Hornby 2022 Black 5 new tooling

[Dunsignalling]

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

Exactly…

 

am I speaking a different language ?

 

ive repeatedly said…

 

the lamps are removable…you can set them up however you want, including all or none at all.

 

The rest and irons, are in the parts bag, along side the vac hose, shank, brakegear, snowplough….

 

if you don't like it, just remove them all and put lamp-irons in.

 

Watch Sam's review, he found them to be glued in.

[adb968008]

7 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

Watch Sam's review, he found them to be glued in.

It wasnt confirmed. 
 

agreed if it is, its unfortunate.

I do know at Warley they suggested to me they might be.

 

But we need confirmation on that…

 

Its not neccessarily a killer blow, but a lesson learned if it is. 
it wont stop me having a go, Chinese glue isnt always what its cracked up to be.

 

But conceptually that doesnt mean the product should be dead and buried in the future.

Edited April 25 by adb968008

[MikeParkin65]

2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Exactly…

 

am I speaking a different language ?

 

ive repeatedly said…

 

the lamps are removable…you can set them up however you want, including all or none at all.

 

The rest and irons, are in the parts bag, along side the vac hose, shank, brakegear, snowplough….

 

if you don't like it, just remove them all and put lamp-irons in.

I dont like to labour a point but the front 'removeable' lamps are obviously not easy to remove - see Youtube -  whilst the tender light is fixed and no spare iron is supplied to fill the gap after it is 'Xuroned'. On DC you'll need to address 'light bleed' with the lamps removed, on DCC hopefully you can just turn the LED's off. The tender-loco gap is fixed and unnecessarily wide - the cam should allow for close coupling but clearly that potential has not been taken advantage of. Worse, the electrical connection appears fragile, again see YouTube. 

 

The frustration is that when Hornby get it right it can be so good - 2Mt is lovely, so lovely I bought a second. 

 

[Dunsignalling]

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

It wasnt confirmed. 
 

agreed if it is, its unfortunate.

I do know at Warley they suggested to me they might be.

 

But we need confirmation on that…

 

Its not neccessarily a killer blow, but a lesson learned if it is.

 

I have emailed Hornby for clarification and received an acknowledgement but not, as yet, a reply.

 

John

[adb968008]

12 minutes ago, MikeParkin65 said:

I dont like to labour a point but the front 'removeable' lamps are obviously not easy to remove - see Youtube -  whilst the tender light is fixed and no spare iron is supplied to fill the gap after it is 'Xuroned'. On DC you'll need to address 'light bleed' with the lamps removed, on DCC hopefully you can just turn the LED's off. The tender-loco gap is fixed and unnecessarily wide - the cam should allow for close coupling but clearly that potential has not been taken advantage of. Worse, the electrical connection appears fragile, again see YouTube. 

 

The frustration is that when Hornby get it right it can be so good - 2Mt is lovely, so lovely I bought a second. 

 

On the tender I do know the led board for the lamp is jst’d into the circuit board in the tender.

just unplug it, or remove it completely.

 

The tender lamp is like the smokebox lamp.. a light track out of the back, not underneath..so a good push from inside the tender should move it.

(sorry never thought to mention this earlier but I handled one of these at Warley looking at that).

 

My plan was to use an expo nut spinner to push it with as it locks the light track inside the tube and reduces chance of it breaking sideways as I push it.

I did suggest to Hornby that removing them from inside/underneath would be less risky than pulling them (ive learned that the hard way with such things in the past), no idea if that sunk in, but Sams videos he was trying to pull it, which I wouldn't do myself.

Edited April 25 by adb968008

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I think we're going round in circles with all these lamps/lights whatever. And I'm not talking lighthouses.

For me, the Hornby model looks like a Black Five and has a very good finish, with some great detailing. Lamps I can give or take.

Main issues I see, which are not easy to remedy at home are:

1. Electrical (or lack of) connection between loco and tender.  Is this a design issue or poor manufacture?

2. No flexibility to close-couple loco and tender. 

3. Lack of flywheel on a £200 model. We don't all do DCC or have "stay alives"...

4. Quality control. In Margate days, each model was run on a test track to check if it was OK. Does this still happen, or are just a %  fully checked?

[MikeParkin65]

43 minutes ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

I think we're going round in circles with all these lamps/lights whatever. And I'm not talking lighthouses.

For me, the Hornby model looks like a Black Five and has a very good finish, with some great detailing. Lamps I can give or take.

Main issues I see, which are not easy to remedy at home are:

1. Electrical (or lack of) connection between loco and tender.  Is this a design issue or poor manufacture?

2. No flexibility to close-couple loco and tender. 

3. Lack of flywheel on a £200 model. We don't all do DCC or have "stay alives"...

4. Quality control. In Margate days, each model was run on a test track to check if it was OK. Does this still happen, or are just a %  fully checked?

I've got to say when I was running DC all of the sweetest runners were Hornby (Black 5's, Princess, Duchess - you can see where my heart is!), all with motors in the body and none of them had flywheels. That was running with a basic trainset controller. Hornby mechanisms are one of their strong points in my experience.

 

I am DCC now but with live frogs for the points, reasonable (but not Brunel standard) tracklaying and with the minimum of track cleaning I find everything runs reliably without the need for stay alive.

 

If I were buying the new Black 5 apart from the lamps going the other 'straight in the bin' item would be the loco tender coupling. I assume the DCC socket is in the tender so would need to add a new connector wired connection for that but thats easy enough.

[maico]

The traditionalist, or Luddites depending on your point of view, must be horrified at this loco which has water based smoke system, sound and LED lamps...!

 

 

Edited April 25 by maico

[cctransuk]

2 hours ago, maico said:

The traditionalist, or Luddites depending on your point of view, must be horrified at this loco which has water based smoke system, sound and LED lamps...!

 

 

 

Not keen on the sound or the lights - but the smoke effect is the best that I've seen.

 

CJI.

[IOW O2]

5 hours ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

I think we're going round in circles with all these lamps/lights whatever. ....
2. No flexibility to close-couple loco and tender. 

3. Lack of flywheel on a £200 model. We don't all do DCC or have "stay alives"...

Fascinating last few pages on the lamps. 

 

As a DC only user, I don't find flywheels make much difference except on heavy diesels where it makes stopping in a terminal platform interesting.  The two steamers that I have that have a flywheel are my two Accurascale manors but they may as well not be there, unless the motors are poorer quality than the only other 3 pole loco that I have, which is a Baccy N class and this has no issues with the two insulfrog points or at times, less than clean track.  Its basically an 0-6-0 pickups anyway.

 

However for £200+ I would have expected a flywheel. 

 

It does not bother me if an engine is metal or not as long as it is capable and looks right, and from my own stud, heavier weight seems to have no relation to hauling capacity, e.g. my total coaches is 24, Hby. King (2018) loco 320g, w/tender 440, max coaches 5, slips at 6, and stops dead on radius 4.5 with 6, lightest loco, Bach. 8750 pannier, 180g, all 24, no slipping, no stopping!

 

I was looking forward to this B5, but to many issues for me.

 

 

Edited April 25 by IOW O2
Spelling. correction

[cctransuk]

Having tried both flywheel and non-flywheel drive in otherwise identical kitbuilt locos, I am firmly of the opinion that flywheels add nothing to performance, and can cause additional noise and vibration.

 

CJI.

[Flying Pig]

8 hours ago, maico said:

The traditionalist, or Luddites depending on your point of view, must be horrified at this loco which has water based smoke system, sound and LED lamps...!

 

Compared to the Hornby system (below) that steam generator seems quite a bit more convincing.  For a start, the exhaust emerges at a higher speed which results in a realistic transition from a laminar column to a turbulent cloud just above the chimney top (all to do with Reynolds numbers I think).  Also the cloud stays aloft longer whereas the Hornby one looks like a portable rain shower - finer droplets from the TRS unit?

 

 

 

[Fireline]

18 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

Watch Sam's review, he found them to be glued in.

 

They are glued in, but using a very light glue, so they are easy to remove. This was apparently done to stop them detaching while they were in transit from the Far East.

[Bernard Lamb]

44 minutes ago, Fireline said:

 

They are glued in, but using a very light glue, so they are easy to remove. This was apparently done to stop them detaching while they were in transit from the Far East.

Not according to Sam.

Bernard

[Right Away]

21 hours ago, MikeParkin65 said:

 

....

As @cctransuk said earlier the working lamps would be welcome if they were properly developed and didnt compromise the core product. As they are at the moment they would be much better deployed on a Railroad Model - Tornado perhaps? 

.... or Thomas!

[Fireline]

29 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Not according to Sam.

Bernard

 

Oh, Sam. Mr "I give anything from Hornby an absolute kicking, coincidentally from around the time they stopped just giving me stuff to review...."

[GrumpyPenguin]

13 hours ago, cctransuk said:

Having tried both flywheel and non-flywheel drive in otherwise identical kitbuilt locos, I am firmly of the opinion that flywheels add nothing to performance, and can cause additional noise and vibration.

 

CJI.

If a flywheel is causing "noise & vibration" then there is something wrong with the ballance, either the flywheel itself or the motor/flywheel assembly.

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

If a flywheel is causing "noise & vibration" then there is something wrong with the ballance, either the flywheel itself or the motor/flywheel assembly.

 

Indeed - but, unless one has the facilities to correct the balance, the flywheel is best left off.

 

CJI.

[Legend]

53 minutes ago, Fireline said:

 

Oh, Sam. Mr "I give anything from Hornby an absolute kicking, coincidentally from around the time they stopped just giving me stuff to review...."

He never got stuff to review from manufacturer. He buys the models himself which is why it’s an independent review .  And frankly he’s equal handed when it comes to any manufacturer . 
 

So he had a model that had faulty tender connection and we now know he is not alone from another YouTuber above

He had glue marks on a £200+ model that were clearly illustrated

He stated the lights were glued in , which others have confirmed they are . I suppose it depends how much glue is used as to how removable they are 

So a verifiable review . Not exactly an unfounded “absolute kicking “ 

Edited April 26 by Legend

[franciswilliamwebb]

52 minutes ago, Fireline said:

 

Oh, Sam. Mr "I give anything from Hornby an absolute kicking, coincidentally from around the time they stopped just giving me stuff to review...."

 

Pants on fire!😮

[Fireline]

8 minutes ago, Legend said:

He never got stuff to review from manufacturer.

 

If I were you, I'd ask Simon Kohler about that. That would be news to him, I'm led to believe....

[Sjcm]

While I understand the lamp argument on both sides, I would say on the realistic/prototypical stakes, a loco that doesn't move is much more of a bar to realism than the lamps. There obviously seems to be a problem with some of the release batch with the tender connection.How big that is is hard to tell, but seeing there is a fair number of YouTubers with this problem and those that have bought it and reviewed are not exactly everywhere, you have to wonder how widespread the problem is, and whether it's something that will increase with wear and tear in 3/6/12 months time. Suffice to say, it's the usual story with Hornby - Rolls Royce price, Lada quality control.

Edited April 26 by Sjcm

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Not according to Sam.

Bernard

Sam said nothing of the sort - he merely said they ‘might’ be glued in - but as his model was obviously faulty he wasn’t going to try messing round with them!

 

Had the loco performed well during the initial running in then I suspect he would have investigated the lamps more throughly when he did his disassembly / mechanism examination.

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, Fireline said:

 

They are glued in, but using a very light glue, so they are easy to remove. This was apparently done to stop them detaching while they were in transit from the Far East.

Thats inline what I was also told.

 

of course what is light (lamp/lantern/etc) amounts of glue is subject to personal opinion.

 

But if youve got a faulty model, theres no point risking further damage, if its going back regardless.

Edited April 26 by adb968008

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Indeed - but, unless one has the facilities to correct the balance, the flywheel is best left off.

 

CJI.

Definitely in the minority there… theres not many, non railroad models out there without a fly wheel in the last 20 years.

Fly wheel effect is minimal at slow speed, but a chunky flywheel will keep spinning the armature and the drive shaft after the power is cut.

 

The effect is the magnetic sticking of the commutator as they rotate is reduced at lower speeds as the flywheel lump with residual energy is still twisting the shaft still resisting the sticking motion...hence a smoother stop at a declining speed.

 

If you visibly want to see it.... stick on a whopper of a flywheel, run it fast, cut the power and see how far it travels… vs with smaller or none.. then you will see the difference.

In IT flywheels are becoming extremely popular for keeping the lights on… running your external power supply through a massive flywheel, length of a house, before converting it back to electricity means that if for what ever reason the external supply gets cut, that continuing revolution of the wheel keeps power to the facility giving time for the batteries/generators to kick in and return that momentum. This is especially popular in Africa regions where dual power resilience cannot be guaranteed… One facility I went to, used a Natural Gas Engine (Jenbacher J616) which was later derived for use in Class 70’s.. massive beast, with the flywheel consumed nearly 40metres of building… enough to keep all South Africas mobile phone network running. iirc they said if they lost power, the wheel would keep momentum for over an hour without any back up supply… noisy beast and watching this long shaft spin was eerily impressive.

 

In other uses, putting a flywheel on the end of a DC circuit is a way of avoiding burning out your DC powered equipment, if the va is too high instead of turning to heat and burning it, the flywheel takes the energy excess and turns it to kinetic energy, which inturn could charge a battery and reduce waste.

 

personally I think we should adopt European style traction tyres myself and stop all this pretence about weight… (but queue the complaints from those who have never seen a European traction tyred model and only remember Hornbys elastic bands from 1979)… you’d get a much stronger, smoother performance.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 26 by adb968008