delicate and unfamiliar.

 

dh