Model Railway Forum banner
21 - 28 of 28 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
10,033 Posts
My search found this video. Here's a direct link to the source on youtube.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
A 5 pole whilst considered better in the days of X04 sized motors etc is a different matter with smaller motors as to get 5 poles in, given each is that much smaller as a consequence, the less wire results in a weaker electromagnet being created. On a 3 pole if a flywheel is fitted (or even the worm depending on sizes) the weaker parts of the magnetic field are smoothed out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,700 Posts
I doubt you are instructed to use a rolling road, but then I haven't bought every example of every RTR OO brand's products. Rolling roads are a snare and a delusion in my opinion, they don't properly exercise the mechanism in the way that running on rails does.

My best suggestion, redeploy the RR as a paperweight. Start running and assessing the mechanism on the rails: where it is going to have to work if it is to be of any practical use....
I am in full agreement with this. To me, RR's are consistent with what I call 'The Parker Pen Syndrome' - the expectation that having the best possible pen would make you write better. It made little difference if you couldn't write in the first place.

While they do have a practical benefit for those without layouts, I personally consider them to be little more than a showing-off tool: 'look at me, look how much money I have spent, aren't I clever ?'.
As 34C indicated, nothing beats running on a proper layout.

My biggest beef (apologies for a rant!) is the show-offs who produce Youtube videos of their latest DCC sound purchase running on a rolling road.
In my opinion, that proves absolutely nothing other than that they are 'plonkers' (go to the shop, buy something, bring it home and plonk it down).
When I evaluate a DCC sound package, I want to see how the sound relates to the physical motion because that's the only way that you can tell if the package is set up properly and is synchronised. Far too many DCC sound packages make a noise, but the chuffs or diesel revs are all inappropriate for the given motion and/or are at completely the wrong time, showing that the producer did not pay any attention or understanding to the prototype they recorded. The only way to check for this is to see the model operating on a proper layout. The problem is, the show-offs without layouts want to get into the game and end up spoiling it for everyone because poor DCC sound packages end up being accepted as the norm because they have not been evaluated properly!
This is why whenever I do DCC sound reviews 00 Gauge Articles - Model Railways On-Line (select DCC sound on the left), I always do it on a layout. And shunting about doesn't cut it either - it doesn't open a loco up to full thrash to show the full range of sounds!
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
8,447 Posts
Now it appears that both are going to appear on sale in Q3 (2022). I don't have the slightest use for a Manor, but am interested to see how both shape up, just in case either brand embarks on a steam model I would like.

Accurascale particularly because it is their first steam model, and these present mechanism performance challenges absent from heavyweight centre motor with drive to both bogies D+E mechanisms based on long established technique for the North American market.

Dapol to see if they are climbing the steam mechanism learning curve, as both the D class (traction tyres) or GW Mogul (gear ratio) didn't have ideal mechanisms. (Whereas their D+E mechanisms I have seen (LMS 10000, NBL DE type 2/class 21) are right up to the mark.)

The Manor is a good test subject, as it is a small 4-6-0; and an example of exemplary mechanism performance from a small 4-6-0 is available from Hornby to provide a comparison in the form of their B12/3: which ices the cake by its very accurate dimensions and appearance, a real gem all around. (Fortunately the BR livery was lined black so Hornby's terrible BR steam loco green didn't sabotage this model.) That's the one to equal or beat.

Bottom line is that these models all come out of the same Chinese tooling and manufacturing system, so the competition between the brands is essentially about how their design input and specification for the model is executed: who has the best performing development and production management liaison?
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
8,447 Posts

Accurascale vid, showing 'the reason why' of user optional parts around the cylinders and slide bars; which allow the model to be run on set track radii without these parts, or when fitted for best appearance, only on (probably much) larger radius curves. Good example of serious explanation rather than 'puffery' - other manufacturers might take note and follow this example.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
691 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
Hi Thanks for the update In the end I decided not to pre-order either as much as I would like one or maybe both . I'm putting all my effort and money into finishing my shed hopefully I will be able to get one sometime down the line. Jim
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
8,447 Posts
I am not planning a purchase of this particular item, but am very interested by the attention to making the best possible model, and value the quality of communication of the reasons for design choices. I am hopeful that this approach continues in future models: just considering steam loco subjects there is quite a list of notable loco classes built in significant numbers which saw long service, but never yet produced in RTR form; which are opportunities....

(Their wagon models that I have purchased are very fine, and I am very much looking forward to the BR mk1 57', BS, CL and S 'suburban' stock.)
 
21 - 28 of 28 Posts
Top