How has Hornby RTR Steam Improved Since 2001?

[robmcg]

Hi All,

 

I was photographing a second-hand Hornby Merchant Navy RTR 00 model yesterday alongside a more recently-made Hornby RTR 00 West Country, as you do, and found myself comparing the resulting photos with regard to the attractiveness and quality of the models..

 

Not much different, really, is my conclusion.

 

While there are some detail improvements, as in deflector braces and lubrication control wheels on the running plate, and no doubt other things, they are certainly not very obvious, in fact the MN is a stunning model.

 

This is not a scientific nor critical comparison, but more a comment about how great the original MN was, revolutionary I should say, rather as Simon Kohler has written.

 

I include below photos below of a second-hand re-named 35003 MN , wrong tender and crest but hey, where is a correct one?, and a re-named 34046 WC, and a very recent original MN 35028.

 

I don't see all that much improvement in 17 years...

 

Photos are slightly edited, nothing substantive changed.

 

 

 

 

comparison for entertainment and discussion.

 

Cheers,

 

 

[Mad McCann]

2001 was a step change. Prior to that, Hornby's models were frankly toys, albeit of accurate basic dimensions but with clunky details and mechanisms best described in terms not appropriate for this forum. It's no coincidence that in wishlists of the time, modellers generally stated that they wanted the new models produced by Bachmann. I think it was such a transformation in basic philosophy for Hornby that the bar set by the new MN was going to be pretty difficult to better. So the record has shown as it happens. 

I don't see that as a bad thing; it merely demonstrates how right they got the basic concept back then. Apart from a minor wobble with the Duke and some southern EMU and the blind alley of what became known among modellers as 'design clever' (sic), they've continued to produce generally excellent models since.

 

D4.

[Hilux5972]

It’s improved a lot!

[Dunsignalling]

The most noticeable advance in appearance from the rebuilt MN (and the air-smoothed WC that soon followed it) to the later rebuilt WC and air-smoothed MN can be seen directly beneath the cab.

 

A proper representation of the ash-pans and trailing truck rather than a somewhat vague and incomplete casting flopping about in mid-air.

 

IMHO, the rebuilt Light Pacifics and the King Arthurs established a standard that some of their subsequent locos have struggled to match. 

 

John

Edited January 25, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[JSpencer]

The most noticeable advance in appearance from the rebuilt MN (and the air-smoothed WC that soon followed it) to the later rebuilt WC and air-smoothed MN can be seen directly beneath the cab.

 

A proper representation of the ash-pans and trailing truck rather than a somewhat vague and incomplete casting flopping about in mid-air.

 

IMHO, the rebuilt Light Pacifics and the King Arthurs established a standard that some of their subsequent locos have struggled to match. 

 

John

 

And even inside the cab. Note also little things like the wing deflector plates on the cabside windows. Tender is also notably refined with many more choices.

 

Haulage wise, the rebuilt West Country will out pull (due to its greater weight) the MN by some margin.

[Brocp]

Better detail.

Better mechanisms (mostly).

Better variety.

[Legend]

And even inside the cab. Note also little things like the wing deflector plates on the cabside windows. Tender is also notably refined with many more choices.

 

Haulage wise, the rebuilt West Country will out pull (due to its greater weight) the MN by some margin.

 

That's interesting because I've found the opposite . My Clan Line will out pull my West Country Wilton . Both I think are the earliest versions of these introductions . I wonder if the WC has been beefed up in the interim?

 

I  think Clan Line was the true step up . Have things improved since then?  Well I think the latest Duchess and Unrebuilt MNs exhibit even finer detail , but do we really need that , I'm not so sure . Clan Line had that step up in detail while maintaining some robustness , I think that's a level I'm generally happy with .   Of course the model is only good if it runs well and there are so many reported issues with motors in S15, Class 71 etc that Hornby really do need to pay attention to this .  Its certainly put me off preordering some locos , preferring to wait for some YouTube feedback before spending the money.

[JSpencer]

That's interesting because I've found the opposite . My Clan Line will out pull my West Country Wilton . Both I think are the earliest versions of these introductions . I wonder if the WC has been beefed up in the interim?

 

I  think Clan Line was the true step up . Have things improved since then?  Well I think the latest Duchess and Unrebuilt MNs exhibit even finer detail , but do we really need that , I'm not so sure . Clan Line had that step up in detail while maintaining some robustness , I think that's a level I'm generally happy with .   Of course the model is only good if it runs well and there are so many reported issues with motors in S15, Class 71 etc that Hornby really do need to pay attention to this .  Its certainly put me off preordering some locos , preferring to wait for some YouTube feedback before spending the money.

 

Very odd as I have the earliest of both too, Clan Line and Port Line, prior to DCC days, then United States which is the same except for DCC chip holder in the loco. My rebuilt West countries are Plymouth (one of the first batches) and Appledore (last year release). The only difference between Plymouth and Appledore are the tender connections are DCC set ups. These rebuilts will far out pull a MN.

 

I have 2 S15s and 2 Hornby 71s, all are robust reliable machines for me. That said my Exeter has an electrical fault somewhere. It won't move when first placed on the track and then suddenly works fine 15 minutes later. Very odd.... I have 3 H class, 1 is perfect. 1 yokes back and forth slightly on the rails but not on the rolling road, the third is fine without the body on but seems to struggle with it on.

Edited January 25, 2018 by JSpencer

[bike2steam]

 Of course the model is only good if it runs well and there are so many reported issues with motors in S15, 

 

Watching/ suffering some of the vids on you-tube I wince, do people run-in their locos properly, and the clumsy, heavy-handedness of some, no wonder some locos run badly or are damaged. You-tube feedback, like trip-advisor can be manipulated.

[Dunsignalling]

That's interesting because I've found the opposite . My Clan Line will out pull my West Country Wilton . Both I think are the earliest versions of these introductions . I wonder if the WC has been beefed up in the interim?

 

I  think Clan Line was the true step up . Have things improved since then?  Well I think the latest Duchess and Unrebuilt MNs exhibit even finer detail , but do we really need that , I'm not so sure . Clan Line had that step up in detail while maintaining some robustness , I think that's a level I'm generally happy with .   Of course the model is only good if it runs well and there are so many reported issues with motors in S15, Class 71 etc that Hornby really do need to pay attention to this .  Its certainly put me off preordering some locos , preferring to wait for some YouTube feedback before spending the money.

Wilton, of course, isn't a rebuilt. Plymouth and her colleagues are in a different league for haulage and the only steam-outline locos I have that will consistently out-pull them are Bachmann 9Fs, though I anticipate my S15s will at least equal the rebuilds when they get a few miles under their belts. My own non-rebuilts, with the addition of  some strategically placed lead flashing can hold their own with their modified siblings.

 

As for motors, the only Hornby loco I've had to replace one on is a non-rebuilt WC Weymouth acquired second-hand with unknown previous history. Only other issue encountered has been the well-known one of a rotten bogie on the earlier version of Manston. I did send one S15 back with a nasty motor hum but we later discovered that to have been due to a faulty controller.

 

As with consumer goods in general, all the duds tend to get talked about while trouble-free examples are usually taken for granted.

 

John

Edited January 25, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

Better detail.

Better mechanisms (mostly).

Better variety.

1. Yes

 

2. Most of the newer (large) Hornby locos are mechanically and electrically similar to the rebuilt MN, give or take the altered wiring for DCC.

 

3. Is an inevitable function of time passing.

 

John

Edited January 25, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Legend]

Watching/ suffering some of the vids on you-tube I wince, do people run-in their locos properly, and the clumsy, heavy-handedness of some, no wonder some locos run badly or are damaged. You-tube feedback, like trip-advisor can be manipulated.

 

I do think YouTube is more of a cross section of the hobbyist and gives some very useful feedback .  Of course, as John says you only really hear of the duffers not where everything is OK. There are some very talented people on there who are not heavy handed . I would point out Mikesndbs , who posts on here, as an example as someone who has an issue with the S15 motor and who has quite clearly explored and explained the issue .  There is another gentleman who was so fed up with motor on Class 71s , which appear to have similar symptoms,that he replaced them with ones from Class 20s , a not insignificant engineering challenge.

 

However back on point , has RTR improved , well in detail definitely , running , not so sure . My perception is QC has definitely suffered in Hornby.

[Legend]

1. Yes

 

2. Most of the newer (large) Hornby locos are mechanically and electrically similar to the rebuilt MN, give or take the altered wiring for DCC.

 

3. Is an inevitable function of time passing.

 

John

 

On point 2 , though I do think they source motors from different suppliers and that that is a source of variability.

[Dunsignalling]

On point 2 , though I do think they source motors from different suppliers and that that is a source of variability.

Quite possibly, the X.4026 that is common to all the Bulleids (and much more) and which I fitted to our Weymouth ran the wrong way when wired what I thought to be the same as the original. Could have just been me, though.

 

Some other large locos are listed as using X.9108, which looks much the same on the service sheets, though maybe a bit shorter?

 

Most of the new smaller locos seem to have dedicated motors that aren't fitted to much else.

 

John

Edited January 25, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 An awful lot of the 'hoorah' around Hornby's MN of 2001 was over its external appearance. Which was good.

 

Inside, not so good. Bachmann - take a look at the 1999 WD 2-8-0 - had them well beaten on mechanism and construction, much better all around. Robust motor mount, isolated chassis block thanks to all wired pick up connections, neat little pick up wipers, neat loco to tender drawbar. The Hornby product's live chassis block and tendency of the motor to lift itself on the worm were particular defects that I systematically rectified on my examples (and those of friends) in order to keep them running. Which they do very well to this day having been sorted, thanks to the excellent 'black can' motor then employed..

...Better mechanisms...

 Hornby began to match fully match Bachmann in this department with the Britannia in 2007. That's a good mechanism all around. Gone backwards on motors since is the impression I am getting, though I have personally had no trouble so far.

 

...Better detail...

 Except that it then fell off from the pre 2007 models and had to be found and glued back on. Not a problem for shelf queens, but those of us who operate models noticed. (The contemporary Bachmann stayed in one piece.) Definite improvement since, the last pieces that fell off were the chimney rim from a Britannia, and a tender frame on a K1 (the assembly operative applied no cement!).

 

...Better variety.

 It is a function ot time passing as already observed, but there has been a shift at Hornby to giving quality attention to smaller and less glamorous 'black' locomotives. I remain impressed with the M7 (hope the H is at least as good) and that has continued with such as the D16, J15, J50, K1, L1, O1.

[bike2steam]

 I would point out Mikesndbs , who posts on here, as an example as someone who has an issue with the S15 motor and who has quite clearly explored and explained the issue . 

 

 , has RTR improved , well in detail definitely , running , not so sure . 

Yep I'd agree with that, but over the last ten years to fifteen years I've only bought examples of the larger steam locos, and (so far) no running problems what so ever. The only ones I've had trouble with were some bought s/h, hard-wiring the tender connection cured most of those.

Edited January 25, 2018 by bike2steam

[Ian Hargrave]

The release within the last year of the Airsmoothed MN and the redesigned Duchess shows a marked improvement in hauling and running capabilities.

[JSpencer]

The release within the last year of the Airsmoothed MN and the redesigned Duchess shows a marked improvement in hauling and running capabilities.

 

Yes and no. Compared to the previous Duchess and the Rebuilt MN, then yes. Compared to the rebuilt West Country and Clan/Britannia then no - they are lighter. The weight balance of these new models (original MN, Duchess and H class) is some what towards the rear. The H being the most noticeable - though admittedly being an 0-4-4 - is not the easiest type to balance in the first place.  The Clan and West countries (both types) have weight balanced directly over the middle drivers.

[sirwilliamfrs]

Although this topic is about RTR steam locos it must be noted that the Hornby Class 60 was when introduced and still is, one of the best ever RTR diesel models. The new Duchesses are excellent too. The rebuilt MN was probably ahead of it's time when introduced and still looks good with the minor modifications along the way. The Class 50 has cab window shape issues and under scale wheels but was well received at first and I believe the Class 56 is underrated, accurate in most respects apart from the strangely sunken roof fan grilles. I am, as a collector, mostly very impressed by the detail on current models from all manufacturers and find the sometimes heated criticisms occasionally mildly amusing. 

Edited January 25, 2018 by sirwilliamfrs

[Ian Hargrave]

Yes and no. Compared to the previous Duchess and the Rebuilt MN, then yes. Compared to the rebuilt West Country and Clan/Britannia then no - they are lighter. The weight balance of these new models (original MN, Duchess and H class) is some what towards the rear. The H being the most noticeable - though admittedly being an 0-4-4 - is not the easiest type to balance in the first place.  The Clan and West countries (both types) have weight balanced directly over the middle drivers.[/quote

 

Well in my recent experience with the two...and it is only two that I'm referring to....then I have politely to disagree,wherever the weight is distributed.Both are markedly superior to others models that I have in terms of performance.

[MikeParkin65]

The release within the last year of the Airsmoothed MN and the redesigned Duchess shows a marked improvement in hauling and running capabilities.

In terms of smoothness my earlier Duchesses are better than 46256 (the first of which had to be returned with body and mechanical issues) and 46229 are from the box. I'm sure there will be some improvement over time. Both my Q6 and the K1 (the next most recent Hornby steamers I have purchased new) are also better than the latest Duchess. A recent Hornby Brit is nowhere near as smooth as my Clan. So on my limited sample performance has been steady but has recently dropped off

[Ian Abel]

 

As with consumer goods in general, all the duds tend to get talked about while trouble-free examples are usually taken for granted.

 

John

Have to agree wholeheartedly with this.

 

I've purchased something approaching 25+ locos now since I re-started (about 4 years ago). A few pre-owned so no substantive comments, but they actually all run well.

 

Every NEW loco I have has performed well after I've run it in (hint, hint, to the masses), and I've no complaints. These include MN(s), WC(s), Q1(s), King Arthur(s), S15 and a Schools.

The only actual "issue" I had was the S15 came with two left-handed drain-cock accessories, and that was instantly correctly by Hornby who sent a replacement accessory PACK, not just the single piece. Given I'm in the US I thought that was verging on the miraculous

 

While a newcomer (only 4 years back at it), I've overall been extremely please with all my purchases and do feel there needs to be a balance of "positive reports" (which, as stated you NEVER GET) before you can draw any real conclusions.

 

My experience, taken in isolation, would indicate that the current locos are very nice quality and very good runners.

Edited January 25, 2018 by Ian Abel

[toboldlygo]

Hi All,

 

I was photographing a second-hand Hornby Merchant Navy RTR 00 model yesterday alongside a more recently-made Hornby RTR 00 West Country, as you do, and found myself comparing the resulting photos with regard to the attractiveness and quality of the models..

 

Not much different, really, is my conclusion.

 

While there are some detail improvements, as in deflector braces and lubrication control wheels on the running plate, and no doubt other things, they are certainly not very obvious, in fact the MN is a stunning model.

 

This is not a scientific nor critical comparison, but more a comment about how great the original MN was, revolutionary I should say, rather as Simon Kohler has written.

 

I include below photos below of a second-hand re-named 35003 MN , wrong tender and crest but hey, where is a correct one?, and a re-named 34046 WC, and a very recent original MN 35028.

 

I don't see all that much improvement in 17 years...

 

Photos are slightly edited, nothing substantive changed.

 

35003_MN_Bulleid_Img_8864abc1_r1200a.jpg

 

34046_WC_Bulleid_Img_8865ab_r1200.jpg

 

35028_MN_Img_7253ab_1abcdef_r1200.jpg

 

comparison for entertainment and discussion.

 

Cheers,

 

Firstly both Royal Mail & Braunton have the wrong tender - both should have variations of the 5,250gl Tender (which has yet to be tooled) in modified/rebuilt form..

 

But other than than that yes they have improved. even within the various production runs (with exception to the A3's) - bonus points for Hornby listening when it comes to the GWR Heavy Tanks and T9's...

[robmcg]

Thanks all those interesting replies.

 

I agree the standard of latest models is very high and congratulate Hornby.

 

That said, I think the 2001 Merchant Navy was a game-changer and even today, with updated wiring for DCC, is a truly lovely model.  Things like proportion, and 'presence' are very strong attributes. The model may lack some minor detail but as is true for all these models the greatest drawback IMO is the 00 gauge and rather coarse wheels, subjective, I know.  I do love the silent running of the best Hornby models and there appears to be a bit of luck involved there.

 

I think a peak of sorts was reached in 2007 with the Britannias and N15s, and I am surprised and pleased that Hornby negotiated the Sanda Kan thing so well.

 

All power to Hornby... (as I ponder whether or not to pre-order a blue original Merchant Navy.  How can I not?      )

 

In the back of my mind I think about Hornby's financial status, and whether or not our 2018 range of choices will be sustained.

 

p.s.  my pet peeve is incorrect valve gear eccentrics on driving wheels,  sometime pointing the wrong way, but because of the geometry of 00 it can from some angles look correct when its not, so it's more of the character of the model than anything I guess.

Edited January 25, 2018 by robmcg

[robmcg]

I should also have mentioned the peerless B17.  You would be doing well to find fault in this particular model by Hornby, and oustanding quality is sustained with the Standard 4MT, the B12 and others... and what about the almost-forgotten 28XX/38XX GWR 2-8-0s?

 

Never mind, it was the 2001 Merchant Navy which got be started on this subject and that's sufficient excuse for me to show my edited picture, with surprisingly little modification to the model.

 

35003 'Royal Mail' in all her splendour, holder of the last authenticated BR steam 100mph+ , at 105.77mph. Overhauled in 1/1967 it lasted to the end in 6/1967.

 

 

A fine model, a tribute to Simon Kohler and the Hornby production team, and a supreme steam locomotive design.

 

 

cheers

 

edit; p.s. the tender is not as per the Hornby version, but is painted by my computer which has a special button marked 'rebuilt tenders'. <g>.

Edited January 27, 2018 by robmcg