Heljan 'OO' DP2

[Pugsley]

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.

It normally costs just as much to make something wrongly, as it does correctly. From a reputation point of view, I would have thought that if there were not enough margin in a job to do it correctly, a company would be better off leaving it, rather than doing a cheap half-arsed job.

 

Edit - Everyone makes mistakes, I've just wasted several modelling hours redesigning some wagon doors after making a simple mistake that I could have picked up earlier if I'd studied photographs a bit closer. however, I'm just a lone modeller, a bigger company should have processes in place to capture this kind of thing before it makes it anywhere near the tooling stage.

 

I agree with what has been said before though, it does sit very nicely on its bogies.

[antrobuscp]

Has anyone else had trouble getting them to go around corners.

 

I've tried about 6 so far and none will negotiate a 3rd radius curve without derailing.

 

The NEM pocket is catching on the bufferbeam, and innermost axles are fouling the body, which, whilst mounted prototypically, is not suitably mounted for model railways.

 

I have come up with a solution, but I want to talk to Howes first before publishing. I shouldn't have to be chopping and changing a £117 RTR model to make it go around bends...

 

I took delivery of mine today and, whilst it runs quite happily on most of my layout, it is giving trouble over certain points - The loco is much less tolerant of changes in level than almost any other loco I possess. After checking the loco through a ladder of Peco code 100 small and medium radius turnouts, the bogie dropped into one of the small radius turnouts, so I checked the back to back and noticed that the wheels are to a much narrower profile than usual - which I take to be the cause. I am a bit reluctant to start hacking the loco about until I see what conclusions others come to. The radii of my layout curves does not, of itself appear to be the problem, rather the catching of the coupling pocket on the buffer beam and also track variations causing the catching of the bogie on the small plastic extention on the lower body side - I'm not sure of the technical description of what it represents.

 

I'll be interested to see the suggested modifications. I can accept the body compromises/faults, but only if it can be a reliable traction unit.

 

Colin

[vac_basher]

I think you will find that it ain't appearances that are the main problem here. The model has to perform properly.There has been one significant posting on this already.

 

To me it seems the problem is some people (not you Mr Hargrave, just quoting you're post to bring what I'm saying into context) want a model that is 100% accurate, yet they expect it to run on unprototypical gauge track and negotiate unprototypically tight curves.....

If Heljan had of designed it to go around tight curves they would have probably had to produce it with the body higher off the chassis, or (shock!) smaller wheels. I guess they try to keep us modellers happy, but at the end of the day any way they do it they will never be able to satisfie each and every one of us. Unfortunatly there's always going to be some of us who would have wanted it the other way.

To my eyes Heljan's DP2 looks unmistakenly like DP2. So there are a couple of minor issues with it (as there are with all models, including Heljan's own Lion and Kestrel which seem to recieve allot of praise (chunky bogies spoil them for me, but did that stop me buying them? I really can't think of one model I've ever bought that has been faultless!) and if it had a price tag of say £500 then it would have been a diffrent story, but at just over £100 notes, I can live with such discrepancies.

I really think that in the past decade or so we've really been spoilt and with the ever increasing realism that is being put into these relativly reccent models the levels of our expectations are increasing with each new release. For God's sake, our fathers and grandfathers played with tinplate trains that looks nothing like what they supposedly were, yet didn't have such heated debates about the realism of their toys. In more reccent times, say at the turn of the millenium for example, a "really good" model (ok, a few better than others, but the vast majority were c**p) was a crudley detailed Lima 47 or a Lima 50 running on Class 37 bogies!

For those that are unhappy with what the manufactors are offering perhaps a change of scale would be the ideal solution, as it has been well documented in the past that OO guage will always be a compromise.

[Michael Delamar]

the only Heljan loco I own is the Co-Bo which is absolutley superb, dont think there is any mould marks on it or anything, the discussion thread on it was quite short so I take it is regarded as an accurate model.

 

another favourite is the Hymek although I dont own one of them personally.

so they can produce some really nice models.

[pete55]

Hello,

Purchased mine this afternoon......and its now EM gauge, (that'll amuse Pennine M.C!) and it seems to go round fairly sharp corners ok.....by that I mean 3 foot radius at one point on my trainset.

I simply pulled the Heljan wheels out.....no clearance issues with the body with the bogie sideframes in place either. So Heljan must have designed in plenty of wheel clearance for 00......

However, I removed the coupling pockets, and the brake mouldings too....re fitting them did cause some resistance, so they need a bit more thinking about.

 

Yes, it has faults as a model, but as a friend would say, its better than the DP2 we hadn't got!

[Ian Hargrave]

Referring to Vac Basher's posting above,I have to say that I,personally can tolerate the errors in the body shell that have been the source of many postings on this topic. However,what I am NOT prepared to tolerate is a model that ,according to a well-respected member of our august band of brothers who is also a retailer who has an exhibition layout on his premises is , a £100+ model which cannot negotiate 3rd---not toytown---radius curves. According to another posting,it seems to come adrift over baseboard joins.

Let's be quite clear on this,other manufacturers and retailers-----Dapol & Kernow are prime examples of this----test their models thoroughly and exhaustively before releasing them on the market for us to enjoy. It appears that Heljan are the proverbial girl with a curl---when they are good--witness the Railbus & Baby Deltic they are very,very good. When they are bad,they are horrid. Remember the Clayton motors and the Class 86? I get a strong impression that theDP2 was not sufficiently tested before market release. Something to do with a stretched chain of factory to Denmark to UK,no doubt.

I like this model. I want to buy one and see it running on my layout at the front of a rake of Mark 1's or Pullmans. What I do NOT want to witness is it dragging them off the track.I sincerely hope a solution can be found

[S.A.C Martin]

the only Heljan loco I own is the Co-Bo which is absolutley superb, dont think there is any mould marks on it or anything, the discussion thread on it was quite short so I take it is regarded as an accurate model.

 

another favourite is the Hymek although I dont own one of them personally.

so they can produce some really nice models.

 

Personally speaking, as someone who owns the superb two tone green Falcon from their first release (my father owns the other two from that batch) and having Kestrel and Lion - I think it's clear Heljan can and have produced some stonking models in the past. I take the point regarding Falcon's cab perhaps needing a slight further slant forward, or Kestrel's buffer shanks not being entirely perfect, but as RTR models they have run perfectly from day one and look the part.

 

DP2 I am reserving full judgment on until I see it in the flesh, however taking on board of the commentary for a fully informed view, I'm not sure if it is "as good" a representation of DP2 as Kestrel is a "good" representation of Kestrel. But as I say, once I've seen it in the flesh I can make a fully informed judgment for myself.

 

Saying that, I keep looking at the bogie to bodyshell arrangement and being drawn to it on that basis...

[BrushVeteran]

Referring to Vac Basher's posting above,I have to say that I,personally can tolerate the errors in the body shell that have been the source of many postings on this topic. However,what I am NOT prepared to tolerate is a model that ,according to a well-respected member of our august band of brothers who is also a retailer who has an exhibition layout on his premises is , a £100+ model which cannot negotiate 3rd---not toytown---radius curves. According to another posting,it seems to come adrift over baseboard joins.

Let's be quite clear on this,other manufacturers and retailers-----Dapol & Kernow are prime examples of this----test their models thoroughly and exhaustively before releasing them on the market for us to enjoy. It appears that Heljan are the proverbial girl with a curl---when they are good--witness the Railbus & Baby Deltic they are very,very good. When they are bad,they are horrid. Remember the Clayton motors and the Class 86? I get a strong impression that theDP2 was not sufficiently tested before market release. Something to do with a stretched chain of factory to Denmark to UK,no doubt.

I like this model. I want to buy one and see it running on my layout at the front of a rake of Mark 1's or Pullmans. What I do NOT want to witness is it dragging them off the track.I sincerely hope a solution can be found

As one that was involved with the testing of the first FPS samples of DP2 I feel it prudent to mention that it was tested thoroughly over here in the UK. It was in fact given a 2 hour test on a collegues layout whos track laying (and I'm sure he won't mind me mentioning it) is not perfect and incorporates 2ft radius curves. Testing was quite thorough and at no time did the locomotive derail (the 13 coach train did!) The model was further tested in the shop on a circle of track (toytown!)laid on the floor and after that on my layout at home where there are a few gradients and reverse curves through slips and complicated trackwork. At no time did the model derail or cause concern over faulty running.

As I have not yet seen any of the production samples I cannot really comment on the running qualities of what has recently been shipped over but as Gareth has mentioned it could be something to do with the NEM coupling box catching the pipework or something similar. Sometimes getting the factory to pre-fit the pipework is not entirely a good idea but we seem to be in a no-win situation with this!

As I say I am only really confirming a point here that this model was tested thoroughly over here in the UK and that if there is something wrong with anything that is purchased subsequently then it should be reported or returned to the retailer/dealer for feedback to Heljan. Once I have got my models I will give them a thorough testing on my own layout to see if there is a problem. I will not speculate any further but am happy to help with reporting the facts.

[reevesthecat]

Hi

received my 2 tone green version today, not conversant enough with the prototype to say if it is the right shape or not! After reading the running concerns on here set up a small test track using Hornby track which involved a second radius reverse curve and 2 R609 curves.

Only ran for about 10 mins through this set up and it didn't derail once so hopefully I have a good un! Overall pleased with the model.

mark

[brushman47544]

I've said this before elsewhere so apologies to anyone reading it again...

 

...but I have always thought with Heljan that perhaps the issue with the accuracy of a final model is down to the accuracy of the initial tooling used to produce the first test shots. If the accuracy is there from the start, then all will be well and good, but if not Heljan doesn't seem to pursue corrections through changes to the tooling in the way other manufacturers do. Think about how Heljan's pre-production models looked when we saw them (generally, not just DP2) and how little if anything seemed to change on the final version, despite numerous comments on here and elsewhere...

 

Perhaps it is down to the economics - the cost of correcting the tooling may in Heljan's view be greater than the returns they will get from selling the models uncorrected.

[northendboy]

Yum, this humble pie is delicious. To be fair it is a handsome model, albeit without the 'presence' of DP1, Lion etc, but at least they went round corners.

 

Yes, the bogie/bodyshell alignment is visibly excellent, but personally I would settle for a bit of a gap which may give it the ability to negotiate radius 3 corners, let alone radius 2. I think the DP1 has a similar clearance but seems to have no trouble in rounding bends. Bit of a let down really, I suppose I could fettle it, but lost a bit of enthusiasm.

 

Edit: It has been running round my track for about 10 minutes now, and it is now getting round 2nd radius curves, although making a bit of a fuss about it. I can only assume that the wheels are chewing into the appropriate bit of the bodyshell and making themselves comfortable. Outlook slightly brightening...

[S.A.C Martin]

Yum, this humble pie is delicious. To be fair it is a handsome model, albeit without the 'presence' of DP1, Lion etc, but at least they went round corners.

 

Yes, the bogie/bodyshell alignment is visibly excellent, but personally I would settle for a bit of a gap which may give it the ability to negotiate radius 3 corners, let alone radius 2. I think the DP1 has a similar clearance but seems to have no trouble in rounding bends. Bit of a let down really, I suppose I could fettle it, but lost a bit of enthusiasm.

 

Only one detailed analysis of the model has shown this tendency for DP2 to derail. Let's not tar the whole batch with the same brush until a few more are tested.

 

I respect Gareth (Trains4U)'s analysis, and his sample will behave as he has described; but we should bear in mind it is a single model out of a batch of thousands, and not necessarily at this point representative of a trend.

[Coach bogie]

Mine has just arrived. SUPERB. It does not fall off, runs well, quiet and will pull a house down. I do not care about 18 pages of whether the cab is right or not. The cab looks better than the only time I saw it, as a wreck at Crewe, on its way back to Newton Le Willows.

 

Thanks Heljan

 

Mike Wiltshire - Satisfied Customer

[Ian Hargrave]

Only one detailed analysis of the model has shown this tendency for DP2 to derail. Let's not tar the whole batch with the same brush until a few more are tested.

 

I respect Gareth (Trains4U)'s analysis, and his sample will behave as he has described; but we should bear in mind it is a single model out of a batch of thousands, and not necessarily at this point representative of a trend.

He actually tested 6 samples--not one. However,i'm glad to hear more encouraging noises.

[bigherb]

Mine arrived today, given it a session on the layout runs superbly through all my old code 100 universal streamline medium and large radius points and a couple of setrack points in the industrial sidings.

The coupling pocket is very close to the buffer beam it would probably struggle on a gradient transition without some of the buffer beam being filed away if you want it to go around corners with the tension lock coupling fitted you will have to snip off the pre fitted buffer beam pipes.

 

One picture with DP1

 

And yes the front does taper starting at the front of the cab door.

 

I'll give it a good look over later but apart from slight out of alignment buffer it's looking good.

[Jon020]

Oh gawd... yes I'm a nit picker! Judging from the really good photos posted by BigHerb (thanks btw) Cab door handrails affixed through the door - the door's gonna have trouble opening isn't it!

Jon

[pinzaboy]

Further to my earlier post about asking for info on getting the body off, I have now answered my own question.Maybe I've been a bit dim but it may be of use to others. Where the instructions say "To gain access to the inside of the body you will first need to remove the four screws underneath" it is true that you undo the four screws and the fuel tanks come off. This reveals a further FOUR screws which, in Bachmann fashion, actually hold the body on. So you need to undo EIGHT screws in total.I have not seen this method from Heljan before. The body then just lifts off.

 

I've now put a decoder in and given it a run. It is lovely and smooth and nice and quiet. As mentioned earler, there is almost no gap between the body and bogies and it looks superb. The body ripples I can live with, and when its running around you can't see them anyway. As for derailments - well yes I've had a couple on Peco points and I can't immediately see why this has occurred.

 

The headcode lighting/tail lights on this loco are a massive improvement on previous Heljan models - tail lights as bright as Bachmann locos and the headcode light is more of a yellow hue as you would expect to see rather than 'bright' white.

 

There is also a plastic bag which contains 2 headcode panels and a note which says " Alternative, corrected headcode font, included if you wish to change them". The ones on the loco are certainly the wrong font and the replacements are fine. I could tell you what they were but between the box and the computer keyboard they have fallen out of the plastic bag and are no where to be seen! Doubtless be in the Dyson by tomorrow if SWMBO gets her way.

 

Tim

[antrobuscp]

Further to my post #431, I have now taken a closer look at my DP2 as I have been puzzled as to why I've been having derailing problems when they do not appear to be widespread. I'm surprised I didn't notice earlier, but the red buffer beam inserts at both ends are offset from centre - by quite a margin on one end in particular - significantly restricting swinging of the bogie in one direction. Normally this would not necessarily cause a problem, but because they are "notched" to allow the bogie to swing by a restricted amount, the uncentered fitting makes quite a difference. I think this is the cause of the derailing on my loco, and I'd suggest anyone else having problems should check that the insert is centred.

 

The wheelsets are also occasionally dropping into Peco code 100 points where the stock? rail is thinned for the switch rail and possible a little easing out of the back to back may help. Because of the misfitted buffer beam - attempting to remove which might cause damage - I'm going to take the loco back and hopefully obtain a good replacement.

 

Colin

[bigherb]

It's not actually fitted wrong it is meant to be offset otherwise the screw coupling would be off centre, the lugs are offset so the pipes that fit in them are in the right place.

[antrobuscp]

It's not actually fitted wrong it is meant to be offset otherwise the screw coupling would be off centre, the lugs are offset so the pipes that fit in them are in the right place.

 

Thanks for that, I can see what you're saying, but the effect on running seems to be as I've stated. Clearly, the least that needs to be done is to remove the mounting on the "tighter" side. I'm not averse to making compromises for tighter curves, but this is the first diesel where I've had quite such a problem.

 

Colin

[bigherb]

It does say in the instruction leaflet that the pipes and their mounting extensions need to be removed for operation on small radius (438mm) curves and to trim the white pipes on the fuel tanks.

[antrobuscp]

I have read and appreciate that Bigherb, but others have made it clear that their locos are successfully traversing Peco code 100 small and medium radii turnouts without apparent major surgery. 438 mm is about 16", and my normal minimum radius is 24" - goods sidings and similar being exceptions where I would not expect to run DP2. I do normally have to trim pipework on the end where I fit couplings, but not on the "front" end. I haven't had much time to look at the loco, hence my "rush to judgement" last night. Clearly the sit of the loco is much better than many others, and this may well mean that I have to make more adjustments, but I am slightly puzzled as, watching the loco through turnouts and on curves, it is not obviously apparent that the extent of the sideways translation of the bogie is actually the problem, more its lack of "smoothness".

 

I am also aware that changes in track levels will affect a loco with tighter tolerances, and I do have a historical problem in some trackwork. The layout was originally laid on the Peco foam ballast a long time ago - it has collapsed over the years as is now known it does. For the most part I have managed the changes, refixing/relaying/adapting//ballasting, as necessary - the layout is overdue a substantial refurbishment. Over certain baseboard joins there remain some variations in level, but this is not where the loco is coming unstuck. It seems to be on basically level pointwork where there is a reverse curve or a tightening and then opening out of the radii.

 

Thinking/viewing time needed, I think.

 

Colin

[Porcy Mane]

Just thinking out loud.

Looking at big herbs pic in post 444 Bachmann’s DP1 seem to have much smaller diameter wheel sets.

Now as modelling compromises go, (I’m just talking diesels here.) to get a RTR model negotiating set-track curves, I’d far rather have a manufacturer make this concession rather than reduce the platform clearance tumblehome as Heljan seem to have done. It’s got to be far simpler for those wanting to achieve finer standards to fit replacement wheel sets than contemplating cosmetic surgery or the like?

If Heljan had gone the smaller wheels/more accurate body shape route, I've no doubt we’d still be debating the wisdom of that decision but I know which I’d have preferred.

After all don’t we spend the majority of time “looking down†on our models uppers rather than looking up at our models lowers?

 

As I said, “Just thinking out loud…â€

 

Porcy

[antrobuscp]

If Heljan had gone the smaller wheels/more accurate body shape route, I've no doubt we’d still be debating the wisdom of that decision but I know which I’d have preferred.

After all don’t we spend the majority of time “looking down†on our models uppers rather than looking up at our models lowers?

 

As I said, “Just thinking out loud…â€

 

Porcy

 

Hi Porcy,

 

The Heljan wheel "treads" are much narrower than their normal type. I compared them to a 47 last night.

 

Colin

[bigherb]

If you get down and watch these run at track level they really do look impressive, the Bachman 55 looks toy like in comparison.

 

The wheels are certainly very fine.

 

Close up of the buffer beam.