3D Printing - Quite An Adevnture

[Richard08]

I rather like this guy's channel - amusing and honest reviews, without the BS. Even more I'm impressed with his efforts in 3D printing land, culminating (so far!) in this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibyJupjL_C4 It's worth going back to his first 3D printing video and following his progress from nowt to a pretty impressive 'Old Coppernob' model. Love his 'can do' attitude

[Bufferstop]

Young Sam has certainly got his teeth into the 3D printing. In the past I've been critical of some of his assesments of various models, but all credit to him for mastering the CAD processes and producing what have been a steadily improving series of 3D printed models.

[mattmay05]

Umfortuneatly for Sam... he's not really informing people correctly plus he's incredibly biased towards some manufacturers...

The CAD process I have watched myself and him have used the same programs but he's not giving you the right information.. his CAD's/STL's are unusable, I downloaded the LBSC loco just to have a look, and my software looked at it and said unable to print error with files.

The errors are the model's aren't complete and have holes... he hasn't run them through a CAD check program to make sure they suitable for printing, something Sketchup doesn't have.
Part of his problem and something I learned 8 years ago is Sketchup is a good program... but not for miniatures, or small items.
You have to draw it at full size, then change thin metal panels for thicker and know the percentage of scaling to get that right... which is why on his stuff round things are square, because the program won't let him draw it that small.

So yes helpful... but also very unhelpful... as I have told customers in the model shop who think he's the bee's knees, then tell them they are doing it wrong then a month later they come back and ask for a repair... no I can't help send it to Hornby, as you didn't listen to someone who does it for a living... just because he has 100k of subscribers or watchers... doesn't mean he's right.

Just so you know I know what I am talking about, plus have written a few articles in magazines too.

[Bigmet]

... just because he has 100k of subscribers or watchers... doesn't mean he's right.

He's right, for his audience. It is to be hoped that the major OO brands are paying attention. Differentiate your product ranges clearly: 'Sam' market, modeller market. This you can run care free on the carpet, while that requires some knowhow and care to get the best from it. HO brands have been doing this for decades.

[Richard08]

... just because he has 100k of subscribers or watchers... doesn't mean he's right.

He's right, for his audience. It is to be hoped that the major OO brands are paying attention. Differentiate your product ranges clearly: 'Sam' market, modeller market. This you can run care free on the carpet, while that requires some knowhow and care to get the best from it. HO brands have been doing this for decades.

Exactly. "If I buy this model, will it work on an average, imperfect, layout. And if so, is it value for money. " is basically what it's about. I watch it (not the running session phone in things admittedly) because I'm fascinated to see manufacturers so often trying to sell junk that needs fixing before you can use it - and the occasional beautiful model.

[Bigmet]

... I'm fascinated to see manufacturers so often trying to sell junk that needs fixing before you can use it - and the occasional beautiful model.

Between 'over 21', middle aged and nearing pension age designs still in production, and a slew of badly dated and/or inadvisable technique choices, poor 'modelling necessity' compromise choices, and outright design errors on the more recent introductions, there is quite an assortment of 'suspect stuff' out there afflicting all currently active OO brand's ranges.

But is the glass half full or half empty? For my money, well over half full. 'The good stuff', in the form of models that match or exceed what previously required DIY building, has now built up into a useful selection over the past 23 years.

[D605Eagle]

... just because he has 100k of subscribers or watchers... doesn't mean he's right.

He's right, for his audience. It is to be hoped that the major OO brands are paying attention. Differentiate your product ranges clearly: 'Sam' market, modeller market. This you can run care free on the carpet, while that requires some knowhow and care to get the best from it. HO brands have been doing this for decades.

I find it quite worrying how many people use him as they go to place for advice, when quite frankly I think he talks a huge pile of **** most the time. I don't know if you saw his review of the Heljan class 15, but it was such a load of rubbish that even lots of people posting in the comments said they had the same model with no issues and thought theirs were fine, but also there were lots of people posting that they wouldn't buy Heljan models because of Sams advice, which is terrible when consider he talks such tosh. I have 59 UK outline Heljan models and I've had one duff one which required major surgery. (1st issue LMS Garrett). The rest ran fine or had just very minor problems like a pickup strip needing a tweak for example.

[Richard08]

I don't know if you saw his review of the Heljan class 15, but it was such a load of rubbish that even lots of people posting in the comments said they had the same model with no issues and thought theirs were fine, but also there were lots of people posting that they wouldn't buy Heljan models because of Sams advice, which is terrible when consider he talks such tosh. I have 59 UK outline Heljan models and I've had one duff one which required major surgery. (1st issue LMS Garrett). The rest ran fine or had just very minor problems like a pickup strip needing a tweak for example.

As he makes very clear, to the point of tedium sometimes, his reviews are based only on what is anonymously supplied to him, he always buys things himself so that he is not held under obligation. Doing that also leaves him free of any 'editorial' or commercial influence,and his avoidance of 'group think' is so refreshing. That to me is a far more useful review that those from people supplied with stuff, stuff that may even been specially checked over before dispatch. Your engines may all happen to be fine, but that doesn't mean everyone else's are, by the same token.

That so many of the models he reviews have problems is significant. One might expect to get unlucky say 10% of the time in a random sample, but when it's 50% or (a lot) more there must be underlying problems (across all manufacturers).

[Richard08]

I don't know if you saw his review of the Heljan class 15, but it was such a load of rubbish that even lots of people posting in the comments said they had the same model with no issues and thought theirs were fine, but also there were lots of people posting that they wouldn't buy Heljan models because of Sams advice, which is terrible when consider he talks such tosh. I have 59 UK outline Heljan models and I've had one duff one which required major surgery. (1st issue LMS Garrett). The rest ran fine or had just very minor problems like a pickup strip needing a tweak for example.

As he makes very clear, to the point of tedium sometimes, his reviews are based only on what is anonymously supplied to him, he always buys things himself so that he is not held under obligation. Doing that also leaves him free of any 'editorial' or commercial influence,and his avoidance of 'group think' is so refreshing. That to me is a far more useful review than those from people supplied with stuff, stuff that may even been specially checked over before dispatch. Your engines may all happen to be fine, but that doesn't mean everyone else's are, by the same token.

That so many of the models he reviews have problems is significant. One might expect to get unlucky say 10% of the time in a random sample, but when it's 50% or (a lot) more there must be underlying problems (across all manufacturers).

[Bigmet]

...
I find it quite worrying how many people use him as their go to place for advice, when quite frankly I think he talks a huge pile of **** most the time. I don't know if you saw his review of the Heljan class 15, but it was such a load of rubbish that even lots of people posting in the comments said they had the same model with no issues and thought theirs were fine, but also there were lots of people posting that they wouldn't buy Heljan models because of Sams advice, which is terrible when consider he talks such tosh. I have 59 UK outline Heljan models and I've had one duff one which required major surgery. (1st issue LMS Garrett). The rest ran fine or had just very minor problems like a pickup strip needing a tweak for example.

But you are well experienced and skilled in this hobby, it's very evident in your postings. 'Sam' is not for you; he's for the inexperienced, for whom ultra reliable and robust is necessary.

I do hope the brand managers are paying attention: you need to clearly define your productrange into 'simple and robust', and 'complicated, require some capability on your part'.

...That so many of the models he reviews have problems is significant. One might expect to get unlucky say 10% of the time in a random sample, but when it's 50% or (a lot) more there must be underlying problems (across all manufacturers).

Let's assume 'Sam' is average for owner induced problems, so no better or worse then the the general run of customers.
There are underlying problems intrinsic to small volume hand assembly [A] in a high staff turnover environment and I see evidence of it very regularly. There are design [D] shortcomings too, (fewer than assembly problems), and some component [C] and subsystem failure (relatively rare).

Currently active and recent Brand's RTR OO products that I have sampled, with my appraisal of product for incidence of [A] [D] [C] and an idea of the relative volume of what I own or have owned.
Accurascale [A] A few wagons.
Bachmann [A] [D] [C] 44% of my locos, most of my coaches and wagons.
Dapol [D] One loco, one wagon.
DJM [A] [D] One loco, long gone, GRTBR.
Heljan [A] [D] 10% of my locos.
Hornby [A] [D] [C] 40% of my locos, some coaches, few wagons.
Oxford Rail [A] [D] 6% of my locos, few wagons.
Rapido [D] One (blindingly wonderful) loco.

It's everywere in short, systemic problem. As expected, those brands that dominate my purchases have more problems. I fix or adjust as required, have needed a few small spares from Bachmann and Hornby over the past 20 odd years is all. I work all my models for 10-12 hours immediately they are received to surface any infant mortality while still 'new' so spares are easy to obtain. It's a damn sight easier than building the models myself, so this is progress relative to the past when there was near nothing RTR worth buying; just not as much progress as I would like.

...he is not held under obligation. Doing that also leaves him free of any 'editorial' or commercial influence, and his avoidance of 'group think' is so refreshing.

The fact he has an audience implies that the existing information channels were not providing full coverage of the potential purchasers. I haven't bothered with the mags since 'forever' because their reviewing was consistently unreliable, with no standardised rating scheme, and practically all the content is devoted to 'how lovely it looks' - so what, we have eyes! - very little to evaluation of mechanism design, construction and performance, which are aspects that really matter, if the brands are to pay attention to making their products reliable. The American and German mags were so much better in this respect, but I haven't read one in the years since I moved on from flying everywhere on business.

I couldn't possibly comment on what influences model railway mag's review policies, but submit that along with others early in the days of internet forums dealing with model railway product issues, and directly related to this criticism of magazine reviews; one editor collectively chose to describe us as 'Taliban'. I felt quite flattered.

[Richard08]

The American and German mags were so much better in this respect, but I haven't read one in the years since I moved on from flying everywhere on business.

Going off at at tangent... I picked up a copy of Railway Modeller about eight or so years ago, when the first stirrings of having a train set again were happening. The editor, in his editorial, cheerfully admitted that photographs were Photoshopped. I binned it, what's the point of 'showing what can be achieved' if what is shown is fake?

[mattmay05]

... just because he has 100k of subscribers or watchers... doesn't mean he's right.

He's right, for his audience. It is to be hoped that the major OO brands are paying attention. Differentiate your product ranges clearly: 'Sam' market, modeller market. This you can run care free on the carpet, while that requires some knowhow and care to get the best from it. HO brands have been doing this for decades.

Exactly. "If I buy this model, will it work on an average, imperfect, layout. And if so, is it value for money. " is basically what it's about. I watch it (not the running session phone in things admittedly) because I'm fascinated to see manufacturers so often trying to sell junk that needs fixing before you can use it - and the occasional beautiful model.

Well its not really exactly is it.. says it in the paperwork do not run on carpet, most of these models now are so extremely fine, with gearboxes, wheelsets, flanges ect... problem is they are not designed for carpet, hence why I pull half a cat out of one, or try and source a spare motor as it's burnt out... unfortunately the customers then find out... Sam isn't the one they should listen to when it starts costing them money.

I do agree though the chassis side. Most layouts are not billiard table smooth or run on a nice flat table, the 4-4-2's show imperfections very well, one small dip say 0.2-0.5mm that's pretty much it, as there's no vertical movement built in. But the market has demanded detail and finesse, so that's what you have.

[mattmay05]

I don't know if you saw his review of the Heljan class 15, but it was such a load of rubbish that even lots of people posting in the comments said they had the same model with no issues and thought theirs were fine, but also there were lots of people posting that they wouldn't buy Heljan models because of Sams advice, which is terrible when consider he talks such tosh. I have 59 UK outline Heljan models and I've had one duff one which required major surgery. (1st issue LMS Garrett). The rest ran fine or had just very minor problems like a pickup strip needing a tweak for example.

As he makes very clear, to the point of tedium sometimes, his reviews are based only on what is anonymously supplied to him, he always buys things himself so that he is not held under obligation. Doing that also leaves him free of any 'editorial' or commercial influence,and his avoidance of 'group think' is so refreshing. That to me is a far more useful review that those from people supplied with stuff, stuff that may even been specially checked over before dispatch. Your engines may all happen to be fine, but that doesn't mean everyone else's are, by the same token.

That so many of the models he reviews have problems is significant. One might expect to get unlucky say 10% of the time in a random sample, but when it's 50% or (a lot) more there must be underlying problems (across all manufacturers).

Problem is he may review what he has... but unfortunately as D605Eagle has said he does speak a lot of rubbish about Heljan, now rightly some of their loco's steam ones haven't been great, motors, or motion, it's well known...but the Diesel ones or electrics are very good, I have one model from Heljan and also a friend has a Class 33, and a few others, can't fault them.

He's only in this for money, and he's not really fussed if it's right or wrong, best to avoid and not watch, in fact Hornby have pretty much dropped him after customer complaints, which are self induced as they don't read the paper work.. They listen to him... its unfortunate that those in the know, who are good modellers and speak sense don't get half of the air time.

Regarding photoshop in Magazines, it's probably not the subject being worked on, maybe some lighting, brightening up of an image some times smoke effects, they don't modify what has been done by a modeller.

You also most remember most of his viewers and subscribers are not real... what I mean by this is, he's openly admitted that the numbers are fiddled, you can buy subscribers or viewers to make your channel look bigger and better than everyone else... by looking at his sub count there's rather big and obvious jumps with no impression on viewers... that is dodgy.

[Richard08]

All the anger directed towards Sam just convinces me more he's on the right road, doing an excellent job of rocking a very complacent boat. He presents his evidence, and as far as I can see no one else is doing the same to refute it. When another equally independent reviewer does the same thing, on the same scale, and finds all is fine and dandy then I'll reconsider.

[Bigmet]

... he's on the right road, doing an excellent job of rocking a very complacent boat...

And we'll know when he has rocked the boat sufficiently, because brand managers - who should be paying attention - will do the work of rebuttal. That they are not doing so (AFAIK, but others may be able to point out actions I have missed) suggests his influence over the customer base* isn't significant enough to actually trigger action.

*Personally, and this is true of all my modelling friends, we make our own decisions. Products are purchased on the basis of our interests, and anything found faulty or unsatisfactory is returned as 'unfit for purpose' tout suite.
Only two of these for me in the last 22 years, Dapol milk tank, DJM J94.

And some items of potential interest are simply not purchased, in my case the list is:
Bachmann 'LMS' sliding door van - visibly inaccurate body shape.
Heljan class 47 - visibly inaccurate body shape.
Hornby class 31 - visibly inaccurate body shape
Hornby Gresley gangwayed coaches - visibly inaccurate body shape
Heljan DP2 - visibly inaccurate body shape
Accurascale class 55 - visibly significantly underscale wheels

(That last one falls into the same category as such as Hornby pacifics with flangeless trailing truck wheelsets: if there's a path to fix an otherwise good model, I'll take it; so it hangs on whether their class 37 bogies have scale diameter wheelsets and are made available as spares.