YesTor

Right, but if you happen to want either tension locks at both ends or full bufferbeam detail at both ends then you're kinda screwed. Even purchasing a separate detail pack won't help as they come with two full 'ploughs' and none of the tension lock compatible ones. Seeing as obviously quite a few people have noticed, it might be good if everyone actually contacted Hornby to complain. I tried and I was spoken to as though I was making the whole thing up, but I guess if enough people speak up then they might actually listen.

My BR Rail Blue 73124 arrived today. A very nice model indeed now its here in-the-flesh, though I have to say the shade of Rail Blue looks nothing like I've ever seen before. Does anyone else think Dapol might have got the wrong shade on this one too?

I noticed the same issue with my Hornby 60 that just arrived. Handrails and wipers were missing or broken too on my model. I telephoned Hornby customer services regarding these issues and unfortunately spoke to a most unhelpful 'advisor', who dealt with my enquiry in just about the most condescending manner I have ever encountered. It has certainly altered my opinion of Hornby customer 'care', if you can call it that.

Yes, I saw the Peco masts at Warley and very nice they look too. Not to mention Peco are introducing a small range of current buildings including a very nice modular diesel depot.

If this is really the case then why should any of us bother discussing the details, defects or errors of any models whatsoever... after all, "they are only model trains"? Same with the livery errors - perhaps Dapol should have simply saved a lot of time, effort and possibly expense and approved the original samples with all the glaring errors, as after all, "they are only model trains". An insignificant error to some, but nevertheless arguably quite a noticeable feature of the prototype, but the wipers are indeed quite clearly wrong. If such things as wipers really do not matter, then why are outlets such as Shawplan etc out there creating etches of every conceivable variation available? Surely, one generic wiper should be okay for all classes, "they are only model trains" after all... There's an old saying, "If something is worth doing, it's worth doing right..."

Spring buffers would indeed be very welcome.

The N gauge samples look amazing. Can't wait for the 4mm scale versions.

Agreed, and look at the hash that Heljan made of their 33/0 "upgrade"

This kind of mentality exists in virtually all manufacturing industries, so it's all very well justifying what might be considered as glaring livery errors, but just assuming for one moment those errors were to carry through to the final production and any manufacturer could easily end up with a very large white elephant sitting on their shelves that no one will buy. All industries are naturally geared to what makes the most profit in the least time, but at some point, whoever is in charge of the purse strings needs to have their eye firmly on-the-ball. Careless errors that slip through unchecked cost dearly, and it's a bit late to pick-up on them once the final product hits the shelves.

Indeed, and the 73 does look incredibly nice detail-wise - although I am still a little unsure of the cab roof 'dimples'. Another concern was the alarming number of livery errors that appeared on the various pre-production models. Okay, so they are going to correct them - assuming they get the "corrections" right of course - but even so, it surely highlights that someone somewhere isn't paying attention for quite so many glaring errors to appear in the first place? Let's hope that they get everything right on the final run.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hornby-Collector-Club-DB-Schenker-Bo-Bo-class-67-Diamond-Jubilee-model/271980498227?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D32958%26meid%3Dbe2a6dc094334c7dbd4757272111d670%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D331201643267 Free P&P

I couldn't agree more. Viewing the photos and artist impressions on the above Flickr link and I believe this livery and overall image to be very well thought through. The new style GWR logo and overall general image adds a modern twist to a traditional concept, ie. a definite sleek and stylish feel, yet retaining a nod to the GWR's history. I think that First Great Western should be commended; and yes, its most certainly a welcome and refreshing change to some of the horrendous swooshes and swirls, that First Group have been particularly notorious for up until now.

...probably the same purpose as that funny helmet on the Colas livery...

That's correct, the actual models usually look far worse!

I mentioned the bizarre roof 'dimples' some time ago to Dapol, and they insisted that the prototype has such dimples. I've looked at hundreds of photographs and am yet to find one such "dimple roofed" example. No idea as to what on earth Dapol are looking at... Worrying.

Agreed, and I too would rather wait while they correct the livery errors. Better to spend a little more time getting things right.

Also, I see they haven't corrected those odd-looking 'dimples' on the cab roof...

Also, why have they painted the cab roof black only below the horns? I can't find any photographs of a Dutch 73 like that, surely the entire roof should be grey?

I actually quite like it, even if for the only reason being in that it's a welcome departure from the vulgar pink, purple, violet, lavender or cerise swooshes that we have become accustomed to from the various operators over recent years.

Of course, that's always the obligatory response of which I was expecting at some point. And in a way I agree, however if we adopted that policy across-the-board then maybe all the manufacturers should ditch fine detailing altogether and return to "Railroad" standards? I've no issue with a bit of modelling, as I have indeed tackled as many of these as seems feasible. For the record: The rainstrips above the cab doors are very heavily moulded, when in reality they are quite sharp and fine. I can't see a possible way of doing this without repainting the entire body afterwards. Additionally, it would be quite difficult to produce something from scratch as they are such an intricate shape, and there are definitely no etched parts available... The same goes for the awful moulded shipping anchors below the bufferbeams (again heavily moulded and very 'rounded' looking, and of course completely lacking any holes). This is possible to improve - simply by drilling out the moulded plastic where the holes should be, followed by touching in with paint. Not to mention the very noticeable joint between the body and underframe at the cab ends. Not really possible to do much about this as far as I can see... Absolutely no representation of the wealth of piping and rigging etc at solebar level - a fundamental feature of the prototype surely? Not impossible, but if you've ever looked along the sole-bar of a 66 you will quickly realize that its a minefield of criss-crossing pipework. Possible to make some representation, as I have tried, however intensely difficult to produce something accurate. Probably not so bad if you have only one or two locos to modify, but if you have more than a dozen or so... Additionally, the way the Bachmann sole-bar has been designed renders it very difficult indeed to add parts to this section. Same again with the bogies and no representation of the dampers - again one of the most noticeable features of the prototype. Possible to correct. However, being such a fundamental feature of the prototype surely there should be some representation... Solid/moulded bodyside grilles - again where the see-through effect of the prototype (not dissimilar to the Horny 60) is totally ignored. Again possible, however not without a complete repaint of the body I would have thought? Bogies which usually have footsteps glued on at bizarre angles. Simply an error/poor assembly that should not happen on a model priced at £125.00 - £135.00? Very basic underframe and fuel tank area. No representation of sand pipes etc - again another very obvious feature. Possible and fairly easy to add sandpipes I agree. Perhaps the simplest modification of all. Still, whether any of the above issues are correctable or not, that still shouldn't in my opinion, digress from the suggestion that maybe its time for an improved 66.

Ahhh, so you mean shift production someplace else where the workforce will slave tirelessly and without question for pittance? Hmmmm... I believe that the rest of the world is waking-up my friend... to the fact that by comparison, we in the western world have life somewhat easy...

Sure, the Bachmann 66 is "good", but it ain't "great". Detail-wise its nowhere near in the same league as for example the Hornby 60 which is probably of similar age in model form? Then compare with some of the latest releases from manufacturers such as the Dapol 73, and I'd guess the forthcoming DJM Class 71, and my feeling is that in 2015 it could be a whole lot better. Okay, the basic shape is fine, and possibly the best feature of the Bachmann 66 is the cab, which seems pretty much perfect in shape and capturing the overall look and feel of a "shed", and the glazing etc is really very good. However, there are few niggles in my opinion. The main one being that the body moulding is less fine than it could be: The rainstrips above the cab doors are very heavily moulded, when in reality they are quite sharp and fine. The same goes for the awful moulded shipping anchors below the bufferbeams (again heavily moulded and very 'rounded' looking, and of course completely lacking any holes). Not to mention the very noticeable joint between the body and underframe at the cab ends. Absolutely no representation of the wealth of piping and rigging etc at solebar level - a fundamental feature of the prototype surely? Same again with the bogies and no representation of the dampers - again one of the most noticeable features of the prototype. Solid/moulded bodyside grilles - again where the see-through effect of the prototype (not dissimilar to the Horny 60) is totally ignored. Bogies which usually have footsteps glued on at bizarre angles. Very basic underframe and fuel tank area. No representation of sand pipes etc - again another very obvious feature. Those features alone, while small details to some maybe, contribute to giving the model a toy like appearance, and not really one that I'd consider to be worth the £135.00 price tag that it now seems to claim... So in summary, a tired looking model of the most popular prototype in existence on today's rail network. Surely a prime contender for someone to improve upon...?

On the wishlist subject, and considering that a Class 59 is already in the pipeline, then how about an all-singing, all-dancing Class 66? After all, the Bachmann model, while good with regard to shape and general appearance, has in my opinion been looking a tad "Railroad" in the detail department for some time now. Surely the most common piece of motive power on the network deserves a top-notch model similar to the proposed spec of the 59 - etched grilles and detail, along with a good representation of the mass of sole-bar pipework (something the Bachmann model severely lacks) would surely be welcomed? I approached Bachmann (Denis Lovett) a while ago at one of the shows, enquiring on the possibility of updating their current spec 66, who frankly seemed quite alarmed that their 66 could be considered to be "lacking in detail", claiming that there "wasn't really any detail on the prototype anyway!! Our model is fine!" Case closed was the tone, in fact! Sure, I know the argument will be that Bachmann currently hold the market with regard to the 66, but with the widespread appeal of the type in model form and the vast array of liveries, maybe there is sufficient space in the market for another manufacturer to produce a better model? A similar comparison would be the Class 47 & 37, where of course each type is produced by several manufacturers with seeming success. I know for sure I'd be up for around thirty, over time, of a highly detailed variant. Personally, I still need a few more in various liveries, some of which are already available via Bachmann. However, with current prices the standard Bachmann model seems to retail at just under £100, while the limited editions are around the £125 - £135 mark; and my sentiment is that while I am indeed prepared to pay those kind of prices for a finely detailed model, I'm no longer prepared to spend that kind of dollar on the current (ten year old plus?) and in my opinion, tired-looking Bachmann offering. With such a popular and unavoidable prototype in the current scene, I'd guess there's more people out there who'd want more than one apiece...

I have one each of the first and second model and to my eye both shades of Network Rail yellow appear identical, however the current model definitely has a different shade (warning panel yellow) for the front end.

...to state that the only competitor is Hornby, is quite frankly nothing short of ridiculous - it's a bit like telling your local corner shop grocer that his only competitor is Tesco. You also seem one-hundred percent certain of whether Hornby can or cannot adapt their plans at this stage, when again, quite frankly you have no true idea. If I were DJM I'd be doing exactly the same, ie. playing one's cards firmly against one's chest. After all, business-is-business, and I wouldn't risk a huge financial investment simply because of one or two hysterical and uninformed outbursts via any given forum. Hornby's development may well be further ahead, but again, business is business, whereby any sensible investor knows never to assume anything... I have two DJM Class 71s on pre-order and to be fair am quite happy with the information presented thus far. Sometimes in life we simply have to sit back and accept that we aren't able to stamp our feet, throw a frenzied tantrum and declare, "I want, I want, I want...!" A lesson I learned well before my seventh birthday, I might add...