RMweb Premium Daddyman Posted October 8, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 8, 2010 I've read quite a bit of talk recently calling for a new model of a class 67 and 73 of the same standard as the Hornby class 60. Fine by me. But shouldn't we be calling for a class 37 to the same standard? I spend 30-40 hours trying to get the Bachmann 37 presentable, as (I guess) did another modeller who recently displayed a superb model of green 37403 on rmweb. Yet the amount of detail he added was not obsessive or over the top - just what we'd expect in a post Hornby-60-world. (I'm not even going to mention the Vitrains model!) It seems wrong that this is necessary for one of the longest-lived and popular BR locomotives, when excellent models of very obscure types are being announced. Hornby has shown itself to be the only major manufacturer who can get a 21st-century level of detail on a diesel model, so they seem to be the obvious choice. Plus, the 37 has always been their model from time immemorial. Controversial? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Let me ask a question? Do you think the class 60 was a fluke? I mean classes 50 and 56 have quite a lot of problems in the cab areas, the 31 doesnt capture the look of a 31. HST - Again comes with errors. There is no guarentee that a Hornby 37 would be as good as the current offerings, let alone better but you can pretty much say it will have a far too rigid drive arrangement making the finescale types who go to the level of detail you describe steer clear on the grounds that it will be a royal PITA to get running. I really thing the Hornby stuff is held in high regard because of all the extra bits stuck onto it and the gimmicks of moving fans, opening cab doors etc. When it comes to getting the basic shape right they are no better or worse than anyone else. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Daddyman Posted October 8, 2010 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted October 8, 2010 Good points, Jim - though weren't the 50 and 31 easy (albeit expensive) to rewheel? But let's say I concede your points - what's the alternative? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waverley West Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 The thought of Hornby using their wonderful self-centring coupling which drags everything going off the rails would put me off wanting to see Hornby attempt a 37 alone, or any other diesel for that matter. I'd far rather see Bachmann have yet another go, although I have to say I have other priorities than spending 30-40 hours on one loco (each to their own though of course). If you want to spend that number of hours on the loco, then that's your perogative of course but I don't think most modellers would share this view about the Bachmann 37?? Oh no, I've said too much now. Rapidly ducks below parapet. I quite like the various recent Bachmann versions although I have to say I don't like the Vitrains alternative at all. It looks Lima all over to me. Again, ducks below parapet. Cheers, Dave Waverley West Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CullingworthGNR Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I for one don't feel qualified to complain about the standard of ready-to-run models, because the inaccuracy of my layouts means that the locos running on it are easily the most accurate representation of reality. Jim and Dave, on the other hand, have every right to query the details! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Good points, Jim - though weren't the 50 and 31 easy (albeit expensive) to rewheel? But let's say I concede your points - what's the alternative? They are yes. The problem is the all wheel drive chassis is so rigid the things wont run on anything other than mirror flat track. A1A-A1A like Vi-trains use is a much better arrangement for a model loco. Of course AWD with a degree of springing on at least the center axle would be the ideal. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigwelsh Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 To be fair the Hornby AWD bogies I have seen are at least flat and I think they had inline gears too? Bachmann on the other hand has banana shaped bogies that need converting to A-1-A to be able to deal with. You could probably say Heljan should have a go in a post Hymek world but they've made some right howlers since. The newest Bachmann 37 coming out now seems as good as we are going to get anyway and a new 67 or 73 should get far more sales than another rehashed 37! The obscure prototypes may be announced as excellent models but its hardly a given until you see a production one.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 there's many more factors which play a role here.... Let's look at the cost and what you get for your money. Now lets forget about 'box shifters' for now as i know they often reduce prices so lets go with their RRP prices. On the Bachmann 37 we are looking at about £80? RRP price (maybe more?) and for that I do expect more detail but not to absolutey individual artwork museum piece quality. Now If i was buying a 37 I would buy the ViTrains model, Why? ask a lot of you... Well for about £50-70 (depending on model and if it's a 'limited edition'...) I can buy an engine which is resonably accurate in terms of detail, it has directional lighting a DCC provision a lovely choice of more 'obscure' liveries.... the list goes on, for me this provides the best value for money, but there is room for improvement which can be always undertaken by the consumer. The Hornby 37, If I am right is the old Triang or 1970's mouldings? Now power wise it is good, but detail wise, i would effectively use it on a triang layout for that reason... It's not worth buying considering the price. However, if it's the railroad version I would not argue, for someone on a budget or starting out then yes it is a good buy. My point? : It's all about value for money If the model or there is a model on the market which ticks the majority of your requirements, then why should the manufacturers change it for more expense on their part, which then means the RRP prices will be higher, and as we know if something is not suitably priced, It Won't sell so if it was me, I wouldn't complain about it. On the controversial front i think again its the divide between the modellers who are happy with what they get and those who are forever chasing that perfect model to their tastes and their high accuracy standards, and the latter to me, Ladies and Gents means nothing.... because out there on the shelves are three 37 models, and there's one which ticks all of my boxes, so to me, why change anything????? It's not a dig at those who spend hours detailing stuff etc, but I'm voicing what a lot of people think.... Me two cents! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I've read quite a bit of talk recently calling for a new model of a class 67 and 73 of the same standard as the Hornby class 60. Fine by me. But shouldn't we be calling for a class 37 to the same standard? ... Controversial? Controversial? I should say so; TBH I can hardly believe I'm reading it. And I'm a longtime D&E modeller, so I shudder to think what some will think... ... spend 30-40 hours ... Yet the amount of detail he added was not obsessive or over the top - . ... Debatable, at best. Are you prepared to spend similar amounts of time enhancing all the other things that go to make a layout? You could probably say Heljan should have a go in a post Hymek world but they've made some right howlers since Precisely. There's no laid-down rule that says each successive model has to be better than that manufacturer's previous best. We can hope, but it's not a given. And it's not as if they set out to make models with a particular number of errors. The obscure prototypes may be announced as excellent models but its hardly a given until you see a production one.. Difficult to know which ones the OP means, but in the case of the LMS twins and BPs, one would imagine that the economics of their LE status will support a higher level of detail/fidelity I'm sure Bachmann and Hornby are savvy enough to realise that a significantly improved 37 wouldn't make economic sense to them. It wouldnt bring in sufficient sales (over and above the current offerings), and the development involved would be sure to right royally p*ss off the majority of modellers - because it would divert resource from other projects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 I've read quite a bit of talk recently calling for a new model of a class 67 and 73 of the same standard as the Hornby class 60. Fine by me. But shouldn't we be calling for a class 37 to the same standard? No. Bachmann's is pretty good - pop by Mr Hanson's stall and you've got all the bits you need for a great class 37. Ask them for an all singing all dancing class 24/25 range instead! I spend 30-40 hours trying to get the Bachmann 37 presentable, as (I guess) did another modeller who recently displayed a superb model of green 37403 on rmweb. It's called modelling! I think if you want models of a high standard then you need to put some effort in - I find it odd that you need 30 - 40 hours to make the Bachmann model presentable. Hornby has shown itself to be the only major manufacturer who can get a 21st-century level of detail on a diesel model, so they seem to be the obvious choice. Plus, the 37 has always been their model from time immemorial. "a 21st-century level of detail" That phrase confuses me - is that seperate from the issue of body shape? I'd say that the Heljan Hymek lacks the smaller add on bits but it outshimes many of Hornby's diesels in overall looks! Likewise the Bachmann 66 I think is a good overall looking model. the 31 doesnt capture the look of a 31. Easy way to fix that I really thing the Hornby stuff is held in high regard because of all the extra bits stuck onto it and the gimmicks of moving fans, opening cab doors etc. When it comes to getting the basic shape right they are no better or worse than anyone else. Completely agree! It's just when they do get it right, the results, like the sixty, are brilliant! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waverley West Posted October 8, 2010 Share Posted October 8, 2010 Couldn't agree more The day after I can make the rest of a layout as good as most of the locomotive offerings from the Trade then I shall worry about whether the blue or red box doesnt hold an exact replica of whatever its meant to be. It seems to me (and I may have written it before ) that there is way too much emphasis placed on the fidelity of model locomotives and rolling stock in general, at the expense of all the infrastructure and "sense of place" elements that make for a great model railway I have to agree with you Mickey. I've always thought it contradictory when modellers criticise a new RTR loco in the minutest detail as soon as it 's released while they happily run their stock on their layout set in some imaginary location. Is that fedelity? To me, the Bachmann 37 gives me a loco that looks like a 37 and, with sound, sounds like one too. That's good enough for me. Other inaccuracies and missing details on my layout (and there are plenty of those) concern me far more. If people want to add "bells and whistles" (not literally I hasten to add) then isn't that what modelling is all about? Is a basically accurate body shell not what really matters? How far we take it after that is then up to us. As other posters above have said, it wouldn't make commercial sense for Bachmann to redo their 37 yet again and I can't see Hornby doing one either. There has to be a law of diminishing returns and common/commercial sense about this, whatever we may want. Bachmann's 37 certainly looks the part for me, but then I never take a ruler to models (I just look at them and decide whether I think they "look right"). My standards aren't the highest though I must admit. Cheers, Dave Waverley West Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted October 8, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 8, 2010 Controversial? I should say so; TBH I can hardly believe I'm reading it. And I'm a longtime D&E modeller, so I shudder to think what some will think... How right you are Ian. I've lost count of how many times Bachmann have already retooled the 37 because of all the complaints. Each time, production slots that otherwise could have been allocated to the very considerable number of people who don't want a 37 of any type or quality are taken up, so everybody else loses out. And now a call for yet another. How about acknowledging that there are thousands of things out there that have never been produced RR in any standard. How far can self interest go? A long way, obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Despite being reletively green on the whole detail modelling aspect of the hobby, I'm afraid I'd have to disagree that the 37, particuarly Hornby's, should be up for retooling, Especially when one considers that their current offering is for their budget railroad range. Looking around I think it's fair to say that their are other classes that deserve to be retooled ahead of them so that their current runs can be rebranded as railroad also. For instace, classes 73 and 67 as you mention, but also the 06, 40, 59, 101, 121, 142 (though this may conflict with Realtracks 143/144), to name but a few. Incidently Hattons appear not to have any class 67's or 73's for sale, though that could be a case of weak google-fu. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRDBLUE17 Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 I don't think we need another 37 as Bachmann have already done a lot of work to get us a decent 37 model not only this they are currently retooling the 37/0 variants and then we are to get the 37/7 and 37/9 variants as well - I am pleased with all my Bachmann 37's and with a little work mainly weathering and adding a few details they look good on a layout and I have seen many great examples on other peoples layouts both on here and at shows. I am a big fan of Hornby's class 60 and whilst this may be my favourite model loco I am more than happy with most of my other more modern releases. If anything was to get re-tooled the 67 stands out for me in Hornby's range along with the 156 given the quality of the other modern units we now have. I really don't get why Bachmann seem to get so much unfair critism from some parties when they offer so much to the modern scene in both locos and rolling stock. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Stafford Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Perfection doesn't come in a £65 package sadly. Look at the price of most top-whack US and continental outline. For the price, the Bachmann 37 is pretty much unbeatable I'd say and the addition of some Shawplan bits make finescale improvement a much simpler task. Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Perfection doesn't come in a 4mm on 16.5mm track either, so it will have to be P4 or HO then! Xerces Fobe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Couldn't agree more The day after I can make the rest of a layout as good as most of the locomotive offerings from the Trade then I shall worry about whether the blue or red box doesnt hold an exact replica of whatever its meant to be. It seems to me (and I may have written it before ) that there is way too much emphasis placed on the fidelity of model locomotives and rolling stock in general, at the expense of all the infrastructure and "sense of place" elements that make for a great model railway Manufacturers have lost a respectable number of sales through producing bad models, but i've yet to hear of anyone deciding not to buy a loco because it's too good. Therefore it's in their interest to get it right or risk loosing repeat sales as a rival covers the loco again to a better standard. I'm guessing alot of these comments are from modellers who weren't in the hobby in the 80's and 90's, when everything had a pancake motor and if you wanted a respectable loco then you had to resort to detailing kits and some severe plastic surgery. That seemed to be the pinnacle, and by the mid 90's the hobby became stagnant as just about everything had been covered, new liveries were plentiful but new models, even of obvious prototypes, were rare. I hope no-one is thinking "No thanks" to a Lima/Hornby 87 because the one they have is good enough.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Manufacturers have lost a respectable number of sales through producing bad models, Have they ? If so how do you go about calculating the number to arrive at that conclusion? Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 . I hope no-one is thinking "No thanks" to a Lima/Hornby 87 because the one they have is good enough.... I'm sure there are folk thinking that Andy - as the OP vividly shows, there are opinions at both extremes of what constitutes an 'acceptable' model. But it's important to remember that they are extremes. There has to be a law of diminishing returns and common/commercial sense about this, whatever we may want. Ta 'Diminishing returns' is the phrase I was unconsciously looking for, I think. My standards aren't the highest though I must admit. I think most would disagree with you there Dave. To me anyway, it's just that you work to *different* standards than the average lococentric - your work is unarguably of a very high standard, but those standards (as Mickey suggests) are rooted in the portrayal of the whole picture. Going further OT, thinking aloud and and maybe also controversially, I wonder what the ratio is of people who say 'wow' to a layout like Dave's, an overall package that just drips with the atmosphere of the real location, compared to those who 'wow' a single loco detailed to the n'th degree? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 I hope no-one is thinking "No thanks" to a Lima/Hornby 87 because the one they have is good enough.... I think what I meant to say was "No thanks" to a new 87 because the Lima/Hornby one is good enough. That's the effect after doing a 12 hour nightshift and having a quick surf whilst the F1 qualifying is on... Bernard, it is acknowledged that a model that commands poor reviews won't sell very well, if the Heljan 47 was so good we wouldn't have had the Bachmann one, and if their own 37 was so good when first released it wouldn't have been upgraded numerous times. Manufacturers have to be pro-active, such as Heljan supplying correctly liveried bodyshells when they made livery mistakes and even a US manufacturer re-tooling a loco because of it's inaccuracies. Would they have done this if sales were at expected levels...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium romley midland Posted October 9, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 9, 2010 12 hour nightshift and having a quick surf whilst the F1 qualifying is on... Did you mean to say whilst the annual Japanese boat race was on? Cheers, Richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waverley West Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Must admit that I read that bit and laughed out loud!! In the nicest possible way of course!!! You keep up with the Low Quailty approach Thanks guys. The Low Quality approach is well and truly established here at Waverley West! :D What I meant was that I will for example happily run a suitably weathered Bachmann 40 on Waverley West. The Bachmann 40 has been widely castigated, both on RMWeb and elsewhere. It may not be accurate to the mm (queue gaphaws from certain circles) but to me it looks like a 40 and, with sound, sounds like a 40 too. It brings back memories. The fact that it isn't absolutely accurate is of no consequence to me. That's not to say I won't replace my current 40 with a retooled one if Bachmann do one, it's just that I don't think a millimetre or there is all that important. It's the overall impression that's important. With Waverley West, the question is, does it look like Waverley in the 80s, does it bring back memories, do people look at it and think, yes, that's Waverley? I hope so and think so. Maybe I'm too laid back about modelling because it's just an escape and a hobby to me (isn't that what it is for most of us?), but my answer to the OP is no, I don't want to see a Hornby 37 (and wouldn't buy any anyway). I'm quite happy with my current Bachmann ones, and am planning to add a couple of split headcode Highland ones around Christmas, one with a white stripe and one without. I'd far rather see a new Hornby (or more likely Heljan) 87, or 67, or for modellers of other regions, a 73 or whatever. If anyone wants to take a Bachmann 37 and spend XX hours on it to improve then no doubt I'll admire the end result, but that's not my approach and I don't really think it's the approach of most modellers. For Bachmann, Hornby or whoever, I just don't see an even better 37 as a viable financial proposition. Cheers, Dave Waverley West Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John M Upton Posted October 9, 2010 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 9, 2010 I find calls for another new 37 slightly bizarre to be honest. Yes the first attempt by Bachmann at the 37 was an utter misshapen disaster (I am still amazed I managed to sell my first release 37419 for more than I paid for it, yes it was so unliveably with bad) but I give Bachmann every credit in that they bounced back and now produce for me a very good model although I do think the cab lighting is a little OTT and could easily live without it. I tried a Vi_Trains 37 and sorry, I was far from impressed. It looked and felt Lima levels of cheap despite the far better detail and chassis than its Italian predecessor and as a result of this I have chosen to steer clear of their 47, prefering the excellent Bachmann current offering instead. One thing I will give the late (possibly) lamented Lima though was that they gave many of us modern image modellers, myself included, much to cut their teeth and improve their skills on over the years, particularly in the late 1980's and into the early 1990's. It took time to bring an out of the box Lima model up to scratch (on occasions including virtually a completely new paint job and of course fixing that dodgy wiring they all came with as standard!) whereas now the standard is there out of the box with current models and as a result I don't see the potential for people to learn detailing skills like what there once was. The only problem with Class 37's (and 47's for that matter) as far as I am concerned is that Bachmann have not produced enough of them!! Lima at least offered the latest liveries in multitude and even if they did not, models were easily available for detailing and repainting. Bachmann seem to release what, two or three a year not including rip off limited editions. Bachmann seem to listen to their customers though. They returned to and redid the 37 to an excellent standard and we now know that the same treatment is also up for that strange fictitious lump they claimed was a Class 40. What I would like to see rather than YET ANOTHER 37 from a different manufacturer is to address the obvious gaps. The 67 is an obvious target and I feel it will be not too long before a new one along with an all new 73 to go with all these Southern EMU's will arrive. What really needs addressing however is stuff for these new locos to haul. There has been some effort in the field of wagons lately but coaching stock is still severely lacking. Production of Mk 2's seems to have reduced to a trickle, air con Mk 2's really need addressing and whilst the current Hornby Mk 3 is acceptable, the Mk 4 is an outdated toy which could be updated when a new 90/91 appears eventually. I'm rambling I know... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Vale Posted October 10, 2010 Share Posted October 10, 2010 I really thing the Hornby stuff is held in high regard because of all the extra bits stuck onto it and the gimmicks of moving fans, opening cab doors etc. When it comes to getting the basic shape right they are no better or worse than anyone else. With the 60, which was the standard the OP was referring to, it's more than just the extra bits - the shape is well-captured, and the level of detail in the basic mouldings (before extra parts are added) is really very good. I did a lot of comparing with prototype detail shots recently preparatory to weathering and found it hard to spot missing bits. Proportions and location of the details were also good, although I didn't get calipers out so that's only going so far. I hope it wasn't a fluke - but I don't know what new diesels Hornby have released since the 60 to compare with, apart from the new HST. Will Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike tugsandsheds Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Thanks guys. The Low Quality approach is well and truly established here at Waverley West! :D What I meant was that I will for example happily run a suitably weathered Bachmann 40 on Waverley West. The Bachmann 40 has been widely castigated, both on RMWeb and elsewhere. It may not be accurate to the mm (queue gaphaws from certain circles) but to me it looks like a 40 and, with sound, sounds like a 40 too. It brings back memories. The fact that it isn't absolutely accurate is of no consequence to me. That's not to say I won't replace my current 40 with a retooled one if Bachmann do one, it's just that I don't think a millimetre or there is all that important. It's the overall impression that's important. With Waverley West, the question is, does it look like Waverley in the 80s, does it bring back memories, do people look at it and think, yes, that's Waverley? I hope so and think so. Maybe I'm too laid back about modelling because it's just an escape and a hobby to me (isn't that what it is for most of us?), but my answer to the OP is no, I don't want to see a Hornby 37 (and wouldn't buy any anyway). I'm quite happy with my current Bachmann ones, and am planning to add a couple of split headcode Highland ones around Christmas, one with a white stripe and one without. I'd far rather see a new Hornby (or more likely Heljan) 87, or 67, or for modellers of other regions, a 73 or whatever. If anyone wants to take a Bachmann 37 and spend XX hours on it to improve then no doubt I'll admire the end result, but that's not my approach and I don't really think it's the approach of most modellers. For Bachmann, Hornby or whoever, I just don't see an even better 37 as a viable financial proposition. Cheers, Dave Waverley West I'm in agreement I believe that if a loco looks like a fair representation of the real thing then I'm happy as my level of overall modelling is not to finescale or rivet counting standards The Bachmann or Vi Trains does thiks for me Super Detailed 67 please Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.