Hornby 2020 range "reveal date" = 6th Jan

[Neil]

17 hours ago, eldomtom2 said:

I suppose they could do a scaled-down version of the below using their generic 0-4-0 chassis... for God's sakes don't give them ideas though!

 

Excellent notion, just have to choose the right 0-4-0 tender loco ....

[Neil]

Actually second thought on the generic 0-4-0 chassis, perhaps it's time to refresh the starter set 0-4-0 into something a bit more passable/useful than the current ones. No need for fancy levels of detail or fiddly bits that are easily broken off but something with better proportions and a less beefy presence would be good. There's been a lot of interest in the Hattons generic pre-group carriages, I could see the same in a more realistically proportioned, generic begginers loco.

[Mark Dickerson]

Agreed - and, for the 101st anniversary, why not send the moulds for the GWR 0-4-0t on a nice holiday? Centre of the Sun, Mariana Trench...

[Legend]

Just now, Mark Dickerson said:

Agreed - and, for the 101st anniversary, why not send the moulds for the GWR 0-4-0t on a nice holiday? Centre of the Sun, Mariana Trench...

And take the Caley pug with it

 

Seriously wouldn’t be surprised at some generic 4 wheel coach design for trainsets , but on a longer wheelbase than the current one, first introduced in 1976

[Dunsignalling]

4 hours ago, Mark Dickerson said:

Agreed - and, for the 101st anniversary, why not send the moulds for the GWR 0-4-0t on a nice holiday? Centre of the Sun, Mariana Trench...

I've been toying with the idea of using a pair as the basis for a freelance Double Fairlie in O-16,5....

 

Well, it gets rid of a couple of them, or possibly four if I make a mess of the first attempt.

 

John

Edited December 29, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[gc4946]

Here's my final speculation on re-liveried and re-issued items:

 

Hornby will give the class 91 and Mk4s a final runout in LNER livery. plus "retro" 91019 in InterCity livery.

67, Mk4s and DVT to appear in Transport for Wales livery.

 

I'm assuming after review by Lyndon Davies and Simon Kohler next year there'll be much clearer differentiation between "full fat" and Railroad ranges.

For models made from pre-2000 tooling I suspect they've reviewed each model and drawn up plans to replace them completely with new models (eg as happened with the Terrier, Large Prairie), transfer those into the Railroad range if still viable (most Limby diesels, 4F) or retire them for good (nearly all ex-Margate tooling).

As long as the tooling is in good order I foresee more reruns of popular prototypes at affordable prices, already happening with the class 66s. 

As Accurascale has launched plans for a class 37 I think Hornby will churn out several contemporary versions in response.

 

101, 156 and the Pacer to become part of the Railroad range for the first time;  all of those will have TTS fitted as standard.

 

A 153 will appear in one of the Wessex Trains liveries and will be TTS fitted.

 

As part of Hornby's centenary celebrations several items of stock will appear in retro Hornby Dublo packaging including 46232 Duchess of Montrose, N2 69567, 7013 Bristol Castle and the 08 shunter.

 

 

[bart2day]

3 hours ago, centraltrains said:

 

Didn't they do the HST last year, just sold out really quickly?

https://www.Hornby.com/uk-en/network-rail-mk3-new-measurement-train-conference-coach-975814.html

 

 

So wish one of the companies would make the electrostar/turbostar range.... 

 

They did the coaches but not the power cars and you are right, the coaches sold out super quick. That’s why I predict a batch of power cars and possibly another run of coaches to go with them.

 

Also totally agree with you on the Electrostar/turbostar. It’s such a gaping hole in the range of contemporary models. Even though I think it’s much more likely Bachmann will announce one than Hornby or any of the new companies which have appeared on the scene in recent years, which means we’ll be waiting until at least 2025 even if they do announce it in February. 

Edited December 29, 2019 by bart2day

[tetsudofan]

19 minutes ago, bart2day said:

 

 

 

Also totally agree with you on the Electrostar/turbostar. It’s such a gaping hole in the range of contemporary models. Even though I think it’s much more likely Bachmann will announce one than Hornby or any of the new companies which have appeared on the scene in recent years, which means we’ll be waiting until at least 2025 even if they do announce it in February. 

 

Better start making my 80th Birthday present list if the blue box team do announce it...…… Please Hornby, do something earlier.....

 

Keith

[wombatofludham]

Why on Earth would Hornby want to retire their Holden looky-liky or fat Pug?  They owe them nothing, are robust and remain popular as a basis for train sets.  When we set up the kiddie's have-a-go layout at the Dolgellau exhibition I deliberately bought a Holden and a Pug to run alongside the venerable Lima 37 and Hornby 142 I donated because they were cheap and reliable, and if they fell off would resist an impact with the floor of the Vestry.  Kids love them, they are cute, fast and at the age most of the kids are, it doesn't matter whether they are in accurate liveries or not (neither are as it happens).  They are absolutely what the trainset market wants.  Eventually, the proud owners will either migrate onto other, more accurate Railroad items if they develop their interest, or move onto other interests and they get packed into the loft to be rediscovered when they grow up and have kids themselves.  At which point they will almost certainly still work such is their bombproof mechanicals.

I also bet they make a significant contribution to Hornby's finances and help pay for all those pretty collector's kettles this site is keen to demand more of, so I wouldn't consign them to a dump too quickly.

 

[Neil]

44 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

Why on Earth would Hornby want to retire their Holden looky-liky or fat Pug?  .....

 

 

Because they are, quite frankly, crap. A similar spec (and therefore robust and thrifty) properly better proportioned model could make sales to both the train set market and the modeller. The starting point would be a simple 0-4-0 chassis of smaller dimensions than the current model. We know from other threads here that good, small and cheap motors are easy to source and that if the history of the Hornby 0-4-0 is traced from Smokey Joe onwards that there have been several versions of the chassis produced; so the next time the moulds need replacing why not replace them with something that would allow for a range of nearer to scale prototypes to be made? A bit of checking with books and internet suggests that a 6' wheelbase, 3'6" diameter 0-4-0 chassis would be suitable for a range of steam and diesel shunters. I'm not suggesting for one moment that these be as detailed as the current crop of industrial loveliness that comes from Hornby  but a decent basic outline would be more attractive to the modeller than the current distorted models. The recent Bagnall diesel is particularly poor in this respect.

[Amand]

A Connie / Nelly / Polly brought up to date with a decent chassis and new body would make my day, first trainset in for Christmas 1970 was no 27 in green with a couple of wagons.

 

The only serious models I'd like to see would be LNER Sentinel Railcar like the NU-Cast one but much lighter without the cast metal body, and a  J39 would be nice as Bachmann's is on the back burner and mine are on their last legs (or wheels.)

[atom3624]

With Polly, Nelly, Connie, would they use Percy gearing, or make it closer to realistic?

 

I remember my Polly solely for losing coupling rod screws as the wheels were invariably spinning round so quickly ... !!  I was 12 !!

 

Al.

[TravisM]

19 minutes ago, Amand said:

A Connie / Nelly / Polly brought up to date with a decent chassis and new body would make my day, first trainset in for Christmas 1970 was no 27 in green with a couple of wagons.

I agree that a better DCC ready chassis with a marginally better body as I feel that these entry level train sets are a great start to a youngster starting in the hobby, not to expensive for a family to buy and if it gets played with only a few times and then put away, no great loss.

 

With the Class 313,314,315, 507 and 508’s in the process of being withdrawn from service, I think these are a no-brainer with loads permutations from basically 2/3 body styles.  I think these would be a great addition especially if done in the “full fat” range.

 

 

[Pandora]

Connie Nellie and Polly were probably based upon the LSWR railmotor locos,  2-2-0T and 0-4-0T wheel arrangements

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSWR_C14_class

Retooled to modern standards with outside cylinders and valve gear

Yes please Hornby!

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

Connie Nellie and Polly were probably based upon the LSWR railmotor locos,  2-2-0T and 0-4-0T wheel arrangements

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSWR_C14_class

Retooled to modern standards with outside cylinders and valve gear

Yes please Hornby!

But preferably not stretched to 160% of the prototype length this time around....

 

John

Edited December 29, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[The Johnster]

I always thought they were based on the NER Y4!  Never thought about the LSW locos...

[Steamport Southport]

If you want an O Gauge version of Nellie.

 

http://www.jimmcgeown.com/Loco Kit Pages/Starter Loco.html

 

 

 

Jason

[Waverley47708]

On 27/12/2019 at 16:03, mdvle said:

 

All companies do this, basing age around the first company that started the lineage.

 

But, having just checked Wikipedia, I would also point out despite some of the comments this is not the centenary of Hornby the company, but rather the centenary of the introduction of Hornby Trains brand which is a different thing.

 

The first Hornby train was released by Meccano in 1920, but Meccano itself dates back to 1901.

 

But as you posted, the Hornby "brand" continued for 100 years even though the company underneath changed multiple times.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornby_Railways

 

 

If anyone coming to Model Rail in Glasgow this February fancies a quiet pint in a local pub, probably best not to start a discussion about when Rangers were formed!

 

Back to trains.

 

Mk2b or c that is the question.

 

Surely that's not too much to ask.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by Waverley47708

[Mark Dickerson]

15 hours ago, Amand said:

A Connie / Nelly / Polly brought up to date with a decent chassis and new body would make my day, first trainset in for Christmas 1970 was no 27 in green with a couple of wagons.

...and this, with crushing inevitability, is what I'm expecting (although a new body on the existing chassis). Better than not-Thomas I suppose. Also the Bagnall in the old Dock Shunter livery.

[wombatofludham]

Once again, I ask why would Hornby - a business - throw away tens of thousands of pounds tooling up a new range of starter locos when the existing fat Pug and Holden-ish locos more than satisfy the market they are aimed at?  They are aimed at the starter market, not high end collectors, they are simple, robust and probably cheap to make.  They sell.  They are appealing. They can put up with a lot of abuse.  The chassis can cope with Radius 1 curves laid on carpet, which isn't guaranteed for a smaller wheelbase with finnicky modern motors.  Above all, they bring in loads of money which can be re-used to fund the more critically designed models for adults where fidelity is more important.  For a children's starter set, sold in supermarkets to parents or grandparents wanting a brand name they can trust, the Bagnall shunter, Holden and fat Pug in pretty colours ticks all the boxes.  And earns Hornby a decent mark up on a bundle of stuff that has cost a few pounds to manufacture but which can retail at a lot more.  

Just because the trainset locos are compromised, or look "crap" to adult modellers, doesn't mean Hornby should be using scarce investment funds to replace them unless the moulds and chassis are life expired.  Which of you would be willing to give up on the dreams of your own pet wishlist items to free up investment to create replacements for the Holden and Pug to satisfy the real market that frankly isn't demanding they be replaced?  Don't all shout at once...

[Tiptonian]

19 hours ago, Neil said:

 

a 6' wheelbase, 3'6" diameter 0-4-0 chassis would be suitable for a range of steam and diesel shunters.

 

As nice an idea as this is, the problem comes if Junior's Hornby train set has Hornby curved  points (and probably express points too)  which have 32mm long dead frogs, and will strand any loco travelling slowly with less than scale 7'9" wheelbase.  One could consider this less of a problem with the current raft of small industrials as, being aimed at the serious modeller, they are less likely to encounter these points. Any reduction in wheelbase of a loco aimed specifically at the toy market is, for this reason,  highly unlikely. The best we could hope for is  a Kitson/Stanier 47000 or Peckett Y class on an overscale wheelbase. Smaller wheels and lower gearing would be welcome, but I imagine most younger owners prefer them just as they are.

Edited December 30, 2019 by Tiptonian

[Neil]

3 hours ago, Tiptonian said:

 

As nice an idea as this is, the problem comes if Junior's Hornby train set has Hornby curved  points (and probably express points too)  which have 32mm long dead frogs, and will strand any loco travelling slowly with less than scale 7'9" wheelbase.  One could consider this less of a problem with the current raft of small industrials as, being aimed at the serious modeller, they are less likely to encounter these points. Any reduction in wheelbase of a loco aimed specifically at the toy market is, for this reason,  highly unlikely. The best we could hope for is  a Kitson/Stanier 47000 or Peckett Y class on an overscale wheelbase. Smaller wheels and lower gearing would be welcome, but I imagine most younger owners prefer them just as they are.

 

However Hornby's Peckett has a 22 and a bit mm wheelbase and unlike the Ruston 48ds doesn't come with a match wagon designed to increase the footprint of the pick ups. As Hornby are said to have included the match truck to avoid problems on their points with the Ruston it would seem that they're happy that the Peckett will not have problems and by the same logic neither should a more compact generic loco.

[Neil]

4 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Once again, I ask why would Hornby - a business - throw away tens of thousands of pounds tooling up a new range of starter locos when the existing fat Pug and Holden-ish locos more than satisfy the market they are aimed at?  They are aimed at the starter market, not high end collectors, they are simple, robust and probably cheap to make.  ...

 

Of late Hornby seem to be good at opening up new markets (I'm thinking of their industrials here). As I mentioned earlier their generic 0-4-0 has been through several different chassis designs either because the tooling wore out or they wanted to develop different bodies. Either of these would suggest that at some stage Hornby will be replacing the existing tooling. When this happens (and it may not be this year) it makes sense to do better, to appeal to more than the train set market. I'm not advocating anything fancy requiring lots of added parts that aren't there on the current generic 0-4-0 range, just a more compact chassis and better shaped/proportioned bodies. Who wouldn't fancy a basic Yorkshire Engine Company 02 or a Borrows well tank at something like the price point of the starter set 0-4-0? Many would be happy with it out of the box, some will want to add detail. Hornby are smart cookies and will no doubt have seen the huge amount of interest in the Hattons generic pre group carriages; it's not a huge stretch of the imagination to speculate that they'll have wondered what implications it might have for them too.

 

You've asked the wrong question about which of our wishlist projects we'd give up on; the smarter question is what is the weakest stuff that Hornby produces?

[Amand]

4 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Once again, I ask why would Hornby - a business - throw away tens of thousands of pounds tooling up a new range of starter locos when the existing fat Pug and Holden-ish locos more than satisfy the market they are aimed at?  They are aimed at the starter market, not high end collectors, they are simple, robust and probably cheap to make.  They sell.  They are appealing. They can put up with a lot of abuse.  The chassis can cope with Radius 1 curves laid on carpet, which isn't guaranteed for a smaller wheelbase with finnicky modern motors.  Above all, they bring in loads of money which can be re-used to fund the more critically designed models for adults where fidelity is more important.  For a children's starter set, sold in supermarkets to parents or grandparents wanting a brand name they can trust, the Bagnall shunter, Holden and fat Pug in pretty colours ticks all the boxes.  And earns Hornby a decent mark up on a bundle of stuff that has cost a few pounds to manufacture but which can retail at a lot more.  

Just because the trainset locos are compromised, or look "crap" to adult modellers, doesn't mean Hornby should be using scarce investment funds to replace them unless the moulds and chassis are life expired.  Which of you would be willing to give up on the dreams of your own pet wishlist items to free up investment to create replacements for the Holden and Pug to satisfy the real market that frankly isn't demanding they be replaced?  Don't all shout at once...

 

I didn't mention Hornby discontinuing the current Smokey Joe / 101 / CR Pug. There's still a place for them in Hornby's range, and for all we know they could have generated enough profit to keep Hornby going. All I was asking for is bringing out one loco design that resembles a loco tens of thousands of us may have enjoyed in the 60s and 70s. Good quality small locos sell, think back to Peckett-mania, and Hatton's own small locos. 

[Mark Dickerson]

6 hours ago, wombatofludham said:

Just because the trainset locos are compromised, or look "crap" to adult modellers, doesn't mean Hornby should be using scarce investment funds to replace them unless the moulds and chassis are life expired.  Which of you would be willing to give up on the dreams of your own pet wishlist items to free up investment to create replacements for the Holden and Pug to satisfy the real market that frankly isn't demanding they be replaced?  Don't all shout at once...

 

They've already added one new body and two(?) former TTTE shells. The motor has been changed. YMMV whether the "real market" would prefer a different-colour loco to one a different shape.

 

And yes, I'd give up my personal wishlist (mostly industrial or LT, so you know, not exactly that likely...) if the entry-level stuff were better. Or if not, just imagine a tram or diesel shunter with a convenient 8'6" chassis...

 

(Besides, I have it on reliable authority from Some Bloke down the Pub that the next 25kV AC Hornby models will be Heysham units - just after something similar on my wishlist - so you've nothing to lose personally )

 

6 hours ago, Tiptonian said:

As nice an idea as this is, the problem comes if Junior's Hornby train set has Hornby curved  points (and probably express points too)  which have 32mm long dead frogs, and will strand any loco travelling slowly with less than scale 7'9" wheelbase.  One could consider this less of a problem with the current raft of small industrials as, being aimed at the serious modeller, they are less likely to encounter these points. Any reduction in wheelbase of a loco aimed specifically at the toy market is, for this reason,  highly unlikely. The best we could hope for is  a Kitson/Stanier 47000 or Peckett Y class on an overscale wheelbase. Smaller wheels and lower gearing would be welcome, but I imagine most younger owners prefer them just as they are.

 

I suspect younger owners don't care either way, but isn't there a problem with:

being aimed at the serious modeller, they are less likely to encounter these points

Why should "Little Johnny" have to encounter them at all? Why should we only advocate in our own narrow interests? I suppose that means my personal wish for Hornby's centenary must be: better track, perhaps like Kato's Unitrack.

Edited December 30, 2019 by Mark Dickerson
Emoticon lost on paste