Tri-ang Railways.

[Golden Fleece 30]

I'm always surprised at the number of people who regard Triang as inferior to Hornby Dublo. True, it did have some shortcomings, but the price and range of models, 2 rail track, and the fact that you could see through the carriage windows, made them so much more attractive to schoolboys like me in the early 1960s than HD. Trix was virtually invisible, unless you visited the better model shops, whilst Triang and HD could be found in the toy shops in every High Street.

 

Triang Railways was my way into our marvellous hobby, and for that I'm very grateful to them.

You could see through Hornby Dublo coach windows before Tri-ang even came about. The Stanier LMS main line stock came out soon after the war along with the Duchess of Atholl. They even had a corridor partition which early Tri-ang did not. Short suburbans and LNER coaches had tin printed windows. In the late 50's as 2-rail had appeared all new coaches had see through windows.

 

Dublo's locos being metal as opposed to plastic is probably why people thought they were better, plus they had a better variation in the 50's with the Duchess, A4, Castle, 8F, Standard tank as opposed to an undersized Princess with no proper valve gear just a rounded crosshead. All Dublo had a good representation of valve gear.

 

Sorry, I like the old Tri-ang but like Dublo even more.

 

Garry

Edited February 6, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Kubes]

I have to say although I loved my Triang trains I was so so envious of my friends Hornby Dublo SD carriages which even to my young inexpert eyes looked so much more realistic and felt so much more railway like than my Triang ones.

[GoingUnderground]

You could see through Hornby Dublo coach windows before Tri-ang even came about. The Stanier LMS main line stock came out soon after the war along with the Duchess of Atholl. They even had a corridor partition which early Tri-ang did not. Short suburbans and LNER coaches had tin printed windows. In the late 50's as 2-rail had appeared all new coaches had see through windows.

 

Dublo's locos being metal as opposed to plastic is probably why people thought they were better, plus they had a better variation in the 50's with the Duchess, A4, Castle, 8F, Standard tank as opposed to an undersized Princess with no proper valve gear just a rounded crosshead. All Dublo had a good representation of valve gear.

 

Sorry, I like the old Tri-ang but like Dublo even more.

 

Garry

We won't mention the HD undersized Deltic, then, or the short HD coaches.

 

I've just looked through Michael Foster's and Pat Hammonds books. Foster lists 14 HD locos, Hammond 21 Triang locos, and that's without including the Transcontinrntal ones, in the period to 1964, So I am comparing like with like.

 

Triang were still building up their range in the 1950s. I was thinking of the early 1960s, when Triang was in its stride, its range was definitely larger. All their coaches had clear windows in the 1950s, even the Primary Series ones. HD 3 rail track looked awful with its centre rail, even when compared to Series 3. Whilst the colour of the HD station buildings and especially the platforms was nothing like the colour of the stations that I knew locally. Even the impressive canopy to the HD through/terminus station couldn't compensate for the colour.

 

Triang wasn't perfect, and there were compromises to keep down the prices, but to me it was, and will always be, better than HD.

Edited February 7, 2018 by GoingUnderground

[Golden Fleece 30]

We won't mention the HD undersized Deltic, then, or the short HD coaches.

 

I've just looked through Michael Foster's and Pat Hammonds books. Foster lists 14 HD locos, Hammond 21 Triang locos, and that's without including the Transcontinrntal ones, in the period to 1964, So I am comparing like with like.

 

Triang were still building up their range in the 1950s. I was thinking of the early 1960s, when Triang was in its stride, its range was definitely larger. All their coaches had clear windows in the 1950s, even the Primary Series ones. HD 3 rail track looked awful with its centre rail, even when compared to Series 3. Whilst the colour of the HD station buildings and especially the platforms was nothing like the colour of the stations that I knew locally. Even the impressive canopy to the HD through/terminus station couldn't compensate for the colour.

 

Triang wasn't perfect, and there were compromises to keep down the prices, but to me it was, and will always be, better than HD.

Talking of undersized coaches Tri-ang had those too with the initial "banana" bending ones and the next generation. The Princess was always under size with both loco and tender. Neither of these needed to be short with Tri-ang's massive 2 5/8" track centres Dublo was closer to scale at 2 1/8". You cannot compare 2-rail track to 3-rail track but with 2-rail to 2-rail comparison Dublo was way above Standard and Series 3 and super 4 versions. As for locos Dublo had already stopped making new items so Tri-ang were bound to have more and being plastic etc were bound to be cheaper.

If you are going up to 64 then Dublo had the W/C which again had far superior valve gear. Tri-ang had Winston Churchill which was a nice loco but let down by the lack of a crosshead and plastic slide bars attached to the body serving no purpose. It took Tri-ang until the 70's with Evening Star to get a more realistic valve gear but the 2-6-2, Princess and Hall kept up with round rods for slide bars with metal folded around them. Even when Scotsman came out in 68 its valve gear was not a patch on the Dublo A4. Tri-ang always looked top heavy having their buffers a couple of mm higher.

 

We all agree to differ, there is nothing wrong with that, and have our own thoughts which is why a few of my Tri-ang bodies are mounted on Dublo chassis's. I never put a Dublo body on a Tri-ang chassis though. I do like the Tri-ang chassis and have 3-railed many so I have nothing against Tri-ang I just prefer Dublo.

 

Garry

Edited February 7, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

Don't forget about the wheels. Dublo's profile was the same when introduced in 1938 as when they ceased in 64 and those wheels without any modification run beautifully through modern finer Peco points today. Tri-ang's coarse scale ones would not run through the older coarser Peco points, or along the track without hitting the chairs, never mind the newer finer points. As for short locos even the streamlined Coronation suffered this, and, was fitted to the A3 chassis which apart from its missing components was an ER single slide bar attempt as opposed to the LMS twin style, mind you it did have a Dublo tender chassis which by then was under the Wrenn label.

 

But, I do appreciate Tri-ang lovers liking their system.  I very much doubt that todays modern locos from Hornby, Bachmann etc will still be running in 60 years time, no brushes to change on a motor so replacement motors needed, very few if any spares, plastic gear wheels that strip, valve gear so flimsy it is easily bent/broken.  They may look a lot more to scale but durability will be an issue in my eyes.  I do have a handful of modern Hornby and Bachmann locos I have 3-railed but they are no where near as good haulage wise as the old Tri-ang and Dublo chassis locos.  Here are a few Tri-ang locos 3-railed.

 

 

 

 

Garry Edited February 7, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[luckymucklebackit]

Perhaps my memory is not correct but I was bought one of the original Tri-ang Hornby M7 tanks and I seem to remember it had much finer wheels compared with the Jinty I had, all-in-all it was a much more refined loco for its time.

 

Jim

[Golden Fleece 30]

Perhaps my memory is not correct but I was bought one of the original Tri-ang Hornby M7 tanks and I seem to remember it had much finer wheels compared with the Jinty I had, all-in-all it was a much more refined loco for its time.

 

Jim

It depends which Jinty you had Jim.  The very first ones had "solid" wheels like the early Princess/Britannia/2-6-2 but were later turned out with sintered iron tyred and open spokes.  These were all black and far better than the solid ones but were still quite coarse and the first M7's had these before Tri-ang-Hornby decided to use a plated tyre.  These were still a coarse wheel but looked finer.  The finer wheels did not appear for a long time afterwards on locos like the B17 etc when a very fine flanged centre wheel was adopted.  I preferred the black sintered tyred ones.

 

Garry

Edited February 7, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Il Grifone]

Perhaps my memory is not correct but I was bought one of the original Tri-ang Hornby M7 tanks and I seem to remember it had much finer wheels compared with the Jinty I had, all-in-all it was a much more refined loco for its time.

 

Jim

 

The wheel standards were about the only thing that rubbed off on Tri-ang after the take over (apart from the name of course).

 

It took Tri-ang a long time to throw off its origins in a cheap and nasty train set (Rovex - the Trackmaster one was rather superior).

[luckymucklebackit]

It depends which Jinty you had Jim.  The very first ones had "solid" wheels like the early Princess/Britannia/2-6-2 but were later turned out with sintered iron tyred and open spokes.  These were all black and far better than the solid ones but were still quite coarse and the first M7's had these before Tri-ang-Hornby decided to use a plated tyre.  These were still a coarse wheel but looked finer.  The finer wheels did not appear for a long time afterwards on locos like the B17 etc when a very fine flanged centre wheel was adopted.  I preferred the black sintered tyred ones.

 

Garry

 

I was bought mine in Xmas 1969, it was the one with the "Glowing Firebox" feature I think it was the R754 loco 30027

 

Jim

[Il Grifone]

I was bought mine in Xmas 1969, it was the one with the "Glowing Firebox" feature I think it was the R754 loco 30027

 

Jim

 

My Tri-ang M7 was assembled from spare parts and lacks this desirable pointless feature. Locomotives ran/run most of the time with the firedoor closed. (Allegedly, 'The Great Bear' ran all the way from Paddington to Bristol without being fired.)

[Coppercap]

My Tri-ang M7 was assembled from spare parts and lacks this desirable pointless feature.

So you didn't want to enjoy all the realistic and exciting features that Triang Hornby trains had to offer? I trust you glued the smokebox door permanently shut?

[Golden Fleece 30]

So you didn't want to enjoy all the realistic and exciting features that Triang Hornby trains had to offer? I trust you glued the smokebox door permanently shut?

I certainly didn't enjoy the "features". All smoke units were removed as they left an oily film over all the stock, my M7 door had to be glued as the hinges snapped, that awful unrealistic chuff chuff was removed, cab lights were removed if I wanted the bulbs for something, coach lights removed as hit and miss (flickered too much). More recently as locos were 3-railed magnadhesion magnets removed as they caused more drag on the steel wheels and also not needed on nickel track. I do like the XO4 motors though.

 

Garry

Edited February 7, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[GoingUnderground]

Which means that you don't get Triang's marketing strategy.. They realised thst such features would attract younger kids to the hobby. The 1950s and 1960s were when the post WW2 "baby-boomers" like me were growing up and represented a large potential market for Triang Railways and for the whole Lines Bros Triang range of toys.

 

The giraffe transporter car, the helicopter car, the bogie bolster rocket transporter/launcher and the rest of the battlespace items, the fog warning noise, the traveling post offices, the operating mineral/grain wagons and the discharge station, and side tipping log carrier, were all intended to increase the play value for younger kids. The smokebox light, carriage lights and chuff sound did likewise, and live on in modern DCC decoders and sound decoders which provides the level of control needed for more realistic operation. Smoke units are still being made and some of them are nowadays quite high tech, such as those made by ESU. So someone out there stiill likes the idea of smoke effect.

 

Hornby and Trix understood the need for play value too, with the breakdown crane and TPO from HD, and the coal conveyor and side tipping mneral wagon from Trix.

 

If you're spending time converting Triang, Triang Hornby and post 1971 Hornby Railways/Hornby Hobbies models to 3 rail or putting the bodies on HD running gear then clearly you value the Rovex company's contribution to our hobby. So why keeep putting them down?

 

I've recently acquired, at great expense, 2 cars of Triang's Australian NSWR Sydney Suburban models, and am struck at how good they look compared to the prototype. I wish that Triang had given us in the UK an equivalent UK outline OHLE EMU.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Which means that you don't get Triang's marketing strategy.. They realised thst such features would attract younger kids to the hobby. The 1950s and 1960s were when the post WW2 "baby-boomers" like me were growing up and represented a large potential market for Triang Railways and for the whole Lines Bros Triang range of toys.

 

The giraffe transporter car, the helicopter car, the bogie bolster rocket transporter/launcher and the rest of the battlespace items, the fog warning noise, the traveling post offices, the operating mineral/grain wagons and the discharge station, and side tipping log carrier, were all intended to increase the play value for younger kids. The smokebox light, carriage lights and chuff sound did likewise, and live on in modern DCC decoders and sound decoders which provides the level of control needed for more realistic operation. Smoke units are still being made and some of them are nowadays quite high tech, such as those made by ESU. So someone out there stiill likes the idea of smoke effect.

 

Hornby and Trix understood the need for play value too, with the breakdown crane and TPO from HD, and the coal conveyor and side tipping mneral wagon from Trix.

 

If you're spending time converting Triang, Triang Hornby and post 1971 Hornby Railways/Hornby Hobbies models to 3 rail or putting the bodies on HD running gear then clearly you value the Rovex company's contribution to our hobby. So why keeep putting them down?

 

I've recently acquired, at great expense, 2 cars of Triang's Australian NSWR Sydney Suburban models, and am struck at how good they look compared to the prototype. I wish that Triang had given us in the UK an equivalent UK outline OHLE EMU.

I don't put Tri-ang down and never have, I just say Hornby Dublo is my preferred choice. As for kids gimmicks I grew up in the 50's and 60's but they did not appeal to me I wanted trains to run like I saw them. I was about 8 when I saw Britannia in York and wanted the model but did have to wait a while. The mail coach idea was good and I had that along with the Dublo one. I will say the later Hornby one was the best until I got my rake of Exley ones which to me neither Tri-ang or Dublo could match. Exley were just to expensive in those days. I prefer the older Tri-ang EMU to the modern version and it is the same with the Met Cam DMU, the shorter one looks far better.

 

Garry

[Legend]

Now now gents the Tri-ang v Hornby Dublo battle was fought 60 years ago. Of course the reality of it is both systems had their merits and issues .

 

I am A Tri-ang Hornby kid. My first trainset was the Freightmaster with green Brush type 2 and I've loved railways ever since . Even now I have a strong affection for anything in a red box. Now, of course now its a very different company with just about everything subcontracted out , not really much to do with Hornby or Tri-ang if it comes to it, although I think the plastic platform sections are still pure Tri-ang.

 

I think the pertinent point, though, is my parents were able to afford the Freightmaster set. We weren't poor but with two sisters clearly cash for presents had to go around . The Tri-ang sets were within range Hornby Dublo wasn't . So like Going Underground I give thanks to Tri-ang for a life long interest in railways . And as I've said before , a great system . track, stations, signals , catenary . A full range of rolling stock steam, diesel, electric, dmus, emus and of course all these operating accessories. All displayed in the eagerly awaited annual catalogue . Happy days .

 

I've never owned H-D but have taken an interest in the Wrenn models of the 70s . Again couldn't afford them at the time but now I'm gradually building up a collection of all the Engines and wagons I wanted . At exhibitions if there is a Hornby Dublo or Tri-ang layout they still attract the crowds . Surely a testament that both systems were great , but the one that was affordable enabling people to indulge in their hobby was the one that eventually won out. There is a lesson there

[luckymucklebackit]

I think that if you started out with Tri-ang then you didn't experience the same frustration as those who had started out loyal to Hornby Dublo - being bought this brand on the basis that "Which" magazine (that my father swore by) voted it "best buy".  Having an existing small collection of HD track and stock I was faced with having the inconvenience of having to buy convertor rails and coupling convertor trucks in order to expand my collection and still have a working layout if I wanted what was now referred to as Triang-Hornby, this resulted in a horrible mix of track standards and couplings and eventually I gave up and sold the lot. coming back to the hobby in my 20s with a clean sheet.

 

Jim

[GoingUnderground]

I think that if you started out with Tri-ang then you didn't experience the same frustration as those who had started out loyal to Hornby Dublo - being bought this brand on the basis that "Which" magazine (that my father swore by) voted it "best buy".  Having an existing small collection of HD track and stock I was faced with having the inconvenience of having to buy convertor rails and coupling convertor trucks in order to expand my collection and still have a working layout if I wanted what was now referred to as Triang-Hornby, this resulted in a horrible mix of track standards and couplings and eventually I gave up and sold the lot. coming back to the hobby in my 20s with a clean sheet.

 

Jim

Apart from the change of couplings which I missed as all my Triang stock has the Mk3 Tensionlok coupling, it wasn't that different being a Triang owner.

 

My first set had Series 3 track, which had smaller radius 1st radius curves than Super 4, but the radius of the 2nd radus curves were the same, and that dimension lives on even today in the Hornby, Bachmann and Peco track ranges as they all share the same basic geometry as Super 4. Series 3 and Standard track curved track were 12 to a circle whilst Super 4 was 8 double curves/16 single curves. Series 3 single straight track was longer than Super 4. At least the fishplates were in the left hand rail and the rail cross section was the same, so I was spared the convertor track until System 6 came along, and that coincided with when I left school and dropped out of the hobby, only returning to it when what to do in retirement became a factor in my life.

Edited February 8, 2018 by GoingUnderground

[Il Grifone]

So you didn't want to enjoy all the realistic and exciting features that Triang Hornby trains had to offer? I trust you glued the smokebox door permanently shut?

 

I didn't bother as it's quite a good fit, but otherwise I would have done. A set of wheels of the right size would be a great improvement however

[Il Grifone]

I think that if you started out with Tri-ang then you didn't experience the same frustration as those who had started out loyal to Hornby Dublo - being bought this brand on the basis that "Which" magazine (that my father swore by) voted it "best buy".  Having an existing small collection of HD track and stock I was faced with having the inconvenience of having to buy convertor rails and coupling convertor trucks in order to expand my collection and still have a working layout if I wanted what was now referred to as Triang-Hornby, this resulted in a horrible mix of track standards and couplings and eventually I gave up and sold the lot. coming back to the hobby in my 20s with a clean sheet.

 

Jim

 

The 'Which' test is available on the internet somewhere. I found it rather weighted to the wrong parameters, as their tests often are. I have to confess to losing confidence in their tests, when they voted as 'best buy' a 1970s colour TV, which we in the trade considered the worst ever.  A later test on dish washers found only one (expensive and German) would actually do the job of cleaning dishes, but gave best buy to another because it was cheaper.

 

Playing around with 2 rail/3 rail, AC/DC and incompatible wheels and couplings was all part of the fun....

 

Tri-ang, Trix and Hornby Dublo all had their pros and cons. I had Dublo, but always wanted Trix. Getting some later on in life showed how wise my parents were. I was lucky to avoid an acetate Rovex set and got 'Duchess of Atholl' instead (Xmas 1951). There were no coaches, but plenty of wagons, presumably because of rationing and/or the Korean War. (I did have the Trackmaster set, but it was only clockwork and didn't count - the wheels were too fine for Dublo track anyway (BRMSB standards).

Edited February 8, 2018 by Il Grifone

[shildonboy]

thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread, I have read the entire thread in a single sitting, allowing the memories to gently wash over me.

 

I received a princess Victoria train set for Christmas when I was 4 years old in 1963 from my parents.  As a bonus there was a petrol tanker and a level crossing from one of my uncles.  I am from a railway family that traces their history back to the Stockton and Darlington railway in 1825 and I lived in the town that I use for my screen name.  Not a surprise that railways are my hobby.

 

Over the years my collection increased through birthdays and Christmas presents.  Everyone I knew had Triang except the one kid across the street who had Dublo, he was an only child and had more toys than my brother and I combined, not only did his parents only have one child to buy for but his aunts and uncles were in the same position.  That said we didn't care we had everything we needed even if by today's standards it doesn't seem to be much.

 

The princess Victoria and the two blood and custard carriages withstood being played with on the floor by a small boy not only did this mean running on the track but much frequent handling, dropping and derailments and yet they survived along with Poly, Nellie a black 0-4-0, Britannia, 4-2-2 caledonian, 2-6-2 continental tank, Type 3 Co Co, M7 tank, a blue pullman, Flying Scotsman, a blue grey pullman, a Wren R1, an AIA AIA type 3, a jinty and a dock authority plus utility vans etc.  a number of these were second hand when I got them.

 

I wish I had them all today.  The demise of a number of these was due to my growing desire to build a branch line terminus and improve the realisim, add detail etc when I was 13 or 14.  The result was the loss of these items but I do still have a number of these items from my early modelling days even if some of them are now much modified.  I mourn the pullmans, the Caledonian, the 2-6-2 and others.

 

That said the others still work even if I have turned the wheels down on the scotsman, the dock authority and the AiA AIA, fitted a comet chassis to the Britannia and Romfords to the others. 

 

I remember the catalogues with the Cuneo paintings and the price lists when a point was 10 shillings, it doesn't sound much now but it was a lot of money, you could get fish and chips for 1 shilling at this time.

 

Regardless of the pros and cons of dublo, Triang, Trix etc what they all have in common is they have created many thousands of happy memories , helped to develop well adjusted men who have married and raised families and made significant contributions to their communities and acted as the catalyst for thousands of friendships  A legacy to be remembered and probably hard to equal.

 

 

[kevinlms]

I posted this in the eBay thread, but perhaps someone here might be interested.

 

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/R-653-Continental-2-6-2-Prairie-Tank-Loco/222830980783?hash=item33e1c2eeaf:g:coYAAOSwlxRafQ44

 

Item location is in Australia.

[thestourbridgelion]

I was lucky to have a Dublo R1 Train set as my first followed by a City of London. Well lucky in one way but unlucky in that my family couldn’t sustain the financial outlay required to continue with Dublo and we switched to Triang making my early modelling attempts a totally unsatisfactory mis match. There is no doubt about it the new Triang catalogue was eagerly awaited each year but there was always something that attracted me back to Dublo. Maybe it was the complexity that appealed. Maybe the mystery-no one had Dublo but everyone had Princess Elizabeth. I can remember being disappointed at the dummy centre power bogie wheels on a CKD EM2 (how I wish I had that now!) when the Dublo Co-Bo in the toy shop window down the road clearly had proper centre wheels on the power bogie. Silvered as well-not prototypical but made the model look well engineered. The underframe on the Dublo SD Restaurant Car was a proper restaurant car underframe not a generic underframe, there was even a deal of satisfaction in actually getting a live frog point to work. These Dublo people seemed to know something about how model railways should be done that we could only aspire to.

There was something quaintly British about Dublo in my mind; expensive, mysterious, complicated, duplicated and doomed. I think this is what gives it its appeal to me over its rivals when looking back with hindsight. Yes Triang appealed to kids more in its day, I think, but I find it difficult to see that any other companies offering will ever have such long term appeal again.

Like model railways of every type-nostalgia plays a huge part.

[Nearholmer]

The modern substitutes for HD are the products of Ace, in 0 gauge. http://www.acetrainslondon.com/newloco.html

 

Three-rail, metal, intricate, but not finescale, its all there. Their Stanier 2-6-4T is the big brother of the HD BR 4MT tank in every respect.

[Golden Fleece 30]

The modern substitutes for HD are the products of Ace, in 0 gauge. http://www.acetrainslondon.com/newloco.html

 

Three-rail, metal, intricate, but not finescale, its all there. Their Stanier 2-6-4T is the big brother of the HD BR 4MT tank in every respect.

Stanier 2-6-4's and BR 2-6-4's were a lot different.  BR were only 2 cylinder but Staniers were 2 and 3 cylinders.  BR's had curved sides to the tanks like Mk1 coaches, Staniers were flat, pus a few more differences.

 

I thought ACE etc were the modern products of Hornby 0 gauge and Bassett Lowke?

 

Garry

[Nearholmer]

GF

 

Yes, I know that the 2-6-4T were subtly different, but I’m big brother to my two younger brothers. I have a medium sized belly, my middle bro is fit as a flea and has no belly, and the youngest of us ..... tends to the portly, but you’d know at a glance we are brothers.

 

And, yes, modern Ace is also the younger cousin of BL. Apart from the first few things that Ace made, though, it isn’t that closely related to Hornby 0, second cousins once removed maybe?

 

I’ll ping up some comparison shots on my thread tomorrow if I get time.

 

Kevin