Mainline Deans Goods

Ask questions or give advice on any other model railway Manufacturers and Gauges
GWR_fan
Posts: 4405
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Mainline Deans Goods

Postby GWR_fan » Wed Sep 13, 2017 6:12 am

I suppose, like many, I purchased a Mainline Deans Goods while awaiting a better alternative model. I eagerly anticipated the OR version when announced and decided it was a must have purchase. Alas, when it did arrive the continual nitpicking soured my taste for it. Personall, I have no qualms with the model however, the voice of public opinion turned me off purchasing it. Perhaps in hindsight OR should have released the typical unlined or perhaps the BR version before releasing the decorative model.

Today, I took out my Mainline model which had not been run for several months. Typical of many seldomly used ringfield motors, the Deans was a little reluctant to move, but with a little coaxing it was soon up and running to my satisfaction. I recalled from the last time it ran that after leaving a curved section of rail the tender always appeared to have derailed the leading tender axle. This is the undriven axle on mine. Investigation showed that the wheels had not actually derailed, however, there was an immense amount of lateral play allowing the tender body to swing widely. This no doubt a result of allowing a lot of play to accommodate radius 1 curves.

I decided to correct the situation and soon had a small washer fitted to the non-gear side of each of the leading and trailing tender axles. This solved the lateral movement allowing the tender to track better in relation to the locomotive itself. A simple modification but worth the minimal effort required.

Bigmet
Posts: 5570
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bigmet » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:35 pm

GWR_fan wrote:...Alas, when it did arrive the continual nitpicking soured my taste for it. Personally, I have no qualms with the model however, the voice of public opinion turned me off purchasing it...

I hope, I do so hope, that Lyndon Davies has realised that a little more finesse in design approach is required. There are established compromises available that make RTR OO product look well, but whoever is doing the design work seems unaware of one of the most significant; which is the option of making tyre diameters in 'maximum wear' condition which in conjunction with an RP25 flange results in an overall diameter over flanges that is pretty much true scale, which in turn makes close fitting splashers of scale dimensions - or as near as makes no difference - possible.

Tooling a model now which fails to match appearance standards achieved forty years ago was not very clever...

This said, as I have posted previously my suspicion is that this is a much steeper learning curve than anticipated for a business already practised in scale model productions. The model has to look right, and it has to conform to an established set of standards, and it has to operate successfully in extended use, with provision for user maintenance and aftersale user accessible features. That's a lot more than a road vehicle model which primarily has to look right, and have wheels that go round once for perhaps the six inches or so as it is positioned on the shelf.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9506
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bufferstop » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:28 pm

Yes there's a significant difference between producing a shell for an unpowered model road vehicle and one for a fully working steam loco. Road vehicle techniques may just get by for a bogie mounted diesel or electric loco, but even there the designer is constrained in some areas by the need to accommodate the motor and in particular the swing of the bogies. He still has to find a way to fasten chassis to shell, the two pillars from the roof riveted or screwed to the baseplate is no longer an option. Definitely there is much to be learned.
I had followed the story of how in the 1930s it had become necessary to increase the scale of UK outline models to incorporate H0 mechanisms, and thus 00 was born, but I still had some difficult compromises to make when I tried to sit a 4mm/ft version of Furness Railway number 20 on a set of unpowered drivers. Reducing the driving wheel diameters to compensate for the oversize flanges were only the start, on the real thing the tops of the driving wheels are covered by splashers which stand on the footplate, clear of the boiler barrel. If I'd stuck to wheel and boiler diameters, the 14.5mm back to backs would have seen the flanges cutting into the sides of the boiler, so the boiler diameter had to be reduced and it's centre line raised to compensate, before the essential gap could be seen. The process has given me a healthy respect for the designers and tool makers who make these wonderful models possible. I don't think anyone should criticise an RTR model for the odd half millimetre here and there. Remember, if the side sheets on a loco cab can be got down to 0.5mm thick and still be strong enough to withstand handling, that's the equivalent of making the prototype cab from inch and a half thick boilerplate. To anyone who complains they should have tried harder to get it closer to scale, I would say "this model is 00 gauge, that's a 14% error straight away that you have accepted".
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

trainlover23
Posts: 360
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 10:28 am

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby trainlover23 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:52 am

Don`t believe all you read on the web written by the so called " experts most of it is drivel. Make your own mind up for goodness sake like what we used to do before in the days before the blasted internet

Bigmet
Posts: 5570
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bigmet » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:08 am

It's quite true that most of what is on the internet is drivel. But in respect of model railway, this is an improvement over the pre-internet situation, when everything relating to product reviews in the magazines was drivel. Now there are pearls freely available online - which have to be strained out from the background noise from the drivellers 'tis true - but this is still an improveemnt over what went before when the print media was all we had.

I well remember the entertainment at my then local MRC over the RM review of the 1970s Japanese brass production of a King. Burble, burble detail, burble, burble finesse, burble, burble quality, burble, burble fine finish, burble, burble connoiseur appeal. Nowhere did it mention that this model was actually HO...
Last edited by Bigmet on Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9506
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bufferstop » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:18 am

Two competing rules that I try to stick to, "don't be swayed by the opinions of others, they are only opinions," and "don't dismiss your immediate first impression, it's often more accurate than that arrived at by considering the evidence."
They work for models just as well as they do for people.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

User avatar
D605Eagle
Posts: 2071
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:58 am
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby D605Eagle » Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:10 pm

There does seem to be a vendetta on RMweb against Oxfordrail, so personally I would take zero notice of anything posted on there. You can't beat going to your local model shop and taking a good look at one in the flesh and then get the shop to test run it. All you need to see before committing to purchasing it.

User avatar
6C
Posts: 1149
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:45 pm
Location: Pingvollr, dans le Wirrale

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby 6C » Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:55 am

I'm getting one - have an old Mainline, plus Hornby updated version from @2008.

Splasher dimensions aside (which are not just an OR issue) - think it is a spanker - a step rather than a leap forward - but worth it for the better tender...
Pete

Fetch me a bottle of your finest Chateau Bichon Frise '65 !!

Bigmet
Posts: 5570
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bigmet » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:03 pm

If I needed this item for my modelling, and had earlier bodies to hand, I would take a look to see if a hybrid might be possible for a 'best of both worlds' model. I feel the step rather than leap forward assessment is a fair one. A good loco drive and a tender clear of drive gubbins and thus more accurate, adds up to net progress.

User avatar
Bufferstop
Posts: 9506
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:06 pm
Location: Bottom end of N. Warks line

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Bufferstop » Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:16 pm

6C wrote:Splasher dimensions aside (which are not just an OR issue) -

Seems they are having just the problem I had (mentioned above). The moaners would do well to try it themselves.
Growing old, can't avoid it. Growing up, forget it!
My Layout, My Workbench Blog and My Opinions

Pennine MC
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:23 am

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Pennine MC » Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:27 pm

Bufferstop wrote:... I don't think anyone should criticise an RTR model for the odd half millimetre here and there

...

To anyone who complains they should have tried harder to get it closer to scale, I would say "this model is 00 gauge, that's a 14% error straight away that you have accepted".


Mmm. I appreciate I may be taking this a bit out of context, but I'm very weary of the old chestnut that overall accuracy doesn't matter because the track gauge is compromised. For one thing, it's necessarily compromised for well worn historical reasons; for another, it's possible for those who model finer gauges to correct it.

If we're going to accept errors of the order of 14%, we're going to have some very funny looking models. A 57ft coach could end up anywhere between 50ft and 64ft; rather more than the odd half millimetre. Is that really what the majority in this hobby want? Genuine question.
Last edited by Pennine MC on Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Pennine MC
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:23 am

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Pennine MC » Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:41 pm

D605Eagle wrote:There does seem to be a vendetta on RMweb against Oxfordrail, so personally I would take zero notice of anything posted on there. .


Whilst I would never champion the place, I do try to observe it objectively and I don't believe there's a vendetta; it may well be of course that the criticism of OR is less restrained than it is of the forum's darlings, creating a noticeable contrast. FWIW I really do want to like Oxford but they keep doing some very silly things, and that's the feeling I most pick up on over there.

User avatar
Lysander
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:53 pm

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby Lysander » Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:59 pm

I agree with you entirely Ian, on all points.

If you really want to see a vendetta against Oxford, wait for the occasional postings on Model Fail Forum. Everytime an Oxford model is released you'd swear the world was going to end......

Tony
Men with false teeth may yet speak the truth.......

GWR_fan
Posts: 4405
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Mainline Deans Goods

Postby GWR_fan » Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:53 pm

The point that I was trying to make was that while the OR model in my opinion is very good, although prototypically flawed, it is not that good that I see it as a replacement for the old Mainline model. The apparent failure of the "generic" OR model (in the opinion of some as it did not fit their exact timescale) has resulted in increased prices for ex-Mainline and Hornby Deans Goods. With the release of the OR model secondhand prices on Mainline and Hornby models decreased until that point in time when the market realised that there was still demand for the earlier models as the OR model did not set the world on fire.

I feel that OR made a mistake in releasing the fully lined model first as the design flaws were emphasised by the oversized lining application. An unlined or BR black version would have camoflauged these defects better. The fully lined version could have then been released later, hopefully incorporating the NRM design upgrades.


Return to “Other Model Railway Manufacturers and Gauges”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest