Bon Accord Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 You are jumping to conclusions.My perspective is that it's immaterial what anyone thinks of the model because we're not getting any production rerun any time soon,if at all,given the difficulties all manufacturers are experiencing at the moment.The implication incidentally is one of your own thinking and not mine.You have your issues with this model....of that we are all well aware....and I am on record as respecting that. Equally,they are not mine....and I expect the same consideration from you in return....without quite unnecessary inquisitorial overreaction. I don't think he's jumping to conclusions at all. Every time a thread such as this appears where Hornby customers are highlighting wholly avoidable and indeed unforgivable QC issues with their long awaited and increasingly expensive models, your contribution to those concerns is uncannily predictable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 You are jumping to conclusions.My perspective is that it's immaterial what anyone thinks of the model because we're not getting any production rerun any time soon,if at all,given the difficulties all manufacturers are experiencing at the moment.The implication incidentally is one of your own thinking and not mine.You have your issues with this model....of that we are all well aware....and I am on record as respecting that. Equally,they are not mine....and I expect the same consideration from you in return....without quite unnecessary inquisitorial overreaction. You are mistaken, yes I can be inquisitive but please don't be defensive, there's no need. I was only interested in your opinion that's all. No offence intended. Let's just stick to discussion of the model. And I apologise for inadvertently leading the discussion away from such if that's what happened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted July 16, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2015 I don't think he's jumping to conclusions at all. Every time a thread such as this appears where Hornby customers are highlighting wholly avoidable and indeed unforgivable QC issues with their long awaited and increasingly expensive models, your contribution to those concerns is uncannily predictable. I have a track record of complaints with regard to Hornby's QC which stretches back several years,so please don't try that one on me.Besides which I do not recall your particular involvement in this issue.I am replying to one person .It might be appropriate if you let him do the talking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted July 16, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 16, 2015 You are mistaken, yes I can be inquisitive but please don't be defensive, there's no need. I was only interested in your opinion that's all. No offence intended. Let's just stick to discussion of the model. And I apologise for inadvertently leading the discussion away from such if that's what happened.Fine.My point is simply that there are no more of this model,so we have to make the most of what we have. You have already heard this from a retailer above ( 87029 ). If there is a rerun of the A3 at any time it is to be hoped that Hornby make improvements such as those carried out recently with the GW 42/52XX on their second run....this took 2 years...but the original of that was during the Design Clever era so a direct comparison with the A3 is probably not possible and in any case involved pick up/bearing issues amongst other chassis tweaks. A direct comparison would probably be with the West Country 34001 Exeter which is being rerun later this year after furore over shortfall in supplies.To be realistic,I cannot see that Book Law or similar is likely to be cosmetically retooled or tweaked.Another production run will probably mean more of the same.We have either to alter/improve ourselves or live with it.87029's customer doesn't have that luxury. There does seem to be a discrepancy between numbers of new model releases ( J15,700)and reruns (A3) which are perhaps not as many as anticipated.Nothing can be taken for granted but things are much improved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I have a track record of complaints with regard to Hornby's QC which stretches back several years,so please don't try that one on me.Besides which I do not recall your particular involvement in this issue.I am replying to one person .It might be appropriate if you let him do the talking. Thanks Ian, I will do some talking then. This isn't my thread but it started as a query as to how well Hornby had rendered this new A3 and by and large so far we are cataloguing the bad/good points (okay, mostly the bad!) so that any other modellers searching for such information in the future will be 'clued-up' before purchase, secondhand perhaps. Of added use is addition of methods used to modify or correct problem areas. The value of this kind of information in a long-lived internet forum archive will outlive that of contemporary hand-wringing over Hornby's QC issues. So perhaps we should dispense with any further discussion of what/how/when in QC/Management in this thread. If Hornby ever read this then I'm sure they'd appreciate a frank discussion of the merits of the model rather than anything else. I'm a newbie here so I imagine the thread content is somewhat 'chaired' by the originator? Ian - at 2,630 posts I would hazard a guess at you being here at the very beginning! Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Here's a couple of photos of the tender with alternative spoked wheels. These are spares for the Hornby P2 (part no. X6659) and as far as I am aware are identical in all proportions to the disc wheelsets provided with "Book Law." Note that the cartazzi wheelset now stands out like a sore thumb being painted black. There is an alternative flanged wheelset for this included with the model, presumably for display purposes. Also, the buffer height adjacent to the leading coach suggests that the tender might be riding slightly high and this has been mentioned earlier. If anyone would kindly furnish me with the correct, expected height from rail to running plate then I shall check this. Running: out of the box this tender was like a millstone round the loco's neck as such... it was being dragged reluctantly round my test track. I knew there were problems but it was only when I swapped the disc wheelsets out for the spoked versions that I could actually see how each wheelset was rotating/behaving. I could detect no obstructions caused by moulding flash nor the electrical pickups fitted. At the outset I should say that the running problems I have experienced with my tender could well be isolated, in the absence of any confirmation from others. I haven't had this problem with other Hornby eight-wheeled tenders. Initially the third wheelset was not rotating at all and riding up in the frame on 22.5" radius (4th radius) curves. The axle retaining plate (held in by three screws) removed, it became clear that the second and third axles are designed to move higher up into the tender than the leading/training axles. I found that the only way I could stop the third axle from riding up too high, preventing the wheels from having any adhesion with the rails, was to limit vertical travel by inserting a carefully shaped sliver of hardwood (about 1/32" thick) above the axle, i.e., before inserting the axle into it's retaining slot in the underneath of the tender body itself. Bodge job..? Feels like it. However, it works well. I shall replace the wood with a piece of suitable Plastikard... In order to relieve the poor-running in general I briefly took out the drawbar between loco and tender and experimentally bent it very, very slightly to relieve/increase the pressure on the axles. I thoroughly recommend that this route is not pursued as the slightest change can result in an A3 that won't pull the skin off a rice-pudding. I went from my benchmark standard for this A3 of being able to haul seven Hornby 62' Gresley coaches (fairly heavy) round a 22.5" radius loop with straight sections of about a yard in length to being barely able to haul four of the aforesaid coaches with lots of wheelspin. Ultimately, the running issues have eased with running and lubrication but don't expect any high-precision engineering down there... Hornby have designed those axles to slop about all over the place in order to negotiate tight 'toy-train curves'. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 A few more recent photos. Note that I have drawn a thin red line through the right-hand, fireman's side to show the footplate alignment above the driving wheels. This is clearly wrong and is part of the distortion under the firebox which is worse on this side. I am summing up the courage to do something drastic about it. Is the tender really too high or is the cab too low? Is the entire loco not level, rising at the front? The distorted footplate is not helping in this apparent discrepancy and the distorted footplate in front of the smokebox, now much reduced, may not be so apparent if the body is moved up at the cab end... I clearly need the Isinglass drawing! I don't suppose someone could kindly provide me with a rail to cab roof measurement please? Any height adjustment of the cab end of the body will necessitate a new fixing method as Hornby have used a plastic lug at this end which locates in the chassis. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Here's one I renamed as 2750 Papyrus. Note the distortion of the running plate over the LH cylinder that is quite severe. I put the new number a little higher than that on the original, but this still fails to line up with the 'LNER' on the tender. I suspect either the loco cab is too low; I think the loco slopes downwards from the front and note that the running plates on loco and tender fail to line up, or the tender rides too high, or most likely a bit of both. RTR manufacturers can get away with it, a kitbuilder most definitely wouldn't. Anyway, No.2596 Manna is next. Glenn Edited July 20, 2015 by mattingleycustom 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Here's one I renamed as 2750 Papyrus. Note the distortion of the running plate over the LH cylinder that is quite severe. I put the new number a little higher than that on the original, but this still fails to line up with the 'LNER' on the tender. I suspect either the loco cab is too low; I think the loco slopes downwards from the front and note that the running plates on loco and tender fail to line up, or the tender rides too high, or most likely a bit of both. RTR manufacturers can get away with it, a kitbuilder most definitely wouldn't. Anyway, No.2596 Manna is next. Glenn LNER2750-RH-s50.jpg LNER2750-FL-s50.jpg Excellent, good to see someone having a go at it. So did you buy two of them then? I'm sure you'll understand when I say "Your front footplate is shocking Sir! ...but your front bufferbeam is somewhat improved than that of mine..." So, the numbers, you used T-cut to remove them, any particular type/brand is good for this? The success you've had with the cab numbers gives me faith in tackling the tender letters... in due course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Excellent, good to see someone having a go at it. So did you buy two of them then? I'm sure you'll understand when I say "Your front footplate is shocking Sir! ...but your front bufferbeam is somewhat improved than that of mine..." So, the numbers, you used T-cut to remove them, any particular type/brand is good for this? The success you've had with the cab numbers gives me faith in tackling the tender letters... in due course. I use wet and dry to remove numbers in most cases but these resisted, so I resorted to white spirit. I purchased two 'Book Laws', this one: Papyrus for a commission and the other (Manna is the chosen victim) for myself. Both arrived missing the reversing rod and damper door piece, both in the boxes. Papyrus was in marginally better condition, 'Manna' has the white lining missing from the front bogie wheels after contact with the misplaced front footsteps. I might have a go at improving Manna's loco body, but it can wait a while as I have other work that must take priority:- SR types come first! (usually). Glenn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamOrmorod Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 I use wet and dry to remove numbers in most cases but these resisted, so I resorted to white spirit. I purchased two 'Book Laws', this one: Papyrus for a commission and the other (Manna is the chosen victim) for myself. Both arrived missing the reversing rod and damper door piece, both in the boxes. Papyrus was in marginally better condition, 'Manna' has the white lining missing from the front bogie wheels after contact with the misplaced front footsteps. I might have a go at improving Manna's loco body, but it can wait a while as I have other work that must take priority:- SR types come first! (usually). Glenn Who's transfers did you use? They look very similar to the Hornby originals, which are pretty good in colour (not too shiny and quite yellow without actually being yellow) in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted July 20, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 20, 2015 The more I see of Book Law, the more I suspect that the factory have retooled the running plate without Hornby's knowledge. They've made the copy from the worn tooling instead of using the cads, it would go a long way to explain the front steps fouling the front wheels and the poor fit of the running plate in general. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Who's transfers did you use? They look very similar to the Hornby originals, which are pretty good in colour (not too shiny and quite yellow without actually being yellow) in my opinion. HMRS transfers were used on this occasion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dominion Posted July 21, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 21, 2015 Here's a couple of photos of the tender with alternative spoked wheels. These are spares for the Hornby P2 (part no. X6659) and as far as I am aware are identical in all proportions to the disc wheelsets provided with "Book Law." Note that the cartazzi wheelset now stands out like a sore thumb being painted black. There is an alternative flanged wheelset for this included with the model, presumably for display purposes. Also, the buffer height adjacent to the leading coach suggests that the tender might be riding slightly high and this has been mentioned earlier. If anyone would kindly furnish me with the correct, expected height from rail to running plate then I shall check this. Running: out of the box this tender was like a millstone round the loco's neck as such... it was being dragged reluctantly round my test track. I knew there were problems but it was only when I swapped the disc wheelsets out for the spoked versions that I could actually see how each wheelset was rotating/behaving. I could detect no obstructions caused by moulding flash nor the electrical pickups fitted. At the outset I should say that the running problems I have experienced with my tender could well be isolated, in the absence of any confirmation from others. I haven't had this problem with other Hornby eight-wheeled tenders. Initially the third wheelset was not rotating at all and riding up in the frame on 22.5" radius (4th radius) curves. The axle retaining plate (held in by three screws) removed, it became clear that the second and third axles are designed to move higher up into the tender than the leading/training axles. I found that the only way I could stop the third axle from riding up too high, preventing the wheels from having any adhesion with the rails, was to limit vertical travel by inserting a carefully shaped sliver of hardwood (about 1/32" thick) above the axle, i.e., before inserting the axle into it's retaining slot in the underneath of the tender body itself. Bodge job..? Feels like it. However, it works well. I shall replace the wood with a piece of suitable Plastikard... In order to relieve the poor-running in general I briefly took out the drawbar between loco and tender and experimentally bent it very, very slightly to relieve/increase the pressure on the axles. I thoroughly recommend that this route is not pursued as the slightest change can result in an A3 that won't pull the skin off a rice-pudding. I went from my benchmark standard for this A3 of being able to haul seven Hornby 62' Gresley coaches (fairly heavy) round a 22.5" radius loop with straight sections of about a yard in length to being barely able to haul four of the aforesaid coaches with lots of wheelspin. Ultimately, the running issues have eased with running and lubrication but don't expect any high-precision engineering down there... Hornby have designed those axles to slop about all over the place in order to negotiate tight 'toy-train curves'. I find the axle keeper plate location, and also the flatness of the tender chassis, can both make a difference to how Hornby's 8 wheel tenders run. Tightening the weight at front and back can sometimes help the chassis become flatter. The keeper plate with its 4 deep U sections can flex a bit in length, and so can lead to rubbing on one axle or another. So if I have a wheel set that is troublesome, sometimes loosening and tightening some of the keeper plate screws can resolve it. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Excellent, good to see someone having a go at it. So did you buy two of them then? I'm sure you'll understand when I say "Your front footplate is shocking Sir! ...but your front bufferbeam is somewhat improved than that of mine..." So, the numbers, you used T-cut to remove them, any particular type/brand is good for this? The success you've had with the cab numbers gives me faith in tackling the tender letters... in due course. I painted the red edges of the bufferbeam matt black which helps the appearance. Since the photos were taken, I took a look at 2750 from the front end and just couldn't deal with the skewed bufferbeam that resulted from the bent left hand running plate. I'm very pleased to report that your 'bending' method (albeit fraught with the danger of actually breaking the thing) has resulted in Papyrus having almost straight running plates and a straight bufferbeam. The 'black sandwich plates' between the steam pipes and the running plate are in reality covers over the valve rodding. On the model they're solid blocks of plastic, whereas on the real things they were hollow allowing for the greater movement of the valve gear consequent on the fitting of long travel valves. Glenn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I painted the red edges of the bufferbeam matt black which helps the appearance. Since the photos were taken, I took a look at 2750 from the front end and just couldn't deal with the skewed bufferbeam that resulted from the bent left hand running plate. I'm very pleased to report that your 'bending' method (albeit fraught with the danger of actually breaking the thing) has resulted in Papyrus having almost straight running plates and a straight bufferbeam. The 'black sandwich plates' between the steam pipes and the running plate are in reality covers over the valve rodding. On the model they're solid blocks of plastic, whereas on the real things they were hollow allowing for the greater movement of the valve gear consequent on the fitting of long travel valves. Glenn Thanks Glenn, I did wonder what those 'black sandwich plates' were. Mine sprung loose when I attempted to use this outrageous 'bending method' to straighten the front footplate but they glued back in place okay. Glad to hear the latter worked for you. I am deliberating as to what to tackle next - I don't want to embark on anything drastic until some Isinglass drawings arrive so that I can check some measurements. I suspect that the body-shell is attached too low down at the cab end. However, I could get on with sorting the front buffer beam as you have... and then those LNER letters on the tender are going to have to come off, pending new repositioned ones... Talking of Isinglass drawings, I noticed there's one available for A1/A3 variants with the experimental ACFI hot water feed apparatus (2576 "The White Knight"/2580 "Shotover") which would make an interesting 1930s model. A general question here please for anyone that has experience of Hornby body-shell glues... does anyone know what can be used to loosen the bond, dissolve the glue even without damaging the plastic? I use a liquid, brushed solvent glue to assemble kits and I've noticed that this can sometimes be used to soften joints for repositioning... perhaps I have answered my own question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Close-up of the default model cab number. Is it the '5' that's too high or the '2' that's slipped or a bit of both? Really nice detail around the cab window area, the model bears up well at such cruel close-quarters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I challenge anyone to read this detail unaided! Hornby should be commended at rendering and paying attention to such exquisite fine details even if we can't see them and even if elsewhere great big details are wonky and we can see them. However, I really feel like I must take issue with the Doncaster Works No. of 1764... it's come to my attention that that belongs to a V1 built in 1931..! ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted July 22, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 22, 2015 Close-up of the default model cab number. Is it the '5' that's too high or the '2' that's slipped or a bit of both? Really nice detail around the cab window area, the model bears up well at such cruel close-quarters. Looks like the 2 has had way to much to drink... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I am pleased to note that comparison with the Isinglass drawing indicates that Hornby have faithfully matched all dimensions I have cared to measure, although many of you probably already know this from previous models. Footplate/running plate straightening: I have turned my attention to the firebox area where the dip forward is pronounced on both sides of the loco. On the right-hand, fireman's side the dip downwards continues right along over the driving wheels. Although the latter is only slight it arrests the eye and in my opinion gives the impression that the loco body is tilted upwards along its length toward the smokebox. This may not be present on all locos and may not concern some but to me it was grating. From the photo you can see that the running plate prises away from the body and splashers reasonably easily. It will not however come away from below the cab as the running plate moulding is integral with the firebox construct within the cab. The lugs visible under the running plate below the cab are fixings for the cab sides. At this stage I didn't want to remove the cab nor firebox for fear of damaging the paintwork. The large black lever on the right in the photo is a piece of wood used to hold the running plate away from the body. I found that in order to lift the running plate up, closing the firebox gap on this side and lifting it up slightly above the rearmost driving wheel, I had to remove the lugs on the rearmost splasher with a needle file. This was done so that a glue bond could be made without undue force required to hold parts together. The running plate was glued using tiny drops of super-glue on a pin under the firebox area and behind the footstep where the running plate curves upwards at the front of the firebox. The back of the footstep gives a good sized gluing area directly to the firebox. Notes on the driving wheel splashers: (i) they look better painted apple-green as I believe they should be, (ii) the rear and centre splashers are integral with the boiler moulding; the leading ones are integral with the running plate moulding, (iii) the white lining on these splashers isn't great, being too pronounced on the leading front splashers particularly. The 'before and after' photos show the end result - not a massive change but removal of the gap under the firebox and a better (straight and level) sighting line along the running plate has resulted. Next job is probably the left-hand side where the gap under the firebox is also pronounced! Perhaps if Hornby had remade this model with a cast metal running plate we would have both more weight and more rigidity in this area... seems to work well for Bachmann. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Sighting along the right-hand side showing a running plate far more parallel with the rails and the boiler.. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted July 30, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 30, 2015 Sighting along the right-hand side showing a running plate far more parallel with the rails and the boiler.. Congratulations, you've got the job - Running Plate Whisperer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pom-pom Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Thanks, glad you enjoy or can maybe use this information. Still can't believe I'm taking a scalpel to a 150 quid model but hey-ho, in for a penny in for a pound. I just want the graceful lines of this A3 to fit that of it's 1924 namesake which seems to have been nicely 'lined-up' properly! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSpencer Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Thanks, glad you enjoy or can maybe use this information. Still can't believe I'm taking a scalpel to a 150 quid model but hey-ho, in for a penny in for a pound. I just want the graceful lines of this A3 to fit that of it's 1924 namesake which seems to have been nicely 'lined-up' properly! Times have changed. £150 today, I remember me paying only £70 for Great Northern 10 years ago. This still remains the best running loco in my fleet, probably more by fluk than design as all my other Hornby locos using the same mech, do not even come close to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearwater Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Oddly I picked up a Brown Jack for 100 quid in Hamley's on Friday. Thought was a good price. Quite odd that they have just received in stock though. Assume is a receivership or similar return. Yet to run it- on list for this week Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now