Hornby 2021 - 4 & 6 wheel period coaches

[sem34090]

I think that's the last of the inaccuracies to be worrying about if using these for GWR-built stock.

[GreenGiraffe22]

This arrived today, it looks the part to my untrained eye, certainly sufficiently Brightonian, it's going to be a department carriage for my breakdown crane.

 

pairing a £200 accurate model with a £30 "generic" support carriage is a little amusing to me but it'll do for now! Will probably add the Hatton's Southern Tool van to the train as and when. Perhaps even a repaint to department grey, that or I'll weather it so much the colour underneath will be irrelevant.

 

Edit: the moulded lamp irons look a little phallic...

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by GreenGiraffe22

[Hroth]

1 hour ago, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Edit: the moulded lamp irons look a little phallic...

 

Merely a phallacy.

 

The lower photo neatly illustrates the prettily dimpled buffers!

 

 

[Hroth]

1 hour ago, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Edit: the moulded lamp irons look a little phallic...

 

Reminded me, try googling "roman phallic lamp"...

 

Warning, probably NSFW!

 

 

 

[Edwardian]

I have now sampled the 4-wheel coaches. I'm not disappointed, largely because I think they are entirely usable for my purposes, but I would be very confident that the Hattons coaches will be more detailed and refined and, if I might borrow back a phrase, the Hattons coaches will be more prototypically literate. A generic coach range needs to be credible and needs to reflect the more typical features and arrangements we might expect to find on the prototype. 

 

 

There are some features of the Hornby coaches I like, for instance, the hand rails on the roof end and brake end are good to see. But, there are some crude features.  The rooves are very thick.  This is disguised on the GW examples by the chocolate paint, but really stands out on, e.g. the SR version.

 

The moulded-in lamp irons on the coach ends are retrograde and pretty bloody awful. I'll have to scrape these off and add separate ones; better if Hornby hadn't bothered. 

 

As has been mentioned, the GW footboards are shown in a silly position, but I note that they come unfitted, so I will have a look at mounting them at a sensible height. 

 

On the subject of the GWR models, the GW livery is wrong.  The beading should be black, not chocolate; Hornby have missed out a step.  

 

NB: The ducket sides (not a GW word, but, then, not really a GW coach!) are smooth, the panelling faux. Smooth, sheet, sides are representative of some prototypes, e.g. Stroudley as built before modified by his successor, and some GER coaches.  I would have preferred beading and would think that more 'generic', but it is a matter of preference, when all's said and done.

 

The buffer heads, on the other hand, are just bloody odd. I may replace these.

 

 

Like the Terrier, it falls short of the refinement we know Hornby is capable of. Like the Terrier, I suspect this was a rush job aimed at stealing sales from a retail commissioner.  Frankly, it shows. Still, it leaves us with a product, and I'm happy to explore its potential.  

 

Like the Terrier, the tooling suite is not so extensive as it might be, resulting in some uncomfortable details; the positions of the gas lamps don't really make sense on the Third and Brake Third; Oil pots might be shared by compartments, but I suggest that gas lamps are likely to be one per compartment.  The worst offender is what we might call the brake coach roof (it's the same for the Full Brake and the Brake Third). This results in a single light for three compartments on the Brake Third, and a redundant lamp over the luggage space in the Full Brake. it's a cost-saving measure that compromises both types of vehicle to which it is applied.  Additionally, at the brake ends, ideally the roof would project slightly over the top of the ducket, which would reflect prototype practice.  

 

 

 

There is some consistency here; the Third Class compartments do not have full height partitions, so thus cope with the sparse lighting of the All Third; that is at least is a reasonable arrangement.  I have two significant reservations, however; (i) Aside from the Stroudley coaches of the '70s, which clearly inspired the Hornby coaches, the body style is more common in the later Nineteenth Century, most typically the 1890s. Coaches built then are more likely to have full height partitions and a lamp per compartment, and (ii) when building or retrofitting gas lighting, I'd expect that half height partitions would not be used or full height partitions would be retro-fitted. What we are given here as 'generic' is just not a very persuasive combination.

 

I will probably add full height partitions and will have to remove and replace the gas lamp tops on the Third and Brake Third to achieve a more intelligent and credible arrangement.

 

I'm not convinced by the arc of the roof rain strip and, of course, the rooves lack gas piping (Hattons, I recall, include the gas piping, so at least the lights in their coaches will be explicable!).

 

The lack of window bollections may reflect the Stroudley origin of Hornby's design, but again, is an atypical feature on a 'generic' coach. 

 

All in all, it's more an idea of 4-wheel coach; something that suggests one, rather than a model that reflects an understanding of how such vehicles were actually built and fitted.  Hattons, again, will show how it should be done.   Yet, nothing seems too seriously amiss, and there is little here that cannot be lived with or fixed. 

 

These are very charismatic and usable models, reasonably priced.  They do though, for me, make the Hattons coaches look to be spectacularly good value in comparison, and the net effect of seeing the Hornby coaches is to whet my appetite more keenly for the Hattons. 

 

Essentially I'm going to use the Hornby coaches as a test run for adapting the Hattons coaches for my freelance line.  As such I hope they will still be usable coaches that I can run with pleasure and pride, but I do not think I will bother with the Hornby 6-wheelers; I've seen enough to conclude that the Hornby versions of generic coaches don't really add anything to the Hattons concept, and I will be making the rest of my purchases from the Hattons range. 

 

Finally, I was swayed into purchasing these by the fact that Peter's Spares had all 4 and at a discount from RRP. I do feel I have received value for money, despite the reservations noted here. I also want to thank Peter's Spares for its spectacularly fast service. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Edwardian
spelling: Compartments have partitions, not petitions!

[Compound2632]

Excellent review! Looking closely, I'm intrigued by the axleboxes - whose are they?

 

The Great Western livery is compromised by the lack of bolection mouldings - which should be in a mahogany finish like the droplights. But in that respect they're no worse than the Triang clerestories of sixty years ago! This has led Hornby into the blunder of lining out around the fixed lights - on the other hand, I don't think they've ever turned out the Triang clerestories in as elaborate a finish. The lack of cream panel between the third class compartments has quite an impact on overall appearance; this is something the Hattons version of Great Western livery just manages to avoid.

 

Gas lighting is a modelling challenge - the piping on the roof, usually sitting on little blocks at 15" - 18" intervals, is a delicate and prominent feature that is very often swept under the carpet - oil or electric lighting is much simpler.

 

These models are so much of an advance on the toy 4-wheeler that there would be unmitigated socially-distanced dancing in the streets were it not for the Hattons carriages in the offing, at the same price (barring discounts).

Edited March 17, 2021 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Excellent review! Looking closely, I'm intrigued by the axleboxes - whose are they?

 

The Great Western livery is compromised by the lack of bolection mouldings - which should be in a mahogany finish like the droplights. But in that respect they're no worse than the Triang clerestories of sixty years ago! This has led Hornby into the blunder of lining out around the fixed lights - on the other hand, I don't think they've ever turned out the Triang clerestories in as elaborate a finish. The lack of cream panel between the third class compartments has quite an impact on overall appearance; this is something the Hattons version of Great Western livery just manages to avoid.

 

Gas lighting is a modelling challenge - the piping on the roof, usually sitting on little blocks at 15" - 18" intervals, is a delicate and prominent feature that is very often swept under the carpet - oil or electric lighting is much simpler.

 

These models are so much of an advance on the toy 4-wheeler that there would be unmitigated socially-distanced dancing in the streets were it not for the Hattons carriages in the offing, at the same price (barring discounts).

 

Yes, I decided not to mention the aspects of the GW livery that the Hornby tooling is physically incapable of representing, but the lack of bollections and the absence of the cream border to the droplights does deny the coaches the characteristic appearance of GW livery.

 

I have pinched the image below from the excellent Penhros Junction website, as it shows these features clearly:

 

 

EDIT: And Hattons:

Edited March 17, 2021 by Edwardian

[Compound2632]

The resolution of that extract from Penrhos isn't as good as the original but it looks as if you've picked the 1923 livery? Anyway, the point is that doesn't show (or not clearly, if it's actually the earlier livery) the brown line on the cream panel that was a feature of the pre-1908 livery and is reproduced by Hattons.

[Edwardian]

3 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

The resolution of that extract from Penrhos isn't as good as the original but it looks as if you've picked the 1923 livery? Anyway, the point is that doesn't show (or not clearly, if it's actually the earlier livery) the brown line on the cream panel that was a feature of the pre-1908 livery and is reproduced by Hattons.

 

Indeed.  Those distance lines on the cream panels are seen on the restored examples at Didcot.

 

I meant to choose the earlier livery from Penhros. Anyway, the Hornby coaches, based on the insignia, purport to be pre-1904 livery, whereas the Hattons actually are in the 1904-1908 livery (again based on the insignia).

 

The material point is that, aside from the insignia, the livery is the same, so, yes, the Hornby version lacks the following details (which the Hattons sample correctly has):

 

- black beading

- cream border to drop lights

- mahogany bollections round windows

- distance line on cream panels

 

Further, the cream on the Hornby is rather dark, but aging varnish I suppose could be prayed in aid.

 

The Hornby application of the livery is very nicely executed, but, compared with the Hattons, it's a sort of 'Railroad' version of the GW livery of the period.    

    

[Pre Grouping fan]

Not sure if this will be of interest to people on this thread. 

 

I've started a conversion of 2 6 wheel 1sts to create 1 Stoudley/Billington 6 Comp 1st akin to 7598 on the Bluebell.

 

1st phase has been to strip the body of 1 and add "bollection" mouldings around the fixed lights. 

 

Then onto the chassis, adding LNWR buffers to the chassis and stripping the unwanted bits off. This is because the prototype has a modified LNWR underframe and I'm going for a preserved appearance.

 

(Not quite sure what's going on with the colours of the platisc used on the underframe, a mix of black and brown). 

 

If there's interest in this I may start a workbench thread to show the rest of the build. 

[Edwardian]

On 17/03/2021 at 14:28, Edwardian said:

I have now sampled the 4-wheel coaches. I'm not disappointed, largely because I think they are entirely usable for my purposes, but I would be very confident that the Hattons coaches will be more detailed and refined and, if I might borrow back a phrase, the Hattons coaches will be more prototypically literate. A generic coach range needs to be credible and needs to reflect the more typical features and arrangements we might expect to find on the prototype. 

 

 

There are some features of the Hornby coaches I like, for instance, the hand rails on the roof end and brake end are good to see. But, there are some crude features.  The rooves are very thick.  This is disguised on the GW examples by the chocolate paint, but really stands out on, e.g. the SR version.

 

The moulded-in lamp irons on the coach ends are retrograde and pretty bloody awful. I'll have to scrape these off and add separate ones; better if Hornby hadn't bothered. 

 

As has been mentioned, the GW footboards are shown in a silly position, but I note that they come unfitted, so I will have a look at mounting them at a sensible height. 

 

On the subject of the GWR models, the GW livery is wrong.  The beading should be black, not chocolate; Hornby have missed out a step.  

 

NB: The ducket sides (not a GW word, but, then, not really a GW coach!) are smooth, the panelling faux. Smooth, sheet, sides are representative of some prototypes, e.g. Stroudley as built before modified by his successor, and some GER coaches.  I would have preferred beading and would think that more 'generic', but it is a matter of preference, when all's said and done.

 

The buffer heads, on the other hand, are just bloody odd. I may replace these.

 

 

Like the Terrier, it falls short of the refinement we know Hornby is capable of. Like the Terrier, I suspect this was a rush job aimed at stealing sales from a retail commissioner.  Frankly, it shows. Still, it leaves us with a product, and I'm happy to explore its potential.  

 

Like the Terrier, the tooling suite is not so extensive as it might be, resulting in some uncomfortable details; the positions of the gas lamps don't really make sense on the Third and Brake Third; Oil pots might be shared by compartments, but I suggest that gas lamps are likely to be one per compartment.  The worst offender is what we might call the brake coach roof (it's the same for the Full Brake and the Brake Third). This results in a single light for three compartments on the Brake Third, and a redundant lamp over the luggage space in the Full Brake. it's a cost-saving measure that compromises both types of vehicle to which it is applied.  Additionally, at the brake ends, ideally the roof would project slightly over the top of the ducket, which would reflect prototype practice.  

 

 

 

There is some consistency here; the Third Class compartments do not have full height partitions, so thus cope with the sparse lighting of the All Third; that is at least is a reasonable arrangement.  I have two significant reservations, however; (i) Aside from the Stroudley coaches of the '70s, which clearly inspired the Hornby coaches, the body style is more common in the later Nineteenth Century, most typically the 1890s. Coaches built then are more likely to have full height partitions and a lamp per compartment, and (ii) when building or retrofitting gas lighting, I'd expect that half height partitions would not be used or full height partitions would be retro-fitted. What we are given here as 'generic' is just not a very persuasive combination.

 

I will probably add full height partitions and will have to remove and replace the gas lamp tops on the Third and Brake Third to achieve a more intelligent and credible arrangement.

 

I'm not convinced by the arc of the roof rain strip and, of course, the rooves lack gas piping (Hattons, I recall, include the gas piping, so at least the lights in their coaches will be explicable!).

 

The lack of window bollections may reflect the Stroudley origin of Hornby's design, but again, is an atypical feature on a 'generic' coach. 

 

All in all, it's more an idea of 4-wheel coach; something that suggests one, rather than a model that reflects an understanding of how such vehicles were actually built and fitted.  Hattons, again, will show how it should be done.   Yet, nothing seems too seriously amiss, and there is little here that cannot be lived with or fixed. 

 

These are very charismatic and usable models, reasonably priced.  They do though, for me, make the Hattons coaches look to be spectacularly good value in comparison, and the net effect of seeing the Hornby coaches is to whet my appetite more keenly for the Hattons. 

 

Essentially I'm going to use the Hornby coaches as a test run for adapting the Hattons coaches for my freelance line.  As such I hope they will still be usable coaches that I can run with pleasure and pride, but I do not think I will bother with the Hornby 6-wheelers; I've seen enough to conclude that the Hornby versions of generic coaches don't really add anything to the Hattons concept, and I will be making the rest of my purchases from the Hattons range. 

 

Finally, I was swayed into purchasing these by the fact that Peter's Spares had all 4 and at a discount from RRP. I do feel I have received value for money, despite the reservations noted here. I also want to thank Peter's Spares for its spectacularly fast service. 

 

 

 

 

 

Addendum: Naked under the skirts

 

From comments received, we've seen how my 'mini-review' did not draw out in full the various ways in which the GW livery is not adequately captured on the Hornby generics. Just to be clear, the only thing Great Western about the GWR-liveried Hornby generics is the commode handle design. However, save that this feature makes the coaches rather un-generic (the GW curly style is rather distinctive), that's not really the issue; suitability as a model of any particular prototype not really being the point here.  

 

So, all I'll say in response to that is, yes, the models don't give a particularly good account of how GW livery appeared, but my focus is not on critiquing a generic coach on how close it is to a particular prototype, but, rather, to judge now typical - generic - and accurate (in terms of accurately reflecting prototypical practice) it is, and, of course, to assess the quality over all.

 

One area I should have mentioned is the underneath. Just as the lighting of the gas lamps is something of a magical mystery, as there is no piping between the reservoirs and the lamps, braking is something that requires imagination.

 

Aside from the brake shoes themselves, there's not a lot to be seen going on in the brake department when viewed from the side.  Colonel Yolland would have had a heart attack.

 

 

 

On turning the model over, we see that, hidden from view between the twin gas cylinders (query whether such a diminutive vehicle would need two gas cylinders?) is a Westinghouse cylinder.

 

 

This, I suspect, like the lack of window bolections, is less a result of conscious choice, but more likely another hangover from hastily adapting Stroudley drawings for use as generic coaches. True, there were several air-braked lines, but never nearly so many as were vacuum braked, as O S Nock no doubt daily grinded his teeth over as a UK representative for Westinghouse.  So, for some this is an advantage, albeit an unseen advantage if operating one of the magic-gas vehicles. For others, the lack of the familiar vacuum cylinder drum and any suggestion of the linkages thereon, will leave the vehicle naked and brakeless. 

 

My view, given that there is a choice to be made here, is that the more common vacuum brakes would have been the better option for a generic coach.  Much to the chagrin of the Brighton modeller, Hattons, whose 4-wheelers are uncannily close to Billinton's block set coaches, will have to remove the vac gear and add such a Westinghouse cylinder.  For most companies, however, Hattons will be more appropriate under the skirts of the vehicle.   

 

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

Yes, there's an amount of what one could call, adapting a phrase, "prototype illiteracy" here.

 

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

My view, given that there is a choice to be made here, is that the more common vacuum brakes would have been the better option for a generic coach.  Much to the chagrin of the Brighton modeller, Hattons, whose 4-wheelers are uncannily close to Billinton's block set coaches, will have to remove the vac gear and add such a Westinghouse cylinder.  For most companies, however, Hattons will be more appropriate under the skirts of the vehicle.   

 

I accept any blame for my part in nudging Hattons towards the automatic vacuum brake. 

[Oldddudders]

19 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

I accept any blame for my part in nudging Hattons towards the automatic vacuum brake. 

But "generic" demands the use of the more widely-used system, so it was the right choice. There really is no arguing with that as a principle.

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

But "generic" demands the use of the more widely-used system, so it was the right choice. There really is no arguing with that as a principle.

 

Indeed. That was exactly my reasoning. Disciples of George Westinghouse and his dubious business practices may direct their ire at me but I stand with F.W. Webb on this one.

[Dave Storey]

On 05/01/2021 at 10:07, Mike_Walker said:

All look pretty much the same to me so I'd say generic. Wonder what's being said at a certain retailer right now... ?

I have a pre order with Hatton's for a set of 3 LNWR 4 & 6 wheelers to run behind my Webb Coal Tank

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Yes, there's an amount of what one could call, adapting a phrase, "prototype illiteracy" here.

 

 

I accept any blame for my part in nudging Hattons towards the automatic vacuum brake. 

 

I recalled that I advanced the same view; vac brakes were more common, hence more appropriate for generics. It's an irony, then, that I'll have to retro-fit the Hattons 6-wheel 'Billinton' Comp for Westinghouse brakes!  But I still think it was the best decision for the majority of modellers. 

[Edwardian]

48 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

But "generic" demands the use of the more widely-used system, so it was the right choice. There really is no arguing with that as a principle.

 

Agree, which is why I also advocated that change; Hattons also started with Brighton drawings, but, as has been chronicled elsewhere, made decisions to move the range from things too specific to things more typical, hence, for instance, vac brakes, window bolections and extending the 3-wheelers from the Stroudley length of 26' to 28'.  

 

It is undeniably the case that the question of what makes a most typical/generic coach was really thought through by Hattons. 

[mi-go-a-go-go]

Hi all.

How are people going about solving the light bleed on the break coaches. My lner one is appalling and the end section is clear plastic with printed detail. So acrylic paint does not want to stick to well on the inside.

 

I would rather not disable or paint over the lights in the end section.

 

Hummm

[JohnR]

I havnt looked at one (the LSWR coaches I ordered havnt arrived yet), but surely its a simple matter to paint on the inside of the coach end?

[Nile]

Make a mask from black paper, card, plastic card. It's not rocket science.

[Torn-on-the-platform]

32 minutes ago, mi-go-a-go-go said:

Hi all.

How are people going about solving the light bleed on the break coaches. My lner one is appalling and the end section is clear plastic with printed detail. So acrylic paint does not want to stick to well on the inside.

 

I would rather not disable or paint over the lights in the end section.

 

Hummm

A layer of acrylic for me! I also covered the flooring and partition of the brake compartment as the colouring of the plastic was inconsistent.

 

I don't have fine decorating skills and this is the first time I've set about painting an RTR product, so not perfect, but I hope you'll agree I've given an improvement. Another coat when I get round to adding passengers.

 

Before:

 

After:

[SR Chris]

1 hour ago, mi-go-a-go-go said:

Hi all.

How are people going about solving the light bleed on the break coaches. My lner one is appalling and the end section is clear plastic with printed detail. So acrylic paint does not want to stick to well on the inside.

 

 

I reduced the light output of the LEDs by sticking small squares of yellow sticky label over them, two over most of them. Less light = less light bleed, simples!

[PhilJ W]

Are the ends of the brake coaches easily removable?

[The Johnster]

And, because leds do not run hot, the lights can be dimmed of you want with a coat of white or cream acrylic, which will reduce the bleed.  If you can easily see that the coach is lit in normal ambient layout lighting conditions, the lights are too bright.  Steam age lighting, even electric, was pretty feeble...

[letterspider]

There's something about the end of those break coaches...I can't put my finger on it...

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by letterspider