Hornby Thompson L1

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

.. it does have the same pony truck arrangement as on the current 8F , ..I wish they had a better pony truck arrangement as none of Bachmann's locos with a leading truck are affected ...

It is no great problem to convert the 8F truck to a single pivot, which I have done on mine to stop the back and forth slop inherent in Hornby's mechanism. Basically no change is made to the way the truck is retained, sandwiched between the pair of keeper plates, but Hornby's twin pivots go, and a replacement pivot in the right place is created.

 

Take it apart, lop off the two pins on the chassis, drill hole in pony truck at pivot point, glue a rod as a pivot into a hole made in the upper of the two keeper plates, make a locating hole in the lower keeper plate. Reassemble with the truck pivot sandwiched between the two keeper plates and engaged on the pivot. Crude and effective. If the L1 arrangements are the same, it sounds as though I will be repeating this mod. when an L1 clanks my way.

[micklner]

Just bought a secondhand LNER version for a nice price , for a bit of variation mine had a derailing rear bogie . Simple cure of moving wheels out to correct spacing.

Front bogie is staying on but looks awful sawing backwards and forwards . Will have a look at modifying as above post.

On the plus point what a superb looker !!

[7013]

Oh dear having to modify brand new models is really not on, thats one crossed off my list, Really poor show Hornby.

[coachmann]

Oh dear having to modify brand new models is really not on, thats one crossed off my list, Really poor show Hornby.

I cannot think of a better or cheaper L1 in 4mm scale. Plastic RTR manufacturers get their income from a toy market and scale model market, and we all win if we are prepared to alter things to suit ourselves. That pony truck alteration sounds good.

[stewartingram]

I cannot think of a better or cheaper L1 in 4mm scale. Plastic RTR manufacturers get their income from a toy market and scale model market, and we all win if we are prepared to alter things to suit ourselves. That pony truck alteration sounds good.

 

And don't forget, the term for doing this is sometimes known as 'modelling' I believe.

[S.A.C Martin]

Oh dear having to modify brand new models is really not on, thats one crossed off my list, Really poor show Hornby.

 

Give them a break - not all of the L1s have shown this "problem".

 

For the record, mine has not derailed once since I got it.

 

This is one of the best RTR releases in years - if not the best (and I personally think it is), and a few cases of the front bogie not running true does not indicate a trend, frankly.

[Mucky Duck]

Oh dear having to modify brand new models is really not on, thats one crossed off my list, Really poor show Hornby.

 

Personally, it's a hugely enjoyable part of modelling and when the end result is still cheaper than a kit (which I'd probably make a right old hash of anyway), it makes perfect economic sense too.

[tetleys]

I've been A.W.O.L. for a few months while I build a new railway room / house in our back garden but the recent bad weather has forced me indoors and after dusting off my layout I've re-kindled my modelling interests that included purchasing a black split fram L1 that I will re-number for one of the group allocated to Ardsley in the early 1960's.

I ran mine in as usual and also found front pony truck issues although there was no problem running in reverse, fortunately the derailments on my code 100 storage tracks appear to be intermittent. Having said that I will certainly consider the suggestions made by members to cure the problem if it persists.

 

It does appear to be a production fault so there is no point in my returning the model for a replacement, whilst it is a pity Hornby didn't get it right before production I'm not going to rant and rave since like others I'm only too greatful for a decent LNER loco. For the record I have a Hornby 8F, Fowler and Stanier 2-6-4 tanks and none of them have any de-railing problems whatsoever and all run sweet as a nut.

 

I think it was Coachman who suggested the L1 was a better alternative to a kit and I have to agree, I'm making my third Comet Thompson non-gangway coach and all three will form a rake for the L1 to haul. The coaches are OK and look like Thompsons but are bereft of hinges unless I drill and piercing saw minute slots, the roof profile is more BR Mk1 than Thompson and they take a lot of time to build even without the cosmetic brake gear at a total cost of over £120. Now if Hornby or Bachmann were to manufacture the same coaches they would probably not be perfect but would come with hinges, accurate door handles and probably half decent brake detail and roof profile all for less than £25 a coach. AND Some members would still complain they were too expensive. Bring 'em on Hornby and I'll forgive you for the L1 problem.

[coachmann]

I'm making my third Comet Thompson non-gangway coach and all three will form a rake for the L1 to haul.

That's it then, Hornby are bound to produce them next year!

[silverlink]

Has anyone any info on when we can expect the BR Black Late crest R2914 model ?

Thanks

silverlink

[7013]

OK dont get at me for expressing an opinion, and no it is not modelling when one buys a product 'Ready to Run' and it does run properly until you fix it , would you buy a car,camera etc. that you had to take a tool kit to before you could use it?

I think the L1 is a superb looking model but there are enough instances of the pony truck derailing for (as far as I am concerned) it to be a problem/flaw or at least a poor design. When it happened with the Bachmann N1 they acknowledged it and fixed it, I was offered a full refund or redesigned model.

We are in a period where models are getting better and better (and prices are rising) and I can understand folks being reluctant to criticise the manufacturers who are doing us proud, however if I purchase a model I expect it to be fit for purpose without having to drill, glue, reposition etc. if by bad luck I get one that derails, I would love an L1 but I am not prepared to spend money on a model that may or may not run well.

[davidw]

Next L1 delivery; I'm told week before christmas....

[S.A.C Martin]

OK dont get at me for expressing an opinion, and no it is not modelling when one buys a product 'Ready to Run' and it does run properly until you fix it , would you buy a car,camera etc. that you had to take a tool kit to before you could use it?

 

No argument from me there: I was as cross as anyone with the state of my father's T9 a while back, when they were first released, happily it was sorted and ended amicably.

 

I think the L1 is a superb looking model but there are enough instances of the pony truck derailing for (as far as I am concerned) it to be a problem/flaw or at least a poor design.

 

I just can't see that it is that bad in this instance. I've counted four examples of this "problem" on this forum. Four engines does not indicate a trend. This is by no means the same as the T9, which had almost every poster on RMweb with one asking for fixes for the problems with traction.

 

We are in a period where models are getting better and better (and prices are rising) and I can understand folks being reluctant to criticise the manufacturers who are doing us proud, however if I purchase a model I expect it to be fit for purpose without having to drill, glue, reposition etc. if by bad luck I get one that derails, I would love an L1 but I am not prepared to spend money on a model that may or may not run well.

 

I can only say in response that I absolutely love my L1, and it is without a doubt the best runner I have ever had on my small circuit. I may be one of the lucky ones: equally I could also represent the silent majority.

 

It has been said that it shares the pony truck design with the 28XX - have any of those had similar problems, I wonder?

[nerron]

I have had no problems with the front pony truck of my L1 through Peco code 75 and finescale turnouts.Picture of 67717 and Comet Thompson coaches is attached.

 

Tetleys wrote:

I'm making my third Comet Thompson non-gangway coach and all three will form a rake for the L1 to haul. The coaches are OK and look like Thompsons but are bereft of hinges unless I drill and piercing saw minute slots, the roof profile is more BR Mk1 than Thompson and they take a lot of time to build even without the cosmetic brake gear at a total cost of over £120. Now if Hornby or Bachmann were to manufacture the same coaches they would probably not be perfect but would come with hinges, accurate door handles and probably half decent brake detail and roof profile all for less than £25 a coach.

 

As regards door hinges ,these can be added using the Comet detailing etch which includes a jig for accurate positioning. All that is need is to drill using a #75 bit. The second rather cruel close- up shows the hinges on the semi-corridor composite.

[DougN]

Ron those coaches look really great behind the L1.

 

I see a number of people are having running issues with the L1. My L1 runs beautifully. This is not bragging as every A1 and A4 (there is 5 in total)as well as a black 5, I have run like 3 legged dogs on my layout. Bachmann loco's on the other hand run faultlessly. I am slowly tracking down the issues with the pacifics. This was one of the reasons I was causious when ordering a L1 as another non runner from Hornby may have put me off them totally but it runs as nicely as any of the Bachmann loco's. I will say that I do stress them with 1:30 grades on a 600radius curve but the Bachmann gear has no problem!

 

I may also do the mod as suggested above as the front pony does look strange down grade! (tyres not parallel with the rail!)

 

Seasons greetings

[nerron]

Doug,

The coaches do go well with the L1-a case of keeping it all in the one family I suppose.I have yet to make the brake composite which will complete the four coach rake.Best wishes for the festive season.

[tetleys]

I have had no problems with the front pony truck of my L1 through Peco code 75 and finescale turnouts.Picture of 67717 and Comet Thompson coaches is attached.

 

Tetleys wrote:

I'm making my third Comet Thompson non-gangway coach and all three will form a rake for the L1 to haul. The coaches are OK and look like Thompsons but are bereft of hinges unless I drill and piercing saw minute slots, the roof profile is more BR Mk1 than Thompson and they take a lot of time to build even without the cosmetic brake gear at a total cost of over £120. Now if Hornby or Bachmann were to manufacture the same coaches they would probably not be perfect but would come with hinges, accurate door handles and probably half decent brake detail and roof profile all for less than £25 a coach.

 

As regards door hinges ,these can be added using the Comet detailing etch which includes a jig for accurate positioning. All that is need is to drill using a #75 bit. The second rather cruel close- up shows the hinges on the semi-corridor composite.

 

Thanks Nerron,

 

I have a suspicion I tried to order the coach hinges when I ordered the kit but they were out of stock, they certainly do finish off the coaches, the problem I now have is, do I retrospectively fit the hinges to all three coaches since one fitted in isolation would stick out like the poverbial 'soar thumb' or do I live with it? I know what I would like to do but I fear the weather may improve and force me back into house building mode, having seen the finished article I'm sure I feel the urge to bite on a certain bullett sooner or later.

 

Thanks again Nerron (you may have delaid Mrs. S's Kitchen being fitted!)

[31A]

Having been slightly critical earlier, I feel I should say that my L1 has now settled down to being a Really Useful Engine, and very reliable performer.

 

My earlier comment about the balance being questionable was evidently premature; the loss of adhesion that I experienced occurred because I thought I could 'get away' with fitting the front scale coupling as well as the auto coupler. However interference between the scale coupling and the auto coupler was causing the pony truck to lift the driving wheels sightly over cerain track irregularities! Having realised that and just fitted a drawhook into the hole in the front buffer beam, it now runs, and pulls, perfectly well.

 

I haven't experienced any derailments of the pony truck on my layout, which is laid with Peco Code 75 and includes various slips, and curved points. I fitted the front steps (as per Coachmann's lovely picture) and whilst I can't really say they exert a controlling influence on the pony wheels (I don't think the pony wheels can touch the steps), they do seem to at least make its strange behaviour less obvious to the eye.

[7013]

I accept what people say about the loco looking beautiful and running well aside from the 'issue' shall we say about the pony truck, and I will hopefully end up with one on my layout at some time in the future, but i do stand by my original assertion that it is not acceptable to purchase models that nedd the toolbox taken to them; perhaps i have been a bit over eagre calling the pony truck a problem, but by the same token it cannot be simply swept under the carpet. Anyway I have made my point and I love the L1. I seem to remember that many raised an eyebrow saying an L1? why? but in the end it has turned out to be a very popular choice. Perhaps because it could be seen in a wide variety of places, my chosen area of modelling (North Oxfordshire) saw L1s alongside GWR and LMS locos at Banbury.

[coachmann]

7013 said :

I seem to remember that many raised an eyebrow saying an L1? why? but in the end it has turned out to be a very popular choice.

This is an interesting observation that I hadn't considered before. Those of us who were around in steam days before the diesel invasion are pretty aware of the essential everyday-engines we would like to see in model form, while younger people are maybe looking back at locos from a different perspection. Attractiveness perhaps or some other factor? In the case of the L1, it looks far more attractive in model form than in full size.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... I seem to remember that many raised an eyebrow saying an L1? why? but in the end it has turned out to be a very popular choice. ...

I was one of the surprised at announcement time, but in a conversation with a retailer before the model was available was told that big tank engines are popular, and consistently good sellers. The real laugh is knowing that they heartily earned the soubriquet 'Concrete Mixer' in service. I'll wait for a sound equipped model to hear if anyone dares reproduce the awful noises that often accompanied progress behind this type. Chuff, thunk, clonk, chuff, oork, bang, chuff, dung, chuff, etc.

[Sailsbury Hall]

I was one of the surprised at announcement time, but in a conversation with a retailer before the model was available was told that big tank engines are popular, and consistently good sellers. The real laugh is knowing that they heartily earned the soubriquet 'Concrete Mixer' in service. I'll wait for a sound equipped model to hear if anyone dares reproduce the awful noises that often accompanied progress behind this type. Chuff, thunk, clonk, chuff, oork, bang, chuff, dung, chuff, etc.

 

Very tongue in cheek, I just hope the model is rather more reliable than the real thing and does not shake its self to pieces within a couple of months!

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

I found yesterday that the back-to-backs of the pony truck on my version are ever so slightly out.

 

I've yet to change, but I will make a not to as whether it fixes the problem

 

Simon

[coachmann]

A brass back-to-back gauge is a good investment....

[7013]

Just for the record, is there any chance of posting a photo of the mod. you carried out 34theletterbetweenB&D? It sounds a fairly simple modification but a picture spares a thousand words.