hornby 2020 Hornby A2/2 and A2/3 (2020 Range)

[Black 5 Bear]

If this is the current standard of build quality/QC that Hornby deem acceptable, it doesn't bode well for other releases due this year.

Considering that the Chinese factory appointed to produce the long awaited/overdue Merchant Navy class has been changed,  I'm not hopeful that they will be of the same quality as the first releases.

Like others, I'm willing to pay for quality, but releasing much heralded locos such as the A2/2 to the market like this is just unacceptable.

 

[Legend]

Do we think QC as in somebody checking models actually exists?

 

Modern QC systems look at the process of making the product and test it , they don’t actually test the finished product , which is obvious from some of the examples here .  It’s a far cry from 1976 and the Hornby catalogue showing assembly stages of the Flying Scotsman with an employee testing a loco on an oval of track . I’m afraid it doesn’t happen this way .

 

Hornby using several different factories doesn’t help in consistent QC either, but then it’s up to Hornby to develop a QC system to deal with this .  

Maybe  they don’t test at all  , let consumers do the QC  and accept there will be a certain rate of returns . Given modellers approach of muddling through and sorting issues themselves  might not be bad approach as some defective items won’t get sent back .   Of course you get a reputation for poor quality  but if people keep on buying anyway at £189 ................

[WisTramwayMan]

I received my Thane of Fife recently. Took 2 attempts to get a reasonable one after parts missing from the original. At long range it looks good.

 

Close up, however, a lot of the running plate mounted detail looks extremely plasticky, and not always aligned correctly. The cab fit is questionable. It certainly doesn't have the heavy, quality feel of certain recent Bachmann releases, ie, 1P, 94xx, or indeed the build quality and feel of the Dapol Mogul, which after the issues with the joint venture OO Terrier was a pleasant surprise.

 

On the flipside, I suppose you could say the price is reasonable, especially when comparing with something like the latest Bachmann Atlantic releases, where around £186 is the best you'll pay. Downside is inferior build quality.

 

I just hope they can do a little better with the W1 and revised P2 later in the year.

[Ian Hargrave]

10 minutes ago, WisTramwayMan said:

I received my Thane of Fife recently. Took 2 attempts to get a reasonable one after parts missing from the original. At long range it looks good.

 

Close up, however, a lot of the running plate mounted detail looks extremely plasticky, and not always aligned correctly. The cab fit is questionable. It certainly doesn't have the heavy, quality feel of certain recent Bachmann releases, ie, 1P, 94xx, or indeed the build quality and feel of the Dapol Mogul, which after the issues with the joint venture OO Terrier was a pleasant surprise.

 

On the flipside, I suppose you could say the price is reasonable, especially when comparing with something like the latest Bachmann Atlantic releases, where around £186 is the best you'll pay. Downside is inferior build quality.

 

I just hope they can do a little better with the W1 and revised P2 later in the year.

My sympathies indeed. But really,price should not be in line with quality,should it ? This model is after all a premium product......supposedly 

[atom3624]

On the QC / tolerances issue, it does appear the acceptance parameters appear a little too wide of the mark.

 

I've a few 'older chassis' super detail models which are near perfect runners - WC, MN, Princess, Coronation, A4, etc - but it appears recent additions have more and finer detail, but the one bit that matters is not concentrated on enough - that they should all run properly.

 

I've a modern Coronation - Hamilton - and it started being 'notchy' at slow speed / low torque.

I had been tinkering a lot solving a shorting issue - metal sander pipe shorting by catching pickup fingers on both sides - resolved - so this running issue could have been self inflicted.

I found the quartering of the centre drivers was VERY slightly out.

I think this was exaggerated by tighter tolerances on the punched out holes in the coupling rods. Now it's spot on, little dab of superglue added in case I've weakened the plastic by 'adjusting' and it runs perfectly.

 

This may be a reason some may not run smoothly, slowly.

It's often valvegear, which can be indicated by 'clicking', but not every time.  The quartering was obvious as well.

 

How long does it take down the production line to produce ONE locomotive - start-to-finish?

OK assuming there's another 10-30 seconds behind it, at worst that's 120 locomotives per hour - might be right?

 

Start-to-finish may be 30 minutes per locomotive?

Why not include lower power smoothness testing having a track where the locomotive chassis or complete is placed onto it, run along for 2 metres at an equivalent of 30% power / 20-25 mph ?

 

Once part of the system, there's a minimum of 2 locomotives on the track at a time, so the "time" is only perhaps 10 seconds.

 

Sounds easy, but could remove a load of issues at production level before departing the factory / assembly line.

 

Al.

[ellocoloco]

3 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

Roco uses a supplier in  Vietnam for some of its releases in addition to its Salzburg hq. They appear not to suffer Hornby’s problems

 

I have read reports on the Spanish forum, Forotrenes, that the last release of Roco's Renfe 333 has had both colour and assembly issues though Roco's website states the same QC process is in place in Austria, Slovakia, Romania and Vietnam. Mabar's Renfe 1900 and Sudexpressmodels Euro 4000 are also reported to have variations in quality. I doubt Hornby's QC is any worse than anyone else. 

[spamcan61]

45 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

 

 

Start-to-finish may be 30 minutes per locomotive?

Why not include lower power smoothness testing having a track where the locomotive chassis or complete is placed onto it, run along for 2 metres at an equivalent of 30% power / 20-25 mph ?

 

Once part of the system, there's a minimum of 2 locomotives on the track at a time, so the "time" is only perhaps 10 seconds.

 

Sounds easy, but could remove a load of issues at production level before departing the factory / assembly line.

 

Al.

There's nothing easy about micro-managing the output of somebody else's production line on the other side of the planet, especially if your business represents 1% or whatever of their annual turnover. For example you would have to define "smoothness" above in exact measurable terms. What would you do with the locos that fail the smoothness test? Where are the trained personnel coming from to start the time consuming process of stripping down and fettling the failures? Then staff trained up for "debug" will probably clear off for slightly better pay at the competition before the next run anyway.

[Ollie K]

2 hours ago, Legend said:

Maybe  they don’t test at all  , let consumers do the QC  and accept there will be a certain rate of returns . Given modellers approach of muddling through and sorting issues themselves  might not be bad approach as some defective items won’t get sent back .   Of course you get a reputation for poor quality  but if people keep on buying anyway at £189 ................

I’ve just become part of the problem then. Was about to box my A2 back up for return and spotted the missing lubricator detail jammed in one of the screw access holes on the underside of the front bogie.

 

After removing the body and unscrewing the bogie, I retrieved it and using tweezers and swearing, was able to seat it back in its slot on the running board. Spurred on to complete the job, the smokebox door and tender scoop are now correctly positioned and secured with a spot of glue. 
 

While the body was off I attempted to close the gap around the front frames, but it won’t budge.

 

Ordinarily I’d have asked to unbox the model in the shop before accepting, but under current restrictions I was handed the box outside the shop. The vendor was aware of the QC issues and exchanging it wasn’t going to be a problem. 
 

Very much agree with the post hoping Hornby learns from this before the A2/3, W1 and new P2 production models are signed off.
 

Ollie

[Ian Hargrave]

54 minutes ago, ellocoloco said:

 

I have read reports on the Spanish forum, Forotrenes, that the last release of Roco's Renfe 333 has had both colour and assembly issues though Roco's website states the same QC process is in place in Austria, Slovakia, Romania and Vietnam. Mabar's Renfe 1900 and Sudexpressmodels Euro 4000 are also reported to have variations in quality. I doubt Hornby's QC is any worse than anyone else. 

 
It should not of course be a race to the bottom or a competition for the wooden spoon. As a matter of record,when I purchase,as indeed I have recently,a new Roco model,it has contained a “checked by” slip in the box. Thus if a fault does occur there is a direct thread of responsibility.

 

It’s not merely a matter of looking to see if all is well with a model,it is a matter of consistency in production because Hornby presumably contracts on an ad hoc basis.Obviously there are going to be variations in the finished product and it would appear that no one claims responsibility for the end result good or bad. So what’s been happening for over a decade is set to run in perpetuity.We have no way of keeping score on the duds and rejects originating from any manufacturer just suffice it to say that for a long while on this forum the subject of  Hornby “returns” keeps grinding remorselessly on. 

[robmcg]

6 hours ago, Ian Hargrave said:

 
It should not of course be a race to the bottom or a competition for the wooden spoon. As a matter of record,when I purchase,as indeed I have recently,a new Roco model,it has contained a “checked by” slip in the box. Thus if a fault does occur there is a direct thread of responsibility.

 

It’s not merely a matter of looking to see if all is well with a model,it is a matter of consistency in production because Hornby presumably contracts on an ad hoc basis.Obviously there are going to be variations in the finished product and it would appear that no one claims responsibility for the end result good or bad. So what’s been happening for over a decade is set to run in perpetuity.We have no way of keeping score on the duds and rejects originating from any manufacturer just suffice it to say that for a long while on this forum the subject of  Hornby “returns” keeps grinding remorselessly on. 

 

As you say there is no way to measure the number of faults and errors in RTR models, many go unnoticed, unreported, or fixed without anyone but the buyer knowing.

 

This forum allows an outlet for the many faulty items sold to be noted, and at times it's quite unnerving! 

 

I'm sure Hornby's business model accepts a certain number of returns, as does the retailer. 

[robmcg]

Back to arcane facts about A2 Pacifics, Yeadons states on p82 of Vol 3 of LNER Pacifics that from July 1957 all six A2/2s changed from emblem to crest and 60501 and 60502 received correct-facing lions, while the others had the BR attempt at tidiness with the lion forward-facing on both sides, and  60504 and 60506 were corrected during repairs and 60503 and 60505 went to their graves with a reversed lion on one side.

 

I haven't looked at photos of Hornby's 60505.  Yet.

 

edit;  have looked now, 

 

oh dear, from a recent photo of the actual model...

 

 

that looks like a rearward-facing lion as it should be.

 

Is there no end to your errors, Hornby?      Or have Yeadons got it wrong....

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by robmcg
added comment and pic

[robmcg]

13 hours ago, OliverBytham said:

I’ve just become part of the problem then. Was about to box my A2 back up for return and spotted the missing lubricator detail jammed in one of the screw access holes on the underside of the front bogie.

 

After removing the body and unscrewing the bogie, I retrieved it and using tweezers and swearing, was able to seat it back in its slot on the running board. Spurred on to complete the job, the smokebox door and tender scoop are now correctly positioned and secured with a spot of glue. 
 

While the body was off I attempted to close the gap around the front frames, but it won’t budge.

 

Ordinarily I’d have asked to unbox the model in the shop before accepting, but under current restrictions I was handed the box outside the shop. The vendor was aware of the QC issues and exchanging it wasn’t going to be a problem. 
 

Very much agree with the post hoping Hornby learns from this before the A2/3, W1 and new P2 production models are signed off.
 

Ollie

 

I'm very pleased for you Ollie, it shows that it is quite common for bits which have fallen off to be hiding somewhere in the packaging or engine itself, congratulations on your repair.

 

I await with a mix of trepidation and hope for a complete 60501 and 60505 when they arrive here!

[Bernard Lamb]

6 hours ago, robmcg said:

Back to arcane facts about A2 Pacifics, Yeadons states on p82 of Vol 3 of LNER Pacifics that from July 1957 all six A2/2s changed from emblem to crest and 60501 and 60502 received correct-facing lions, while the others had the BR attempt at tidiness with the lion forward-facing on both sides, and  60504 and 60506 were corrected during repairs and 60503 and 60505 went to their graves with a reversed lion on one side.

 

I haven't looked at photos of Hornby's 60505.  Yet.

 

edit;  have looked now, 

 

oh dear, from a recent photo of the actual model...

 

 

 

that looks like a rearward-facing lion as it should be.

 

Is there no end to your errors, Hornby?      Or have Yeadons got it wrong....

 

 

Take a look at the model and then compare it to the publicity photograph that Hornby used.

You could not make it up. Well spotted Rob.

I think your expression of oh dear is rather too mild.

Now, where did I put that bottle of T Cut?

 

Bernard

[gordon s]

Bit confused.....

 

If Yeadons says 60505 wasn’t reversed before withdrawal, then surely the pic of 60505 with a rear facing lion  is correct?

 

You even say as much Rob in your comment, but then go on to say it’s wrong.......

 

6 hours ago, robmcg said:

Back to arcane facts about A2 Pacifics, Yeadons states on p82 of Vol 3 of LNER Pacifics that from July 1957 all six A2/2s changed from emblem to crest and 60501 and 60502 received correct-facing lions, while the others had the BR attempt at tidiness with the lion forward-facing on both sides, and  60504 and 60506 were corrected during repairs and 60503 and 60505 went to their graves with a reversed lion on one side.

 

I haven't looked at photos of Hornby's 60505.  Yet.

 

edit;  have looked now, 

 

oh dear, from a recent photo of the actual model...

 

 

that looks like a rearward-facing lion as it should be.

 

Is there no end to your errors, Hornby?      Or have Yeadons got it wrong....

 

 

 

[45568]

12 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Bit confused.....

 

If Yeadons says 60505 wasn’t reversed before withdrawal, then surely the pic of 60505 with a rear facing lion  is correct?

 

You even say as much Rob in your comment, but then go on to say it’s wrong.......

 

 

No, the 'wrong' facing lions face the front on both sides of the tender or tank, thus looking at the pix of ToF, the tender has the heraldically correct rear-facing lion on one side, which is incorrect for this loco. according to Yeadon as quoted above!

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

[John Tomlinson]

On 12/02/2021 at 21:08, Silver Sidelines said:

Very sad really, I had two spare bits of plastic when I opened the box, one the smokebox lamp iron and the other I deduce is what looks like a coat hook above the tender handbrake.  I suspect the one on the equialent one on the left hand side had gone walk abouts and was lost.   Then there is the firebox to cab joint.  On the kitchen table I thought I might live with the model but when I took it upstairs to see its new friends it really shouts out just how rubbish it has been made.  It's now on its way back to join a pile of other 'dud' models.

 

 

How very shoddy. The whistle that couldn't be fitted properly should have shouted at the assembler that it wasn't right, obviously not interested and no one else checked.

 

For £40 off ebay as "spares and repairs" - well fine - but not brand new at top wack.

 

John.

Edited February 14, 2021 by John Tomlinson
typo

[Bernard Lamb]

 

For Gordon and any others who are confused.

I mentioned this photo, but as there is still some confusion, I will actually post it.

Acknowledgements to Hornby and Hattons and the person who took the original and to AY if I have committed a sin in posting it.

Not at the death, as I cannot see the AWS bang plate, but if Yeadon is correct it remained with the front facing lion on this side.

Bernard

[Black 5 Bear]

16 hours ago, robmcg said:

Back

I've just seen this video on YouTube which has been kindly compiled by Adi Pullen.

With respect to Adi, this shows how appallingly badly this particular loco has been assembled.

I wonder what percentage of returns there will be with this model ?

I'm usually a big supporter/purchaser of Hornby, but frankly if I were them, I'd be embarrassed to market this item at the £200 RRP price point.

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Black 5 Bear

[atom3624]

I've recently viewed that one as well.

I commented on the wavy running plate.

They are feeble to the touch when lifting up, but was wondering if it could be 'manually adjusted' - perhaps not.

 

Pity as my 60501 CotN is arrow straight - still very feeble to the touch, encouraging the comments requesting metal running plates.

 

Al.

[60027Merlin]

He does not seem to realise that the lining should be orange/black/orange not red/black/red as he states.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[landscapes]

1 hour ago, 60027Merlin said:

He does not seem to realise that the lining should be orange/black/orange not red/black/red as he states.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Eric

 

I totally agree with you, but I suppose credit to him for taking the time and effort to give his view and report on the model.

 

I loved his pronunciation of the locomotive name Thane of Fife.

 

I’m working on weathering 60501 at the moment and trying to do something with that green livery, so I don’t suppose I will have to worry to much about the lining as I need to cover that green under a layer of grime so the linings will get covered as well.

 

Regards 

 

David 

[robmcg]

I noticed the wavy running plate and squashed front step handrails, and mis-fitting of the frames, more for me to look for when I receive my two!

[robmcg]

12 hours ago, gordon s said:

Bit confused.....

 

If Yeadons says 60505 wasn’t reversed before withdrawal, then surely the pic of 60505 with a rear facing lion  is correct?

 

You even say as much Rob in your comment, but then go on to say it’s wrong.......

 

 

 

Yes I am aware of the difficulty in language here.

 

The incorrect lion was when it was reversed by BR to make both sides face forwards, a correct design in heraldry should not be reversed.   Thus the forward facing lion on the fireman's side was incorrect,    and a rearward facing lio on that side was/is correct, as modelled, but it is not as 60505 actually was. 

 

The real 60505 went to the scrapper with an 'incorrect' forward facing lion on the fireman's side... even though the rendition on the model  was in heraldry 'correct', it was incorrect in terms of reproducing the actual engine. 

 

.

 

Amusing really, given the lengths we go to to enjoy accurate models.   Cheers.

Edited February 14, 2021 by robmcg

[landscapes]

11 minutes ago, robmcg said:

I noticed the wavy running plate and squashed front step handrails, and mis-fitting of the frames, more for me to look for when I receive my two!

Hi Rob

 

I must admit after seeing the video I did have a other look over my model.

 

There is a very slight lean back to the cab but the running plates are dead straight.

 

The top smokebox lamp bracket has broken off but I can replace that with a staple 

 

I also noticed that there is very slight gap between  the curved frames that  sit over the buffer beam but nothing to worry about.

 

I think most of the models will have defects but they do vary from model to model.

 

Good luck when you get yours hope all is well with it despite the problems they are superb models.

 

Regards

 

David

[Legend]

I can’t get past the green , it just looks bleached to me , in comparison the my Bachmann A2 Blue Peter . Clearly with the issue of the frames it’s not well put together . The front buffer had a glued on appearance to me and I wasn’t sure about the join between boiler and cab . It also looks like there’s a bit of cost cutting going on , no front NEM coupling . I know it’s an express engine but you usually get the option, but of course the flanged pony wheels have magically disappeared.  For a £189 loco , no I don’t think so. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Legend