[ebaykal]

Out last day in Dortmund, being a sunday, all model shops being closed thankfully

, we had the chance to visit the railway museum at Bochum - Dahlhausen.

One of the highlights of the museum was seeing one of my favorite steamer; the Br 44 in the flesh.

I have compiled a series of photos comparing the big brother vs its young counterpart the Roco Br044.

Has Roco done a good job? Hope you enjoy.

Big Bro:

Little Bro:

Tender boogies

Cab view

The eccentric mill

The air pump

...and finally little bro who is about to be weathered..

cheers

Baykal

 

[john woodall]

Hi Baykal,

Great detail shots.

Some great things to consider when superdetailing.

John

 

[7113]

On balance I would say that Roco hace just about captured the lines of the original - both are very impressive. More of the same please Baykal.

Regards

 

[Brian Considine]

I think that Roco have done an excellent job capturing the massiveness of the real thing.

Excellent comparison photos Baykal & thanks for posting them.

 

[34C]

Good model without a doubt, which does throw small compromises into sharp relief. Two detail aspects struck me: the cylinders looked a little undersize on the model, and presumably the tail rod covers are absent so as not to foul the pony wheel; and the transverse leaf springs in the tender bogie need much more depth of relief to represent the way the springs come through a hole in the frame plate. But overall they have both the overall character right and well rendered detail; still playing catchee up to get that sort of quality in UK prototype models.

 

[Guest]

QUOTE (34C @ 7 May 2008, 22:47) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>But overall they have both the overall character right and well rendered detail; still playing catchee up to get that sort of quality in UK prototype models.

Well rendered yes. But according the photos wrong pretty much all of the time. There is a hell of a lot of work getting that to match the pics. Far more so than a hornby class 60 say.

I think a lot of the gushing admiration people have for non UK models is they have no idea what it should look like (I include myself in this). The pics in this thread to me prove that the European manufacturers are pretty hopeless too. Take a Hornby HAA hopper. Show it to an american and what would they see? Loads of nicely moulded detail. Lots of separate bits, nice livery application. Would they really know its the wrong shape?

Cheers

Jim

 

[goedel]

QUOTE (jim s-w @ 7 May 2008, 23:20) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well rendered yes. But according the photos wrong pretty much all of the time. There is a hell of a lot of work getting that to match the pics. Far more so than a hornby class 60 say.

I think a lot of the gushing admiration people have for non UK models is they have no idea what it should look like (I include myself in this). The pics in this thread to me prove that the European manufacturers are pretty hopeless too. Take a Hornby HAA hopper. Show it to an american and what would they see? Loads of nicely moulded detail. Lots of separate bits, nice livery application. Would they really know its the wrong shape?
I disagree, no two steam locomotives are exactly alike, especially a huge class such as the Baureihe 44 and after so many years of maintenance, replacement parts etc. there are bound to be differences between the prototype 377 and a model of 657.

 

[Richard Johnson]

QUOTE (goedel @ 8 May 2008, 20:30) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I disagree, no two steam locomotives are exactly alike, especially a huge class such as the Baureihe 44 and after so many years of maintenance, replacement parts etc. there are bound to be differences between the prototype 377 and a model of 657.

***I actually agree with you both - Yes Jim, some parts are certainly very much "approximations" rather than faithful copies - plus there is certainly a lack of depth to the detail which is probably as much a fault of cost expediency for tooling + it being moulded in one colour of plastic than anything - some sympathetic painting to artificially add shadow and depth visually would help a lot. This is most obvious to me on tender springing, wheels, rod structure and painting.

That "plastic" look just screams at me when the images are higher resolution!

And Goedel... I totally agree that its hard or unfair to compare detail-for-detail as its likely that steam loco's did differ a lot through the life of the class ...but... I do agree with Jim that there is a lack of "substance" in things like some detailing + the "mass" of the cylinders...

Its getting these "character making" parts right that make the difference betwen a good and a great model, which to me is why it is almost always better to add a little effort to a loco out of the box to make it something more special.

ie: "To make it a model of a locomotive, not just a locomotive model".

Also... also agreeing with Goedel's comment that not all of a class are the same in detail... Apart from varying loco's being different in service - there's also the fact that due to the need to scrounge ever more rare parts a preserved loco often has features in detail that were simply NOT on the original of the same number.... So a photo like this will not tell the real story the way an "in service" image vs a model will....

So - re these two:

I think I could say that to me its "a well preserved 1:1 loco Vs a not too bad locomotive model", with the Roco just not yet a great model of a locomotive... and I'm sure that with some creative work + Weinart or similar parts + some of his artistic skill with paintbrush and weathering, its good enough that Baykal could make it something very special if he wished to.

Richard

 

[Brian Considine]

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 8 May 2008, 14:10) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think I could say that to me its "a well preserved 1:1 loco Vs a not too bad locomotive model", with the Roco just not yet a great model of a locomotive... and I'm sure that with some creative work + Weinart or similar parts + some of his artistic skill with paintbrush and weathering, its good enough that Baykal could make it something very special if he wished to.

Richard

Look forward to seeing the results !

 

[7113]

I've just looked at the original post again and it struck me what it was that's been bugging me - it's the motion. There is much more red on the real thing than on the model. Could explain why it looks so different.

Regards

 

[ebaykal]

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 8 May 2008, 13:10) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>That "plastic" look just screams at me when the images are higher resolution!......

I think I could say that to me its "a well preserved 1:1 loco Vs a not too bad locomotive model", with the Roco just not yet a great model of a locomotive... and I'm sure that with some creative work + Weinart or similar parts + some of his artistic skill with paintbrush and weathering, its good enough that Baykal could make it something very special if he wished to.

Richard

I am on to it Richard & Brian.

I am taking my time on this one particularly and trying not to make the mistakes I did with the weathering of the Br56. Plus not forgeting the wienert parts. I want this loco to be special.

Taking photos of models one needs skill and talent of which I am still at the early stages in learning. I believe with the correct parameters set, one can turn a simple model into an artistic model. People go into great depths when it comes to model photography . I have seen model photographers waiting for the right time of the angle of the sun and photographing their models outside just to give that realistic impression.

The Br44 series and their variants the SNCF 150X loco's were used extensively on heavy haulage in Turkey. Models available? Only Roco and Maerklin that I know of.

The new Trix SNCF 150X is on order. Saw its prototype in Dortmund in Trix stand. Hope to compare it with the Roco one when it arrives.

cheers

Baykal

 

[Guest]

QUOTE (goedel @ 8 May 2008, 12:30) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I disagree, no two steam locomotives are exactly alike, especially a huge class such as the Baureihe 44 and after so many years of maintenance, replacement parts etc. there are bound to be differences between the prototype 377 and a model of 657.

That may be but I still think your comment of British stuff playing catchup is way off the mark. The fact that every pic shown shows multitudes of errors is not something you will find with current British locomotives, Take the Bachmann class 20 which has 3 different types of bogie depending on the prototype, or the 66 which has a very subtle difference in the brackets on the bogies to match the locomotive being modelled. As for self coloured plastic on models Vi trains tried that and public reaction was so severe that had to start painting all of the models almost straight away.

I do admit though that I am more used to seeing steam loco models built by some of the best model makers around from kits. So they are exact and not approximations.

Cheers

Jim

 

[goedel]

QUOTE (jim s-w @ 8 May 2008, 20:37) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>That may be but I still think your comment of British stuff playing catchup is way off the mark.
It was 34C's comment Jim!

I agree that there are both differences between members of the same class and also areas where there is room for improvement on the Roco model. As an N scale modeller I've already sacrificed detail in exchange for panoramic scenery and scale length freight trains so to me exacting detail is not so important as capturing the feel of a locomotive, but that is not to say I don't appreciate the incredible standards achieved in H0 and similar scales with judicious skill by many talented modellers. Here I think the Roco model will look the part after a bit of dirt has been added which will enhance details, for example those springs on the tender chassis...

I think Richard summed it up brilliantly in the final paragraph of his last post!

 

[neil_s_wood]

I reckon Baykals idea is a good one. Photographing the prototype and the model from the same angles for comparative purposes. It would be good to see more of this. While the Roco model is clearly not perfect, you have to look at how much it actually does cost for a perfect model to realise there have to be compromises to make a mass market model afordable.

 

[Guest]

QUOTE (goedel @ 8 May 2008, 22:29) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It was 34C's comment Jim!

Oh yes. Appologies for mis-representing you.

Jim

 

[Guest]

QUOTE (neil_s_wood @ 8 May 2008, 23:15) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>there have to be compromises to make a mass market model afordable.

Not just affordable - produce-able at all. Given that a model is not an exact replica using scaled down materials, is powered a different way and expected to do a different job as a vehicle in its own right it will never be perfect. Chances are even if you could design it to be so you probably couldn't release it from the mold anyway.

Dont get me wrong - the model under discussion here looks a fine one. Just not any different from that which british modellers now expect.

Cheers

Jim

 

[john woodall]

Hi Jim,

The roco class 44 (of which there were 1753 built between 1928-1945) is a good model, not necessarily a great model.

This IMHO is a great model http://www.brawa.de/Produkte/H0/Lokomotive...0008-br-75.html

When I compare it to this http://www.hornby.com/locomotives-89/r2734x/product.html I have to ask what do British modeller expect?

These two models are light years apart (and admittedly pretty far apart in terms of price as well).

John

 

[Brian Considine]

I remember when people said that large UK locomotives in OO would not sell once the RRP breeched the £100 barrier - now we have tank locomotives that manage it & they are selling.

Although there is a vast difference between the Brawa BR75 & the Hornby M7 IMHO the Hornby practice of side on views of their locomotives do them no favours at all, in fact do not do some excellent models any justice at all.

 

[Guest]

QUOTE (john woodall @ 9 May 2008, 04:05) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>These two models are light years apart (and admittedly pretty far apart in terms of price as well).

Hi John

Light years apart how? Just because the M7 doesn't have loads of fussy stuff stuck to it doesn't mean its less accurate. Even one build by one of the best loco builders you will find is simplistic, detail wise

see

http://www.scalefour.org/images/portfolio/...ont3quarter.jpg

Yes the Roco class 44 looks complicated but is it accurate? My point made earlier about the Hornby HAA still stands.

Cheers

Jim

 

[Brian Considine]

The UK/Euro debate has been done to death already on this & other forums & could go on like (most of) our first train sets - round & round in circles.

Is it a coincidence that the picture of the M7 in the link is the side with all "the fussy stuff stuck to it" ? & what price a commercially built one ? More than the Brawa BR75 I suspect.

P4/EM aside what I find puzzleing is that many people who are voracious about minor detail in OO models are also quite happy to accept that their models are narrow gauge.