Class 31, by Accurascale - It's time 2 Brush Up!

[Steadfast]

1 hour ago, McC said:

 

No blue stars on our ones, as per the prototype. 

We generally recommend and encourage comparison to the prototype, rather than other models :) 

Have done. 

There's very visible handrails missing off the roof that I hoped was a feature of the pre prods and fixed for production but sadly not it seems, noticeable especially when we view our models from the roof and hard to fix on non weathered models.

 

I've also still yet to find a 31 with those holes in the bogies. 

 

Jo

 

 

[McC]

27 minutes ago, Kirby Uncoupler said:

Fran has frowned on my forthright comment, although i'd say an honest opinion is worth far more, than some bottom-licking tame review, as seen elsewhere. I'll reserve further judgement, until I have the Accura 31 in my hands, my eyes may be deceived by the angle or any photo distortion (?), it's not a major issue, and will not stop me buying either product. Thanks for the scan Fran. 

                                                      Cheers, Brian.

 

We enthusiastically encourage and listen to all critique, most especially when backed up evidentially, rather than 'feelings' and 'conjecture'. We've also repeatedly proven that when we get things wrong, we'll fix it, and if we can improve things, we will. The manufactured models are, objectively, 100% accurately rendered in shape and detail, to the limits of the processes involved. The shape is correct, I trust your eyes will be reassured by one in the plastic (and metal!). 

Edited October 9 by McC

[Kirby Uncoupler]

I used to work next door to King's Cross station, and well remember popping over to the concourse in the late 1970s,  to be confronted by a row of five Class 31s at the buffer-stops, remarkably each one was in a different shade of BR Rail Blue.

     Don't worry too much about shades of colour on models, unless you want everything -and-span ex-works. The blue shade will darken, as the sun burns out any yellow pigment in the colour, and as for the yellow fronts, that was a constant battle with the sunlight, and had to be frequently over-painted. This could explain why coupling code stars were sometimes obscured or missing? As mentioned above, the yellow paint spec was beefed up in the mid-80s, to a more orangey shade, which lasted slightly longer, but still eventually faded back to the pre- 80s weaker colour. 

    I'm pleased to find that the expression "bottom-licking" gets through the RMweb naughty words filter!😀

                                                                              Cheers, Brian.

     

[Accurascale Fran]

31 minutes ago, dj_crisp said:

 

Cool - looking at it dead on the curve looks flat which your 3d scan shows. I still think it looks a bit flat at the base of the headcode box but each view to their own eh and maybe i just need to see it in person one day ;)

 

 

 

Hi Will,

 

We have the surplus blue locos going on sale tomorrow most likely, so feel free to pick one up and have a look then! I'm sure you're very interested in 31s and picking one up given your feedback you have provided above. 

 

25 minutes ago, Kirby Uncoupler said:

Fran has frowned on my forthright comment, although i'd say an honest opinion is worth far more, than some bottom-licking tame review, as seen elsewhere. I'll reserve further judgement, until I have the Accura 31 in my hands, my eyes may be deceived by the angle or any photo distortion (?), it's not a major issue, and will not stop me buying either product. Thanks for the scan Fran. 

                                                      Cheers, Brian.

 

Hi Brian,

 

Not frowning at all. I just never understand "I feel this is wrong, or I think that isn't right" without evidence to back it up. We scan, survey, photo and pour over prototypes for months, or even years, to try our best to get it right in miniature. Can mistakes be made? Of course, we are all only human, and those who proclaim to be absolutely perfect can drop some absolute clangers, as we have seen elsewhere in recent months. We have made the odd one too along the way. However, for feedback to be constructive it needs to be backed up by evidence, otherwise it is guesswork at best. I was merely showing I can counter your point with evidence to suggest otherwise so the masses reading can make informed decisions. 

 

Overall I do hope you plump for one of our 31s and enjoy it when you get it.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

[Accurascale Fran]

12 minutes ago, Steadfast said:

Have done. 

There's very visible handrails missing off the roof that I hoped was a feature of the pre prods and fixed for production but sadly not it seems, noticeable especially when we view our models from the roof and hard to fix on non weathered models.

 

I've also still yet to find a 31 with those holes in the bogies. 

 

Jo

 

 

 

Hi Jo,

 

The handrails on the roof have been missed off the blue locos and is on us. It's an error that has been corrected on the green models going forwards.

 

I have looked back on the thread but have not noticed you pointing it out in pre-production stage. Did you email us the observation instead?

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

[philg]

52 minutes ago, Kirby Uncoupler said:

Fran has frowned on my forthright comment, although i'd say an honest opinion is worth far more, than some bottom-licking tame review, as seen elsewhere. I'll reserve further judgement, until I have the Accura 31 in my hands, my eyes may be deceived by the angle or any photo distortion (?), it's not a major issue, and will not stop me buying either product. Thanks for the scan Fran. 

                                                      Cheers, Brian.

Couldn’t believe I read in one magazine that “comparisons are not part of our reviews. We leave it to the purchaser to decide what’s ‘best’” - or words to that effect

 

Our model media really are the ones with access to all the pertinent info and, inhibit, should absolutely be helping us decide where to invest 

[Accurascale Fran]

1 minute ago, philg said:

Couldn’t believe I read in one magazine that “comparisons are not part of our reviews. We leave it to the purchaser to decide what’s ‘best’” - or words to that effect

 

Our model media really are the ones with access to all the pertinent info and, inhibit, should absolutely be helping us decide where to invest 

 

Hi Phil,

 

I wont mention names but I know of one manufacturer who is effectively holding magazines to ransom regarding advertising spending being cut if there are unfavourable reviews published about its products, threatening not to send further samples in for review etc. 

 

I guess this sabre rattling works when publishing is such a tight margin business these days.

 

Oh, and for the record; No. It is not us!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

[Kirby Uncoupler]

Just to confirm, I only have Bachy examples so far to hand, my Accura headcode box comment was based on the head-on close-up pic, provided on a page or two back, especially the "unexpanded" image version on repeat quotations, which highlighted the top half of the cabs.  I bet the domino white dots varied in spacing too. Out of over 200 Class 31s with 400plus headcode boxes (i.e. not the Skinheads), there's bound to be some variation creeping in? For example, some  BR DMUs had different shape headcode boxes, even within the same class, like Class 117, some were curved-top, some were flat-top, so maybe not all loco roof-boxes were the same? I like to keep an open mind.

                                                                             Cheers, Brian.

                                                          

[Mark]

1 minute ago, Kirby Uncoupler said:

Just to confirm, I only have Bachy examples so far to hand, my Accura headcode box comment was based on the head-on close-up pic, provided on a page or two back, especially the "unexpanded" image version on repeat quotations, which highlighted the top half of the cabs.  I bet the domino white dots varied in spacing too. Out of over 200 Class 31s with 400plus headcode boxes (i.e. not the Skinheads), there's bound to be some variation creeping in? For example, some  BR DMUs had different shape headcode boxes, even within the same class, like Class 117, some were curved-top, some were flat-top, so maybe not all loco roof-boxes were the same? I like to keep an open mind.

                                                                             Cheers, Brian.

                                                          

Correct me if I am wrong but I have never seen a 117 with a heavily curved head code box. The class 118’s which look identical otherwise had curved headcode boxes. 117’s were manufactured by Pressed Steel and the 118’s were Birmingham RCW.

[Wayne 56089]

My order page for 31432 still says in transit, is this normal? 

[McC]

6 minutes ago, Wayne 56089 said:

My order page for 31432 still says in transit, is this normal? 

Drop support a line and they can assist 

[Kirby Uncoupler]

6 minutes ago, Mark said:

Correct me if I am wrong but I have never seen a 117 with a heavily curved head code box. The class 118’s which look identical otherwise had curved headcode boxes. 117’s were manufactured by Pressed Steel and the 118’s were Birmingham RCW.

You are quite right about the two separate DMU classes, but Class 117 had both patterns. The same might also apply to Class 127, but we are now wildly off-topic, so any further comment should be in a separate thread elsewhere.

                                                                              Cheers, Brian.

[dj_crisp]

14 minutes ago, Mark said:

Correct me if I am wrong but I have never seen a 117 with a heavily curved head code box. The class 118’s which look identical otherwise had curved headcode boxes. 117’s were manufactured by Pressed Steel and the 118’s were Birmingham RCW.

 

The first 3 117 sets (possibly first 4 but think there might only be one power car) had the same headcode curve as the 118.

 

My comment on the 31 is more around the rainstrip curve at the base of the headcode box  which would imply the windscreens could be too flat.... I'll see in person to check

Edited October 9 by dj_crisp

[dj_crisp]

21 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi Phil,

 

I wont mention names but I know of one manufacturer who is effectively holding magazines to ransom regarding advertising spending being cut if there are unfavourable reviews published about its products, threatening not to send further samples in for review etc. 

 

I guess this sabre rattling works when publishing is such a tight margin business these days.

 

Oh, and for the record; No. It is not us!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

 

If you can survive rmweb you can survive any magazine review ;)

[Steadfast]

53 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi Jo,

 

The handrails on the roof have been missed off the blue locos and is on us. It's an error that has been corrected on the green models going forwards.

 

I have looked back on the thread but have not noticed you pointing it out in pre-production stage. Did you email us the observation instead?

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

Thanks for the reply Fran.

 

No, I hadn't noticed before I mentioned it yesterday, as I'm an N scale modeller (with an overflow of little baby Bachy 31s). As I mentioned in my initial post, I said I hoped these faults could be fixed for production, as I had assumed the photos to date were of pre prod models as deliveries were just beginning.

 

Forgive me for not poring over photos of the test samples since announcement. On looking back over the test shot pictures, it was difficult to see much detail as the images are quite low resolution so not much use for critiquing, and this one from your website seems to have lost an entire wheel to Photoshop!

 

Whilst I like to think I have an eye for detail, there's no chance of spotting the holes at that resolution, even if I had seen the pictures.

 

This thread was regularly at the top of my unread threads so I thought I'd take a peak since I have a soft spot for Peds, seeing if any of the liveries suited my needs for the cabinet of shiny things. That's when I noticed the holes and handrails, because until then I hadn't given the models much more than a cursory glance.

 

I didn't notice them no, because I wasn't looking at the thread. This thread isn't short of viewers though, so maybe someone else did but chose not to say, or did and the comment got lost in the pages and pages of "is it here yet" wibble. 

 

Edited 16.50 to add:

 

Additionally, I'm a great believer in the give and take of great community resources like we have in RMweb, so I will stick my head above the parapet and make comments in hope of achieving better models, even if they're not a scale I model in but feel I can assist.

 

The accusatory tone, suggesting I didn't notice soon enough really doesn't sit well: once I noticed I told you.

 

Jo

Edited October 9 by Steadfast

[alastairb]

54 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi Will,

 

We have the surplus blue locos going on sale tomorrow most likely, so feel free to pick one up and have a look then! I'm sure you're very interested in 31s and picking one up given your feedback you have provided above. 

 

 

Hi Brian,

 

Not frowning at all. I just never understand "I feel this is wrong, or I think that isn't right" without evidence to back it up. We scan, survey, photo and pour over prototypes for months, or even years, to try our best to get it right in miniature. Can mistakes be made? Of course, we are all only human, and those who proclaim to be absolutely perfect can drop some absolute clangers, as we have seen elsewhere in recent months. We have made the odd one too along the way. However, for feedback to be constructive it needs to be backed up by evidence, otherwise it is guesswork at best. I was merely showing I can counter your point with evidence to suggest otherwise so the masses reading can make informed decisions. 

 

Overall I do hope you plump for one of our 31s and enjoy it when you get it.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

I'm always amazed how posters can critique the shape of a model, that was produced from a laser scan, based on their casual observation of the prototype, maybe many years ago. Moreover the prototypes were very much handbuilt and inevitably vary in shape and precise dimensions.

 

A couple of pages ago we had contributors pronouncing on the relative dimensional accuracy of Accurascale and Bachmann Class 31s. This was based on a wide angle mobile phone photo which was clearly taken at an oblique angle and a non central position relative to the 2 loco cabs.

Edited October 9 by alastairb

[philg]

35 minutes ago, Accurascale Fran said:

 

Hi Phil,

 

I wont mention names but I know of one manufacturer who is effectively holding magazines to ransom regarding advertising spending being cut if there are unfavourable reviews published about its products, threatening not to send further samples in for review etc. 

 

I guess this sabre rattling works when publishing is such a tight margin business these days.

 

Oh, and for the record; No. It is not us!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran 

That I can believe. When I was writing for Model Rail I criticised one vendors cavalier approach to DCC. They were NOT happy, but MR did stand behind my comments

[Darius43]

Received my two blue Class 31s today* - photos to follow - and have ordered some crews.

 

Really happy with them despite the perceived errors reported in this thread - real or imagined.

 

Well done Accurascale!!!

 

Cheers

 

Darius
 

* Plus a load of blue Mk1 suburbans.

[Kirby Uncoupler]

23 hours ago, aureol40012 said:

Playing “spot the difference”.

Hmmm?       BK

[rob D2]

I miss “ Steve jones “ electric nose, reviews , they were hilarious !

 

Or go the other way with the ultra serious “ blood on their hands “, manner in which rail express used to do it !

 

Anything is better than RM “ should improve with running in “

[dj_crisp]

35 minutes ago, alastairb said:

I'm always amazed how posters can critique the shape of a model, that was produced from a laser scan, based on their casual observation of the prototype, maybe many years ago. Moreover the prototypes were very much handbuilt and inevitably vary in shape and precise dimensions.

 

A couple of pages ago we had contributors pronouncing on the relative dimensional accuracy of Accurascale and Bachmann Class 31s. This was based on a wide angle mobile phone photo which was clearly taken at an oblique angle and a non central position relative to the 2 loco cabs.

 

Thankfully I can casually browse flickr and thanks to great uploaders such as Brian Daniels I can see interesting angles as well as the classic 3/4 view

 

 

 

It's then not hard to see straight lines Vs curves taking in account perspective..... say the headcode base Vs the rainstrip

 

Considering both models were produced by 3d scans they're hardly the same.

Edited October 9 by dj_crisp

[Accurascale Fran]

1 hour ago, Steadfast said:

Thanks for the reply Fran.

 

No, I hadn't noticed before I mentioned it yesterday, as I'm an N scale modeller (with an overflow of little baby Bachy 31s). As I mentioned in my initial post, I said I hoped these faults could be fixed for production, as I had assumed the photos to date were of pre prod models as deliveries were just beginning.

 

Forgive me for not poring over photos of the test samples since announcement. On looking back over the test shot pictures, it was difficult to see much detail as the images are quite low resolution so not much use for critiquing, and this one from your website seems to have lost an entire wheel to Photoshop!

 

Whilst I like to think I have an eye for detail, there's no chance of spotting the holes at that resolution, even if I had seen the pictures.

 

This thread was regularly at the top of my unread threads so I thought I'd take a peak since I have a soft spot for Peds, seeing if any of the liveries suited my needs for the cabinet of shiny things. That's when I noticed the holes and handrails, because until then I hadn't given the models much more than a cursory glance.

 

I didn't notice them no, because I wasn't looking at the thread. This thread isn't short of viewers though, so maybe someone else did but chose not to say, or did and the comment got lost in the pages and pages of "is it here yet" wibble. 

 

Edited 16.50 to add:

 

Additionally, I'm a great believer in the give and take of great community resources like we have in RMweb, so I will stick my head above the parapet and make comments in hope of achieving better models, even if they're not a scale I model in but feel I can assist.

 

The accusatory tone, suggesting I didn't notice soon enough really doesn't sit well: once I noticed I told you.

 

Jo

Hi Jo,

 

I’m sorry you feel that my tone was accusatory, it certainly wasn’t meant to be. Your language in the previous post suggested that you had noted it at preproduction stage, hence me asking if you provided feedback as we would’ve kicked ourselves if we missed it. 
 

It’s great that we have 31 aficionados like you to note this, it’s just a pity it wasn’t earlier in the process. While the website can smash images flat, we did provide clear, high resolution images on here, social media and in the magazines, not to mention have them present on our stand at shows. As a 31 fan I’m just a bit surprised you missed all that over the last two years, that’s all. We must up the amps on our publicity machine so!

 

We are investigating why the holes appeared on the bogies and will report back. You can rest assured though that they’re at least in the correct position 😉

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

Edited October 9 by Accurascale Fran

[spamcan61]

14 minutes ago, rob D2 said:

 

Anything is better than RM “ should improve with running in “

I'd say RM point out more detail errors in reviews than anyone else these days, without making them sound like the end of the world as we  know it, and most OO locos at least are given a fairly consistent haulage test i.e how many Pullmans round their big roundy roundy. Hornby magazine are the nearest to the old style RM reviews these days IMHO.

[Accurascale Fran]

40 minutes ago, dj_crisp said:

 

Thankfully I can casually browse flickr and thanks to great uploaders such as Brian Daniels I can see interesting angles as well as the classic 3/4 view

 

 

 

It's then not hard to see straight lines Vs curves taking in account perspective..... say the headcode base Vs the rainstrip

 

Considering both models were produced by 3d scans they're hardly the same.

Hi Will,

 

It’s always worth doing the research on the subject matter too. For instance, the image you posted above I believe is of 31101, which was originally built as Toffee Apple D5518, and was later rebuilt with the roof mounted headcode box after a big smash.

 

We would treat any data from that locomotive with extreme caution. The owners kindly allowed Gareth to survey it as part of our development and it is non standard in a number of ways!

 

Also, it is my understanding (and I have two excellent sources for this) that Bachmann did not laser scan a 31 for their model.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

Edited October 9 by Accurascale Fran

[Kirby Uncoupler]

I'm sure many contributors have been consulting their copies of "Power Of The 31s" (OPC 1984), some may have noticed subtle differences in the headcode box shapes and position? May I direct interested parties to compare  consecutive plates 139 and 140 of consecutive (renumbered) locos 31 419 and 31 420, the headcode boxes are clearly different. That on 419 sits tightly above the windscreen top, whereas that on 420 has a two or three inch gap between the headcode box and the windscreen top. Sorry, I can't reproduce this image here due to copyright, but other photos in the book seem to suggest the same.

      So are we looking at two headcode box styles, and did Accy and Baccy scan two different locos? It could be that the box shape is correct  in both cases? Could members please confirm the photo images?

                                                                                       Cheers, Brian.