Updated rebuilt Merchant Navy

[TravisM]

With Hornby doing the Merchant Navy in the unrebuilt form recently, I was wondering if there was any chance of the rebuilt version being “tweaked” or updated?  I do like Hornby’s 2000 version but I think it’s starting to show it’s age in comparison to newer models, especially when it’s noticeably missing the cylinder drain cocks, front buffer beam steps and a few other minor tweaks to bring a good model up to a awesome one.

[robmcg]

I think all the rebuilt MNs from 2000 on had steps and other bits in the accessory pack, but no cylinder drains alas.   Possibly Peters Spares can supply something suitable?

 

Otherwise, the model I think is excellent, although not quite to the standard of the rebuilt Light Pacifics.   Maybe I'm in a minority!

[Ian Hargrave]

2 hours ago, robmcg said:

I think all the rebuilt MNs from 2000 on had steps and other bits in the accessory pack, but no cylinder drains alas.   Possibly Peters Spares can supply something suitable?

 

Otherwise, the model I think is excellent, although not quite to the standard of the rebuilt Light Pacifics.   Maybe I'm in a minority!

 No you’re not.IMHO post spot on.Surely Hornby have more urgent cases for a facelift than this..

[Dunsignalling]

28 minutes ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 No you’re not.IMHO post spot on.Surely Hornby have more urgent cases for a facelift than this..

Probably in the top three, though, along with the Black Five and 8F.

 

The rebuilt Light Pacific really is in a different league (and to pretty much everything r-t-r, not just the MN) IMHO.

 

John

Edited April 8, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[Brit70053]

2 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 No you’re not.IMHO post spot on.Surely Hornby have more urgent cases for a facelift than this..

Talking of facelifts, the rebuilt MN received just that shortly after being issued. As originally produced, the raised ovoid area of the smoke box door was undersized and Hornby responded to criticism of this by re tooling this feature to a more correct profile and size. I heard about this at the time and enquired of Hornby about obtaining a replacement for my 'Canadian Pacific' model, offering to pay of course.

To Hornby's credit, I received a new smoke box door free of charge.

 

Regards,

                 John  

[TravisM]

Thanks for the replies and I’ll see if I can find a brand new model rather than my friends 35028 “Clan Line” as I want to model 35018 “British India Line” which ran through Peterborough recently.  He told me he’s had his from new and said though it’s a cracking model and runs very well, the front looks strange without the steps and drain cocks.  Also fitting DCC was a absolute pig to do.

 

Can anyone tell me the catalogue numbers of the last ones released so I can get one that’s at least DCC ready.

[Black 5 Bear]

59 minutes ago, jools1959 said:

Thanks for the replies and I’ll see if I can find a brand new model rather than my friends 35028 “Clan Line” as I want to model 35018 “British India Line” which ran through Peterborough recently.  He told me he’s had his from new and said though it’s a cracking model and runs very well, the front looks strange without the steps and drain cocks.  Also fitting DCC was a absolute pig to do.

 

Can anyone tell me the catalogue numbers of the last ones released so I can get one that’s at least DCC ready.

I've sent you a PM with regards to the above.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 

 

5 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

...Surely Hornby have more urgent cases for a facelift than this..

 

5 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Probably in the top three, though, along with the Black Five and 8F.

Nah. Any popular model subject retaining Margateness or Airfix/Dapol/Lima content must surely go ahead of a broadly successful all-new Chinese tooling surely? The 8F and Black 5 probably head my list of 'should have been upgraded by now'. And a couple of their all-newly tooled in China jobs are very definite laggards too...

 

Good moves on the LMS pacifics to fend off 'the new entrants' from nicking them, and I would hope they will go on with their other weak LMS group items that currently have no competition, as they have with the GW large prairie. Surely there's a market for a better Fowler 4P tank for example, to add to the 5MT and 8F?

 

The poor Chinese new toolings: Hornby have a good mechanism under a badly wrong body shape Brush type 2 (TOPS 30/31) and their 'Gresley' gangwayed coaches are the worst thing they have done in China to date. Mis-shapen and a poor selection of types, only the full brake and buffet truly useful. (These two of course have 'all region' credentials into the BR blue period.) Having shown that their technique now allows for correct body shape, demonstrated on the Gresley non-gangwayed, it's time to do right. The Gresley end vestibule stock in BTK, TK, FK and a restaurant triplet would be a good start, to go with the zillion pacifics out there, come on Hornby, you know you want to...

[robmcg]

I think you are expecting too much, 34C.

 

I'm pleased that Hornby's turn-around financially may well be happening.

 

I also rather like the Fowler 2-6-4T , 8F and Black 5s, as they are, albeit in an ideal world we have new everything every time we wanted.

 

Maybe it's the grey weather we are having here in the antipodes, onset of winter and all that. :)  

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

1 hour ago, robmcg said:

I think you are expecting too much, 34C...

Ever optimistic, as always. If Hornby can produce something as relatively obscure as the B12/3 to an excellent standard, then surely there's room for equivalent models of such 'core' locos as the Black 5 and 8F? And as for the coaches, likewise with those rarities the 1928 QoS Pullman cars...

[G-BOAF]

The Black 5 and 8F are in more of a need of an update than the MN (and all were in more need than the Streamlined Duchess imho), but I would say it is a close third, especially when compared to the rebuilt light pacifics.

 

For me, the main failing is the cab windows (after 'modification' to open, the frames were wrong), and the huge seam along the side of the boiler. Surely with modern moulding this could be eliminated? The reverser is also wrong as it should be partly inset into the side of the firebox cladding. Other minor details that could be improved include the whistle (which needs a bracket at the front). And the front bogie attachment (pivoted arm), which was the most obviouly hangover from the previous generation of models.

 

This said, mechanically the original Rebuilt MNs with their sprung rear drivers were excellent (for a first few years when they were manufactured properly). Haulage is excellent.

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by G-BOAF

[31A]

On 08/04/2019 at 13:07, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

 

 

 

Nah. Any popular model subject retaining Margateness or Airfix/Dapol/Lima content must surely go ahead of a broadly successful all-new Chinese tooling surely? The 8F and Black 5 probably head my list of 'should have been upgraded by now'. And a couple of their all-newly tooled in China jobs are very definite laggards too...

 

Good moves on the LMS pacifics to fend off 'the new entrants' from nicking them, and I would hope they will go on with their other weak LMS group items that currently have no competition, as they have with the GW large prairie. Surely there's a market for a better Fowler 4P tank for example, to add to the 5MT and 8F?

 

The poor Chinese new toolings: Hornby have a good mechanism under a badly wrong body shape Brush type 2 (TOPS 30/31) and their 'Gresley' gangwayed coaches are the worst thing they have done in China to date. Mis-shapen and a poor selection of types, only the full brake and buffet truly useful. (These two of course have 'all region' credentials into the BR blue period.) Having shown that their technique now allows for correct body shape, demonstrated on the Gresley non-gangwayed, it's time to do right. The Gresley end vestibule stock in BTK, TK, FK and a restaurant triplet would be a good start, to go with the zillion pacifics out there, come on Hornby, you know you want to...

 

In terms of updating Pacifics, what about an A4 with the cylinder covers properly shaped?

 

[G-BOAF]

2 hours ago, 31A said:

 

In terms of updating Pacifics, what about an A4 with the cylinder covers properly shaped?

 

 

At heart, I agree, however it is not practical. The valanced A4 has to negotiate non-prototypical curves, and the properly shaped valances would prohibit this without huge unsightly cutouts at the side (even under-sized wheels wouldn't work in the case of the A4). The only solution is to drastically reduce the curve around the cylinders. Look at a model carefully and you will see a small piece of plastic (nylon?) inside the front side valances to prevent the wheels rubbing on the softer plastic of the bodywork; even at the current compromise, there is contact on second radius. I would imagine you would need 4th radius minimum to have a properly valanced A4.

 

With the non-valanced A4 they could have done the cylinders correctly, I agree. But then this would have looked at odds with the valanced version. It also would require a sizable part of the diameter of the cylinder to be comprised of the valance/cover in order to enable the body to slide off; not impossible but complex engineering

 

What IS odd, and what should be corrected is the curve of the cylinder moulding itself, vs the flatter profile of the valances. This results in an unsightly gap between the inside of the valance and cylinder. Very odd design. better to have things flush as Bachmann do on their A4 (the one thing about it that is better than Hornby) Fixing this could also enable close to full size cylinder covers to be fitted. I intend to fill the gaps on my A4s (when I have the time).

 

What is a less understandable compromise is the lack of the slight transverse curve on the cods mouth - the hinges are flat by the rest of the opening sections, including the join between top and bottom flaps should have a slight curve. Another negative is the double chimney being 'hollow' and having different sized front and rear holes, and the buffer beam join on the front of the loco (though possibly necessitated by tooling limits)

Basically from the front driving wheels back, the A4 is a VERY good model in terms of shape and positioning of moulded and separate details. When I was faffing around with proving (to myself and others) the off-positoning of the lettering on the Great Gathering models, splicing between model and prototype revealed how good things really are on the model.

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by G-BOAF

[Wickham Green]

On 08/04/2019 at 11:18, jools1959 said:

Thanks for the replies and I’ll see if I can find a brand new model rather than my friends 35028 “Clan Line” as I want to model 35018 “British India Line” which ran through Peterborough recently.  

Don't forget '18 was the prototype rebuild and differed slightly from the others ................. though whether it retains those differences in preservation is a different matter.

[Steamport Southport]

On 09/04/2019 at 23:01, 31A said:

 

In terms of updating Pacifics, what about an A4 with the cylinder covers properly shaped?

 

 

I would think the A1/A3s would be more of a priority.

 

They must be losing sales due to the ski slope.

 

 

 

Jason

[31A]

On 10/04/2019 at 01:57, G-BOAF said:

 

At heart, I agree, however it is not practical. The valanced A4 has to negotiate non-prototypical curves, and the properly shaped valances would prohibit this without huge unsightly cutouts at the side (even under-sized wheels wouldn't work in the case of the A4). The only solution is to drastically reduce the curve around the cylinders. Look at a model carefully and you will see a small piece of plastic (nylon?) inside the front side valances to prevent the wheels rubbing on the softer plastic of the bodywork; even at the current compromise, there is contact on second radius. I would imagine you would need 4th radius minimum to have a properly valanced A4.

 

With the non-valanced A4 they could have done the cylinders correctly, I agree. But then this would have looked at odds with the valanced version. It also would require a sizable part of the diameter of the cylinder to be comprised of the valance/cover in order to enable the body to slide off; not impossible but complex engineering

 

What IS odd, and what should be corrected is the curve of the cylinder moulding itself, vs the flatter profile of the valances. This results in an unsightly gap between the inside of the valance and cylinder. Very odd design. better to have things flush as Bachmann do on their A4 (the one thing about it that is better than Hornby) Fixing this could also enable close to full size cylinder covers to be fitted. I intend to fill the gaps on my A4s (when I have the time).

 

What is a less understandable compromise is the lack of the slight transverse curve on the cods mouth - the hinges are flat by the rest of the opening sections, including the join between top and bottom flaps should have a slight curve. Another negative is the double chimney being 'hollow' and having different sized front and rear holes, and the buffer beam join on the front of the loco (though possibly necessitated by tooling limits)

Basically from the front driving wheels back, the A4 is a VERY good model in terms of shape and positioning of moulded and separate details. When I was faffing around with proving (to myself and others) the off-positoning of the lettering on the Great Gathering models, splicing between model and prototype revealed how good things really are on the model.

 

 

 

Thank you; I must admit I was really thinking of the post war version with valances (mostly) removed.  I must admit I hadn't thought of the issue with curves in the case of the "fully skirted" models.  I find the discrepancy jars less on the "fully skirted" models anyway (although I haven't actually bought any) and think it's more of a problem on the later version because you can see the actual cylinder end, and it's very obvious that the remaining part of the valance doesn't curve round following it, as per your third paragraph.  I agree it would be a challenge to design a solution for a mass produced model, but then I'm not a model designer!  One idea might be to have a break where the remaining valance over the cylinder joins the 'running plate' part of the casing, after all there is usually a break here on other models of outside cylindered locos, although it would have to be very close-fitting to look good.

[Mallard60022]

On ‎10‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 15:58, Wickham Green said:

Don't forget '18 was the prototype rebuild and differed slightly from the others ................. though whether it retains those differences in preservation is a different matter.

Think it does as far as the Ejector (is it?) pipes are concerned; saw it at York and checked.

P

[Flyingscotsmanfan]

Or maybe a new A1/A3 that doesn’t have a ski jump

[phil gollin]

.

 

There are still many Southern prototypes that need modelling e.g. LBSCR K-class 2-6-0s, 4-COR EMU, or SECR D/D1 (etc....) before more effort is spent on updating the Merchant Navy.

 

The same applies to other regions.  Which "new" classes are people willing to give up to get their new  models just to get their updated 8F's or Gresley Pacifics ?

 

There are still some "dogs" out there, but forgoing extending the number of classes modelled just to gild-the-lily of an existing class seems shortsighted.

 

.

Edited April 12, 2019 by phil gollin

[JSpencer]

Hornby churn out 4/5 new tooled locos each year. After the Duchess, Princess etc, I'm confident an all new rebuilt MN is going to be in the pipe somewhere.

[adb968008]

i hope they dont do a rebuilt MN.

i’m still in the market for more Unrebuilts.

 

But i’d much prefer new tooled stuff thats never been done or is much older.., weve never had a decent Saint, or Stanier / Fowler 2-6-2T’s, Tilbury tank.

 

[Francis deWeck]

There is one upgrade that shouldn't be carried out on the Rebuilt MN's and the Un-rebuilt WC/BBs is the trailing bogie. Conversely, the re-built WC/BBs should have the trailing bogie modified to permit a moveable trailing bogie (applies to A3s, Brits, Clans and presumably any other Pacifics in mind).

[No Decorum]

1 hour ago, Francis deWeck said:

There is one upgrade that shouldn't be carried out on the Rebuilt MN's and the Un-rebuilt WC/BBs is the trailing bogie. Conversely, the re-built WC/BBs should have the trailing bogie modified to permit a moveable trailing bogie (applies to A3s, Brits, Clans and presumably any other Pacifics in mind).

I quite agree. Some years ago, when there were some requests for an updated Princess, I rushed to buy the existing model in case a new one had the fixed trailing truck with the flangeless wheels. Judging by the new Duchesses, the problem isn’t so bad now and the truck can be fettled to take the flanged trailing wheels supplied. Spam Cans have a large lump of metal which is beyond fixing.

 

I accept that others have contrary views just as passionately held.

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, Francis deWeck said:

There is one upgrade that shouldn't be carried out on the Rebuilt MN's and the Un-rebuilt WC/BBs is the trailing bogie. Conversely, the re-built WC/BBs should have the trailing bogie modified to permit a moveable trailing bogie (applies to A3s, Brits, Clans and presumably any other Pacifics in mind).

 

Sorry, but I strongly disagree.

 

Flangeless wheels and floppy trucks hanging in mid air both look daft, but no dafter than the curves that dictate their existence. I personally prefer the fixed truck as less of the model looks daft - the wheels take up a far smaller portion of the overall view than the truck/ashpan does.

 

I have one rebuilt WC (purchased S/h) which has been modified to give some movement within the fixed truck and comfortably goes round 24" curves with the flanged wheels fitted, where the fixed ones seem happy only at 36" or larger. It won't become clear, until I take it apart, exactly what's been done but it looks fairly standard so I suspect it won't be too difficult to replicate.

 

That said, it won't offer a solution for production models as the loco still can't handle train-set curves.

 

John

Edited April 19, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[Forester]

On 17/04/2019 at 16:30, JSpencer said:

Hornby churn out 4/5 new tooled locos each year. After the Duchess, Princess etc, I'm confident an all new rebuilt MN is going to be in the pipe somewhere.

 

Theyhave  flooded the market with the Rebuilt MN over many years and they now sell poorly when new identities are released.

Why would they want to produce another which could be ony a minor improvement on the current one?