Review: Oxford Rail's Dean Goods

[Lysander]

https://srmg.org.uk/news-blog/2017/7/27 ... dean-goods

Tony

[Richard Lee]

An interesting review. Thank you. I particularly liked the comparison (with photos) with the older Dean Goods model.

If I was interested in buying GWR locomotives I must admit that I would also seek out, read, and consider the importance of some of the the harsher criticisms of the new model before making up my mind. I usually like to see a range of opinions.

I may be under the wrong impression, but I do wonder whether Oxford Rail got a bit of a 'free pass' for their first locomotive from many commentators, and endured higher level of expectation for the Dean Goods? I must stress that I have little knowledge of either prototype, but the Oxford Rail Dean Goods looks nicer to me than their Adams Radial.

[Sails]

Thanks Tony,

Definitely going for and early BR black once released.

Also glad I looked through the other blogs and saw the Club 'Tirdonkin' wagons getting produced by Dapol, think I'll preorder a set of those too..

Mark

[Lysander]

If I was interested in buying GWR locomotives I must admit that I would also seek out, read, and consider the importance of some of the the harsher criticisms of the new model before making up my mind. I usually like to see a range of opinions.

Thank you for your comments Richard and I wouldn't disagree at all. A range of balanced views is important unless you want a model at any cost. The problem, unfortunately, is that the most vociferous criticism of this model has become relentless and obsessive, as it did for the Adams' Radial: it goes way beyond objective balance and one suspects a personal agenda. That poster, who has a small following, was quite right to point out some of the flaws in the Dean - the side-sheet cut-out profile, the shape of the chimney, the rivets on the splashers, etc. but, have legitimately made the points, to then continue to rubbish the model and sneer at those who are not similarly horrified completely devalues the argument. I ended up ignoring those comments completely and simply decided whether, for me, the Oxford Dean was sufficiently a Dean to pass muster. I think that it is, for the reasons that I gave in my review. It just boils down to personal choice.

Thanks Tony, Definitely going for and early BR black once released.Also glad I looked through the other blogs and saw the Club 'Tirdonkin' wagons getting produced by Dapol, think I'll preorder a set of those too..Mark

I'm looking forward to the all-green GWR release Mark.

The 'Tirdonkin Trio' is our most ambitious commission to date Mark and continues the club's practice of issuing commissions in all three gauges. I'm pleased that you like it. For information, all profits go into club funds to support the next commission - no-one individual profits personally. Delivery is expected in a month to six weeks but wagons will not be released until the first day of the show. We have already taken firm orders for 25% of the run.

Tony

[Bigmet]

...I do wonder whether Oxford Rail got a bit of a 'free pass' for their first locomotive from many commentators, and endured higher level of expectation for the Dean Goods? ...

Actually they took a fair beating over the first loco too, the Adams Radial Tank!

The company principal did stick his neck out when their entry into OO RTR was announced, with the line 'In pursuit of excellence' tagged onto 'Oxfordrail' and the statement "I am determined that Oxford Rail will be judged on the integrity and the quality of our models that we will be offering." (All lifted from their home page general information piece, http://www.oxfordrail.com/General.htm Go take a read to make sure I am quoting fairly.)

Ambition is a fine thing, and I like that objective. Aim high, challenge the existing competition; but it is perhaps a red rag to some! Having now seen their Radial Tank, it is decent enough; and I don't doubt the Dean goods has merit, not least what appears to be a good mechanism layout that runs very nicely (I plan on purchase of cheap examples of both as and when a good offer is available, because the key mech. dimensions are right for locos which are never going to get RTR models).

Still someway off the 'excellence' though, if fidelity to prototype is what is aimed at (that's what I would hope for as the primary standard): the most serious criticism of the Dean goods is that it doesn't appear to represent any of the class at any time in its existence. Way to go yet in catch up with the best of the other player's efforts. Doesn't make it a bad model, though no published review uses a scheme that provides any objective method of comparision. FWIW I'd go with 'looks enough like a Dean goods to make the cut in qualifying as a model, significant number of detail errors, which may or may not offend the eye or the more expert folk's perceptions. (If I needed it for a layout it would be purchased, the loco drive alone setting it ahead of the previous RTR model; but then I am on the impressionist side of the railway modelling interest; among other things you get the impression that the loco is doing the work when the drive is in the loco. I could never reconcile myself to the 'mighty tender' as it inevitably made itself visible in operation which is all wrong.)

It appears to be well enough designed and contructed, and that is good news, as it means Oxford have a competent workshop. With the right research fed to that workshop, a really good model that corresponds very closely to prototype should be possible. In this respect my take is let's see how they do on the next one. That's my (rambling six pound eleven shillings and) twopence worth.

[Bufferstop]

I think the initial press releases were a bit heavy on the hyperbole, but having once worked for a company who only avoided a conviction under the Trades Descriptions Act on a technicality, I know how easily the advertising boys can get carried away. I think Oxford could justifiably claim to be in the same league as the existing brands, that they might be able to surpass them is now a real possibility.
My former employers error was to use a press release lifted straight from a US one without much scrutiny. The technicality was in the grammar, the offending phrase being "then slips silently into standby" which everyone assumed meant that it would be silent in standby, when in fact it sounded like a vacuum cleaner under a duvet. It was argued that the phrase was ambiguous and that it referred to the fact that it would return to standby without calling the operator. They must have hired a darned good brief to argue that one.