Hornby announce the ex SECR / SR / BR(s) Wainwright H Class 0-4-4 tank as part of their 2017 range

[Merchant Navy]

On 05/06/2021 at 23:01, RFS said:

 

Bought the train pack 3 years ago, and it has been running fine till today when the loco was clearly struggling going forward. Not too bad in reverse.  So decided to remove the body to have a closer look, and found a large piece of blue sticky stuff (blu-tak?) on the flywheel at the front. Where on earth did that come from? So really pleased to find that it wasn't just me! Offending stuff removed and the loco now runs fine. The stuff was very soft so perhaps that's due to it being really warm the last couple of days. 

 

I'm glad to see comments like these as I'm likely to opt for a `H` (R3539 or R3631) in the next few days, so I'll be taking a look inside the loco, given the reports of issues and in case there is a problem with the motor or something else.

[JSpencer]

On 15/07/2022 at 21:16, Merchant Navy said:

 

I'm glad to see comments like these as I'm likely to opt for a `H` (R3539 or R3631) in the next few days, so I'll be taking a look inside the loco, given the reports of issues and in case there is a problem with the motor or something else.

 

Be careful not to break the front sand pipes off when removing and (more importantly) when putting back the body.

[sjp23480]

On 15/07/2022 at 20:16, Merchant Navy said:

I'm glad to see comments like these as I'm likely to opt for a `H` (R3539 or R3631) in the next few days, so I'll be taking a look inside the loco, given the reports of issues and in case there is a problem with the motor or something else.

Just had one of these pass through my hands for repair, it was the SECR liveried R3648 - which seem to command quite a premium on ebay, if you can find a buyer.

 

The motor was playing up - stoppong/starting and smoking quite badly after stalling.  Suggested over lubrication, but the owner confirmed that he had never been near it with the 3in1!

 

Opening it up, I found the gear train had been basted with the white grease (silicone) that Hornby use during manufacture.  

 

So much grease had been used it had found its way into the motor and onto the brushes and commutator.  Judicious removel of the excess, followed by a slosh of IPA and an extended period of running in saw the motor back to smooth running and a relieved owner.

 

 

[tractionman]

On 21/04/2024 at 19:18, sjp23480 said:

Just had one of these pass through my hands for repair, it was the SECR liveried R3648 - which seem to command quite a premium on ebay, if you can find a buyer.

 

The motor was playing up - stoppong/starting and smoking quite badly after stalling.  Suggested over lubrication, but the owner confirmed that he had never been near it with the 3in1!

 .

 

I had a SR green liveried one from the first run, a lovely looking loco but had the same issues of overheating etc so sent it back to Rails but instead of replacing it they returned it to me with even more lube all over it, so I sent it back for a refund, a shame really as I liked the look of it--I should have perservered by the sounds of it.

 

I still have the SECR liveried version as it was not as bad as the SR one.

 

I am about to sell up my SECR stock so good to know Ebay gets a decent sale price for these :-)

[Fireline]

On 24/04/2024 at 12:11, tractionman said:

 

I had a SR green liveried one from the first run, a lovely looking loco but had the same issues of overheating etc so sent it back to Rails but instead of replacing it they returned it to me with even more lube all over it, so I sent it back for a refund, a shame really as I liked the look of it--I should have perservered by the sounds of it.

 

I still have the SECR liveried version as it was not as bad as the SR one.

 

I am about to sell up my SECR stock so good to know Ebay gets a decent sale price for these :-)

 

A lot of the problems with these seem to be down to the R0 resistor on the PCB failing. I've taken to opening my locos, and replacing the resistor with a piece of single core copper wire. Not had a problem with one since I've started doing that.

[NHY 581]

The SE&CR liveried examples are priced high but all liveries seem to be creeping up. However, if anyone is after examples where the valance to the footplate is lined, such as the SE&CR and Southern liveried versions, do make sure you zoom in on any images posted as part of the sale description. 

 

Even if left in the box, the packaging can rub removing the very fine lining. Worst case it will reveal the black plastic beneath the paint. Once you see it, the model is ruined as it's the livery that sets it apart. Certainly not worth paying a high price for. 

 

Rob

 

 

[Peter Seager-Thomas]

One of the many preparations for my proposed layout included haulage comparisons. The initial tests involved haulage capacities from level through to 1 in 40, in increments of 10.

 

The three 0-4-4Ts were the worst performers. The EFE 02 was the best, actually managing six coaches on the level, with both Hornby M7 and H Class only managing five. At 1 in 80 all three were down to three coaches apiece, tailing off equally to one coach on a 1 in 40 incline, (where the Oxford Radial could still manage three).

 

I believe that one of the reasons the GWR never persevered with Pacifics was because weight tends to be loaded on the rear wheels, which if driven, is adhesive weight, and if not, is weight wasted in carrying. The same with a model I suppose.

 

The gradient tests alas were imperfect, as I should also have done the tests running tender/bunker first, I’m sure I have read somewhere that the M7s were better performers bunker first.

 

That said, I am absolutely delighted with all three 0-4-4Ts

 

Peter.

[No Decorum]

3 hours ago, Peter Seager-Thomas said:

One of the many preparations for my proposed layout included haulage comparisons. The initial tests involved haulage capacities from level through to 1 in 40, in increments of 10.

 

The three 0-4-4Ts were the worst performers. The EFE 02 was the best, actually managing six coaches on the level, with both Hornby M7 and H Class only managing five. At 1 in 80 all three were down to three coaches apiece, tailing off equally to one coach on a 1 in 40 incline, (where the Oxford Radial could still manage three).

 

I believe that one of the reasons the GWR never persevered with Pacifics was because weight tends to be loaded on the rear wheels, which if driven, is adhesive weight, and if not, is weight wasted in carrying. The same with a model I suppose.

 

The gradient tests alas were imperfect, as I should also have done the tests running tender/bunker first, I’m sure I have read somewhere that the M7s were better performers bunker first.

 

That said, I am absolutely delighted with all three 0-4-4Ts

 

Peter.

Tank locomotives are supposed to run equally well in forward and reverse. However, crews often liked to turn them (if they could) to run smokebox first, because in reverse coal dust from the bunker tended to blow into the cab. An exception I read about was a driver being given an 0-4-4T for a goods turn being unhappy that there wasn’t time to turn it to run in reverse because adhesion was better in reverse.

[JSpencer]

On 26/04/2024 at 08:59, Fireline said:

 

A lot of the problems with these seem to be down to the R0 resistor on the PCB failing. I've taken to opening my locos, and replacing the resistor with a piece of single core copper wire. Not had a problem with one since I've started doing that.

All 5 of mine show some warming up, so between replacing the grease and eventually replacing the circuits with directly wired chips, I'll probably cure those. 

[JSpencer]

20 hours ago, Peter Seager-Thomas said:

One of the many preparations for my proposed layout included haulage comparisons. The initial tests involved haulage capacities from level through to 1 in 40, in increments of 10.

 

The three 0-4-4Ts were the worst performers. The EFE 02 was the best, actually managing six coaches on the level, with both Hornby M7 and H Class only managing five. At 1 in 80 all three were down to three coaches apiece, tailing off equally to one coach on a 1 in 40 incline, (where the Oxford Radial could still manage three).

 

I believe that one of the reasons the GWR never persevered with Pacifics was because weight tends to be loaded on the rear wheels, which if driven, is adhesive weight, and if not, is weight wasted in carrying. The same with a model I suppose.

 

The gradient tests alas were imperfect, as I should also have done the tests running tender/bunker first, I’m sure I have read somewhere that the M7s were better performers bunker first.

 

That said, I am absolutely delighted with all three 0-4-4Ts

 

Peter.

 

Many years ago, in either this or another thread, I post similar results on haulage abilities of these 0-4-4s.

 

The O2 has the smallest physical motor but is blessed by having the weight centered over the driving wheels. The H class is the worst with the weight centered well over the trailing wheels. 

What is interesting on the H is that the front part is a separate molding to the rear part. And I suspect Hornby Initially planned to make the front diecast. (I only wish they had).

There does not appear to be any easy cure to this. I added a little sprung spacer to tip the rear towards the front. It looks better on the track (when level). Otherwise it becomes a case of trying to find ways to add weight to the front and/or making the rear lighter. There really is not much you can do.

 

That said the chip plug is useless. It is located in the wrong place for any direct plug in. If you use a chip on a harness, the chip has no were to go. So if you are running in DC, you could strip the plug socket out and grind weight away to move it forwards. If running on DCC, you will have to strip it out and hard wire it as well. 

Compare with the smaller O2 that has a speaker location in the coal bunker and a easy means to fit a 6 pin through the smokebox door...

 

Edited May 7 by JSpencer

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

13 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

...The O2 has the smallest physical motor but is blessed by having the weight centered over the driving wheels. The H class is the worst with the weight centered well over the trailing wheels. 

What is interesting on the H is that the front part is a separate molding to the rear part. And I suspect Hornby Initially planned to make the front diecast...

I have been a little surprised at the lack of comment from the Southern interest concerning the desireable construction of Bachmann's two fairly recent 0-4-4T productions. These have a well thought out construction and mechanism layout, largely diecast ahead of the rear driver axle, plastic body to the rear, gearbox on the rear driver, light coreless motor to the rear along with the decoder location. The centre of mass is thus within the coupled wheelbase, resulting in stable traction. That's the way to do it!

[JSpencer]

7 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

I have been a little surprised at the lack of comment from the Southern interest concerning the desireable construction of Bachmann's two fairly recent 0-4-4T productions. These have a well thought out construction and mechanism layout, largely diecast ahead of the rear driver axle, plastic body to the rear, gearbox on the rear driver, light coreless motor to the rear along with the decoder location. The centre of mass is thus within the coupled wheelbase, resulting in stable traction. That's the way to do it!

 

Indeed I did wonder about the Bachmann Midland 1P (what was the 2nd?). I have the Met tank of Rapido on order and while they will doubtless be light years ahead as far as DCC fitting and sound goes (compared to the H), I have high hopes that weight distribution will be decent too.

[No Decorum]

2 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

 

Indeed I did wonder about the Bachmann Midland 1P (what was the 2nd?). I have the Met tank of Rapido on order and while they will doubtless be light years ahead as far as DCC fitting and sound goes (compared to the H), I have high hopes that weight distribution will be decent too.

The TMC-commissioned G5 – an absolutely superb model provided you haven’t got the NER green version and good colour vision!

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

It's the G5 I have, and apart from an 'eccentric' pivot arrangement for the bogie (very easily altered to a simple pivot on the bogie centre) it's a lovely piece altogether: and performs!