Why do you enjoy old trains vs new ones?

[Paddy]

As I get older I am becoming ever more interest in “classic” trains such as HD and TT.  The new models are wonderfully detailed but for me the charm is lacking.  I am too young to remember Hornby Dublo but the range is very interesting.

 

Currently I am reading Michael Foster’s book on Hornby Dublo and the observation I would make are:

 

1. They manufactured each item is volumes which far exceeded annual sales leading to vast quantities of unsold stock.

 

2. May be they should have made smaller batches and changed identities and liveries more frequently.

 

3. Found a way to lower the cost - possibly less stock may have allowed this.

 

4. According to the book, the legendary reliability of HD locos is a myth in several cases.

 

5. Introduced a finer scale 3-rail track system.

 

6. Switched to Tri-Ang couplers and/or some form of compatibility e.g. like the Tri-Ang wagon they created.

 

All good fun though.

 

Kind regards

 

Paddy

 

[BernardTPM]

10 minutes ago, Paddy said:

Currently I am reading Michael Foster’s book on Hornby Dublo and the observation I would make are:

 

6. Switched to Tri-Ang couplers and/or some form of compatibility e.g. like the Tri-Ang wagon they created.

At the time, Tri-ang was the odd one out with both Trix and Hornby Dublo using the 'Simplex' coupler*. When Playcraft came along in the early 1960s they also adopted the Simplex.

By the time the next wave of new manufacturers came along in the mid-1970s the tension lock was the only game in town so Lima, Airfix and Mainline were all, to varying degrees, compatible. For their brief foray into 00 Jouef hedged their bets and provided a choice of couplings, though the tension lock was fitted.

 

* invented by Sidney Pritchard who used the patent money to set up Peco.

[sagaguy]

A very wise man was Sydney Pritchard,Meccano wanted to buy the coupling rights completly but he stuck out for a royalty on each one,one halfpenny a coupling i seem to recall.

 

                             Ray.

[Silverfox17]

Paddy, you mentioned in your post

 

4. According to the book, the legendary reliability of HD locos is a myth in several cases.

 

I guess that could be true in all cases, but in their defence there were hundreds of thousands of locos made but I think it was really only a small proportion that had issues.  Until a few years ago I had a lot of Dublo and Tri-ang 00 (I still have quite a bit) but now I am back into TT and I can say I have never had as many issues with all the older locos than I had with the modern Hornby , Bachmann and one Heljan/Hattons locos (probably around 300 old locos to 20 new).  The slow running of the old ones might not be as slow as a modern one but not far off.  Both Dublo and Tri-ang motors were very good and virtually indestructible.  I have had modern Hornby and Bachmann where the valve gear has fallen to bits and no spares available, motors stop and cannot be repaired, flimsy plastic handrail knobs that fall out and bend trying to put back etc.  At least the old ones are very easy to repair yet modern ones are not.  Give me the old ones any day as parts don't fall off, have spares (new or second hand from old locos cheaply) and will run and run, and they have the charm as you say.  

 

Garry 

 

 

[Paddy]

Hi Garry,

 

I cannot personally comment one way or the other as I have never owned any HD.  Michael goes to some lengths in his book to describe the poor engineering on later locomotives which led to some of them being effectively withdrawn from the market.

 

In my mind, there is no doubting the robustness of HD though.  The sheer amount of models that are still around is testament to this.

 

Whatever the truth is, the range has character!
 

Kind regards

 

Paddy

 

[rockershovel]

I’ve recently been sorting through a batch of Hornby Dublo 3-Rail and I would say that the general design and construction were very robust, in an old-school sort of way. That said, Tri-Ang clearly knew how to make sellable product at the right price. It didn’t have the air of quality that HD locomotives offered, but the plastic coaches and rolling stock were very much “state of the art” compared to HD tinplate.

 

Tri-Ang had obviously done their homework. The Transcontinental range in particular, was strongly influenced by the “impressionistic” style of Lionel (who were very successful, at the time) and the “gimmick” rolling stock (giraffe car, etc) were obvious copies of known successes. 

 

I don’t think that a “finer scale” version of 3-Rail would have helped, once Tri-Ang had set the pace to 2-rail. Lionel and Marklin dominated their home markets, but when Lionel ventured into American OO, they used 2-Rail to compete with American Flyer. Tri-Ang were preparing to meet any other competitor in the field, with track that was actually quite crude in scale compared to HD. 

 

Once Hornby got to grips with plastic, they did it very well, but I rather think the company was past saving by then. 

 

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by rockershovel

[sncf231e]

3 hours ago, rockershovel said:

Lionel and Marklin dominated their home markets, but when Lionel ventured into American OO, they used 2-Rail to compete with American Flyer.

 

 

When Lionel ventured in 00 gauge (before WW2) they started with 3-rail and later also made 2-rail (locomotives were available in 2 versions). American Flyer never did 00, they did 2-rail H0 gauge (and 2-rail S gauge). Lionel ventured also in H0 gauge in the fifties and than they made (well sold, it was made by RivaRossi) 2-rail.

Regards

Fred

 

[Silverfox17]

Hornby Dublo 2 and 3-rail wheels on locos and stock were actually quite fine, as good as modern Hornby and Bachmann, it was only their track that was coarse. My 3-rail layout using the latest Peco universal points which are finer than the older ones from 20 years ago took the Dublo wheels even better than those points of 20 years ago did. Not one Dublo wheel had to be modified in any way showing how fine they were from their design in the late 30's.  Even Peco did not think they would work until I showed them some videos. 

 

Garry 

Edited May 27, 2020 by Silverfox17

[Silverfox17]

Here is my Dorchester running on the later fine (still code 100) pointwork.

 

Garry

 

 

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, sncf231e said:

When Lionel ventured in 00 gauge (before WW2) they started with 3-rail and later also made 2-rail (locomotives were available in 2 versions). American Flyer never did 00, they did 2-rail H0 gauge (and 2-rail S gauge). Lionel ventured also in H0 gauge in the fifties and than they made (well sold, it was made by RivaRossi) 2-rail.

Regards

Fred

 

 

I wasn’t aware of the 3-Rail OO. I’ve seen a demonstration of 2-Rail American OO, 5/8” gauge, and a link to a website. I’ve seen American Flyer S and HO, both 2-Rail. 

 

You learn something every day, on this forum. 

[Il Grifone]

Sorry about housing estates and Meccano, but he first represents the customers and without Meccano it is unlikely we would have the trains today. Meccano Ltd branching out into Hornby trains put them on the nursery/living room floor in the '20s.

 

The big mistake with Dublo IMHO was copying Märklin in the thirties and going 3 rail. Trix had already shown the possibility of insulated wheels and a 2 rail system was certainly possible. in the end when they decided it was too late.

 

However ancient production/marketing errors do not detract from the pleasure of operating them knowing they going to fall apart or bits drop off.

[rockershovel]

The housing estates are important. They represented the flowering of a very British form of social housing experiment, the Mutual Building Society - a savings group formed for the specific purpose of funding house-building for purchase by members of the society. 

 

I seem to recall a discussion on a similar thread, a little while ago, regarding the Basset-Lowkes and the Hornby-Dublos, two families of the era. The H-Ds would have been exactly the sort of people whose inner-suburban terrace or suburban semi would have been funded by the Building Society.

 

Interestingly enough the archetypal inter-War children, William Brown and the Famous Five, don’t appear to have had train sets, probably because (1) both were written by women (2) both appear, like Bertie Wooster, to be essentially Edwardian characters transposed into the 1920s - although the Five certainly knew about trains, and indeed still appear to earn their bun and pop money from the GWR. 

Edited May 27, 2020 by rockershovel

[Il Grifone]

7 hours ago, sagaguy said:

A very wise man was Sydney Pritchard,Meccano wanted to buy the coupling rights completly but he stuck out for a royalty on each one,one halfpenny a coupling i seem to recall.

 

                             Ray.

 

That might be the case, but I understood they bought part of the rights (for 'toy' railways) and Peco retained the rights for scale' railways. The financial 'clout' of Meccano Ltd., allowed them to contest the Trix patent infringement, which was settled with royalty payments. The Trix version of the coupling is slightly different with a closer setting for the trip pin (later adopted by Playcraft - did they pay royalties or was it too late by then? They couple OK (or at least as well as the multitude of variants of the tension lock), but the uncouplers are incompatible.

 

Dublo wheel standards were very fine for their time and were the only thing adopted by Tri-ang after the take over. Dublo rail section (3 rail - code 125, 2 rail 110) is actually much coarser than it need have been. It is not surprising Peco Streamline will accommodate it. It was designed to be a universal system to accept BRMSB and NMRA wheels at one end and Tri-ang at the other. Dublo came in the middle Allegedly it was tightened up in the eighties (from 1.4mm flangeways to 1.3mm IIRC*). This would still leave a check gauge of 13.9mm which is quite adequate for Dublo's 14.2mm. All this, of course, is just part of the fun of vintage trains.

* I'd have to check on these figures, unless someone beats me to it. (SWMBO has other things for me to do....)

 

Doesn't the Famous Five's GWR train go slower than a airship or something?

Edited May 27, 2020 by Il Grifone

[rockershovel]

I always thought the fine-scale, nickel-plate rims on locomotives were a major part of the attraction of Hornby Dublo, much more attractive than the sintered, solid-spoke things on Tri-Ang. That, and the cast loco bodies which actually looked like painted metal, I always thought Tri-Ang looked toy-like in comparison. 

[rockershovel]

Tri-Ang certainly produced one masterpiece of production engineering, the 3-pole motor and worm set which would have a long and varied life in a number of applications. 

[sncf231e]

Old trains vs new ones?

 

Here a 85 year old clockwork train (from France) as new (well almost  (and new to me anyway)) in the box:

 

 

Regards

Fred

Edited May 30, 2020 by sncf231e

[Il Grifone]

I think that answers the original question!  

[andyman7]

On 26/05/2020 at 20:46, roythebus said:

The place where Meccano was invented is in Calais, we went past it 8 times a day doing Routemaster sightseeing tours of Calais in 2018.

 

On 26/05/2020 at 22:01, Sarahagain said:

I didn't know that Frank Hornby was in Calais when he invented Meccano...

 

 

I thought that "Mechanics Made Easy" (which was later renamed Meccano) was invented in Liverpool....

 

 

 

Calais is an important location in the Meccano story as was Bobigny (Seine) near Paris - both French outposts of the Liverpool empire when trade tariffs existed for the continent. Bobigny was where Hornby Acho was made.

Anyway, to anwer the OP's question, I like both old and new trains. I'm fascianted by the various innvations, compromises and solutions used in creating model toys over the years.