John Isherwood

Are you really defending someone who repeatedly lies in response to direct questions? Difficulty coping is one thing; deliberate misrepresentation is quite another. We now have direct evidence that making allowances for Jim leads to the loss of the right to financial redress, if taken to excess. There is NO excuse for what is happening at Modelmaster - the sooner the acquaintances of / apologists for Jim accept this, and use their combined influence to bring an end to this fraud, the better. CJI.

In which case, it can only serve as a lesson to us all that it is possible to overstretch our tolerance of poor service to the point of excess. CJI.

On what grounds did Paypal reject your claim? Non-delivery of goods ordered should be an automatic refund - it always has been for me. John Isherwood.

As I understand it, the plastic / wood bond relies upon the solvent softening the plastic enough for it to flow and penetrate the fibres of the wood. This is not a true bond; no component of the plastic chemically bonds with any component of the wood. As such, any adhesion will be tenuous; track construction using this method can only rely on numerous questionable joints combining to provide an acceptable degree of mechanical strength. What is essential is the use of a solvent that chemically breaks down the plastic to allow it to flow into the wood fibres - this will be dictated by the type of plastic used. CJI.

The conclusion that I draw from all this back and forth, and from errors reported here and elsewhere over several years, is that any company partnering with Dapol to produced commissioned models : - a] need their heads examined; b] deserve all they get! CJI.

Indeed - this is not the 'Imaginary Locos Names & Numbers' thread; fictional histories are of little interest when not accompanied by some form of diagram / drawing / illustration to back them up. CJI.

I'm afraid that livery issues seem to be par-for-the-course with Dapol - 'near enough is good enough' seems to be their motto! CJI.

Not much use as a review then - most people's first priority is 'does it look like the real thing', followed by assembly, running and livery application. 'Influencers' are a recent abberation of social media; promoting your website as a source of knowledge when the prime motivation is merely financial gain via advertising revenues. The fact that you have little or no knowledge of what you are talking about seems not to matter! Let's face it - Sam's reviews are thinly disguised, (sponsored?) advertising. A competent reviewer needs to have at least a passing acquainance with the subject of the model that is under review. CJI.

Yes - see my website at https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm John Isherwood.

Was No.16's chimney really so tall - it looks to be way outside the loading gauge? CJI.

I had no problems with the Genesis AFPs; my transfers were designed to fit them and the finished models look fine. CJI.

Tony, I don't underestimate your input into this most laudable of undertakings - I certainly don't expect anyone to try and do the same with my collection when the time comes. I've already told the family, in no uncertain terms, to call in a box-shifter who deals in secondhand models and take what (little) is offered. I can understand your disillusionment, too - and I do know the commitment that is necessary in order to market what someone else no longer has a use for; I am currently disposing of the remainder of John Talbot's Appleby Model Engineering's stock. In doing the latter, I priced the items to sell readily - it's pointless trying to realise their original price. Pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap; it's the only way. Unfortunately, the skill, time and effort put into original production has no value as such. Sad but true. John Isherwood.

But that is exactly my point - most of your potential purchasers would not have bought the components in the first place. Their offers will reflect the fact that they would like to own the model, but that they have long ago accepted the fact that commissioning kit-built models is beyond their reach, and so they do without. I think that, being a lifelong kit builder, accustomed to the heady prices paid by those few with the necessary wherewithal, you have to some extent lost touch with what the wider market can afford to pay for locos - RTR or kitbuilt. The market for the models that you offer for sale, at the prices that you feel would be justified, is tiny / non-existent. Sorry, John Isherwood.

I think that the point that you overlook is that very few of us can afford to commission kit-built locos - and if we could, we would apply our own specification and pay the price accordingly. What you are offering for sale are kit-built models, built to someone else's specification - not necessarily what we would commission ourselves and therefore something of an unknown quantity. By all means commit these models to auction, but I sincerely doubt that they will realise more, once commission is paid, than you will be offered here. The price of anything is what someone is prepared to pay; what it would cost to reproduce is, unfortunately, irrelevant. I am under no illusions that my extensive collection of models will not realise a fraction of what they cost me to acquire, once I am gone. That's why I make a point of enjoying them now! Regards, John Isherwood.

In case Irish railway modellers had missed my postings concerning Appleby Model Engineering components, I should mention that I have acquired the very last stock of 4mm. scale AME components; (as listed at https://www.cctrans.org.uk/ame.htm). Amongst the castings are sufficient Sambre et Meuse VLH2 Irish bogie sideframes bogie sidframes to build nine pairs of bogies, and these are priced at £4.00 per pair of bogies; (ie. four castings). The castings do not include axleboxes, but I can supply these separately - see the AXLEBOXES section of my AME list. Once the remaining stock of AME castings has been sold, there will be no more. Regards, John Isherwood.

Gone the same way as the dinosaurs! It's a watch Ebay situation nowadays for these. Resin AFUs - if you trace any, please let me know; I could use some. The transfers are still available, though! Regards, John Isherwood, https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm

Tony, The U Class is of interest - what will you accept for it? Regards, John.

Did you intend to duplicate Britannia Class names? CJI.

Tony, You seem to have taken my post as a personal criticism - look again, I was responding to a subsequent post concerning the detail accuracy of kitbuilt models from decades ago. I made no mention of the standard of construction of the models that you are refurbishing. I know that we differ in our emphasis when modelling details are concerned, but you seem to have taken offence concerning something that I didn't say about a subject that I didn't mention! Regards, John Isherwood.

'Inaccurate' - though the meaning of the word remains the same, its interpretation amongst the majority of railway modellers nowadays is very far from that at the time the kit-build was commissioned. Firstly, though I have no doubt that the hardcore LNER / BR(ER) modellers may have had access to precise records of the condition of each loco at any specific date, the majority of modellers did not, and didn't particularly care provided it was better than the current Tri-ang offering. It is easy to overlook the vast change in the volume of generally-available, detailed knowledge of railways that has occurred in the intervening years, and to be disparaging about what are inevitably products of their age. Perhaps surprisingly to some amongst us, there are still many modellers who can recognise a quality kit-built model, but who don't know or care whether the fittings installed are exactly correct for that particular depiction of the subject. Whilst recognising and applauding the detailed knowledge of those who have studied their chosen subject minutely, we should not dismiss the skill of those who produced what was asked of them, at a time when most of us were far less fastidious. CJI.

Given that the worm will almost certainly be a standard component, it should be possible to identify the correct size and source a replacement - perhaps via Ultrascale? CJI.

There have been numerous drawings published in the model press over the years - including from the period that you specify. I think that you will have to be more specific. CJI.

Do you mean tank wagons which were owned by British Railways - not many of those; or privately-owned ones that ran on BR - the vast majority? CJI.

I had a feeling that might be the case. CJI.

It reads 65959 on my screen - but I have no idea if that makes sense. CJI.