DHS Diecast Discussion Forum
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In

Tonkin 994H close-up photo Options · View
Weserhutte
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 12:11:44 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/2/2005
Posts: 648
Location: America
Going through e-mail after being away for a couple of weeks, I was excited to see an e-mail from a friend in Europe with "994H" as the attachment name. Then I opened the photo, and couldn't believe this is the production piece. NZG's first 994 from decades ago didn't need any phillips-head screws to secure the crossmember between the boom arms! In my personal opinion, this is confusing the hell out of me because Norscrap has better engineering in this respect. And that's saying a lot!

See for yourself, and make your own judgement;

WCollins
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 12:56:11 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2011
Posts: 556
Location: Healdsburg CA.
I really like those Norscot 993K tires.

-William
Jack of all trades, Master of none.
Miniature Construction Models
Gavin84w
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 1:12:18 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 12/27/2003
Posts: 1,628
Location: Australia
So if this manufacturing process removed cost from the manufacture of the model, then this reduction in cost is passed on to the consumer so a reasonable price point can be achieved and Caterpillar sign off on it you can,t look past that?
Antho
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 2:25:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 11/26/2008
Posts: 2,559
Location: Edmonton, AB
I'll admit that's pretty disapointing. I'd like to know why they did this, same goes for the rivets on the smaller loader booms. I mean, there was absolutely no other option?
Robert Heuston
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 2:49:40 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/23/2010
Posts: 1,734
Location: Hunter Valley
A bit of putty and some paint and you won't notice it.
You dirt guys are whingers.
Greasemonkey
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:01:06 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/27/2007
Posts: 2,647
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
Antho, I'm sure there were other options, but I would guess the screws allow less complex, and probably fewer molds to be made. That would lower the cost, and ultimately the price of the loader. Was it the right choice? For some, it won't be, but for the majority of the people who buy the model, it probably will be. Incidentally, if the prototype was any indication, they did quite well.

Personally, I can overlook the screws, considering the price of the model.
GC1
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:37:05 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/26/2007
Posts: 1,706
Location: Australia
Yep…as Robert says…bog it up, paint over it and make it as near as the real one as possible with some of your own skills…it's all part of what we do. If that doesn't get your attention then take a look at some of the stuff guys on this very board do….the idea is improvement on what the makers do to get us, a not just great, but fantastic model.
MartinW
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:41:28 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/3/2013
Posts: 744
Location: North Wales, UK
That is a shame. I have been looking forward to this model and the MT4400 but facebook is already riddled with posts highlighting issues with it.

What's up with the handrails near the cab there, do they have something on them?

Makes me laugh when some comment that you get it for a good price. You may well do in the US but us here in the UK pay the equivalent of $260 US for it. Would you be so forgiving if you were paying that much?

New UK based Scale construction forum.

www.scaleplantandconstruction.co.uk
Jamiescotland
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:50:13 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/19/2013
Posts: 696
Looking forward to the Cranes etc review coming up in the next couple of days. I'm sure any issues will be highlighted there. The paint looks very thick and glossy from the photo above, but I will reserve judgement till I see more pictures
catkom3
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 8:51:11 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 11/8/2005
Posts: 199
Location: Kinross, Scotland
That picture is fairly similar to the ones Chuck already has in the DHS shop,


You can see the screws in this shot



But not in this one,doubt they'll cause much of an issue,and not my cup of tea,Komatsu WA1200,now your talking,and where is it,??
Regards
Joe.
EastCoastFabricator
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 10:14:21 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 2/27/2006
Posts: 1,298
Location: Somewhere in the USA
Yep....going with the Norscot 994 and the WA1200

There are two rules for success: 1. Never tell everything you know.
RPFowler
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 3:28:54 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/10/2006
Posts: 962
Location: Ras Al Khaimah, UAE
seems ironic that this will finally arrive when the K is launched!!!!!

Does seem there are a few pipes missing from the articulation point.
Greasemonkey
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 3:46:44 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/27/2007
Posts: 2,647
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
MartinW wrote:
Makes me laugh when some comment that you get it for a good price. You may well do in the US but us here in the UK pay the equivalent of $260 US for it. Would you be so forgiving if you were paying that much?


Actually Martin, the answer is yes. I'm in Canada, and to be honest, we won't get it for much less than that. My point was that it's not a 500 dollar model, and as such, I'm willing to overlook the screws.

Richard, the K won't be released for some time yet.
Ricky-1
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:40:31 PM
Rank: Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 1/30/2004
Posts: 52
Location: Garda Lake, Italy
If the final model is the same as the prototype, then I don't see that much improvement over the Norscot 994...
The tyre thread doesn't seem the best possible, just like the 775G...

Personally, i don't see any "whining" in criticising a scale model (not a toy!) that costs good money...plus consider that some things in such a big model really stand out....like the tyres!!
EastCoastFabricator
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:50:36 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 2/27/2006
Posts: 1,298
Location: Somewhere in the USA
Ricky-1 wrote:
If the final model is the same as the prototype, then I don't see that much improvement over the Norscot 994...
The tyre thread doesn't seem the best possible, just like the 775G...

Personally, i don't see any "whining" in criticising a scale model (not a toy!) that costs good money...plus consider that some things in such a big model really stand out....like the tyres!!


I am kind of bummed. This WAS going top be my first Tonkin model. Guess ill wait and see how the roadbuilder turns out.

There are two rules for success: 1. Never tell everything you know.
gbarnewall
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 4:55:08 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/1/2006
Posts: 4,065
Location: Dublin Ireland
Greasemonkey wrote:
Antho, ............but I would guess the screws allow less complex, and probably fewer molds to be made........


3 piece loader arm = 3 molds
1 piece = 1 mold

1 piece it is for me,if it worked out cheaper as a 3 piece wouldn't every other manufacturer be doing this for years??

But hey guys!! just pose it in a way that hides the screws lol

It will be nice to see it side by side with NZG's WA1200

Why is "phonetically" spelt with a "ph"?

... It's better to be silent and thought a fool, then to speak up and remove all doubt

The complex of Newgrange was originally built between c. 3100 and 2900 BC,[2] meaning that it's aproximately 5,000 years old. According to Carbon-14 dates,[3] it is more than 500 years older than the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, and predates Stonehenge by about 1,000 years.

MartinW
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:12:22 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/3/2013
Posts: 744
Location: North Wales, UK
gbarnewall wrote:
But hey guys!! just pose it in a way that hides the screws lol


LOL Teeth

Like this?



New UK based Scale construction forum.

www.scaleplantandconstruction.co.uk
EastCoastFabricator
Posted: Monday, September 29, 2014 5:34:52 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 2/27/2006
Posts: 1,298
Location: Somewhere in the USA
MartinW wrote:
gbarnewall wrote:
But hey guys!! just pose it in a way that hides the screws lol


LOL Teeth

Like this?




Or this:


There are two rules for success: 1. Never tell everything you know.
Greasemonkey
Posted: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 12:49:35 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/27/2007
Posts: 2,647
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
gbarnewall wrote:
Greasemonkey wrote:
Antho, ............but I would guess the screws allow less complex, and probably fewer molds to be made........


3 piece loader arm = 3 molds
1 piece = 1 mold

1 piece it is for me,if it worked out cheaper as a 3 piece wouldn't every other manufacturer be doing this for years??


That's not really how it works. The complexity of a mold, drives the price way up. To create a mold that will release a part like the loader arms as a single casting, can be far more more complex and expensive than making one mold, with cavities for three or more pieces to create the same part that has to be assembled.
Rossco
Posted: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:21:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/21/2003
Posts: 728
Lacking allot of detail but if the price is right, no complaints. Will fit in the cabinet with the other huge loaders many on here own.

Rarther a funny configuration for a model thou.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

SoClean Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.8 (NET v2.0) - 3/29/2008
Copyright © 2003-2008 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.