There is a suggestion of a new King model from KR Models. CAD illustration shown on their Facebook page, but precious little else.
The question has been asked directly of KR Models and they have stated it is NOT the DJM King.
Best
Scott
https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/149017-kr-models-n-gauge-king/&tab=comments#comment-3726016 (https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/149017-kr-models-n-gauge-king/&tab=comments#comment-3726016)
Interesting. The CAD uses the same colours as the DJM version did, but there are differences in the two CADs on RM Web.
I think that folk will be very wary until they see how the OO GT3 comes out, given there is not an N gauge GT3 coming soon, and these guys are not exactly round the corner or likely to turn up at TINGS or Warley?
It feels a bit like staking a claim before testing the water, just in case anyone else was thinking of making a King.
Just my tuppenceworth :)
Bring on the 56xx. Much more useful loco.
Best
Bob
Bob, they were at Warley last year and I'm pretty sure they are at Warley again this year.
Best
Scott
I stand corrected. thanks.
Perhaps someone who goes to Warley will get the lowdown for us then.
Bob
It is stated on the RM Web discussion that the DJM king failed to make the numbers so interesting that someone else would try to make one.
Not a GWR man I wouldnt be interested so paid no attention to the DJM ones coming and disappearing
BUT
Did the DJM one fail because nobody wants a King or because DJM was run by Dave Jones who many seemed to have a dislike towards. I dont know the situation as we weren't customers of his and I neither like or dislike the bloke
BUT
A good couple of genuine blokes who run a crowdfunded manufacturing company (Ben & Mike) have always delivered what they have told us they will deliver, delivered absolutely amazing models with next to no hassle and I dont even know if they've ever delivered a project late????
So would it appear that if a well respected company was to produce a King the support would be there or like Bob says this maybe just try to stop anyone else having a go??
No idea, not a loco for me so will see what happens I guess.
The DJM one failed cos the entire business failed.
AFAIK KR haven't produced anything yet, this is their 3rd announcement, so we'll see.
John P
So far then, to me, it all sounds like DJM déjà vu. No delivered products, but still new announcements. :wave:
Direct link to the Facebook post which is included as an image on the RMweb page: https://www.facebook.com/krmodels.uk/photos/a.180899975953317/447572162619429/ (https://www.facebook.com/krmodels.uk/photos/a.180899975953317/447572162619429/)
(seems to be publicly accessible, no Facebook account required to view).
Quote from: exmouthcraig on November 09, 2019, 01:58:57 PM
A good couple of genuine blokes who run a crowdfunded manufacturing company (Ben & Mike) have always delivered what they have told us they will deliver, delivered absolutely amazing models with next to no hassle and I dont even know if they've ever delivered a project late????
Ha, thanks for the kind words, Craig.
I might say that our models have never been late because we have never promised a delivery date!
The truth is that everyone in manufacturing does their best to expedite the research, development and delivery of models as quickly as possible but sometimes issues arise that cause delays. You may recall in the case of the Pendolino we had to go through three iterations of coupler to get one we and Rapido were satisfied with, so delays are just a part and parcel of the process I am afraid!
Cheers
Ben A.
Once bitten twice shy for me. I won't be putting up money for new models unless it is Revolution. The thing about revolution is that they have "proper jobs" and produce models in their spare time. This means they are unlikely to run out of cash. DJM had no other income so, when models failed to appear, failure was almost inevitable.
Don't know how KR Models are set up. Perhaps they need to show how their business model is funded before people have confidence in them. I would love to see a successful N gauge model from them but DJM have put lme off paying up front.
I bought a Dapol Brittania which is fine for the WR mainline and no longer need a king anyway.
Quote from: Chris Morris on November 09, 2019, 04:49:50 PM
The thing about revolution is that they have "proper jobs" and produce models in their spare time. This means they are unlikely to run out of cash. DJM had no other income so, when models failed to appear, failure was almost inevitable.
I know what you meant to say, but how you describe it is not how the two business models work (or failed). Revolution are totally crowdfunded and things wont progress unless there is cash in the bank. Their own salaries from their work has nothing to do with the business success or even potential failure of Revolution's models.
Their approach means they should not fail, but there is always a chance that a factory will do what they did to DJM and hold then to ransom over dies, for example (we dont actually know why this happened with DJM but it did happen twice).
DJM set out to be a manufacturer, and consequently had a different business model. This simple business model evolved with time. Some of DJM's revenue came from the traditional manufacturer's business model (the OO austerities IIRC), some came from crowdfunding held in a pot by Kernow Models (the successful OO Class 71 and the failed OO Class 74), some from design work for other manufacturers (and he has told me himself that this was one of the biggest mistakes he made, as it didnt give him enough of a revenue stream to live on, and it got in the way of his own projects), and some from the Revolution model of crowdfunding. This final approach was compounded by cash flow issues when he was ransomed over two dies (the OO 74 and the N Clayton IIRC) and he simply ran out of money.
I have faith in Revolution's financial acumen but they could still have a project that goes wrong. That is the risk with crowdfunding and that is why some will never invest in a model that is crowdfunded, whether a Revolution one or not.
HTH
Bob
To be fair, as the OP I was hoping we could avoid the DJM conversation by clarifying KRMs quoted position. I was clearly naive. But could we maybe just leave that alone for now?
I think because its a King, comparisons are inevitable, and KR have not exactly covered themselves in N gauge glory so far either. I felt with the GT3 that it was a take it or leave it approach, and I guess if your main market is OO then with the other gauges (they are offering GT3 in O gauge too) you are just waving a sign saying if you want it, come get it, or we wont do it.
I'm done on this one anyway. I've never wanted a King, from any manufacturer, but I do think clarity on the business models is important. KR is simple crowdfunding, but have not delivered anything in any scale as yet. Chris is right to have his doubts. I'd like to see KR deliver one thing in one scale successfully, and then I'll eat my N scale hat.
For example, I've paid for a load of Cemflos from Accurascale, because they've done decent work in OO with crowdfunding too.
Cheerio
Bob
Quote from: Bob G on November 09, 2019, 07:33:05 PM
I think because its a King, comparisons are inevitable, and KR have not exactly covered themselves in N gauge glory so far either. I felt with the GT3 that it was a take it or leave it approach, and I guess if your main market is OO then with the other gauges (they are offering GT3 in O gauge too) you are just waving a sign saying if you want it, come get it, or we wont do it.
I'm done on this one anyway. I've never wanted a King, from any manufacturer, but I do think clarity on the business models is important. KR is simple crowdfunding, but have not delivered anything in any scale as yet. Chris is right to have his doubts. I'd like to see KR deliver one thing in one scale successfully, and then I'll eat my N scale hat.
For example, I've paid for a load of Cemflos from Accurascale, because they've done decent work in OO with crowdfunding too.
Cheerio
Bob
I know, Bob, it wasn't a criticism more a forlorn observation.
I just don't like focusing on the negative.
Best
Scott
Quote from: Bob G on November 09, 2019, 07:33:05 PM
I felt with the GT3 that it was a take it or leave it approach
I think this hits the nail on the head. The N gauge market is smaller and I can't help but feel that a much more widely-spread prototype (such as the 43xx/63xx Moguls or Large Prairie for example) would have had a better chance of attracting the sufficient interest to get it off of the mark.
I really do want the King to go forward though, I model late 50's WR and this would fit in nicely, as such if it gets to that stage I will purchase a couple. I just hope that the choice of prototype here, for a first model in N gauge for this manufacturer, has a wide-enough appeal to go ahead...
i would be happy enough with a 2nd hand farish king..but i always get outbid on the few that come up on ebay.
Just Found this thread and was wondering, have KR Models dropped the proposed N gauge King?
Quote from: ianwales on June 16, 2022, 02:18:18 PM
Just Found this thread and was wondering, have KR Models dropped the proposed N gauge King?
All the indications are that KR Models have dropped all their intended projects in N. The ones they announced were seemingly based on having acquired some kind of design information from the unlamented DJ Models, but they were then beaten to production of the Shark brake van and the Clayton Type 1 by EFE, and the King proposal vanished soon after.
They also show no sign of shrinking any of their other 4mm weirdies (GT3, Fell etc) to N, so basically I'd forget about them as an N manufacturer.
Richard T
My own feeling about a King loco, is that it will be down to either Farish, or the new kid on the block Sonic models to go for it. I'd be very surprised if Dapol went for it.
I'd imagine too many of us got embroiled in the demise of DJM, to pay deposits or partake in crowdfunding.
Thankfully I got my two deposits back in full, but once bitten twice shy. It would need to be "on the shelf" for me to part with my money.
It's said that the owner of Sonic, Sam, previously designed for Farish, and oversaw the Duchess loco design. Presumably he would possess the required skills/knowledge for a King. I think Sonics 56xx is a cracking model.
If we assume the KR project to be dead, that is two schemes to have failed in quick succession... For any other manufacturer considering it, the first question is why they failed. Was it:
1. Mistrust of the companies/individuals involved.
2. Dislike of the funding methods and unwillingness to participate on those terms.
3. In reality, the claimed demand for the model simply isn't there beyond a very vocal few.
For those who really want one, the question is how you convince another manufacturer it was not number 3. That probably does mean you will have to put a substantial amount of money where your mouth is...
Quote from: Bigmac on November 09, 2019, 08:28:49 PM
i would be happy enough with a 2nd hand farish king..but i always get outbid on the few that come up on ebay.
i did get one--although i had to fiddle and faff with the front bogie pivot to get it to work: then it ran with a distinct "beat"..4 cylinders ?.
i had it out for a run recently--and after a few laps it smoothed out a lot.
Were all the farish Kings made in China ?
Quote from: Bigmac on June 19, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Were all the Farish Kings made in China ?
In 2000, Farish (Poole) introduced the King in two variants
Cat no 1414. King Edward II GWR Shirtbutton
Cat no 1415. King John. BR green early crest.
Ramsay's British Model Trains says it used the original Farish Castle body designed in 1982 with a newly designed front bogie. That was typical Farish compromise of the times.
In China, two more versions were produced.
372-550 King Richard II BR blue early crest
372-551 King James II BR green early crest
King driving wheels were 6'6". Castles were 6'8 1/2"
King bogie wheels were 31, Castles were 3'2"
Kings were 68'2" over buffers, Castles were 65'2"
Kings had a GWR No 12 boiler, Castles a No 8 boiler.
In the 2000s, we tolerated a Castle modified by Farish to look like a King. Would we tolerate that now?
I guess the real issue is does it look like a King?
HTH
Bob
Does Charles? :D ;)
Quote from: Bealman on June 19, 2022, 09:12:25 AM
Does Charles? :D ;)
I was going to say we don't do political comment on this forum but of course Charles is not allowed to show any political views publicly.
I didn't realise that baiting Royalty was allowed, though :o
Just a simple innocent question ;D
Quote from: Bob G on June 19, 2022, 08:50:08 AM
Quote from: Bigmac on June 19, 2022, 08:08:42 AM
Were all the Farish Kings made in China ?
In 2000, Farish (Poole) introduced the King in two variants
Cat no 1414. King Edward II GWR Shirtbutton
Cat no 1415. King John. BR green early crest.
Ramsay's British Model Trains says it used the original Farish Castle body designed in 1982 with a newly designed front bogie. That was typical Farish compromise of the times.
In China, two more versions were produced.
372-550 King Richard II BR blue early crest
372-551 King James II BR green early crest
King driving wheels were 6'6". Castles were 6'8 1/2"
King bogie wheels were 31, Castles were 3'2"
Kings were 68'2" over buffers, Castles were 65'2"
Kings had a GWR No 12 boiler, Castles a No 8 boiler.
In the 2000s, we tolerated a Castle modified by Farish to look like a King. Would we tolerate that now?
I guess the real issue is does it look like a King?
HTH
Bob
It all depends on what each of us wants from our railway. To me, almost all early Farish items are just not worth having; I certainly wouldn't use them. I wouldn't tolerate the early Farish King or castle or 61xx or hall or Western as they just aren't good enough representations of the real thing. I ended up buying a second recent Farish Castle (which is an excellent model albeit in need of a bit of lead) and a Dapol Brit so my express workings in steam days are covered and I am no longer interested in a king.
Quote from: Bob G on June 19, 2022, 08:50:08 AM
Ramsay's British Model Trains says it used the original Farish Castle body designed in 1982 with a newly designed front bogie. That was typical Farish compromise of the times.
IIRC, wasnt the same chassis and the same metal body casting (boiler, firebox, cab) used for the King, Castle and Hall just with different plastic mouldings for the smokebox and cylinders?
(Perpetuating the myth of all GWR locos being the same appart from the name ::) )
To me the King is ugly because of the bogie.
Quote from: PLD on June 19, 2022, 11:28:51 AM
IIRC, wasnt the same chassis and the same metal body casting (boiler, firebox, cab) used for the King, Castle and Hall just with different plastic mouldings for the smokebox and cylinders?
(Perpetuating the myth of all GWR locos being the same appart from the name ::) )
Well I do wish the comment in brackets was true, but I'm not sure the Hall and the Castle were the same bodies.
In fact, looking back at the 2005 Farish catalogue, the front footplate area of all three are in fact different, but so are the little circular things on the outside of the firebox of all three bodies (I cant remember what they are called at the moment) so perhaps Ramsey's is wrong too (surely not :) )
The best looking loco of that era is the rebuilt MN of 1997, but then I would say that, wouldn't I?
HTH
Bob
Quote from: Bob G on June 19, 2022, 12:15:37 PM
Quote from: PLD on June 19, 2022, 11:28:51 AM
IIRC, wasnt the same chassis and the same metal body casting (boiler, firebox, cab) used for the King, Castle and Hall just with different plastic mouldings for the smokebox and cylinders?
(Perpetuating the myth of all GWR locos being the same appart from the name ::) )
In fact, looking back at the 2005 Farish catalogue, the front footplate area of all three are in fact different, but so are the little circular things on the outside of the firebox of all three bodies (I cant remember what they are called at the moment)
Washout plugs, if you mean the several in rows above and below the handrails.
The bulges on the top side corners of the firebox box are, I think, covers over the mudhole doors.
Quote from: chrism on June 19, 2022, 12:24:08 PM
Washout plugs, if you mean the several in rows above and below the handrails.
That's what I meant! Thanks. I can sound knowledgeable again now.
Bob
Quote from: Bob G on June 19, 2022, 12:15:37 PM
Quote from: PLD on June 19, 2022, 11:28:51 AM
IIRC, wasnt the same chassis and the same metal body casting (boiler, firebox, cab) used for the King, Castle and Hall just with different plastic mouldings for the smokebox and cylinders?
(Perpetuating the myth of all GWR locos being the same appart from the name ::) )
Well I do wish the comment in brackets was true, but I'm not sure the Hall and the Castle were the same bodies.
In fact, looking back at the 2005 Farish catalogue, the front footplate area of all three are in fact different, but so are the little circular things on the outside of the firebox of all three bodies (I cant remember what they are called at the moment) so perhaps Ramsey's is wrong too (surely not :) )
The best looking loco of that era is the rebuilt MN of 1997, but then I would say that, wouldn't I?
HTH
Bob
ive just been and looked--all 3 bodies are very different in several respects
I have 3 Graham Farish kings, one in 1948 blue one in early emblem green and one in late crest green the first 2 are single chimneyed, the green one, a king John modified with a Chinese made smokebox with larger single chimney. all of them have had their bogies modified with the wheelsets replaced with Farish spoked wagon wheelsets with the points filed off. this makes such a difference to the look of the loco. by the way, the spring will no longer fit, but leaving it out doesn't result in the loss of stability. I wish that I could claim that I thought of this, but it was another member of the forum that posted this modification and I followed suit. mechanical lubricators have also been added where appropriate.
Any new King model now will have to be outstanding before I put any money down
Regards,
Alex