Roy L S

More specifically, rather that the OO CAD, it would be the existence of an extensive and pretty recent R&D file on the prototype loco that may well have influenced the choice. As there will be different considerations such as material thicknesses (which cannot necessarily be shrunk), clearances, drivetrain, DCC socket space and adequate tractive weight in the smaller model, I would have thought a brand new CAD would be done from the ground up, but yes, that can be derived from R&D already done as can livery artworks. Regards Roy

Hi Ben Thank you, it was more the anomaly that the field where estimated arrival date would go is blank, whereas in the case of other projects with a closed order book an estimate is given. I don't think I will receive any prior notification having paid in full, typically orders have just turned up thus far, but I will keep watching for news. Regards Roy

At the risk of having my head bitten off (again 🤔) in respect of the N Gauge models the order book closed on 30th September 2023, and it was my understanding that the wagons were in production. However, having checked the RevolutioN project page on their website, unlike every other project with an "order book closed" status there is no estimated UK delivery date for these wagons (or their OO gauge counterparts where admittedly the order book didn't close until 31/12/2023 - much later). Could one of the Gents on the Revolution Team provide an update on the status of these wagons please? Many thanks Roy

Lovely looking models, I feel sure they will find a "niche" in their own right and as a feeder for standard gauge layouts in O too, a great use for Peco O-16.5 track and refreshing to see this mentioned in the video.

Very interesting, but aligns with the changes to how Bachmann will be announcing new models going forward. The green hints 009 and Statfold is about pretty much all things narrow gauge, but the exhibition itself isn't. Nonetheless I would still put my money on 009, maybe not a loco but a piece of rolling stock. Roy

The older type 8F was free of the tiny pony wheels which were only found on the 4 wheel bogies, but they were very crude by today's standards, reasonable but not spectacular runners and certainly not as good as the latest coreless motor locos. The later 8F is an altogether different beast, with modern coreless motor chassis, DCC Next 18. fitted speaker, see through spokes etc - a lovely model. However I would suggest that given the design of the chassis, pickups and axle-bearings converting to a wider gauge could be something of a challenge. Also, there has only been one production run so far and that was a few years ago now so you are likely to only find one secondhand and probably not cheap. Roy

An Economy of Austerities maybe?

Hi Jerry Thanks for the info and encouragement, I appreciate that as with all things in most clubs or associations a limiting factor will be capacity in terms of both personnel and resources. I will doubtless end up buying some drop in wheelsets for one of my Farish Class 24 diesels to form a 2mm start point and buy some plain track by way of a small trial layout - I think breaking into 2mm really requires getting something running which so far I have failed quite dismally to do. I would have much preferred that to be a steam loco, but your points are all well made and understood. I guess I would see simplicity as key to that first steam conversion, so that would mean crankpins that are designed to facilitate reuse of existing coupling rods, on the basis that transition to 2mm scale has to be a staged process, from there moving on to fold up frets etc. I live near Bicester so I think there is an Oxford Area Group that is reasonably close, and I really should investigate that 🤔. EFE's next diesel loco. I had pondered this myself and as existing models seem to have some basic provenance in the DJM plans (I am not saying designs or CADs just plans) and also because there are so few diesel classes not already made RTR in N, I had been thinking in terms of the Baby Deltic which would certainly suit me fine! Rather excitingly in terms of steam that DJM thinking would also seem to suggest a Q6 0-8-0 at some point 🙂 which is probably why I am a mile off! Regards Roy

I have been an "on the fence" potential 2mm modeller and on and off a member of 2mm SA. I have just renewed membership for another year and have some handmade points (made for me years back) ready for a small trial layout. What has put me off starting has been the lack of a simple (and I mean simple) drop in wheel conversion kit for a RTR steam loco, yes diesels no problem but something similar is I think definitely needed for steam modellers to get something running easily as a "toehold" in the scale. As I have said above, the EFE J94 seems like the perfect opportunity to address this. Roy

There are so many points made in the above that I agree with, but a few I do not: - "There are a lot of people in the hobby who have "bounced off" N. Over the years I've seen a lot of comments of the form " Haven't got a lot of space or a layout, started off in OO, tried N but it wasn't for me/found it too fiddly/couldn't get on with it so here I am, back in OO . Now how do I do something in the limited space I've got?" I think there will inevitably be some, but I would challenge there being "a lot" and certainly not enough to in itself warrant an entirely new scale being developed. "The argument that there is more RTR available in N is simply not the knockdown argument that some folk think, if your starting point is "N gauge is too small a scale to satisfy me". Respectfully I disagree. We have already witnessed comments to the effect that people will not engage with TT120 as a viable modelling scale until there is sufficient a range of models. I do not want to get into the issue of how quickly Hornby can (or will) add products to the range, but it is clear that the lack of range in TT120 now (and for what may be a considerable time to come) is preventing some from entering the scale. Such a range does exist in N, it is substantial, supported by many manufacturers and absolutely will attract many potential TT120 modellers for whom that is an issue, not least because of the quality of what is being produced, which is comparable and in many cases better. Also, at 2.065mm/ft (I am talking British here as TT120 already is a thing on the continent and elsewhere) is actually less than 1/5 smaller as a scale than TT120 - noticeably smaller of course, but significantly smaller? For a small minority possibly yes, for most probably not and for a layout in terms of square footage it takes up a lot less space for a comparable Tt120 layout. So, there absolutely will now and for a long time to come be a significant number who if looking for a minimum/smaller space British layout will choose N over TT120 based on available range alone. "Even this is to concede too much to the naysayers. It's entirely possible given what we've seen so far, that demand for TT:120 will be fully sufficient to sustain production of commercial RTR indefinitely. S gauge is a commercial scale in the US. The range of RTR is much smaller than for HO, of course, but folk who like the scale or perhaps want to be different, work in it. Marklin's Z gauge is never going to displace N , but it's been around since 1972 and there are no threads with eager posters speculating about how soon Marklin will drop it". Hornby under and influenced by Simon Kohler clearly saw a market for TT120 or they would not have started investing in the scale so heavily, this has continued, possibly in a more pragmatic and diluted form under current management. Initial demand was strong, but how many like me will have taken a "punt" on an "Easterner" set (or similar) because at a discounted price of £165 for a complete set it would simply have been rude not to, based on curiosity value alone? How much of this has translated into sustainable future sales to newcomers to railway modelling, or "converts" from other scales it is simply too soon to say. Definitely it has some, and some (like me) will see TT120 as a small "side hustle" to another established modelling scale but that's all, which doesn't matter as after all it is still sales, but then some, and likely a very significant proportion of existing modellers won't engage with the new scale at all. Will TT120 succeed and become established as a British modelling scale? At this point it is too soon to say for sure. What is abundantly clear is that Hornby have belief that it will and have a strategy to add products to the range for the next few years so they are giving it every chance. Personally I believe it will probably carve itself a place a place too, because the size will inevitably suit some as an alternative to OO or N and it would be wrong to suggest otherwise. However I can't see it threatening those established scales in terms of volume. If we could "fast forward" five years, I think that there is much more chance that we would see TT120 continuing to be modelled in Britain than not and with manufacturer's support. Roy

Except of course that with the exception of direct sales from Dapol your warranty is not with them, it is with the retailer you bought the loco from because that is who your contract is with. In either case though, be it Dapol or a retailer, they would very reasonably expect you to produce proof of purchase as part of any return/warranty claim. if bought direct from China via eBay or otherwise, the only proof of purchase a person could provide would make it self evident that the model was purchased through an unauthorised channel so your warranty and any claim under it would be void. Roy

The EFE one is no slouch in the haulage department, one of mine pulled 20 mineral wagons with no bother at all. I don't think there would be that much in it as there seems a fair bit of weight in the J94 so I am thinking tanks/footplate may be diecast. It should be remembered that the cab of the old Farish model is plastic. As should be expected given the ancient provenance of the Farish model, the new EFE one trounces it in pretty much every respect imaginable in terms of accuracy, detail, and running quality and is of course DCC ready. In my opinion there really isn't any comparison between the two (I have three EFE ones). Roy

Models started coming out post WW2, I think the first loco may have been a generic 0-6-0 tender loco and wagons under the "Formo" brand, including a set, but am not 100% sure from memory. The GF OO range was probably at it's zenith in the 50s with two rail OO models of the "Black Five" (ish 🤔), King, Merchant Navy, later a Large Prairie and 94xx, plus rolling stock (including Pullmans). A substantial range of OO track evolved into the 60s, there may have been a US "Hudson" loco too I believe. The tender locos were weird contraptions with a two pole tender mounted motor driving loco wheel, some kind of "clutch" arrangement in the drive, plunger pickups and a kind of "box" at the front of tenders to enclose the driveshaft. Survivors can still be found but rarely in good condition. The Prairie asd 94xx were more traditional in design and remained in a reduced OO range in the 60s. The "mainline" and "suburban" generic coaches in various liveries plus wagons and vans (all ending up in more modern packaging) survived into the late 70s along with the 94xx in BR Black and GW green. This residual range was discontinued at the end of the 70s at which point Farish concentrated on their N models. I had a 94xx in the late 70s (pestered my parents for one) and it was a really nice loco, the diecast body gave it lots of weight, and by that point it had a decent can motor so ran really smoothly. It sat nicely on my shelf with the "new" chassis N Gauge 94xx I also had 🙂. There's probably more to it, but that is the post-WW2 Farish basics I think. Roy

The Graham Farish Flying Scotsman is a model from the 1980s and is very crude, it is in no way comparable to modern Farish products so to compare against modern TT120 lacks any credibility at all.

A nice looking layout for sure, and you are entitled to your opinion, but in saying that TT120 locos are "better looking" that Graham Farish models, could I ask precisely what are you comparing given that Graham Farish do not make an A3 or A4? The only possible direct comparison is the 08 which is neither better or worse looking than the Graham Farish model - it is what it is - an 08 (I have both models), a thoroughly competent model but in reality (with rose coloured TT120 specs off) it is no better detailed overall than the Farish model. Comparing the A4 I have with the Farish Peppercorn A2 Pacific, I wouldn't say that overall it is better or worse, and in some ways (especially wheel standards) looks more crude. In terms of running, the 08 is no better than the Farish model in my experience and to add to that, the TT120 A4, which is a beautiful model for sure and runs very nicely, but it absolutely isn't a better runner in any way when compared to any of my numerous recent coreless motor loco-drive Farish tender locos, which, it is worth noting, have a more advanced technical spec than the TT120 counterparts (coreless motor, Next 18 DCC socket, fitted speakers). I do agree that the dead-frog Hornby points in the picture look better than Peco N Settrack points, but that isn't really a fair comparison as most serious N layouts you see will, unless an absolute minimum space layout, typically use Code 55 track and medium radius Streamline points as a minimum (With live frog or Unifrogs). My own experience is that far better than the Hornby Code 80 track that came with my Easterner set (if more expensive) is the Peco Code 55 TT120 track and point-work which really is excellent and what I have bought for when I get round to my own TT120 layout project (looking more likely to start sooner with the arrival of the J50). Roy

So basically they are saying any new Dapol product regardless of scale that is on sale direct from China should be looked upon with suspicion. Well people have been warned, but I guess to some it will still depend on just how much of a "bargain" something appears to be. Caveat emptor for sure, I would have very little sympathy with anyone if a duff item arrives ...🤔

It was reported that following the Collett Goods 0-6-0 in N Peco said they would not make any further locos, as they were/are primarily a model railway track manufacturer. In terms of the two locos produced, you are partly correct. The Jubilee was made for Peco by Rivarossi of Italy, and there were three different incarnations. The first in LMS black can be identified as having driving wheels coupled with gears (the rods did not do the work - just cosmetic - on the front wheelset there wasn't even a crankpin). The next batch dispensed with the gear-coupled driving wheels, the rods then connecting all wheels, again LMS black, a final batch were produced in LMS crimson in the early 80s. Interestingly the Jubilee was never produced in BR livery. Batch sizes were quite large for the market and took many years to sell through. I think there may have been only one batch of Colletts in different liveries, although it was upgraded from initially having only a single traction tyre on the tender to having two. Peco were unfortunately for them too far ahead of the Market in that the loco had a DCC chip onboard, but an oddball 4 pin Lenz job, this was used to help "justify" a premium price of £130 which was a lot when released, of course not helped by the loco being UK manufactured adding to cost. One of the biggest issues with this loco was the choice of tender used to house the mechanism, a larger (I think 3,500 gallon) one which was extremely rare for this particular loco and look out of proportion. It was/is though a model of utmost quality. Peco have of course since collaborated with Kato to produce 009 locos, which seems to confirm they have no desire to produce further locos on their own, and I suspect a similar collaboration would be the only way Peco would be involved in a TT120 loco. Roy

I was referring to a brand new scale as regards British models and the UK Market which given that the thread title is "Hornby Announces TT120" I thought fairly obvious.

I wasn't comparing to early British N, I was referring to the focus Bachmann had on re-establishing a new Graham Farish N range in the mid to late 2000s ("noughties") following their takeover of the UK based Poole operation and initial use of the original Poole designed models made in China. There was a pretty relentless introduction of new tool models for a time, and as I say in one year I recall seven new locos alone plus significant rolling stock. A slightly different scenario granted, but the scale in Britain had to be grown again from a low point where very little British N was produced by anyone following closure of the Poole factory in 1999 and Bachmann re-starting Farish production in China some time later (two ish years?) followed by the brand new models to which I refer. In terms of manufacturers I have spoken to, suffice to say universal names in our world so mainstream rather than "cottage" industry types who currently have no plans to enter the TT120 space and who produce a range of N products already. Inevitably any manufacturer with an ounce of business sense will watch the TT120 situation closely, I wouldn't suggest otherwise. In terms of cottage industry involvement, I think the advent of 3D printing has helped enormously, and I would not challenge that there is support for TT120 from that area and I feel pretty confident that some innovative designer will produce 0-6-0 models that fit the J50 chassis in time. It is interesting to compare the introduction of TT120 to TT3 and look at how that evolved. There are some quite legitimate direct comparisons as TT3 was a complete range introduced by one manufacturer, and in a very similar way to TT120 the scale started with a very limited range (just two locos for example - Jinty and Castle) and was scaled up from that initial launch in a similar way as Hornby are doing today, with more locos, rolling stock, accessories and a new track system following. Also, in a similar way, there was cottage industry support in terms of products by the likes of Gem and K's to name but two and a slightly bigger name Kitmaster (who produced Mk1 coach kits and a Royal Scot kit too). I have a fair collection of TT3 and have a fair level of enthusiasm for it, appreciating it for what it was. I was even a member of the 3MM Scale Association for a time, so have a reasonable understanding of the history too. It is an inalienable fact that no other mainstream manufacturer joined Tri-Ang on their journey then, and I know there has been much debate on this forum already about the cause of the demise of TT3 as a mainstream scale, with much being made of the introduction of the more compact N (and British N's infancy) as a contributory factor, which I know is to an extent disputed but I personally believe was key along with the untimely death of a key Tri-Ang staff member. I have one of the Pat Hammond books that tracks the rise and fall of TT3, and how sales from a peak in the late 1950s dropped to about 1/6 of that value by the early 60s. It could well be that a different dynamic exists today and TT120 will not suffer the same peak and then demise as TT3, but the loss of the "champion" and driving force (SK leaving) at a critical time for it is a worrying comparison for me personally. However, I think the pivotal point is not about how much product Hornby will introduce and how quickly, it will be if (and I say if not when) another manufacturer dips a larger toe in the water beyond a single open wagon, and I do hope that will happen. I also think an association akin to the N Gauge society or 3MMSA will help by growing a critical mass of members and with that the confidence to talk to manufacturers directly (Think N Gauge society Hunslet, Kits and rolling stock). It is after all still early days just yet... Roy

But then TT120 is the rarest of things, a brand new modelling scale in model railways and in terms of overall products there has been significant volume, but of necessity it included the mundane but essential items such as track and accessories which skews the position somewhat. In terms of locos and rolling stock I don't think I would be bold enough to say "more brand new models than any other manufacturer in any scale" and I don't think that's correct, in fact the volume of releases thus far has been comparatively slow - to take just one comparable example, in British N I can recall during the late "noughties" when Bachmann were trying to get the Farish range re-established one particular year where if memory serves, there were seven locos alone released. TT120 was launched with a huge fanfare and with hugely optimistic "promises" by some then at Hornby in terms of what would be delivered and when, a classic case of over-promising and under-delivering which didn't help. In current economic conditions Hornby have the hardest of jobs and are doing their best within the inevitable financial and logistical constraints that exist but it hasn't been perfect and the TT120 "fundamentalists" would do well in my opinion to balance their sometimes overspun views with a little more pragmatism. Aside from Peco who have dipped a toe in the water with some track (which arguably has a global market), lineside models and buildings (and a single British wagon) nobody else has committed to producing anything for the British market, and from my conversations with some manufacturers they don't actually seem that interested. This makes Hornby's job in establishing the scale all the more difficult and it is going to take more time than was initially suggested. Roy

Yes, they would both be good choices, the G2 had a very long life and one preserved. The other loco ripe for the picking now UM have ceased production is the LNER B12/3 - another loco with inside cylinders so no complex valve-gear, and again one preserved on the North Norfolk Railway, a stalwart in the Hornby range for many years as an affordable express passenger loco.

Hi Ben Looking at the rather splendid Vale of Rheidol loco you are progressing in 009 I think you are doing yourselves an injustice in terms of what you might achieve. That said I think there are a number of issues with the choice of the Garratt in N. I asked Harttons at one if the shows that they attended why the Garratt? The only reason given was because it did well in OO. In truth they didn't really promote it that actively either compared to their OO models and I don't think it really stood a chance. I am encouraged that you would even consider a steam loco and would personally suggest an 0-6-0 tender one or similar as an initial model to have room to accommodate innovations that RevolutioN prides itself on like DCC sound. Which one? Well I am sure there are many suggestions but for me the long lived and numerous LNER J26/J27. Roy

I think the J50 is a reasonably joined up choice given the existing A3 and A4 locos in the range, and with a BR green class 37 in due course a nucleus of a BR Eastern Region railway is in a small way beginning to form. I think some (but not all) J50s were vacuum braked so one could be pressed into service on a branch passenger train, but it would be cold in the winter with no steam heat. I can see me ordering one and with the BR green 08 incoming, a more joined up small branch terminus type shunting plank begins to look plausible. Again though the J50 is only 6 pin DCC ready, a basic 3 pole motor and presumably no speaker fitted so nothing technically sophisticated about it, which given strides being made in N feels like a bit of a mistake to me. Roy

I am not sure I would want to use a liquid lubricant on pinpoint bearings personally, it is likely to attract dirt and in time jam the wheels up more over time. If any kind of "lubricant" is to be used I would suggest graphite in the bearing pocket itself. Of course the other alternative that has been mentioned would probably be to carefully ream out the bearing holes slightly with a purpose made axle-reamer. Should someone expect to need to do this on a brand new model? No in an ideal world probably not and it would invalidate any warranty but it would be a potential solution as an alternative to returning them. It is interesting that Michael has identified the kinematic couplings going to full stretch, and to me this is another indication of overtight wheel bearings that are overpowering their spring mechanisms.

I am not sure my comments were intended to be "helpful" or unhelpful, they were observations based on what had been reported at that point, and actually @Michanglais and @froobyone who have both reported issues with stiff running Mk3s so far. No, we don't know if it is a single coach out of Michael's 8 purchased, but given the power car would cope with three but not five it does suggest that the problem is with more than one coach, I am sure @Michanglais will say if otherwise. Let's wait and see what consensus is once more of the coaches land with purchasers. Roy