Hornby 2021 - 9F new tooling

[ColinB]

8 hours ago, Bluebell Model Railway said:

My next-door Neighbour has one of Hornby's 9F's unfortunately I cannot afford one, plus I don't need one. However I was allowed to test check and look over it while he was on Holiday.
 It's a smooth-running model, I certainly didn't pickup on any issues with anything getting caught or any issues with Touque .. that is if Sam actually knows what Touque is... Sadly I have had to deal with a number of things he's said advising people badly, models coming to me needing a service as it has half a dog or cat inside it, because Sam shows it's ok to run it on carpet... well yea did you read the instructions.. 

Anyway we know some Hornby models do have motor issues, as they are third party motors, not produced by their own factory like they used to be sadly that does create issues in terms of the quality and reliability.... I am not saying that this is the case here, without knowing what motor, specs, size ect... and finding it on Ali express for £1.20.

If there is an issue, if you send the model back under warranty, and more do return, then it's something that needs looking in to and they will then be aware of the problem if there is one.

Sadly @ColinB speaking to customers they think because of the viewer numbers, and the subscriber count they think he's right... and most of the time he isn't and lacks the technical knowledge to make such statements....and he does do more harm than good, Hornby did drop him due to some of these issues he's causing. As I now refuse repairs if I hear his name mentioned... send it to the manufacturer.

Sadly I have to disagree, I am a design Engineer by profession and have seen quite a number of poor designs in my life, generally he is right. There are some occasions where he is gets it wrong but on pickups, motors and bearings he is absolutely right. He is a bit fixated on flywheels, they are useful but not the end of the world if not fitted. In some cases he is overly generous with his reviews. As to your customers unfortunately there are some people that don't have the necessary mechanical knowledge to adequately analyse his reviews properly. As to you refusing repairs if you hear his name that is your perogative, it is good that you have enough work to refuse more. Interestingly I repair a lot of locos for someone I met on EBay he hasn't got a clue about anything electrical. He constantly got his locos fixed by so called repairers paying a fortune for the privilege. I was amazed what I found when I started to repair them, self tappers in parallel thread holes, gears glued back together with superglue, when you can buy a new one, DCC motor parameters adjusted to compensate for a duff motor. So as you can see that also works both ways. There again I don't repair locos for a living and I don't charge for repairs, just the parts but having spent my whole life on microelectronics fixing locos is a doddle.

[adb968008]

19 hours ago, thetrains said:

 

Not trying to defend Sam, (no fan particularly) but he did an update I just I've seen this morning, last week, where he stripped down the actual motor to compare to S15 etc. and put his own new motor in and now runs fine. If you go to @ 19.50-20.30 mins in, he says by saying Hornby's statement about the 9f motor being new is "untrue" based on his strip down. 

 

Really iffy statement by him I reckon.

I suspect the gap is that Sams trains is comparing the motor between the B12 and 9F.

Hornby is comparing the motor between the old 9f and the new 9f.

 

The wording in that video seems very carefully scripted and not random adlib.

 

I do find Sams Trains is misleading though, the motor is new to the 9F, and as a consumer they are buying 9f’s, not B12’s or individual motors. Could the motor be a better one, yes of course, and that goes for any model out there.  Sam found one he is happy with that improves the performance of his own 9f.

 

I found that the Hornby 9f and Bachmann 9f are comparable, and yes certainly both could be improved with better motors. (indeed several disagree with me that I think the Bachmann 9f is underpowered), but given Bachmanns 9f has been in the market place 17 years without too many complaints then the market has spoken and Hornby imo has met the market threshold.

 

If sams wants to be more objective, comparing apples for apples rather than cores for cores maybe better… why not put all his different 9fs on the treadmill… it is afterall a 9f not the market for motors he's reviewing.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[No Decorum]

17 hours ago, HExpressD said:

I think the issue with the motors was a batch issue not a spec issue, so even if it is the same motor, which Hornby have said it isn't (I know who I'd trust between Strains and the manufacturer). Again assuming a batch issue, saying the motor has the same faults because it looks the same would be like having a tin of beans give you salmonella in 2019, and not now eating another tin of beans because 'it looks the same'. 

 

In any case, I think saying it is, after a manufacturer has already says that it isn't (presumably they'd know) is a way to land yourself in some trouble!

I think you might be spot on about it being a batch problem. Sam and Hornby are probably talking at cross purposes. Sam has taken “new” as meaning new to Hornby whereas Hornby probably means that the motor is new compared to the old 9F.

 

MidlandRed posted a link on screen 18 to a video of the 9F running. In my view, it showed terrible low speed running. I’m reasonably content with my Bachmann and Hornby 9Fs, so I’m not in the market for a new one. If I were, the problems people have experienced would put me off getting one. It’s a terrible shame. A good Hornby motor usually has the edge over any other. In theory, a five-pole skew-wound motor has the edge over a three-pole straight-wound one but if it isn’t assembled well, it can be a dud.

[No Decorum]

3 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I suspect the gap is that Sams trains is comparing the motor between the B12 and 9F.

Hornby is comparing the motor between the old 9f and the new 9f.

 

The wording in that video seems very carefully scripted and not random adlib.

 

I do find Sams Trains is misleading though, the motor is new to the 9F, and as a consumer they are buying 9f’s, not B12’s or individual motors. Could the motor be a better one, yes of course, and that goes for any model out there.  Sam found one he is happy with that improves the performance of his own 9f.

 

I found that the Hornby 9f and Bachmann 9f are comparable, and yes certainly both could be improved with better motors. (indeed several disagree with me that the Bachmann 9f is underpowered), but given Bachmanns 9f has been in the market place 17 years without too many complaints then the market has spoken and Hornby imo has met the market threshold.

 

 

 

 

Ack! Beat me to it.

[adb968008]

Just now, No Decorum said:

Ack! Beat me to it.

But shows we are not alone in thinking the same way.

[adb968008]

I’m not convinced there is an issue at all beyond personal expectations… its a 9f you want heavy haul, its a HST you want high speed etc.

 

Imo The motor is fine, its used in other locos, including non-Hornby locos. He put in a stronger motor.. he could have added weight instead, he could have added traction tyres… several ways to skin a cat, but its personal preference.

Had he presented it as an improvement / enhancement imo would be more than fine and constructive.

 

The loco struggling on a curve in his video is using power to overcome force.. he could have explored why it was, (valve gear, b2b, quartering, his track, comparisons to other locos etc) rather than simply trying to overcome it with extra force… whilst the loco now pulls more, how smooth is it at low speed and does it fly like a rocket rather than a sedate speed ?.. none of this we know.

 

Others suggested he might have one with a poor motor, we dont know as we havent seen him with a replacement… and to me that is important, its bigger sister motor had quality issues in a different locomotive by another manufacturer, but this option hasnt been explored here and so maybe unfair against Hornby.

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[ColinB]

25 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

I think you might be spot on about it being a batch problem. Sam and Hornby are probably talking at cross purposes. Sam has taken “new” as meaning new to Hornby whereas Hornby probably means that the motor is new compared to the old 9F.

 

MidlandRed posted a link on screen 18 to a video of the 9F running. In my view, it showed terrible low speed running. I’m reasonably content with my Bachmann and Hornby 9Fs, so I’m not in the market for a new one. If I were, the problems people have experienced would put me off getting one. It’s a terrible shame. A good Hornby motor usually has the edge over any other. In theory, a five-pole skew-wound motor has the edge over a three-pole straight-wound one but if it isn’t assembled well, it can be a dud.

The big question is, if the previous 9F motor worked well why change it?  The only advantage is the new twin flywheels, the retooled Princess loco only has one flywheel and that works ok. As anyone that has worked in engineering will tell you, change means risk, so when you change anything there has to be a very good reason and you test it like hell. My biggest criticism with Hornby is that their designers don't seem to work as a team, there is very little sharing of ideas or components, it is like each designer sits in front of their PC oblivious to what other people are doing. I know all loco designs are different but the electrical parts should be pretty constant. 

[Legend]

Yeah, looks like that's it.  Hornby mean it's a new motor to the 9F, but I think as Sam has conclusively proved its 99% similar to the model used in B12.  Given that there have been issues with this motor in the past you have to wonder why Hornby persist on using it, especially on its flagship model.

 

Interesting response and quite well thought out. 

 

Thanks for pointing this out as it was in a Live Stream I wouldn't usually watch.

Edited November 22, 2022 by Legend

[adb968008]

53 minutes ago, Legend said:

Yeah, looks like that's it.  Hornby mean it's a new motor to the 9F, but I think as Sam has conclusively proved its 99% similar to the model used in B12.  Given that there have been issues with this motor in the past you have to wonder why Hornby persist on using it, especially on its flagship model.

Ford engines have had issues in the past, Ford still make cars with Ford engines.

The motor in the 9f is in several different manufacturers models, including Piko..

It doesnt make many complaints on line from what I see.

 

 

1 hour ago, ColinB said:

The big question is, if the previous 9F motor worked well why change it?  

Because its a completely new tooling… everything is new.

 

Hornbys previous 9F dated to 1979.

They made a half way 9f with the Crosti 7 years back, but it was railroad.

 

Thats what makes Sams trains misleading… Hornby said its a new motor in the 9f.. because it is, previously there were varying types in the 9f going back to ringfield in 1979… but not this one.

 

Sams saying its not a new motor because its in the B12…. Thats wrong context… a B12 isnt a 9F.  Now if the B12 has issues (I dont know my B12 works fine), then would he still say it if it didnt ? ..

 

crucially…  this motor sits in other models which he declined to name… That motor is might also in some electric folding car mirrors, but he hasnt gone there either…. There must be 100k+ of this motor out there in different applications… did he go there.. No… so why chose the B12 when others are available ?

 

So I will raise the stakes and say Ive got an x04 motor thats  from the 1960’s…. The only difference now is its in a can, as he demonstrated when he opened it up… its the same.. armature wrapped around a core with a commutator on the ends using

brushes…. Why is it any different ?

 

Going further… theres a huge one in the Science museum in London, that demonstrates exactly why brushes are called brushes… because they are the size of sweeping brushes.

 

he’s off base imo. If he’d put more science and less entertainment into it, he may be appear more credible in my eyes. As it is, I feel he's damaging Hornby unfairly, with unequal comparisons, of the model, the motor and its peers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[micklner]

I  doubt very much that will ever be spares for them, and it would appear the same for all recent and future Hornby efforts.

 

Two bob motors in £200 plus models.

 

Simply not good enough Hornby , up your game or die.

[spamcan61]

2 hours ago, ColinB said:

My biggest criticism with Hornby is that their designers don't seem to work as a team, there is very little sharing of ideas or components, it is like each designer sits in front of their PC oblivious to what other people are doing. I know all loco designs are different but the electrical parts should be pretty constant. 

I don't think Hornby have a design team in the traditional sense of the word i.e. one in house team that work from initial prototype through to volume production. They use one or more 3rd party manufacturers, who do 'the tooling' - which may well include the actual powertrain design. Do Hornby specifiy the actual type of motor to be used I wonder?, maybe yes, maybe no, they might leave it to the actual manufacturer and their supply chain.

 

So it's no surprise to me that there isn't that much commonality of design method or parts between different Hornby products in the post Sanda Kan era.

Edited November 22, 2022 by spamcan61

[adb968008]

41 minutes ago, micklner said:

I  doubt very much that will ever be spares for them, and it would appear the same for all recent and future Hornby efforts.

 

Two bob motors in £200 plus models.

Take your pick….

 

https://laisdcc.com/LaisDcc_Motor_Catalog.pdf

 

From what ive bought the last 2 years, a huge number of the rtr models across a dozen plus manufacturers Ive seen have motors which came from this catalog.

There ali store is here..

 

https://laisdcc.aliexpress.com/

You’ll find a lot of things look very familiar here from across the board of UK, European and US model railroad companies…

 

Delivery from China takes about 2 weeks, includes UK taxes.

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[ColinB]

8 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Take your pick….

 

https://laisdcc.com/LaisDcc_Motor_Catalog.pdf

 

From what ive bought the last 2 years, a huge number of the rtr models across a dozen plus manufacturers Ive seen have motors which came from this catalog.

There ali store is here..

 

https://laisdcc.aliexpress.com/

 

Thank you, they are very useful links.

[adb968008]

Whilst i’m at it i’ll share this link too..

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001287313553.html

 

for broken shafts, bearing cups etc, very useful for kit building.

Whilst they come in 12’s.. its better than 1 brittle 3D print for a fiver, and on a diesel you need 4 cups anyway.

 

You can spend hours on this site browsing for bits, its all there.

[ColinB]

51 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Ford engines have had issues in the past, Ford still make cars with Ford engines.

The motor in the 9f is in several different manufacturers models, including Piko..

It doesnt make many complaints on line from what I see.

 

 

Because its a completely new tooling… everything is new.

 

Hornbys previous 9F dated to 1979.

They made a half way 9f with the Crosti 7 years back, but it was railroad.

 

Thats what makes Sams trains misleading… Hornby said its a new motor in the 9f.. because it is, previously there were varying types in the 9f going back to ringfield in 1979… but not this one.

 

Sams saying its not a new motor because its in the B12…. Thats wrong context… a B12 isnt a 9F.  Now if the B12 has issues (I dont know my B12 works fine), then would he still say it if it didnt ? ..

 

crucially…  this motor sits in other models which he declined to name… That motor is might also in some electric folding car mirrors, but he hasnt gone there either…. There must be 100k+ of this motor out there in different applications… did he go there.. No… so why chose the B12 when others are available ?

 

So I will raise the stakes and say Ive got an x04 motor thats  from the 1960’s…. The only difference now is its in a can, as he demonstrated when he opened it up… its the same.. armature wrapped around a core with a commutator on the ends using

brushes…. Why is it any different ?

 

Going further… theres a huge one in the Science museum in London, that demonstrates exactly why brushes are called brushes… because they are the size of sweeping brushes.

 

he’s off base imo. If he’d put more science and less entertainment into it, he may be appear more credible in my eyes. As it is, I feel he's damaging Hornby unfairly, with unequal comparisons, of the model, the motor and its peers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually I think you are over generalising on the Ford Engine part, do you actually know how much they spend on developing a new engine and the modern Fox engine bears no similarity with the 2.0 litre pinto engine of the 80s. They also don't buy their engines from a catalogue as Hornby do, the only exception being Peugeot small diesel engines. If you are ever in Essex go look at their Engineering Centre and the biggest Engine Test facility in Europe. Sam is not the only one to have issues with that motor, there is an old guy called Barry that has had similar issues, in his case he actually tells you which alternative motor will fit. I doubt that the motor would be fitted to a cars folding mirror, for a start it wouldn't meet the harsh environmental requirements in the specification laid down by the motor manufacturers. There are a lot of things that can make a motor not work properly, brush design, support of brushes. I recently bought some Pendolino motors to replace my 3 pole motors. On these there is an issue with how the magnets are held in. Out of 5 of them 3 had issues where the clip was not attached properly allowing the magnets fall onto the armature. Simple fix, but I shouldn't have to do it.

[ColinB]

5 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Whilst i’m at it i’ll share this link too..

 

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001287313553.html

 

for broken shafts, bearing cups etc, very useful for kit building.

Whilst they come in 12’s.. its better than 1 brittle 3D print for a fiver, and on a diesel you need 4 cups anyway.

 

You can spend hours on this site browsing for bits, its all there.

Thanks, a very useful link.

[adb968008]

31 minutes ago, ColinB said:

Actually I think you are over generalising on the Ford Engine part, do you actually know how much they spend on developing a new engine and the modern Fox engine bears no similarity with the 2.0 litre pinto engine of the 80s. They also don't buy their engines from a catalogue as Hornby do, the only exception being Peugeot small diesel engines. If you are ever in Essex go look at their Engineering Centre and the biggest Engine Test facility in Europe. Sam is not the only one to have issues with that motor, there is an old guy called Barry that has had similar issues, in his case he actually tells you which alternative motor will fit. I doubt that the motor would be fitted to a cars folding mirror, for a start it wouldn't meet the harsh environmental requirements in the specification laid down by the motor manufacturers. There are a lot of things that can make a motor not work properly, brush design, support of brushes. I recently bought some Pendolino motors to replace my 3 pole motors. On these there is an issue with how the magnets are held in. Out of 5 of them 3 had issues where the clip was not attached properly allowing the magnets fall onto the armature. Simple fix, but I shouldn't have to do it.

But the point is, its an industry standard motor.

its not a bespoke tailor made design.
Theres hundreds of thousands of them out there.

If there is an issue, I am not convinced the issue is the motor.

 

Stiff valve gear, or bad quartering could impaire the performance. This is a “BO-BO” rather than a 2-10-0 afterall.. the centre driver is unflanged giving the model huge radius advantage, but if the coupling rods were tight and the axles twist it could affect the models performance.

 

Nearly every loco I own slows down on sharp corners, and gradients, not all of them are Hornby, or 9fs or even models fitted with that exact spec motor.
 

The same is true on the real railway too… curves and gradients affect performance.

 

The replacement by ST is a coreless, I fully can understand why Hornby would not want to use that in its market. I hope anyone copying his video understands the implications of doing so.

 

Now if we saw the 4 different Hornby 9f permutations, and the Bachmann one, plus a replacement Hornby one, and one with the new ST endorsed motor… then it would be an objective comparison.

 

What we have is 1 loco with an allegeded problem, compared to another with an allegded problem just because it uses the same motor and shouting “fire”, yet ignoring all the others that use it silently and most people are blissfully unaware as its doing its job.

 

From that i’m confused..

 

is he saying its the motor thats poor and its the Chinese manufacturers fault ?,

or

its application in the 9f, compared against peer benchmark 9f’s ?

or

just plain blaming Hornby for using it but others are free to do so ?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[adb968008]

Let me give a different example…

Meet the 9f motors big sister…

(On the table)..

(its This one exactly to be precise)..

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002670420818.html

It is used in the Hattons class 66…

I have repaired more than a dozen dead Hattons 66’s all with this exact motor.

All had the same poor assembly fault.

 

However this motor exists also in Hornbys class 87 and Dapols class 73… (i’m guessing another new model will arrive using it also in next weeks).

(Hornby 87 above, Heljan 86 below- i’ll get to that in a minute).

 

The 73, 66 and 87 all have differing top speeds, ive never seen motor faults reported on the 73 and 87.
 

This difference in performance is only down to gear train ratios, chassis weight and motor flywheel size.

(Hattons 66 above, Dapol 73 below)
 

The faults on the Hattons 66 motors I can only conclude to be an unfortunate bad batch assembled.

 

I can be objective in this as I've interchanged motors between all 3 from 3 different applications of the motor by three separate commissioner's and bought replacements from the source. Ive seen the results of interchanging replicates behaviours in their environment of the other motors. Ive also found just simply flywheel size can have behavioural change too and I may fit smaller flywheels to my 66’s for speed testing, I might remove them from the 73 altogether. Crucially… I found and fixed the fault in the bad motors too.

 

But Alternatively..

 

(fiction from here:) 

I could of course just point fingers at Hattons, start an online war, say its there fault for using dodgy motors go online buy and fit a Heljan class 86 motor instead, as its an exact spec fit just a higher rpm and thus gives it faster speed and berate the manufacturer for using it in the first place, whilst not forgetting to advertise the link for 3D piece needed too…

(End fiction)

but that would not be totally accurate, misinformed and unfair.

 

I know its popular to berate Hornby, and I don't cut them much slack myself, but its only when its fair. I feel this is not.

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by adb968008

[ColinB]

13 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

But the point is, its an industry standard motor.

its not a bespoke tailor made design.
Theres hundreds of thousands of them out there.

If there is an issue, I am not convinced the issue is the motor.

 

Stiff valve gear, or bad quartering could impaire the performance. This is a “BO-BO” rather than a 2-10-0 afterall.. the centre driver is unflanged giving the model huge radius advantage, but if the coupling rods were tight and the axles twist it could affect the models performance.

 

Nearly every loco I own slows down on sharp corners, and gradients, not all of them are Hornby, or 9fs or fitted with that exact spec motor.
 

The same is true on the real railway too… curves and gradients affect performance.

 

The replacement by ST is a coreless, I fully can understand why Hornby would not want to use that in its market. I hope anyone copying his video understands the implications of doing so.

 

Now if we saw the 4 different Hornby 9f permutations, and the Bachmann one, plus a replacement Hornby one, and one with the new motor… then it would be an objective comparison.

 

What we have is 1 loco with an allegeded problem, compared to another with an allegded problem just because it uses the same motor and shouting “fire”, yet ignoring all the others that use it silently and most people are blissfully unaware as its doing its job.

 

From that i’m confused.. is he saying its the motor thats poor, or its application in the 9f, or just plain blaming Hornby for using it ?

 

 

 

Given Sams background of repairing locos in the past I suspect he would notice bad quartering or conrod issues before he jumped to the motor. That is generally what I do, in fact many times the last thing I suspect is the motor. Sadly with many of the locos I have replaced it should have been the first port of call. As a company why fit a motor that has had previous issues, it is just not worth the aggro, whether or not the criticism was justified or not. It shows a great lack of inexperience by the designer, obviously Hornby don't have meaningful  review teams. Perhaps Sam should have replaced with a similar motor, but seeing as firstly replacement Hornby motors are mega expensive and secondly I doubt he could get one anyway, now that Hornby has abandoned any sensible spares policy. 

I have to admit my one runs perfectly but then if it didn't it would be going back to its maker.

[JST]

23 hours ago, thetrains said:

Really iffy statement by him I reckon.

To be fair to him, I think you will find that he did actually choose his language reasonably carefully (e.g. "on the evidence available to me" kind of phrasing) rather than calling Hornby outright liars. Looking at the motors, they do seem identical but I seem to remember that the problem with the S15 motors was down to a batch with dodgy brushes made from over hard material. Anyway, mine seems fine!

Edited November 22, 2022 by JST

[ColinB]

52 minutes ago, JST said:

To be fair to him, I think you will find that he did actually choose his language reasonably carefully (e.g. "on the evidence available to me" kind of phrasing) rather than calling Hornby outright liars. Looking at the motors, they do seem identical but I seem to remember that the problem with the S15 motors was down to a batch with dodgy brushes made from over hard material. Anyway, mine seems fine!

That would explain a lot, if the brushes are suspect the motor will never work properly. It is a shame Hornby doesn't say that. Actually to think of it Hornby never does admit it made a mistake. To give credit to my old firm when they eventually got found out they usually put up their hands and said this is how we are going to fix it. Usually it got them more sales.

[maico]

Mike took one apart, it was a budget motor with less than stellar QC. Some are fine.

Depends on how much the budget is, I generally stick with more expensive  Faulhaber, Maxon Swiss, Canon, Portescap for coreless, and Bühler or Roco inhouse for can.

Maxon are really expensive, Marklin Trix don't fit them anymore.

The Portescap replacement with flywheel on their spares website is £39 which is OK.  A factor like RS will charge more for the exact same motor bare.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by maico

[micklner]

One for Q6, a similar looking motor to the 9F motor.

 

 

Luckily there is one for the Q6 (and cheap) on the Ali Express link above.

Edited November 22, 2022 by micklner

[RedgateModels]

No sign of a service sheet for the new 9F on Hornby.com yet ☹️

[Ian Hargrave]

25 minutes ago, RedgateModels said:

No sign of a service sheet for the new 9F on Hornby.com yet ☹️

I questioned the absence of such with Hornby at GETS early last month. I met with a blank somewhat puzzled response. Good luck with that then.