Jump to content

AY Mod

Hornby 2020 range announcements

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:


The announcement details say 500 models only, not 1000.

Whatever. The gist of my post,  in response to the one I replied to, is still relevant  .

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

One of the reasons Hornby bring models to market far quicker than say,  Bachmann, is that by the time a model is announced, much work has already been done on those new models. I think people often underestimate how much time it takes to produce a new tooling.

There are several posts around the net showing that Hornby 1st stated they were looking to retool the 91 as far back as 2016.

 

'Looking at' is very different to deciding to go ahead and doing it. I 'look' at Bachmann Blue Pullmans, but haven't bought any

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GordonC said:

 

'Looking at' is very different to deciding to go ahead and doing it. I 'look' at Bachmann Blue Pullmans, but haven't bought any

It was a statement of intent. If I were another manufacturer, it would certainly make me reconsider investing in a new model that could be either beaten to production or dilute potential sales.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

Whatever. The gist of my post,  in response to the one I replied to, is still relevant  .


Agreed.

I wasn’t picking on you, but had noticed several contributors had continued with the erroneous 1000 figure.

It was a just spontaneous reaction to correct it.

Your general point is correct though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GordonC said:

 

'Looking at' is very different to deciding to go ahead and doing it. I 'look' at Bachmann Blue Pullmans, but haven't bought any

And the term "looking to" has a completely different meaning than "looking at"

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

 

A couple of people have bemoaned the lack of newly-tooled wagons. It is my belief that the cost of decent research on a wagon - such that it is accepted as a faithful copy - simply takes away too much of the limited profit such a vehicle can make if it is to be priced to sell.

It looks as if newly tooled or retooled wagon of a fairly uncommon prototype probably needs to sell at £25+ on the first run to recoup the costs even without making a profit. When you look at the common types the variations of what are traffic-wise the same beast are enourmous. Just look at discussions/foaming at the mouth on 16T minerals or 7-plank POs.

A small instance would be the Bachmann 1-plank. BR made at least three variations in the early days but the Bachmann doesn't match any even before looking for dimensional accuracy, but they still turn it out so presumably people still buy it.

I would like a proper Palethorpes van, but who is going to tool up a six-wheeler of which a handful were made to 2 different designs and how many would buy them at a cost of about £35 or more each.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, MrTea said:

 

Assuming Rocket is a success (and judging by the comments on here, it will be!) then yes, definitely.

 

I seem to remember from a recent Twitter post that Mr Isles (of this parish) popped up at Beamish in early December?

 

So unless he was there for the trams or old vintage buses it's just possible there was some research into early railways going on?

 

Or it could be that I was taking a few days' leave to see my son graduate from Northumbria University and I was visiting one of my favourite museums on the way back south?

  • Like 13
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GordonC said:

 

'Looking at' is very different to deciding to go ahead and doing it. I 'look' at Bachmann Blue Pullmans, but haven't bought any

 

 

...although I guess that might depend on exactly what Hornby's definition of 'looking at' amounts to- It could just mean it was discussed in few meetings and one of Hornby's researchers had done a bit of work and downloaded a few 91 pics from the net- On the other hand, it could mean that considerable staff time and money had already been invested, drawings sourced, CAD work was in progress etc, and Hornby were at a point where the decision was a question of 'do we stop now and accept we've wasted a chunk of time and money, or do we push on and hope to get our model out first?'.

 

I've got a couple of layout ideas I've been 'looking at'- One of them I've done a fair bit of research over a period of years, but at very little cost (I've bought quite a few books, but they're all titles I'd have bought anyway), and done very little in practical terms beyond drawing out a trackplan based on the actual location -it's a long-term aim towards building something I could maybe exhibit. The other, I've done far less research and planning for so far during the last 6 months or so, but have already spent a couple of hundred quid at least on kits and bits towards it. For me, if I had to make a choice, it would be a lot easier to give up on the first than the second.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Meanwhile, those left out (e.g. me, this time) may find things to spend cash on that would otherwise have headed to Margate. I've already nicked £300 from my model railway budget today, on the strength of not needing it for trains, and I'm now eyeing up fourteen hundred quidsworth of Leica zoom lens that I had expected would take until 2021 to get the cash together for....

 

But this is a problem isn't it?

I think Hatton's have struck it right with their 66s.

 

I was in the market for Oxford's N7... just in a different livery.  It was suggested they were holding certain liveries back until the grey one sold a little more.  In the short few months, my money went elsewhere - despite selling my N2 to (part) fund the N2!  But now I've decided I have enough of that size tank (well, one other!).

 

It's swings and roundabouts - but Hatton's have released enough popular liveries at the same time to get a bit of momentum, with other less popular ones not far behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 06/01/2020 at 10:23, RecordEdit said:

Congratulations to Hornby in their Centenary year.  It had to be expected they would push the boat out given they have hit the 100.  The Class 91 announcement raised my eyebrow as it has for many here.  I would like to believe Cavalex would have gone into their project with their eyes wide open with respect to the chances of Hornby doing something like this, particularly after seeing Hattons and Rails experiences with the 66's and Terriers.  Not interested in the Class 91 personally but hopefully room for both of them.

 

Looking forward to seeing Dave from Dean Park's take on the issue, given how loudly he banged the drum for Hornby to do something with their 91.

 

 

Hi,

 

Firstly, what an exciting line up for 2020 (and more than likely into 2021).   I was very excited to see a Buffer fitted HST in my beloved Swallow livery.  I am also extremely pleased to see a full rake of individually numbered/lettered MK3 in Swallow to match the powers.   I spoke to Simon about the need for full rakes and he agreed with me that modellers want to have realistic rakes, so thank you Simon for listening. ;-) 

 

GREAT to see the MK3 DVT in Swallow return as well.   That should knock the wind out of the second hand market which saw these changing hands for in excess of £100.

 

I almost needed a lie down when I officially saw the APT-P announced, but in fact I already knew this was on the way.   I may have my sources! lol.   Like one of the earlier posts I am also very confused as the the addition coach packs for the APT-P, so would welcome some information on the make up of the train.  I know that it ran in 14 car rakes, but that is it!   I also want to know if they have the black window surrounds on the cab.   It has to be this version to get my money!

 

Finally, and with mixed feelings I see the 91 on the list.

 

Those of you who follow me at Dean Park Station on youtube and through my well known "who wants a new Class 91" thread on rmweb know that this loco/train is close to my heart.  I waited and pleaded for someone (Hornby) to make one to modern standards.   Every year at shows I would pester someone to make it.   Therefore when Cavalex contacted me and said they were doing the full 225 I was beyond excited.  In my view, Cavalex have a awesome model in the making.   It is truly a work of art that must now be realised, despite this latest Hornby announcement.

 

If I am being honest I find the move by Hornby a bit 'terrier-ish', where the good people at Hornby have been reactive rather than pro active in getting this new 91 announcement out there.  However I am bright enough to understand that its 'just business'!   I feel that if Cavalex had not come along I would still be waiting for Hornby to give me the new 91.   I am also a bit confused as to why they have not at least announced their intent to do the MK4 stock to run with it.  I am sure this will come, as it would make NO SENSE at all to just do the loco.   In this respect Cavalex have my respect for coming out and saying they would do the whole 225 train from the off.   The 91 is like a bus....I have waited years for one to come along and now two have come almost at once!   Hornby, I am sure your one will be great, but I have not plans what so ever to cancel my Pre orders with Cavalex.

 

I backed the Cavalex project from DAY ONE.   The model community have been kept fully in touch with the progress of the project and therefore my pre order for the Cavalex one will stand and more than likely increase in size!   I just hope there is room for the Cavalex 91 (extremely high detail) and the Hornby 91, more of a mainstream Class 87 type of detail.    If Hornby and Bachmann can both produce MK2f to two different specs then I am hopeful the same can be managed with the 225!

 

I think new innovations and manufacturers are good for the hobby.   Good for Hornby and Bachmann as well....as they are forced to improve their current offerings.   Competition (when it is Fair) is healthy.

 

So in summary, (if you are still reading this lol) I have to congratulate Hornby on a brilliant centenary catalogue.   You have got me panicking on how I am going to pay for all of the great new announcements.   However I also want to encourage and support Cavalex to maintain their progress on the 91/mk4/dvt project, which is set to be as impressive as the APT-P that Hornby are working on!

 

   

Edited by DaveClass47
  • Like 6
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

It was a statement of intent. If I were another manufacturer, it would certainly make me reconsider investing in a new model that could be either beaten to production or dilute potential sales.

 

Excluding kettles, there are very few D+E models that Hornby have gone back and re-tooled even including ex-Lima, Mainline and Airfix tooling - I can only think of Classes 08, 31, 56, 67 and 87 and Mk3 coaches so they do not have a track record of improving existing toolings.

 

As a model manufacturer, I'd be surprised if Hornby hadn't 'looked at' and and considered the majority of types of locos and rolling stock in varying levels of detail even just to have information to hand on prototype quantities, possible liveries, geographical spread, bodyshell types, access to prototype vehicles. Over time some of these considerations might just change and tip it over the 'not this year' into 'go ahead'. If it was 'looked at' and decided against once, that could easily happen multiple times so I dont see how Hornby can get all possessive over 'their' models. If their products are good enough and well priced then no other competitor is going to challenge them, but leave tooling for 30 years barely improved then what can you expect?

 

Today if another manufacturer is looking for a new project should the class 110 not be considered? Hornby's tooling must be from early 1980s and barely improved since then - it might have had a new power bogie but from the exterior, unchanged in the last 40 years. To be fair it was probably ahead of its time then and is far from the worst DMU model, but retooling could include Class 104s and be an obvious gap in what models are currently available. Have Hornby looked at it? Probably ... is there any visible signs they have any intentions of doing anything on it? No, not as far as I know

 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DaveClass47 said:

Hi,

 

Firstly, what an exciting line up for 2020 (and more than likely into 2021).   I was very excited to see a Buffer fitted HST in my beloved Swallow livery.  I am also extremely pleased to see a full rake of individually numbered/lettered MK3 in Swallow to match the powers.   I spoke to Simon about the need for full rakes and he agreed with me that modellers want to have realistic rakes, so thank you Simon for listening. ;-) 

 

GREAT to see the MK3 DVT in Swallow return as well.   That should knock the wind out of the second hand market which saw these changing hands for in excess of £100.

 

I almost needed a lie down when I officially saw the APT-P announced, but in fact I already knew this was on the way.   I may have my sources! lol.   Like one of the earlier posts I am also very confused as the the addition coach packs for the APT-P, so would welcome some information on the make up of the train.  I know that it ran in 14 car rakes, but that is it!   I also want to know if they have the black window surrounds on the cab.   It has to be this version to get my money!

 

Finally, and with mixed feelings I see the 91 on the list.

 

Those of you who follow me at Dean Park Station on youtube and through my well known "who wants a new Class 91" thread on rmweb know that this loco/train is close to my heart.  I waited and pleaded for someone (Hornby) to make one to modern standards.   Every year at shows I would pester someone to make it.   Therefore when Cavalex contacted me and said they were doing the full 225 I was beyond excited.  In my view, Cavalex have a awesome model in the making.   It is truly a work of art that must now be realised, despite this latest Hornby announcement.

 

If I am being honest I find the move by Hornby a bit 'terrier-ish', where the good people at Hornby have been reactive rather than pro active in getting this new 91 announcement out there.  However I am bright enough to understand that its 'just business'!   I feel that if Cavalex had not come along I would still be waiting for Hornby to give me the new 91.   I am also a bit confused as to why they have not at least announced their intent to do the MK4 stock to run with it.  I am sure this will come, as it would make NO SENSE at all to just do the loco.   In this respect Cavalex have my respect for coming out and saying they would do the whole 225 train from the off.   The 91 is like a bus....I have waited years for one to come along and now two have come almost at once!   

 

I backed the Cavalex project from DAY ONE.   I have kept fully in touch with the progress of the project and therefore my pre order for the Cavalex one will stand.   I just hope there is room for the Cavalex 91 (extremely high detail) and the Hornby 91, more of a mainstream Class 87 type of detail.    If Hornby and Bachmann can both produce MK2f to two different specs then I am hopeful the same can be managed with the 225!

 

I think new innovations and manufacturers are good for the hobby.   Good for Hornby and Bachmann as well....as they are forced to improve their current offerings.   Competition (when it is Fair) is healthy.

 

So in summary, (if you are still reading this lol) I have to congratulate Hornby on a brilliant centenary catalogue.   You have got me panicking on how I am going to pay for all of the great new announcements.   However I also want to encourage and support Cavalex to maintain their progress on the 91/mk4/dvt project, which is set to be as impressive as the APT-P that Hornby are working on!

 

   

 

Dave, over on the APT thread Paul Isles has confirmed through a third party that the 7 car APT will have black screen 9but contain the development car) while the 5 car one will have full yellow front . Apparently there are full details in catalogue . I hope so. Must say I’ve found Hornby catalogues fairly vague on certain points . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I do wonder if they have gone a bit OTT on the limited editions front. Many are excellent choices but another Evening Star in 70s style packaging? Another Sir Nigel Gresley? and Smokey Joe - a limited edition? The last would have been perfect as the club special. £500+ for a tin plate 0-4-0 replica from 1920. There are not many but I may have understood more if it were say an O gauge Princess Elizabeth replica. Hachette were doing O gauge 0-4-0 tin plate replicas for about £15, fifteen years back http://www.binnsroad.co.uk/railways/hachette/index.html

 

Edited by JSpencer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Denbridge said:

Any particular model may be limited to a 1000 models. That doesn't preclude the tooling being used to make other class members and without the anniversary packaging

They already have a Princess Coronation though - and I wager that's why a one-off diecast body is viable, since there's no need for research and everything except the base body is recycled.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

Dave, over on the APT thread Paul Isles has confirmed through a third party that the 7 car APT will have black screen 9but contain the development car) while the 5 car one will have full yellow front . Apparently there are full details in catalogue . I hope so. Must say I’ve found Hornby catalogues fairly vague on certain points . 

 

Third party here - these details are also confirmed by the descriptions on the Hornby website - the 5 car set has the full list of it's stock and the 7 car set mentions the development car, but not if it's a 2+1+Power+Dummy+2 or a 2+1+Power+3. Photos on the net seem to suggest the former.

 

Cheers,

  60800

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

I do wonder if they have gone a bit OTT on the limited editions front. Many are excellent choices but another Evening Star in 70s style packaging? Another Sir Nigel Gresley? and Smokey Joe - a limited edition? The last would have been perfect as the club special. £500+ for a tin plate 0-4-0 replica from 1920. There are not many but I may have understood more if it were say an O gauge Princess Elizabeth replica. Hachette were doing O gauge 0-4-0 tin plate replicas for about £15, fifteen years back http://www.binnsroad.co.uk/railways/hachette/index.html

 

I like the theme of a 'train per decade', but also winced when I saw the price of the tinplate 0-4-0. Having recently dabbled in live steam, for an extra £135 you could buy a UK made, all metal, live steam Roundhouse 0-4-0 loco, or alternatively a slightly lower spec Mamod MKIII live steam 0-4-0 loco for £165 less than the tin plate limited edition. Looks like they are selling though and I guess on that basis, investment value could rocket assuming there are no second runs.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

Dave, over on the APT thread Paul Isles has confirmed through a third party that the 7 car APT will have black screen 9but contain the development car) while the 5 car one will have full yellow front . Apparently there are full details in catalogue . I hope so. Must say I’ve found Hornby catalogues fairly vague on certain points . 

Hi, thanks for that.

 

What is the development car? lol.   I will get the catalogue and all will hopefully be explained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DaveClass47 said:

Hi, thanks for that.

 

What is the development car? lol.   I will get the catalogue and all will hopefully be explained.

It was effectively the prototype MK4 - an APT trailer body on non-articulated bogies with a different underframe design. 

 

Cheers,

  60800

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Well, well, well: proper Coronation Scot carriages!

 

(And for once a range of carriages where one can't have too many firsts!)

 

Should one look forward to standard Period 3 60 ft composites and brake composites and 50 ft kitchen car in the fullness of time?

 

I'm not a religious man but oh my god yes yes yes I hope and pray!

 

20 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

 

Sadly no 60' or 62' underframe stock in the original Coronation Scot sets. 

Other than the BTO and FK already produced the ones that look fairly straightforward possibles from the proposed coaches would be

50' D1912 RK

57' D1910 BFK. D1904 TO

65' D1902 RFO

 

 

A boy can dream though!

 

To be honest I'd be really happy just to have a RTR TO to a modern spec!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 60800 said:

It was effectively the prototype MK4 - an APT trailer body on non-articulated bogies with a different underframe design. 

 

Cheers,

  60800

 

IRRC someone has posted/linked to pics of it either back in this thread or in the new Hornby APT thread

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the Hornby 2020 range is well balanced in my opinion and its great to see that other regions are also being given the chance as well. Yes I am a GWR fan and I will be getting that HST with the additional Mk3's when they are due out. I will be getting the Class 60's in the DB red as well as the APT and the Rocket and I will be reviewing those on my YouTube channel as soon as I can get my hands on them. I will certainly be getting the Hornby Class 56 in the Hungarian livery as I have the Romanian Class 92 model (my excuse is I like something different) and I will probably get a GBRF Class 50 as well. I am getting the 2020 Hornby Brochure today to remind me of the other models as there is so many. Its easy to forget.

 

As for Hornby upgrading their models. I think that models like the Class 60 would only need minor upgrades to make them up to date. Metal or brass horns and handrails would benefit the Class 60 in terms of looks and the metal horns would be less prone to breaking off. Although I am careful with my models, I have seen Hornby Class 60's with missing/broken horns in adverts for sale and its the same with the handrails. Some came off on one of my models and they are a devil to fit back on because they "flex" as metal ones are more "rigid" and are more easier to handle. A cab light upgrade with an "auto off" function when the train moves in DCC mode would be a great feature as well I think :).

 

As for the electrical side of things. Hornby should upgrade the innards to allow a 21 or an 18 pin decoder to be used. As I believe other companies are now using 21 pin interface and the newer 18 pin (or is it 16 pin? - I cannot remember which is was) interfaces on their range to make their models more functional and compliant for newer DCC technology. Of course I am not including the smaller models like the Sentinel Shunter etc that uses a nano decoder. For the regular models, knocking up a new PCB for the new decoders shouldn't require too much investment to do as Hornby have upgraded them in the past to improve reliability for the directional lights on the Class 60 and the Class 43 HST etc by swapping the metal contacts (very unreliable in my opinion) to plug in harnesses which has fixed the problem with non working lights. A great move in my opinion :).

 

@GordonC From what I have learned about the recent comings with the new Class 91 from Hornby. Its probably better to let Hornby upgrade this Class 110 model to a premium model when the demand and interests need one as then the old model could be relegated to the Railroad range. Although I think Bachmann makes the Derby lightweight DMU which if they wished to, they could make a Class 110 because to me, there doesn't seem to look a lot of differences to my untrained eyes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BritishRail60062 said:

 

As for the electrical side of things. Hornby should upgrade the innards to allow a 21 or an 18 pin decoder to be used. As I believe other companies are now using 21 pin interface and the newer 18 pin (or is it 16 pin? - I cannot remember which is was) interfaces on their range to make their models more functional and compliant for newer DCC technology.

 

Bachman have fitted Plux22 into the new 158...………… (and the latest SLW 24)

As for NEXT18 - best use of that is in very small locos.

 

Note - Hornby have previously fitted 21 pin into factory fitted sound locos that used ESU decoders - but have now reverted back to 8pin for their TTS range.

 

If they want to move on with more lighting functions, then they will have to go beyond the "traditional" 8-pin.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, newbryford said:

 

Bachman have fitted Plux22 into the new 158...………… (and the latest SLW 24)

As for NEXT18 - best use of that is in very small locos.

 

Note - Hornby have previously fitted 21 pin into factory fitted sound locos that used ESU decoders - but have now reverted back to 8pin for their TTS range.

 

If they want to move on with more lighting functions, then they will have to go beyond the "traditional" 8-pin.

 

I completely agree mate and I am sure that the investment will be worthwhile for Hornby in this aspect. Additionally the new PCB could allow Hornby to add a second switch so that the tail lights can be turned off when a train is being hauled because it would make train operations more realistic and if the tail lights had another circuit added. The switch could be used on analogue mode and a function key for DCC mode. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take note the Hornby R4995 OO Gauge Network Rail ex-Mk1 BG Generator Van 6264 - Era 11 appears to be a duplicate of the previously released version from Bachmann 39-175X Mk 1 Generator van (ex-BG) 6264 which was a Model Rail exclusive...luckily I have a spreadsheet detailing what I've got.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BritishRail60062 said:

I think that the Hornby 2020 range is well balanced in my opinion and its great to see that other regions are also being given the chance as well. Yes I am a GWR fan and I will be getting that HST with the additional Mk3's when they are due out. I will be getting the Class 60's in the DB red as well as the APT and the Rocket and I will be reviewing those on my YouTube channel as soon as I can get my hands on them. I will certainly be getting the Hornby Class 56 in the Hungarian livery as I have the Romanian Class 92 model (my excuse is I like something different) and I will probably get a GBRF Class 50 as well. I am getting the 2020 Hornby Brochure today to remind me of the other models as there is so many. Its easy to forget.

 

As for Hornby upgrading their models. I think that models like the Class 60 would only need minor upgrades to make them up to date. Metal or brass horns and handrails would benefit the Class 60 in terms of looks and the metal horns would be less prone to breaking off. Although I am careful with my models, I have seen Hornby Class 60's with missing/broken horns in adverts for sale and its the same with the handrails. Some came off on one of my models and they are a devil to fit back on because they "flex" as metal ones are more "rigid" and are more easier to handle. A cab light upgrade with an "auto off" function when the train moves in DCC mode would be a great feature as well I think :).

 

As for the electrical side of things. Hornby should upgrade the innards to allow a 21 or an 18 pin decoder to be used. As I believe other companies are now using 21 pin interface and the newer 18 pin (or is it 16 pin? - I cannot remember which is was) interfaces on their range to make their models more functional and compliant for newer DCC technology. Of course I am not including the smaller models like the Sentinel Shunter etc that uses a nano decoder. For the regular models, knocking up a new PCB for the new decoders shouldn't require too much investment to do as Hornby have upgraded them in the past to improve reliability for the directional lights on the Class 60 and the Class 43 HST etc by swapping the metal contacts (very unreliable in my opinion) to plug in harnesses which has fixed the problem with non working lights. A great move in my opinion :).

 

@GordonC From what I have learned about the recent comings with the new Class 91 from Hornby. Its probably better to let Hornby upgrade this Class 110 model to a premium model when the demand and interests need one as then the old model could be relegated to the Railroad range. Although I think Bachmann makes the Derby lightweight DMU which if they wished to, they could make a Class 110 because to me, there doesn't seem to look a lot of differences to my untrained eyes. 

 

The body profile looks quite different between the Derby Lightweight and the Class 104/110 - if you look at the bodyside its a smooth curve on the Derby lightweight compared to the 110 which has fairly flat sides and a tumblehome at the bottom.

  • Agree 2

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.