How Far Has Hornby and other RTR 00 Come Since 2000?

[robmcg]

Hi All,

 

I was messing around with pictures of 00 RTR models today, as you do, and thought there wasn't much better about current production than the best there was was in 2000.

 

 

The above being about 2001 from the 2000 tooling, I think.

 

Ignoring DCC of course (unnecessary) and sound (an abomination at worst, faintly entertaining at best).

 

I cite below, a  Bachmann 1999-tooled Bachmann ex-WD 2-8-0 and a Hornby 2000-tooled Merchant Navy.

 

 

 

both pic edited a little. Both models are stunning IMHO. Both then and now. Both are weathered, the MN has recent-model cylinder drains, everything else standard, albeit edited here and there.

 

Of course there are a greater variety of great models now compared to 2000. But are they all that much better? The latest 00 RTR still usually has oversized flanges and of course 'narrow' gauge. 

Edited November 25, 2018 by robmcg

[Bon Accord]

I doubt modern models are much better, however the one singular benefit of the intervening time period to me is that since most of the "easy" classes have been produced, the more obscure/older/pre-grouping and arguably far more useful models for a layout are at last seeing the light of day..

[mdvle]

It's not as simple as choosing a date and saying before bad, after good.

 

The quality depends in part not just on the advances of the last 20 years, but in what the company making it decided they wanted.

 

Thus just as their are good models from 20 years ago, there are average to mediocre models from 10 years ago.

 

I suspect it also shows up more in non-steam models, where there are frequent problems with the models getting some of the subtle angles, curves, etc. correct combined with the ability to make some details look better.

[darrel]

I was thinking earlier we have never had it so good.

I wasn't thinking about 2000 more late 80s early 90s. Back then it was really only Hornby and Lima and Hornby were really rubbish. For example the class 08, 37 and 47 were poor the class 58 could not pull the skin off a rice pudding. Lima were better but still we had moulded handrails and moulded grills. Now yes it was worthwhile carving off the handrails and fitting wire ones detailing bufferbeams etc. And I still like a lot of the line locos and mine still run well.

Skip forward to today look how many manufacturers we have look how well detailed the models are look at the variety of models we have. Ok the models now are more expensive but you get what you pay for. If you compare it to the cost of a lima loco back in the 90s plus the cost of a detailing pack from craftsman or A1 models, the cost of fitting lights plus paint and the hours spent detailing and add in inflation then they are not too bad. And you are also getting better motors

I won't go into DCC or sound fitted as I have stuck to old school DC I have so many locos it would cost a fortune to chip them all, and if I had a fortune I would buy more locos.

The only downside today is the need to pre order locomotives to guarantee getting the one you want. If everything I have pre ordered comes out in the same month I'm totally screwed.

[robmcg]

It's not as simple as choosing a date and saying before bad, after good.

 

The quality depends in part not just on the advances of the last 20 years, but in what the company making it decided they wanted.

 

Thus just as their are good models from 20 years ago, there are average to mediocre models from 10 years ago.

 

I suspect it also shows up more in non-steam models, where there are frequent problems with the models getting some of the subtle angles, curves, etc. correct combined with the ability to make some details look better.

 

True, but there was a definite shift in production philosophy around 2000... for Hornby in particular it was as if they decided that there was profit in excellent scale models. Simon Kohler says he had to work very hard to get the Merchant Navy approved by the (then) Board, or some members of it at least.  He once told me he was extremely proud of that model, as were the design and production team,  and later he once let slip that he thought the Standard 4MT 4-6-0 was about the best they had done. I'm inclined to agree.

 

 

For Bachmann Branchline the change was perhaps less distinct? The ex-WD is marvellous, their Standard 5MT 4-6-0 and A1 were in my eyes a new level, but both manufacturers appear to me at least to have made a major shift c1999-2000, Dennis Lovett and Simon Kohler perhaps at the forefront.

 

typo edit

Edited November 25, 2018 by robmcg

[mdvle]

True, but there was a definite shift in production philosophy around 2000... for Hornby in particular it was as if they decided that there was profit in excellent scale models.

But you are conveniently ignoring Design Clever, which while and understandable philosophy had the misfortune of putting out some mediocre models.

 

Or, to go with non-steam, the Mk2e and Class 50 for two easy examples of where excellence in scale models was not followed.

 

Like I said, post-2000 isn't a blanket "good" but rather you have to look at the individual releases.

 

As I also said though, there is more of a difference when you go outside of steam.  For one example, the upcoming Bachmann Class 117 and Class 24 are significantly better than what was being released 10 years ago never mind 20.

 

For Bachmann Branchline the change was perhaps less distinct? The ex-WD is marvellous, their Standard 5MT 4-6-0 and A1 were in my eyes a new level, but both manufacturers appear to me at least to have made a major shift c1999-2000, Dennis Lovett and Simon Kohler perhaps at the forefront.

I agree there was a major shift then, but the last 5 years has brought about an equivalent / equal shift in the rolling stock / (E/D)MU / Diesel market that make anything released 10+ years ago the equivalent of pre-2000 in steam.

[Hilux5972]

I don’t understand everyone’s bad attitude to the class 50. It’s a superb model.

[Andy Mac]

I came back to the hobby roundabout 2003/4.... purely by accident, on a quiet night shift was bored at work and was aimlessly surfing the Internet and somehow comes across Hattons website.... well the rest is history and since then Hattons have relieved me of thousands of pounds.....

 

So back to the original post.... I had to say, that having been away from the hobby for nearly 20 years, I was initially disappointed/confused.... the parcel arrived from Hattons...Hornby class 86 and something else.... the models/toolings were still the same as from when I was really into the hobby in the 70’s and early 80’s...

Pretty poor, I thought to myself... the hobby hasn’t really moved forward much at all... however there was a name I wasn’t familiar with, Bachmann, wonder who they are? So fortunately ordered a class 24 or 25, it arrived and I was impressed (i’m Easily pleased!) with it at the time... so yes the hobby took a step forward round about then,and I then became careful to only aim for the modern detailed Chinese tooled models and that’s the only reason i’m Still here...

Today’s newly tooled models are generally better than the new wave of models released in the 2000’s, but not by much...

[ThaneofFife]

a long way...…..

 

obscure models, choice of manufacturer on some models (37, 47 soon we will have 55), dcc and sound, lighting, the demise of the traction tyre and the arrival of heavy powerful flywheel locos in their place, more interest from manufacturers in AC overhead electric traction that's really now "come on boost" started really by Bachmanns 85 then with the superb class 87 the imminent 90 and the coming revival of the Heljan 86 in retooled 86/0 form. RTR manufacturers really now picking off the electrics and is long overdue IMHO.    But every dog has its day as they say.

 

Peco bullhead 75 range and catenary, superb Mk1 Mk2 coaching stock, a flurry of 3rd rail DC units and DMU bubble cars, an amazing array of liveries and loco build options, not to mention an influx of new players in the UK such as Oxford, DJM, SLW, Locomotion, Rapido, Accurascale etc. then retailers becoming more involved in producing their own models too not just specials.

 

Strange really when you think that many locos have now been picked off certainly most of the diesels yet we still see new entrants coming in.

[Gibbo675]

I don’t understand everyone’s bad attitude to the class 50. It’s a superb model.

Spoilt Ba##**ds perchance ?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

It was Bachmann that broke the mould in RTR OO circa 2000 as far as I was concerned, the big innovation being rolling stock: and Hornby have yet to fully catch up, and 'the rest' are pretty much nowhere by comparison. Suddenly it was possible to purchase RTR wagon and coach models of really common vehicles to a 'skilled kit builder' standard. I would propose that this was something never seen before in OO. (It changed my mind as a classic 'returner' to the hobby after roughly 25 years away: the plan to go large in US HO exploiting their extensive RTR choice was dropped, now I could go large in the UK using OO.) The way the early production runs of the BR mk1 coaches and 16T minerals selection evaporated from retailer's shelves like the snow in spring revealed that Bachmann had tapped into a large latent market.

 

As for locos, that WD 2-8-0 from Bachmann was the first UK RTR OO loco that I could put alongside my continental cousin's HO and not feel second best. Happily we got mechanisms well developed over the preceeding 30 odd years for HO from that point, and general improvement in exterior accuracy and finish. Hornby fully caught up with Bachmann in steam locos with the release of the loco drive Britannia in my opinion, (there was still lingering Margateness in earlier steam introoductions, that wibbly wobbly wiper loco to tender link, item 1 for the prosecution, finally eliminated as Satan's plug came in.

 

Side  note: Bachmann seems able to consistently gauge 'the how' of a range of set track oriented lower cost toys with clear water between these and modeller oriented product. Hornby still finds this impossible to consistently navigate, thus the various complaints that they so often provoke: and no other manufacturer goes there at all.

[John Tomlinson]

That's an interesting question you've raised there Rob.

 

Like an earlier poster I came back to the hobby in the late '90's, as it turned out a masterpiece of timing though of course entirely by chance! So I've rather been spoilt, especially compared to the Triang Hornby stuff in the late 60's, early 70's of my youth.

 

I suspect that actually models have continued to improve over the last 20 years, but there's very much a law of diminishing returns. So take the Hornby Duchess for example. The latest model with its correct pattern wheels etc. is lovely, but I can buy a mint pre-owned example of the model before this on ebay for less than half the price, do a bit of tweaking and I'm not going to see much of a difference as it trundles round the track. Ditto I suspect the SLW Sulzer 2's, again massively and no doubt rightly acclaimed. The faults in my detailed up Bachmann ones are well known, but do I really see a fraction of a millimetre error in the windscreens as they work a train? If I'm going to be really difficult about this, why spend a lot for the ultimate model when someone uses track that has a 12% error in width, and employs tension lock couplings that have no bearing to reality and appear at the face of the train. Surely some inconsistency here!

 

Where I think we have gained a lot, as someone else said, is in the range of locos produced, and as a big fan of early diesels the Heljan introductions have been nothing short of astonishing, and would never have been dreamt of 20 years ago. We've also gained a lot in the quality and range of RTR rolling stock, particularly on the freight side which was abysmal in RTR at the turn of the century. For mid 20th century themed British layouts, I regard the Bachmann Mk1 coach and 16t steel mineral as hugely valuable.

 

John.

Edited November 25, 2018 by John Tomlinson

[mdvle]

I don’t understand everyone’s bad attitude to the class 50. It’s a superb model.

 

But it has flaws that make it a non-option for many of us.

 

The biggest is that Hornby couldn't decide whether it was a highly detailed model or a toy and put those awful working louvres on it that totally ruin the look of the model - they are recessed inside of the skin too far and thus spoil the look of the model.

 

Then there is the fact the nose is wrong.

 

If those things don't bother you then great, I am happy for you.  But don't be surprised when it is an issue for many of us.

[The Johnster]

The big shift was the arrival of Airfix and Mainline in the late 70s, which broke the toy train mindset attached to RTR with well detailed, well finished models.  Nobody had done British RTR with any detail below the running plate before, and while we regard some of this stuff as crude now, it was a quantum leap when it happened!  Hornby took a very long time to adapt to this, but are pretty much up to speed now.  There are, however, the 'railroad' items to remind us of how things used to be; I am ambivalent about some of these.  

 

I have, as an example, no less than 3 A28/30 auto trailers, which are somewhat improved in terms of finish, wheels, and buffers over the original Airfix, but still use the original bogie moulding with the brake blocks not in line with the wheels despite a suitable modern bogie being available within Hornby's range.  An opportunity to improve the model has been missed, and the existence of it means that H are unlikely to embark on an updated version to modern standards any time soon, if ever.  So this model is holding back development of what might be a better one.  

 

Same goes for the B set, not in the catalogue at the moment but could be re-introduced any time.  Again, better bogies from the recent Colletts are available, but I bet they won't be used because they mount differently, and again development is held back.  And as long as the toolings for these are available, nobody will make a better B set in 00, or come to that any Collett non-gangwayed stock.

 

But standards of scale, detail, running, and reliability hit a high around the turn of the 21st century, and there has to be a limit to how much more improvement we can reasonably expect from mass produced RTR from any company at this sort of price level, especially given the resistance to current increases.  Where can the manufacturers go from here, apart from refining the standards of nearly 20 years ago which were very good; inside working motion, compensated chassis, working automatic scale couplings (no, I don't know how that could be done either)?  The first two could be done, but either would easily double the asking prices because of the complexity of assembly.  No, I reckon future development will be in the field of DCC, where there is still room for it within the existing production model.

 

There is, unfortunately, a down side to this highly desirable situation in which most modeller's needs are superbly well catered to by realistic and readily available mass produced RTR.  It is the death by a thousand cuts of the kit sector, which is all we have if we want anything other than the RTR offerings, in my case non-gangwayed GW coaching stock and pre-1928 auto trailers.  Kits hit a high in the 80s and 90s, with a wide range of high quality product some of which even an idiot like me could build; few are readily available now!

[dibber25]

I think you've invalidated your own question by immediately dismissing developments that you personally don't like. (CJL)

[Joseph_Pestell]

It has always been possible to add on the fine detail stuff if that is what was wanted. Hornby made that decision around 2000 and I would agree with Rob that the Merchant Navy was representative of a new generation.

 

Why not much progress since? Well, to quote Chief Engineer Scott, "ye canna beat the laws of physics". While manufacturers continue to feel the need to make models that will go round corners (R2 curves), there will only be so much that they can do to enhance performance.

[GreenGiraffe22]

 While manufacturers continue to feel the need to make models that will go round corners (R2 curves),

 

 

for which some of us with limited space for roundys are eternally grateful  

[The Johnster]

Not to mention those of us with scale aspirations and BLTs who can almost double the capacity of their fiddle yards with one 4th to 3rd radius turnout.  And, I suggest, those who run layouts where very sharp curvature is prototypical, such as dock or industrial layouts.  Forcing flexible track down to these sorts of radii is potentially damaging to it and it is very difficult to maintain an accurate radius; set track is much better in these circumstances.

 

'Train set' track has it's place, though I would agree that it's imposition on large locomotives and longer stock is a bit limiting.  The manufacturers know what will sell, though, and it is notable that none of those in the RTR game here or abroad have gone for a more scale approach to trackwork, relying on the likes of Peco who've had the UK field more or less to themselves for years.

[robmcg]

I came back to the hobby roundabout 2003/4.... purely by accident, on a quiet night shift was bored at work and was aimlessly surfing the Internet and somehow comes across Hattons website.... well the rest is history and since then Hattons have relieved me of thousands of pounds.....

 

So back to the original post.... I had to say, that having been away from the hobby for nearly 20 years, I was initially disappointed/confused.... the parcel arrived from Hattons...Hornby class 86 and something else.... the models/toolings were still the same as from when I was really into the hobby in the 70’s and early 80’s...

Pretty poor, I thought to myself... the hobby hasn’t really moved forward much at all... however there was a name I wasn’t familiar with, Bachmann, wonder who they are? So fortunately ordered a class 24 or 25, it arrived and I was impressed (i’m Easily pleased!) with it at the time... so yes the hobby took a step forward round about then,and I then became careful to only aim for the modern detailed Chinese tooled models and that’s the only reason i’m Still here...

Today’s newly tooled models are generally better than the new wave of models released in the 2000’s, but not by much...

 

Very much my own experience!  Came back to the hobby after 37 years away (motorbikes, cars, girls, etc)  in 2004 by chance saw a Hornby Duchess  and bought it and an oval of track....    and went from there, and Hattons have had thousands from me too! 

 

cheers  

[robmcg]

...

 

 there has to be a limit to how much more improvement we can reasonably expect from mass produced RTR from any company at this sort of price level, especially given the resistance to current increases.  Where can the manufacturers go from here, apart from refining the standards of nearly 20 years ago which were very good; inside working motion, compensated chassis, working automatic scale couplings (no, I don't know how that could be done either)?  The first two could be done, but either would easily double the asking prices because of the complexity of assembly.  No, I reckon future development will be in the field of DCC, where there is still room for it within the existing production model.

 

....

 

Just as in Tony Hancock's blood donor sketch (I think it was that one) where the quiet patient other man says, 'very true' to all of Hancock's wisdoms,  I say,  "very true".

 

Especially with price resistance. It's going to be a hard road for Hornby.  I wonder if the niche players and those switching to 0 gauge are better placed? 

[robmcg]

I think you've invalidated your own question by immediately dismissing developments that you personally don't like. (CJL)

 

No, the initial question remains. 

 

I excluded DCC and sound because I prefer to judge the modelling quality, not the gimmickry.

[Haymarket47]

No, the initial question remains. 

 

I excluded DCC and sound because I prefer to judge the modelling quality, not the gimmickry.

I’m sorry, I fail to see how DCC is “gimmick”. For me the ability to run multiple locos on the same track as well as have locos in the sidings, yards etc all with lights on or off as desired, stationary or moving, is all part of the fun and makes it a much more enriching experience. Also the ability to “drive” a loco, especially with modern decoders is great fun. I don’t understand your position - don’t knock it until you try it is my mottoI saw a family today watching a DCC shunting layout by Scarborough Model Railway Club and the young person was totally enthralled with the sounds coming from the SLW Class 24 - a beautiful model too if I may add. The hobby needs to move forward and embrace new technology but if you want to stick to DC then that’s your rightful choice.

[micklner]

When Hornby are still trying to sell this and similar tat for £35 then the answer at times sadly not very far. 

 

 

 

Hornby need to decide, are they a toy seller (they don't make anything any more) or high level model seller. The toy side should be totally separate range from a high level range, the railroad name isn't enough of a divide. They need to decide what range is actually selling and making serious money for them otherwise they will de doomed before long. Short runs of high level models is doing them no good, as I doubt it is bringing anything like enough cash into the company

[robmcg]

I’m sorry, I fail to see how DCC is “gimmick”. For me the ability to run multiple locos on the same track as well as have locos in the sidings, yards etc all with lights on or off as desired, stationary or moving, is all part of the fun and makes it a much more enriching experience. Also the ability to “drive” a loco, especially with modern decoders is great fun. I don’t understand your position - don’t knock it until you try it is my mottoI saw a family today watching a DCC shunting layout by Scarborough Model Railway Club and the young person was totally enthralled with the sounds coming from the SLW Class 24 - a beautiful model too if I may add. The hobby needs to move forward and embrace new technology but if you want to stick to DC then that’s your rightful choice.

 

I tried DCC and DCC sound in 2007-9 and rather liked the rendition of diesel sounds but not steam.  Each to their own, I agree.

 

I just like a good model RTR or kit or scratchbuilt, the sounds are extras which I personally don't want, but I know others do.  That doesn't invalidate the comparison of 2000-2018 RTR models.

[dibber25]

No, the initial question remains. 

 

I excluded DCC and sound because I prefer to judge the modelling quality, not the gimmickry.

 

But your heading asks 'How far has RTR come?' that implies  a lot more than just the looks of the model. You refer to 'gimmickry' and 'abomination' (DCC sound) thereby dismissing major technical developments which are a key part of how far RTR has come, just because you don't like them. If the question is "are today's locos better-looking than they were 20 years ago?" the answer is a simply "yes." But you asked how far RTR has come. The real success story for Hornby and the rest is the degree to which they have managed to incorporate significant technical innovations into models whilst also improving the fidelity to prototype appearance. That's how far RTR has come. (CJL)

Edited November 25, 2018 by dibber25