Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[gwrrob]

Are we missing something here Robin ? I have to bow to the vastly superior knowledge of those on a higher plane than I can but dream of.....but dare I speak as I find...pause for breath to stifle panic attack.? OK guys perceived wisdom dictates it's crap....except that of the 4 ( no not a misprint ) I have currently in my possession,none of them exhibit the anti social tendencies reported at length on a variety of posts herein.They are a bit noisy true but not to an unacceptable level and they all do what they were asked to do which is to work an auto train with reasonable slow speed control on DC in each direction.

 

I apologise if I have spoiled anybody's Sunday lunch pre dinner pint and now expect pariah status or a position on the naughty step at least. Just going upstairs to put on my hair shirt...

 

RP25 wheel profiles

6 Pin DCC Socket

Provision for DCC sound speaker in coal bunker

Chemically blackened wheels

Separately fitted and blackened handrails

NEM pockets with tension lock couplings

5 pole motor, capable of similar running qualities to DJ Models Austerity or better

Fully detailed and painted cab interior

Vacuum brake pipes fitted to bufferbeams - additional bufferbeam detailing pipes included with model for customer to fit

Separately fitted etched brass cabside numberplates (as per King class)

Separately fitted BR smokebox door numberplate & shedplate (where applicable)

Provision of Auto-working gear (or lack of) where applicable to specific model

Correct details for individual model - Top Feed, Bunker Steps, Whistle Guard

Separately supplied and fitted headlamps (as per King class)

Electrical pickup on all six wheels

Prototypical gap between frames with cosmetic inside motion

Separately fitted smokebox door handle/dart

Variation of top-feed and non-top feed fitted boilers

Cab window glazing

Seperately fitted (and removable) cabside doors

Correct fitment of ATC equipment and whistle guard per model

[NHY 581]

Are we missing something here Robin ? I have to bow to the vastly superior knowledge of those on a higher plane than I can but dream of.....but dare I speak as I find...pause for breath to stifle panic attack.? OK guys perceived wisdom dictates it's crap....except that of the 4 ( no not a misprint ) I have currently in my possession,none of them exhibit the anti social tendencies reported at length on a variety of posts herein.They are a bit noisy true but not to an unacceptable level and they all do what they were asked to do which is to work an auto train with reasonable slow speed control on DC in each direction.

I apologise if I have spoiled anybody's Sunday lunch pre dinner pint and now expect pariah status or a position on the naughty step at least. Just going upstairs to put on my hair shirt...

 

No Ian. These are very good looking models but flawed. I think we all accept that there are good ones but the issue is that there are also a lot of bad ones. Most people I have spoken to, have had to replace their examples to get a good one. I fact, I await a replacement for one of mine.

 

 

Rob.

[Ian Hargrave]

No Ian. These are very good looking models but flawed. I think we all accept that there are good ones but the issue is that there are also a lot of bad ones. Most people I have spoken to, have had to replace their examples to get a good one. I fact, I await a replacement for one of mine.

Rob.

Point.....but 4/4 good uns perhaps means the gods are smiling on me then? OK.

[Barry Ten]

Point.....but 4/4 good uns perhaps means the gods are smiling on me then? OK.

 

They may be, but even if every other one of these models is a bad 'un, there'd still be a 1 in 16 chance of getting four good 'uns in a row, so not outrageous odds.

[Ian Hargrave]

They may be, but even if every other one of these models is a bad 'un, there'd still be a 1 in 16 chance of getting four good 'uns in a row, so not outrageous odds.

Yes I did say that was being controversial didn't I ? This is purely serendipity quite obviously. All four of mine came from different sources and none were purchased directly from Hattons.Thus they are truly a random sample.

 

I am merely seeking to point out ( not for the first time ) that amongst the dross there are some good models.

[woodenhead]

I got my one 14xx secondhand via EBay, it runs fine and I got it less than RRP on a sold out livery so was chuffed.

 

There are probably more good ones out there than bad. If a model was returned as it performed less than satisfactorily than the buyer wanted but was otherwise ok, would Hattons sell it again as the next purchaser might be happy with it?

[Captain Kernow]

Are we missing something here Robin ? I have to bow to the vastly superior knowledge of those on a higher plane than I can but dream of.....but dare I speak as I find...pause for breath to stifle panic attack.? OK guys perceived wisdom dictates it's crap....except that of the 4 ( no not a misprint ) I have currently in my possession,none of them exhibit the anti social tendencies reported at length on a variety of posts herein.They are a bit noisy true but not to an unacceptable level and they all do what they were asked to do which is to work an auto train with reasonable slow speed control on DC in each direction.

 

I apologise if I have spoiled anybody's Sunday lunch pre dinner pint and now expect pariah status or a position on the naughty step at least. Just going upstairs to put on my hair shirt...

I'm glad you're happy with yours, Ian.

 

If the loco won't crawl at an equivalent of walking pace without suddenly speeding up or slowing down for no apparent reason, then I can't be doing with it.

 

But what gets me now, having decided to replace the chassis, is that the design of the body makes it even harder to simply build one of the etched chassis available out there and just fit it. It all seems so unnecessarily complicated.

 

I'm still musing on gearbox options, in order to fit the twin-beam compensation that I think I'll need in OO.

 

Wouldn't be a problem in P4, ironically enough.

[Ian Hargrave]

I'm glad you're happy with yours, Ian.

 

If the loco won't crawl at an equivalent of walking pace without suddenly speeding up or slowing down for no apparent reason, then I can't be doing with it.

 

But what gets me now, having decided to replace the chassis, is that the design of the body makes it even harder to simply build one of the etched chassis available out there and just fit it. It all seems so unnecessarily complicated.

 

I'm still musing on gearbox options, in order to fit the twin-beam compensation that I think I'll need in OO.

 

Wouldn't be a problem in P4, ironically enough.

 

Sounds as if infected with a dose of a Pharaonic plague.I accept that it is a weirdly cobbled together piece of kit .I got lucky and no I would not attempt surgery on it.How many similarly afflicted ones are out there ?

[NHY 581]

I'm glad you're happy with yours, Ian.

 

If the loco won't crawl at an equivalent of walking pace without suddenly speeding up or slowing down for no apparent reason, then I can't be doing with it.

 

But what gets me now, having decided to replace the chassis, is that the design of the body makes it even harder to simply build one of the etched chassis available out there and just fit it. It all seems so unnecessarily complicated.

 

I'm still musing on gearbox options, in order to fit the twin-beam compensation that I think I'll need in OO.

 

Wouldn't be a problem in P4, ironically enough.

 

In a bizarre twist, my 'good one' has started playing up in exactly the same way today. Speeding up, slowing down especially when entering and exiting point work.

Now stops for no apparent reason as well..

 

A Bachmann pannier run through the same points exhibits none of this.....so it must be the loco. Looks like the second one is on it's way back to Hattons.

 

 

Very strange.

 

 

Rob.

[Tom F]

In a bizarre twist, my 'good one' has started playing up in exactly the same way today. Speeding up, slowing down especially when entering and exiting point work.

Now stops for no apparent reason as well..

 

A Bachmann pannier run through the same points exhibits none of this.....so it must be the loco. Looks like the second one is on it's way back to Hattons.

 

 

Very strange.

 

 

Rob.

 

 

Interesting Rob. As it happened both my examples (which ran appalling on DCC) struggled with my hand built point on Cwm Prysor. Where as both my Bachmann 57XX and 74xx(64XX) glide through. Granted this could have been an issue of back to backs.

[NHY 581]

I did wonder on the back to backs Tom. It is almost as if its tight through the point....

 

 

Rob

[phil-b259]

Nearly 2 years after release it seems Hattons have done a good job of looking after the many customers unhappy with this model but I find it hard to believe there'll be another JV with DJM after the initial exciting promise (Post #1) so totally under-performed

 

"Our new,highly detailed model will be designed and produced in partnership with DJ Models and will set new standards for a ready-to-run small locomotive....."

 

This was an opportunity missed by a country mile and when put alongside the many other small loco failures I've had in the interim, it totally sours my enthusiasm for spending the sort of money required to further expand my small steam fleet.   

 

Colin

 

 

In fairness, it doesn't say the new standards would be high.

 

As others have noted, the body is actually done to a very high standard so I would say that DJM / Hattons have actually fulfilled 50% of the highlighted statement.

 

I do grant that in view of the actual running performance of the loco, some on here certainly have had problems and the chosen drive mechanism is not as good as was expected based on said statement.

[NHY 581]

I did wonder on the back to backs Tom. It is almost as if its tight through the point....

Rob

Well, not sure of the exact measurements but a OO back to back gauge slips into the 14xx as a snug sliding fit whereas the Bachmann Panniers wheels are set maybe .5 or even 1.0mm closer together. This may account for the slowing through the PECO points.

 

Looks like the 14xx is set to dead OO standards.

 

Rob.

[Captain Kernow]

As regards wheel standards, I will say that (when it was making an attempt to behave), my Hattons/DJM 14XX did run through all the handbuilt points on 'Bethesda Sidings' OK.

[BWsTrains]

Are we missing something here Robin ?....

Ian,

 

not at all, your experience is but one data point of many.

 

A fair question for you to answer is what percentage of buyers would you expect to purchase an RTR model of any persuasion and expect it to work as supplied.

My own estimate is that if 90% were satisfied as 1st time buyers that would be a bare minimum, 95+% would be better.

 

Evidence on RMWeb for this release and others (and I'm thinking Oxford Rail Dean goods here, scarred as I am) is the percentage probably is much lower and in this day and age that's totally unacceptable. When people are returning up to 3 or 4 models to get one working one, something is clearly wrong in design/ manufacture or QA or all of these.

 

Your data point is in no way inconsistent with others input, when failure rates are high, some will be winners, other losers. 

 

Colin

 

 

 

.

Edited September 30, 2018 by BWsTrains

[NHY 581]

As regards wheel standards, I will say that (when it was making an attempt to behave), my Hattons/DJM 14XX did run through all the handbuilt points on 'Bethesda Sidings' OK.

 

One would venture, CK, that's down to your accuracy whereas I am using PECO points which are more of a compromise, I'm sure. I may try it through a couple of large radius points in due course to see if that makes a difference.

 

Ho hum.

 

Having been a bit of a naughty bu@@er today, my 14xx has been behaving itself this evening and we have enjoyed a spot of shunting at Sheep Lane.

 

 

Rob.

[Captain Kernow]

Having been a bit of a naughty bu@@er today, my 14xx has been behaving itself this evening and we have enjoyed a spot of shunting at Sheep Lane.

 

Interesting, but beware!

Edited October 1, 2018 by Captain Kernow

[NHY 581]

Interesting, but beware!

Well, I have received correspondence from Hattons inviting the return of the item.....probably will, once the first is returned..

 

 

Rob

[NHY 581]

As I have posted elswhere, there appears to have been no comment by either Dave Jones or Hattons regarding the reliability issues with this model.

 

 

Rob.

[Sir TophamHatt]

Has the decoder socket changed?

 

The website says "Next 18" which I thought was one of these:

 

 

but the latest Model Rail (MR253) page 108 says it'll be a 6-pin socket

 

I may have got things confused though as I'm not that great with the different types of DCC.

[Chris Chewter]

My pair were defiantly 6 pins if that helps.

[No Decorum]

As I have posted elswhere, there appears to have been no comment by either Dave Jones or Hattons regarding the reliability issues with this model.

 

 

Rob.

 

I have held my peace until now because I admire and respect Dave Jones’ courage in going out on his own. However, in the absence of comment, I will put my point of view. I got myself an Adams O2 and that put me on my guard. On the whole, it’s nicely decorated but what ruins it is the very obvious way the coupling rods flail about. I ordered an Austerity in LNER livery, noting that the coupling rods were solid, so that would limit any eccentric movements. Subject to what I thought of it, I might buy more. Overcome by the beautiful decoration of the Hatton’s (and other’s) limited editions, I took the plunge before my “test” LNER sample arrived. Sure enough, the coupling rods remained horizontal. Not my experience but I believe that the rigid coupling rods have caused trouble to others. All of them are rougher than I would expect from a modern model. In addition, some variants suffer from EM-itis. This is where poor detail is shown up by some liveries, as in the aluminium bogies of Heljan’s EM1 and EM2. In the case of the Austerities, the injectors are moulded badly. When they are painted black, it is less evident but when the finish is nicely executed bare metal, it shows up badly. Added to this, the much vaunted dished wheels have not the flat-faced spokes characteristic of these machines.

 

Perhaps I am too picky but in my defence I would say that the Austerities were meant to be an advance on the Hornby version. Any manufacturer who produces a new version of a model already existing needs to produce it without obvious fault. The DJ Austerities were an advance on the Hornby ones in some respects but not in others.

 

Next up came the little locos which are the subject of this thread. Once more, intended to be a new version of an existing Hornby model. As soon as I saw the flailing coupling rods, I gave it a miss and, in view of all the reported problems, I’m relieved that I did. Here was an open goal for Hornby, which Hornby missed by a mile.

 

Next along, the Class 71. There are many good features in this, not least the ingenious way the headcodes are inserted. However, it’s a growler and stutters at low speed. Here was another open goal for Hornby and another miss, though not as wide as with the 14XX. Provision for DCC was poor and non-existent for sound. Those who don’t want DCC or sound got a lovely runner from Hornby.

 

So, have I subscribed to DJs 92? Not likely, however awful the Hornby one is.

 

What about a Hudswell Clarke? After all, there is no earlier RTR model. Sorry, barge pole comes to mind.

 

Let me try to finish on a positive note. The Hudswell Clarke is a well-chosen subject. Just look at how tiny steam industrials have been flying off the shelves. What would it need to induce me to buy one? Easy. A conventional motor driving through articulated coupling rods. Well engineered to eliminate slop. Provision for a decoder and sound if possible. (Whisper: Bachmann 009.) Attention to little details to ensure that nothing sticks out like a sore thumb. In short, the way Hatton’s did the Ps and Qs Barclays.

 

Sorry for getting out of bed on the wrong side this morning.

[Ian Hargrave]

No.You speak as you find. A balanced and fair appraisal of the situation.I accept that I have been fortunate with my 14XX .The Class71 is let down badly by its performance which does not hold a candle to its Hornby counterpart.The Kernow O2 is just about OK for a couple of coaches which is all I need it for.

 

An appropriate and timely post.

[JSpencer]

My own personal experience.

 

I have two O2s, no issues for me. Both have performed well. They actually outperform the bigger heavier Hornby H class, because the little weight they have is located where it should be, over the drivers.

 

For 20+ years, my Dapol J94 has been a great runner. A favorite of mine. I had high expectations for the new DJM one. But the chassis is rigid and the weight is concentrated to the rear. I reworked one a lot, adding weight but they are quite fussy little models. Fortunately the USA tanks and P class have come along to replace the aging Dapol J94 and terriers. The 14xx has the same flaws as the J94, weight distribution is wrong, chassis too rigid and motor under powered. Lovely details but not practical in day to day use.

 

For the 71, all Bo-Bo's I've ever had have proved to be good reliable runners, coping with any track work I threw at them in the 3 decades of modelling railways. But the DJM 71 is rather stiff, little or no down play. As soon as it hits a super elevated curve, a pair of wheels (leading or trailing) pop off the rails. Hard to get it to do one circuit without it popping off somewhere. The Hornby version glides round and never derailed once. The bogie pivots are off centre towards the middle of the loco, meaning lifting hooks cannot be easily fitted. Power/weight wise, it's enough to cope with 6 pullmans on my small layout so no issue there for me but anyone wanting top scale speed or to pull scale loads will find it wanting.

 

My gut feeling on this is that the Hornby 71 cut DJMs 71 sales reducing resources for development. It has some very good ideas but equally awkward flaws that could have been easily fed back with a little end user testing. The J94 faced an old but tough competitor, not sure why it went off radar with its rigid chassis and bad weight distribution especially after the O2 and well tanks which have good weight distribution and a flexible chassis. Maybe it too was built down to a price.

 

It could though that the first factory(ies) he used were simply an unlucky choice. He was stuck with what he got. The next DJM project are using different factories and the next small tank loco is reverting to a classic design. So it seems DJM has learned too and the next projects should be better. We'll see at the next release but these are an unfortunate series of events after the fairly positive feedback (in general -though there were signs of areas to improve) on the O2.

I agree he has been very brave starting his own company and even braver taking on my daring projects after these difficulties which he is determined to overcome in the next designs.

Edited October 2, 2018 by JSpencer

[NHY 581]

Well, I tried. Mine have now been returned to Hattons and will the subject of a refund.

 

One of the original two, one was returned due to poor running. Whilst I awaited a replacement, the other deteriorated and was awaiting return when the replacement for the first arrived today. It was no better than the first so following a call to Hattons, it was agreed they would be returned and a refund offered. I have to say the staff at Hattons have been very good and I have no issues with the help given.

 

However, the locos are flawed. Lovely, accurate to look at but they simply won't work as they should. A great shame.

 

Rob

Edited October 6, 2018 by NHY 581