Jump to content
 

Hornby - New Tooling - Terrier


Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Have you noticed that, on the box illustration (at least of the KESR model), the hex nuts are smaller than the coupling rod boss, while on the actual model, they are bigger than the coupling rod boss. I wonder which got changed in the production models, the rods or the crankpins? 

 

Next they'll be advertising it with a comely model (1:76, natch) suggestively fondling the brake lever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GeoffBird said:

I have -ordered a 655 "Stepney".  As this is also an A1 like Rolvendon, can I assume that it will have all the features/faults discussed by Edwardian?  Has anyone seen a photo of one of the real production models of this?

The pre pro sample was shown but that was made with the first shot parts so was incorrect in some areas as well as painting/printing. None of the production models have been shown before release.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎07‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 00:01, adb968008 said:

 

i’m staying away from duplication in my collection, I wish we could have had an SECR D class, LSWR H16 instead.

 

Probably sooner than we think.

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, GeoffBird said:

I have -ordered a 655 "Stepney".  As this is also an A1 like Rolvendon, can I assume that it will have all the features/faults discussed by Edwardian?  Has anyone seen a photo of one of the real production models of this?

 

All 3 announced A1s are 'early condition', by which here I mean before the changes associated with motor-train working (1905-1912), or  replacement brake shoes or any other more modern in-service or preservation features.

 

So, pending sight of a production version, my expectation is "yes", if only because I would not expect to see a complete re-tool of (i) the centre section (boiler and tanks), or of (ii) the cabs, among other areas,   

 

However, one or two fairly minor issues were peculiar to Rolvenden and so would fall off the list, viz the thick and wrongly constructed coal rails and the inclusion of cab window grills.  Also, to judge from the sample of Stepney, a correct smoke-box door and correctly positioned lamp irons should be expected on the other A1s.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 06/04/2019 at 22:33, Hroth said:

 

However, the old-tool Terrier was something that should have been Railroaded a long time ago, to a level that the other Railroad 0-6-0 tanks occupy.

 

I've thought that it (old Dapol/Hornby Terrier) would make an excellent loco for a train set, instead of these fictitious ones. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

I've thought that it (old Dapol/Hornby Terrier) would make an excellent loco for a train set, instead of these fictitious ones. 

GWR 101 is a real loco, the Hornby one looks like it although simplified somewhat:

274_Slide1_1.jpg

Edited by melmerby
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Smokey Joe, etc, are/were based on the Caledonian Pug, again a real loco. Now there's a tank engine to do again only as a model rather than a toy.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The thing with those basic "starter" train sets is that the loco chassis are all the same and very cheap to produce. No doubt much less than the ex Dapol Terrier.

A Terrier based Railroad set with some older rolling stock might be feasible for a mid price set.

 

I've actually got one of the basic 0-4-0Ts bought for £5 off the Hornby stand at Warley a few years ago just because of the price.

Been trying to think of a use for it!

Edited by melmerby
added detail
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/04/2019 at 23:01, adb968008 said:

 

i’m staying away from duplication in my collection, I wish we could have had an SECR D class, LSWR H16 instead.

A reader wrote in to the Railway Modeller a few months back saying that he had spoken to Locomotion and they had told him that they were looking at getting justification to fund the commissioning of a Wainwright D class. I did a follow up saying that I thought that this loco had great potential with a wide variety of liveries and should be a Bachmann mainstream model using the existing C class tender. Someone else also sent in another letter supporting letter after this.

Of course if Locomotion do produce it, it is likely to be very expensive and modellers won't be able to afford maybe more than one, if that

.

23 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

I've thought that it (old Dapol/Hornby Terrier) would make an excellent loco for a train set, instead of these fictitious ones. 

The old Dapol/Hornby Terrier would make a nice train set loco although it does have a number of small parts which might preclude sales to younger modellers.

I wonder what price Hornby would be able to pitch it at, as the last 'old' Terrier was on sale for only about £5 cheaper than the new one.

 

14 hours ago, melmerby said:

GWR 101 is a real loco, the Hornby one looks like it although simplified somewhat:

274_Slide1_1.jpg

I have never seen this picture of the loco before. I have one of the original ones of these which I think is moulded in green plastic.

It could certainly be improved with separate handrails etc, plus a decent chassis, motor and gears plus a full set of valve gear.

I don't know how many liveries it carried and seem to recall that it was converted to oil burning for a while, but I doubt that it would have made a great difference to the appearance of this small engine. Of course the downside is that being only one loco the cost of upgrading could not really be justified.

RB

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

101 and the Pug are nice, but nowhere near as good as the old Terrier. Point taken about the cheap chassis - but part of that is that it is produced in such numbers and over such a long period of time that costs have been reduced to next to nothing.

 

The advantage of the Terrier is that it can genuinely wear a number of different eye-catching liveries, and be reasonably authentic, which neither 101 (single livery in its 9 years lifespan?) or the pug (CR Black, NB "Improved Engine Green" or Black, LMS/LNER Black, BR Black). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How much difference is there between the Caledonia Pug and the North British one ?  They were both built by Neilson and look similar in photos. Perhaps Hornby could produce a new model of the latter and use the new motor and gears and chassis/footplate casting to upgrade to old one, reinstating the tank side handrails, a separate smoke box handle etc.

It is interesting to note that with all the generated interest in pre-grouping locomotives and especially their new J36, Hornby have the old J83 in the Railroad range, but have never produced it in North British livery. 2020 range ?

 

RB

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, wainwright1 said:

A reader wrote in to the Railway Modeller a few months back saying that he had spoken to Locomotion and they had told him that they were looking at getting justification to fund the commissioning of a Wainwright D class. I did a follow up saying that I thought that this loco had great potential with a wide variety of liveries and should be a Bachmann mainstream model using the existing C class tender...

Choice of manufacturer is whistling for the wind. (It would for sure be good if it ended up with a mainstream manufacturer, and thus able to become a standard item in that manufacturer's range after two or three years exclusivity to Locomotion, as has happened with the 4-4-0s and Ivatt Atlantic.) There are safe hands with direct knowledge of the commercial model trade at the NRM now, so here's hoping.

 

4 minutes ago, wainwright1 said:

How much difference is there between the Caledonian Pug and the North British one ?  They were both built by Neilson and look similar in photos...

An all new tooling to provide a correct Neilson puggie with the key variations provided for in the tooling strikes me as the most likely happening, given that it has railway company and other owner's livery choices. I don't imagine any manufacturer doing this as anything but a scale model, now that the market has been established for these tiddlers being done right, instead of mangled to fit a poor 'one size fits all' mechanism.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 07/04/2019 at 16:21, mdvle said:

 

There are 2 main segments to the hobby, those that are price driven, and those who want detailed models.

 

The fact that the segment worried about price are excited about the Hornby 66 doesn't mean there isn't an equal market for the Hattons 66, though the fact that it is a Hattons model may make it more difficult to judge how successful it is or not.

I think there is a third strain of us .One that dont really care , putting it politely:lol: ,and just like nice looking models  they they fancy .They seem to out number  the rest frankly .This is based on working in model shops and observing in train shops

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, wainwright1 said:

How much difference is there between the Caledonia Pug and the North British one ?  They were both built by Neilson and look similar in photos. Perhaps Hornby could produce a new model of the latter and use the new motor and gears and chassis/footplate casting to upgrade to old one, reinstating the tank side handrails, a separate smoke box handle etc.

It is interesting to note that with all the generated interest in pre-grouping locomotives and especially their new J36, Hornby have the old J83 in the Railroad range, but have never produced it in North British livery. 2020 range ?

 

RB

 

There are some differences, but the big problem is that Smokey Joe is substantially overscaled - 9mm too long and over 5mm too high [and don't ask me about the wheels] which is a lot on such a small loco, and in addition the firebox has been inflated to accomodate the motor. I've tried detailing it and masking some of its faults but in the end its just too big. 

 

We really are looking at a complete new tooling and yes, it would be sensible to mark this by producing the North British rather than the Caley version - but think of the easy conversion possibilities

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I don't think Hornby are going to re-vamp the Smokey Joe, GWR 101 or any other starter loco. Why would they?

They are there to do a job - Get youngsters into the model railway market at a minimum price and they do it well.

The basic 0-4-0 loco is reliable, rugged and playable.

Any talk of re-tooling into something more to scale is just wishful thinking.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, melmerby said:

I don't think Hornby are going to re-vamp the Smokey Joe, GWR 101 or any other starter loco. Why would they?

They are there to do a job - Get youngsters into the model railway market at a minimum price and they do it well.

The basic 0-4-0 loco is reliable, rugged and playable.

Any talk of re-tooling into something more to scale is just wishful thinking.

 

 

 

I wasnt talking of that. I suggested use of an existing tool (the old 1990s Dapol/Hornby Terrier) as the "train set loco". 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Caledonian said:

 

We really are looking at a complete new tooling and yes, it would be sensible to mark this by producing the North British rather than the Caley version - but think of the easy conversion possibilities

 

It would need a 'tender', of course, to provide sufficient pickups .................. maybe borrow one from the DS68 ??!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, melmerby said:

I don't think Hornby are going to re-vamp the Smokey Joe, GWR 101 or any other starter loco. Why would they?

They are there to do a job - Get youngsters into the model railway market at a minimum price and they do it well.

The basic 0-4-0 loco is reliable, rugged and playable.

Any talk of re-tooling into something more to scale is just wishful thinking.

 

 

 

Tooling new versions of either of those locos doesn't preclude Hornby from keeping the older tooling in their range for the youngsters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

I wasnt talking of that. I suggested use of an existing tool (the old 1990s Dapol/Hornby Terrier) as the "train set loco". 

 

Still too expensive IMHO Currently offered at MRP £85.99 (R3528), even at half price it's getting on for 50% more than  the price of the starter

loco @£34.99

 

BTW the L&Y Pug is on the books again this year:

https://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/lms-class-21-pug-0-4-0st-11244-era-3.html

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The old Dapol tooling has an honourable role in the Railroad range, but not at that price!

 

Given what that 1989 tooling is - in terms of accuracy and quality  - given that it cannot owe Hornby anything by now, and given a far superior mid-range offering at a list price of £89,99 (IIRC), charging  £85.99 for the old  dog is, well ...

 

308016268_HighwaymanStandAndDeliver.jpg.bc103b6c624eae55fa6cb199925d90b5.jpg

 

In fact, I'd dare to suggest that banging this flea-bitten old pariah dog out at anything more than £55 would be unconscionable. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

The old Dapol tooling has an honourable role in the Railroad range, but not at that price!

 

Given what that 1989 tooling is - in terms of accuracy and quality  - given that it cannot owe Hornby anything by now, and given a far superior mid-range offering at a list price of £89,99 (IIRC), charging  £85.99 for the old  dog is, well ...

 

308016268_HighwaymanStandAndDeliver.jpg.bc103b6c624eae55fa6cb199925d90b5.jpg

 

In fact, I'd dare to suggest that banging this flea-bitten old pariah dog out at anything more than £55 would be unconscionable. 

 

We seem to forget that the old dog was not just a model with fewer bits but at the same time a model that was given modern state of the art paint jobs. You only have to look at the A1 model in Railroad basic deco scheme vs A1 in full fat scheme to see the difference is huge and that the A1 in full deco scheme is not far off the price of a super detailed pacific.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JSpencer said:

 

We seem to forget that the old dog was not just a model with fewer bits but at the same time a model that was given modern state of the art paint jobs. You only have to look at the A1 model in Railroad basic deco scheme vs A1 in full fat scheme to see the difference is huge and that the A1 in full deco scheme is not far off the price of a super detailed pacific.

 

It doesn't matter how much lipstick you put on the pig, it's still a pig.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to ask if anyone is getting rough running out of their terriers. I've picked one up and either it needs running-in or it doesn't like my old Hornby Controller much.

 

Mine also came with the cab steps floating around the box. My last bottle of Zap-A-Gap has gone off in the bottle too! The only other issue I have had is that my usual No. 18 Kadees foul on the coupling hooks, so I'll have to pick up a set of slightly longer No. 19s.

Edited by hartleymartin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...