Railroad Crosti 9F

[cctransuk]

At my age I am cynical about manufacturers taking a course of action to encourage more people into the hobby, as it usually means "I really want cheaper models". The days of CKD are long gone.

 

You never typed a truer word !!

 

.... and I don't recall the ultra-simple Tri-ang CKD kits being such a resounding success that the range was extended beyond the initial few items, or them being produced for very long at all !!

 

I drew my own conclusions at the time, and I've had no cause to change my views since.

 

If I never read another "they'd sell like hot cakes" posting again, it'll be too soon. If the proposal is such a dead cert - put a business case to your bank.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Brian Kirby]

Corr, anyone would think we were re-introducing the Black Death, where's the harm in a little retail experiment? Example: Lady assembly person is sitting by the Polybulk wagon production conveyor belt, along come the main body components and the bogies, with or without wheels. Instead of spending X minutes putting things together, she puts them into a pre-mould vacuum tray (or a machine does it). Items move along, next lady assembly person is ready with the automatically provided correct number and type of detail parts, instead of spending X minutes painstakingly applying these, she (or a machine) bungs them in a small plastic bag and tapes it to the previously mentioned vacuum tray. Along comes the box automatically, and a robot arm shoves the tray of parts into the box. Job done. I thought the most expensive element of production was the cost of labour, with CKD they could even bring production back to the UK? Didn't think of that one did yer?

    Why would i have to visit my bank manager? I've no intention of producing CKD, i haven't got a range of anything, i'm just offering an idea to our dear (and now even dearer) manufacturers, so they can get some more mileage out of older production tools. An RTR Polybulk for £60 anyone?  :-))

                                                                 Cheers, Brian.

[250BOB]

Guys

I am a bit of a fan of running tender first freights on my roundy roundy layout, but don't have or want a turntable. Can anyone point me in the direction of any photos of Crostis in charge of freights but running tender first please.

Thanks

Bob

[pete55]

Which is nothing to do with Hornby!

 

Keith

 

Nor is it Ian Allan....think you'll find it's now Key Publishing.

[Brian Kirby]

Guys

I am a bit of a fan of running tender first freights on my roundy roundy layout, but don't have or want a turntable. Can anyone point me in the direction of any photos of Crostis in charge of freights but running tender first please.

Thanks

Bob

Bit of a tough one there Bob, the Crostis had "high-sided" tenders which weren't designed for tender-first running, but i'm sure it happened now and again, plus of course when reversing on to a train. On the other hand, 9Fs on the Western Region had "inset" type tenders, which provided a clear screen view backwards from the cab, so reverse working might be more common with these?  

                                                                                                    Cheers, Brian.

[Legend]

Which is nothing to do with Hornby!

 

Keith

Or Ian Allan as I think they sold their mags to Key Publishing

[Jamiel]

Hi Bob

I haven't seen a photo of a 9F running tender first on the main line, there are photos showing them marshaling stock that way though.

 

In general I would expect to see a 9F pulling a freight train that had been prepared for it in a marshaling yard, or on one of the dedicated trains they worked like those at the Tyne Docks.

 

As they were a fast main-line freight engine, and not a pick-up goods loco, I think it would be far more unlikely to been seen running tender fist, but as soon as you say something like that, someone pops up with a photo.

On the subject of detailing, I have ordered some parts to play with, but since RT Models are very busy with work at the moment, and I presume Brassmasters are getting ready for the upcoming shows, I don't expect to get anything to work with soon. Pity as the work I have seen others do is making me really want to get down to it. Still plenty of wagon kits to build to go behind the beast in the meantime.

Jamie

Edited September 9, 2015 by Jamiel

[robmcg]

For those doubting the attractiveness of the Hornby Railroad 9F Crosti, here is an unedited (but for background, contrast, brightness and cropping) pic of this model.

 

Stunning!

 

 

 

[gismorail]

Having put my money where my mouth is I think it's an excellent model but judging from some comments some people don't know when their well off. I mean come on people get real !!!!!! who would have thought even a few years ago that one could buy a RTR Crosti 9F for the price.

 

What would a kit cost !!!!! and then you have to build it if you have the skill to do so..... if not you'd have to pay someone to do it for you which at today's prices would cost you more than £117.00 and would it run as well as this model does........

 

I really do despair at some members attitude sometimes     yes Hornby have had their problems of late which has annoyed most of the buying public as well as stockists but at least this model as arrived as promised and I hope Hornby make a profit out of it ........ I mean they are a business at the end of the day who need to make money to survive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

Rant over and yes I do feel better 

[Downendian]

What would a kit cost !!!!! and then you have to build it if you have the skill to do so..... if not you'd have to pay someone to do it for you which at today's prices would cost you more than £117.00 and would it run as well as this model does........

 

I really do despair at some members attitude sometimes yes Hornby have had their problems of late which has annoyed most of the buying public as well as stockists but at least this model as arrived as promised and I hope Hornby make a profit out of it ........ I mean they are a business at the end of the day who need to make money to survive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rant over and yes I do feel better

I'm bemused at this post Gismorail. Which members is it aimed at? Certainly not Brian's excellent modelling to add brake rigging, or the discussion on CKD, which would require some modelling. Neither of which have been critical of the Hornby model- yes I have one and its superb. So I can't really see who the rant is aimed it, it's been all reasonable discussion to improve the model.

 

By the way a Golden arrow resin kit can very simply be added to a railroad chassis at little over £120 if a rebuilt Crosti is required, I've done one and I don't have anywhere near the skills that Brian has. It runs identically as it has more or less the same chassis.

Neil

Edited September 9, 2015 by Downendian

[Rusty.J]

The cylinders look noticeably under scale compared to both prototype photos and Bachmann's version though the rodding looks marginally better on this model. I feel the cylinders at least were copied from the railroad 9F.

 

Not sure I wood give Hornby 10 out of 10 personally. Despite being new tooling, they copied existed railroad 9F characteristics. The pony is no better than my old tender drive Evening Star. They could have left the steps for the user to fit like they fund for the P2 and the Duke. Like those models, the lamp irons would have been welcome, however I feel as the railroad 9F model does not have these, they left them off. However it's buffers are better (although non sprung metal would have been suffice)

 

 

Hornby will get a mixed message from this, do they stay the super detailed way or produce these odd prototypes to Railroad standards?

Well I could never have ever thought of hearing someone rant about a RailRoad model like that It's RailRoad.....

[Legend]

I didn't view that as a rant, just some constructive criticism on how the model could have been better. And on the whole I think the points being made are within context. An un rebuilt Crosti is no use to me , but it looks a very good model. Hoping it does well and a rebuilt one follows. That could very well prove tempting

Edited September 9, 2015 by Legend

[Rusty.J]

I'm bemused at this post Gismorail. Which members is it aimed at? So I can't really see who the rant is aimed it, it's been all reasonable discussion to improve the model.

 

By the way a Golden arrow resin kit can very simply be added to a railroad chassis at little over £120 if a rebuilt Crosti is required, I've done one and I don't have anywhere near the skills that Brian has. It runs identically as it has more or less the same chassis.

Neil

Probably at post #691 if I got the number right. I was catching up on this topic and that post did stand out with the unusual level of negativity from a model that has otherwise received such excellent rating here.

[Rusty.J]

I didn't view that as a rant, just some constructive criticism on how the model could have been better. And on the whole I think the points bring made are within context. An un rebuilt Crosti is no use to me , but it looks a very good model. Hoping it foes well and a rebuilt one follows. That could very well prove tempting

True but that post did have a difference to it compared to the rest of the posts. That's why I made that statement. Not saying it's bad. Good criticism is always welcome. As I said with a model that has received so much of praise and good feedback and it's one of those models that has boosted a troubled manufacturers reputation, it does feel odd when you suddenly get a big post like that.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Rusty.J

[Dunsignalling]

Corr, anyone would think we were re-introducing the Black Death, where's the harm in a little retail experiment? Example: Lady assembly person is sitting by the Polybulk wagon production conveyor belt, along come the main body components and the bogies, with or without wheels. Instead of spending X minutes putting things together, she puts them into a pre-mould vacuum tray (or a machine does it). Items move along, next lady assembly person is ready with the automatically provided correct number and type of detail parts, instead of spending X minutes painstakingly applying these, she (or a machine) bungs them in a small plastic bag and tapes it to the previously mentioned vacuum tray. Along comes the box automatically, and a robot arm shoves the tray of parts into the box. Job done. I thought the most expensive element of production was the cost of labour, with CKD they could even bring production back to the UK? Didn't think of that one did yer?

    Why would i have to visit my bank manager? I've no intention of producing CKD, i haven't got a range of anything, i'm just offering an idea to our dear (and now even dearer) manufacturers, so they can get some more mileage out of older production tools. An RTR Polybulk for £60 anyone?  :-))

                                                                 Cheers, Brian.

Unfortunately, locos these days are made up of about ten times as many parts as they were in the days of Tri-ang CKD. Moreover, as I described in my earlier post, CKD wasn't anything of the kind, all the real assembly (motor, gears, wheels, valve gear) was already done. "Building" it consisted of screwing the various sub assemblies to the chassis and putting the body on, i.e, the easy bit.     

 

There was another aspect which bears consideration. Those assembling locos effectively inspect the parts they are using; if you just pack them they need inspecting separately.

 

Having one production line doing both fully-built and CKD wouldn't work; it would just slow everything down. Even if you could make it work, it would cause the output from any production stage doing it to fluctuate. The output of one stage is the input of the next and that would be highly disruptive. 

 

Having stripped a couple of modern r-t-r locos (almost) down to "bare bones" and reassembled them (they work, too) I would venture to suggest that anybody who can't do the same would be seriously out of their depth if presented with one in truly CKD condition. They are at least as complex as most kits I have encountered. 

 

Providing what Tri-ang did, i.e. with sufficient pre-assembly to make finishing it off doable for the mechanically unskilled majority would present no cost saving to purchasers. If they left it hard enough to restrict it to experienced modellers, it would be just another kit, and we all know what has been happening to sales of those since r-t-r got better.  

 

John

Edited September 9, 2015 by Dunsignalling

[gismorail]

This has been an excellent thread with some great detailing ideas coming though from fellow members I just could'nt understand the negative comments being made along the way and felt that there was a danger that it could suddenly turn into a Hornby bashing thread ,nothing to be bemused about.

Maybe my personal modelling standards and expectations are not a high as some and I'm the first to admit that my knowledge of the prototype is limited .... but I have learn't a lot from fellow members on this thread. 

[Downendian]

Nothing that I've seen Gismorail.

Every model ever released or to be released will have faults, the Crosti is no different all fortunately minor and easy to rectify. But if we want to improve on the model we need to know what they are. The faults are clear to see and have been discussed that's all, and in a measured way,

It does seem that there are a few that see constructive criticism as Hornby bashing, perhaps they are happy with what they have. There are a few of us who want something different out of the box, and to get the toolkit and paints etc out. That is what these threads are all about.

Neil

[rockershovel]

Have to say, if I were to go in for British outline SG then there would HAVE to be 9Fs involved. They really are a very handsome loco.

[stewartingram]

According to what I have heard IA don't buy direct from Hornby any more as Hornby won't deal with them, instead they have to go through a third party to get supplies, therefore reducing their margins and their ability to compete price wise.

Conversely they do get their supplies of Bachmann direct and have a good rapport with them! (which allows them to price competitively)

 

Keith

During the week that the Crosti was released (or at least received many mentions of "in stock at xxx" on here), I was on shift, working just across the road from IA Waterloo. I was hoping to pick one up but none appeared. When I mentioned this to the manager, he said they had been in stock for a few days, but they hadn't received the invoice so couldn't yet put them out for sale. A week later I returned, still none on display - I assumed that they had either sold them all or still not yet received the invoice.But as I picked mine up from T4U, I wsn't bothered. Still have received a reply back from Hornby about the faulty gearwheel though.

 

Stewart

[Brian Kirby]

 The cylinders look noticeably under scale compared to both prototype photos and Bachmann's version though the rodding looks marginally better on this model. I feel the cylinders at least were copied from the railroad 9F.

 

 

I was rather surprised by this comment, i thought the Crosti's cylinders looked big and powerful, let's not shatter the Crosti dream. Curiosity got the better of me, and this morning i compared the cylinders on a Bachmann Evening Star and on the Hornby Crosti. Taking a measurement of the side face of the cylinder casings (not including the piston rings either end), the Bachmann was 14.5mm deep and 12.5mm wide, the Hornby Crosti was 14.5mm deep and 12mm wide, so there's half-a-mil in it widthwise! (One and a half inches in real money) So i'm amazed that they can be perceived as "noticeably different", although to be fair the Hornby are pitched ever-so-slighty lower, introducing a small gap at the top. So the next question for the dead-on accuracy brigade is: Which of the above measured cylinders is the more precise? Does anyone have a 4mm drawing to measure the casings? Look away if you may be upset by the answer.

                                                       Cheers, Brian.

[Brian Kirby]

 

 

Having one production line doing both fully-built and CKD wouldn't work; 

I wasn't envisaging that, which suggests RTR and CKD of brand new models side-by-side, surely the manufacturers would want to flog a few thousand RTR ones first, i was intending CKD as a method of entending the sales potential of older models in a separate later run, with a mildly challenging kit of parts for the modeller? I seem to recall the Tri-ang CKD range was around for about ten years, so hardly a flash-in-the-pan or a sales failure, although i agree the assembly required was quite basic. What if (say) the lovely Bachmann MR 1F 0-6-0T was made available as CKD, i bet sales of this model have dropped off by now, why not bring it back later as a kit? I think any new CKD loco kit would have to be a bit more involved than just screwing the body on, i'd say let the modeller put ALL of the body detailing on, including the handrails, and maybe factory finish the body in plain black, so the customer can apply their own transfers and varnish as they wish. The chassis break-down is a bit more tricky, do they supply it fully made, or maybe with prepared wheelsets (to avoid DIY quartering) ready to insert and hold in with the screw-in keeperplate? The motor and wiring could be made "electrically-ready" by the factory, just requiring physical fitting and testing at home. Chassis details like the brakegear moulding, sandpipes and couplings can also be fitted on by the modeller.

                                             Just an idea. Cheers, Brian.

[bike2steam]

This has been an excellent thread with some great detailing ideas coming though from fellow members I just could'nt understand the negative comments being made along the way and felt that there was a danger that it could suddenly turn into a Hornby bashing thread ,nothing to be bemused about.

Maybe my personal modelling standards and expectations are not a high as some and I'm the first to admit that my knowledge of the prototype is limited .... but I have learn't a lot from fellow members on this thread. 

You will always get those that are not happy, you either accept possibly a few faults/compromise - or pay more, then those that moan will do it about the cost, sometimes manufacturers just cant win.

Edited September 9, 2015 by bike2steam

[Metr0Land]

I wasn't envisaging that, which suggests RTR and CKD of brand new models side-by-side, surely the manufacturers would want to flog a few thousand RTR ones first, i was intending CKD as a method of entending the sales potential of older models in a separate later run, with a mildly challenging kit of parts for the modeller? I seem to recall the Tri-ang CKD range was around for about ten years, so hardly a flash-in-the-pan or a sales failure, although i agree the assembly required was quite basic. What if (say) the lovely Bachmann MR 1F 0-6-0T was made available as CKD, i bet sales of this model have dropped off by now, why not bring it back later as a kit? I think any new CKD loco kit would have to be a bit more involved than just screwing the body on, i'd say let the modeller put ALL of the body detailing on, including the handrails, and maybe factory finish the body in plain black, so the customer can apply their own transfers and varnish as they wish. The chassis break-down is a bit more tricky, do they supply it fully made, or maybe with prepared wheelsets (to avoid DIY quartering) ready to insert and hold in with the screw-in keeperplate? The motor and wiring could be made "electrically-ready" by the factory, just requiring physical fitting and testing at home. Chassis details like the brakegear moulding, sandpipes and couplings can also be fitted on by the modeller.

                                             Just an idea. Cheers, Brian.

 

Surely this (in another vein) is what Hornby are doing nowadays with full-fat and Railroad?  ie one mould for eg Mk1 coach or Tornado, and 2 levels of finish.  If you want a cheaper model and do some modelling you get the RR one and get stuck in.  People complain enough about there not being enough differentiation between RR and models in the main range that are past their sell-by date.  Why on earth would they complicate things and have a 3rd string to their bow?

[JSpencer]

True but that post did have a difference to it compared to the rest of the posts. That's why I made that statement. Not saying it's bad. Good criticism is always welcome. As I said with a model that has received so much of praise and good feedback and it's one of those models that has boosted a troubled manufacturers reputation, it does feel odd when you suddenly get a big post like that.

As the author that post, I am not one to follow the crowd!

 

I think overall the Crosti is very good. My recommendation to Hornby is, if they were using exist 9F parts then fair enough. However everything was retooled and they copied the various little errors of that or missed an opportunity to include positive aspects of recent railroad models like the Duke and P2.

 

Basically if Hornby decided to do DP1 based on their railroad deltic, but in the end, tool up everything, do an all round good model but use exact copies of the railroad class 55 bogies, I am sure we would all agree that they missed an opportunity to correct this error. This is my feedback to Hornby.

 

One positive aspect I forget to say is the chimney above the smokebox is much better than the single chimney on the Bachmann 9F. The later has a horrible mould line and the two halves are not always perfectly lined up.

[250BOB]

I have to say that I think this thread has been remarkably low on criticism of the Hornby Railroad Crosti.....and I feel that there has been an acceptance that this was a Railroad model, and just right for the more expert amongst us to take the tool kit to.

 

But would I be right in thinking that the majority of folk might just be very happy to accept the model for what it is, and not make any amendments, perhaps other than having it weathered.??

 

I would never normally have bought a Railroad model, preferring to have a much more detailed model for the extra money.  But I think we all agree that this model is not of the very basic Railroad type, and makes a passable appearance for a decent model in its own right. 

 

I'm not going to take a tool kit to my model.....I will have it professionally weathered, but not much else.....but that's a personal thing, others I know will differ.

 

Bob