Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[rmnik]

Interestingly looking at the advert for the 4-VEPs on the inside front cover of the September issue of Hornby magazine,

both the NSE and all over blue livery 4-VEPs have all black gangway connections and either weathered or "shopped" cable recesses.

[RFS]

Meanwhile, the price of the VEP terrifies me!

 

Hatton's price for the DCC-ready version is £120. For that you're getting an engine and 4 super-detail coaches. If you were to think of the price as £40 for a loco and £20 each for 4 coaches then it's not a bad price at all. I know Hatton's have been selling off blue-grey 4-CEPs at £89 and that's an even better bargain. Irresistible you might say (and yes, I bought one to make up an 8-car set ).

[Gwiwer]

Hattons have only been selling one Cep variant at £89 which might only be on account of slower than expected sales and the arrival of the second batch while the first ones are still in stock. All the rest are at more typical prices.

[SRman]

... Although Rails have been selling blue/grey and now green ones at reduced prices.

[Gwiwer]

No longer. They still list it but when you attempt to order it shows "Permanently out of stock". Hattons are still listing the latest b/g one at £89 however.

[kipford]

For anyone looking to EM or P4 one of these ( like me) according to Nigel Burkins blog its looks like Hornby have pulled a flanker (or should that be a different word) and used non standard axle sizes . I await my NSE version and the discovery of what problems lie ahead with re-wheeling with interest

 

Dave

[jonathan452]

No, of course not! That's why we're modellers - a piece of plasticard, or maybe even an interior from Southern Pride (I haven't used them yet, but it looks a possibility).........................

ĸen

 

Maybe, but the solid partition walls are in my opinion at best an unnaceptable production compromise, at worst a quality control blunder.

 

I do wonder sometimes about the lines of communication between Margate and China.

 

As Chris Leigh ('Dibber 25') pointed out in the 'Model Rail' review the fifty year old Triang Mk 1's were moulded with partition windows and doors, not to mention every side corridor coach since then. So as he asks 'why we have taken a step backwards here'?

 

Although the 4VEP isn't on my definitive wish list, I may have been tempted to make an impulse purchase further down the line.

 

However recent experience has finally drumed in-to me to avoid the first releases in the hope that the key corrections will be made in subsequent (blue/grey?) batches.

 

Maybe common sense will then prevail in the positioning of the motor bogie and the correction of the partition walls.

[jonathan452]

Further to my last post I have just found the below on Hornby's forum.

 

Now if I was Hornby I would be sending the first batch back to China for urgent retification works....................

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Strange 4 Vep

• 
  gelboy45 (1 posts) , 2 days ago 15:23 13 August 2011
   
  I am so disappointed that this long awaited model has SOLID 1st Class compartment corridor walls.
   
  Why is this and will it be corrected?
   
  Gerry ;0(((
  • Report
    
  • Reply
    

  [*]

  PeterEm (1 posts) , 10 hours ago 10:55 15 August 2011

   

  ....and a giant motor bogie at the passenger end of a brake coach?

   

  Agree, answers please because I fear this has the potential to be a real sales disaster unless something gets modified!

   

  Peter

  • Report
    

[43179]

For anyone looking to EM or P4 one of these ( like me) according to Nigel Burkins blog its looks like Hornby have pulled a flanker (or should that be a different word) and used non standard axle sizes . I await my NSE version and the discovery of what problems lie ahead with re-wheeling with interest

 

Dave

 

The non standard axle diameter, inside bearings as opposed to pinpoints and a motor 'bogie' (and not a proper AWD chasis) sounds suspiciously like they're using 'Limby' style componants on the VEP - same as the 153. Combine that with the misshapen looking cabs, weeny roof vents and the scary looking couplings within the unit and I think I will be giving this one a miss..! It could have been great but instead its just " meh " (you have to say it with your face screwed up) --- if you know what i mean ??

[S.A.C Martin]

Reading the Model Rail review, and the comments here, I'm faced with something of a dilemma. I have essentially planned my latest wheeze (!) around the NSE VEP and I am now left wondering whether I should buy the (cheaper) Southern Pride kit. Unlike a lot of Hornby's more recent releases - the Thompson L1 springs to mind - it hasn't garnered the overwhelming reaction from the press they normally do. I was really looking forward to this release, but am torn between my own thoughts on the unit ("can it be that bad?") to seeing so many knowledgeable people disappointed by it elsewhere.

[SRman]

I wonder whethger Hornby may be persuaded to supply replacement interiors for the DMBC coaches. They have certainly come to the party on previous errors or problems, such as the coupling problems with the earlier Pullman releases (of the newer pattern with interior lighting), or replacement smokebox doors for the first releases of Merchant Navies.

[frobisher]

 

Maybe, but the solid partition walls are in my opinion at best an unnaceptable production compromise, at worst a quality control blunder.

 

Not Quality Control but Quality Assurance. QC is about making sure things are as they should be during manufacture (and design is meant to have solid partitions) QA is about making sure things are as they should be during pre-production (QA should have raised the issue of the solid partitions - it may have of course been flagged as "acceptable").

[jonathan452]

 

Not Quality Control but Quality Assurance. QC is about making sure things are as they should be during manufacture (and design is meant to have solid partitions) QA is about making sure things are as they should be during pre-production (QA should have raised the issue of the solid partitions - it may have of course been flagged as "acceptable").

 

Noted.

 

But I would like to be a 'fly on the wall' both in Margate and China, taking in-to account my previous comment about the lines of communications between the two locations.

[Trevellan]

Reading the review in Hornby mag I was very disappointed to note that the motor bogie is fitted with traction tyres. I thought this was increasingly regarded as an outmoded concept. The Bachmann CEP doesn't need them, so why the VEP? This does seem to reinforce the point above about a Lima design philosophy on this one. Still, I've not heard enough to cancel my advance orders - yet.

[spamcan61]

Reading the review in Hornby mag I was very disappointed to note that the motor bogie is fitted with traction tyres. I thought this was increasingly regarded as an outmoded concept. The Bachmann CEP doesn't need them, so why the VEP? This does seem to reinforce the point above about a Lima design philosophy on this one. Still, I've not heard enough to cancel my advance orders - yet.

 

I was wondering - although I've not seen it specifically stated anywhere - if the power bogie used is basically the same as the one used in the Limby Class 73, which has traction tyres.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...Ideally I'd want one in NSE colours on one side and SWT colours on the other!

May be possible without a repaint: it all hangs on the construction Hornby use. As many will know, both Hornby and Bachmann have made coaches on a clip together sides and roof components basis. It is no problem at all with either of these brands mk1s to make up hybrid coaches with maroon one side, crimson and cream the other for example. On a layout where trains are alternately viewed from one side, then the other, this makes two 'different' trains for the price of one a possibility.

 

Guess you will have to wait on the first owner of this model willing to explore whether the construction allows this.

 

Edited for a weird malfunction which posted the content twice...

[Gwiwer]

I'm afraid, Mr. Kohler and team, that I am already convinced to not part with my hard-earned in exchange for a traction-tyred unit with an apparently lightweight power unit in full view and solid first class compartments. There are other concerns as well (some of which may be fairly easy to rectify or modify for many modellers) and while no model will be perfect the retail price for a unit similar in many ways to the Bachmann Cep yet more expensive and less refined means at least one sale has been lost here.

 

I am now wondering seriously about the Brighton Belle. If that appears with traction tyres, avoidably visible motor and such like I shall be more than disappointed.

[jonathan452]

I'm afraid, Mr. Kohler and team, that I am already convinced to not part with my hard-earned in exchange for a traction-tyred unit with an apparently lightweight power unit in full view and solid first class compartments. There are other concerns as well (some of which may be fairly easy to rectify or modify for many modellers) and while no model will be perfect the retail price for a unit similar in many ways to the Bachmann Cep yet more expensive and less refined means at least one sale has been lost here.

 

I am now wondering seriously about the Brighton Belle. If that appears with traction tyres, avoidably visible motor and such like I shall be more than disappointed.

 

Are they listening????????????

 

Did they take any comments on board at the pre-production/engineering sample stage?

 

The position of the motor bogie was definately mentioned on this thread at the time.

 

The first release models really do need to be sent back to China for rectification works now.

 

Forgetting such issues as 'batch production' and having to reserve production slots/shipping well in advance etc.

[Gwiwer]

Are they listening????????????

 

Did they take any comments on board at the pre-production/engineering sample stage?

 

Simon Kohler indicated that he was listening to me when I raised exactly this issue of the motor placing with him while inspecting test shots at Carn Brea a year ago. As for taking anything on board his response was a silent shrug of the shoulders.

[Ragtag]

The Model Rail review mentioned that the refurbished NSE version lacked the guard's compartment so the visible bogie in this model may be a result of the bogie having to be visible in the NSE version, and Hornby standardising the chassis design?

 

Agree that the other flaws are a disappointment on a brand new model, especially if flagged before production.

[Gwiwer]

Refurbished Veps did not "lack" a guard's compartment. Rather they had the large caged area replaced with seating while the guard retained his (or her) compartment in the same position it always was. That was largely due to the cost of rebuilding the whole units had it been deemed necessary to move the brake and all of the associated control and emergency equipment therein.

 

So far as Hornby is concerned and to my mind they chose to model a refurbished unit but didn't have to make that choice, they could have placed a Limby-style motor (which appears to be what the Veps are fitted with) on the inner end bogie where it would be out of sight on an as-built unit and less intrusive on the rebuilt ones, and they could have moulded the side corridor panels as something a little more refined than a solid wall.

 

That being said at least - and at last - we have a quite credible Vep model despite the obvious flaws

[dibber25]

 

Maybe, but the solid partition walls are in my opinion at best an unnaceptable production compromise, at worst a quality control blunder.

 

I do wonder sometimes about the lines of communication between Margate and China.

 

As Chris Leigh ('Dibber 25') pointed out in the 'Model Rail' review the fifty year old Triang Mk 1's were moulded with partition windows and doors, not to mention every side corridor coach since then. So as he asks 'why we have taken a step backwards here'?

 

Maybe common sense will then prevail in the positioning of the motor bogie and the correction of the partition walls.

 

The positioning of the motor bogie has been done with the refurbished units in mind. It makes much more sense when you see the NSE version because there is no guard's section over either bogie in the rebuilt vehicles. Had it been in this end of the refurbished coach it would have been even more visible, I suspect.

CHRIS LEIGH

[jonathan452]

 

The positioning of the motor bogie has been done with the refurbished units in mind. It makes much more sense when you see the NSE version because there is no guard's section over either bogie in the rebuilt vehicles. Had it been in this end of the refurbished coach it would have been even more visible, I suspect.

CHRIS LEIGH

 

Yes was aware.

 

But as Gwiwer has just pointed out 'they could have placed a Limby-style motor (which appears to be what the Veps are fitted with) on the inner end bogie where it would be out of sight on an as-built unit and less intrusive on the rebuilt ones'.

 

Instead we seem to have gone for the least acceptable compromise.

[wombatofludham]

I must admit I'm amazed at the solid corridor partitions in the side compartment area, whilst not completely unfixable it shouldn't be happening in what is effectively a mid-range priced model (not an el cheapo Railroad model where compromises can be expected), and I can't help thinking the motor bogie is a step backwards, particularly as they've stuck it in plain view. If Hornby insist on sticking in a self-contained motor bogie and not a motor arrangement like Bachmann which does intrude into the seating area, they could have stuck it in the guards area and let the refurbished model suffer the motor intrusion in the relatively insignificant "snug" area. Even if the "default" design chosen was the refurbished condition because the possible post-privatisation liveries they carried outnumber the pre-refurbishment liveries, it still makes sense that the smaller passenger compartment fitted post refurbishment would hide the bogie better, and the DCC dock could be better accomodated elsewhere (under the roof or even under the floor) without intruding into the main passenger compartment.

 

I still quite fancy having a Southern plank to plank even though I live well north of third rail land, with a CEP, EPB and VEP as the banger blue VEP looks the part to me, but these detail own-goals are frustrating given the progress they have made elsewhere.

[Legend]

But the essential truth is for a £140 model would you not expect something better than a Limby motor? It strikes me that Replica have a pretty good unit for MUs and if Bachmann can put an unobtrusive motor on their MPV (although their 150 is distinctly odd) then surely it could have been possible here. Hornby models do cost more than Bachmann so you would expect something a bit special , not just the same mass produced (and therefore presumably cheap) motor that they use for 156s.

 

The solid first class compartment partitions are just amazing. Do you think its just miscommunication between factory and Margate? I can't see any reason for these to be solid. Would it work if you simply use compartments from a 1960s Triang Mk1 composite. You can get them pretty cheap at swapmeets. But then it really shouldn't be necessary. I reckon they'll still sell in droves, however, which I suspect will not motivate Hornby to up their game on this or subsequent models!