Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[S.A.C Martin]

Do you still have the left over Hornby bits? I was looking at a club members VEP at the weekend, and thought that it should be possible to cut the corridor door from the front, and mount it inside of a sanded down 'retracted' corridor, then put both into a rubber mould and produce a drop on replacement in resin - it dosn't fix the windows, but would seem to be a relatively quick win?

 

Jon

 

Nope, sorry Jon. The way Hornby makes the front end is bizarre, and in cutting it apart, it effectively renders it unusable. The glazing unit has the recess with pipes as a painted section of it, and the sections which give you the door and windows, is stuck firmly against the glazing.

 

But your theory sounds rather good. The only drawback is that you are still left with the biggest problem (at least for me) - the windows and their distance to the outside pillars.

[pauln]

 

I too have had a response to my letter today apologising for the delay. There is no definitive explanation for the noisy running but Mr Kohler has offered me another VEP on loan to test some theories for his engineers. So overall a positive step forwards.

 

I'll keep you all informed.

 

An update. I have had a NSE liveried VEP delivered direct from Mr Kolher at Hornby with a Sapphire chip pre-installed and tested. This one does not exhibit the extremely noisy running that my other 4 have had (see earlier posts). Out of the box it was still rather jerky at very low speed (below 4 on the NCE powercab); anything higher and it runs nice and smoothly with no slipping on 3rd radius curves. I have given it a good run in and remembering some earlier advice adjusted CV10 to 1. The jerky movement is now almost eliminated but at the cost of a rather swift leap into forward movement. I'm sure a bit more CV fiddling will reduce that (does anybody have a suggested set of CVs that they are using with good results on the VEP please?)

 

One thing I have noticed on this unit is that the traction tyres are on different axles; that is one is on the left side of one axle and one is on the right side of the other axle. I am sure my earlier ones were both on the same axle (and looking at S A C Martin's photos they are also on the same axle). I have pointed this out to Hornby to see what they say. Observations of how others' VEPs are configured and whether this would make any difference to the reported slipping problems are welcome.

 

So, whilst I was distinctly unhappy initially I cannot fault Hornby's attempts to deal with my specific problems and I hope that I will shortly have a VEP that runs as well as I had hoped the first one would.

 

 

Paul

Edited November 20, 2011 by pauln

[Uk_Steve]

great news!! fair play!!

[Roy P]

 

One thing I have noticed on this unit is that the traction tyres are on different axles; that is one is on the left side of one axle and one is on the right side of the other axle. I am sure my earlier ones were both on the same axle (and looking at S A C Martin's photos they are also on the same axle). I have pointed this out to Hornby to see what they say. Observations of how others' VEPs are configured and whether this would make any difference to the reported slipping problems are welcome.

 

Paul

 

I mentioned in a previous post in this thread that my sons 4VEPs don't (so far) seem to be as bad as some reported here. For what it's worth, both units have their traction tyres fitted to both wheels on the outer axle. Running analogue control (for the time being) they do seem to require a high proportion of the available output to move at a respectable rate.

RP

[zarniwhoop]

 

I mentioned in a previous post in this thread that my sons 4VEPs don't (so far) seem to be as bad as some reported here. For what it's worth, both units have their traction tyres fitted to both wheels on the outer axle. Running analogue control (for the time being) they do seem to require a high proportion of the available output to move at a respectable rate.

RP

 

Mine too are on the outer axle. If the MBSO had been manufactured with the motor in the baggage compartment (possible for pre-rebuild, but probably looking even worse in the rebuilt version), that might have made sense, i.e. near the middle of the unit.

 

I too run on analog, and mine needed a high setting on the controller to run. With the bogies on the far DTC replaced by bogies with pinpoint bearings (or, perhaps, re the fitting of internal bearings, just 'replaced with bearings') it runs *much* better.

 

ĸen

[phil gollin]

.

 

So, did anyone who attended Warley over the weekend ask Hornby about the 4-VEP problems ?

 

.

[gelboy45]

H'mm, over 87,000 views and more than 1,100 replies on this topic. Of course, most of the views are probably mine awaiting a positive response from Hornby.

 

I want to buy an improved Vep from Hornby............

 

Gerry

[kintbury jon]

 

With the bogies on the far DTC replaced by bogies with pinpoint bearings (or, perhaps, re the fitting of internal bearings, just 'replaced with bearings') it runs *much* better.

 

ĸen

 

Any chance of a photo of this mod?

[exet1095]

I asked Simon Kohler about how the Brighton Belle would be powered, saying I was worried in the light of the VEP issues highlighted in this thread. He was pretty insistent that there were only a few problems with individual units and that most of the comment on internet fora was pretty worthless. Now, I have not bought a VEP (because of the solid partition) and so I said I only had the evidence of what others said. This was exactly the point, he replied - lots of anonymous comment and very little of substance. We then moved back onto the Belle which was a much more positive conversation.

 

Anyway, the Belle looked great and as long as it runs ok I am sure I will want one.

 

Paul Dryden

[spamcan61]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm..so the Belle might end up with much the same Limby unit as the VEP then :-/. Let us hope that the Belle coaches have pinpoint axles, and the Belle performance is as good as the Javelins seem to manage with the Limby unit.

Edited November 21, 2011 by spamcan61

[S.A.C Martin]

I asked Simon Kohler about how the Brighton Belle would be powered, saying I was worried in the light of the VEP issues highlighted in this thread. He was pretty insistent that there were only a few problems with individual units and that most of the comment on internet fora was pretty worthless. Now, I have not bought a VEP (because of the solid partition) and so I said I only had the evidence of what others said. This was exactly the point, he replied - lots of anonymous comment and very little of substance.

 

Not terribly happy about what I've read here, if your account is true. What you have recounted is rather at odds with the attitude I have encountered in my letter from Mr Kohler. With my response to his letter having gone out last week, I am left wondering if it was worth the time and effort.

 

very little of substance

 

Edited November 21, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[Andy Y]

I asked Simon Kohler about how the Brighton Belle would be powered, saying I was worried in the light of the VEP issues highlighted in this thread. He was pretty insistent that there were only a few problems with individual units and that most of the comment on internet fora was pretty worthless. Now, I have not bought a VEP (because of the solid partition) and so I said I only had the evidence of what others said. This was exactly the point, he replied - lots of anonymous comment and very little of substance.

 

This frustrates the hell out of me. When Simon has shown concern over comments on here I have always emphasised that there is an open door to talk to me or the wider membership. Instead we've seen slow responses to qualified and illustrated concerns. Simon had made similar comment to another member yesterday at the show so I dropped by for a chat to reiterate that we need better communications. Simon agrees that we should sit down and talk through various issues but to read your feedback leaves me somewhat speechless that the evidence is devalued by dismissal.

 

Yes; we may only be a small part of Hornby's customer base but does it mean that what we, as modellers, say isn't relevant?

 

I spent a lot of time trying to communicate over the 31 chassis issue; yes the customers do receive replacements but it's never been accepted there was a problem.

 

Aaaaaaargh!!!

 

Message to Hornby - look; we do want to work together, be supportive and buy good quality products when they come on the market but this disdain for anyone standing by fact isn't helping!

[John M Upton]

Of course there is another possibility. Hornby may say 'stuff it' and shove the VEP moulds on the back shelf of the warehouse for a few years and forget about them. They did it with the Class 466 Networker, produced one batch that had some serious design issues and then did not return to it for some years and even then only with a few models (one of them a Modelzone job) and with a distinct lack of enthusiasm...

 

We will know more on the 25th of December I reckon. If Hornby announce further variants of the VEP then they still have faith in the model, if no more announced then I would not expect to see them back for quite some time if at all.

[Ceptic]

 

Nope, sorry Jon. The way Hornby makes the front end is bizarre, and in cutting it apart, it effectively renders it unusable. The glazing unit has the recess with pipes as a painted section of it, and the sections which give you the door and windows, is stuck firmly against the glazing.

 

But your theory sounds rather good. The only drawback is that you are still left with the biggest problem (at least for me) - the windows and their distance to the outside pillars.

 

l, too, have considered a resin casting for a replacement gangway, made from a widened Hornby donor*. But, this also means that the door would have to be cut from the front, widened and set forward within the gangway shroud. A lot of detail would be lost in the process, i.e. the route indicator aperture size and the gutter would need to be preserved, along with the detail of the rubbing surfaces**. lt also crossed my mind that a thinnish, wrap-around, detailed, etch, covering the whole of the front end, onto which, it could be blended in, plus a seperate etch for the door, again, set foward within a re-mastered, resin gangway. This leaves you having to cut away, and re-position the cable recesses and windows !!.

Just the job for those with steady hands, good eyesight and nerves of steel.

 

Re :- Traction tyres..... Yep, mine are both on the outer axle, also.

Re :- Response / reply from Hornby....None, to date.

 

Regards to all, Ceptic.

 

* P.S. This may infringe copyright

** P.P.S. Would it even be possible to etch that sort of fine detail ?.

Edited November 21, 2011 by Ceptic

[Trevellan]

This frustrates the hell out of me.

Yes, me too and I find it utterly baffling. I know we've experienced a lot of repetition on this thread and I myself have alluded to circular arguments being unhelpful. However, I would suggest that several contributors have gone beyond the call of duty to address deficiencies in the product while trying to be as constructive as possible and to understand commercial pressures which may have dictated what is, after all, a very unsatisfactory outcome for many of us. Just imagine a similar situation in the car industry and the likely response.

 

It’s obvious that Simon is a company man, but a lot of RMwebbers have acknowledged his positive influence at Hornby. I think now would be a good time to listen and I sincerely hope the offer of a dialogue is taken up.

[gelboy45]

I have reviewed and deleted the message I was going to post and finally decided like Hornby that I really don't care either!

 

Off to get a life ;0))))

 

Gerry

[Removed a/c]

For me the negatives on this model have outweighed the positives. A general lack of response from Hornby doesn't help either. No problem though there are plenty other manufacturers out there wanting my hard earned..........and I am enjoying discovering them all too

[Pugsley]

* P.S. This may infringe copyright

There's no may about it, it would.

** P.P.S. Would it even be possible to etch that sort of fine detail ?.

Undoubtedly, yes. It's a good idea you have there, and possibly the best solution - it's going to be a lot easier than chopping the existing end off and sticking on a new one. The gangway could be resin cast from a 3d printed master, and incorporate the door, making it even easier.

[jonhall]

There's no may about it, it would.

 

Without wishing to start the whole copyright arguement, making a copy of the original would, but modifying it then copying *probably* wouldn't - it rather depends how much work goes into the modifications.

 

Jon

[Legend]

I asked Simon Kohler about how the Brighton Belle would be powered, saying I was worried in the light of the VEP issues highlighted in this thread. He was pretty insistent that there were only a few problems with individual units and that most of the comment on internet fora was pretty worthless. Now, I have not bought a VEP (because of the solid partition) and so I said I only had the evidence of what others said. This was exactly the point, he replied - lots of anonymous comment and very little of substance. We then moved back onto the Belle which was a much more positive conversation.

 

Anyway, the Belle looked great and as long as it runs ok I am sure I will want one.

 

Paul Dryden

I can't say I'm surprised at this. With Hornby there is a lot of spin (the Corporate I love working for Hornby DVD as an example) also small things that are easily sorted , get sorted out, requests for spares, individual models requiring repair etc all creating positive PR. However when it comes to something of substance that really needs sorting out they stick their heads in the sand. What contempt for their customer base and I think further underlines the attitude of Mr Martin in the Hornby to make cheap toys thread on this forum.

 

I'll take bets now that the 5Bel has a Limby power unit. In the more positive conversation did Simon Kohler say otherwise?

Edited November 21, 2011 by Legend

[metadyneman]

Of course there is another possibility. Hornby may say 'stuff it' and shove the VEP moulds on the back shelf of the warehouse for a few years and forget about them. They did it with the Class 466 Networker, produced one batch that had some serious design issues and then did not return to it for some years and even then only with a few models (one of them a Modelzone job) and with a distinct lack of enthusiasm...

 

We will know more on the 25th of December I reckon. If Hornby announce further variants of the VEP then they still have faith in the model, if no more announced then I would not expect to see them back for quite some time if at all.

That would be a shame but to be honest if Hornby had thought about it properly and provided us with a model that was at least comparable with the Bachmann 4-CEP then we would be looking at a huge support for EMUs both AC and DC from them. As it is Bachmann have clearly got the lead and their class 350 Desiro which has just hit the shops , quality wise kicks Hornby's effort at EMUs into touch! I see a 450 coming next from them and maybe a refurbed 4-CEP. Bring it on!

[Stevelewis]

One thing that I have learnt from all this is not to jump in with both feet with new models, unless I can be fairly sure it will perform and look ( reasonably) as expected.

 

Part of my decision making coming from experience from other recent purchases.

 

Given my experience with a recently purchased 4VEP which has been returned and refunded, I would certainly NOT purchases a 5BEL until I am sure it

is worth buying!

 

Conversley I am expecting delivery tomorrow of a recently released 4 car EMU, which I had no hesitation in ordering.

 

It seems like Hornby treat us poorly sometimes, and feel that it is in their interests to address the 4VEP problems quickly and positively, particularly in the current economic climate when every possible retail sale is vital.

[dave flint]

Of course there is another possibility. Hornby may say 'stuff it' and shove the VEP moulds on the back shelf of the warehouse for a few years and forget about them. They did it with the Class 466 Networker, produced one batch that had some serious design issues and then did not return to it for some years and even then only with a few models (one of them a Modelzone job) and with a distinct lack of enthusiasm...

 

We will know more on the 25th of December I reckon. If Hornby announce further variants of the VEP then they still have faith in the model, if no more announced then I would not expect to see them back for quite some time if at all.

 

Perhaps no bad thing. It would then leave the door open for a manufacturer who can actually be arsed to produce DC EMUs that are cheaper and yet have better detail and chassis arrangements.........in fact, one that now has a bit of a track record......

 

And yet......look at the Gresley suburbans that Hornby have just brought out. As I mentioned on that thread, it seems pot luck whether you get Hornby's A-team or the z-listers working on their models these days.

Edited November 21, 2011 by dave flint

[Venator]

I had a thoroughly pleasant chat with Simon at Warley about the 4VEP.

 

Before I even got started he did say that he wasn't happy with the solid partition in the 4VEP and he literally held his hands up and said they got it wrong. I myself am not entirely happy with the solid partition but at least Hornby have acknowledged the error. It's something I can live with and fix if I want to.

 

Simon told me that the 4VEP had been extensively tested in Margate and they hadn't encountered any of the problems mentioned. This would back up my experience of the model at least (any doubts or confusion see the video I posted earlier in the thread). Overall it was an interesting, positive chat and one I enjoyed. Simon did actually thank me for having some kind words to say about the VEP!

 

 

Perhaps no bad thing. It would then leave the door open for a manufacturer who can actually be arsed to produce DC EMUs that are cheaper and yet have better detail and chassis arrangements.........in fact, one that now has a bit of a track record......

 

And yet......look at the Gresley suburbans that Hornby have just brought out. As I mentioned on that thread, it seems pot luck whether you get Hornby's A-team or the z-listers working on their models these days.

 

To say that Hornby shouldn't do any more DC EMUs is a bit selfish, if you don't feel they're up to your standards / too expensive then don't buy them! Don't deprive others (like myself) of those models. I'm very glad Hornby have done the much criticised 466 and VEP, otherwise I wouldn't have them and my portrayal of the Southeast's railways wouldn't be as good. Personally I would hope that Hornby do make more "slam door" EMUs because there's still so many gaps to fill in both the DC and AC areas.

 

Venator

[andyman7]

I think there is a clear distinction here between Hornby's attitude to individual customers and their corporate approach to forums such as this. For example I wrote to Hornby direct re the Class 31 issue and was personally dealt with in an entirely satisfactory manner quite a long time before the offcial remedy, when the official stance was still 'on the fence'. Here, we have seen an individual approach acknowledged by Simon and remedy offered, but the general discussion seems to have been dismissed. Bachmann seem much more collegiate in their approach, whereas as Hornby seem fearful of any corporate admission of failure. I think they are missing a trick, but I would stop short of accusing them of contempt for customers because it is clear that they do enage with (and remedy) individual customer issues. What they don't do is to recognise and treat the (not unimportant) subset of serious modellers as a constituency that merits their own appropriately honest and open approach - and it is something that they are losing out from.

Edited November 21, 2011 by andyman7