Jump to content

Andy Y

Hornby - New Tooling - Terrier

Recommended Posts

I have had a quick look and offer this initial assessment of what Hornby has shown us. On the whole they look very good and the pre-Grouping choices seem to represent the chosen conditions well. I was expecting the RAILS/Dapol to be a show stopper, so a very interesting comparison is in the offing. I’m certainly going to keep the RAILS/Dapol ones on order, but will probably add a couple of the Hornby ones to the roster in due course. 

 

655 Stepney 

 

Note this is far from the persevered/Thomas the Tank condition, which is essentially that of an A1X in anachronistic Improved Engine Green.  Hornby depict a pre-Grouping  in-service model, in line with the welcome recent trend for doing so.  Hornby, I think, first did this with the SE&CR H Class.

 

The condition depicted is typical of the appearance of the class from the 1890s to the application of the umber livery from 1905 in that it lacks the condensing pipes.  In general these were removed when class members went into the works to have 14” cylinders fitted.  In the Case of No.55, this was in 1894.

 

Here, though, we have the re-numbering to 655.  This was part of the first series of re-numbering, taking place 1900-1902 and done to make numbers available for new Billinton B4 locomotives.  B4 No.55 was completed in July 1901, so that might indicate when Stepney was re-numbered, and, indeed, Middlemass in his book states that Stepney was duplicate listed in June 1901.

 

The new numbers were applied in a number of ways.  Probably the most professional-looking form was the use of gold transfers in place of the old brass plate.  This was the case with Stepney.

 

I have seen three photographs of Stepney in this condition.  None show the buffer mounted front outer lamp irons depicted on the model.  The rear splasher intruding into the cab appears over large, but perhaps this is intended as a necessary design compromise, if, indeed, it is any more than an optical illusion.  The guard irons look wrong to me; chunky and oddly cranked compared with the elegance of the originals. Other than these relatively minor issues, I am most happy to say that I have spotted any problems with the tooling. 

 

I suggest the logical date for a repaint into umber was upon conversion for motor train working, which, in the case of 655, was in 1907.  As such, it contrasts nicely with the RAILS/Dapol 1880s condition A1 with condensing pipes and iron brake shows.

 

The moronic Era system merely tells you that the loco ran in this condition at some point between 1875 and 1922. Big Help. This particular model appears suited to mid-1901 to 1907. Replace the transfer numerals with an etched plate and you can take the model back to 1894.

 

K&ESR No.5 Rolvenden

 

Hornby here bags the second KE&SR Terrier, RAILS/Dapol having announced Bodiam.  Whereas Bodiam had retained condensing pipes, Rolvenden did not. Like the RAILS/Dapol model, this represents the earlier condition, so the two models should complement one another.

Again we have the buffer mounted front outer lamp irons which are not present judging from photographs of Rolvenden in this, and indeed in later condition.  Again the odd and nasty guard irons.

 

Bunker rails were here but not the blanked ones Hornby have shown.  Hornby seems to have tooled for one cab variant here, blanked coal rails and window bars; good for an A1X, but not correct for Rolvenden. A three-quarters view of Rolvenden in the condition depicted by Hornby, the rails are open and there are no window bars. These are not impossible features to correct.

 

No.751

 

Unlike the other two “Era 2” releases, this model goes head to head with RAILS/Dapol; the same loco in the same condition. It will be interesting to see them together, but there was only one SE&CR Terrier, so no-one is going to need to own both the RAILS/Dapol and the Hornby model, so this is a particularly aggressive choice for Hornby.

 

There are the same minor reservations as with the others.  Again, the photograph of 751 in this condition shows the absence of the buffer mounted front lamp irons.  The more I look at those guard irons the more they disturb me; they are totally wrong shape!

 

That aside, again we appear to have the appropriate physical condition for the depicted. I was particularly pleased to see that the vacuum exhaust pipe leading from the cab front along the boiler.

 

All in all, for RTR models it looks as if there will be a good degree of fidelity to the chosen prototypes and a willingness to tool for the key variants.

I agree with the assessment of the shape of the front guard irons, totally the wrong shape given the design drawings and photographic evidence as well as the surviving locomotives. Great looking models though and it's easy to be critical especially when there is little to be critical about. However, the locos are a minefield of detail differences, some of these are picked up on the Dapol model tread.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the assessment of the shape of the front guard irons, totally the wrong shape given the design drawings and photographic evidence as well as the surviving locomotives. Great looking models though and it's easy to be critical especially when there is little to be critical about. However, the locos are a minefield of detail differences, some of these are picked up on the Dapol model tread.

 

The issues are few indeed, given the potential for mistakes and tooling compromises. The Dapol criticisms relate to the 7mm model, which simply had relatively few tooling options resulting in a number of compromises.  The 4mm model will be quite another matter. 

 

Hornby look as if they have produced a good model here. I would be less impressed as a Southern or BR modeler, however, as it looks as if Hornby saved costs here by only tooling for a single tank variant; the A1Xs should all have 12, not 8, bolts to the tank sides. 

 

All in all, though, this looks like a very good Terrier, but I suspect that there may be an even better one to come! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the rails/Dapol model is as good as the B4 then it should be a winner! The Hornby model looks nice, but they need to blacken the wheels. Did the Southern green version have a copper capped chimney? Not seen that before.

 

Perhaps rails have time to tool a spark arrestor to one up the Hornby model... Not seen one on any rtr model yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By focussing on the odd niggle, I realise that we do not do justice to what seem largely accurate and certainly fine-looking models. There are dozens of details that a manufacturer could get wrong, or apply inconsistently, with this prototype.  The fact that the niggle-list is as short as it is a point in favour of this release. So, comments need to be taken in this context.

 

There is much to like here. I would be more fulsome were this not a case of doubling up - more prototypes modelled rather than more than one comparable model of a single prototype is better for the hobby, and this seems a deliberate spiking of Rails to weaken the opposition.  Damage to a strong re-emerging Dapol might suit Hornby/Oxford, but surely does not benefit the consumer.  Be that as it may ...

 

The Hornby model looks nice, but they need to blacken the wheels. 
 

 

I think that is a fair point about the wheels.  Unblackened they lend the model a toy-like appearance, despite the apparent quality of the rest of the work.  No matter, out with the Carrs fluid!

 

 

Did the Southern green version have a copper capped chimney? Not seen that before.

 

 

I suspect this is a tooling compromise.  I suspect Hornby have tooled for a copper-top Stroudley chimney only, and neglected the Marsh chimney.  Looking again at the Hornby chimney, it doesn't look quite right as a Stroudley chimney.  It has the copper-tip, but should be parallel for most of its length. It looks a bit like the Marsh in profile. I wonder if we have a hybrid compromise chimney not right for any version announced?  

 

That said, I am rather out of my arcane comfort zone with these 'modern' A1Xs!  Perhaps someone can assist or correct here?

 

However, I think I may be correct is saying that overall there is a good match to the A1X prototypes, but there are issues with the chimneys, side tanks and, in the case of the SR version, livery. ...

 

 

BR No.32655

 

This is, of course, Stepney in BR A1X condition. It is another direct duplication of a Rails/Dapol announced model. 

 

As you say, Hornby has these A1Xs wearing the same chimneys as the A1,i.e. Stroudley copper-top chimneys.  Later, Marsh pattern chimneys were fitted. The Marsh chimney was, I believe, a cast chimney, so no copper-top. It was also a different shape.  It splays out further up the chimney, so is slightly fatter in the lower parts. Photographs of 2655/32655 in SR and BR days show a Marsh chimney. Hornby seems to have given us a version of Stroudley chimney, presumably having chosen to tool for just one chimney.

 

There are also a couple of consequences of limited tooling in relation to the side tanks. There are prominent bolts (probably the wrong term) that affix the cladding to the tanks.  32655 should have 12, not the 8 shown. 

 

The second issue is that, where condensing pipes were removed by SR and BR, a circular recess with 4 bolt-heads was left.  It was only the Brighton who made good the tank fronts as flush. 

 

I conclude that Hornby has tooled for a single tank version for all models (without separate slides for tank fronts) and that this is the tank version appropriate for the A1s, not for the SR and BR models.

 

As Rails/Dapol will offer a direct comparison in due course, it will be interesting to see if they capture the differences that Hornby has neglected.

 

BR No.32636

 

This is ex-Fenchurch, which was sold out of service and returned to the fold under SR. This might explain the lack of coal rails to the bunker, but the omission on the model is correct as she was photographed in this condition in the early '60s.   

 

Another unique feature is that she did have flush tank fronts. Condensing pipes were removed before sale to Newhaven Harbour.  As she stayed out of LB&SC ownership, they were not re-fitted in the 1906-12 period. 

 

However, like 32655, she should have an all-black Marsh-pattern chimney, and she should have 12, not 8, tank-side bolts.

 

SR No.2662

 

Again, the same issues apply to 2662.  I believe there should be an all-black Marsh pattern chimney - again, I welcome either correction or confirmation on this, but this is what appears from the photographs.

 

The two issues with the side tanks also affect this model; there should be a circular recess on the tank front where the condensing pipes were removed, and there should be 12-bolts to the tank-sides.

 

Finally, I believe there is a livery inaccuracy. The black front splasher looks wrong, and, I believe, it is. The splashers should be green and should be lined. Specifically, there should be a black border edged white.

 

This is seen generally in this livery, but specifically a photograph of 2662 at Fratton in 1937 clearly shows the lined splasher.  In my view, the plain and black splasher lets the appearance of this model down.

 

    

 

If the rails/Dapol model is as good as the B4 then it should be a winner! 

 

Judging by some of the comments so far, there will always be some for whom price is everything.  We shall see, but I wouldn't be surprised if holding out for the Rails/Dapol/NRM model gets you a more refined model.  Those with the Dapol LSWR B4 reported a mechanically superb model, so we can expect a good runner.

 

I can already see some tooling compromises on the Hornby. Not to the extent that would make me at all anti this model - it looks to be a good representation of the prototype and some compromise is inevitable given tooling costs versus prototype variety. Whilst this is not an unreasonable approach to the bewildering prototype variety, the selection chosen by Rails/Dapol would require quite an extensive tooling suite (more than on the Dapol 7mm model), and so Dapol "getting it right" could easily account for the price differential.  

 

For my money, it is worth waiting to see, particularly where Hornby have doubled up on the versions Rails/Dapol previously announced. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The remarkable thing is 751 in SECR. She ran in full Wainwright livery in A1 condition between 1905 and 1910 on a small line in the darkest depths of Sheppy Island. She had already left to be rebuilt (into an SECR boilered hybrid) when P class number 27 arrived.

 

Yet this loco will soon be done THREE times! Once by Hornby with the old tooling, again with the new tooling and finally the Rails/Dapol tooling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must confess to an ulterior motive for being pleased with this announcement. I'm hoping this drives the price of second-hand Dapol/old Hornby models down, as I've been looking for a cheapo example to mess around with.

 

The remarkable thing is 751 in SECR. She ran in full Wainwright livery in A1 condition between 1905 and 1910 on a small line in the darkest depths of Sheppy Island. She had already left to be rebuilt (into an SECR boilered hybrid) when P class number 27 arrived.

 

Yet this loco will soon be done THREE times! Once by Hornby with the old tooling, again with the new tooling and finally the Rails/Dapol tooling.

 

With the popularity of the C, H and P in full SECR livery, it's probably seen as an easy sale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must confess to an ulterior motive for being pleased with this announcement. I'm hoping this drives the price of second-hand Dapol/old Hornby models down, as I've been looking for a cheapo example to mess around with.

At least your honest as your username ;)

 

I have 12 Terriers, and I did have at the back of my mind the thought Hornby might not let it just go to Rails, and held off ordering the Rails one.

 

My quandry is..

1. Do nothing, keep my 12 inaccuracies and all.

2. Trade up the lot and start again

3. Incrementally do it.

 

If i trade up, I would want to be going for a more accurate trade up, after all the old ones are going to be £20 fodder on ebay now.

If I incrementally do it, its going to be the odd one out for a prolonged period, unless I ditch all of my current ones.

But if I dispose of the collection, why collect, I could just stick with one or two.

Which takes me back to the start..i would want to be trading up for the most accurate one.

 

Now.. If Hornby over produces, that may be it for Terriers for a few years, in which case I’m forced into option 3. Similarly depending on impact to Rails.. it could also bring reluctance to make further variants, in which case I am forced to option 3.

 

So really i only have 2 choices that i can influence... 1 and 2.

It maybe my default for now is 1, and when both are available I do 2... I would need to see a progress report from Rails to decide.

Edited by adb968008

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the condenser pipe hole covers, there were a number of bolt pattern variations, some three, some four, and differing bolts and positions. I would not particularly expect a manufacturer to bother to get these right as per prototype, but they did differ (as did the covers for where the domes at the front of the top of the tanks were).

 

I'm happy to wait to see how the Rails/Dapol one turns out, as I think they may be able to address any issues that the Hornby one may have, and I'd rather pay more for a truer to prototype version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chimneys.

 

(1) Stroudley Copper-top on A1 (Binnie), (2) Marsh on A1X (Binnie), (3) Hornby (it looks like the same for all models).

post-25673-0-21294200-1546944991_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-05135800-1546945025_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-32150400-1546945055.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least your honest as your username ;)

 

I have 12 Terriers, and I did have at the back of my mind the thought Hornby might not let it just go to Rails, and held off ordering the Rails one.

 

My quandry is..

1. Do nothing, keep my 12 inaccuracies and all.

2. Trade up the lot and start again

3. Incrementally do it.

 

If i trade up, I would want to be going for a more accurate trade up, after all the old ones are going to be £20 fodder on ebay now.

If I incrementally do it, its going to be the odd one out for a prolonged period, unless I ditch all of my current ones.

But if I dispose of the collection, why collect, I could just stick with one or two.

Which takes me back to the start..i would want to be trading up for the most accurate one.

 

Now.. If Hornby over produces, that may be it for Terriers for a few years, in which case I’m forced into option 3. Similarly depending on impact to Rails.. it could also bring reluctance to make further variants, in which case I am forced to option 3.

 

So really i only have 2 choices that i can influence... 1 and 2.

It maybe my default for now is 1, and when both are available I do 2... I would need to see a progress report from Rails to decide.

 

I decided the costs of replacing all my old terriers (brought mostly when they cost £35 each) isn't worth it (some even match certain prototypes that do/did carry a mix of A1 and A1X features as portrayed anyway).

 

I just fancy a decent A1 and a decent A1X and Fenchurch in A1 condition with condenser pipes!

 

Of course this forum is leading to questions like, do I want to £30 more to have correct 12 bolts but maybe the incorrect chimney on the A1X?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chimneys.

 

(1) Stroudley Copper-top on A1 (Binnie), (2) Marsh on A1X (Binnie), (3) Hornby (it looks like the same for all models).

 

Personally, I have the impression that Hornby change the copper parts between the A1 and A1X. The stack shape is more Marsh like to my eyes than Stroudley so to my mind the A1X looks more correct in the chimney part than the A1.

 

The Dapol O and N gauge models seem to have the Stroudley stack applied everywhere - to my mind.

 

If they came in kit form (like tanks) you could swap parts over between makes to get a perfect model. But obviously, there is no one I will be spending £200 buy one of each and then matching parts to make the most perfect A1X ever.

We don't know what improvements Rails have done over the Dapol O gauge models. Indeed - depending where they are - it could mean a delay to get everything right and go one better. That delay almost certainly won,t make economic sense as most people will give up waiting and buy Hornby in the end and live the minor faults.

 

Looking at previous duplication, an awful lot of people sat on the side - for a period - until both were out before buying or they were discounted. I doubt that will change here - I may well sit out the 6 week discount limit just to see what Rails do and whether or not shops add further discounts. Especially as the two that interest me are both duplicated.

Edited by JSpencer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I have the impression that Hornby change the copper parts between the A1 and A1X. The stack shape is more Marsh like to my eyes than Stroudley so to my mind the A1X looks more correct in the chimney part than the A1.

 

The Dapol O and N gauge models seem to have the Stroudley stack applied everywhere - to my mind.

 

If they came in kit form (like tanks) you could swap parts over between makes to get a perfect model. But obviously, there is no one I will be spending £200 buy one of each and then matching parts to make the most perfect A1X ever.

We don't know what improvements Rails have done over the Dapol O gauge models. Indeed - depending where they are - it could mean a delay to get everything right and go one better. That delay almost certainly won,t make economic sense as most people will give up waiting and buy Hornby in the end and live the minor faults.

 

Looking at previous duplication, an awful lot of people sat on the side - for a period - until both were out before buying or they were discounted. I doubt that will change here - I may well sit out the 6 week discount limit just to see what Rails do and whether or not shops add further discounts. Especially as the two that interest me are both duplicated.

 

I agree.  I think we have a chimney more Marsh than Stroudley. That makes it my main concern with Hornby's A1s. It's a pity Hornby seems to have adopted a one-size-fits-all tooling for something as prominent as the chimney; a consequence of a rush job to market and a determination to under-cut its rival? 

 

Once I stopped being distracted by its shiny copper top, I realised that Hornby's chimney really does not look right for the A1s. I'm tempted by Stepney, but I suspect I'd end up replacing the chimney with the straighter Stroudley type. 

 

One key point then is whether, unlike Hornby, Dapol tools for two different chimneys. You get what you pay for, so I predict two!

 

I suppose I have come to some sort of verdict today inasmuch as today I have just pre-ordered Rails/Dapol Boxhill, Bodiam and SE&CR 751 and paid my deposits.   

 

Turning to the front end details, guard irons and the issue of buffer-mounted lamp irons, here's SE&CR 751, prototype, the Hornby version, and the drawing released for the Dapol/Rails version: 

post-25673-0-39246000-1546951086_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-08595700-1546951201.jpg

post-25673-0-77637500-1546951315.jpg

post-25673-0-20843000-1546951327.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornby seem  to have kept everything from the running plate downwards the same on both models except the brake shoes.

 

Maybe I'll just stick the old tooling SECR 751!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must confess to an ulterior motive for being pleased with this announcement. I'm hoping this drives the price of second-hand Dapol/old Hornby models down, as I've been looking for a cheapo example to mess around with.

 

 

With the popularity of the C, H and P in full SECR livery, it's probably seen as an easy sale

 

The first Hornby did 751, there were no other SECR coloured shunting locos on the market. It was welcome.

Since then Hattons have done 4 Ps in SECR colours, which are far more useful covering a bigger area and period - my thirst is quenched!

 

 

I agree. ................ (snip)

One key point then is whether, unlike Hornby, Dapol tools for two different chimneys. You get what you pay for, so I predict two!

 

I suppose I have come to some sort of verdict today inasmuch as today I have just pre-ordered Rails/Dapol Boxhill, Bodiam and SE&CR 751 and paid my deposits.   

 

Turning to the front end details, guard irons and the issue of buffer-mounted lamp irons, here's SE&CR 751, prototype, the Hornby version, and the drawing released for the Dapol/Rails version: 

 

I aggree the chimney, lamp irons, and gaurd irons really bug me on the Hornby A1.

 

Come on Rails/Dapol, please give us a proper chimney too and do Fenchurch with those condensers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been viewing this with interest. Looking very good.

 

Hopefully we will now have a decent chassis without those unreliable plunger pick-ups.

So we will also get a good representation of both the A1 and A1X versions with original wooden and iron brake shoes, plus options on the lamp irons, though perhaps not all the possible variations.

Variations on the sand boxes at the front end and the bunker coal rails, though again perhaps not all the possible variations on the latter.

Will there be more than one chimney option ?

 

I believe that Simon Kohler has advised retailers visiting the trade presentation yesterday that a number of errors have already been noted and corrected, so it may well be that the finished articles will be nearer to the prototype examples that they represent.

 

Just a couple of observations:

From memory, did not one of the Kent and East Sussex Terriers have a modified bunker. i.e. No tool box and the height of the bunker was slightly  increased. I think that it ran in this condition in both blue and green liveries but I can't off hand remember which one it was ?

 

I hope that Hornby get the livery on Stepney and the SECR ones right. Dapol got the colour for Stroudley Improved Engine Green right on their original Boxhill and Stepney, but every Terrier that Hornby has produced in the Brighton livery has had the colour much too pinky. When they did the SECR version, they also manage to make that much too bright and sickly. Now that they done the H class and got the Wainwright livery right on that they have no excuse for getting it wrong on the Terrier.

 

Obviously when they do more models such as the Isle of Wight pre-grouping versions they will need to produce an enlarged bunker, but that should not prove too difficult if they make the cab/bunker section as a separate moulding as on the original Dapol version. If they produce another LSWR one however, they will also need a different chimney and safety valves and I imagine that this will also be applicable to some other versions.

 

The condensing pipes have also been mentioned as not being visible on any of the pre-production models. Perhaps they will be supplied in a set of optional add on parts as with the original Dapol version ?

 

RB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hopefully we will now have a decent chassis without those unreliable plunger pick-ups.

 

 

Hornby's will have a 3-pole motor, which should be adequate, if a little retrograde for current Hornby. 

 

I would expect good, and probably better, performance from the Rails/Dapol unit, based on the feedback for the B4.  Rails have announced a 5-pole motor and "sprung centre driving wheels to give compensation providing all wheel electrical pick up and better traction" (http://railsofsheffield.com/products/35677/Dapol-4s-010-006s-oo-gauge-stroudley-terrier-a1x-class-br-lined-black-late-crest-0-6-0-tank-locomotive-no-32661-dcc-sound). 

 

But only time and testing will reveal all!

 

 

 

I believe that Simon Kohler has advised retailers visiting the trade presentation yesterday that a number of errors have already been noted and corrected, so it may well be that the finished articles will be nearer to the prototype examples that they represent.

 

 

 

Interesting.  As I read that these are pretty much already on the boat, it seems reasonable to suppose that the pictures released reflect the appearance of the models.  Perhaps not, but these pictures are all we have to go on and we must form our views accordingly!

 

 

 

From memory, did not one of the Kent and East Sussex Terriers have a modified bunker. i.e. No tool box and the height of the bunker was slightly  increased. I think that it ran in this condition in both blue and green liveries but I can't off hand remember which one it was ?

 

 

 

I believe that the bunker sheets were raised at some point. Both K&ESR had bunker coal rails fitted.  This involved 4 bolts to the number sides, which I would not expect either manufacturer to include, as this would be insane from the tooling costs point of view.

 

Otherwise, the Rails/Dapol illustration for Bodiam correctly shows open coal rails. The Hornby picture shows blanked coal rails and window bars, which suggests that A1X cab tooling has been pressed into service as the nearest match. 

 

Below, prototype views showing Rolvenden's cab/bunker, front end detail and chimney, the Hornby Rolvenden model and the Rails/Dapol illustration for Bodiam

post-25673-0-70025300-1546961672_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-29235000-1546961714_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-92517400-1546961885_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-72133900-1546962080_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-24755700-1546962165.jpg

post-25673-0-70216500-1546962183.jpg

post-25673-0-76181000-1546962191.jpg

post-25673-0-06365100-1546962204.jpg

post-25673-0-91787200-1546962212.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe that Simon Kohler has advised retailers visiting the trade presentation yesterday that a number of errors have already been noted and corrected, so it may well be that the finished articles will be nearer to the prototype examples that they represent.

 

 

In the past Simon Kohler said that many errors had been noted with original VEPs and would be addressed in the following batch. Basically bogies were put the right way round and the interior corridors had window cut outs but they still missed issues to the front and the bumps on the roof remained too small both of which was highlighted in every review.

 

I guess we should send a PM to the developer on here to have a good idea of what was found and corrected vis-a-vis the phtotographed samples and what will be produced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m one of those who were concerned by the price difference mainly because I have a limited budget. I will stick with my order for the Dapol version and hope for the best.

 

I have very little knowledge of the detail differences between the various versions of the Terriers so I’m hoping Dapol will have done their homework. I am a little bit wary of their attention to detail as they have been known to use the wrong fonts for numbering some of the N gauge Terriers. This bothered me enough not to buy one version, I may not know about some things but I do know about lettering and typography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...From memory, did not one of the Kent and East Sussex Terriers have a modified bunker. i.e. No tool box and the height of the bunker was slightly increased. I think that it ran in this condition in both blue and green liveries but I can't off hand remember which one it was ?

32670 had (to the best of my knowledge) a unique bunker:

 

https://locoyard.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/005-tenterden-town-32670.jpg

Edited by Ian J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Terriers are anywhere near as important to overall Hornby sales and profits as 66's are to Bachmann. What can Rails do, stop selling Hornby? Plus Hattons are also competing against Woodland Scenics, which Bachmann distribute.

 

Both Hattons and Rails need to bear in mind other retailers are commissioning things from Hornby and/or Bachmann or others without also competing directly with them. It is clear both manufacturers have decided it is time to lay down some markers. Challenging existing manufacturers head on with their existing product ranges is a risky strategy. Note that the likes of Rapido and Revolution have avoided that. And if you get drawn into a battle on a new front (manufacturing) you can take your eye off your core business (retailing). There is no shortage of retailers to step in if Hatton or Rails lose drop the retail ball.

 

The terrier still needs to make money. The King duplication was a real shambles for Hornby (Hattons dropped out nearly 2 years later and probably lost less). On the other side when Kernow announced their 117, Bachmann held discreet discussions and it became win win for both. Hornby just accerlerated their program here in order to beat Rails to it. Very quite and very hush hush.

A manufacturer might be able to cut supply to a retailer but it cannot stop niche manufacturers. The 71 went ahead regardless (another burned fingers exercise for both parties). Here I think Hornby learned that showing their cards too early just lead to a tit for tat public battle and both lost. The Q6 was held back until the last minute, Hornby won but the opposition had not advanced much. Rails/Dapol have clearly covered too much ground now to back down but maybe Hornby could have discussed with Rails at early stage. A bit risky as Rails might have decided to go ahead anyway and just accelerate their model.

A new Deltic is doubtless putting preasure on Bachmann too, here they have no reply. They cannot make a model faster, cheaper or better and the niche maker has no dependency on Bachmann for anything.

 

Shops doubtless do not want to be in direct competition with a big player so in theory duplication might have been avoided with early discussion. Note Hornby's second strike against Dapol with the 61XX. Clearly Hornby are defending their territory and anyone out there thinking of a making a model that is historically in their inventory had better watch out.

The Terrier was a big risk because Rails was supposed to be out in December 2018, they did not make it (but I've never known Dapol to deliver that fast anyway, so maybe it was mitagated). Some tooling has been done. Rails can still review the new arrival, see what areas their version has which Hornby's does not and have tactical victories there (the Rails A1 currently looks stronger).

Edited by JSpencer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Rails Vs Hornby issue. I've recently cancelled my deposit for an 812 and it put me in a bit of a funk, not just because of self-denial, but because I have direct experience of a small-family based business, it's not an easy undertaking, and I'm always going to feel more guilty about not giving them money than I would a larger company. If I and 500 others cancel pre-orders with Hornby, well that's not even a blip on the shareholder radar, if I and 500 others cancel with a family owned business like Rails, thats a bigger hit. By all means buy whatever you want, from whoever you want. But personally I would feel awful if anyone had to fold because of bad-luck or poor timing. 

 

Just a thought

 

ScR  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Rails Vs Hornby issue. I've recently cancelled my deposit for an 812 and it put me in a bit of a funk, not just because of self-denial, but because I have direct experience of a small-family based business, it's not an easy undertaking, and I'm always going to feel more guilty about not giving them money than I would a larger company. If I and 500 others cancel pre-orders with Hornby, well that's not even a blip on the shareholder radar, if I and 500 others cancel with a family owned business like Rails, thats a bigger hit. By all means buy whatever you want, from whoever you want. But personally I would feel awful if anyone had to fold because of bad-luck or poor timing. 

 

Just a thought

 

ScR  

 

In the past I used to order and cancel if required but it was a rare thing to do. However I ordered 2 DJM 71s crowdfunded. One I thought was going to be a Golden Arrow number without rain stripes. Then the rain stripes were on  all of them and then Hattons announced a true GA version. So I cancelled it and switched orders to Hattons. I did not like it but still DJM won either way. This and other cancellations and time scales drag on and prices go up mean I no longer order anything right away but in the past, when things were stable and most items appeared within a couple of years, I had no issue pre ordering loads.

I don't do this anymore. With discount limits being set and so many items being announced (and often delayed, even final prices as unknown), I wait, bide my time to only order when I'm certain I want it and nothing else more important will appear.

 

I don't want to give shops the impression that they will have more sales than they will really have leading to accidental over ordering.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Rails Vs Hornby issue. I've recently cancelled my deposit for an 812 and it put me in a bit of a funk, not just because of self-denial, but because I have direct experience of a small-family based business, it's not an easy undertaking, and I'm always going to feel more guilty about not giving them money than I would a larger company. If I and 500 others cancel pre-orders with Hornby, well that's not even a blip on the shareholder radar, if I and 500 others cancel with a family owned business like Rails, thats a bigger hit. By all means buy whatever you want, from whoever you want. But personally I would feel awful if anyone had to fold because of bad-luck or poor timing. 

 

Just a thought

 

ScR  

 

I had assumed that my deposit with Rails for the Terrier was not refundable, but even if I could claim back, I would not consider cancelling unless it became clear to me that the forthcoming model was severely flawed, and Oliver has reassured that they are aiming for the highest fidelity! Rails are also my local. They are always friendly, knowledgeable and game for a chat (a big change from my first visit 10 years ago, which lead to a boycott of around 3 years!), so I have added incentive to support them. I also feel that of the two companies, they are the more likely to produce Fenchurch as preserved, as Dapol have already done so in O gauge. I was initially disappointed by Hornby's announcement of a terrier, but am now looking forwards to the Rails release even more!

Edited by Torn-on-the-platform
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other side when Kernow announced their 117, Bachmann held discreet discussions and it became win win for both.

 

but maybe Hornby could have discussed with Rails at early stage. A bit risky as Rails might have decided to go ahead anyway and just accelerate their model.

 

Shops doubtless do not want to be in direct competition with a big player so in theory duplication might have been avoided with early discussion.

Isn’t collusion illegal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre-order placed for Stepney from my preferred retailer...

 

The Hornby one is cheaper, looks just as good spec wise as the Dapol one and judging by all my Hornby models, it will have a superb paint job and run well.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.