Jump to content
 

Hornby Announce a Re-tooled Class 91 for 2020


MGR Hooper!
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's hard to tell if it's a sly snipe at the Cavalex project. It would be a fairly low risk way at taking a snipe. Many people who are looking to buy the Cavalex set I guess already have an older Hornby formation. Maybe many would be appeased by a better running dcc ready 91 v the cost of replacing their whole formation. And if sales were good, then there would be scope for new tooled mk4s and DVT. There has been speculation that Hornby have been sniping at a few new comes/crowd funding projects. As to if this is deliberate or just making what the market wants is hard to say. After all Hornby's marked research I believe suggested that a new tooled class 91 is what many people wanted (presumably to pull their existing mk4 stock rather than replacing their whole formations). 

 

Personally I run a 9 car formation with all old Hornby stock. My class 91 is re-motered with a 5 pole ringfield, full pick ups on every wheel and DCC. Runs fine DCC. The Intercity 225 is not a centrepiece formation for me. Hense why I avoided the temptation of the Cavalex model. I will therefore probably resist the new Hornby class 91 too (although tempted). After all its £160 I could put towards other models I'd prize more. How ever it has inspired me to see what I can do to my existing model to make it more realistic looking.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt really add any more to what we know but Simon at Hornby is on a Hornby Mag youtube video interview and clearly states that their MK4's are far from confirmed at this stage. I think he said 'I never say never I never say yes, lets wait and see'.

 

So thats not too positive and dont seem to be doing too much to stop the many that are about to put pen to cheque towards Cavalex. Very much helps people decide to go that way I think now including me! I was on the fence before this as I sure whilst maybe not as good as the Cavalex version Hornby no doubt would come in a bit cheaper.

Edited by sanspareil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Alex, but I find the Hornby strategy absolutely baffling. Announcing the Power car with no DVT/Dummy Car to match and then playing hide and seek with the MK4s. The initial reaction was that whoever got to market first would have the upper hand but maybe that won't be the case here. We shall see what happens but if Cavalex can move forward quickly they could well clean up.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Winter123 said:

Agreed Alex, but I find the Hornby strategy absolutely baffling. Announcing the Power car with no DVT/Dummy Car to match and then playing hide and seek with the MK4s. The initial reaction was that whoever got to market first would have the upper hand but maybe that won't be the case here. We shall see what happens but if Cavalex can move forward quickly they could well clean up.

Nothing baffling, a simple ploy to stop a new product.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 6
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Winter123 said:

Agreed Alex, but I find the Hornby strategy absolutely baffling. Announcing the Power car with no DVT/Dummy Car to match and then playing hide and seek with the MK4s. The initial reaction was that whoever got to market first would have the upper hand but maybe that won't be the case here. We shall see what happens but if Cavalex can move forward quickly they could well clean up.

May be they are planning the same gameplan as with the APT.  Sell the locomotive first, that way you know the max number of people who will want to buy the rest. which gives you a better estimate of how many to make, As with the APT there there will be no need to make more extra coaches than for the numbe rof units you sell to start off with. ( unless you will be able to add the new coaches to the old 80's model!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well with the demise of the Cavalex project people possibly need to start to apply pressure on Hornby from every side and at every opportunity to raise their standards.  I for one felt very let down by the class 87 and in the end didn't bother buying any, and probably won't in the future if they don't pull their socks up a bit.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very sad to see the better model being with drawn from the Market.
All I will say to Hornby is

1st Cavalex have set the bar are you good enough to reach it. I dont think they are but time will tell.

2nd No matching new MK 4 or DVT = no sale. I not buying a new 91 and not having the coaches. So come on Hornby put your money were your mouth is.

John
 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oleander said:

No matching new MK 4 or DVT = no sale.

 

I must admit to never really looking at the Mk 4 coaches in any detail, I just knew the Cavalex one's would be the best that could reasonably be done.  How do Hornby's existing Mk 4's standup?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dixie Dean said:

 

I must admit to never really looking at the Mk 4 coaches in any detail, I just knew the Cavalex one's would be the best that could reasonably be done.  How do Hornby's existing Mk 4's standup?

When the new loco comes out . You will see. Poor I would guess. Then You have the question of the special livery 91 no MK4 exist of thoes. So you end up with a Loco and no coaches . Cavalex had the better sultion . the whole train .

  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
31 minutes ago, Dixie Dean said:

 

I just knew the Cavalex one's would be the best that could reasonably be done. 

How did you know? From CAD’s? Someone else produced incredibly detailed CAD’s in recent and he is now gone from the model railway community. I have no doubt that his King would have been a great model, but does that mean I’m not happy with Hornby’s new King because it’s slightly less detailed? No not at all. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hilux5972 said:

How did you know? 

 

From a lot of information I possess which is too extensive to explain here.  Of course this is dependant on the extent of detailing Hornby go to (front & rear lights, cab lights, fine detailed servo pantograph, etc), but on past performance I am not expecting a great deal.

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Indeed how Hornby approach the pantograph I think will be one of the first tests , and suspect will be an issue . But surely this 91 is severely compromised already without Mk4s 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

 

I must admit to never really looking at the Mk 4 coaches in any detail, I just knew the Cavalex one's would be the best that could reasonably be done.  How do Hornby's existing Mk 4's standup?

Your talking about comparing coaches that were made 30/40 years ago for a train set market against coaches that were being proposed to modern standards?  How do you think they’d compare?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
54 minutes ago, Dixie Dean said:

 

Well quite badly, of course, but how badly I didn't exactly know.

 

 

Well Hornby give them new paint jobs and charge a premium for them !   As Andy says they are about from 35 years ago when Hornby detail standards weren't as good as now . They were used in trainsets so presumably are relatively cheap to make . I think they have one bodyshell for First and Tourist Class and another for Catering car . Over the years they were modified in real life by GNER , so I don't think the windows at the end of the train are accurate for anything post the GNER "Mallard" rebuild . They also don't model the end coach which has no corridor connection , it facing onto the class 91 rear cab . But perhaps the most obvious thing to modellers is that the end valance is part of the bogie rather than being part of the coach itself . Much like the Hornby Class 52 Western if you remember that . Built to go round train set curves.  I think that's one of the biggest compromises.

 

I bought a Virgin East Coast liveried train pack a few years ago which comes with two TSO Mk4s in VTEC livery (which for reasons above aren't accurate but have a nice paint job) . Unfortunately they didn't produce any single coaches . My solution was to get some old East Coast grey ones , which for a while were available from Hattons new for £11-£15 . I then clumsily repainted them . From a distance (like a mile!) its not bad  but I've never found anyone that does the first class blue stripe that fades either end .   So I was looking forward to some mk4s had they become available , although not into crowd funding at all.

 

My suspicion is that Hornby will simply relivery and release their existing mk4s

 

Edited by Legend
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

 I just knew the Cavalex one's would be the best that could reasonably be done.  

 

10 hours ago, Hilux5972 said:

How did you know? 

 

10 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

From a lot of information I possess which is too extensive to explain here. 

 

I can't help but laugh when I read posts such as this. ' I'm going to win the argument because I know stuff but I'm not going to say what it is'

 

No one knows for sure just what sort of product was going up against the Hornby model, it could have been the bees knees or could have looked superb but run like a dog. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

I can't help but laugh when I read posts such as this. ' I'm going to win the argument because I know stuff but I'm not going to say what it is'

 

Gotta love arm-waving on the internet to cover a baseless argument.

 

Look over there, a three-headed monkey! <legs it />

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

If Hornby can create something to the standard they did for the 50, 56, 60 locomotives, then I would guess most would be very satisfied...

I don't doubt Hornby's ability to make a good model of the traction unit, but it is the whole 225 set I want to a consistent matching standard, or nothing. Hornby have the capability, their QoS Pullman cars are a good indicator. Question is, will they? Sadly it looks like a Deltic on mk1s is going to remain my example of post-steam ECML express traction as I don't find the Ambiguous Puzuma set that attractive...

 

13 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

From a lot of information I possess which is too extensive to explain here.

The information in the public domain terminally trumps yours and is brief enough to need no explanation: it isn't going to happen as a RTR OO model.

 

The audience here can recall such as Ixion N gauge, DJM, Little Loco Company: all have fallen by the wayside for differing reasons. Probably the kindest non-judgemental evaluation is that of the old proverb: 'there's many a slip 'twixt cup and lip'. It's difficult in short, and 'stuff happens' to interfere with honest intention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, truffy said:

 

Gotta love arm-waving on the internet to cover a baseless argument.

 

Look over there, a three-headed monkey! <legs it />

That's not a monkey that's an ape (or a librarian)

  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

 

this is dependant on the extent of detailing Hornby go to (front & rear lights, cab lights, fine detailed servo pantograph, etc), but on past performance I am not expecting a great deal.

Hattons made a comment in their video of the Hornby 91 that it will have an 8 pin decoder socket.

8 pins support 3 functions. Lights are 2. Day/night mode is another. Anything further like switching off 1 end & a servo pantograph will not be available unless they change their mind about the decoder socket.

All these functions are available on the Bachmann 90 so I was hoping Hornby would up their game to match this.

I suspect they will stick with an 8-pin socket & not add these features, but I hope I'm wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

...All these functions are available on the Bachmann 90 so I was hoping Hornby would up their game to match this.

I suspect they will stick with an 8-pin socket & not add these features, but I hope I'm wrong.

Hornby will listen to their customer, the retailers.

 

Look at the price sensitivity of the general RTR OO market. Hornby have undoubtedly succeeded with their TTS product. That's the ticket, modest capability upgrade for a modest price.

 

Paying significantly more for a better exploitation of DCC capability is very much a minority sport; leave that to the boutique brands for now, see if a significant proportion of the customers start making 'want' noises for particular features which they might pay a little extra for.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

It does seem rather silly producing the 91 with no new Mk4 stock or a DVT. Bit like producing a steam loco without a tender. Hornby excel in some areas such as detail, running qualities etc. However when it comes to things like DCC they can be rather basic/simplistic and certainly not pushing the boundaries. Cavalex have been very magnanimous in their comments, one can’t help feeing that now the opposition have conceded there is no pressure on Hornby to produce the best 91 they could, just an acceptable one.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Hornby will listen to their customer, the retailers.

 

Look at the price sensitivity of the general RTR OO market. Hornby have undoubtedly succeeded with their TTS product. That's the ticket, modest capability upgrade for a modest price.

 

Paying significantly more for a better exploitation of DCC capability is very much a minority sport; leave that to the boutique brands for now, see if a significant proportion of the customers start making 'want' noises for particular features which they might pay a little extra for.

I'm glad this point has been made. The model railway market covers a wide base, and the desire for ultra-DCC capability with full polyphonic sounds and dozens of switchable options meets one part of that market but can alienate others. I have a dual DCC/DC set-up because I have far too many vintage engines that are never going to get chipped. I have a handful of sound locos but for me personally the fundamental benefit of DCC is being able to control trains individually rather than circuits, and have lights stay on when the train stops. Beyond that the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Clearly my preferences don't represent everyone, but frankly if the Hornby 91 has the right shape and livery, I can live with an 8 pin interface. 

Edited by andyman7
  • Agree 3
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...