Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcing our Collett 14xx / 48xx / 58xx model

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Joel Dapol
    commented on 's reply
    Hello and my apologies about the problems you have experienced with the 14xx. Choosing packaging is always a problem with detailed and heavy models so it it is important we receive feedback and can find methods to improve. We have had relatively few complaints so far and most products seem to have arrived at our stockists intact and in good condition. However, we will give feedback to the factory on how this can be improved on future runs. We have also asked for longer screws that may provide some additional support, however, we do not have these in stock currently. perhaps you can email [email protected] with your details and we can send these when they become available?

  • Longbow
    replied
    Hi Dapol - I and several others have experienced damage in transit to this model as discussed in the link below. The model is attached to the packaging via the front axle keeper plate, and this part is secured by two flimsy mounting screws which can tear loose under the stress of transit. Is it possible please to get a replacement keeper plate and longer screws to secure it?

    Leave a comment:


  • IanS
    commented on 's reply
    The 48xx/58xx/14xx locos are arriving with retailers now.
    Ian @ antics.

  • Neil Dapol
    commented on 's reply
    They should arrive with us some time this week and will be going out to stockists shortly afterwards.

  • Badger
    replied
    I may have missed it, Has the loco been launched yet & if so where's my pre-order?

    Leave a comment:


  • IanS
    commented on 's reply
    The GWR mid-chrome green livery models are 7S-006-001 (lettered Great Western) 7S-006-002 (1934 shirtbutton monogram) and 7S-006-020 (post WW2 lettered GWR)
    Ian S.

  • Badger
    commented on 's reply
    Is there any future plans for GWR green 14xx? I've been promised an GWR autocoach but its no good without a GWR coloured loco.

  • Richard Dapol
    replied
    Hi Badger, Thank you for your interest in our forthcoming 48xx/58xx locomotives.
    We are manufacturing a special run of 1401 as running in the film 'The Titfield Thunderbolt', where the G W R letters were painted over. Also we are producing two models in lined B.R. green, one early crest and one late crest. We shall consider lined B R Black on a subsequent run.
    We hope to have decorated samples early next month, however I have attached a taster of the first EP on my garden railway, where the model handled a 'B' set with ease on 4'-0" curves and up gradients. Obviously being an EP some details are not fitted correctly or missing.
    Regards,
    Richard

    Leave a comment:


  • Badger
    replied
    Recently I received an offer through Dapol to purchase a 14xx of which I've been looking forward to. The offer states the GWR logo painted out, which in my mind looks terrible.
    When are we going to see a Brunswick green 14xx to run with the GWR auto coach that is already in existence? Alternatively a black lined out GW engine?

    The current offer is OK for those who are willing to modify their purchases but for me when I but something I expect it to be complete.

    So come on Dapol, let's have the loco that everyone wants in the right colours complete with company ownership on the tanks.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • IanS
    commented on 's reply
    First of all remember that the boilers have the top feed and these were switched around between locomotives.

    I can't comment on when the first top feed boilers were added to the pool for the 48/58xx class, the 'best guess' I've found is 'in the 1940s'. It is possible these were for the last batch of 48xx (4860-4874) in 1936, though latterly there were obviously many more boilers with top feeds than this accounts for. It is also worth noting that the 517 class boilers could be fitted to the 48xx, so it is possibly more likely that the top feeds appear when converted 517 boilers were replaced, or added as boilers needed major overhauls after 7 to 10 years service, both possibilities would again put the dates in the 1940 period.

    I believe it is safe to say that in the early years of 48xx class (1930s) the (majority at least) of the 48/58xx locomotives did not have top feed boilers.
    By the time of the renumbering to the 14xx series it is probable that some top feed boilers were in service, but might well have been rare before the renumbering. Like the following post WW2 and BR period reference to dated photographs would be needed.

    So far as I am aware from Dapols' original product announcement the model will be produced in both with and without top feed options as appropriate to the locomotive and livery.

  • tallboy53
    replied
    As I recall, the top feed was only fitted to the class after its renumbering to the 14XX series. The 48's being produced should therefore not have the top feed fitted. Too much to hope that this will be reproduced on the models I guess?????

    Leave a comment:


  • Woody
    replied
    idea for a future run. 1438 and 1458 were long time residents at Stourbridge Junction. at some time in the late 50s they were transferred to Oswestry or Wrexham, well it's that area they ended up. only problem is that neither had top feed

    Leave a comment:


  • IanS
    commented on 's reply
    I wouldn't disagree with the idea that seam joint lines should disappear, especially as a newly painted or well cleaned locomotive (ie no dirt in the joint) would need to be viewed very close up to see the joint.
    However modellers in all genres are renown for their attention to this kind of detail, cf the 1/72 aircraft modellers obsession with 'fine panel lines'.

    I'm sure Dapol can foresee the howls of protest and vociferous demands that no-one buy a Dapol model ever again if the joint line was omitted.
    The screams of horror are bad enough when the manufacturer gets it right, but as the 'perceived wisdom' is factually incorrect quite obviously the manufacturer and the prototype must be wrong! (This has happened.)

    The customer in the end will decide and if the customer suggests that the panel lines are important then the customer isn't going to buy the model without them.

    Re Rivets
    I did not intend to cause offence and apologise for any which may have been caused.
    I was simply trying to explain in a way which could be followed by those who would not unreasonably consider a rivet to be a rivet that a modern 21st century rivet, as will be seen on an operating preserved locomotive, may be a rather different shape to the original early/mid 20th century rivet it replaced and why.

    We may be straying even farther from the original point, but...
    While the shape of the rivet may not be of huge import it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that modellers might make a judgement based on a comparing models with preserved locos.
    It is notable that several model manufacturers look at preserved locomotives when researching models and take no account of the changes made in the possibly over 100 years since the prototype was built, even in cases where the changes made during the service life or restoration of the individual locomotive they have looked at are well documented.
    Should we expect that modellers now and in the future will automatically understand that the real thing they see is not quite the same as it was in the 1930s (and hopefully depicted by the 1930s era model they are holding) without recording and explaining what we know now?

    Again, I apologise for any offence caused.
    I do not know your individual technical experience / background, I am trying to explain in terms which might be understood by those who have no engineering/railway/preservation background and accept I may not always be successful in this...

  • Gronk
    replied

    I'm afraid "Historically authenticity" is only relative to the eye of the beholder and facts availble at the time of observation, therefore authenticity is perceived by people in many ways and at different times depending on what you see or don't see. Relative to my point of view I can also see some other differences and ommisions you have not mentioned yet but they should not detract from the final version. After all, the basic cad drawing will not show everything in great detail so we will have to wait to see what's produced. I'm sure it will please the vast majority and will sell 'well warts and all', be a very accurate and appealing model for the money. However its good you are trying to raise standards but sadly compromises are a fact of business and manufacturing life.

    Leave a comment:


  • Miss Prism
    replied
    I understand the need for compromise on thicknesses of footplate edges, splasher sides and tops, steps etc, especially for plastic. But to infer from such areas of accepted compromise that seam joints should be deliberately exaggerated seems a bizarre leap of logic. Such logic would demand incorrectly-sized chimneys and domes for example - which is clearly silly.

    The unfortunate context of these kinds of debate is the endemic, or at least growing, expectation for overscale 'detail'. The unqualified and persistent clamour for 'compromise' needs to take a hard look at itself - there is a danger of ceasing to be able to distinguish what needs compromise (on legitimate issues of prototype feature variation, material strength, tool architecture and release angle, or wheelset sideplay, etc etc), and what does not. This culture stems from ignorance, and it is time to redress that perception. Seam joints do not fall into the 'compromise-necessary' category in my opinion. Ian S has now introduced rivet size and shape into this mix. I do understand why modern rivets are slightly more hemi-spherical than some older ones, but I take the view that where there is an opportunity, as there is here, to make a reasonable attempt at historical authenticity, then it should be taken.

    I accept our individual expectations of what constitutes 'reasonable' vary widely of course, and I admit I am playing hardball and being provocative in this discussion.

    I have included a picture of 4805, straight out of the Swindon shops in 1932, on http://www.gwr.org.uk/bunker-seams.html

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X