could revolution take it on as a crowd funded loco? It's a very popular diesel so would surely get a lot of orders? far more popular than a class 92 i should imagine.
alternatively could hornby arnold shrink the oo hornby model? appreciate it's not as simple as just shrinking it as you need to get the n gauge mechanism and pcb etc. etc. but they obviously have all the research and designs and arnold must have the expertise.
it seems unbelievable we are getting / already have new spec. class 17, 22, 23, 24, etc. which don't have the same following as the class 50. nothing against those locos by the way, i like them, but just saying that a class 50 is more popular and would sell a lot more you would imagine?
50 year anniversary as well - so good time to sell class 50 models you'd think!
anyway the alternative is just wait and see if dapol cancel it outright or if it's just delayed a few more years....
tim
:NGF:
Bachmann do of course have the ex-Farish model already, and given they've steadily updated most if not all of their BR diesels, it must be on the cards eventually. The 08, 20, 47 and 37 were updated some years ago now, the 55, 31 and 25 were done recently, and the 40s are on the way.
Of their original line-up, there's what, only classes 33, 44-46, 50, 52 and 56 still outstanding? Given Dapol have done the 33, the 52 and the 56, I can't see Farish double-dipping there, but that still leaves the 50 and the various 'Peaks'.
That Dapol have pulled back from their own Class 50, Bachmann might well look at their future projects, and the 50 does seem an obvious choice. Long-lived, widely travelled, lots of different liveries, and as you say, fairly popular -- though not with the crews and engineers who had to get the darned things running reliably prior to their refurbishment!
Cheers, NeMo
yeah fair point, could end up with a new farish class 50 one day i guess, even though they don't have one in bachmann oo gauge.
tim
Can't imagine anyone taking it on in a hurry, even though I agree it should sell well.
I'm guessing they'll all be concentrating onn getting their "wish lists" down now !
My gut feeling is that Farish would less work to do as much of the chassis would be the same as the class 37 & 55.
Dodger
Quote from: dodger on March 19, 2017, 07:10:21 PM
My gut feeling is that Farish would less work to do as much of the chassis would be the same as the class 37 & 55.
Dodger
Good point - but I won't hold my breath for it this time !
A new 50 would fill the last big gap in my planned loco fleet and so nobody would be happier than me if someone else were to take this model on. Let's see, 007 in GWR green, 149 in Railfreight triple grey, a couple of NSE and a handful of large logo blue (one with a black roof) would do very nicely. I'd happily put a deposit down on a dozen right now. I doubt it'll happen, but we can dream...
::)
Are Dapol not doing it then ? I thought the announcement was that it was to be delayed.
Jamie
"Delayed", yes - but the inference and general opinion is that the "delay" is indefinite.
It's a soft way of saying "you're never going to see it, but we don't want to say that".
Quote from: 47033 on March 19, 2017, 08:12:36 PM
Are Dapol not doing it then ? I thought the announcement was that it was to be delayed.
Jamie
Read between the lines and you may eventually come to the same conclusion that I have: this is the beginning of the end of Dapol in N.
I think Farish may be the only manufacturer who could release a 50, but it'll take several years for it to appear in the shops as they've got their own backlog of projects to work through.
Why do you think that? I can think of no reason that any brand couldn't do it.
Quote from: njee20 on March 19, 2017, 08:45:41 PM
Why do you think that? I can think of no reason that any brand couldn't do it.
Indeed anyone
could do it, but I can think of no reason that any brand would
want to do it... :hmmm:
Given that Dapol have said only that development is paused; they could at any time restart and gazump any other manufacturer if they were so minded.
If Dapol deem that it is currently not financially viable (after expending a significant amount of money, time and effort), what is so different about any other manufacturers cost base or production method that would make it viable for them starting from scratch??
Is there really so much pent-up demand?? over the two threads on here, there are only around half a dozen (albeit vocal) members specifically lamenting this particular prototype...
I agree, I can't imagine Farish doing it for exactly that reason, hence wondering why they are being suggested as the only brand who "could" do it. I'd say they're the least likely, and a crowdfunding venture would be the safest way to ensure Dapol don't suddenly rush theirs out.
That said, there's no implication Dapol have spent lots of time, effort and money on it. They've produced CADs, which are the cheap bits, and have stopped short of tooling, or anything expensive. they announced it a long time ago, but that's totally different.
To be honest, Dapol already have the CADs, what is missing is confidence in spending ~£100K on the tooling.
The simplest solution would be a crowdfunded initiative with someone like RevolutioN getting the up-front cash from customers to pay Dapol to start cutting metal. The advantage of this approach is that it removed the financial uncertainty from Dapol as manufacturers since they know they will not end up out of pocket. The benefit to modelers is that some independent eyes to look over the artwork and deco-samples mean we should avoid some of the decoration clangers that Dapol seem prone to.
Where there is a will, there is a way. Now it remains to be seen if anyone is willing to step forward to run such a crowd-funding exercise and if there is demand for 1000+ models.
I wonder if the popularity of the 50 would, paradoxically, not lend itself to a crowdfunded model.
Thinking about successfully crowdfunded models Revolution (and DJM) have been able to do a more or less complete list of options - five 92s, three Pendos, five(?) variants of TEAs etc, which will cater for 99% of orders, there may be the odd person who wanted a specific model, but meh, what are you going to do. Even with the 321 there are some clear winners in terms of liveries which are sufficient to get it across the line.
Thinking about the 50s there are (and I'm far from an expert)
- original un-refurbished blue
- large logo grey roof
- large logo black roof
- original NSE
- revised NSE
- later NSE
- myriad one offs: GWR green, LMS maroon, engineers 'dutch', railfreight triple grey
I wonder if the risk is that you'd get a lot of orders, but it would be thinly spread, and you'd never reach 'critical mass' to get it across the line.
I would definitely have a late NSE, and would have 50007 in GWR green, but totally as rule 1 purchases. I wouldn't want any of the earlier ones, and as such wasn't planning to buy a Dapol offering from launch. I imagine a lot of people would feel similarly about blue and large logo.
I wonder if a crowdfunded undecorated version would float ?
At least those wanting the more obscure liveries could (perhaps) be catered for also.
Quote from: koyli55002 on March 20, 2017, 11:50:23 AM
I wonder if a crowdfunded undecorated version would float ?
At least those wanting the more obscure liveries could (perhaps) be catered for also.
I doubt it. There can't be many people who want to paint their own locos.
:beers:
Quote from: austinbob on March 20, 2017, 11:51:56 AM
Quote from: koyli55002 on March 20, 2017, 11:50:23 AM
I wonder if a crowdfunded undecorated version would float ?
At least those wanting the more obscure liveries could (perhaps) be catered for also.
I doubt it. There can't be many people who want to paint their own locos.
:beers:
agreed, and I suspect that actually (with the possible exception of LMS Maroon) the quirky one-offs would actually all be quite popular.
Livery variations are much cheaper to accommodate than tooling variations. I believe a few hundred orders can make a livery financially viable (if you look at the exclusive models offered by some shops) whereas tooling changes are rather more involved an expensive.
The Class 50 would need to be offered in original and refurbished conditions. Beyond that, extra livery options would be a bonus, not a hindrance. Granted not every livery would be guaranteed to reach "critical mass" but there are always some modelers who love a particular class enough to get "one of each". Just look at the eyewatering array of liveries that have been slapped on the class 66 and that gets rerun by both Dapol and Farish every couple of years.
As for undecorated models they get suggested fairly regularly but the experience of both RevolutioN and Heljan seems to be that they sell so badly as to be not worth bothering about. Anyone who wants a livery badly enough to apply it themselves is probably going to be willing to also do the extra step of stripping a factory-applied livery to do so.
Quirky one-off liveries also seem to sell disproportionately well. They also provide excellent fodder for shop-specials.
Quote from: austinbob on March 20, 2017, 11:51:56 AM
Quote from: koyli55002 on March 20, 2017, 11:50:23 AM
I wonder if a crowdfunded undecorated version would float ?
At least those wanting the more obscure liveries could (perhaps) be catered for also.
I doubt it. There can't be many people who want to paint their own locos.
:beers:
Ah well.
Mindst you, I reckon 50007 "Elgar" would be quite popular ?
That, together perhaps with the large logo livery (as refurbished from Donny works) ought to sell well, I feel.
Quote from: njee20 on March 20, 2017, 11:18:28 AM
Thinking about the 50s there are (and I'm far from an expert)
- original un-refurbished blue
- large logo grey roof
- large logo black roof
- original NSE
- revised NSE
- later NSE
- myriad one offs: GWR green, LMS maroon, engineers 'dutch', railfreight triple grey
I wonder if the risk is that you'd get a lot of orders, but it would be thinly spread, and you'd never reach 'critical mass' to get it across the line.
Doesn't that neatly encapsulate why Dapol don't want to do it?
Coupled with Karhedron's comments in the 'Lack of Bargains' discussion, regarding bargains being generated by lack of sales.
This risks becoming a wish list, but I can't imagine 50007 outselling NSE, even if it were popular. I guess Dapol deemed their selection sufficient to cover interest, I'd personally do later NSE rather than original NSE.
Quote from: austinbob on March 20, 2017, 11:51:56 AM
Quote from: koyli55002 on March 20, 2017, 11:50:23 AM
I wonder if a crowdfunded undecorated version would float ?
At least those wanting the more obscure liveries could (perhaps) be catered for also.
I doubt it. There can't be many people who want to paint their own locos.
:beers:
Mind you. I did hear Lee Marvin painted his own wagon :laugh:
Many liveries is not a problem if you want something you can keep re-running. In fact it is attractive. As we have learned you just have to be careful not to offer too much choice for each run.
The elephant in the room to me is that Farish have already sold X thousand in a variety of liveries (even if it isn't their best model and could do with updating).
Cheers Mike
Can they? Not being facaetious, i didn't realise they were current.
I guess it's always a risk when you retool something which has been around for years. I guess the market is in thirds:
- people who will replace their old models with something better
- people who never bought the old one because it was "wrong"
- people who won't buy because they have a fleet of the old ones they're happy with
So the million dollar question is how big is that third group? I guess a crowdfunding programme gives you the answer!
well farish are updating the class 40 and you can still buy old versions of this loco easy enough... same goes for others they have done like class 31. the old farish 31 was better than their 50 as well imo.
look how many preserved class 50s there are - they are really popular locos!
people were prepared to try crowd funding a class 21/29, a class 50 has got to be at least 5 times as popular??? ok I know that was going to use dapol existing designs... anyway point is a class 50 model with modern spec would surely take a lot of orders, and carry on selling well for a few decades if model is designed well...
if I had money and design or marketing skills I'd even try it myself!! alas I have neither! I would definitely order 2 dcc fitted versions though if the designs and spec looked good.
anyway that's my campaigning over with!! back to doing work...
Tim
Quote from: njee20 on March 20, 2017, 01:00:50 PM
Can they? Not being facaetious, i didn't realise they were current.
The last Farish Class 50 hasn't been manufactured for a while. 2010 maybe, the BR blue 'Glorious' I think. So any kicking around are pretty old models.
They're alright models, and recognisably Class 50s. But I can't see anyone buying one at full price or expecting it to match the standards of current models. No lights, bogies are wrong, front-end 'face' isn't right either... lots of things to whine about. Anything over £40 and you're being 'done over' in my humble opinion!
On the other hand, tweaking them with some filler and various BHE parts is cheap and fairly straightforward; a fun project for anyone hankering after a 50 and not averse to some etched brass and airbrush modelling!
Cheers, NeMo
I fit in the don't like the Farish 50 and won't a modern one, if we excepted it is there so why replace why did Dapol do a western? Why did Farish redo the 47, 40 & 25 after all how old or poor they are is no reason to redo them. I am a big fan of the 50's, its one of the iconic loco's of the last 50 or so years. Hardly a layout based in the last half century can deny having one like a 47 or 37. Still on mainline ion charters and other workings and probably nearly every heritage line. Can run with mk1 & 2 coaches, parcels, newspapers, goods, nuclear, you name it 50's have probably dragged it.
I would have thought 1000 would be simple on large logo and NSE alone, 1500 to 2000 may be achievable.
The biggest issue with the Farish 50 is the shape of the nose, with an insufficient step under the cab windows (i have seen this remedied with plasticard and a complete nose rebuild).
Perhaps one of our 3D maestros could CAD up a replacement clip-in cab unit for the existing shell - this would go some way to improving things.
I've got 6 Farish 50's (LLB, GWR Green, 1 NSE early, 2 NSE late, RF grey) and i'd replace them all (and pick up a couple more) in a heartbeat.
Oddly, i was looking at them last week thinking it was time they went to ebay. Had the Dapol announcement been a month or later i would have been QUITE PRETURBED.
The new Farish locos are very nice but the older ones just aren't good models. I would like a 61xx and a hoover but when I see one I can't bring myself to buy because neither really look the part.
I would buy a decent looking hoover if one was to become available. Question is, how much would I be willing to pay?
Quote from: captainelectra on March 20, 2017, 01:31:43 PM
Perhaps one of our 3D maestros could CAD up a replacement clip-in cab unit for the existing shell - this would go some way to improving things.
Genius. The cabs do indeed clip right out. The Farish glazing would need replacing of course, but nothing you can't do with some glue-n-glaze.
Cheers, NeMo
I would buy a decent looking hoover if one was to become available. Question is, how much would I be willing to pay?
[/quote]
I can recommend a Dyson ....... :laugh:
I think it was Richard Dockerill who rebuilt some Farish 50s for Acton Main Line with extended noses, along with various etched details - they looked superb.
Quote from: Chris Morris on March 20, 2017, 07:18:00 PM
I would buy a decent looking hoover if one was to become available. Question is, how much would I be willing to pay?
Here's the test then! You probably won't ever get a better class 50 than this, but are you willing to pay £545 for it?
http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/ (http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/)
Tom.
I've got the urge to order another one before CJM retires. You won't get a better 50 ever!
Pete @ EGLM
The 50 is one of Chris's best IMO, stunning!
I am lucky enough to have a 92 from Chris, which was delivered approx. 18 months before Revolution announced theirs (I have also ordered two of those). I love it, and the quality is astonishing for a hand-made item.
It occurs to me that, with the Farish 50 being out of production and the Dapol announcement, you can now only get a new 50 or 59 from CJM.
Price wise Chris's work is never going to be considered true "RTR", so it's a real shame a mainstream manufacture isn't now slated to produce examples any time soon.
Anyway, fingers cross these large gaps (especially in the case of the 50) are filled asap, although I have no idea how!
Skyline2uk
for a really good accurate class 50 model with lights and space for sound and dcc fitted I would pay about 160 quid. that seems to be what new european diesel n scale models sell for.
it's a long term investment for someone to get the class 50 tooled up as it will keep selling for ages, decades maybe, and quite a few different liveries can be made. with 50 year anniversary quite a few collectors or general enthusiasts might buy one as well just for display.
Tim
Seems reasonable to me. There seems to be resistance to prices going to that sort of level here, Dapol should possibly be commended for keeping them very reasonable, or perhaps not as it means things don't get made!
Quote from: njee20 on March 22, 2017, 12:20:03 PM
Seems reasonable to me. There seems to be resistance to prices going to that sort of level here, Dapol should possibly be commended for keeping them very reasonable, or perhaps not as it means things don't get made!
Dapol have always appeared/self-claimed to squeeze themselves before us modelers. I certainly feel they have done so...
It's very noble, but not overly good commercial sense!
Dapol have a slight history of run size issues. This has often led to them flooding the market and then making it worse by flogging off the excess cheaply. As a small manufacturer, this must affect their bottom line and they don't have the size to smooth out such bumps.
I think the fact they worked so hard to be commercially viable and keep us modelers buying they've done well to last this long before having to make the recent announcement and some big changes.
As for the Class 50 there's a lot of speculation that these are going to sell as well as imagined by some. The fact some of Grafar's didn't ever find a home to an extent proves this. What else is up the sleeve of Revolution though?
As an aside, for class 50 fans, there is a give-away DVD with the March issue of 'The Railway Magazine' entitled 'The Last Years of the Class 50s'.
If anyone wants mine send me a PM, first come first served.
Best regards,
Joe
Just bought a weathered Farish class 50 off eBay. After the news about the dapol version's demise I thought this is the only viable class 50 purchase at the moment.
There are quite a few around at the moment but this could now change rapidly.
:beers:
Will we now see renewed love for the Anbrico cast kit? :D
Quote from: captainelectra on March 22, 2017, 08:04:51 PM
Will we now see renewed love for the Anbrico cast kit? :D
There's a unmade kit on eBay at the moment...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ANBRICO-MODELS-KIT-BUILT-BR-CLASS-50-DIESEL-LOCO-BODY-KIT-mx-/111331742940 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ANBRICO-MODELS-KIT-BUILT-BR-CLASS-50-DIESEL-LOCO-BODY-KIT-mx-/111331742940)
You need the Atlas 2103 Chassis apparently. Not sure how easy these are to get. Are they any better than the Farish chassis in terms of looks and performance?
Cheers, NeMo
I had one many years ago (way before even the GF 47) - the loco had a huge cast chassis and weighed a ton!
Eventually, we put Lima 55 sideframes over the Atlas frames which actually didn't look too bad!
Quote from: NeMo on March 22, 2017, 08:11:57 PM
Quote from: captainelectra on March 22, 2017, 08:04:51 PM
Will we now see renewed love for the Anbrico cast kit? :D
There's a unmade kit on eBay at the moment...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ANBRICO-MODELS-KIT-BUILT-BR-CLASS-50-DIESEL-LOCO-BODY-KIT-mx-/111331742940 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ANBRICO-MODELS-KIT-BUILT-BR-CLASS-50-DIESEL-LOCO-BODY-KIT-mx-/111331742940)
You need the Atlas 2103 Chassis apparently. Not sure how easy these are to get. Are they any better than the Farish chassis in terms of looks and performance?
Cheers, NeMo
Imagine a bogie mounted Peco Jubilee motor vertically mounted driving two axles on one bogie and just two sprung contacts (one for each rail) pushing down onto the top of the rail on the other bogie - a bit like the pick ups on an old three rail Hornby loco. And a ton of steel chassis somewhere between the two. Surprised it even moved.
Eee when I were a lad we didn't worry about dead frogs. We just pushed the loco over em! The only thing digital was a watch!
I hope you see where I am going with this.... it's not exactly a love affair with this chassis. Makes the old LifeLike chassis positively delightful in its complexity :)
Bob
Indeed. As part of a 'modernisation' I sold two Minitrix Warships to fund the purchase of that kit and the chassis.
(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/nighthawk-alloallo/images/1/1c/Captain_alberto_bertorelli.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20111216142934)
What a mistake-a to make-a!
Quote from: Ian Morton on March 22, 2017, 09:49:40 PM
Indeed. As part of a 'modernisation' I sold two Minitrix Warships to fund the purchase of that kit and the chassis.
Isn't that what BR did?
I speak only for myself, but I'll pay more for a more detailed model every time, and wouldn't buy a cheap "lower detail" option.
I agree with what you say but according to some of the manufacturers it dosent cost a lot more to put all the bells and whistles on.Im like you I would rather have a model that will look the part pull a decent rake of coaches or wagons and run straight out of the box without oiling and bits falling off and lights failing after a few laps and even going up in a puff of smoke thats why I like Union Mills no thrills Models they are built to last not just look pretty in a wall cabinet and I might add at a very good price .
Thanks must go to Colin Heard for all his hard work keeping N gauge running , while others worry about how many rivets and bits they can add on ,if a one man band can do it why cant others.
No we dont want to go back to pizza cuter wheels and things like the Lima Deltic and Lima Coaches or the really early early Farish type panniers but a nice copromise between them and the very latest would be fine with me and I suspect a lot of modellers ,some people might even be put off by all the reports that they read about modern stock and stear clear of N gauge because they cant afford to gamble on getting a good loco money being as short ax it is nowadays.
Just my opinion for what its worth.
Bob Tidbury
Quote from: njee20 on March 23, 2017, 08:45:22 PM
I speak only for myself, but I'll pay more for a more detailed model every time, and wouldn't buy a cheap "lower detail" option.
I think @GreatBigBlue (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=5037)'s comment is more about choosing between a simpler model that's delivered versus a better detailed model that doesn't exist.
Looking to the future, the N-gauge side of the hobby needs to decide if it wants to cater to the "chequebook modellers" happy to pay CJM and Mercig prices, or the "family modellers" including teenagers and dads who can't afford to spend hundreds of pounds on playthings.
The way the hobby is going, it's on the way to becoming a rich man's pastime, a bit like amateur astronomy (one of my other hobbies, and once you get past basic kit, becomes wildly expensive, as in hundreds of pounds for a single eyepiece, and thousands for the telescope).
I do think it'd be nice to have cheaper, sturdy, and reliable models that might lack some of the details, but at the same time were more "pocket money priced" to attract younger hobbyists and, crucially, keep casual hobbyists spending modest amounts of money on an ongoing basis. I'm sure I'm not the only one here who has to prioritise my wife and toddler ahead of toy trains -- and I'm a professional on an income well above the national average. The expense of the hobby must be extremely off-putting for many potentially modellers, such as those on pensions.
So basically, an updated Farish 50, with perhaps a better front-end and some lights could be just the thing!
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 23, 2017, 08:36:04 PM
Knocking on 60 and remembering the excitement of D400 at Glasgow central on my summer holiday departure I think I may have some authority here (ducks flying objects). Why can't Dapol just pump out basic Class 50s? Forget fiddly details as it has been said elsewhere and here GET THE LOOK RIGHT it's N gauge stupid! The cost of adding over scale handrails, etched grills etc etc is pointless expense. It can't be seen from normal viewing distances. There will always be "rivet counters" yes I uttered that politically incorrect phrase. Who cares about what grill was covered or not covered in 1978? Not me.
I am wearing my intermediate computer glasses and the blurry warship on my layout looks good. It looks good though out of focus because its proportions are perfect. We had to put up with (not me) the ghastly Farish class 50 and 56 and people bought them in droves just because it said it was a class 50 on the box? No a perfect miniature of the real thing without all the bells and whistles would I'm sure sell and those wanting to cut and shut, add or take away offending details are free to do so without causing the manufacturer to produce a million versions. Blue, large logo, network southeast (if you must) all the same moulding BLAM job done. I applaud Hornby's MK1 coaches and prefer them to Bachmann's as they are finer without all that pipework and jiggly couplings. Are we here to run trains to evoke memories or just to look at them and nitpick? :P
Not sure that just because
you don't want fine detail those that do deserve to be insulted by calling them "rivet counters" ::)
We've had this debate on here before and the majority viewpoint, as well as the research done by the manufacturers, was overwhelmingly in favour of finely detailed models rather than cheaper more basic ones.
Sadly the N gauge market just isn't big enough to have separate "detailed" and "budget" ranges like 00 ;)
Paul
Quote from: NeMo on March 23, 2017, 09:02:02 PM
The way the hobby is going, it's on the way to becoming a rich man's pastime, a bit like amateur astronomy (one of my other hobbies, and once you get past basic kit, becomes wildly expensive, as in hundreds of pounds for a single eyepiece, and thousands for the telescope).
I am also an astronomer on the side. :thumbsup:
You are right about the price of kit but as with astronomy, so with modelling. You can get quite a lot of astronomy done with a good pair of 7x50s which shouldn't break the bank and some nice dark skies (priceless ;) ). Likewise in N gauge there is plenty of 2nd hand farish around for very little. If you want to start off with a basic BLT then 1 or 2 locos and a handful of stock is enough to get you going and building the layout can be hours of fun in itself.
Yes I know we all want a constant supply of shiny new models (I am as guilty of that as anyone :-[) but we need to remember that high prices for the latest sound-fitted Pacifics are not necessarily a bar to the hobby as a whole.
Quote from: NeMo on March 23, 2017, 09:02:02 PM
I think @GreatBigBlue (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=5037)'s comment is more about choosing between a simpler model that's delivered versus a better detailed model that doesn't exist.
I get that, but there are few, if any, examples where I'd buy a basic model over nothing at all. We have a superb range of excellently detailed models, I don't want something that regresses us 30 years. Like I said, I speak only for myself, but to that end I would definite try and dissuade any manufacturer from assuming the market would welcome a 'trainset' model with open arms. I'm lucky I guess in having excellent eyesight, I guess that makes me a rivet counter! :hmmm:
Quote from: njee20 on March 24, 2017, 05:54:43 AM
Quote from: NeMo on March 23, 2017, 09:02:02 PM
I think @GreatBigBlue (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=5037)'s comment is more about choosing between a simpler model that's delivered versus a better detailed model that doesn't exist.
I get that, but there are few, if any, examples where I'd buy a basic model over nothing at all. We have a superb range of excellently detailed models, I don't want something that regresses us 30 years. Like I said, I speak only for myself, but to that end I would definite try and dissuade any manufacturer from assuming the market would welcome a 'trainset' model with open arms. I'm lucky I guess in having excellent eyesight, I guess that makes me a rivet counter! :hmmm:
Agree, I really don't want to go back to the dark days.
It would almost certainly cost as much for a basic 50 as for a new detailed one, if Farish were to re-work the front end - new tool - and get a new chassis with lights unless one exists that could be fudged under the new body.
I suspect Farish will have thought of following the Hornby Railroad model and decided (rightly or wrongly) that the UK N market just won't accept it.
Best
Iain
I am not the least but interested in the old Farish 50, indeed I wasn't interested in N gauge when that was all there was. So it has to be a current standard one for me.
For example I couldn't bring myself to buy an old Farish 47 at an extreme bargain price but I very happily bought the new version at just over £100. Likewise I just wouldn't buy a Farish 52 but have 6 Dapol ones. It's about the shape being correct and also the fineness of the mouldings and the level of detail.
I would buy a class 50 ade to current standards whether it came from Dapol, Farish or anyone else. I guess I would pay up to £150 for an unchipped one.
Quote from: njee20 on March 24, 2017, 05:54:43 AM
Quote from: NeMo on March 23, 2017, 09:02:02 PM
I think @GreatBigBlue (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=5037)'s comment is more about choosing between a simpler model that's delivered versus a better detailed model that doesn't exist.
I get that, but there are few, if any, examples where I'd buy a basic model over nothing at all. We have a superb range of excellently detailed models, I don't want something that regresses us 30 years.
Obviously I'm not suggesting we go backwards 30 years! But would you need every tiny detail spot-on? Let's give an example here. I believe that on the Dapol 'Western' you've got pre- and post-Ealing crash battery box clips. These are tiny, sub-mm sized features. It's obviously nice to know @DJM Dave (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=2882) went to the effort here to make sure the 'Western' was right. But variations add to the cost, and really, how many people would notice these if they weren't pointed out to them -- and I totally get that some so-called modellers absolutely live for the moment when they can spot a "basic error" on model nobody else can see.
Quote from: njee20 on March 24, 2017, 05:54:43 AM
I'm lucky I guess in having excellent eyesight, I guess that makes me a rivet counter! :hmmm:
Enjoy it while it lasts. Virtually nobody over the age of 40 has the eyesight they had when they were 20. Sooner or later, we all need glasses...
Cheers, NeMo
Speak for yourself ;)
Quote from: Bealman on March 24, 2017, 09:35:40 AM
Speak for yourself ;)
Nope, stats. Unless you're one in a million, a 45-year-old's eyes won't focus on near objects as well as they did when that person was 20. The protein in the lens becomes harder with age.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accommodation_(eye)#/media/File:Duane_(1922)_Fig_4_modified.svg
You'll notice the standard deviation lines above and below the mean line. You'd have to be pretty unusual to fall outside that range! Or, like me, in denial! I'm 46, I don't wear glasses, but sadly can't focus on things closer than, say, 25 cm, which is way off what a teenager can manage.
Cheers, NeMo
I'm 65 this year but still think I'm NewportNobby's eyes and brain ;)
Hello there,
It may be worth considering this from the manufacturer's point of view.
If your aim is, always, to produce the best possible model you can with current technology then while your models may be considered expensive by some, you will have the satisfaction of a job well done.
If you start compromising on details or finesse then you immediately open yourself to criticism and accusations that the model "should have included part X for the money..."
And where do you draw the line on which bits to leave out, and which bits to include? Do you start from a sale price and work backwards? Every visible detail you compromise or omit gives a discerning customer a reason not to buy.
For example: Does your "base" level Class 50 have moulded handrails? Is the distinctive MU connector pipe moulded or omitted altogether? Do you mould the body in yellow and just paint the blue sidesand roof? Whether you choose the original or refurbished version as your "starting point" you'll immediately upset half the market! What mechanism do you use? Should you make it DCC ready, or offer a DCC Sound version too? How many iterations of CAD design will you go through to get it looking "right" - after all computer time needs to be paid for too?
I also think Union Mills is something of a red herring to this discussion. I am not a steam enthusiast, so I do not own any, but as I am aware they don't feature the more complex outside valve gear used on most of the larger prototypes, and the locomotives offered are largely in plain colours - usually black - requiring little in the way of paint masking or tampo printing which would of course add to the cost.
Cheers
Ben A.
Greatbigblue does seem to mention two things - first of including molded handrails, ditching etched grilles etc, which I would absolutely not want, then doing away with the minute technical variation between classes, which I'd be mildly more happy with, depending on what they were.
Taking the 50 I personally wouldn't want an "unrefurbished" one with the different roof vents masquerading as a later model. I'd accept incorrect bogie detail though (I'm hypothesising, I don't know if they've changed, which is why I don't care!). Some would probably feel the other way round though.
To Ben's point how do you draw the line on what's acceptable? Hornby did the "design clever" thing and it was a universal flop!
I'd want DCC capability, and I'd take finer detail over working lights. Again, people who are on DC wouldn't care about the former, and people have mentioned lights as being a top priority.
Quote from: Bealman on March 24, 2017, 10:01:50 AM
I'm 65 this year but still think I'm NewportNobby's eyes and brain ;)
Whoa, George :stop:
Don't drag me into this thread please as I have no interest whatsoever in a Hoover. I am quite happy with my Dyson, thank you.*
Other vacuum cleaners are available
Quote from: njee20 on March 24, 2017, 10:10:10 AM
doing away with the minute technical variation between classes, which I'd be mildly more happy with, depending on what they were.
This already happens to an extent - e.g. the Dapol HST power cars don't have the correct roof detail for those with Brush cooler groups (currently, that's all of them apart from the FGW fleet, so all current liveries apart from FGW / GWR, and a number of recent liveries too). It's not ideal, and Hornby do model these correctly, but I think it's an acceptable compromise given the smaller market for N gauge.
Also I think that the Mk3 coaches have door lights, even when this not correct for the earlier liveries.
Quote from: Karhedron on March 24, 2017, 12:22:15 PM
Also I think that the Mk3 coaches have door lights, even when this not correct for the earlier liveries.
Yes, and the roof detail on them is correct for the Mk3 and Mk3b, but not for the Mk3a.
More obvious with HSTs is the incorrect roof vents on the coaches and the incorrect buffets. I'm ok with that personally. I'd rather they got the livery right, but that's a well trodden path!
Quote from: njee20 on March 24, 2017, 01:58:53 PM
More obvious with HSTs is the incorrect roof vents on the coaches and the incorrect buffets. I'm ok with that personally. I'd rather they got the livery right, but that's a well trodden path!
The roof details are OK for HSTs - it's Mk3a carriages which they are wrong for.
One or t'other, again, this is why I'm personally not bothered, I don't spot it :-)
Door locks were introduced around privatisation so are correct for late swallow and anything after.
All production HST mk3 have 1 square vent.
6 of the prototype mk3 with 3 vents (amounst other things) were converted and found use on eastern and western.
When virgin introduced the voyager to crosscountry and west coast to replace the HSTs the mk3's were used to strengthen exciting existing trains. When Arriva crosscountry brings back the HSTs the shortage of HST mk3s see the conversion of mk3As which have the 3 roof vents leading to a mixture of HST and A.
Grand central obtained the non standard unwanted buffered HSTs and had to convert coaches from the mk3a
Quote from: CaleyDave on March 24, 2017, 03:39:36 PM
Door locks were introduced around privatisation so are correct for late swallow and anything after.
All production HST mk3 have 1 square vent.
6 of the prototype mk3 with 3 vents (amounst other things) were converted and found use on eastern and western.
When virgin introduced the voyager to crosscountry and west coast to replace the HSTs the mk3's were used to strengthen exciting trains. When Arrival crosscountry brings back the HSTs the shortage of HST mk3s see the conversion of mk3As which have the 3 roof vents leading to a mixture of HST and A.
Grand central obtained the non standard buffered HSTs and had to convert coaches from the mk3a
Plus there are two FGW HST trailers converted from Mk3a.
The GC coaches being all converted from Mk3a (apart from the buffets) bears no relation to the buffered power cars, though - in oepreation those are fully interchangeable with any other power cars.
Quote from: CaleyDave on March 24, 2017, 03:39:36 PM
When virgin introduced the voyager to crosscountry and west coast to replace the HSTs the mk3's were used to strengthen exciting trains.
I'd definitely call HSTs 'exciting trains' :D
Paul
Quote from: davidinyork on March 24, 2017, 03:45:22 PM
Plus there are two FGW HST trailers converted from Mk3a.
Correct (I had not spotted them).
Looking at the 2017 Platform 5 book
A (hopefully) complete list of coaches with 3 roof vents are...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great western have 3 MK3A TS (42381-3) and 2 MK3P TS (42353,42356)
East Midland have 1 MK3A TS (42384)East coast have 1 MK3P TF (41170) and 2 MK3P TS (42355,42357)
Cross country have 15 MK3A TS(42366-80), 3 MK3A TF (41193-5) and 5 TCK (45001-5).
Grand Central have 9 MK3A TS (42401-9) and 6 MK3A TF (41201-6).
Network Rail have 2 MK3P (975814,975984)
Quote from: davidinyork on March 24, 2017, 03:45:22 PM
The GC coaches being all converted from Mk3a (apart from the buffets) bears no relation to the buffered power cars, though - in oepreation those are fully interchangeable with any other power cars.
I was more the fact that Grand Central are made up of the runts of the litter. Reading it back inserting the word "unwanted" would better ilistrate my point.
Quote from: Sprintex on March 24, 2017, 03:53:27 PM
I'd definitely call HSTs 'exciting trains' :D
:doh:
That is what happens when I post from a phone :dunce:
Quote from: CaleyDave on March 24, 2017, 05:13:21 PM
East Midland have 1 MK3A TS (42384)
That one's a standard Mk3 - converted from Mk3 TF 41078. As I recall it was converted as a replacement for TS 42324 which was written off in a shunting mishap.
The rest of your list is, so far as I know, correct.
Mk3a sleepers and the RFB catering vehicles have the HST-style roof ventilators, as do the MK3b FO / BFO. The sleepers and the Mk3bs also have built-in tail lights. The RFBs were all subsequently converted into RFMs, with additional RFMs converted from Mk3a FOs and ex-HST Mk3 TRUKs.
Mk3 catering vehicles, in both the HST and Loco-hauled variants, are rather a minefield as regards detail, with multiple modifications over the years.
Some of the other HST Mk3 TRUKs were converted into royal train carriages, as were two of the prototype HST vehicles.
Quote from: CaleyDave on March 24, 2017, 03:39:36 PM
When virgin introduced the voyager to crosscountry and west coast to replace the HSTs the mk3's were used to strengthen exciting trains.
I find all trains exciting :)
I find MK3 coaches are off topic :P
I have noticed in other threads that Union Mills gets overwhelming praise compared to both Farish and Dapol. The formula of a well performing locomotive with less detail appears to work for steam outline so why will it not for diesel and electric ?
If the basic shape and size is OK then the model can become the basis for super detailing if the owner demands it - it could become the basis for others to thrive just like, say, tmc's wonderful weathering service.
I think we need the choice. If we had the choice, then Farish and Dapol (and anyone else) could aim for their market rather than super detail at any price.
(As for counting rivets, I don't see many of the diesel locomotives !)
I don't think Union Mills popularity is too much to do with less detail. I think its more to do that with Union Mills you know what you are buying and you get it at a price you think is reasonable. Their locos have basic detail but you know that when you buy one. Most people praise Union Mills because of the robustness, reliability and pulling power of their locos.
If other manufacturers actually delivered what was promised/described in their literature and every loco they delivered (OK nearly every loco) was robust, reliable and did what it said on the tin then we'd all be happy. OK, if it costs more for them to do that then so be it.
If they can only produce locos sometimes that work properly such that us modellers may have to fettle a loco to get it to work properly or that there is a good chance we may have to send it back for repair or replacement - then the manufacturers should tell us this at the time of purchase.
Then they can keep the price low and we can make the choice as to whether we are prepared to take the risk in purchasing their product.
:beers:
Valid points austinbob. Not fulfilling the promise is probably the underlying reason for unhappiness when we think of schedule, quality/reliability and robustness.
Union Mills have full control of their supply chain (as I understand it) and offer one or two fundamental power units which Colin uses very well for multiple projects. That is not possible for many locos without compromise - do we really want to go back to inaccurate shared chassis for a 37 and 47 etc? I don't know Colin's business model in terms of sunk costs or amortisation or need to generate profit. Without that then comparisons with UM are frankly academic.
Anyone manufacturing models in China would like greater control of the supply chain (specification wise (the number of times you get told we don't know how to do X), consistency and scheduling) but that currently is incredibly difficult for such a small scale business (or certainly without costs spiralling out of control).
There is certainly a balance between detail and assembly cost, or perhaps more accurately separately applied detail and assembly cost. Not all detail requires to be a separate part - some of the best grilles I've seen are moulded rather than etched (though that is easier in OO than N). Removing detail does not necessarily save significant amounts of cash unless it also saves a significant amount of assembly time.
For every person that wants less detail, how many don't? If you are to be convinced as a manufacturer of a very niche product to remove detail for a small saving are you going to be able to sell significantly more to compensate? Margin is generally is a percentage so any lower sale price means the margin may be the same in percentage terms but you are going to raise less cash in absolute terms (if you need to pay for tooling or salaries or going to shows or R&D) then that is a problem and the only solution is to sell more. So do you genuinely believe a marginal saving on less detail is going to lead to more sales? Or will it just mean marginally cheaper prices for existing customers? Are you prepared to take that bet?
If you believe it is worth a punt then I will gladly help you realise it, but it will require a lot of effort and it will be your risk.
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: BobB on March 25, 2017, 11:00:20 AMI think we need the choice.
Hit the nail on the head - choice is good, but sometimes some posters seem to forget that others are entitled to make different choices to theirs...
The other problem is choice costs money to provide. If two suppliers produce models of the same prototype to different standards it doubles the development costs but will result in minimal if any extra sales, so even the more basic model end up costing more per unit than if only the super-detailed version had been done. If both versions are developed in tandem by the same supplier, yes some development costs would be shared, but potentially two lots of tooling are needed and two lots of set-up costs for the production line. At best the lesser model still ends up around the same price as now and the detailed model costing more...
This constant proposal of the lowered detail will seemingly save considerable sums of money, whilst making logical sense, doesn't make any business sense. It has also been mentioned that this was previously discussed on the forum to an overwhelming majority (if my memory serves me correctly) are in favour of higher detail models.
As someone who has spent time researching the market and talking to modelers in various different scales this is also proven. I'll probably get sleighted for this comment, but I'll say it anyway.
This constant referral to this (?potentially?huge?) cost saving proves how out of touch/incorrectly informed some people are.
Most of the shells are single piece plastic with a handful of attaching parts. Removing a grille off the mold wont save all that much money.
As a professional CAD monkey, if the CAD data is made accurately and as we see/expect in the professional world this also adds little time applying it to the CAD model.
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 26, 2017, 08:17:36 PM
I didn't say I didn't want fine detail just not OTT for the size of the damn things. I'm for smart scale moulding not dirty great pipes and handrails which are over scale anyway. Kato have very crisp mouldings and look just fine. Plus if you want to run trains not just look at them British models are :poop: compared to them.
I've got a Kato SD40 that was secondhand when I bought it, and is probably the best part of 20 years old. But it's got to be said, despite the plastic handrails and the lack of glue-on bits, it looks and works perfectly. It's got a good weight to it, and the flywheel mechanism gives the thing very smooth acceleration and braking. The grain-of-wheat lights have a realistic glow to them very different to the nonsensically bright white LEDs we're used to these days.
The wheel flanges *are* a bit deep, so it tends to drag on ballasted Code-55 track (at least when I'm doing the ballasting!) but it's otherwise lovely.
What UK modellers aren't getting are locomotives that balance reliability with detailing in the way Kato manage to do. Kato don't seem to feel the need to model every rivet and handrail in finely etched brass or folded steel, but instead manage to nail the look-and-feel of the loco nevertheless. It's a tragedy that Kato aren't interested in the UK market. :veryangry:
Cheers, NeMo
I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but I'd not be surprised if Kato made 10 times the volume of Farish or Dapol, and that brings huge economies of scale.
Quote from: njee20 on March 26, 2017, 08:38:49 PM
I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but I'd not be surprised if Kato made 10 times the volume of Farish or Dapol, and that brings huge economies of scale.
You're definitely *not* wrong!
That said, since Kato *do* make some European outline models (not least of all the continental version of the Class 66) it'd be interesting to know how many of those are sold.
If Kato made a UK liveried Class 66 to European N gauge, would it sell? I believe that some freight rolling stock is already made that operates on both sides of the channel tunnel, so the basics of a modern era freight railway might be made in European N without much bother.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on March 26, 2017, 08:30:05 PM
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 26, 2017, 08:17:36 PM
I didn't say I didn't want fine detail just not OTT for the size of the damn things. I'm for smart scale moulding not dirty great pipes and handrails which are over scale anyway. Kato have very crisp mouldings and look just fine. Plus if you want to run trains not just look at them British models are :poop: compared to them.
I've got a Kato SD40 that was secondhand when I bought it, and is probably the best part of 20 years old. But it's got to be said, despite the plastic handrails and the lack of glue-on bits, it looks and works perfectly. It's got a good weight to it, and the flywheel mechanism gives the thing very smooth acceleration and braking. The grain-of-wheat lights have a realistic glow to them very different to the nonsensically bright white LEDs we're used to these days.
The wheel flanges *are* a bit deep, so it tends to drag on ballasted Code-55 track (at least when I'm doing the ballasting!) but it's otherwise lovely.
What UK modellers aren't getting are locomotives that balance reliability with detailing in the way Kato manage to do. Kato don't seem to feel the need to model every rivet and handrail in finely etched brass or folded steel, but instead manage to nail the look-and-feel of the loco nevertheless. It's a tragedy that Kato aren't interested in the UK market. :veryangry:
Cheers, NeMo
Yes! Can you imagine? They would either up everyone's game, or corner the market. Oh...hurts thinking about it.
One of my main issues is that I'm NOT handy and I'm terrified at the prospect of having to doing little electrical/wiring/soldering/adjustment things to get/keep my loco running. Although I'm forging ahead with my British N-Gauge dreams, I must say when I order US-image stuff...I get excited...when I order British-image stuff...I get nervous...
Quote from: NeMo on March 26, 2017, 08:42:50 PMKato *do* make some European outline models (not least of all the continental version of the Class 66) it'd be interesting to know how many of those are sold.
If Kato made a UK liveried Class 66 to European N gauge, would it sell? I believe that some freight rolling stock is already made that operates on both sides of the channel tunnel, so the basics of a modern era freight railway might be made in European N without much bother.
Yep, you can get 1:160 TIA "silver bullet" china clay tanks and IKA Megafret flats at least. My concern would be how they'd look next to other trains, rather than intra-train inconsistencies.
The economies of scale will apply across the board after all - even if their 66s don't sell many they'll use the same mechanism as their US and Japanese models which have sold in droves.
In what way? You mean if Dapol sold 10 times as many models then they'd do better...? Not sure that's nail/head, more economics basics!
Quote from: njee20 on March 26, 2017, 08:57:11 PM
Yep, you can get 1:160 TIA "silver bullet" china clay tanks and IKA Megafret flats at least. My concern would be how they'd look next to other trains, rather than intra-train inconsistencies.
I'd suggest not even trying to mix with other trains. A freight-only branch in the 2010s could easily be modelled with just 66s and the kinds of wagons you mention. European cars, lorries and lifting equipment could easily be used for freight depot details, and if you're scratchbuilding or kit-bashing buildings, the minor scale difference won't be a big deal.
In fact, sounds rather a fun project... :hmmm:
Cheers, NeMo
I don't understand. How is that related to anything that's been discussed, or a class 50? Or Dapol?
Hello all,
Some years ago a well known model retailer approached Kato with a view to commissioning a 1:148 scale Class 66.
Their minimum order quantity was 10,000 units, and that was without taking accoint of the different lighting clusters, standard v low emission etc. The project stalled.
Cheers
Ben A.
Interesting!
The DCC compatibility would be a significant barrier for me, I don't like those drop in PCBs, but otherwise I'd happily have a number. However, would I replace any of my 20 or so Farish and Dapol ones...? No, they all work just fine. I suspect that's the rub.
I'm still unconvinced of the relevance of the kettle on the previous page. It's entirely different moulding to a diesel, even if the fidelity is great. It's all apples:oranges anyway, so an entirely moot point.
Wasn't it earlier discussed that Kato had their own factory... They aren't trying to get slots in another production line owned by others and more than likely have their own team to build up the molds.
These two facts make Kato unique in what they can achieve, especially as Ben says, they deal with a minimum of 10,000 Units. This could be for outsiders/commission jobs only though...
Quote from: Nik96 on March 26, 2017, 10:23:53 PM
These two facts make Kato unique in what they can achieve, especially as Ben says, they deal with a minimum of 10,000 Units. This could be for outsiders/commission jobs only though...
Yep - 10,000 is a '
small batch' for outsiders/commission jobs... For their own releases they're looking for 4 or 5 times that as the minimum run...
Quote from: PLD on March 27, 2017, 07:09:15 PM
Quote from: Nik96 on March 26, 2017, 10:23:53 PM
These two facts make Kato unique in what they can achieve, especially as Ben says, they deal with a minimum of 10,000 Units. This could be for outsiders/commission jobs only though...
Yep - 10,000 is a 'small batch' for outsiders/commission jobs... For their own releases they're looking for 4 or 5 times that as the minimum run...
40-50,000 models of one type albeit across liveries... I find those sorts of sales figures hard to digest. Probably because we're constantly reminded this is a dying hobby in this country but I've heard that the far east still love their trains just like we used to.
The Japanese are more into N gauge than the UK, probably because house space is at more of a premium. The population of Japan is about twice that of the UK. These to factors must have quite a big effect on volume.
Likewise in the States, the population is circa 5 times the UK. This larger volume gives greater opportunity to amortise tooling, own factories and improve quality
Hi there,
It is very difficult to quantify the numbers of N gauge enthusiasts, as there are so many factors to consider. Continental or British? Modeller or Collector? N Gauge only, or mixed scale? Serious enthusiast or one-off purchaser?
I have seen estimates that there are 25000-40000 enthusiasts in the UK, whereas in Japan there are several million.
This may seem hard to believe, but when you look at websites such as HobbySearch http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/rail/ (http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/rail/) which have literally dozens of new models coming to the market every week, and compare that to the release rate of Farish and Dapol models, it does become more plausible.
Cheers
Ben A.
Hi Ben,
25-40K "modellers" sounds realistic given the circulation of the monthly model railway magazines. If British N gauge is 10% of the market then this would indicate 2.5-4K modellers.
Paddy
Quote from: Paddy on March 28, 2017, 02:02:07 PM
Hi Ben,
25-40K "modellers" sounds realistic given the circulation of the monthly model railway magazines. If British N gauge is 10% of the market then this would indicate 2.5-4K modellers.
Paddy
Try doubling that to best part of 20% of the market. Given the NGS has approx 6k members and there are still significant numbers of N gauge modellers who aren't members I'm sure that 2.5k-4k would be a gross underestimate.
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: red_death on March 28, 2017, 02:57:42 PMTry doubling that to best part of 20% of the market. Given the NGS has approx 6k members and there are still significant numbers of N gauge modellers who aren't members I'm sure that 2.5k-4k would be a gross underestimate.
Cheers, Mike
Thanks Mike - I feel much moro positive about N gauge now.
Paddy
Quote from: Nik96 on March 26, 2017, 10:23:53 PM
Wasn't it earlier discussed that Kato had their own factory... They aren't trying to get slots in another production line owned by others and more than likely have their own team to build up the molds.
These two facts make Kato unique in what they can achieve, especially as Ben says, they deal with a minimum of 10,000 Units. This could be for outsiders/commission jobs only though...
Kato do indeed have their own in-country factories and half-a-century of continuous production experience.
Quote from: Nik96 on March 28, 2017, 12:28:54 PM
Quote from: PLD on March 27, 2017, 07:09:15 PM
Quote from: Nik96 on March 26, 2017, 10:23:53 PM
These two facts make Kato unique in what they can achieve, especially as Ben says, they deal with a minimum of 10,000 Units. This could be for outsiders/commission jobs only though...
Yep - 10,000 is a 'small batch' for outsiders/commission jobs... For their own releases they're looking for 4 or 5 times that as the minimum run...
40-50,000 models of one type albeit across liveries... I find those sorts of sales figures hard to digest. Probably because we're constantly reminded this is a dying hobby in this country but I've heard that the far east still love their trains just like we used to.
I can't speak for other countries in the region but if you live in a city in Japan, your location is usually very much described in terms of proximity to the nearest station. Living in a suburb of Tokyo, I can wander down to my local shopping area (centred around the local station) and pick up half-a-dozen railway magazines, and 3 or 4 model railway publications which are mainly focussed on N gauge. As well as a couple of publications on the history of the local line. Moreover I can go over to the kiddies section and find at least one child-orientated book featuring trains from the local line, and a whole bunch of others featuring trains in general.
Quote from: Chris Morris on March 28, 2017, 01:09:58 PM
The Japanese are more into N gauge than the UK, probably because house space is at more of a premium. The population of Japan is about twice that of the UK. These to factors must have quite a big effect on volume.
Looking at recent housing data, it seems the average UK new build house is smaller than the legal minimum in Japan... But yes, Kato (and to some extent Tomix) have done very well from promoting track systems which can be laid out on an ad-hoc basis, and N is the dominant scale.
Quote from: Ben A on March 28, 2017, 01:37:50 PM
Hi there,
It is very difficult to quantify the numbers of N gauge enthusiasts, as there are so many factors to consider. Continental or British? Modeller or Collector? N Gauge only, or mixed scale? Serious enthusiast or one-off purchaser?
I have seen estimates that there are 25000-40000 enthusiasts in the UK, whereas in Japan there are several million.
This may seem hard to believe, but when you look at websites such as HobbySearch http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/rail/ (http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/rail/) which have literally dozens of new models coming to the market every week, and compare that to the release rate of Farish and Dapol models, it does become more plausible.
My local railway company (Seibu) has just introduced a new train into regular service (the 40000 series if anyone's taking notes); Kato brought out the N gauge model to coincide with that. Admittedly Kato has a slight bias towards Seibu as their HQ is sandwiched between two Seibu lines, but overall if there's a new train coming into service, you can bet one of the majors (Kato, Tomix, MicroAce, GreenMax) will be not far behind. There's also Tomytec (a branch of the same conglomerate as Tomix) which puts out obscurer stuff as unmotorized models which can be motorized and otherwise improved, partly with 3rd party accessories.
Somewhere I've seen figures (can look up the reference if anyone really wants to know) which indicate the Japanese model railway industry is (even at current exchange rates) worth about GBP 500 million per annum, 90% of which is in N. I challenge you to find any mainly N gauge manufacturer with a plusher HQ and shop than Kato's Tokyo location.
PS I was privileged to meet the current Mr. Kato himself last year, very nice chap who clearly knows his trains.
Quote from: railsquid on March 28, 2017, 04:28:42 PM
PS I was privileged to meet the current Mr. Kato himself last year, very nice chap who clearly knows his trains.
I believe he is a model citizen :-X
If only we could somehow get the Japanese interested in the British railway scene, then problem solved! :beers:
I've come late to this topic and had a quick look through a number of the comments, but not all of them, so apologies if anyone has already said what i'm about to say. Given that the original Farish 50 sat on the same chassis as the class 55 surely it is not a stretch too far to develop a new/improved 50 body to sit on a modified BachFar 55 chassis which is already DCC ready. Yes there would be a development cost but I am sure that would be recouped in sales judging from the comments on this forum. Whilst it is not quite the same as a completely new retooled model we could at least have something that looks like a 50 (and for those of us modelling late 60s/early 70s we could even have an 'as built' version). Alternatively, perhaps there is scope for a kit manufacturer to develop a body to sit on a modified 55 chassis.
Quote from: Black Cloud on March 28, 2017, 08:44:21 PM
Alternatively, perhaps there is scope for a kit manufacturer to develop a body to sit on a modified 55 chassis.
Seems a reasonable suggestion - possibly one for the 3D guys to have a stab at
Quote from: newportnobby on March 28, 2017, 08:50:29 PM
Quote from: Black Cloud on March 28, 2017, 08:44:21 PM
Alternatively, perhaps there is scope for a kit manufacturer to develop a body to sit on a modified 55 chassis.
Seems a reasonable suggestion - possibly one for the 3D guys to have a stab at
If somebody has details/drawings for the bogies (I think this was mentioned as an error) I can get going with it imminently.
Hello all,
The 50 and 55 bogies are the same English Electric design, that is the advantage of starting with the Deltic.
The issue is the main dimensions. According to data from the Railway Centre the Deltic is 69'6 long, with a wheelbase of 59'6, whereas the 50 is 68'6 long, with a wheelbase of 56'2, meaning that even if the chassis is not too long, the bogies will be in the wrong position.
These issues can be solved with a new chassis block and driveshafts, but it is not trivial in my view.
I think DP1 - the prototype Deltic - was slightly shorter but I don't know if it would be right, and I am not sure that many proud owners of that model would want to convert it!
Of course you could replace the Deltic body with a body for DP2 and have a prototype 50!
Cheers
Ben A.
Intercity livery maybe?
(http://images.on-this.website/21199_1222243143506a0acb73b81.jpg)
:laughabovepost:
Lovely :thumbsup:
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 29, 2017, 08:30:02 PM
Quote from: funnysunny365 on March 29, 2017, 01:49:07 PM
Intercity livery maybe?
No No No. Almost as bad as toothpaste south east! :thumbsdown:
Wouldn't go insulting NSE too loudly given the Admin of this forum is a devout fan, might find you're unable to log in tomorrow ;D
Paul
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 29, 2017, 08:30:02 PM
No No No. Almost as bad as toothpaste south east! :thumbsdown:
:o Which many think was their best livery. :P
Later NSE I totally agree, far and away the best livery.
Quote from: Ben A on March 29, 2017, 01:01:25 PM
Hello all,
The 50 and 55 bogies are the same English Electric design, that is the advantage of starting with the Deltic.
The issue is the main dimensions. According to data from the Railway Centre the Deltic is 69'6 long, with a wheelbase of 59'6, whereas the 50 is 68'6 long, with a wheelbase of 56'2, meaning that even if the chassis is not too long, the bogies will be in the wrong position.
These issues can be solved with a new chassis block and driveshafts, but it is not trivial in my view.
I think DP1 - the prototype Deltic - was slightly shorter but I don't know if it would be right, and I am not sure that many proud owners of that model would want to convert it!
Of course you could replace the Deltic body with a body for DP2 and have a prototype 50!
Cheers
Ben A.
More specifically, with the Class 55 Farish have modelled the cast (rather than fabricated) variant of the bogies - Classes 37 and 55 have had both types fitted at various times, but Class 50s only ever had the cast ones. The Farish model of the prototype Deltic has the bogies represented (correctly) as fabricated ones - which would not be correct for a Class 50.
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 12:10:14 AM
But could you tell in N scale at 2 foot? Bogie centre difference could be jarring but bogie fabrication? c'mon :P
Yes you can - to me it is one of those things that once you've seen the difference you can't un-see it!
The 2nd and 3rd picture here demonstrate the different frames on the top part of the bogie: http://www.delticsounds.com/bogies.html (http://www.delticsounds.com/bogies.html)
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: red_death on March 30, 2017, 01:47:54 AM
Yes you can - to me it is one of those things that once you've seen the difference you can't un-see it!
Indeed! Farish haven't always got it right, either - they seem to use solely fabricated for the Class 37s and solely cast for the Class 55s - the Class 55s in their early form should have fabricated ones - they were later all replaced with cast ones, and on the preserved locos (apart from the NRM's 55002) they were swapped back for fabricated ones when sold so that the cast ones could be reused on 37s. They still have the fabricated ones apart from 55015, which is having cast ones put on as part of its rebuild.
37s are more of a mixture, and if you look at the DRS fleet now there is a fairly random mixture of the two types and it's necessary to look at photos if wanting to model a specific loco - although even then it can change as the bogies sometimes get swapped at a major overhaul.
How about fictional liveries?
Quote from: funnysunny365 on March 30, 2017, 03:40:21 PM
How about fictional liveries?
If they feel they can't sell enough of a proper livery to make it worthwhile producing, how the heck do you think a fictional livery that will sell only to a very few odd-ball modellers would ever be financially viable ?? :doh: ::) :no: :worried: :dunce:
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 05:48:10 PM
Quote from: funnysunny365 on March 30, 2017, 03:40:21 PM
How about fictional liveries?
You get yourself a spray gun and do it yourself !!!! Rail blue, Large logo and Network southeast (one version only for first run). I am willing to renumber and scrape off the headlight on a refurbished bodyshell. One bodyshell and three liveries is that more economic for manufacturers?
The difference between as-built and refurbished is rather more than just the headlight!
This page epitomises the dilemma facing manufacturers. Bogie differences some will accept (I will), others (Mike) won't. Body shells between common between variants likewise.
I'd have thought they'd have to do both bodyshells at the very least. The public are far too exacting these days. And why shouldn't they be?
I wholly disagree. The main difference I know of is the roof profile. Were it the reverse I'd not have an unrefurbished body masquerading as a later variant.
You have lower standards than others. It's not really "OMG" territory. they could use the same blue for NSE, large logo and plain blue. It's only n gauge after all.
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
IMHO most people don't care about grills and bogies as long as the character is caught
That is
your opinion, which you are entitled to hold and I would defend your right to express it, but it is not a universal opinion (in fact, if this thread is a fair reflection it is NOT shared by MOST people).
If you wish others to respect you having that opinion, you shouldn't claim that you speak for the majority...
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
Quote from: davidinyork on March 30, 2017, 05:51:33 PM
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 05:48:10 PM
Quote from: funnysunny365 on March 30, 2017, 03:40:21 PM
How about fictional liveries?
You get yourself a spray gun and do it yourself !!!! Rail blue, Large logo and Network southeast (one version only for first run). I am willing to renumber and scrape off the headlight on a refurbished bodyshell. One bodyshell and three liveries is that more economic for manufacturers?
The difference between as-built and refurbished is rather more than just the headlight!
:doh: OMG it's N scale!!! IMHO most people don't care about grills and bogies as long as the character is caught
Absolutely right....
I have this vision in my mind of a whole bunch of locos - steam and diesel - from my youf.
I don't remember where the rivets were or what the bogies look like. That doesn't matter to me. I just have this image in my mind of this beautiful piece of machinery thundering down the track and I want to replicate this on my layout.
:beers:
Then get a Farish 50.
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 06:51:07 PM
Quote from: davidinyork on March 30, 2017, 05:51:33 PM
The difference between as-built and refurbished is rather more than just the headlight!
:doh: OMG it's N scale!!! IMHO most people don't care about grills and bogies as long as the character is caught
To be fair though, the headlight, nameplates, and in some cases the multiple unit cables are the most obvious differences between as-built pre-TOPS D400s and refurbished Class 50s. The other differences really do require a careful eye, even when looking at photos, let alone a small model.
As @PLD (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=647) said, people do have different standards here. For some, the Lima Class 86 captures the spirit of the loco, while others wouldn't let it run anywhere near their layout! While I can appreciate the Peco Jubilee as being a very well made loco, I'm not sure I'd want manufacturers to downgrade their detailing to its level (though I'd love them to
upgrade their reliability to its level!).
Would a Union Mills-style diesel sell well? Obviously the UM steam locos do, and they appeal to both casual modellers and those who use them as a base upon which to add their own detailing parts. But clearly UM doesn't satisfy that (probably large) middle ground who more detailing than casual modellers but don't want to make any upgrades themselves.
If you simply want a basic Class 50, then the Farish model isn't that bad, and with a few tweaks can be improved quite a bit. The mechanism is excellent, even if it isn't DCC-ready as supplied.
Cheers, NeMo
They can Farish do one...
Edit: here are the OO gauge Hornby models:
Original:
(https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/R2348_1.JPG)
Refurbished:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/i6SYcVlc_y0/hqdefault.jpg)
For me the roof has to be right, it's too glaring, even in N.
Quote from: njee20 on March 30, 2017, 07:09:39 PM
Then get a Farish 50.
Such a helpful and sensitive response.. Don't bother replying
Quote from: austinbob on March 30, 2017, 07:45:42 PM
Quote from: njee20 on March 30, 2017, 07:09:39 PM
Then get a Farish 50.
Such a helpful and sensitive response.. Don't bother replying
Why? You want something that looks like a 50 zipping around. Why not get a Farish one? It's acceptable.
People want a higher detailed model, but not too high. The manufacturers really are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
(https://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/products/8408-U-01_3087001_Qty1_1.jpg)
Certainly not perfect, but surely you can understand the issue with saying "I want something better... but it doesn't have to be that good"?
Apologies if, in my usual way, I'm deemed as being argumentative. I'm genuinely confused by a stance of "it must look more like a 50 than the Farish one, which is so horrific as to be intolerable, but it doesn't need to look that much like one".
Quote from: austinbob on March 30, 2017, 07:45:42 PM
Quote from: njee20 on March 30, 2017, 07:09:39 PM
Then get a Farish 50.
Such a helpful and sensitive response.. Don't bother replying
I'd have thought it was a fairly sensible response to be honest. If you want a model that looks sort of like a 50 then it's fine. If you want an accurate model then it isn't, really.
I don't know why some people here are making such an issue of the difficulty to the manufacturer with the detail differences - there really aren't many on the 50. The bogies are all the same (only cast ones were fitted to 50s), and there are only two body styles - original and refurbished. The headlight and the roof cut-out are probably the most noticeable differences between the two, plus other details such as grills. The multiple-working jumpers were there before refurbishment although some of the locos didn't have them initially. There are no sub-classes other than the short-lived regearing for freight use of 50049/149, but that didn't involve any visible changes other than the paint!
For the original style, the only livery is BR blue. For the refurbished ones there are BR blue, large logo, two versions of NSE, plus a number of one-off such as GWR green on 50007. In preservation there have been a few more variations.
Compare this to the Class 47, of which there are masses of variations. Farish have done a fairly good job of correctly representing these on the models so far using their new tooling. The 37 also has a lot of variants, too. The 50 is easy by comparison.
There are actually very few of the long-lived BR-era diesels which aren't now available in N gauge in a good DCC-ready model. Apart from the 50, there is the 40 (Farish in the process of developing a new model) and the Peaks (44/45/46) - this was one of the best of the pre-DCC Farish models (a few deficiencies such as over-wide bogies notwithstanding), and they don't look out of place among modern models which the 50s frankly do. I don't think there are any others, are there?
It is perhaps surprising that Farish did the prorotype Deltic, as this is a one-off with one livery (two if you count the different shade of blue in preservation!) and will therefore surely have limited opportunity for re-runs as there won't be that many who want one. Especially given that there can't be many people left around now who actually saw it move under its own power!
Quote from: davidinyork on March 30, 2017, 08:37:06 PM
It is perhaps surprising that Farish did the prorotype Deltic, as this is a one-off with one livery (two if you count the different shade of blue in preservation!) and will therefore surely have limited opportunity for re-runs as there won't be that many who want one. Especially given that there can't be many people left around now who actually saw it move under its own power!
I think one problem is that the 50s were not popular locos for much of their lives. They were at best inconsistent during their LMR days, and once on the WR, they were pretty much loathed as the locomotives used to kill off the much-loved 'Westerns'.
It really wasn't until after refurbishment that their stock began to rise, not just because they performed better than they ever had done before (which isn't saying much) but also because they really were interesting by comparison to the countless 47s, 37s and HSTs you'd otherwise seen on at Paddington, Bristol or the western part of the SR. I remember those years well, and in their large logo livery they added quite a bit of glamour to the otherwise rather uniform WR scene. Of course they were on borrowed time by then, their work largely taken over by HSTs, so there was a sense that the 50s were the "last gasp" of express diesel-hauled passenger working, making rides behind them a little more memorable than they might have been.
My point here is that the 50s aren't iconic in the same way as the 'Deltic' (or Deltic class) and aren't adored by enthusiasts like the 'Westerns', which may explain why the demand for them isn't perceived to be there. Of course they have their fans, but as a class, they were never really popular until well into the 1980s, and I'm not sure their popularity ever matched the sustained levels of classes like the Deltics or Westerns.
Cheers, NeMo
More specifically, with the Class 55 Farish have modelled the cast (rather than fabricated) variant of the bogies - Classes 37 and 55 have had both types fitted at various times, but Class 50s only ever had the cast ones. The Farish model of the prototype Deltic has the bogies represented (correctly) as fabricated ones - which would not be correct for a Class 50.
[/quote]
But could you tell in N scale at 2 foot? Bogie centre difference could be jarring but bogie fabrication? c'mon :P
[/quote]
Sorry but your arguments are weak when you can't use the correct terminology.
N Scale is 1:160 ie US or European
2mm is 1:152 ie British 2mm Fine Scale
We are discussing N Gauge or 1:148 models, now just because Bachmann a mainly American orientated Chinese company has started in correctly calling it n scale doesn't mean we should. Unless their trying to tell us that all there new stuff is or will be wrong!
Personally I want a properly shaped, scaled and detailed large logo or NSE class 50 for my hard earned pounds, after all that is the industry these manufacturers have chosen to operate in. So why shouldn't we get a class 50 that is the right scale dimensions where practical, looks 100% correct with the right detail.
Quote from: Only Me on March 30, 2017, 08:28:48 PM
Im watching this arguement with one hand over the end thread button... keep it civil please gentlemen.......
Sounds like "Blankety Blank" :D
Handbags at 50 paces..........
In my opinion, there is a market for an up to date class 50 made to the current standard. The Farish 50 was fine for its time but I think it now looks out of place next to the models of its contemporary classes (Farish 08, 20, 25, 31, 37, 40, 45 and 47; and the Dapol 33, 52, 56 and 58). I am sure someone will make a new one in the coming years as I think the demand is there. If nobody thinks a loco like a class 50 made to modern standards is viable, then I think British N has a bleak future. :(
Quote from: escafeld on March 30, 2017, 10:33:51 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on March 30, 2017, 09:21:13 PM
Personally I want a properly shaped, scaled and detailed large logo or NSE class 50 for my hard earned pounds, after all that is the industry these manufacturers have chosen to operate in. So why shouldn't we get a class 50 that is the right scale dimensions where practical, looks 100% correct with the right detail.
Buy a CJM one then that's already available http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/ (http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/)
Even down to a choice of windscreen wiper
£545 :hmmm: Now where's that mortgage application form?
:)
I'm not too concerned about the lack of detail on the Farish 50. My problem is that they haven't captured the shape of the front end. This means that for me it just hasn't got the right character and this stops it from being convincing enough for me buy. I was tempted by a secondhand one a while ago but in the end it just wasn't close enough to looking right. I wouldn't worry too much about the bogies as they aren't far off and for me it doesn't detract from the character of the loco.
The great work that Dapol did in N was creating locos that really did look right and forced Farish to up their game. The class 50 does have quite a following and I fully expect a decent N gauge model will appear as it is the only mainstream U.K. diesel that doesn't have a decent model available. I wouldn't place a bet on who will make it at the moment. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it turned out there have been discussions on the subject in places other than Dapol.
Quote from: escafeld on March 30, 2017, 10:33:51 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on March 30, 2017, 09:21:13 PM
Personally I want a properly shaped, scaled and detailed large logo or NSE class 50 for my hard earned pounds, after all that is the industry these manufacturers have chosen to operate in. So why shouldn't we get a class 50 that is the right scale dimensions where practical, looks 100% correct with the right detail.
Buy a CJM one then that's already available http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/ (http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/)
Even down to a choice of windscreen wiper
Probably be a long wait for it though - CJM's order book has quite likely got a bit longer since the Dapol announcement!
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 09:37:22 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on March 30, 2017, 09:21:13 PM
More specifically, with the Class 55 Farish have modelled the cast (rather than fabricated) variant of the bogies - Classes 37 and 55 have had both types fitted at various times, but Class 50s only ever had the cast ones. The Farish model of the prototype Deltic has the bogies represented (correctly) as fabricated ones - which would not be correct for a Class 50.
But could you tell in N scale at 2 foot? Bogie centre difference could be jarring but bogie fabrication? c'mon :P
Quote
Sorry but your arguments are weak when you can't use the correct terminology.
N Scale is 1:160 ie US or European
2mm is 1:152 ie British 2mm Fine Scale
We are discussing N Gauge or 1:148 models, now just because Bachmann a mainly American orientated Chinese company has started in correctly calling it n scale doesn't mean we should. Unless their trying to tell us that all there new stuff is or will be wrong!
Personally I want a properly shaped, scaled and detailed large logo or NSE class 50 for my hard earned pounds, after all that is the industry these manufacturers have chosen to operate in. So why shouldn't we get a class 50 that is the right scale dimensions where practical, looks 100% correct with the right detail.
I find your comment very offensive. You know damn well what I meant by N scale and everybody else did too!
Anyway. I have had enough of this. It's enough to make me go OO/HO scale (see what I did there). essentially we are talking here about the difference between an accurate impression of a locomotive (call it art) and having to have every detail represented though you can't see it most of the time (call it OCD). Goodbye forum....
[/quote]
Right so it is offensive to point out your mistakes but you are entitled to criticise members who want the correct detail in the correct scale. I admit I may have overly made my point but I find offensive (well irritating when people miss use terminology and scale). Partly because as a surveyor / engineer I spend my life working to scale.
Quote from: escafeld on March 30, 2017, 10:33:51 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on March 30, 2017, 09:21:13 PM
Personally I want a properly shaped, scaled and detailed large logo or NSE class 50 for my hard earned pounds, after all that is the industry these manufacturers have chosen to operate in. So why shouldn't we get a class 50 that is the right scale dimensions where practical, looks 100% correct with the right detail.
Buy a CJM one then that's already available http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/ (http://www.cjmmodels.co.uk/products/cjm-class-50/)
Even down to a choice of windscreen wiper
Not convinced by this model either, no lights, not DCC ready and at 4 times the price of a Dapol / Farish model if either did a new modern version. That said I do appreciate that these are all effectively limited edition bespoke models, I just cannot justify the cost of one.
Thread locked in 5, 4, 3, 2...
Personally I'm most offended by the inability to use the quote button.
Kinda missing the point of CJM too I fear.
Last week I bought a second hand class 50 off eBay. For an old model, to me, it wasn't too bad. Only paid a few quid for it. The plan is to get some extra detail bits and pieces for it and then repaint it. This will be my first project of this kind in N gauge. Bottom of my to do list at the moment but looking forward to giving it a crack.
Certainly a better bet than taking out a mortgage on a CJM or waiting years for someone to produce a new model.
:beers:
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 31, 2017, 07:39:53 PM
I am criticising people who want 100% accuracy as I think that it may well spell the end for our hobby due to cost and a possible discouragement to manufacturers scared of getting a slating here and in the model railway press that impacted on sales.
Trouble is you are coming across as saying that because you aren't bothered about having every detail correct no-one else should be bothered and even that manufacturers should
deliberately make models less accurate than is technically possible...
It actually costs no more to put a vent in the right place as to put it in the wrong place. I suspect that releasing an inaccurate model would lose more in sales than any small cost in getting things right. If that wasn't the case, everyone would be shunning the new Farish Deltics, 47, 37 etc and Farish would be churning out more models using the old Poole tooling...
As I said last night and you have clearly ignored;
Quote from: PLD on March 30, 2017, 07:03:20 PM
That is your opinion, which you are entitled to hold but it is not a universal opinion.
If you wish others to respect you having that opinion, you shouldn't claim that you speak for the majority...
If you want others to respect your opinion, you need to reciprocate - respect others opinions and accept that they may not be the same as yours.
And you built up everyone's hopes last night. Such a shame that like Dapol you didn't deliver what you promised... ;)
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 30, 2017, 09:37:22 PMAnyway. I have had enough of this. It's enough to make me go OO/HO scale (see what I did there). essentially we are talking here about the difference between an accurate impression of a locomotive (call it art) and having to have every detail represented though you can't see it most of the time (call it OCD). Goodbye forum....
And Dapol's mk3 is a really bad example - they are heavily compromised to make them viable. Buffets are virtually all wrong, as they've standardised them. Roof vents are wrong for the mk3a variant (I think, I always got it wrong). Various other things were compromised. It's also just "wrong" in some ways - too many steps for one.
Can someone confirm that this is still the thread about the class 50?????
:confused2:
It seems to be clear if you want a decent co.50 you should have the money to buy a CJM. If not you should be happy with a basic model that has errors, because your not allowed an alternative view.
If you say N Scale it is taken to mean 1:160, 1:148 has always been known as British N Gauge, but laziness from manufacturers in the last couple of years has started to see N Scale used. In America this would be taken for granted as being the same size and scale as their models, which would be wrong. Same goes for Europe, where they don't always quote scale other than N Scale. This does irritate me along with being told that I do not deserve a correct detailed loco because it might put a manufacturer off. Yet I am the one being offensive which I will apologise for hence why I have not quoted anyone this time. ""
If all this wasn't so funny I'd ignore this thread.
Talk about trouble in Toyland ::)
Seconds out - what round have we got to? :P
Has anybody ever spoken directly to a manufacturer after seeing CAD models uploaded with anything they may spot that's inaccurate. Maybe the manufacturers need to seek experts or modelers to make sure they've a good compromise between business sense and accurate scale models?
That's what Dapol Digest is supposed to offer, and Revolution and DJM (among others) have posted CADs on here/RMWeb for review.
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 29, 2017, 09:14:55 PM
Quote from: Karhedron on March 29, 2017, 08:33:50 PM
(http://images.on-this.website/21199_1222243143506a0acb73b81.jpg)
:laughabovepost:
"nice and shiny" as in the Volkswagen passat advert.
"VolksBahn, das loco" :laugh3:
Quote from: funnysunny365 on April 01, 2017, 10:54:19 AM
Quote from: GreatBigBlue on March 29, 2017, 09:14:55 PM
Quote from: Karhedron on March 29, 2017, 08:33:50 PM
(http://images.on-this.website/21199_1222243143506a0acb73b81.jpg)
:laughabovepost:
"nice and shiny" as in the Volkswagen passat advert.
"VolksBahn, das loco" :laugh3:
It's not just imaginary any more - there really is one in this livery:
http://www.fiftyfund.org.uk/index.php/our-locomotives/50031-hood (http://www.fiftyfund.org.uk/index.php/our-locomotives/50031-hood)
The Fifty Fund have previously done Loadhaul and two-tone green as well!
I can assure you, we're looking at this thread and are thinking of pulling it.
But that maybe over - moderation perhaps?
Quote from: Nik96 on April 01, 2017, 10:42:43 AM
Has anybody ever spoken directly to a manufacturer after seeing CAD models uploaded with anything they may spot that's inaccurate. Maybe the manufacturers need to seek experts or modelers to make sure they've a good compromise between business sense and accurate scale models?
Hi Nik
Have you looked at the Revolution Trains website? There you'll see CAD images of all our projects from the Pendolino originally to the TEA tankers, KFA flats, Class 92 electric and Class B tanker.
These are now all in production, tooling or have been delivered. And at each stage we have listened to feedback and made amendments accordingly.
As a specific example: most recently with the 92 it was pointed out to us that the position of the radio transponders was correct for only a limited number of the class, so we moved it to the more common location.
We are expecting CADs of the 321 EMU and HOA hoppers very soon - and will post images on the threads here, RM Web and our own website. Feel free to send us feedback!
Cheers
Ben A.
Hi Nick,
Or have you looked at my website us work for a previous employer?
I believe I was the instigator of this innovation in Model railways, winning at least 1 major award for being so.
Others may follow, but in all honesty, it's a common sense approach, as I know I, and others in the business do not see everything that may be wrong on a cad/cam and as such 'another pair of eyes' is invaluable in bringing to the customer the very best that we can.
However, some manufacturers have published cad/cams and tooled no matter what the comments to improve the Model.
But at a least those that publish and listen, will change the design if they can.
Cheers
Dave
DJModels Ltd (4 locomotives and counting)
Quote from: Nik96 on April 01, 2017, 10:42:43 AM
Has anybody ever spoken directly to a manufacturer after seeing CAD models uploaded with anything they may spot that's inaccurate. Maybe the manufacturers need to seek experts or modelers to make sure they've a good compromise between business sense and accurate scale models?
Didn't the Dapol 'Westerns' and D6300s both benefit from exactly this sort of discussion? Admittedly over on RMWeb, but still, if it's rivets that really do need counting, I can't think of a better group of people for that job.
Both those models turned out very well, Dapol's hit-and-miss approach to quality control notwithstanding.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on April 01, 2017, 06:01:50 PM
.. RMWeb, but still, if it's rivets that really do need counting, I can't think of a better group of people for that job. ...
:laughabovepost:
Quote from: Nik96 on April 01, 2017, 10:42:43 AM
Has anybody ever spoken directly to a manufacturer after seeing CAD models uploaded with anything they may spot that's inaccurate. Maybe the manufacturers need to seek experts or modelers to make sure they've a good compromise between business sense and accurate scale models?
I have weighed in from time to time when I have spotted issues both on CADs and with livery samples. I highlighted the mis-proportioned windows to Dapol on the first CADs of the 142 Pacer. I also did a side-by-side comparison showing how the issue arose with one particular feature being out of place and everything above the point being compressed to fit. The latest EPs look a lot better but the proof of the particular pudding will be when the models arrive. I did put in a few comments on the class 50 thread although that is rather academic now.
In the past I have found most manufacturers to be responsive to input provided it is given politely and constructively at a fairly early stage in the development. With the exception of Farish, the current N gauge manufacturers are fairly small outfits and I think they recognize the benefits of getting input from the modelling community. With the best will in the world, the last 80 years of railway history in this country is immensely diverse and we cannot expect manufacturers to be experts of every prototype they set out to model.
Thanks guys, it was a thought I had but it appears we're already doing it. Of course its one thing in life to give advice and completely opposite to act on it. I suppose it's a risk that you take when it comes to selling products is to listen to the market and the inaccuracies they've found.
I read that heljan are going to make a class 50 in o gauge
so demand / profitable in o but not n it seems??!!??!
Probably, done to death, O is an untapped market, so is very elastic in its pricing - easy pickings.
RMWeb seems to be scathing of it because some 'one man band' cottage industry has also announced one (I believe also RTR).
If someone did an O gauge 92 I'd almost certainly buy one purely for display. It was close run with the 60, I nearly bought one a few times!
I was looking at Marklin O stuff on the Gaugemaster site.
locos at £2 grand, coaches at £500-£700. Looked great.
Actually bought BachFar "Glorious". Flat end look IMHO is mostly caused by almost non existent jumper cable boxes when compared with a Dapol class 56. A good dose of weathering powders has made all the difference too. Done the chassis mod just waiting for a decoder. Not sure about lowering the body as looks as if it would cause bogies to foul back of buffer beam?
BTW both side grills on 56 parted company after initial brief running session. QC?
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/50/5037-070417233503.png) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=50732)
The irony being that the class 50 MU cable boxes are far closer to scale than those on the Dapol 56, which protrude about a scale 18"!
Quote from: njee20 on April 08, 2017, 05:24:00 AM
The irony being that the class 50 MU cable boxes are far closer to scale than those on the Dapol 56, which protrude about a scale 18"!
Maybe, :hmmm: but funny things happen when scale and perception collide. To further make my point check this picture. The class 50 fittings are chunkier than the 56's
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/50/5037-080417092050.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=50735)
Quote from: rhbnut on April 08, 2017, 09:21:55 AM
Quote from: njee20 on April 08, 2017, 05:24:00 AM
The irony being that the class 50 MU cable boxes are far closer to scale than those on the Dapol 56, which protrude about a scale 18"!
Maybe, :hmmm: but funny things happen when scale and perception collide. To further make my point check this picture...
Absolutely. This is why railway modelling is as much art as science. There are times when something on a model might be 100% accurate, but still doesn't look quite right.
We're all "guilty" of this with trees. A typical old pine tree is anything up to 200 ft tall, but you don't see many 15-inch model pine trees on N gauge layouts! In fact anything more than 4 inches tall tends to look a bit silly on small layouts.
Even though @njee20 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=1147) is right about the physical measurements of the cables on the two locos, the 'to scale' version on the Farish Class 50 *looks* too flat to be convincing. Bringing it forwards a bit would make the loco *look* more detailed, even if it was *less* accurate.
Cheers, NeMo
Here is a close up of a CJM Class 50 which shows how Chris chooses to depict the multiple operation cables - much more like the Dapol Class 56.
Looking at the close up of the Farish model, the other thing that stands out are the absence of the vents either side of the head code box. I believe these may be the horn?
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/main_2825.JPG)
Mine is an unrefurbished 50, so it doesn't have the large headlamp, but this looks way too large on the Farish model. So to me replacing the cables and getting these two key elements of the face of the model more correct (where the vents are the eyes and the headlight is the mouth or nose) would make a huge difference.
To me, it doesn't matter.
That looks great.
Awesome, actually.
Quote from: rhbnut on April 07, 2017, 11:28:02 PM
.. BTW both side grills on 56 parted company after initial brief running session. QC?
Wouldn't have happened on a Doncaster built. :D
Quote from: austinbob on March 31, 2017, 07:45:47 PM
Last week I bought a second hand class 50 off eBay. For an old model, to me, it wasn't too bad. Only paid a few quid for it. The plan is to get some extra detail bits and pieces for it and then repaint it. This will be my first project of this kind in N gauge. Bottom of my to do list at the moment but looking forward to giving it a crack.
Certainly a better bet than taking out a mortgage on a CJM or waiting years for someone to produce a new model.
:beers:
Excellent idea. I picked up a new one for a good price a year or two back (when I say "new", it had evidently been sitting on a shelf for half-a-decade) and it fills a class 50 shaped gap in my fleet. From skimming threads like this I gather it's not perfect, and as a model it doesn't have the "presence" or depth of say a Dapol 52, but to me it looks like a class 50. Though bear in mind the last time I saw one in the flesh was 30 years ago. Anyway it's way better than the alternative (no class 50 at all, and CJM is not an option for me). If someone comes up with a brand new model I'll probably stump up for it.
Totally agree that the Dapol MU cables look far better, possibly as much because they're not mounded, so they have relied, as much as the physical size of them.
The 56 is a great model IMO, looks solid!
Quote from: njee20 on April 08, 2017, 05:33:53 PM
Totally agree that the Dapol MU cables look far better, possibly as much because they're not mounded, so they have relied, as much as the physical size of them.
The 56 is a great model IMO, looks solid!
Moulded detail on more recent models does tend to be a lot more convincing though - see the Dapol 67 or the Farish 47/7.
Only just seen this thread. Have to say I'm gutted that the Dapol 50 may not ever happen. The Dapol 56's seems to have done ok even though there are plenty of Farish ones around.
Whilst I have a few vintage examples of the Poole built 50, I don't like them and was looking forward to an updated model. Personally I feel that this model should sell well, but that is only my personal opinion. The refurbished version is the one that carried all the livery variations. As built loco's only ever carried the original BR blue although there were variations on BR logo positions and of course they started fitting the nameplates in 1978. One missing off the livery variations I saw early on in the thread is 50010 which at some point after refurbishment had a blue roof following a repaint instead of grey. I guess I may have to dig deep and treat myself to a CJM 50 instead. This just adds to my frustration with N gauge these days. The lack of a 4-TC to go with Dapols 33/1 is another pet annoyance of mine...
Quote from: 25901JFM on April 10, 2017, 02:29:14 PM
Only just seen this thread. Have to say I'm gutted that the Dapol 50 may not ever happen. The Dapol 56's seems to have done ok even though there are plenty of Farish ones around.
Whilst I have a few vintage examples of the Poole built 50, I don't like them and was looking forward to an updated model. Personally I feel that this model should sell well, but that is only my personal opinion. The refurbished version is the one that carried all the livery variations. As built loco's only ever carried the original BR blue although there were variations on BR logo positions and of course they started fitting the nameplates in 1978. One missing off the livery variations I saw early on in the thread is 50010 which at some point after refurbishment had a blue roof following a repaint instead of grey. I guess I may have to dig deep and treat myself to a CJM 50 instead. This just adds to my frustration with N gauge these days. The lack of a 4-TC to go with Dapols 33/1 is another pet annoyance of mine...
The lack of a 4TC even annoys me in Scotland! Of course Farish is in a better position to make a 4TC than Dapol but why when they don't make locos to shove them?:uneasy:
Quote from: 25901JFM on April 10, 2017, 02:29:14 PM
This just adds to my frustration with N gauge these days. The lack of a 4-TC to go with Dapols 33/1 is another pet annoyance of mine...
Understood, but just how difficult would a 4TC set be to build? I mean, they're basically four Mk1 coaches with cabs at each end. I'm sure there are underframe differences compared with Mk1 coaches, and stuff with windows, doors and rivets to keep you amused, but nothing terribly complicated if you're happy with a broad approximation. I know for sure that Electra Graphics vinyls exist if painting isn't your thing.
At some point, as railway
modellers we do have to accept that some of the things we want aren't ready to run and will need to be kit-built, bodged from something that does exist -- or, heaven forfend -- scratch-built!
Cheers, NeMo
As 4TC's were converted from Mk1 stock the conversion is fairly simple. Basically 2 TSO's, 1 BSK and 1 FK are required. All vehicles will require underframe modifications and some work to the coach body ends is necessary. The most difficult part would be the driving cab and first compartment alterations on the TSO. A case for a 3D portion to be attached to a shortened body?.
Dodger
:sorrysign: I shouldn't have mentioned the 4-TC as it is off topic! I appreciate your comments NeMo and dodger, however I have neither the skills or patience to make a good job of a conversion of the Farish Mark 1's especially given the work required for the driving cab ends. I would however be prepared to pay for a good quality conversion, the livery aspect would not be too difficult as I favour blue & grey to go with my Dapol BR Blue 33/1. Everyone is different, I am not a kit builder or scratch builder. I prefer to buy r-t-r models or professionally built and painted loco's & rolling stock. I have every respect and envy for those that have the ability to build or convert r-t-r stock.
I'm just surprised at some of the models that do get produced compared to some of those that are not. Personally I just fail to see how a new tooled r-t-r 50 would not sell, when you bear in mind some of the quite low production runs of newer models and the silly money that some then sell for on that auction website when the retailers sell out. I for one would be prepared to buy more than one if they ever make it to production as I do like the 50's.
However I'm just one of the lurkers on here rather than a regular contributor so I shall retire to the wings now... Thanks for listening.
Quote from: 25901JFM on April 10, 2017, 08:16:53 PM
Everyone is different, I am not a kit builder or scratch builder. I prefer to buy r-t-r models or professionally built and painted loco's & rolling stock. I have every respect and envy for those that have the ability to build or convert r-t-r stock.
This was me two or three years back. But honestly, wagon kits from the NGS or Parkside Dundas are not difficult to put together, and once you've done a few, you'll feel your ambition growing! Before you know it you'll be respraying loco bodies and slapping vinyls onto old Mk1 coaches to make up trains you'd like but can't buy.
If you're not a member already, please do look at some NGS Journals. One of the big changes the current editor has made is getting more "how to" articles printed, and using them to encourage (some might say "badger") modellers to try such projects themselves.
The Electra Graphics vinyls are cheap and easy to use, and old Mk1s can be picked up for a few quid each at any train show. The cab end is a bit more difficult, I grant you, but it's basically yellow with a few spots of paint for lights and cables. But still, nothing incredibly hard. Even if the resulting model wasn't perfect, it'd be a "pocket money" project, and once running with a Class 33 or 73 at one end, you'd have something unique to your layout that basically looks the part.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on April 10, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
If you're not a member already, please do look at some NGS Journals.
25901JFM is a member of the NGS as shown under his forum name.
Quote from: NeMo on April 10, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
One of the big changes the current editor has made is getting more "how to" articles printed, and using them to encourage (some might say "badger") modellers to try such projects themselves.
Some would say 'threatens to send the boys round' rather than just badger :uneasy:
Quote from: NeMo on April 10, 2017, 08:29:03 PM
If you're not a member already, please do look at some NGS Journals. One of the big changes the current editor has made is getting more "how to" articles printed, and using them to encourage (some might say "badger") modellers to try such projects themselves.
Cheers, NeMo
Yes I am a member of the NGS. I feel the journal has improved a lot since the change of editor. Having said that I'm not a kit builder I do have 3 NGS Turbot wagons, which went together quite well although fitting the buffers caused a few expletives! Painting is another skill that I also lack and the Turbots remain unpainted at present... The older I get (the half century this year) the less adventuresome I am becoming!
John
QuoteThis was me two or three years back. But honestly, wagon kits from the NGS or Parkside Dundas are not difficult to put together, and once you've done a few, you'll feel your ambition growing! Before you know it you'll be respraying loco bodies and slapping vinyls onto old Mk1 coaches to make up trains you'd like but can't buy.
Oh, flip me not that I'm adverse to assembling such a small kit. Parkside Dundas kits have had parts so small and I just cant assemble two chassis sides parallel enough to run straight for the love of trying and they've all gone in the bin, I cried when I bought a Peco kit earlier this year and it has separate running gear (side to side) to assemble . NGS does not advertise itself well. Used to be a member but I could not work out what was what -"kit" or "semi-kit", it's all a bit daunting unless your familiar with NGS stuff.
Rich
Class50 was never on my menu anyway If I did purchase one, it would be the early 'D400' period when I remember them operating on the WCML just prior to electrification. They were not the worlds most inspiring locomotives and had a terrible reputation for reliability. Certainly pre refurbishing.
Quote from: RST on April 10, 2017, 10:52:24 PMNGS does not advertise itself well. Used to be a member but I could not work out what was what -"kit" or "semi-kit", it's all a bit daunting unless your familiar with NGS stuff.
Rich
Hello Rich,
I am sorry you feel that the NGS does not advertise itself well. We do advertise in most of the magazines each month, but I accept the ads are, for cost reasons, kept fairly small.
I am not sure what you mean by "semi-kits" - we offer either kits or RTR. We do grade the kits and those that are easier for beginners tend to be shown as such.
As for painting, I would recommend Halford's car aerosol paints as a good start. Their grey primer is almost impossible to get wrong, provided you remember a couple of simple points:
1). Mount the model on something to make it easier to hold
2). Start the spray off the model, pass over smoothly in a single motion, then release the spray button off the model again. This will avoid the dreaded "pooling" though Halford's primer paint is very forgiving of this.
3). Several light passes is better than one heavy one.
Once you've painted it grey you can either gently brush paint the top coat, or find suitable Halford's top coat matches for whatever you want. There are some that are very similar to BR loco green or maroon.
Cheers
Ben A.
Quote from: RST on April 10, 2017, 10:52:24 PM
Oh, flip me not that I'm adverse to assembling such a small kit. Parkside Dundas kits have had parts so small and I just cant assemble two chassis sides parallel enough to run straight for the love of trying and they've all gone in the bin, I cried when I bought a Peco kit earlier this year and it has separate running gear (side to side) to assemble . NGS does not advertise itself well. Used to be a member but I could not work out what was what -"kit" or "semi-kit", it's all a bit daunting unless your familiar with NGS stuff.
I think you're selling yourself short here! I've seen pictures of your Alltan Street layout there's plenty of skilful work there.
The Peco chassis is pretty simple. Slide in the wheels, plop in the couplings and you're done. Using a bit of matt black or grime grey before assembly to tone down the plastic works a treat.
Once you've made the chassis, there are all sorts of kits that use these chassis, including almost trivially easy whitemetal bolster wagon kits from P&D Marsh that are literally flat plate-like structures you glue on top of the Peco chassis! Several of the NGS kits use the Peco chassis too, including some useful hoppers and vans.
The Parkside Dundas chassis suffers a bit from the fact the supplied kit doesn't match the instructions in one important respect -- twice as many buffer beams supplied as you need! Not sure why, but a bit of common sense when looking at the kit in front of you will help. Really, the biggest challenge is that the plastic doesn't take to ordinary plastic solvent adhesives, but some poundstore superglue will do the trick nicely.
All sorts of wagon bodies available for these chassis; obviously some of their own, but also various NGS kits.
If you look on the NGS website, several are described as 'easy' and these are the ones for beginners. If you look at the sample instructions for the SR shock van, you can see the kit parts supplied, and this kit is a very rewarding one for beginners. Vans of this type were common on the railways well into the BR blue era, and the kit itself is easy to paint and weather. Transfers are supplied, I believe.
http://newweb.ngaugesociety.com/?page_id=53 (http://newweb.ngaugesociety.com/?page_id=53)
I don't want to harp on about this, but the bottom line is that not everything you want will be made ready to run, and if you're willing to start with basic kits like many of those made by the NGS, you'll quickly become more confident in your modelling abilities. As I've said, it's not like you *can't* model; your craftsmanship is evident on what I can see on this forum.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on April 11, 2017, 09:02:02 AM
Quote from: RST on April 10, 2017, 10:52:24 PM
Oh, flip me not that I'm adverse to assembling such a small kit. Parkside Dundas kits have had parts so small and I just cant assemble two chassis sides parallel enough to run straight for the love of trying and they've all gone in the bin, I cried when I bought a Peco kit earlier this year and it has separate running gear (side to side) to assemble . NGS does not advertise itself well. Used to be a member but I could not work out what was what -"kit" or "semi-kit", it's all a bit daunting unless your familiar with NGS stuff.
The Peco chassis is pretty simple. Slide in the wheels, plop in the couplings and you're done. Using a bit of matt black or grime grey before assembly to tone down the plastic works a treat.
Most Peco wagon kits are like that but I did find one kit for a five-plank wagon where the chassis came in four parts (two buffer beams and two solebars). I think I made sure I had a flat surface and a right-angle 'V' block to ensure it went together correctly. The components were also fairly well designed to sit squarely together.
I've got a pack of NGS kits for a GWR low-loader wagon that I've not yet opened so I don't know how they compare for ease of assembly.
We are completely off topic but I think the NGS does well for publicity. I was certainly aware of it before I started out in N gauge and found out about the products as soon as I looked at the web site. NGS has stands at a number of exhibitions, all manned by volunteers. Also this forum gives NGS the odd mention...
I haven't tried any NGS kits yet as there is nothing I want in the range. IMHO N gauge isn't the most enjoyable scale for modelling. I have built 20 of the Peco 5 plank wagons and a smaller number of vans. I can confirm they are very easy to put together. They are a great way to make long inexpensive trains. My Peco 5 planks were used to make a clay train. It is probably my favourite N gauge train in my collection because I did build it myself rather than just buy it.
Roaming further off topic, here are some of the Peco 5 plank wagons (running on the wrong railway). Perhaps surprisingly these would be suitable for a class 50 to pull if I had one. Although the more well known clay hood was introduced in the early 1970s the flat version remained in use well into the 1980s (they hung around longer than the hoods I think).
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/50/3123-110417095502.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=50802)
NGS kits are no more difficult to assemble than any other kit. Certainly there are degrees of difficulty for individual kits. the Grainflow hopper is a little more complex than the earlier kits but with care and rudimentary modelling skills it is achievable. Please, what ia a 'semi kit'? I am thinking a kit for an American articulated lorry? I am beginning to think that everybody wants to open the box and find a finished model these days. Sad! :(
I do like to run correct stock for a period/location. The expected new class 50 had me thinking of moving my layout forward from early/mid 1960s to late 1970s. This would bring in 50s and HSTs.
Now, however, with a decent class 50 kicked into touch, a Castle almost imminent and a King in realistic prospect I'm thinking of moving back towards the late 1950sinstead. Most of my rolling stock will fit nicely into period - just need a rake of Hakesworth crimson and creams.
Quote from: 25901JFM on April 10, 2017, 08:16:53 PM
Everyone is different, I am not a kit builder or scratch builder. I prefer to buy r-t-r models or professionally built and painted loco's & rolling stock. I have every respect and envy for those that have the ability to build or convert r-t-r stock.
Hi
None of us are born with the skills they are learnt by having a go. You might actually surprise yourself by what you are actually capable of. The secret is to pick something simple to start with and work up from there.
Cheers
Paul
If you can glue to bits of plastic together then you can build a kit. Take two parts, glue together. Take another part and glue to the first two. Continue until the model is complete.
Getting a good finish relies on learning how much glue to use and which types are better for what application. Both come from experience - i.e. giving it a go.
Similarly, improved paint finishes comes with practise. Compare the artwork of a 3 year old to that of a ten year old; The only difference is several years of practise. This is true if you're 7 or 70!
Happy modelling.
Steven B.
I agree. Basically, start building, and it's surprising what you achieve!
Quote from: Bealman on April 11, 2017, 10:50:32 AM
I agree. Basically, start building, and it's surprising what you achieve!
Yep - nothing that looks like what it should :-[
It's a case of "Look, sunshine. I'm playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order"
Meanwhile..............back to the class 50
Quote from: escafeld on April 11, 2017, 12:16:26 PM
The NGS kit Boogie Bolster Kit & Chassis is no more difficult than a very simple Airfix Kit. It comes supplied with Farish boogies. The only piece that need some care is gluing the two halves of the floor together to make sure they are flat. The wagon kit costs £6.30 + glue and paint
At a time when many are concerned about the ever increasing price of r-t-r items kits look even better value. For instance 21 clay wagons from Kernow - £244.93 but 21 Peco 5 plank wagon kits £84 plus a bit of time, glue and paint. Some will get pleasure from making something and saving money and others, especially in today's busy world, just won't have the time.
I'm also thinking locos - New Farish loco is £100 plus. Worsley class D600 kit is £23 and I have seen old tatty but working Farish Poole type 47s for £30. So that's a new loco for £53, admittedly plus a lot of work plus transfers and nameplates. I understand these kits are not for beginners.
Good argument there Chris. I might just have to bite the bullet and build a few N gauge kits. No problem with wagon kits but I've so far been put off loco kits because you can't buy one with ALL the bits in like you can for OO or O gauge. Would be nice to have N kits with the chassis parts and wheels included. As I understand it, its the availability of wheels that's the problem.
:beers:
I have tried to put that across to Ray about his kits Austinbob but it falls on deaf ears, I also think kits should come complete with all transfers nameplates, ,wheels and even the chance to have a chassis and all you have to provide is glue and paint and of course your time.
At least AR is on the right lines with his Sentinal kits you have a choice of how much detail you want to add your self orallready done for you.
I know this is going off topic NN bu I was replying to part of the last post Ha Ha Ha
Bob Tidbury
Relevant posts, like RTR class 50s, seem a bit thin on the ground. The last mention of a class 50 on this thread was 5 posts ago :hmmm:
You're right, but not sure there's much more to say really...
:beers:
Quote from: Western Exile on April 11, 2017, 04:48:46 PM
Relevant posts, like RTR class 50s, seem a bit thin on the ground. The last mention of a class 50 on this thread was 5 posts ago :hmmm:
Yep. I'm sure there isn't anything left to say on the original topic.
Now... a dilemma for the mods.
The usual practice of locking it arbitrarily. Or... leave it to run whilst there's some interesting, if off topic discussion and let it die naturally in a couple of days?
The latter I think njee20.
I'd quite like to see more chat about N gauge loco kits. Maybe its time to start a different thread.
:beers:
Quote from: austinbob on April 11, 2017, 06:20:28 PM
The latter I think njee20.
I'd quite like to see more chat about N gauge loco kits. Maybe its time to start a different thread.
:beers:
That's the route I'd prefer to be taken, Bob.
Leave the class 50 thread to anyone with further comment about it but for those who may come to it in the future, please remain on topic.
I hope someone starts making a class 50 - I've just come across a big bag full of 2mm Class 50 etched nameplates...
There's are a couple of topics about possible models for crowdfunding around at the moment. I would have thought a crowd funded class 50 would be more likely to be successful. That is if Farish aren't already working on one....
At the risk of repeating what has been said by others (previously on this thread as well); the big risk to any crowd-finder is if Dapol suddenly re-star their work and beat the new people to it.
It's the same reason why I am not pushing for a crowd-funded 59 :'(
Skyline2uk
I very much doubt we will see any new N gauge tooling from Dapol in the next few years or indeed the foreseeable future. They are really only interested in developing their O gauge range at the moment. As people pay around half the price of a crowd funded model up front sales are pretty much guaranteed at the point of starting tooling. At this point Dapol would know they would have lost probably 1,000 sales for their model even if they got it out first. If a crowd funding bid was started it would simply not start tooling if Dapol announced they had started tooling.
I think that's a bit of a simplistic view of crowdfunding. What would actually happen is people would back it, Dapol would get theirs out suddenly, half the crowdfunders would scream refund, the other half would be furious their crowd funded one wasn't going ahead because it included the exact model they wanted. The crowdfunding company lose face, and potentially the not insignificant sums invested before tooling commences (if not after).
I think Dapol have totally killed the idea of an n gauge 50 for a good while yet.
Nothing. But why would Dapol do that? they could run a crowdfunding campaign if they so desired. Having someone else does it just means another slice of the cake to cut.
I can think of several reasons: all the usual outsourcing guff, plus someone else to take the heat if it falls through.
Natural = nothing in my OP, stupid autocorrect!
That is true, but it also gives them a very limited market, unless they go on general release, which they'd be insane not to, particularly with something like the 50 where there are more variants than you'd ever want in a crowdfunding campaign. Then why do the crowd funding?
I'm not really up on the ins and outs of all this but from my simplistic view couldn't a crowdfunder contract Dapol to be the manufacturer and supplier of a crowd funded model, with a contract clause that for a set time they don't general release a class 50, that way the crowd funded model gets produced and released, or have a clause that Dapol could only release certain models that weren't part of the crowd funded specs, of course there is much more to it and hope you understand how I'm trying to put it across.
Basically contracts and timelines to limit, restrict general sales so the crowdfunder gets fulfilled (if worked out the right way it could be a win all round)
Again though, what's in that for Dapol? Ok they get some cash up front, but they then have massive sunk costs in tooling that they can't recoup for a further x years. They also either have to administer a crowdfunding campaign or pay someone else to do it.
Then you've got all the liveries, I really like the 50s, but the only ones I'd actually buy would be a late-NSE or 50007 in GWR green, neither of those were in Dapol's original batch, so I'd not have bought one. Should the crowdfunding campaign cover all of the liveries? If it didn't would others be exempt from the general release ban?
What if dealers undercut the crowdfunded price, as has happened with DJM and the 92?
Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of a new 50 and I think Dapol have been very underhand in their "abeyance" message, but I for one cannot see a crowdfunding campaign working for it at all. Happy to be proven wrong, particularly if they do late-NSE!
Clearly Dapol don't see as much of a market in N as they do in O, which is obviously a new market for RTR they're tapping into. I think Chris is right insofar as we're unlikely to see much new from Dapol in N for a while.
But there's still talk (reasonably) of delays before Dapol are able to run their own batch etc. That still leaves money tied up totally needlessly. The benefits are far greater for the consumer than for Dapol.
To add on and try to expand on my post earlier, what I was trying to put across was a big box manufacturer may decide not to produce a model due to perceived lack of interest, they don't want to put out the cost for a potential lemon, crowdfunding provides the starting line, by having the two working together both parties should be able to win, and the consumer gets the desired models into the market place.
Crowdfunders put out the initial interest feelers.
The models are proposed and put up for funding
(At this point no one is out of pocket)
When the desired funding level is reached models go for CADs
Next up the big box guys are brought in for the tooling
Models are eventually produced
Now as was mentioned before what is to stop cancelled orders and putting the crowdfunders out of pocket, that's where exclusive models come into play, say a crowdfunder got the interest on NSE and BR blue, then those models wouldn't be available to the big box guys, that ensures the crowdfunders don't lose out as the models proposed aren't made elsewhere, the big box guys use the tooling to produce "other variants" and thus have their own exclusives.
I'm sure royalties could even be worked out so that tooling that crowdfunding made possible alway gets something for their use and that could offset anything the Crowdfunders lose by being in a partnership
It would all of course be in a contract that both sides would have to agree to, all in all it's probably a long shot this type of thing would happen, but I'd like to see it if it were possible
Quote from: njee20 on September 25, 2017, 10:39:40 PM
What if dealers undercut the crowdfunded price, as has happened with DJM and the 92?
Hi
Wasn't that a misunderstanding that has now been corrected by the dealer?
Cheers
Paul
I would just love to see someone other than Dapol make a decent class 50. This would remove the opportunity for Dapol to make a future model. I would like to see this because Dapol have effectively blocked new models of both this and the West Country by saying they were developing them for many, many years then pulling out.
Quote from: PaulCheffus on September 26, 2017, 07:42:43 AM
Quote from: njee20 on September 25, 2017, 10:39:40 PM
What if dealers undercut the crowdfunded price, as has happened with DJM and the 92?
Wasn't that a misunderstanding that has now been corrected by the dealer?
Possibly, as Dave's website is among the worst I've ever seen I can't see what a 92 would actually cost me! Presumably in this context "misunderstanding" = verging on price fixing.
I agree with Chris, it's massively frustrating that Dapol have done this, again! Just waiting for them to decide the Pacers are actually "on hold" now!
Not wanting this to become a tit-for-tat discussion on the merits (or not) of crowdfunding, as that's not overly relevant. If it's the ideal scenario for business why doesn't it happen more often? We've seen a couple of projects come to fruition, with a couple more to follow, both from new manufacturers. We've seen equal numbers of failures. DJM are running multiple concurrent 'streams' admittedly, but he has very widely broadcast cashflow limitations, which is when crowdfunding is good.
The class 50 is "on abeyance until the economic conditions become more favourable", which is subtly different. Dapol aren't saying they don't think a market exists, nor that they don't have the cash to go to tooling, they're saying there are better places to put their money and resources right now where the market will tolerate far higher prices and is perhaps more buoyant, ie O gauge. That's the ideal scenario for business! Perhaps in 5 years time when "economic conditions" are more favourable the market for N will tolerate a higher price and relative production costs will be reduced and they'll pick it back up again.
There are undoubted benefits to Dapol in crowdfunding, insofar as they get money, but there's also an opportunity cost, and I don't think it's the answer for them on this model at this time. They're a small company with limited resources, and are very publicly backing another horse with significantly better odds at the moment. Again, very happy to be proven wrong, but that's my opinion.
Quote from: njee20 on September 26, 2017, 10:03:52 AM
Not wanting this to become a tit-for-tat discussion on the merits (or not) of crowdfunding, as that's not overly relevant. If it's the ideal scenario for business why doesn't it happen more often?
I think there is an issue of trust. Customers have to have faith in the Crowdfunders and their ability to bring the product to market with sufficient quality. It is not like you can wait until the product has been released and then assess its quality before deciding to make a purchase. Modelers also tend to have an older demographic that is more wary of such risks than younger people who may be more comfortable about crowd-funding initiatives.
I think that RevolutioN and DJM have opened a door here and crowd-funding is here to stay. Whether it remains a niche way of producing models or becomes more widespread remains to be seen.
I hope you're right, I really like crowdfunding as a way of delivering products which might otherwise struggle to be brought to market.
I think the 59 is a more likely candidate to be delivered that way though - I'd have thought it's a more marginal market, which is one of the principal benefits of crowdfunding - you get upfront confirmation of your market. If Dapol (or another company) do deliver a 50 I'd be astounded if it didn't sell well on general release.
Crowdfunding has two main benefits - proving the market exists and raising funds.
I don't see the market largely changing to crowdfunding, but I do think that it offers new opportunities to produce things that might be considered more marginal/unlikely!
As for the 50 a few people have already identified the major problem which is Dapol can restart work at any moment and trump a start from scratch. A crowdfunder could commission Dapol to produce a 50 (and I can a massive advantage to Dapol - free tooling to add to their range which they could run and re-run). The opportunity cost is just that a cost/pricing issue ie make it attractive enough to Dapol to do it.
NEWS FROM CHIRK DAPOL ARE RESTARING ON THE 50s
Due out Q3 2018 liveries and numbers to be decided - Only one confirmed 50007 Sir Edward Elgar as a club special in GWR colours
Quote from: acko22 on September 30, 2017, 12:04:04 PM
NEWS FROM CHIRK DAPOL ARE RESTARING ON THE 50s
Due out Q3 2018 liveries and numbers to be decided - Only one confirmed 50007 Sir Edward Elgar as a club special in GWR colours
Good, we can return their children now ;)
Couldn't see anything to that effect on their website...
But excellent news though! If, as well as 007 in green, they knock out large logo blue, any NSE variant and 149 in Railfreight, I'll be in for at least ten :D
Wonderful news. Hoping the NSE models are still on the cards. The 50's could be one of their biggest sellers I think.
Sounds like I'd better join the club then, definite rule one purchase for me!
Crossing fingers for a late-NSE too.
Quote from: Tank on September 30, 2017, 12:31:05 PM
Wonderful news. Hoping the NSE models are still on the cards. The 50's could be one of their biggest sellers I think.
I should think NSE is a must on a 50, one of the definitive locos for that livery surely?
Whether they come in that in the first release is a bother question.
Skyline2uk
This livery ran from 1984 to 1991 so could run along side NSE liveried loco's, it ran on rail tours and heritage in this livery into the 2000s.
Quote from: Skyline2uk on September 30, 2017, 12:56:36 PM
I should think NSE is a must on a 50, one of the definitive locos for that livery surely?
Whether they come in that in the first release is a bother question.
Yes, the previously announced batch included the original NSE "ice cream van" livery, which IMO is the worst!
:laughabovepost:
Well each to their own!
Railway livery is always a contentions issue, nobody can tell you what you like and they would be a fool to try.
Not fond of "Transrail" myself, but it's becoming more and more popular.
Skyline2uk
I have a feeling that "Sir Edward" might have to do a special visit to the preserved railway at Calne.....and yes, I know that is stretching modeller's licence (a.k.a Rule One) on two counts at least !
great news
looking forward to ordering a large logo one
I did have one pre ordered before but not sure it that got cancelled
Tim
Yes great news.
Quote from: msr on September 30, 2017, 05:33:58 PM
For those who cannot wait, CJM already produce the Class 50.
Yes, but given that those are made to order and that he's likely to have a fairly full order book for 50s at the moment, that might not actually be any quicker than waiting for a Dapol one!
Not to mention the fact you could buy 5 Dapol offerings for one CJM one!
They are among Chris's best models though I must say, absolutely stunning.
Looks like rule one for me too, an NSE 50 pulling a green CEP, under the wires next to a scotrail 320, while a voyager gets dragged by an EWS 73, exciting time ahead
Not my era but an early one in plain blue will be running under "Rule" 1.
Oh and is it time to change the title of this thread??!!
Roy
I can see Sir Edward and a late-NSE 50 getting purchased for railtour duties...simply Glorious :-)
Well good news and it was heartening to hear the relief at the Dapol club today! The "shelved production" time has allowed some more back room work so it will be worth the wait and I can see quite a few on my layouts ! At least time to save up for a bit longer.
OT the collectors club meet at Dapol today was great fun - I used Poldeen to showcase easyshunts and several shunting games ensued, got a futher batch of Cube wagons having built a large part of 5 of them today, under the glare of the membership. Then "mugged by Tim" again for 3 more chemical tanks!
Was there any other N Gauge news from the Club day? Might we hope for a revival of other stalled projects such as the WC?
Whatever shiny BR blue hoover they bring out will begrudgingly run on 'Reading General' one day, alongside the last days of grubby and worn Westerns on freight duty, circa 1976.
Great news that this is going ahead at last.
The only obvious reason to fit 18/21 pin sockets into existing models would be to allow sound installation, but surely that would require major redesign?
Quote from: msr on September 30, 2017, 05:33:58 PM
For those who cannot wait, CJM already produce the Class 50. Here are two green versions to entice you:
50007 'Sir Edward Elgar'
and D444 'Exeter'
Exeter looks fantastic. Yeah, CJM models ain't cheap, but what you pay for's what you gets, for sure.
Whole other thread there, but I think some of his models aren't worth the price tag. The 50 certainly isn't one of those though!
Quote from: njee20 on October 01, 2017, 09:24:53 AM
Whole other thread there, but I think some of his models aren't worth the price tag. The 50 certainly isn't one of those though!
Base model is £555 (£625 for NSE livery), plus £70 to detail each end, plus £30-70+ for weathering. That's a lot of money.
At some point, in the UK probably around the £300 mark for a loco, we're slipping into what I call 'chequebook modelling'. Less about having an authentic model and more about owning a status symbol. Good old fashioned envy? Perhaps, but hear me out...
As good as the Saturn chassis might be, at a mere £205, it's presumably not five times better than a standard issue Kato chassis in terms of performance and reliability, but that's the sort of price differential we're dealing with. It's also heartening that Dapol can, at times, produce almost bespoke quality weathering for literally a few quid over the price of the base model loco or wagon. There surely is the potential for Dapol to produce a lovely model of the 50, with a Kato-quality chassis (just for once!) and a decent paint job.
In the meantime, sure, there's the CJM version. Each to their own, of course. But personally I'm more impressed by someone who has tweaked a Farish Class 50 using their own modelling skills than by someone showing me a handmade model someone else built for them for the best part of £600.
After all, at the end of the day it's still just a toy train buzzing around a train set, but if I can tell someone "I made that" then at least there's some point to what we do.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on October 01, 2017, 11:25:16 AM
After all, at the end of the day it's still just a toy train buzzing around a train set, but if I can tell someone "I made that" then at least there's some point to what we do.
Cheers, NeMo
There's a whole other thread there, as well! 'The point' for some people is just to have as accurate a representation as possible, and they will pay someone else to do it.
I'm not a modeller, I just want to play trains. I'm not going to start hacking about an expensive loco with little prospect of ending up with what I want. But I might pay someone else to do it.
It takes all sorts.
Quote from: Yet_Another on October 01, 2017, 11:53:05 AM
I'm not a modeller, I just want to play trains. I'm not going to start hacking about an expensive loco with little prospect of ending up with what I want. But I might pay someone else to do it.
Fair point!
Quote from: Yet_Another on October 01, 2017, 11:53:05 AM
It takes all sorts.
Indeed. I guess the recent release from LEGO of a 'Millennium Falcon' for £650, while people around here are relying on food banks just to have a decent meal, has made me feel a bit more reflective about how I spend my money on my hobby.
Cheers, NeMo
Yep, I don't like pulling locos apart or fiddling with them, cos I worry I won't get them back together again.
To some, however, that's a major part of the hobby!
However, I'd love a CJM loco.
I haven't got one, and although I could probably afford one, I tend to spend my money on trips to Wigan and Blackpool to stir up certain forum members ;)
Quote from: longbow on October 01, 2017, 08:57:39 AM
The only obvious reason to fit 18/21 pin sockets into existing models would be to allow sound installation, but surely that would require major redesign?
Doesn't it allow better control of lighting, etc, because it has more available functions?
That was what I thought on next 18 - you get more than 2 functions, so we can have cab lighting, independent head and tail lights etc without re-wiring.
I was going to buy a CJM 92 a couple of years ago. I skipped up to his stand at Warley with my cash (metaphorically) in hand, but actually when I looked at the model I was underwhelmed - mainly the printed, unglazed light clusters let the front end down IMO. For the money I want perfection, and it wasn't perfect, indeed I decided a RTR 'mainstream' model would likely be better (and now there's one coming), and I'd personally be gutted that my £800 loco (weathered, detailed, DCC etc) was surpassed by something at 15% of the cost.
Quote from: njee20 on October 01, 2017, 01:04:03 PM
That was what I thought on next 18 - you get more than 2 functions, so we can have cab lighting, independent head and tail lights etc without re-wiring.
I was going to buy a CJM 92 a couple of years ago. I skipped up to his stand at Warley with my cash (metaphorically) in hand, but actually when I looked at the model I was underwhelmed - mainly the printed, unglazed light clusters let the front end down IMO. For the money I want perfection, and it wasn't perfect, indeed I decided a RTR 'mainstream' model would likely be better (and now there's one coming), and I'd personally be gutted that my £800 loco (weathered, detailed, DCC etc) was surpassed by something at 15% of the cost.
I guess the thing with CJM models is that when he started out with them, they were streets ahead of what was available from mass-producing manufacturers, but since then the RTR manufacturers have really upped their game - an RTR model will never be as detailed out of the box as a bespoke one, but given the price difference most will be happy with modern RTR offerings, especially if they want lighting, etc, which the CJM models don't have. Most CJM models now have a modern RTR equivalent (or will have when the 50 and 92 appear) - the only one which won't is the 89, and he doesn't appear to produce that any more in any case.
Not to annoy anybody, but maybe this thread is nearing its end (naturally, not rudeness has been shown at all)?
I say that as we (hopefully) have an answer to the op question: Dapol.
And I am intrigued by the questions coming up from the previous couple of posts, and I am about to drift further from the thread title....
For 20 years, I wanted a CJM. I saw a picture of the 92 in an NGS Journal which belonged to my friends dad and at the age of 9 I wanted one. Very badly.
For me it was a combination of relative rarity / exclusivity ("cheque book modelling") and wanting a high standard model of a prototype that Farish was not showing any signs of doing.
As the years went by the added fact of Chris retiring in 2018 lent another "piece of history" element to the wanting factor. Finally, as some will know, in 2014 I was lucky enough to obtain my example 92022 from the generousity of friends and family.
Since then, Revolution have of course announced their 92 at a much lower price point and no doubt a much better spec. However, not as 92022, and building on what Nobby said, my two Revolution models won't be cheap enough to give me the confidence (yet) to re-number / decal one. I am moving towards making and painting my own models, but I am not there yet.
Skyline2uk