Heljan Class 47's, Do I own £2400 of scrap?

[S.A.C Martin]

I'm just wondering if any other Heljan locos have been affected in this way - it only seems to be 47s. I and my father have between us five of the falcon models, plus Kestrel and a class 15. I am wondering if I should check the 53s...

[Baby Deltic]

Just been through my Heljan loco's and all appear OK. I only have two Heljan 47's - 47714 and D1733. I have removed the bodyshells. The bodyshell on 47714 was fairly tight, but I think that was due to the fact it has a protruding plastic lens for the high intensity headlamp. I did make the mistake of holding it by the battery box, which became unclipped, causing the loco to head floorwards. No damage done.

 

One of my Hornby 31's - D5512 has a small crack appearing in the bodyshell near the front corner.

[GD]

I too had a large collection of Heljan 47's (around 25), many of them carefully renumbered and I had a fantastic fleet but then I bought a 47299 off ebay which quickly developed a banana chassis and in the process of removing the bodyshell it cracked just like the photo of 47500. I dismissed this as being unlucky but six months later I bought a cheap 47744 off ebay just for the chassis but I just could not get the body off so I gave up and packed it away. A few months later and that had cracked also and other stories were just emerging of simalar problems so I took the heartbreaking decision to sell the rest of the fleet that I had carefully built up.

I have now built up a fleet of Bachmann 47's with the latest releases and I have 2 Heljan 26's but I am very unlikely to buy anything else from Heljan.

[neal]

Some Grafar 94xx panniers (bodyshells) suffered the same fate many years ago.

 

This is a major commercial problem for manufacturers (Hornby and Heljan), and I am sure that since the issues have surfaced, they will not have taken the issue lightly with their suppliers. If Hornby honour their promise to replace the faulty 31's, this will potentially have cost them tens if not hundreds of thousands in revenue.

 

Whilst the shareholders may suffer some of the pain, note the rising differential in RRP's between Hornby/Heljan and Bachmann.

 

 

The consumer will dictate the long term implications of these problems.

 

 

N

[97403_Ixion]

Hi, thought I'd share a few findings on this matter.

 

My first instance of this problem was with the Virgin liveried Porterbrook loco. At first, I thought I had just put the bodyshell on badly and stored it as such. I then read about all these problems (this was some time back, when the old RmWeb site started talking about it). I started going through my various 47 locos and found some which were tight but a number were OK.

 

Just recently, after reading these recent entries, I started checking the locos again. One or two were tight, including 47981 (a perfect partner to Bachmann 47975, I might add!). This was too tight to remove the bodyshell. I started to think about what the problems were and how to get around them... I put the loco in the fridge (not freezer, I might add) and let it cool. While this was not likely to make large differences in contraction between chassis and body, I felt sure metal would contract more than plastic and even a small change would be better than none. I tried removing the bodyshell after a period of time cooling (at least half an hour). It was still tight but with persistence, it eventually came off.

 

As far as what happens inside the loco, although the metal chassis is the root cause (so it seems), the flat section of black plastic at each end that sits on top of the metalwork does sometime protrude a little beyond the chassis metalwork. This started to explain why the body shell could be pulled upward but would then spring back down, once the force was removed. I filed away some of the plastic along the sides of the chassis and on the corners, where it overhung the chassis metalwork and found that the body was more easily removable afterwards. In addition, I also filed back some of the metal work to ease the fit just a little more and the tight fit seemed to be reduced more still.

 

I'm not saying the above findings are the only causes but for me, the cooling idea did seem to work a little on one loco and hopefully on others, as and when I come across them. The reason I did not freeze it was to try to reduce the risk of hardenning the plastic to the point of it fracturing when applying forces to it. Of course, in the real world, liquid nitrogen is used, to help fit tyres to loco wheels, I gather.

 

I wish everyone the best when checking their locos and recommend doing something as the shell may become totally unremovable before possibly splitting.

 

Cheers, Ixion.

 

P.S.: Don't forget to get the fridge owner's permission!!

[Coombe Barton]

However, other than limiting the damage, what's the point of removing the body? If the chassis is going to swell you couldn't possibly get it back on again!

If you remove the body while you can and the chassis swells you only have to replace the chassis - if the chassis swells while the body is on you may not be able to get the body off or it might just crack. If you can get the body back on again the chassis hasn't expanded.

[Guest 838rapid]

If you remove the body while you can and the chassis swells you only have to replace the chassis - if the chassis swells while the body is on you may not be able to get the body off or it might just crack. If you can get the body back on again the chassis hasn't expanded.

 

Thats my theory too!!

 

I have marked the chassis with the body number,fingers crossed.

 

As i dont run them harldy ever i would have run the risk of never noticing them splitting.

[backwaterscotland]

Having spent this afternoon sorting my stock out I have found that one of my two Heljan 47 is showing hairline fractures on the front at both ends (both on the secondmans side) and the chassis was tight enough to need a fair amount of force to remove. The chassis does appear to be straight with no bowing but is just way too tight.

 

47 in question is 47715 in ScotRail livery.

 

My other 47 (a bitsa) has no signs of problems yet and is quite a loose fit but I have no idea what model the chassis was originally from.

 

Andy B)

[mike tugsandsheds]

I only have 4

 

Rail Express XP64 - OK

Royal 47798 - OK

47851 - Traction Mag OK

UNnumbered Green - OK

 

Any news from Heljan re batch/models to check for ?

[reevesthecat]

As far as I recall no running numbers were identified or even the potential numbers of models affected. I have about 15 Heljan 47's all stored with body off ,I just hope when I do get to check them again and if there is a problem I can get replacement chassis.

mark

[rob D2]

Sorry to see the damage to the fleet,

 

I have only one HJ 47 left and that is ok so far......it's my Hornby 31 that concerns me.

 

With a collection that big, I'm wondering how you would stand going through household insurance if helajn do not come up with a satisfactory answer.

[Coombe Barton]

I don't have any so can't do this. But is there any critical dimension that can be checked to determine if there is any overlengthening (which I assume is the fault) of the chassis?

 

And in response to another question - I can't help thinking that batch control where they are manufactured is not sufficient to closely locate body numbers to chassis faults. If it's an alloy problem then they're probably producing mega numbers of chassis castings and then using them to put into whatever cosmetic body (which is what it is from a amanufacturing point of view) that's ordered. If it is the metal mix that's at fault then, unless someone can prove otherwise, then everything is going to be suspect. But as I said this is from supposition rather than knowledge.

[47423]

I can't help thinking that batch control where they are manufactured is not sufficient to closely locate body numbers to chassis faults. If it's an alloy problem then they're probably producing mega numbers of chassis castings and then using them to put into whatever cosmetic body (which is what it is from a amanufacturing point of view) that's ordered. If it is the metal mix that's at fault then, unless someone can prove otherwise, then everything is going to be suspect. But as I said this is from supposition rather than knowledge.

That was the theory i came up with too.

[muddys-blues]

Hi my friends, I had a Heljan 47299 Ariadne that did this, but with some patience and time, I have got the body off, and manage to secure the cab front back to the body, I have filled the crack area in, and I shall repaint the yellow area, the chassis has been stripped, and will be straightened in a vice, and then re-built up to become a non running scrap line loco, with one of my bodies awaiting a scrap line paint job.

 

The problem on the chassis is on the central area were the motor is mounted, the thinner area of cast metal must have some air pockets within the casting, and over time and temperature differances within the storage area it finally goes on the move.

 

Another thing though, why is it always the rarer of the bodies that end up on these bowing chassis ?? Sods law.

[Chameleon]

This does seem to be a very worrying development as it isn't even restricted to one manufacturer let alone one model. Expanding chassis were virtually unheard of before production moved to china. It does seem quality control has been sacrificed on the altar of economy. When production moves to the other side of the world control is lost. There may well be a great many models out there with hidden and fatal flaws. I think everybody with Hornby 31s and Heljan locos should keep a very wary eye on their locos.

[66540_ruby]

Hi i was just reading this and decided to check my two 47s both DRS 47298 and 237,

I managed to get the body off 237 with a bit of gently persuasion but 298 took a lot of effort.

When i got it off the is a fracture down one side just beside motor.

I bought these second hand and was wondering if there was if there was anything i could do.

Thanks In advance Craig

[GD]

Hi i was just reading this and decided to check my two 47s both DRS 47298 and 237,

I managed to get the body off 237 with a bit of gently persuasion but 298 took a lot of effort.

When i got it off the is a fracture down one side just beside motor.

I bought these second hand and was wondering if there was if there was anything i could do.

Thanks In advance Craig

Why not form a "broken chassis group" and collectively contact trading standards or a solicitor as Heljan seem pretty quiet on the subject. It looks like thousands of pounds worth of models are affected, nobody should have to lose out as it is unquestionably a manufacturing fault.

[andyman7]

This does seem to be a very worrying development as it isn't even restricted to one manufacturer let alone one model. Expanding chassis were virtually unheard of before production moved to china. It does seem quality control has been sacrificed on the altar of economy. When production moves to the other side of the world control is lost. There may well be a great many models out there with hidden and fatal flaws. I think everybody with Hornby 31s and Heljan locos should keep a very wary eye on their locos.

As has been quoted elsewhere, this problem has been known about for years and has affected products dating back to Grafar in the 50s and Dinky Toys in the 30s. The problem is not solely due to China, another reason it didn't occur before was that until the modern generation of models, the idea of a solid diecast chassis casting didn't exist on British outline diesels - remember 70s and 80s diesels with plastic chassis, pancake motors and a slug of metal in the centre tanks!

Bachmann were hit too with the running plates of an early batch of N class locos (that's a kettle by the way ) that they had to replace. Aside from the one report of a dodgy 50, this seems to affect certain batches of two products - the Hornby Class 31, and the Heljan 47. It's a concern, and both Hornby and Heljan (as Bachmann did before ) have moved to address it, but I'm not going to stop buying models myself *just* because it's a Hornby or Heljan - I'm trying to keep this in proportion...

[Pinkmouse]

All I see here is a perfect market opportunity for someone to provide replacement chassis blocks.

[WILLIAM]

Inappropriate content removed

 

I emailed the story of my exploding 47 to a well know magazine, along with pictures, some months ago (after I might add having contacted Heljan who ignored me on several occasions). Didn't even get a response. As you say this should surely be news and, to me, is more fundamental than some of the minor errors the magazines report on.

 

[muddys-blues]

It seems a shame that in some reviews in a certain Model Railway magazine VI trains got a strip torn off them about quality control issues when they first appeared on the scene, so VI trains listened to that criticism and sorted out their issues to the best they could.

 

Here we have another major manufacturer Heljan, who undoubtedtly have a chassis problem in a number of their 47 model, this maybe even a couple of years down the line, but choose to ignore the issue, I feel that if enough people lobby some of these magazines with enough numbers, they may help make an issue to Heljan, who may be able to offer replacement chassi blocks.

 

Saying that Heljan did manage to send out a sizable number of Class 17's with major running faults, yes they did sort the problem, but really these companies do have to sort out their QC before taking our hard earned cash.

 

Its the "head in the sand" attitude that stinks, you can imagine some of the boardroom meetings possibly saying to each other "just ignore them they'll go away, but they will come back for the next model with their cash", follwed up with "fools they are, fools the lot of them"

[WILLIAM]

It seems a shame that in some reviews in a certain Model Railway magazine VI trains got a strip torn off them about quality control issues when they first appeared on the scene, so VI trains listened to that criticism and sorted out their issues to the best they could.

 

Here we have another major manufacturer Heljan, who undoubtedtly have a chassis problem in a number of their 47 model, this maybe even a couple of years down the line, but choose to ignore the issue, I feel that if enough people lobby some of these magazines with enough numbers, they may help make an issue to Heljan, who may be able to offer replacement chassi blocks.

 

Saying that Heljan did manage to send out a sizable number of Class 14's with major running faults, yes they did sort the problem, but really these companies do have to sort out their QC before taking our hard earned cash.

 

Its the "head in the sand" attitude that stinks, you can imagine some of the boardroom meetings possibly saying to each other "just ignore them they'll go away, but they will come back for the next model with their cash", follwed up with "fools they are, fools the lot of them"

 

To be fair Heljan UK (Howes) have been sending out replacement chassis' on an ad hoc basis when they have had them to spare. I contacted them when I discovered mine but they responded telling me they had no more replacements and ignored any further correspondance (Heljan Denmark ignored me full stop). I tried again six months later and have just received a replacement chassis from Howes albeit secondhand (the body is however a write off and cannot be replaced). This is a bit of a result but in my opinion still doesn't constitute a full & credable response to this obviously widespread problem and perhaps we should be seeing more acknowledgement and action from Denmark? What happens if/when I discover another has exploded?

[Baby Deltic]

I must admit that Heljan aren't particularly in my good books following the quality of the class 14 I bought. It was a case of sort it yourself or join the queue of returns waiting for replacement. There was the class 17 issue which they seemed to have resolved. On the flip side of the coin, they do an excellent Hymek, and Kestrel and Falcon were good models. It won't stop me buying Heljan loco's, however - especially class 15's and Baby Deltic's. If my chocolate and lime Falcon does a banana, I'll be seriously peeved.

[Andy Y]

Locked pending further consideration following stupid comments.