42xx - shape of the footplate

[SimonMW]

Having just unpacked my 42xx bought from TMC, it seems a little out of shape. Does anyone else have one that can comment if it is straight??? I've sent an email to TMC to ask them too.

 

Edited March 10, 2018 by SimonMW

[lofty1966]

Having just unpacked my 42xx bought from TMC, it seems a little out of shape. Does anyone else have one that can comment if it is straight??? I've sent an email to TMC to ask them too.

 

‘Tis definitely bent.

If my memory is correct the support bars need adjusting.

Do a search on here as I am sure there were easy cures posted

[7007GreatWestern]

This is a common problem with the early releases of the Hornby Eight-Coupled tanks and recent releases have been much better (but still not perfect). The problem goes back to the design of the smokebox saddle, motion bracket and outside steam pipes (though the latter aren't a problem on your model), which make it impossible for the production-line operative in China to get everything straight. The only solution is to take the body to bits and fettle it yourself or return it to the retailer. Fortunately there are some very good articles if you do decide to do it yourself. George Dent did an article in Model Rail showing the process. Here's an link which you might find useful:-

 

http://georgedentmodelmaker.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/hornbys-big-tank.html

 

Also a gent called Ray, who goes by the alias SilverSidelines has done his own blog article which is similarly excellent:-

 

https://longsheds.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/no129-hornbys-class-52xx-tanks.html

 

I've done a couple of these myself, one of which should be appearing on A Nod To Brent in the next few weeks. It's a relatively straightforward job, greatly assisted by the fact that the upper body isn't even glued to the running plate (they clip together). A very 'doable project' for someone with basic dexterity, tools and confidence.

 

You may be wondering how it could be that Hornby produced a design with such elementary flaws. The answer is simple: this model was one of the products of Hornby's "Design Clever" fad. It amazes my that there are people on this platform actually calling for its return........

 

Andy.

[7007GreatWestern]

Here is one of the eight-coupled tanks with straightened running plate.

 

 

Getting everything straight from the front of the tanks to the leading face of the cylinders required the motion radius plate, outside steam pipes and the bottom edge of the smokebox saddle to be filled down. I used abrasive boards for the task. I recommend doing it a bit at a time and re-checking the fit as you go along to avoid filing off too much! Once everything was satisfactory I glued the joints and gently clamped everything while the glue cured.

 

Getting the running plate forward of the cylinders to lie down is another matter altogether. As you can see, I have tried replacing the factory fitted struts with my own made from nickel-silver wire which are longer than the originals. The hope was that lengthening the struts would push the front bufferbeam down further. I'm still not completely satisfied with it. My next move will be to remove the factory fitted coupling hook from the front buffer beam and replace it with one similar to this:-

 

 

Hopefully the 'invisible' portion of the hook will locate under Hornby's (extremely crude) representation of the extension frames, thereby drawing the whole front running plate and buffer beam downwards.

 

I hope this is of help,

 

Andy.

[gwrrob]

 

 

I've done a couple of these myself, one of which should be appearing on A Nod To Brent in the next few weeks. It's a relatively straightforward job, greatly assisted by the fact that the upper body isn't even glued to the running plate (they clip together). A very 'doable project' for someone with basic dexterity, tools and confidence.

 

 

So far I've done the rear cab etch and added a new Markits smokebox handle. It will be renumbered to 7220 and have GWR on the tanks. The red dot also needs moving to above the cabside number, this is correct for a post war loco.

[hayfield]

Buy a kit then you could straighten it.  Sorry wrong thread

 

Just return it to the retailer and ask for a new one

[toboldlygo]

So far I've done the rear cab etch and added a new Markits smokebox handle. It will be renumbered to 7220 and have GWR on the tanks. The red dot also needs moving to above the cabside number, this is correct for a post war loco.

 

Now that the big computer upgrade is complete (a Birthday present), said loco was lurking where my laptop used to sit this afternoon - with a nine inch angle grinder close by     

[The Johnster]

This prompted me to go into the railway room to have a look at 4287; my last operating session terminated with it in Cwmdimbath station having just arrived in the loop with a loaded coal train, so while the crew are sneaking an extended cuppa in the signal box before running around, I checked the running plate for level.  I was not aware of an issue, so any bendiness would have only been slight, but I am happy to report that mine's fine!  

 

Minor changes in level on real 42xx/5205/72xx were not unknown, a consequence of frame strain on sharp curvature; Ebbw Junction's examples, which worked heavy iron ore trains up the winding inclines of the Ebbw Valley, were particularly prone.  Tank leakage became an issue as well, for the same reason, and the proposed 2-10-2T, an enlarged 72xx with a King boiler, would have suffered even more!

[toboldlygo]

This prompted me to go into the railway room to have a look at 4287; my last operating session terminated with it in Cwmdimbath station having just arrived in the loop with a loaded coal train, so while the crew are sneaking an extended cuppa in the signal box before running around, I checked the running plate for level.  I was not aware of an issue, so any bendiness would have only been slight, but I am happy to report that mine's fine!  

 

Minor changes in level on real 42xx/5205/72xx were not unknown, a consequence of frame strain on sharp curvature; Ebbw Junction's examples, which worked heavy iron ore trains up the winding inclines of the Ebbw Valley, were particularly prone.  Tank leakage became an issue as well, for the same reason, and the proposed 2-10-2T, an enlarged 72xx with a King boiler, would have suffered even more!

 

I've renumbered a fair few 42xx/52xx & 72xx over last few years, when you start researching them it's apparent that the front part of the running plates was extremely weak and far from sitting straight all the time (apart from ex-works). Also there are accounts of the only things stopping the front of the running plate of are the braces!

[7007GreatWestern]

Now that the big computer upgrade is complete (a Birthday present), said loco was lurking where my laptop used to sit this afternoon - with a nine inch angle grinder close by     

 

Steady! You could end up on a certain well known 'naughty step'!

[gwrrob]

Steady! You could end up on a certain well known 'naughty step'!

It's obviously a SR modellers trait.

[Coppercap]

I've renumbered a fair few 42xx/52xx & 72xx over last few years, when you start researching them it's apparent that the front part of the running plates was extremely weak and far from sitting straight all the time (apart from ex-works). Also there are accounts of the only things stopping the front of the running plate of are the braces!

You want to look at photos of the 'straight-framed' County 4-4-0s in their later life. These were never fitted with bracing, and some looked decidedly bent (upwards)! The slightly later 'curved-frame' engines didn't seem to suffer the same way.

[toboldlygo]

Steady! You could end up on a certain well known 'naughty step'!

 

 

Lol, I have 24 hour protection from the MiM, anyone who attempts to put me on the naughty step - will get dispatched to the MiM's Black site for a treatment of my choosing

 

 

It's obviously a SR modellers trait.

If you saw my to do list - you'd think I was modelling GWR

[SimonMW]

Buy a kit then you could straighten it.  Sorry wrong thread

 

Just return it to the retailer and ask for a new one

TMC don't have any more unfortunately. I've sent them an email, will see what they say. I'm reluctant to start pulling it apart until they have commented.

[hayfield]

TMC don't have any more unfortunately. I've sent them an email, will see what they say. I'm reluctant to start pulling it apart until they have commented.

Very wise, good luck

[SimonMW]

Very wise, good luck

Message from TMC...

 

"It looks as though the plastic is a little warped. I just checked another one and it appears they are all like this. It’s the sort of thing that often happens in the manufacturing process. Sadly there isn’t much that can be done about it and as I say it seems to be apparent in others of the same model."

 

 

Suggestions?

[gwrrob]

 

Message from TMC...

 

"It looks as though the plastic is a little warped. I just checked another one and it appears they are all like this. It’s the sort of thing that often happens in the manufacturing process. Sadly there isn’t much that can be done about it and as I say it seems to be apparent in others of the same model."

 

 

Suggestions?

 

 

Simon, no consolation this time but I would see one in the flesh the next time you buy a Hornby model from their design clever period. I would ask for my money back on this one.

[7007GreatWestern]

Hi Simon,

 

If this was almost any other model I would suspect your retailer of bluffing in order to avoid refunding/exchanging. In this case however they're right! Here's the photo from their website of one of their premium priced weathered models:-

 

https://www.themodelcentre.com/R3222COALTMC/

 

I tend to agree with Rob - if you're not confident to do the mods yourself or you feel you shouldn't have to then send it back. I see you're in Oz. I'm not sure whether Australian or UK Consumer Rights pertain but here's a helpful link to your rights in UK Law:-

 

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/i-want-to-return-my-goods-what-are-my-rights

 

The article makes reference to 'goodwill' returns and hopefully that will be the case in this instance. I also suggest you check TMC's website for their Terms & Conditions which may be above and beyond the minimum that is required in Law. They ARE legally obliged to stick to their own T&Cs.

 

Andy.

[wirey33]

My one has the same issue. I contacted Hornby to see if there were "non-bent" one available as spares; there weren't.

 

Pretty shoddy to supply a loco with an obvious manufacturing/design fault and not do something about it.

 

Even the fact that a national magazine published an article explaining how to rectify the issue didn't seem to bother them.

 

Little wonder they're deep in the shite.

[7007GreatWestern]

 

Pretty shoddy to supply a loco with an obvious manufacturing/design fault and not do something about it.

 

 

In fairness to Hornby they have done something about it - they've progressively introduced improvements to the model with each successive release to the point that the most recent models are very good indeed. That isn't much consolation though to the folks who have the early releases and are dissatisfied with them. 

 

As an aside, I bought two pre-owned Hornby models from certain well known Liverpool emporium this weekend. Both appeared to be pristine and unused. One was a 14 year old, Sander Kan manufactured, 'old school' Hornby 'Grange'. The other was a Hornby 'Star', about six years old and like the 42xx a product of 'Design Clever'. Can you guess which one is now running like a Swiss watch and which is going back to the retailer because it is unusable on DCC? No prizes sadly.

 

Andy.

[SimonMW]

I think I may have found a straight one at another retailer, I'm getting them to send me a photo.

That then leaves me with the decision to keep or return the bent one. To return it will cost me postage from Australia. To keep it I'd look at renumbering, if I can find suitable cabside plates. Any suggestions on that?

[wirey33]

That then leaves me with the decision to keep or return the bent one. To return it will cost me postage from Australia. 

 

If the supplier has supplied an item not fit for purpose (i.e bent) then they should be liable for the postage costs for returning it and you should be refunded the original costs for shipping it to you.

 

I copied this from the Which.co.uk website...

"Returning faulty goods

If you receive faulty goods and wish to return them, the Regulations are in addition to your other legal rights.

So, if your goods are faulty and don’t do what they're supposed to, or don’t match the description given, you have the same consumer rights under the Consumer Rights Act (which replaces the Sale of Goods Act from 1 October 2015) as you have when buying in store.

Any terms and conditions that say you must cover the cost of returning an item wouldn’t apply where the goods being returned are faulty."

[SimonMW]

If the supplier has supplied an item not fit for purpose (i.e bent) then they should be liable for the postage costs for returning it and you should be refunded the original costs for shipping it to you.

 

I copied this from the Which.co.uk website...

"Returning faulty goods

If you receive faulty goods and wish to return them, the Regulations are in addition to your other legal rights.

So, if your goods are faulty and don’t do what they're supposed to, or don’t match the description given, you have the same consumer rights under the Consumer Rights Act (which replaces the Sale of Goods Act from 1 October 2015) as you have when buying in store.

Any terms and conditions that say you must cover the cost of returning an item wouldn’t apply where the goods being returned are faulty."

Thanks wirey33.

 

I've pointed out to TMC that I can get a straight one from another retailer, and that I'm debating whether to return it for refund or to keep and repair... Will see what they come back with.

[hayfield]

If the supplier has supplied an item not fit for purpose (i.e bent) then they should be liable for the postage costs for returning it and you should be refunded the original costs for shipping it to you.

 

I copied this from the Which.co.uk website...

"Returning faulty goods

If you receive faulty goods and wish to return them, the Regulations are in addition to your other legal rights.

So, if your goods are faulty and don’t do what they're supposed to, or don’t match the description given, you have the same consumer rights under the Consumer Rights Act (which replaces the Sale of Goods Act from 1 October 2015) as you have when buying in store.

Any terms and conditions that say you must cover the cost of returning an item wouldn’t apply where the goods being returned are faulty."

 

 

Does this cover overseas sales ?

[SimonMW]

I have been sent a photo from another retailer of a straight-framed one, and it is on its way to me You can still see a slight anomaly in the way the front running plate fits, but the buffer beam is vertical and the buffers horizontal - a HUGE improvement on the one from TMC.

 

So now I have to decide whether to just return it for refund, or keep, renumber, and fix...