Hornby 2022 Black 5 new tooling

[Ian Hargrave]

7 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Just an observation…

 

its been 13 days, 16 pages since last time we saw a picture from a purchaser of this model (not a youtube review). Even then its only 2 confirmed sightings, and both are on page 28.

 

This feels a little underwhelming for a brand new tooled model of a very popular prototype.

 

Somethings missed the spot.

 

Maybe because the previous incarnation has sated the market ? Most of us,I imagine,have examples of it and find they need no more. And an added disincentive will no doubt be the increase in cost. In any case,some will no doubt be waiting for the imminent BR version. None were available from retailers at the NEC this weekend and yet we have seen several YouTube videos ,one of them being from an enthusiast in Canada . 

[MikeParkin65]

14 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Just an observation…

 

its been 13 days, 16 pages since last time we saw a picture from a purchaser of this model (not a youtube review). Even then its only 2 confirmed sightings, and both are on page 28.

 

This feels a little underwhelming for a brand new tooled model of a very popular prototype.

 

Somethings missed the spot.

 

Leading with the LMS version might be a factor - I suspect the BR late crest versions will be more popular on pre order. 

[The Meerkat]

18 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Just an observation…

 

its been 13 days, 16 pages since last time we saw a picture from a purchaser of this model (not a youtube review). Even then its only 2 confirmed sightings, and both are on page 28. The thread has had 98k views.

 

Compare to the 2MT which turned up on page 25 of its thread, and had 20 different purchasers images over the next 16 pages, which has had over 125k views.

 

This feels a little underwhelming for a brand new tooled model of a very popular prototype…  

 

Is anyone excited by a new Black 5 ?

 

 i am in away as i love the black 5 since i was a kid, i went to to east lancshire railway works, was round the mid 90s  and instead of kicking us out as we wasn't suppose to be there,  they gave us a tour and spent hours there and they said to me  hope on this cab and it was big black 5 and i loved them ever since  tho i do have smoke and sound one on pre order

[Legend]

34 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Just an observation…

 

its been 13 days, 16 pages since last time we saw a picture from a purchaser of this model (not a youtube review). Even then its only 2 confirmed sightings, and both are on page 28. The thread has had 98k views.

 

Compare to the 2MT which turned up on page 25 of its thread, and had 20 different purchasers images over the next 16 pages, which has had over 125k views.

 

This feels a little underwhelming for a brand new tooled model of a very popular prototype…  

 

Is anyone excited by a new Black 5 ?

 

 

That might be because it's only the LMS model released and people , I suspect the majority, have ordered the BR and Caprotti Versions .  There are a couple of really positive reviews on YouTube but they all comment on the distance between loco and tender .  2 Reviews have had an issue with getting it to run at all . 

 

With the 2MT I Don't recall any negative reviews except its in the older style of packaging and is relatively pricey  given that it doesn't have firebox glow or ironically working lights! 

 

They could have come from different factories of course , so the quality of one is not necessarily replicated with the other

Edited April 29 by Legend

[Phil Parker]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

I suggested that a useful review should confine itself to reporting basic facts about the subject that would assist most potential purchasers. I made no reference to ridiculous minutae such as the orientation of boltheads - please point out where I suggested any such thing.

 

Ah, so there are limits to a review even for you. Perhaps a list of exactly what should and shouldn't be included? Lamps obviously are to be commented on. Handrails? Smokebox darts? Markings on gauges in the cab? It's going to be a long list...

 

But, the people who took the time to complain about bolt orientation don't consider this to be minutae, it matters to them or they wouldn't take the time to check and then get in touch. So who is right? You, or the bolt checkers?

 

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

Any review is subjective as we each have our own criteria for what is acceptable in terms of fidelity to prototype and detail, where we draw a line for the compromise between cost and detail/features and how we weight whether a model just looks right.

 

Precisely. Any reviewer writes for their reader, doing their best to give them what they want. If that means big pictures and only a brief overview, that's fine. The same applies to online reviews, which is why they tend to be a bit shouty as this generates clicks indicating a satisfied audience. Even there we have to deal with the preferences of the reviewer who may (for example) have a bee in their bonnet about cast boilers where many couldn't care less as long as it looks right.

 

Let's face it, RMwebbers can't decide what they want. Lots of detail, or less bits to get knocked off? There are people in both camps

. Ultimately, we can't be right for everyone.

[Sjcm]

yeah that's about the size of it. I did think the lamp thing was a bit of a storm in a teacup, but after seeing them on the reviews they do look a bit big and lighted, a bit.....well naff. Maybe I'm turning into a rivet counter on the quiet. As for glueing lamp brackets into a new model as the one reviewer did, fine for you, but basically taking away a main feature if you ever try to sell it, plus you can see the lamp/brackets getting lost over time. I just have a bee in my bonnet about the QC on new models given the price, and the tender thing is too much of an unknown quantity for me. That said, some people are happy with it, and some people will still buy it whatever the problems mentioned on here. Some people just want it, which is fine. Even Sam's trains swore blind he wouldn't buy it but did. He claimed  it was for a proper review but as someone who spends 30 minutes per review going on about the lining, or the detail of the cylinder cocks, then it's obviously a model aimed at him.

Edited April 29 by Sjcm

[GrumpyPenguin]

7 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Because as fitted between loco and tender on RTR OO, none of them come even vaguely close to 'better things' already long available in RTR OO!

 

For optimum appearance on any OO layout, the mechanical link should accomplish five things, all of which have been frequently demonstrated by Bachmann, and at least once by Hornby.

A simple rigid metal drawbar of near scale appearance mounted through the dragboxes.

Spacing adjustment provided from scale to sufficient for specified minimum radius curvature.

No appreciable slack between loco and tender.

Cab and tender front always correctly aligned, no skewing on straight track.

Any model 'tackle' to enable this fully concealed, all you see is the drawbar between loco and tender dragboxes in a side on view.

 

Per a response above, Bachmann have  triumphed since circa 2010 with the  drawbar in the right location combined with an adjustable screw locked spacing slide concealed behind the tender frames, perfection. Hornby just once TTBoMK, on the 2006 Britannia/Clan, with just two fixed spacings, and easily rpelaced with a DIY replacement to adjust spacing if the owner requires (caveat,  I haven't looked at all their product.)

 

And finally, there is no general need for camming connections on UK steam models: few real monster steam loco prototypes, and short tenders. A RTR OO 9F as an example can go round 24" radius with a simple scale spacing metal link, give it slightly overscale spacing and it's good for R2; the BR standards and other late grouping steam designs really benefit in appearance by using a  simple drawbar, because so much is on view.

 

KISS.

 

 

As for electrical connections, a small plug on thin wires engaging in a concealed socket, as the wires can be dressed to look like the hose connections dangling beneath the drawbar. (I would be quite happy to 'prune out' any excess over the four which is the maximum I require should the  decoder be best placed in tender, the wires make this an easy owner option.

 

KISS.

 

 

I'm sorry,that's a load of twaddle & a waste of words - I said "properly engineered" which negates all of the objections you managed to come up with.

 

And people wonder why every time I consider returning to UK modelling I see what's on offer & stick with European HO.

[No Decorum]

There’s a lot wrong with the model but, unless I’ve missed it, not much said about the vac pump, which seems to have been neatly done.

[Flying Pig]

11 minutes ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

I'm sorry,that's a load of twaddle & a waste of words - I said "properly engineered" which negates all of the objections you managed to come up with.

 

Except, perhaps, unnecessary.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

3 hours ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

I'm sorry,that's a load of twaddle & a waste of words - I said "properly engineered" which negates all of the objections you managed to come up with.

Properly engineered isn't present in respect of these devices in RTR OO, on the evidence to date. Now, by your own admission you are not interested in RTR OO; but I am and thus feel quite justified in twaddling on. You can probably avoid seeing my future wastes of words by a user selectable setting. 😎

Edited April 29 by 34theletterbetweenB&D
typo

[jjb1970]

I don't like the working lamp feature, it's an idea which sounds interesting but just hasn't been implemented very well IMO. That aside, there are lots of positives about this model, if it works. That's my worry, are the reports about it having problems working just those offering opinions suffering bad luck or indicative of a systemic manufacturing problem? I know a lot of people hate Sam but in terms of confidence to rectify faults and work on models I'd rate his ability as above average and whatever faults he might have he does seem able to address typical issues with models. Take his opinions on other aspects of the model as opinions, but the quality issue is worrying as a model should work out of the box. However, without figures we don't know whether he just got unlucky or if it is indeed a systemic fault.

[Tumut]

Hello All, YouTube Sam's Trains has now done two reviews of the new Hornby LMS Black 5. I will not comment on those reviews specifically, only to say that I find Sam's reviews to be reasonably comprehensive, he speaks very clearly ( I do not lip read per se, but I can read his comments visually with the sound off, so I am impressed by that ). Yes, Sam does have a predilection for sprung buffers, but he is not alone in this, as if he was, then one would sell replacement sprung buffers ! At the end of the day, it is a considered review, you aren't compelled to watch it, if you do not like Sam, then do not watch it.

Regards from Australia, Tumut.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

As someone noted above, there have been precious few photos of the model on RMweb by those buying it. 

If someone on here has a model, how is it? So far, we only have an anodyne magazine "review" ansd some YouTube offerings to go on.


 

 

[brushman47544]

1 hour ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

As someone noted above, there have been precious few photos of the model on RMweb by those buying it. 

If someone on here has a model, how is it? So far, we only have an anodyne magazine "review" ansd some YouTube offerings to go on.

 

Perhaps the absence of photos and reviews on here is a "review" in its own right?

[Dunsignalling]

Some criticisms remain objective even when an overall review may be subjective.

 

On the Black 5, the lights are objectively excessive in both size and brightness, irrespective of any stronger views one might hold on the tail lamp.

 

The so-called close-coupling device is objectively nothing of the kind.

 

Both are inherent in the design and tooling of the model.

 

By contrast, mentions of stray glue, ease of (re)moving the lamps or running plate distortion will (hopefully) be subjective to the review sample.

 

John

Edited April 30 by Dunsignalling

[GrumpyPenguin]

14 hours ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Except, perhaps, unnecessary.

Depends on the standards you are willing to expect for your money.

[spamcan61]

19 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

By contrast, mentions of stray glue, ease of (re)moving the lamps or running plate distortion will (hopefully) be subjective to the review sample.

 

John

I disagree, both these 'features' are objective, they can be proven by observation / measurement. There is stray glue visible or there isn't, the running plate is either straight or it isn't. 

The degree of importance the reviewer places on these is subjective.

[GrumpyPenguin]

11 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Properly engineered isn't present in respect of these devices in RTR OO, on the evidence to date. Now, by your own admission you are not interested in RTR OO; but I am and thus feel quite justified in twaddling on. You can probably avoid seeing my future wastes of words by a user selectable setting. 😎

& there lies the problem "isn't present in respect of these devices in RTR OO" - there is no excuse in this day & age.

 

Clearly, you did not read the last sentence of my post - I would love to return to UK modelling (probably Souther Region Steam/EMU) but until the standards of RTR OO are equal to RTR HO it will not happen. And yes, I'm prepared to pay for that (wheras it would appear to me that the OO market will not).

[Dunsignalling]

7 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

I disagree, both these 'features' are objective, they can be proven by observation / measurement. There is stray glue visible or there isn't, the running plate is either straight or it isn't. 

The degree of importance the reviewer places on these is subjective.

They are only objective to the review sample as they will not inevitably be present in all specimens of the model.

 

The criticisms of the lamps and coupling arrangement are objective because it matters not how many boxes are opened, every model will have them.

 

John

Edited April 30 by Dunsignalling

[spamcan61]

5 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

They are only objective to the review sample as they will not inevitably be present in all specimens of the model.

 

 

John

Whether they are present in all or only some of the product is of no relevance to the objectivity, they can be observed and measured; they are objective statements.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

22 minutes ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

Clearly, you did not read the last sentence of my post - I would love to return to UK modelling (probably Southern Region Steam/EMU) but until the standards of RTR OO are equal to RTR HO it will not happen. And yes, I'm prepared to pay for that (whereas it would appear to me that the OO market will not).

Thus it isn't going to happen any time in my lifetime, was the conclusion I reached in 1999. Up to that time I had been planning my 'last grand project' using HO, North American flavour, for the reasons you describe, enabled by crossing the pond very regularly.

 

But I really wanted BR(ER) in the final decade of steam. And then Bachmann started with scale models of two absolute essentials, the WD 2-8-0 and BR 16T minerals, produced to the standard of a competent kit builder. Not as sophisticated as RTR HO, but good enough for me, since it it integrated well with my DIY UK models various.

 

And the situation has been generally rosy since, but quite often two steps forward, one step back occurs... Those retrograde moves have to be corrected and/or campaigned against.

[jjb1970]

The standard of British OO RTR is excellent. At the high end companies like Accurascale, SLW, Cavalex and Rapido are world class. When Bachmann get it right they're world class too. Hornby and Dapol are more mixed, ditto Heljan but when they hit the mark they're superb. I  don't know much about Revolution OO but their N models have been superbly done.

[Michael Hodgson]

I don't usually bother with the reviews in Sam's trains and haven't watched his first review of the Black five, but his critiscisms of the repalcement of one that had to be returned struck me as fair comment, erring if anything on the charitable side.   it seems to be a nice looking model, but unreliable out of the box and he really shouldn't have to muck about with it to get it running, so not very good value for money.

[The Stationmaster]

17 hours ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Leading with the LMS version might be a factor - I suspect the BR late crest versions will be more popular on pre order. 

Quite agree.  The lamps issue and the loco tender chasm apart Hornby seem to have dropped something of a marketing own goal with this one - even compared with their 2MT.  If it had been an Accurascale, Bachmann, or Rapido release - albeit with variations between what they do - there would be around half a dozen or more released now covering all the main stages in the life of the class with various detail differences between them.  Bigger market, more sales (if the model is up to scratch) and greater immediate return on investment so potentially a more attractive price.  

 

Yet again it looks to me as if Hornby have let themselves down not only on one or two issues on the models themselves but also with their marketing.  However I can understand, in some respects, that they might be constrained by their present financial situation (but surely that means they should be taking much greater care with their marketing?).

[spamcan61]

22 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I don't usually bother with the reviews in Sam's trains and haven't watched his first review of the Black five, but his critiscisms of the repalcement of one that had to be returned struck me as fair comment, erring if anything on the charitable side.   it seems to be a nice looking model, but unreliable out of the box and he really shouldn't have to muck about with it to get it running, so not very good value for money.

Despite the fact I'm not a member of the Sam's Trains fan club (or vehemently opposed to his output) I watched that second video all the way through and agree it was a pretty fair, non melodramatic assessment.