It's a really nice model, but is simply no good on a gradient of any kind! It's not a traction issue - the bogey and rear wheels are not sprung, which means that any sloping of the track, and the driving wheels are lifted from the track, and the loco stops! Otherwise, a great loco!
I have watched the RUclips video of 30583 with interest and surprise. Tim Mulhall commentated that the models had been designed with different cabs to suit each loco's particular appearance. It was therefore very disappointing to note that the cab front has the details of 30582 whilst the cab sides are specific only to 30582 or 30584 whilst the cab back lacks the window bars found on 30583 in later years. The cab roof is correct but the dome is not and nor are the tank fronts and these are only the obvious faults out of a much longer list.
The third variant of the loco has now arrived and the models show most of the same errors as the first, 30583. The dome still appears to be the low Adams version with superfluous fixing bolts which this loco did not carry in the post-war period, The cab side and front are also incorrect for 30583 and of course the lack of daylight under the boiler remains. The errors on the front buffer beam have still not been changed. It will be interesting to see if the EKR version has the tall dome as shown in previews especially as it, 488 and 30583 should all have the same version.+Adrian Swain
That is Tony Wright layout Little Bytham so it look not out of place on this layout . And the layout what a Great layout .The locomotive, I only seeing film or pictures of the Locomotive (there is one at The Bulebell ) it's looks great
30582 has now surfaced as the fourth variant in the series. Strangely the models available in the shops differ to the OR pictures on their web site and their maintenance leaflet with regards to the number and position of boiler bands. The full size loco photos do not match the model either. perhaps OR can explain this major discrepancy.
From the video, I can simply give a very straightforward review based on what I see. 1) I'm happy to see a new entrant into the British OO gauge market. 2) Oxfordrail seem to have to captured the overall shape well. 3) Pity about the motor protruding out of the boiler. I thought those days were gone. Would have been nice to have a proper boiler 4) The handrails don't look right to me. Somehow it just looks wrong. Especially the front around the smokebox area. Nonetheless I hope Oxfordrail do some more OO gauge (or even N gauge) stuff. I won't be buying an Adams Radial from them as I find Hornby's superior. But I hope Oxfordrail do more. Class 86 (OO & N), Class 87 (OO & N), Class 90 (N), Class 92 (OO & N)
+Jeremiah Jefferson Bunyan Where do you see the motor out of the boiler in the Oxford Rail model? yes in my dad's white metal one built in the 80s but I don't see it on the Oxford model? thanks
+Jeremiah Jefferson Bunyan Thanks, but I just don't see it and I zoomed it in, one of the boxes by the smoke box seems to be lifted one end but I see no signs of motors?
+MikesMovies Well I have no idea how to upload a pic in the comments. But if you read RMweb or something you'll be able to see. Oxfordrail have not designed the model well. the motor protrudes through the boiler and down into the chassis. If you compare images of the Hornby model/real loco with Oxford's effort you'll clearly see that there's not as much see-through space under the boiler as there should.
Crew in the cab would block the view of the motor and I think I would paint the hand rails black. I like the price tag as I have a rule not to pay more than £100 for a loco. however that's getting more and more difficult to enforce these days.
+Brockwell Lane T.M.D -ps Dont like the fact both Oxford and Hornby has gone for the same loco especially as the prototype was not a widespread big class of locomotive. If more than one company wants to do Class 37s or Black 5s fair enough. There's plenty of locos not covered and seems like a missed opportunity to me..
It's not at all clear what rhis is about. Is it about 'We', the loco, or the layout (cleaner than fairyland with the buildings levitating 3" off the ground).
This certainly looks like a superb model, however, I have a concern about the livery of the 'as preserved 488' version. Can anyone please explain what the green of the model is ? It looks more like an LSWR green but it is much more 'limey' and brighter in tone than the preserved loco has ever carried. Has the colour only been matched by name and/or has a full colour pigment/RGB match been done ? Either way, the model green does not match the green of the preserved 488 and looks very wrong.
Hi All For "rivet counters" who enjoy a good laugh at the expense of RTR manufacturers I suggest a close look at the latest illustrations of the Oxfordrail Adams 415 Class Radial tank in SR Maunsell green and Bullied black livery, both as No 3520. Sorry OR but the "Complex history of these locos" seems to have defeated you again.
Hi, really good to see this and all the best of luck to Oxford Rail, I'd like to ask some questions please. What type of motor have you used in this loco? Would you consider not doing these horrid limited editions like so many other manufacturers do, that gives us a chance to decide we like the loco and save up for it, that would be really good. I am saving up for this one right now, won't be until after Christmas but I'll be getting one and will be interested to compare it with my dad's one he built some many years back. ruclips.net/video/4L6EBjt_FjU/видео.html Again, really good to see you with this out there. Mike
What research did Oxford do for their EKR version ? The definitive work "The East Kent Railway" Vol 2 by Finch and Garrett indicates that the livery is SERIOUSLY WRONG !! If the colour is right the lining should be full Drummond triple lining. From 1936 it was SR Maunsell OLIVE with single lining but NOT like the model. Yet again many details are wrong and don't match photos. A pretty toy but not for the "Discerning modeller" and Oxford's "Pursuit of excellence" seems to have come to a grinding halt.
That is a very nice Locomotive, Oxford Rail deserve to succeed.
Yay! My name is Adam!
Great locomotive!
🚂🚋🚋🚋
Brilliant brother good work.
Nice layout too - with smooth trackwork.
It's a really nice model, but is simply no good on a gradient of any kind!
It's not a traction issue - the bogey and rear wheels are not sprung, which means that any sloping of the track, and the driving wheels are lifted from the track, and the loco stops!
Otherwise, a great loco!
I like the look of this
I have watched the RUclips video of 30583 with interest and surprise. Tim Mulhall commentated that the models had been designed with different cabs to suit each loco's particular appearance. It was therefore very disappointing to note that the cab front has the details of 30582 whilst the cab sides are specific only to 30582 or 30584 whilst the cab back lacks the window bars found on 30583 in later years. The cab roof is correct but the dome is not and nor are the tank fronts and these are only the obvious faults out of a much longer list.
The third variant of the loco has now arrived and the models show most of the same errors as the first, 30583. The dome still appears to be the low Adams version with superfluous fixing bolts which this loco did not carry in the post-war period, The cab side and front are also incorrect for 30583 and of course the lack of daylight under the boiler remains. The errors on the front buffer beam have still not been changed. It will be interesting to see if the EKR version has the tall dome as shown in previews especially as it, 488 and 30583 should all have the same version.+Adrian Swain
That is Tony Wright layout Little Bytham so it look not out of place on this layout . And the layout what a Great layout .The locomotive, I only seeing film or pictures of the Locomotive (there is one at The Bulebell ) it's looks great
30582 has now surfaced as the fourth variant in the series. Strangely the models available in the shops differ to the OR pictures on their web site and their maintenance leaflet with regards to the number and position of boiler bands. The full size loco photos do not match the model either. perhaps OR can explain this major discrepancy.
From the video, I can simply give a very straightforward review based on what I see.
1) I'm happy to see a new entrant into the British OO gauge market.
2) Oxfordrail seem to have to captured the overall shape well.
3) Pity about the motor protruding out of the boiler. I thought those days were gone. Would have been nice to have a proper boiler
4) The handrails don't look right to me. Somehow it just looks wrong. Especially the front around the smokebox area.
Nonetheless I hope Oxfordrail do some more OO gauge (or even N gauge) stuff. I won't be buying an Adams Radial from them as I find Hornby's superior.
But I hope Oxfordrail do more. Class 86 (OO & N), Class 87 (OO & N), Class 90 (N), Class 92 (OO & N)
+Jeremiah Jefferson Bunyan Where do you see the motor out of the boiler in the Oxford Rail model? yes in my dad's white metal one built in the 80s but I don't see it on the Oxford model? thanks
+MikesMovies Have a look at this pic, very obvious. www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_11_2015/post-1-0-52884000-1447946786_thumb.jpg
+Jeremiah Jefferson Bunyan Thanks, but I just don't see it and I zoomed it in, one of the boxes by the smoke box seems to be lifted one end but I see no signs of motors?
+MikesMovies Well I have no idea how to upload a pic in the comments. But if you read RMweb or something you'll be able to see. Oxfordrail have not designed the model well. the motor protrudes through the boiler and down into the chassis. If you compare images of the Hornby model/real loco with Oxford's effort you'll clearly see that there's not as much see-through space under the boiler as there should.
+Jeremiah Jefferson Bunyan ah got you now! it would not bother me personally but yes I do see it
Crew in the cab would block the view of the motor and I think I would paint the hand rails black. I like the price tag as I have a rule not to pay more than £100 for a loco. however that's getting more and more difficult to enforce these days.
+Brockwell Lane T.M.D -ps Dont like the fact both Oxford and Hornby has gone for the same loco especially as the prototype was not a widespread big class of locomotive. If more than one company wants to do Class 37s or Black 5s fair enough. There's plenty of locos not covered and seems like a missed opportunity to me..
It's not at all clear what rhis is about. Is it about 'We', the loco, or the layout (cleaner than fairyland with the buildings levitating 3" off the ground).
This certainly looks like a superb model, however, I have a concern about the livery of the 'as preserved 488' version.
Can anyone please explain what the green of the model is ? It looks more like an LSWR green but it is much more 'limey' and brighter in tone than the preserved loco has ever carried.
Has the colour only been matched by name and/or has a full colour pigment/RGB match been done ? Either way, the model green does not match the green of the preserved 488 and looks very wrong.
Hi All For "rivet counters" who enjoy a good laugh at the expense of RTR manufacturers I suggest a close look at the latest illustrations of the Oxfordrail Adams 415 Class Radial tank in SR Maunsell green and Bullied black livery, both as No 3520. Sorry OR but the "Complex history of these locos" seems to have defeated you again.
Hi, really good to see this and all the best of luck to Oxford Rail, I'd like to ask some questions please. What type of motor have you used in this loco? Would you consider not doing these horrid limited editions like so many other manufacturers do, that gives us a chance to decide we like the loco and save up for it, that would be really good. I am saving up for this one right now, won't be until after Christmas but I'll be getting one and will be interested to compare it with my dad's one he built some many years back. ruclips.net/video/4L6EBjt_FjU/видео.html Again, really good to see you with this out there. Mike
What research did Oxford do for their EKR version ? The definitive work "The East Kent Railway" Vol 2 by Finch and Garrett indicates that the livery is SERIOUSLY WRONG !! If the colour is right the lining should be full Drummond triple lining. From 1936 it was SR Maunsell OLIVE with single lining but NOT like the model. Yet again many details are wrong and don't match photos. A pretty toy but not for the "Discerning modeller" and Oxford's "Pursuit of excellence" seems to have come to a grinding halt.