RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 18, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 18, 2017 Has anyone managed a review of these? Apparently Hornby Magazine has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted October 18, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 18, 2017 (edited) I'm sure I can't be the only one who is hoping Mike The Stationmaster's camera batteries are charged by now (post 470)? John Storey Right - not having had a chance to get out to the garage and pop it on the module I've done some of the dining room table with views exactly as it comes out of the packaging (which has a bit more padding than is usually the case). One in the (sprung) buffer was lying loose in the box and of course the various 'extra bits' are not fitted. The pics will enlarge if you click on them and many are much larger than life size of course. The individual detail is correct for 1362 at the time that livery and shed allocation was carried. The overall 'errors' are the humps over the wheels - which crept through the CAD checking probably in some respects because we were working very hard to get the detail right for each individual engine and the slightly misplaced cab footstep (which doesn't look out of place from some angles although quite why It finished up like that I really don't know). Despite what many would have you believe the checking of CADs is not a simple task and a lot of time and effort was put into doing it. The numberplate recess doesn't look bad on one side but isn't so good on the other - it was not specified by Kernow and never appeared on the CADs. Overall of course the appearance is far too clean for a latterday 1361 although they can rarely be seen in clean condition in 1930s photos either. 1. More or less head-on, correct shedplate for the running number (of course) 2. Rear three quarter view left hand side, complete with the home of the detached buffer on view 3. Front quarter quarter left hand side - you can pick out the errant 'splasher' which actually stand about 1mm proud of the running plate and is hardly visible unless you take a close-up pic and enlarge it plus using some lightening of the image to make sure it shows up. 4. Front three quarter from above, very heavily lightened in the 'puter to bring up the detail 5. Right hand full broadside view. Again full on camera flash shows the 'splashers'. Alas I could get a clear sharp view from below which is light enough to show why they are there. Edited October 18, 2017 by The Stationmaster 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerrySVR Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Appreciate your review have to say very attractive loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium it's-er Posted October 19, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 19, 2017 Has anyone managed a review of these? Railway Modeller in their current November issue. One of their photos has 3 of Kernow's 1361s, which is useful to note some of the variations. One version has a small horizontal handrail just behind the cab, next to the bunker - it marks that version out as different (Mile's 1362 in his photos above doesn't have that handrail). And thanks to Mike the Starionmaster for his photos! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2017 (edited) In front of me sits GWR 1364 a little minuscule miracle.I agree with Mike.I know why the splashers are there.I have looked forward to this since I handled her sample predecessor at Doncaster last February.She in no way disappoints.The detail is exquisite.Handsome indeed..and handsome is as handsome does. Edited October 20, 2017 by Ian Hargrave 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 (edited) In front of me sits GWR 1364 a little minuscule miracle.I agree with Mike.I know why the splashers are there.I have looked forward to this since I handled her sample predecessor at Doncaster last February.She in no way disappoints.The detail is exquisite.Handsome indeed..and handsome is as handsome does. The answer is to the splashers being there is ? Edited October 20, 2017 by micklner 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 20, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 20, 2017 The answer is to the splashers being there is ? Yes - I'd like to know the answer to that; especially as the Heljan one has no splashers, scale diameter wheels, and buffers at the correct height. Regards, John isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 The splashers are there to accommodate the wheel rims.Yes I was fully aware of the splashers issue when I ordered the model..I made my choice and as has been posted many times on this forum it's my railway and I will live with it. There are issues of inaccuracy with innumerable r-t-r models and as I have neither the skills or dexterity to build my own then I'm going simply going to enjoy this little model.If you wish to compare it with its Heljan counterpart then that is your choice. I suggest you conduct your appraisal on the Heljan thread. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerrySVR Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Is there an issue with coupling height mine has yet to arrive so can't check myself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) The splashers are there to accommodate the wheel rims.Yes I was fully aware of the splashers issue when I ordered the model..I made my choice and as has been posted many times on this forum it's my railway and I will live with it. There are issues of inaccuracy with innumerable r-t-r models and as I have neither the skills or dexterity to build my own then I'm going simply going to enjoy this little model.If you wish to compare it with its Heljan counterpart then that is your choice. I suggest you conduct your appraisal on the Heljan thread. On reading that the wheel flanges must then be, hugely oversize ? otherwise why do they not fit under the footplate? It doesn't make any sense why it needed to be made like it has . The splashers look at least 2mm high or more above the footplate. At worst all that was needed was a slight cut out on the underneath of the Footplate. On looking at the above photos, the wheel rims are clearly not above the Footplate. Its simply appears to be a design error . I see no problem with comparing this version with the Heljan version, that luckily doesn't have this problem. That what forums are for , to discuss things. Edited October 21, 2017 by micklner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2017 I see no problem with comparing this version with the Heljan version, that luckily doesn't have this problem. That what forums are for , to discuss things. The problem, I think, is similar to that with the Emperor's new clothes. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 On reading that the wheel flanges must then be, hugely oversize ? otherwise why do they not fit under the footplate? It doesn't make any sense why it needed to be made like it has . The splashers look at least 2mm high or more above the footplate. At worst all that was needed was a slight cut out on the underneath of the Footplate. On looking at the above photos, the wheel rims are clearly not above the Footplate. Its simply appears to be a design error . I see no problem with comparing this version with the Heljan version, that luckily doesn't have this problem. That what forums are for , to discuss things. Indeed exactly the sort of comparison that is important to assist those that are undecided as to which option to purchase. Sadly it seems that these sort of poor design decisions are becoming something of a hallmark of DJModels, a real shame when the overall finish and finess of their toppings are very good. As for the the 1361, I’d love to get hold of a factory second or preproduction model for a good price to dismantle and carve off the splashers and see what can be done to correct.... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2017 As for the the 1361, I’d love to get hold of a factory second or preproduction model for a good price to dismantle and carve off the splashers and see what can be done to correct.... Why? You can't go far wrong with https://railsofsheffield.com/search?searchTerm=1365 ; and £15.00 or so cheaper than the opposition. Regards, John Isherwood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Fatadder Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 Why? You can't go far wrong with https://railsofsheffield.com/search?searchTerm=1365 ; and £15.00 or so cheaper than the opposition. Regards, John Isherwood. Mostly because aside from the stupid recess for the nameplate (fixable) i am more impressed with the standard of tooling of the DJM body. Now if I actually needed one for Brent I’d look into it in a lot more detail, the third option would be a Kernow body on a Heljan chassis and footplate (but that would be a very expensive route.....) For me, if I see either model second hand for 50-60£ or so I will end up buying to see what I can do (as per the Hattons 1400) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tetsudofan Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 Here we go again.... Surely you've all had your say and its now up to us to make up our minds whether or not to retain our pre-orders, cancel our pre-orders or, if we have not pre-ordered, to decide whether or not to purchase these items. Your continued rambling is getting a bit boring. In my case, my pre-orders stand. Keith 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterfgf Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Here we go again.... Surely you've all had your say and its now up to us to make up our minds whether or not to retain our pre-orders, cancel our pre-orders or, if we have not pre-ordered, to decide whether or not to purchase these items. Your continued rambling is getting a bit boring. In my case, my pre-orders stand. Keith My pre-order also stands. Peterfgf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gulliver Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Why? You can't go far wrong with https://railsofsheffield.com/search?searchTerm=1365 ; and £15.00 or so cheaper than the opposition. Regards, John Isherwood. Very heavily discounted, £159.95 RRP down to £115? 28% off? Perhaps because the one you have highlighted has tapered buffers when they should be straight, it has the wrong cylinder drain cocks, is missing the handrails from the coal bunker near the cab doors, is missing the handrails from the coal bunker at the rear and has the wrong number of brackets on the rear. Think I will stick with my order which will have these correct, even if it does have a barely noticeable splasher. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) Very heavily discounted, £159.95 RRP down to £115? 28% off? Perhaps because the one you have highlighted has tapered buffers when they should be straight, it has the wrong cylinder drain cocks, is missing the handrails from the coal bunker near the cab doors, is missing the handrails from the coal bunker at the rear and has the wrong number of brackets on the rear. Think I will stick with my order which will have these correct, even if it does have a barely noticeable splasher. "Perhaps because the one you have highlighted has tapered buffers when they should be straight ..." Not necessarily. Regards, John Isherwood. PS. in the interest of not publicly prolonging this discussion, I did attempt to respond directly to Gulliver - but it seems that he doesn't accept PMs. Edited October 21, 2017 by cctransuk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) Here we go again.... Surely you've all had your say and its now up to us to make up our minds whether or not to retain our pre-orders, cancel our pre-orders or, if we have not pre-ordered, to decide whether or not to purchase these items. Your continued rambling is getting a bit boring. In my case, my pre-orders stand. Keith Don't waste your energy here.The issues are already well aired almost with the tenacity of a ferret throttling a rabbit.Preaching to the converted is not conducive to one's well being.Maybe a good subject for The House Of Commons Select Committee on Lost Causes or even a place on the Go Compare website ? This seems.almost akin to Dimitri Schostakovich's reply to Stalin's attack on his music..entitled "A Composer's Reply To Just Criticism".The survival of humanity does not depend on the merits or demerits of one small model locomotive and the obsessive need to score points off the competition Money paid choice taken and hopefully the restoration of a sense of proportion Edited October 21, 2017 by Ian Hargrave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2017 Don't waste your energy here.The issues are already well aired almost with the tenacity of a ferret throttling a rabbit.Preaching to the converted is not conducive to one's well being.Maybe a good subject for The House Of Commons Select Committee on Lost Causes or even a place on the Go Compare website ? This seems.almost akin to Dimitri Schostakovich's reply to Stalin's attack on his music..entitled "A Composer's Reply To Just Criticism".The survival of humanity does not depend on the merits or demerits of one small model locomotive and the obsessive need to score points off the competition If the only utterance you can make on this thread is to throw petulant and insufferable nonsense at the other forum members, it merely demonstrates a paucity of argument. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 If the only utterance you can make on this thread is to throw petulant and insufferable nonsense at the other forum members, it merely demonstrates a paucity of a Argument ? No argument,I have made my choice with eyes wide open as have others..If you choose to interpret that as insufferable then that is your concern. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 21, 2017 Argument ? No argument,I have made my choice with eyes wide open as have others..If you choose to interpret that as insufferable then that is your concern. I think my meaning is perfectly clear Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 I think my meaning is perfectly clear If you wish to continue this dialogue it is best you use the pm facility rather than vent issues on a public forum. Phrasing such as this cuts no ice with me.Measured civility is more appropriate.I will not respond to matters otherwise.Clear? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gulliver Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 "Perhaps because the one you have highlighted has tapered buffers when they should be straight ..." Not necessarily. Regards, John Isherwood. PS. in the interest of not publicly prolonging this discussion, I did attempt to respond directly to Gulliver - but it seems that he doesn't accept PMs. That image is dated 1949. Presumably they changed them to the straight type by the time of the image posted on Kernow's website. Not aware I had done anything to stop PMs. Will check. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted October 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2017 Talk of continuing further correspondence by PM is disappointing to the many who find public debates, aka full and frank discussions, both informative and entertaining. That just isn’t cricket, chaps. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now