Sutton's Locomotive Works *NEW* Class 25

[zr2498]

On 06/10/2024 at 11:10, Roy Langridge said:

I think the size of the difference between Bachmann and SLW depends whether you are DC, like yourself, or DCC Sound like me. For those who enjoy sound, the difference remains huge. 
 

Roy

I suspect that for those wanting DCC sound, if Bachmann could get their speaker set up improved, something like the Cavalex 56 using and ESU passive radiator, then the gap between Bachmann and SLW would be very close indeed.

Bachmann and SLW are both using Zimo which is lacking the tone control that the ESU decoders now have. Perhaps the next gen' of Zimo will have this? It has made a big difference to those of us who upgrade sound.

 

[zr2498]

On 13/10/2024 at 17:08, lochlongside said:

Hi There,

Would appreciate some advice from a Class 25 expert - please !!

received my green (D7599) class 25 yesterday - unpacked, tested ok (so far on 00 DC only - will do DCC later tonight) but have a query around the small pack of ancilliaries - there are no instructions in the tin so apart from the couplings my question is what are they /where do they go - see photo - I have lettered them with x qty for reference.  B and C look like sandpipes but there are no obvious holes for them to go into; as for the rest - no idea !!

Is there a knowledgeable person who is willing to advise?

Thanks for posting this, and thanks to @Hal Nail for the reply. It was the same for the 24's = no instructions.

Perhaps an email to SLW with your photo might get an official response / solution, which could be shared with all on this thread?

PS the parts are very much smaller than your photo suggests! Steady hands requird to get these fitted.

[MidlandRed]

The bogies are far better on the SLW as is much of the fine detail IMO - the Bachmann is certainly very good thiugh and more than adequately represents the class - the SLW is more the ultimate model of it imho. I like the SLW sound (even though I’m DC only) - when I get to DCC (eventually) I know it’ll be even better. 

[alastairb]

2 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Well….maybe. But when…yes,as I have just achieved….you have hands and track on with one of these,your reactions will be totally different.I already have a couple of SLW24’s,so I knew something special was on the way. Patience has it own reward . And my reward is ….arguably….the best OO gauge r-t-r  model locomotive currently on the market 

This is not a warehouse based dispatch organisation. It’s run by three dedicated people committed to following one man’s dream in a tiny beautifully situated stone cottage in what is an idyllic English village. That’s the reality.which I’m happy to accept and am rewarded for my wait.

I look forward to receiving my 25/2 and 24/1. I'm sure I'll be delighted by what are by all accounts, and my personal observations, exquisite models.  However, like many on here I'm just puzzled why SLW can do the difficult bit - design and develop the model to these standards and have it produced half a world away - but can't do the much simpler task of promptly delivering the model to their eager customers or communicate the reason why final despatch is taking so long.

[MikeParkin65]

14 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Well….maybe. But when…yes,as I have just achieved….you have hands and track on with one of these,your reactions will be totally different.I already have a couple of SLW24’s,so I knew something special was on the way. Patience has it own reward . And my reward is ….arguably….the best OO gauge r-t-r  model locomotive currently on the market 

This is not a warehouse based dispatch organisation. It’s run by three dedicated people committed to following one man’s dream in a tiny beautifully situated stone cottage in what is an idyllic English village. That’s the reality.which I’m happy to accept and am rewarded for my wait.

Morning Ian - I dont think anyone is doubting the quality of the models or the commitment to the project by SLW. The latest conversation about delivery times stems from the regular full page SLW advertising in the model press including urging us not to be tempted by the readily available alternatives whilst as those of us who have already ordered know the actual product isnt available to buy being either sold out already or not ready to be distributed until some point in the future. 

 

I've no idea how many units of each model SLW have made but if its 1000's then I think they seriously need to look at professional distribution company, if its smaller numbers then surely no need to advertise as those who know will be in the order queue patiently waiting and the run will sell out at the pace SLW are happy to work at.

 

None of us want SLW to be stuck with unsold relatively expensive models which is I think a risk if they have too many either piled up in a barn somewhere near the idyllic cottage or perhaps in a container on the high seas UK bound. They need to get them out before the market moves on I think.

[Michael Hodgson]

On 15/10/2024 at 11:25, E100 said:

I do wonder if perhaps there is something going on that other manufacturers aren't having to cope with

 

 

I have a suspicion that it's down to their wanting to do a 100% Quality Control check on every individual model, and a lack of trust that means they're not prepared to delegate any tasks to employees. 

[pauliebanger]

14 hours ago, zr2498 said:

 

........Bachmann and SLW are both using Zimo which is lacking the tone control that the ESU decoders now have. Perhaps the next gen' of Zimo will have this? .......

 

ZIMO lacks tone control? That's just not correct.

ZIMO MS decoders already have a suite of DSP audio effects far superior in scope to those offered by ESU.

Here are the currently available filters and their parameters which can be adjusted either during sound project creation or, with the correct FW loaded, (from June 2023, predating ESU) by CV by end users:

Filter types

1.Low pass

2.High pass

3.Band pass

4.Low Shelf

5.High Shelf

6.Notch

7.Peak

 

Parameters 

Each filter has the following parameters:

A.Cut off frequency 

B.Quality factor 

Where relevant 

C.Gain

 

These sound quality adjusting features give much more control over tuning output to accurately match speaker capabilities in situ than overall Treble and Bass adjustment can achieve.

 

Paul 

[E100]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

I have a suspicion that it's down to their wanting to do a 100% Quality Control check on every individual model, and a lack of trust that means they're not prepared to delegate any tasks to employees. 

 

I share this suspicion. I would suggest though that whilst that is viable with smaller runs up to say a 1000 models, with larger runs this is no way to manage things unless there is frequent and serious random QA errors that require correcting by an expert. If there aren't errors then it feels quite overkill to check every single model in this way after x number have now been checked of each SKU without error - by all means random spot check after that.

 

If there are errors I understand the desire to have each one checked (this is commendable), however again if these errors are systematic i.e. a similar error then it surely doesn't take too long to train someone up to manage that aspect. If they are random and frequent then I would have some sympathy that these are more challenging to spot. That being said provided you have a prefect model in front to compare to then it's really just spot the difference so again baffles me as to why this isn't sped up.

 

I guess at the end of the day though it's Phil's business and I don't run a moderately if not very successful model company so who am I to say otherwise. Some communication around the delay to some by now pretty loyal customers in the face of increasingly tempting competition would be appreciated however, since these delays are certainly unusually long. I do appreciate the update has been made to the website but perhaps a more personal touch on the facebook group / through the newsletter would go some way to earn some goodwill.

 

[spamcan61]

7 minutes ago, E100 said:

 

I share this suspicion. I would suggest though that whilst that is viable with smaller runs up to say a 1000 models, with larger runs this is no way to manage things unless there is frequent and serious random QA errors that require correcting by an expert. If there aren't errors then it feels quite overkill to check every single model in this way after x number have now been checked of each SKU without error - by all means random spot check after that.

 

Absolutely, this has been a long established technique in manufacturiing industries for many many years, there's a whole branch of engineering devoted to it. See for example following page - not expecting anyone to read the whole thing!

 

https://www.eurofins.com/assurance/resources/articles/explaining-acceptance-quality-limit-aql/#:~:text=There are three sub-levels,are used for normal inspection.

[zr2498]

2 hours ago, pauliebanger said:

ZIMO lacks tone control? That's just not correct.

ZIMO MS decoders already have a suite of DSP audio effects far superior in scope to those offered by ESU.

Here are the currently available filters and their parameters which can be adjusted either during sound project creation or, with the correct FW loaded, (from June 2023, predating ESU) by CV by end users:

Filter types

1.Low pass

2.High pass

3.Band pass

4.Low Shelf

5.High Shelf

6.Notch

7.Peak

 

Parameters 

Each filter has the following parameters:

A.Cut off frequency 

B.Quality factor 

Where relevant 

C.Gain

 

These sound quality adjusting features give much more control over tuning output to accurately match speaker capabilities in situ than overall Treble and Bass adjustment can achieve.

 

Paul 

Thanks for the useful information. I assume this is a facility for the sound file creators, rather than customers? Or am I wrong, in that  CVs are adjustable according to individual taste?

[pauliebanger]

1 hour ago, zr2498 said:

Thanks for the useful information. I assume this is a facility for the sound file creators, rather than customers? Or am I wrong, in that  CVs are adjustable according to individual taste?

It would only be useful for sound project creators if they knew the model type, specs, speaker type and how deployed and be able to test the outcomes in an actual model. Since the majority of sound providers' projects are for aftermarket sound fitting, where hardware and physical speaker deployment/enclosure is unknown, it would be impossible to know in advance which changes to make.

If creating a custom project for rtr sound fitted, as with SLW Class 25 for example, the above conditions would apply, but knowing these parameters at the design stage and having access to pre- production models for real world testing, I made these adjustments (and more) in my sound editing suite, where I am able to modify individual sound samples if necessary.

The best use of DSP effects is, therefore, for end users to make global changes to suit their own preferences or maybe to differentiate between multiple models of the same type.

In view of this, the facility is available to anyone to change any sound project existing on ZIMO MS decoders.

This can be done via CV changes on a DCC controller but using ZCS on a PC would be more convenient for most users. I would use my MXULF for this but maybe other devices can achieve the required connection.

Because there are a large (and increasing) number of variables a large number of CVs are required. These DSP CVs, and others, are indexed using the CVs 31 and 32 as specified by NMRA.

 

Paul 

Edited 17 hours ago by pauliebanger
Completed an unfinished sentence.

[pauliebanger]

Oh dear, the reason given for my earlier edit sounds like I've just been 'recalled'. Lol

 

I meant that I added some missing words!