Jump to content
 

Heljan 'OO' DP2


Mike at C&M

Recommended Posts

Gah! It's annoying because the underpinnings and ride height are certainly superior to Bachmanns attempt.

Yes but you can adapt the Bachmann offering to get a similar ride height.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Max Stafford

Curve limitations aside, the model really does have a beautiful 'sit', capturing that impression of weight and mass. While I accept it's not everybody's cup of tea, there remain other paths to glory as Jon and Sean ably demonstrate, but I think I'll be quite happy with this one personally!

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The ability to negotiate a tight curve will also be dependent on how level the track is.

Quite right----particularly over baseboard joins.I have a FIA TRAINS 10000 which sits beautifully on the track at prototypical height but which is occasionally temperamental over a 3rd radius curve on a join. I will follow this thread with interest. £100+ is a lot to ask for running the risk of it happening with the DP2. Thanks also to Gareth for raising the issue.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Max Stafford

What radius in inches is 3rd radius? 36?

 

Dave.

 

What radius in inches is 3rd radius? 36?

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if already mentioned, but comparing with prototype pics, those five side engine room windows look too low for me, which throws out "the look" of the bodyside and will be very difficult to rectify. I don't mind the odd fault, but added to the cabs, the shape of the hooters and the body ripples, i'm not keen. Shame really because the bogies and underframe look great.

Cheers, Brian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Max Stafford

Not really paid close attention yet to the 'body ripples', are they more pronounced that the ripples would be on a full size loco?

After all, a locomotive body is basically a skin on a frame and won't generally be perfectly smooth and flat.

A couple of years ago somebody on this forum went out of his way to produce bodyside rippling on a Class 27. Very convincing it looked!

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if already mentioned, but comparing with prototype pics, those five side engine room windows look too low for me, which throws out "the look" of the bodyside and will be very difficult to rectify. I don't mind the odd fault, but added to the cabs, the shape of the hooters and the body ripples, i'm not keen. Shame really because the bogies and underframe look great.

Cheers, Brian.

 

Brian.

 

I've just run a ruler along 10000's side picture and all appears correct to me on the bodyside windows. They were positioned with the top frame of the bodyside window at the same level as the lower frame of the cab window. A fact I discovered after my first DP2 conversion!

 

Not really paid close attention yet to the 'body ripples', are they more pronounced that the ripples would be on a full size loco?

After all, a locomotive body is basically a skin on a frame and won't generally be perfectly smooth and flat.

A couple of years ago somebody on this forum went out of his way to produce bodyside rippling on a Class 27. Very convincing it looked!

 

Dave.

 

Dave.

 

Only my personal opinion but I thought they were a little too rippled for my liking. Others may disagree, but I did think it may look prototypical when I first noticed, but ultimately, decided it looked a bit too rough - only my opinion of course.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Max Stafford

In their latter days, some of the 26s had bodysides that would have put one of those old copper topped tables you used to see in pubs to shame - I doubt there was one square yard of smooth plating on the sides of some! ;-)

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Brian.

 

I've just run a ruler along 10000's side picture and all appears correct to me on the bodyside windows. They were positioned with the top frame of the bodyside window at the same level as the lower frame of the cab window. A fact I discovered after my first DP2 conversion!

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

 

Sorry Sean, i disagree. The top of the engine room window frame should line up with the upper edge of the driver's window frame, they should overlap. Splitting hairs maybe, but the Heljan has too much bodyside above the engine room windows, they are too low from the cantrail grilles. Overall this model has the correct size and shape, the nose is not too bad and the cab windows i could alter, but i can't move those side windows up without carving the thing up.

 

Dave is quite right about body ripples on various prototypes, notably the Peaks and Class 25s where the framework could be seen showing through, but the point is they were rippled all over, not just in the odd place. It would be very difficult to achieve this effect. I'll have to search for this clever conversion to see how it's done!

 

Cheers, Brian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies Brian.

 

That's what I meant when I was talking about the frames I just didn't go into any depth. Effectively, what you're saying, (and what I'm agreeing with), is the chrome parts of both frames align, top of lower cab windowframe with top of engine room frame and bottom of lower cab window frame with bottom of engine room frame? I hope so, because thats how I've lined them up on my DP2.....

 

Looking at the Hattons pictures, you can clearly see the creasing in photo 6. It's especially visible below the main radiator vent.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looking at the Hattons pictures, you can clearly see the creasing in photo 6. It's especially visible below the main radiator vent.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

 

Yes, i see what you mean, ripples in more than one place. On the other hand, perhaps we should be more grateful for, what is so far, the best commercial model of DP2 to date? Are we being hyper-critical of something that certainly looks like the DP2? As far as we know ( so far! ), the basic bodyshell is the correct size and shape, maybe us accuracy zealots should start carving the cabs, etc. or convert a Bachmann Deltic, if it bothers us that much. Some say the Deltic noses are wrong, so where do we get off?

 

Look at the Heljan 86, that certainly looks like an AL6 ( old-fashioned me ), but we all know that the body dimensions are distorted. I suppose you either love 'em or hate 'em, even at £49! BK

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Are we being hyper-critical of something that certainly looks like the DP2? As far as we know ( so far! ), the basic bodyshell is the correct size and shape, maybe us accuracy zealots should start carving the cabs, etc. or convert a Bachmann Deltic, if it bothers us that much. Some say the Deltic noses are wrong, so where do we get off?

 

Look at the Heljan 86, that certainly looks like an AL6 ( old-fashioned me ), but we all know that the body dimensions are distorted. I suppose you either love 'em or hate 'em, even at £49! BK

 

Some of us jusrt have a different view, each to his own. I don't like what I've seen so far of DP2 and won't be buying one. As far as the 86/AL6 goes, while DP2 looks like DP2 and has detail issues, the 86 doesn't even look like an 86 to me...

 

Martin

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes, i see what you mean, ripples in more than one place. On the other hand, perhaps we should be more grateful for, what is so far, the best commercial model of DP2 to date? Are we being hyper-critical of something that certainly looks like the DP2? As far as we know ( so far! ), the basic bodyshell is the correct size and shape, maybe us accuracy zealots should start carving the cabs, etc. or convert a Bachmann Deltic, if it bothers us that much. Some say the Deltic noses are wrong, so where do we get off?

 

Look at the Heljan 86, that certainly looks like an AL6 ( old-fashioned me ), but we all know that the body dimensions are distorted. I suppose you either love 'em or hate 'em, even at £49! BK

 

I'd tend to agree Brian.

 

Whilst I've made my views known, it is the only RTR DP2 available and I can see from the replys that many would rather have this than nothing and I can't argue with that.

 

Cheers.

 

Sean.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a "rivet" counter, so very happy with mine. I think one has to think about the tooling investment. At a production run of 4000, there is a limit to the investment. If it was a bigger run, the small detail issues could have been improved. Pluses are the body/bogie relationship, minus are some small crude moulding issues with the body. But over all it captures the look of DP2 well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a "rivet" counter, so very happy with mine. I think one has to think about the tooling investment. At a production run of 4000, there is a limit to the investment. If it was a bigger run, the small detail issues could have been improved.

 

Odd then isn't it, that the 'Kestrel' and 'Lion' releases - also one off prototypes, with similar production runs, presumably subject to similar investment, and nothing surviving to research - are nowhere near as compromised? (and TBPH, I dont think the cab shape error comes under 'rivet counting'). You could actually argue that DP2 should have been more correct than the other two, given that it has so much in common with both Deltics and 50s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd then isn't it, that the 'Kestrel' and 'Lion' releases - also one off prototypes, with similar production runs, presumably subject to similar investment, and nothing surviving to research - are nowhere near as compromised? (and TBPH, I dont think the cab shape error comes under 'rivet counting'). You could actually argue that DP2 should have been more correct than the other two, given that it has so much in common with both Deltics and 50s.

 

Sorry I didn't mean "Rivet counter" to be derogatory. I'm not convinced about my Kestrel's face, though Lion is a good effort. I was Just trying to say that there cant be much return on investment with revenue generated (and I'm guessing here) approx £140,000, {4000 X cost price £65 net China £30?) and tooling at £70,000? (some cost for locos at Margate were this in the 1980s) leaves a project profit of £70,000. Less transport, marketing, distribution, etc etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd then isn't it, that the 'Kestrel' and 'Lion' releases - also one off prototypes, with similar production runs, presumably subject to similar investment, and nothing surviving to research - are nowhere near as compromised?

 

Dunno about that Ian. I keep looking at the buffer shank cowls on my Kestrel and thinking they look particularly malnourished.

 

But this aint the time or the place... :)

 

Porcy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...