Hornby - New tooling - Large Prairie

[brushman47544]

15 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Bachmann have IMHO missed a trick with their panniers in not providing the top feed casing and delivery pipes as separate fittings, either removable or as retrofit item in the box.  It would increase the retail price, but not by much, and would enable any member of a class to be correctly represented at any time of it's service history.  

I agree but their pannier tooling is relatively old - weren’t there rumours recently that the tooling was life expired - so perhaps not surprising that this option was part of the tooling suite. More of a surprise was that the 64XX tooling didn’t provide for this. Perhaps we’ll be lucky when the 57XX / 8750 tooling is replaced - in that respect it’s a shame the Wishlist Poll doesn’t offer that level of detail in the voting.

Edited October 18, 2019 by brushman47544
Typo that changed the meaning completely

[The Johnster]

My view is that they would have been better advised to produce the later series of 64xx, which would have lent itself to a production run in 74xx form; no doubt the level of projected sales mitigated against it.

[tomparryharry]

This is what happens when you have 'the only game in town'. Keeping this strictly to the Hornby side of the forum, we all know, and have asked, for a really good update of the early series panniers.  Bachmann will continue with the later series pannier, partly because getting an accurate model to maintain the Bachmann quality, and because hey are still, 'the only game in town'. Can Hornby do it? Yes, I believe they can. Moreover, I think Hornby are as good, if not better, than we would otherwise give them credit for. 

 

Good luck, I say.

Ian.

[David Stannard]

4 hours ago, The Johnster said:

8700 was an ordinary member of the 57xx class, wasn't she?  

 

 

 The original 8700 was built in February 1931 but was converted in January 1934 to the prototype of the 9700 Class condensing engine. In March 1934 the new 8700 was built and was the final locomotive of Lot 282 to be made, it was fitted with the cab from the original 8700 which had been removed when it was converted to 9700.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, David Stannard said:

 

 The original 8700 was built in February 1931 but was converted in January 1934 to the prototype of the 9700 Class condensing engine. In March 1934 the new 8700 was built and was the final locomotive of Lot 282 to be made, it was fitted with the cab from the original 8700 which had been removed when it was converted to 9700.

From those dates 8700 appears to be converted to the prototype condensing engine in 1934, but 9701-10 had already been built by then!

RCTS quotes March 32 for the conversion of 8700 and 1933 for the main series 9701-10 and 8700 being renumbered in Jan 1934.

[The Johnster]

7 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

I agree but their pannier tooling is relatively old - weren’t there rumours recently that the tooling was life expired - so perhaps not surprising that this option was part of the tooling suite. More of a surprise was that the 64XX tooling didn’t provide for this. Perhaps we’ll be lucky when the 57XX / 8750 tooling is replaced - in that respect it’s a shame the Wishlist Poll doesn’t offer that level of detail in the voting.

All of my 57xx/8750 panniers bar one are the current tooling body, and I have no complaints about them; they are as good as anyone has a right to expect of a volume produced RTR item, and the chassis/mech matches the quality.  The odd man out is a bit of a weak link, a current spec 64xx chassis with a hybrid 57xx body/8750 cab and bunker riding on it.  This has the running plate and tank/boiler section of a Mainline 57xx which I converted 30 years or more ago to 8750 spec with a cab and bunker from a Keyser kit.  This was replaced earlier this year with a current spec Baccy 8750 cab from 'Bay to bring it closer to spec, but still needs a new smokebox dart and a whistle shield.  In order to hide the fact that the original Mainline had no cab detail, I fitted the sliding ventilators to the K's cab in the fully closed position, and have repeated this on the current cab as there is no backhead detail attached to the 64xx chassis.  The sliding ventilators are scratchbuilt (which makes them sound like very fine scale and complex things) (they're not) out of plasticard.

 

I suspect that the original decision to tool both the Mainline and Bachmann panniers with top feeds was 'informed' by the idea that most panniers had top feeds most of the time, but this precludes 57xx and some early 8750s in the form in which they were originally built, not to mention locos later fitted with topfeedless boilers.

 

Getting back to topic, the large prairies should at least be easy enough to supply in pre-1934 livery, though going back to cabs with no sliding ventilators and earlier bunkers may mix things up a bit!

[mdvle]

8 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Bachmann have IMHO missed a trick with their panniers in not providing the top feed casing and delivery pipes as separate fittings, either removable or as retrofit item in the box.  It would increase the retail price, but not by much, and would enable any member of a class to be correctly represented at any time of it's service history.  

 

Model from a different era, with less competition.

 

Now the big 3 have to compete with the smaller companies and retailers are doing, which is pushing the hobby forward with the better selection of liveries and specific details.

 

So Bachmann / Hornby would possibly / likely make different choices today.

[The Johnster]

So they might.  We can but hope that such choices will fit with our own particular desires...

[Craigw]

I thought this might be of interest to some following this thread. 6112 around Old Oak in the 1930s. Scan is from a negative I won on Ebay.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[The Johnster]

As modelled by Hornby, with sliding cab shutters and top lamp bracket shield on bunker.  She's in 'GREAT WESTERN' Egyptian Serif pre-1934 livery and clean, probably still fairly new.

[David Stannard]

On 19 October 2019 at 09:22, melmerby said:

From those dates 8700 appears to be converted to the prototype condensing engine in 1934, but 9701-10 had already been built by then!

RCTS quotes March 32 for the conversion of 8700 and 1933 for the main series 9701-10 and 8700 being renumbered in Jan 1934.

 

 Thanks for the correction, yes March 1932 was the initial conversion in which the loco still retained it's original cab, later on 8700 was altered to comply with the full production locos 9701-9710 and fitted with the new Collett cabs and shortly after that renumbered to 9700 in January 1934.

[Neal Ball]

I've emailed Hornby this week, asking if the Prairie tanks will be in the Uk in time for Warley.

 

I have received a very non committal comment that they will arrive sometime Winter 2019/2020, which I interpret to mean they are not on the ship just yet!

 

Maybe if Simon Kohler is on the Hornby stand at Warley, he will give us the more up to date position.

[The Johnster]

I'd say your interpretation is correct, but Simon's a canny operator who doesn't give much away, so I doubt you'll get much out of him or anyone he's briefed at Warley!  You might see more livery versions in the display cabinet, though.

[The Stationmaster]

20 hours ago, Neal Ball said:

I've emailed Hornby this week, asking if the Prairie tanks will be in the Uk in time for Warley.

 

I have received a very non committal comment that they will arrive sometime Winter 2019/2020, which I interpret to mean they are not on the ship just yet!

 

Maybe if Simon Kohler is on the Hornby stand at Warley, he will give us the more up to date position.

Maybe if SK hadn't rushed to get a new Terrier into production for somewhat childish 'political' reasons the money could have been spent producing the large prairie when it was originally intended to be produced.  As things now stand it is in increasing danger of being overtaken by Dapol's effort thus wasting a lot of the hard work Hornby put into developing the model (before the return of SK).  Had it appeared more promptly significant variants -  which the tooling is designed and able to produce - could have easily followed as worthwhile early Year 2 models.  Big own goal at Margate methinks and now Year 2 is likely to run head-on into Dapol's version - a splendid example of how to chuck away a lead to market and suffer the consequences. 

[Denbridge]

On 18/10/2019 at 17:20, The Johnster said:

8700 was an ordinary member of the 57xx class, wasn't she?  You may be confusing her with the original 5400 which the 54xx class (and consequent 64xx and 74xx) was developed from.  This loco was a rebuild of a 2021, which was later scrapped and replaced with a brand new 5400 to standard 54xx specification and appearance 2 years later.  She had 5'2" driving wheels and a low roof cab, a unique loco that I've never seen modelled, probably due to it's short working life in this form.

 

We are splitting hairs here as the only difference between 57xx and 8750 is the cab and bunker; the GW regarded them as different classes because of the differences in weight, which were minor and not enough to affect Route Availability.  Bachmann have released both 57xx and 8750s in the prewar pre-1934 Egyptian Serif livery; not sure about shirtbuttons but I'm fairly certain I remember a Replica 57xx in shirtbutton.  Hornby have released their 2721 in this livery as well, but you are right in general; prewar liveries seem to be avoided despite the popularity of the period.

 

Nice conversion to later 64xx without topfeed as built, though.  I've recently done this job on a 57xx, removing the top feed casing and the pipes which run along the tank tops and down the sides just ahead of the cab, and disappear into the plumbing.  The cab has to lose the lip on the leading edge of the roof and the radius joint between the backsheet and bunker side on your model as well, and you seem to have made a seamless job of this!  

 

Topfeedless boilers were repaired and put into storage at Swindon to be put on to the next loco needing one that they would fit, in this case any 54/64/74xx, as overhauls of locos were quicker than of boilers and the locos needed to be in traffic earning money and not blocking workshop bays, so boilers were swapped freely between locos of any class that they would fit.  From a modelling perspective, this means that topfeedless boilers could appear on locos that had previously had top feeds and vice versa.  So a post 1941 built loco might well have a topfeedless boiler after a later overhaul, and a top feed one after a later still overhaul, and vice versa.  It is very difficult to establish which boilers were fitted to which locos at any given time and it best to work from photos if possible.  

 

Bachmann have IMHO missed a trick with their panniers in not providing the top feed casing and delivery pipes as separate fittings, either removable or as retrofit item in the box.  It would increase the retail price, but not by much, and would enable any member of a class to be correctly represented at any time of it's service history.  

I built the prototype 54xx, using a Sutherland 2021 kit some years back. Sadly I sold it for personal reasons along with many other models. I've just bought another kit so I can replace it. The prototype was very distinctive retaining the slim Panniers of the 2021s.

[Denbridge]

23 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Maybe if SK hadn't rushed to get a new Terrier into production for somewhat childish 'political' reasons the money could have been spent producing the large prairie when it was originally intended to be produced.  As things now stand it is in increasing danger of being overtaken by Dapol's effort thus wasting a lot of the hard work Hornby put into developing the model (before the return of SK).  Had it appeared more promptly significant variants -  which the tooling is designed and able to produce - could have easily followed as worthwhile early Year 2 models.  Big own goal at Margate methinks and now Year 2 is likely to run head-on into Dapol's version - a splendid example of how to chuck away a lead to market and suffer the consequences. 

Do people honestly believe that Hornby really did that with the Terriers? Those models will have been in development long before Rails announced theirs. It isnt something you can knock out in a few weeks. I bet the Hornby terriers were undet development for at least a year previous to the Rails announcement. Of course Hornby would want to get theirs to market first, having already invested tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of pounds on development. Absolutely nothing childish about that. Nor political. Good business in fact.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

13 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Maybe if SK hadn't rushed to get a new Terrier into production for somewhat childish 'political' reasons the money could have been spent producing the large prairie when it was originally intended to be produced.  As things now stand it is in increasing danger of being overtaken by Dapol's effort thus wasting a lot of the hard work Hornby put into developing the model (before the return of SK).  Had it appeared more promptly significant variants -  which the tooling is designed and able to produce - could have easily followed as worthwhile early Year 2 models.  Big own goal at Margate methinks and now Year 2 is likely to run head-on into Dapol's version - a splendid example of how to chuck away a lead to market and suffer the consequences. 

With us fickle lot as the customers, I suspect that first to market by 6 months 'does the business'. Hornby most likely now have a fully amortised Terrier tooling, which they can churn endlessly in the range of liveries it authentically affords as a  popular cash cow loco, potentially for decades.

 

Likewise the Prairie, having it on sale ahead of Dapol's version is sufficient. Hornby need volume and cash cow products to sustain their business against competition from the various boutique suppliers, and this might well be the pattern for the future with popular subjects. There has to be change in their business practise to respond to the significant increase in competition over the last five years.

[Legend]

In fairness had they not got the Terrier out ahead of Rails then it would have sufferred sales wise , so he had to get it out quick . I think SK is quoted somewhere  that he accelerated the Terrier because it was a "Hornby model"  (not really  it was Dapol that first brough it out in the late 80s and it was subsequently inherited by Hornby , its not a Hornby model like a Jinty or Princess) and he wanted to keep the market . In fairness I think he did that , while some may have waited for the Rails version I bet many went out and got the Hornby one .  Its the same with the Large Prairie , get it out significantly ahead of Dapol and they will win the market , but if significantly delayed then people might just be tempted to hold off that little while longer . Dapol are producing some great models at the moment.  Tricky choices.

 

Meanwhile I'm waiting to see what hes got in store for the "100 year" celebrations . Hopefully it will be something innovative and not just a repeat of the same boring bland catalogue .  Something that celebrates their heritage would be good.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Legend

[gwrrob]

It will something radical like 4472 Flying Scotsman ...

[St Enodoc]

1 minute ago, gwrrob said:

It will something radical like 4472 Flying Scotsman ...

How about the giraffe car?

[Denbridge]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

How about the giraffe car?

Nah, their reintroducing the 10 1/4 gauge range.

[Harlequin]

 

(That would do well in the market for gimicky toy trains that's being created by a certain TV programme...)

 

This thread is veering wildly off topic. Sorry.

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by Harlequin

[mdvle]

4 hours ago, Denbridge said:

Do people honestly believe that Hornby really did that with the Terriers? Those models will have been in development long before Rails announced theirs. It isnt something you can knock out in a few weeks. I bet the Hornby terriers were undet development for at least a year previous to the Rails announcement. Of course Hornby would want to get theirs to market first, having already invested tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of pounds on development. Absolutely nothing childish about that. Nor political. Good business in fact.

 

It is pretty clear from comments reported on here that Hornby rushed the Terrier into production because the feeling was the Terrier is a Hornby model.  All the secrecy around it (it wasn't included in the initial press briefing I seem to recall but rather a last minute addition in January) further supports that this was a rushed project that could have likely been halted/delayed prior to tooling when Rails/Dapol announced their version.

 

[edit]

Straight from Simon Kohler in the release announcement(*)

 

‘There have been plans to re-tool the ‘Terrier’ even before I left on my three year walkabout and on my return I made it a priority. We had decided on a 2020 launch but on hearing that there were plans for the same model to be produced elsewhere and for it only to be available through limited outlets we decided to bring our plans forward.  Luckily we had already completed much of the work so it was purely down to having steel cut and models produced.’

 

So pretty clear that Hornby had little invested in a new Terrier and could have easily cancelled or delayed it, but instead rushed it into tooling.

 

[end edit]

 

In doing so not only did they perhaps cause delays with other products like the large prairie, but they also put out a Terrier model with issues that more time and care could have avoided (not that the majority of modellers care).

 

* link to quote:

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by mdvle
added SK quote

[colin penfold]

I loved my battle space car. It was the first train I got to drive which had real momentum and was a test of driving skill. A demonstration of how a toy train experience can influence later adult modelling where I always sought out controllers that replicated that sense of momentum.

Edited October 25, 2019 by colin penfold
Clarification

[melmerby]

27 minutes ago, mdvle said:

Straight from Simon Kohler in the release announcement(*)

 

‘There have been plans to re-tool the ‘Terrier’ even before I left on my three year walkabout and on my return I made it a priority. We had decided on a 2020 launch but on hearing that there were plans for the same model to be produced elsewhere and for it only to be available through limited outlets we decided to bring our plans forward.  Luckily we had already completed much of the work so it was purely down to having steel cut and models produced.’

 

So pretty clear that Hornby had little invested in a new Terrier and could have easily cancelled or delayed it, but instead rushed it into tooling.

 

In doing so not only did they perhaps cause delays with other products like the large prairie, but they also put out a Terrier model with issues that more time and care could have avoided (not that the majority of modellers care).

 

 

Don't follow that argument.

Quite clearly it was almost at the point of toolmaking and a delay "to correct" the issues that you mention could have a) delayed it and b) pushed up the price.

That could well have led to a head to head with two similar specced locos at same price. Hornby would have likely had considerably less sales than they have actually managed.

If Hornby had just delayed it to the original schedule, with the oppositions version available I suspect even poorer sales.

IMHO Hornby did the right thing.