Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[PMP]

Thanks for posting those, (first three, posts crossed), I have to say I’m pleasantly surprised, compared with mine and one other I’ve heard of the downhill running on yours looks excellent. I’d love to take yours to bits to see why the difference is so marked! Did you try it before the dcc fit on a gradient? There was no difference on mine in either DC/DCC. On the basis of your video I’d potentially try another, prior to seeing that it was a definite ‘meh!’

 

Regarding the uphill traction mine too is a reluctant climber, I have added weight in a number of different trials with a little success. Currently it sits on the shelf of doom, I’m unsure whether to fit a high level chassis, or try and live with the current one as it’s not a priority on the work flow at the moment.

Edited July 15, 2018 by PMP

[melmerby]

 Did you try it before the dcc fit on a gradient? There was no difference on mine in either DC/DCC.

No I just try locos on a rolling road. If they seem OK they get about 30mins in each direction at half and full speed, then a decoder goes in.

 

Regarding the traction, weight over the driving wheels has been sacrificed to satisfy the minority that want sound. If the decoder was in the bunker the boiler could have had a solid slug of metal.

(In fact that could be a useful mod for the future, if I can find out how it goes together.

 

I posted the vids of the Airfix locos to show that even these can run reasonably well, the main problem is gummed up plunger pickups. My two locos (both second hand) have clean & working plungers.

They, unlike most of the rest of my fleet, are fitted with Digitrax Decoders, which give good motor control but have IMHO a poor speed linearity.

Interestingly one is much noisier than the other and both considerably more noisy than the Hattons/DJM offering.

 

Cheers

 

Keith

Edited July 15, 2018 by melmerby

[tomparryharry]

Thanks for the tip, Keith. I'm a Luddite. So, based upon your post one wonders if the vacant plug would improve the DJM traction.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

Edited July 16, 2018 by tomparryharry

[melmerby]

Thanks for the tip, Keith. I'm a Luddite. So, based upon your post one wonders if the vacant plug would improve the DJM traction.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

It might be possible to get a little bit of weight into the boiler alongside the decoder.

Unfortunately an 0-4-2T is on a loser straight away as there is too much superstructure behind the rear drivers.

(Even the real ones had more weight over the trailing wheels than the front drivers)

 

My ideal solution would be to drive the trailing wheels as well. However that would need a complex gear ratio to get the right rotational speed compared to the drivers. (44:62)

 

Keith

[tomparryharry]

As a slight aside to the topic, but any 14/48xx is a limited use locomotive, At least, in South Wales. Autocoach? Fine. But, put anything else on the loco, and the running foreman would roster a pannier on the job. I've got a lot of photos with 48's on things like the Penygraig/Pontypridd/Cowbridge auto services, but more often as not, when the service needed strengthening, a pannier was substituted. There's nothing wrong with the model I own, but I don't expect to run it with 3-4 coaches. Llantrisant had 2 of these locos at various times on the books, usually 4871, and a large Metro 3586. Also, 4821 was loaned out from Ebbw Junction.

 

I'm currently saving up for a matchboarded auto trailer (A9?) from Shapeways. Once that is done, I'll have a complete Llantrisant-Cowbridge auto service, which is why I bought the DJ model in the first place....

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[melmerby]

As a slight aside to the topic, but any 14/48xx is a limited use locomotive,

 

I'm currently saving up for a matchboarded auto trailer (A9?) from Shapeways. Once that is done, I'll have a complete Llantrisant-Cowbridge auto service, which is why I bought the DJ model in the first place....

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

Not a 48XX but it's earlier cousin:

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/woodend/gwrwe2851.jpg

 

Now if Dapol would shrink the nice trailer they market in 7mm I would definitely buy one.

 

Keith

[Steamport Southport]

I'll just leave this here.

 

http://www.mdrs.org.uk/wycmaidmarlow.htm#1950s

 

 

 

 

Jason

[ROSSPOP]

 

Now if Dapol would shrink the nice trailer they market in 7mm I would definitely buy one.

 

Keith

 

How about flogging your  4mm stuff as there will never be a sweet running GWR Auto-tank in 4mm.....

 

You now have a brilliant 7mm Auto- trailer from Dapol and yes they are about to produce a 7mm Auto tank which will perform brilliantly.

 

All ready to pre order from Hattons......

 

I think that completes the circle...........

 

Johnny Rosspop

[melmerby]

How about flogging your  4mm stuff as there will never be a sweet running GWR Auto-tank in 4mm.....

 

Johnny Rosspop

You obviously didn't look at the videos.

 

Mine runs very nicely, thank you.

Just need a decent pre-Collett auto trailer.

 

Re Dapol: My only ever Dapol purchase was a DRC and was rubbish first time and even the second is not brilliant, so why would a 7mm Autotank be any better?

Plenty of other tales of woe with it.

 

Keith

[Captain Kernow]

Thanks for posting those, (first three, posts crossed), I have to say I’m pleasantly surprised, compared with mine and one other I’ve heard of the downhill running on yours looks excellent. I’d love to take yours to bits to see why the difference is so marked! Did you try it before the dcc fit on a gradient? There was no difference on mine in either DC/DCC. On the basis of your video I’d potentially try another, prior to seeing that it was a definite ‘meh!’

 

Regarding the uphill traction mine too is a reluctant climber, I have added weight in a number of different trials with a little success. Currently it sits on the shelf of doom, I’m unsure whether to fit a high level chassis, or try and live with the current one as it’s not a priority on the work flow at the moment.

It is fascinating, isn't it, how some people get a 'good' one, and others do not.

 

This, to me, just underlines the inconsistency of the chassis and motor/gearbox design in use.

[tomparryharry]

It is fascinating, isn't it, how some people get a 'good' one, and others do not.

 

This, to me, just underlines the inconsistency of the chassis and motor/gearbox design in use.

I'm not entirely sure it's a design issue. To have a good one-bad one is a production QC issue. I've seen a problem on a small gearbox, where the injection moulded gear teeth had a taper over the width of the part. Quite small, but if the gear went in backwards, it would bind at a certain point on its diameter. Naturally, gears which were parallel didn't bind at all.... Plastic moulded gears will normally have a 'pip' where the injection port left its mark. These need to be expertly 'degated' to clear up binding. (Degating is where the part is removed from its sprue). Sweetly running, or a bag of spanners....

 

I will admit to having a good one. Just a lottery, I guess. What will make or break a good model is strict QC, or an apologetic manufacturer with a positive attitude. I haven't taken my model apart; I don't need to. But. I'll bet good money of just one of the gears in the geartrain is either skewed, or in backwards.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[melmerby]

I'm not entirely sure it's a design issue. To have a good one-bad one is a production QC issue. I've seen a problem on a small gearbox, where the injection moulded gear teeth had a taper over the width of the part. Quite small, but if the gear went in backwards, it would bind at a certain point on its diameter. Naturally, gears which were parallel didn't bind at all.... Plastic moulded gears will normally have a 'pip' where the injection port left its mark. These need to be expertly 'degated' to clear up binding. (Degating is where the part is removed from its sprue). Sweetly running, or a bag of spanners....

 

I will admit to having a good one. Just a lottery, I guess. What will make or break a good model is strict QC, or an apologetic manufacturer with a positive attitude. I haven't taken my model apart; I don't need to. But. I'll bet good money of just one of the gears in the geartrain is either skewed, or in backwards.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

I have had several poor running Bachmann locos where there is a definite "sticky" bit

Usually on dismantling there is a noticable defect with the idler gear. Most often as you mention it is surplus plastic on the gear from the moulding process.

Careful removal and cleaning up results in a nice smooth running loco.

Another poorly running loco was traced to excess amounts of lubricating grease around the gears, in fact totally packed with the stuff and it had the consistency (and colour) of cold Stork Margarine!

A good degrease and the loco ran perfectly.

 

Keith

[Paul_sterling]

I'm not entirely sure it's a design issue. To have a good one-bad one is a production QC issue. I've seen a problem on a small gearbox, where the injection moulded gear teeth had a taper over the width of the part. Quite small, but if the gear went in backwards, it would bind at a certain point on its diameter. Naturally, gears which were parallel didn't bind at all.... Plastic moulded gears will normally have a 'pip' where the injection port left its mark. These need to be expertly 'degated' to clear up binding. (Degating is where the part is removed from its sprue). Sweetly running, or a bag of spanners....

 

I will admit to having a good one. Just a lottery, I guess. What will make or break a good model is strict QC, or an apologetic manufacturer with a positive attitude. I haven't taken my model apart; I don't need to. But. I'll bet good money of just one of the gears in the geartrain is either skewed, or in backwards.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

The draft on the gears is actually more likely a design issue. If as moulded, it can be fitted either way round, it is not as it is known "poke oke" design. Sometimes QC becomes an issue because of design detail, sometimes the other way round. But believe me from experience, seldom is it one or the other, they are quite intrinsically linked. 

 

Paul. 

[tomparryharry]

The draft on the gears is actually more likely a design issue. If as moulded, it can be fitted either way round, it is not as it is known "poke oke" design. Sometimes QC becomes an issue because of design detail, sometimes the other way round. But believe me from experience, seldom is it one or the other, they are quite intrinsically linked. 

 

Paul. 

 Quite right. But, I'd suggest that it can be designed out at the QC stage. Part of the assembly instructions would (or should) be amended to address the problem. If the draw (draft) of a part of the geartrain falls outside of a specification, then either reject the part, or remedy the cause of the problem. One problem that can arise is the scale of volume. If you're on a  250,000 part run, you'll nail down QC pretty tight.  It can be a bit different when your order is only 750. An injection machine runs on machine time, with a production office prioritising the big money jobs. Fair play to any model maker who can get machine time where big production slots can run for weeks at a time. machine time can be booked for a year or more....

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

[coachmann]

I posted a loco heading down a grade on video some time ago and it's progress was in fits and starts. Unfit for any serious modelling, toy train buyers of the 1950's had smoother running locos. Fitting DCC and sound is virtually a specialist job. The superstructure is up to today standards, but................. !

 

The irritating part of all this is we are unlikely to see a decent GWR 14XX now for many years. It is said that modellers of the Great Western do very well from the RTR manufacturers, but we have waited a long time and are still waiting for a decent 14XX,  43XX, Large Prairie and a 'Manor'......Hardly obscure locos by any measure.

[The Great Bear]

I posted a loco heading down a grade on video some time ago and it's progress was in fits and starts. Unfit for any serious modelling, toy train buyers of the 1950's had smoother running locos. Fitting DCC and sound is virtually a specialist job. The superstructure is up to today standards, but................. !

 

The irritating part of all this is we are unlikely to see a decent GWR 14XX now for many years. It is said that modellers of the Great Western do very well from the RTR manufacturers, but we have waited a long time and are still waiting for a decent 14XX, 43XX, Large Prairie and a 'Manor'......Hardly obscure locos by any measure.

How true, not forgetting a Saint, arguably one of the most seminal of all loco classes, for which there isn't even the Airfix/Mainline models only a lame adaption of the Triang Hall. Edited July 19, 2018 by The Great Bear

[Paul_sterling]

How true, not forgetting a Saint, arguably one of the most seminal of all loco classes, for which there isn't even the Airfix/Mainline models only a lame adaption of the Triang Hall.

 

I'm really surprised no one has re-done the Saint Class yet, as both Hornby and Bachmann have each covered the classes derived from it. Perhaps the New Build/rebuild might trigger some inspiration. 

 

Paul. 

[trevor7598]

Why do people put up with problems on brand new loco's, all of which cost around £ 100 as a starting

point, with some over £200. I cant think of any other electrical / mechanical product where the purchaser

has to take it apart to get it working, from brand new.

I don't have a Hattons 14xx, but I do have one of their P tanks, and it is superb in every respect, and 

that must be down to good design, and a good manufacturer.

I've had dodgy loco's and they go straight back to where they came from.

[Allegheny1600]

Managed to get the videos up

Three to start with

 

4825 Descending

 

snip

 

I tried it with a load (two free running Airfix B-Set coaches) as it would be more taxing.

It has a Lenz Silver Mini decoder

The lack of grip is notable on the ascent

 

What do you think?

 

Keith

Hi Keith,

Many thanks for posting these videos, I do appreciate seeing just how poor running this model is and feel sorry for all you guys let down by it.

I thought this manufacturer was promising a new standard of quality, I didn't realise he meant poor quality.

I find the Airfix models in your later videos to be better runners.

Has anyone fitted the comet chassis to the DJM model by any chance? Does it fit okay?

I would really like one of these very pretty little locos but mine have to run well.

[sp1]

I think I was lucky in getting a good runner. The body on these is superb but seems to have been let down in many cases by a poorly designed chassis. As much as I would welcome any new models with bodywork as good as these BUT (and it is a big but!) if you have to build (or acquire by other means) a new chassis to make them run well then I really hope that DJM don’t produce any more GWR locos because no other manufacturer is likely to touch them for decades (and no, I won’t mention th Oxford Rail Dean Goods.....)

[chuffinghell]

The irritating part of all this is we are unlikely to see a decent GWR 14XX now for many years. It is said that modellers of the Great Western do very well from the RTR manufacturers, but we have waited a long time and are still waiting for a decent 14XX,  43XX, Large Prairie and a 'Manor'......Hardly obscure locos by any measure.

There have been moments when I have regretted my decision to model GWR and wish I'd gone for later BR locos due to the limited choice of GWR RTR locos............but there's just something about GWR!

[chuffinghell]

I think I was lucky in getting a good runner. The body on these is superb but seems to have been let down in many cases by a poorly designed chassis. As much as I would welcome any new models with bodywork as good as these BUT (and it is a big but!) if you have to build (or acquire by other means) a new chassis to make them run well then I really hope that DJM don’t produce any more GWR locos because no other manufacturer is likely to touch them for decades (and no, I won’t mention th Oxford Rail Dean Goods.....)

[Barry Ten]

I haven't seen one of these running (other than in video clips) but the frustrating thing about this model is that the body was never the worst problem with the Airfix )and later Dapol/Hornby) model, it was the chassis. The body could be tarted-up in an afternoon with a Mainly Trains detailing kit, but you were still stuck with the intrinsic chassis issues. I'd have thought the top priority for a new 14xx would have been to get the mechanical side of it bang-on from the outset, which means a well-balanced, reliable, rugged mechanism with proper-sized wheels and a sensible, proven drive-train. If there's ever a model where you'd want as much weight as far forward as possible, it's this one. What you don't start doing is filling the smokebox with low-density electronics, then bunging in an unnecessary gear-driven chassis with sloppy, over-size coupling rods, then insist that it needs lubricating from purchase, something no other manufacturer in this scale seems to require.

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if another manufacturer decides that the time's just right for a definitive 14xx.

[NHY 581]

I haven't seen one of these running (other than in video clips) but the frustrating thing about this model is that the body was never the worst problem with the Airfix )and later Dapol/Hornby) model, it was the chassis. The body could be tarted-up in an afternoon with a Mainly Trains detailing kit, but you were still stuck with the intrinsic chassis issues. I'd have thought the top priority for a new 14xx would have been to get the mechanical side of it bang-on from the outset, which means a well-balanced, reliable, rugged mechanism with proper-sized wheels and a sensible, proven drive-train. If there's ever a model where you'd want as much weight as far forward as possible, it's this one. What you don't start doing is filling the smokebox with low-density electronics, then bunging in an unnecessary gear-driven chassis with sloppy, over-size coupling rods, then insist that it needs lubricating from purchase, something no other manufacturer in this scale seems to require.

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if another manufacturer decides that the time's just right for a definitive 14xx.

 

Bachmann or Hornby are both able to nail this one. I have avoided the 14xx though finally purchased an O2 from Kernow.

 

The O2 runs very well but the slop in the coupling rod iritate. The chassis on both models is overly complicated and I think the designer was just being too clever.

 

 

I would have had a couple of 14xx but such are the odds of getting one that runs as well as it looks, I won't bother.

 

 

Rob.

[57xx]

Many thanks for posting these videos, I do appreciate seeing just how poor running this model is and feel sorry for all you guys let down by it.

I thought this manufacturer was promising a new standard of quality, I didn't realise he meant poor quality.

That's actually what most would class as a good runner! See PMP's blog for what a really bad one is like.