Class 31 chassis rot

[phil-b259]

I will certainly be reviewing my future purchases from Hornby if this is how they treat their customers. Maybe we should take the advice of the Hornby rep in the first posting when we have our Hornby shopping lists to hand - 'Scrap 'em!'

.

Review as much as you like but it won’t help. Hornby are not going to change their stance on this issue however much people complain.

 

It has been proved that duplication of super detailed models is not viable and manufacturers will avoid this if at all possible. Thus if your model requires a class 60 sayl then you will either have to swallow your pride and buy from Hornby or model something else.

 

Personally I have had my fair share of Mazzak problems - 2 T9s and a couple of bogies (a Brit and a WC I think) but it’s not going to stop me buying from Hornby when they release something I want because I recognise them for what they are - TOYS and a relatively short period (time wise) of manufacture support as a consiquance.

[Romsey Les]

So you’ve 13 year old ‘toy train’ has failed... you expect Hornby to refund roughly 50% of the value...

So do you expect the same for your other white goods/electronic manufacturers?

 

Hornby did offer replacements/credit notes which was a good will gesture on their part, and they did advertise the cut off date... the scheme lasted a few years from memory...

I get loads of emails from Hornby telling me about their new models etc etc and read Simon Kohler`s blog avidly but I cannot recall ever seeing anything from them about Class 31 problems or of a cut off date. Where did it appear and when ?  Unlike white goods and electronic products my "toy train" is not in constant use and has "failed" through a defect in original manufacture acknowledged by Hornby and replaced/credited until relatively recently.

[phil-b259]

All well an' good referring to 'non affected Hornby chassis' ........... without checking, I've no idea what the availability is of the Class 31 chassis as a spare but other models are most certainly NOT available. I'm currently trying to combine bits of a Hornby 'Schools' class ( that I bought 'as new' from a certain well known retailer ) with a Comet chassis kit 'cos decent Hornby chassis are on a par with hens' teeth.

Hornby - along with virtually all other RTR manufacturers are not in the business of making spare parts - what parts they do have are small in number and quite a lot come from previously returned models that get broken down into their component parts.

 

Where a serious defect requires a large quantity of spares then it will require a special order to be placed with the factory - and that will usually have to be bolted onto the end of a order for a brand new batch of complete models.

 

The action Hornby took several years ago when the problem first emerged (ordered a large quantity of chassis blocks tagged on the back of a new batch of 31s) was actually pretty exceptional by the current RTR business model and not something that has been repeated for any other model.

Edited August 30, 2018 by phil-b259

[fezza]

Sorry but sensible customer service says that if you produce a faulty product you fix or refund it - or customers walk away.

 

Contrast how Bachmann responded this week to worries about the 47. Just wish Bachmann would produce a 31 and a 50 and I wouldn't have to give Hornby a penny more. The Hornby attitude stinks - and may help explain why the company is struggling despite having the most famous name in the business.

[Andy Mac]

I get loads of emails from Hornby telling me about their new models etc etc and read Simon Kohler`s blog avidly but I cannot recall ever seeing anything from them about Class 31 problems or of a cut off date. Where did it appear and when ?  Unlike white goods and electronic products my "toy train" is not in constant use and has "failed" through a defect in original manufacture acknowledged by Hornby and replaced/credited until relatively recently.

Search the forum, for the exchange/credit note discussions. I can remember it quite well, as I have a skinhead Dutch 31, which is still ok... I was torn between returning the model for a credit note or keeping it in the hope that it would last... they did give several months notice of the offer withdrawal....the reason I kept the model, was Hornby wanted the shell and chassis returned, and I really liked the Dutch livery, so decided to keep it...

 

I’m sure you’d have found, had you run the model, it would have performed well for many years, and only in the relative recent past that it’s running qualities would have started to fail.... wither it was in a box or used on a layout, the model, lasted a good number of years longer than it’s warranty, but unfortunately didn’t have the longevity we now expect....

 

I’m not Hornby’s greatest fan, I think they have made terrible decisions in the past, but they did deal with this reasonably....

[Romsey Les]

 

just for completeness here`s a pic of the body damage.  I`m sure I could repair it but certainly not sure I would get a satisfactory finish.  Probably better (as has been suggested) to put the whole sorry package on ebay for parts and at least recoup some of the expenditure.

[phil-b259]

I get loads of emails from Hornby telling me about their new models etc etc and read Simon Kohler`s blog avidly but I cannot recall ever seeing anything from them about Class 31 problems or of a cut off date. Where did it appear and when ?  Unlike white goods and electronic products my "toy train" is not in constant use and has "failed" through a defect in original manufacture acknowledged by Hornby and replaced/credited until relatively recently.

True, Hornby have never publicised the issue Mazak issue and you also correctly observe that there was no deadline issued by which claims for redress had to be submitted by.

 

However this is quite normal - unless it’s a safety issue (and even then some still try and hide it as this saga shows. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/oct/31/hotpoint-indesit-whirlpool-tumble-dryers-fire-risk-uk-homes https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/04/which-and-watchdog-find-failings-in-whirlpools-fire-risk-tumble-dryer-fix/ ) manufacturers prefer to keep quiet and shy away from admitting liability publicly they have a problem.

 

Hornby’s behaviour is thus no different to any other manufacturer who found a problem - address the issue quietly and on a one to one basis rather than shout from the rooftops.

 

As for the amount of use making a difference, while there has been some success with this in the field of white goods (based on the occasional cases highlighted in Which magazine) the legal consensus is that it’s time, not usage which counts after the warranty period.

 

IIRC the average life expectancy of most white goods from a legal perspective is around 6 years and after that the courts believe the manufacturers have no responsibility to fix or provide parts for defects - even if they were present when the goods were made. If a £500 fridge or whatever is considered to life expired at 6 years, a £100model train is hardly going to be expected to last decades!

Edited August 31, 2018 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

Sorry but sensible customer service says that if you produce a faulty product you fix or refund it - or customers walk away.

Contrast how Bachmann responded this week to worries about the 47. Just wish Bachmann would produce a 31 and a 50 and I wouldn't have to give Hornby a penny more. The Hornby attitude stinks - and may help explain why the company is struggling despite having the most famous name in the business.

Sensible for who?

 

In any case you are not comparing like for like.

 

In the case of the Bachmann 47s we have no confirmation there is even a mazak issue in the first place!

 

All that has happened is someone has raised a concern that there MAY be an issue developing.

 

While Bachmann should indeed be praised by the swift action they have taken thus far they have yet to (1) confirm there are actually any mazak issues or (2) That if there does turn out to be mazak issues then it will undertake to procure fresh chassis blocks or offer any form of discount voucher.

 

If you want to compare response you need to travel back in time 5 o4 more years when the FIRST reports of 31s emerged. What were Hornbys actions at that time and how do they compare to what Bachmann have done. Alternatively you need to master time travel and go forward 5 years to make any comparison.

Edited August 30, 2018 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

DSCN1438.JPG

 

just for completeness here`s a pic of the body damage. I`m sure I could repair it but certainly not sure I would get a satisfactory finish. Probably better (as has been suggested) to put the whole sorry package on ebay for parts and at least recoup some of the expenditure.

Others have had success with models that are just as bad. True the plastic body may have been distorted by the chassis so the gap doesn’t close up on its own, but it wouldn’t, be impossible to devise some means of support to push the surfaces together while some glue sets.

 

A tiny bit of paint to touch up the cab area is not hard to do either.

Edited August 30, 2018 by phil-b259

[Clive Mortimore]

I get loads of emails from Hornby telling me about their new models etc etc and read Simon Kohler`s blog avidly but I cannot recall ever seeing anything from them about Class 31 problems or of a cut off date. Where did it appear and when ?  Unlike white goods and electronic products my "toy train" is not in constant use and has "failed" through a defect in original manufacture acknowledged by Hornby and replaced/credited until relatively recently.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/43768-Hornby-corroded-class-31-chassis/

 

I am sure there were earlier threads but I don't seem to be using the right search criteria to find them.

[andyman7]

I understand the OP's frustration but I think that after 13 years an acceptance has to be made that the manufacturer won't be able to sort the issue. The other week I dug out an Airfix kit that had been in my possession unmade for over a decade. It turned out that one half of the fuselage was malformed (a fairly major fault). I didn't see any point chasing Hornby because the time to do that would have been back in 2006 when I bought it!

[brittannia]

I sent a Class 31 Dutch livery back to Hornby some 8 years ago with the mazak problem, they sent a complete replacement free postage.About 4 years later the Blue 31 developed the Mazak problem and I received the £100 voucher.  So in my case Hornby did everything to keep a customer happy.

[fezza]

Bachmann responded immediately suggesting they wanted to get to the bottom of it. Can't ask for much more at this stage.

 

Hornby were silent for a considerable time, have never issued a full official list of models affected and then set a time limit on refunds. I saw models affected still for sale as new products with retailers even after the deadline passed.

 

Not great.

[stovepipe]

I get loads of emails from Hornby telling me about their new models etc etc and read Simon Kohler`s blog avidly but I cannot recall ever seeing anything from them about Class 31 problems or of a cut off date. Where did it appear and when ?  Unlike white goods and electronic products my "toy train" is not in constant use and has "failed" through a defect in original manufacture acknowledged by Hornby and replaced/credited until relatively recently.

The cut-off date was 31 July 2016, I read about it in the previous thread, see

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/43768-Hornby-corroded-class-31-chassis/?p=2533795

 

The models concerned were manufactured in 2003/4, and it seems Hornby took ownership of the problem up to 12 years after, which is twice the time period required under the consumer law applying at the time.

[PM47079]

DSCN1438.JPG

 

just for completeness here`s a pic of the body damage. I`m sure I could repair it but certainly not sure I would get a satisfactory finish. Probably better (as has been suggested) to put the whole sorry package on ebay for parts and at least recoup some of the expenditure.

Ok, well its not the worst I have ever seen.

1 - do not put the body back on the chassis. That is definitely fixable to someone even better if you can find the tiny bit of plastic that is missing from the bottom. For some one who may want to have one with full yellow ends it would be ideal.

2 the cowling that goes underneath the buffer beam is a worthwhile spare alone as it is only carried by unrefurbished 31s

 

3 what does the chassis look like now you have the body off? Did it break up when you removed the body?

[Black 5 Bear]

Hornby's response to the Class 31 mazak problem was far beyond what many other manufacturers/suppliers would offer.

Many of these models affected by this problem date from 2003,a full fifteen years ago when these models were being sold for around the £60 mark.

When you look at it that equates to about £4.00 per year. That's not even the price of a pint in London!

[Romsey Les]

As far as I can see the only chassis damage is to the plate that is underneath the cab seat unit (the lights contacts are screwed to it) and that`s just at one end. The plate had broken apart. The ends of the main chassis under the cabs seem to be warped slightly so I guess the whole length has expanded ?  I have the tiny bit of plastic from the body, in fact the other side has gone as well and I have that too. 

Ok, well its not the worst I have ever seen.
1 - do not put the body back on the chassis. That is definitely fixable to someone even better if you can find the tiny bit of plastic that is missing from the bottom. For some one who may want to have one with full yellow ends it would be ideal.
2 the cowling that goes underneath the buffer beam is a worthwhile spare alone as it is only carried by unrefurbished 31s

3 what does the chassis look like now you have the body off? Did it break up when you removed the body?

[chaz]

Just to put a little perspective on this topic...

 

I have a Nikon telephoto lens in my camera gear collection. Its current list price is £1590 and it is a superb piece of kit (it's the 300mm PF lens for those in the know). It is marked with a symbol which means I can expect it to last ten years. After that the lead-free solder will degrade and "whisker" leading to eventual failure. It may or may not be repairable - time will tell. 

 

Now, you could take the view that it ought to last indefinitely at that price and so not buy it. It's such a useful piece of kit that I accepted the possible limit. Just like the class 31 model it's potential failure will have little to do with the amount of use I make of it and all to do with the material it is made from - and lead-free solder is now mandatory I believe.

 

Chaz

[steve45]

Just to put a little perspective on this topic...

 

I have a Nikon telephoto lens in my camera gear collection. Its current list price is £1590 and it is a superb piece of kit (it's the 300mm PF lens for those in the know). It is marked with a symbol which means I can expect it to last ten years. After that the lead-free solder will degrade and "whisker" leading to eventual failure. It may or may not be repairable - time will tell. 

 

Now, you could take the view that it ought to last indefinitely at that price and so not buy it. It's such a useful piece of kit that I accepted the possible limit. Just like the class 31 model it's potential failure will have little to do with the amount of use I make of it and all to do with the material it is made from - and lead-free solder is now mandatory I believe.

 

Chaz

But you purchased this bit of kit knowing it had a life expectancy, when I purchased the class 31 I certainly expected it to last longer and not rot, especially as it has been stored with no use in the last 10 years. Instead when I purchased it I would have expected it to last until it wore out with usage, so I don't agree with the point you are trying to make, sorry.

 

Steve

[PM47079]

I think if you have all the little bits of plastic there is someone out there who can fix it up. It could even be fixed up resprayed blue for instance and no one would be any the wiser. They may have a dcr livery 31 that they could use the chassis from and create something completely unique. Hornby haven't done a blue skinhead since 31111 in 2006!

Edited August 30, 2018 by PM47079

[newbryford]

 

The action Hornby took several years ago when the problem first emerged (ordered a large quantity of chassis blocks tagged on the back of a new batch of 31s) was actually pretty exceptional by the current RTR business model and not something that has been repeated for any other model.

 

To name a few other similar replacement parts:

Dapol supplied replacement bodies last year for the DRS 68s with inaccurate printing.

Bachmann supplied replacement bodies for the 2EPB about 2011 because one had an incorrect number.

Hornby supplied replacement circuit boards for the first batch of Class 50s that caused DCC decoders to short out.

Heljan produced complete new chassis including wheels and motor for the Class 17

[newbryford]

Would it not be better if this was tagged onto the original mazak chassis thread?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...Just wish Bachmann another mfr would produce a 31 ...

There may be some real hope there IMO. The Hornby body shell is significantly inaccurate in shape for both class 30 and 31. But now all numerous diesel loco classes that saw long service have models, so there's no prospect for new diesel model introductions by competitors unless duplication is risked. Bach duplicated the 47 as long ago as 2007, then Dapol the class 52, SLW the 24 and here come Hattons with a 66. All of these were specifically taken on because the manufacturer could see room for significant improvement over the existing models on offer. On which basis Hornby's Brush 2 with its incorrectly positioned cabside windows must be moving toward the top of the 'target' list - hopefully.

 

Smug note. As someone who knows what the Brush 2 looks like, Hornby got not a penny from me for their attempt! I have had a happy time buying cheap 'rotted' drives to install in my old Airfix bodies, which far better capture the essential character of the old ped. Even the most cracked up of the Hornby chassis blocks is still robust enough that running is unaffected.

[NickL2008]

To name a few other similar replacement parts:

Dapol supplied replacement bodies last year for the DRS 68s with inaccurate printing.

Bachmann supplied replacement bodies for the 2EPB about 2011 because one had an incorrect number.

Hornby supplied replacement circuit boards for the first batch of Class 50s that caused DCC decoders to short out.

Heljan produced complete new chassis including wheels and motor for the Class 17

 

Didn't Hornby also offer replacement wheel sets for their original class 50 releases with unnecessary traction tyres too?

 

NL

[phil-b259]

To name a few other similar replacement parts:

Dapol supplied replacement bodies last year for the DRS 68s with inaccurate printing.

Bachmann supplied replacement bodies for the 2EPB about 2011 because one had an incorrect number.

Hornby supplied replacement circuit boards for the first batch of Class 50s that caused DCC decoders to short out.

Heljan produced complete new chassis including wheels and motor for the Class 17

 

These replacement parts were ordered pretty much as soon as the models were released - Hornby are arranging to make some new tender bodies for one of the most recent Bulleid pacifics due to decoration errors too.

 

It is also important to note that in all the cases you highlight the defects were apparent within the one year warranty period model railway manufacturers give - so under law the manufacturers didn't have the option of ignoring them anyway.

 

The replacement chassis blocks Hornby ordered by contrast came along several years after the last of the models were sold and the warranty had expired - plus the reason was to correct what might be termed a material failure (as the chemical failure of the mazak) not decoration errors. Similarly the extra footplate part required to correct the mazak rot experienced by a certain Bachmann N class happened several years after the actual model had been released.