Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[S.A.C Martin]

I am wondering if it would be possible to take a scalpel to the gangway and create a little space between the layers, as the pencil trick implies, but doesn't actually do? It's the gap between the outer metal surround and the gangway itself that is missing with the moulded gangway, and that looks the most odd of all.

[royaloak]

Agree that the body is "squat" with the underframe too high (look at the buffer height) but the gangway looks to be right with the result that the lamp bracket is lower than the buffer head.

 

Still cant make my mind up! (no change there really)

[DavidH]

In the end-on photo of the the two models, isn't the Hornby model a little behind the Bachman one? Perspective is making it look smaller.

[Trains4U]

In the end-on photo of the the two models, isn't the Hornby model a little behind the Bachman one? Perspective is making it look smaller.

 

Yes, about an inch an a half behind (I didn't move them from the positions shown in the photo above)

[brushman47544]

On Southwestern Lines, 4VEPs were used on:

 

Waterloo - Reading

Waterloo - Alton

Waterloo - Basingstoke - Sothampton - Bournemouth (stoppers + some semi fasts)

(Waterloo) - Ascot - Guildford

Waterloo - Woking - Guildford - Portsmouth (stoppers + some semi fasts)

Eastleigh/Southampton - Portsmouth

In the late 70s/early 80s - when the Ascot - Guildford off peak and weekend trains worked through to/from Waterloo - I only remember CIGs, although I'm sure VEPs appeared too.

 

Waterloo - Guildford via the New Line (Horsley) was also VEPs until replaced by 455s. Not a popular decision at all with the locals since there was a high proportion of 1st Class passengers using those trains at that time.

Edited September 14, 2011 by brushman47544

[Oldddudders]

In the late 70s/early 80s - when the Ascot - Guildford off peak and weekend trains worked through to/from Waterloo - I only remember CIGs, although I'm sure VEPs appeared too.

 

Waterloo - Guildford via the New Line (Horsley) was also VEPs until replaced by 455s. Not a popular decision at all with the locals since there was a high proportion of 1st Class passengers using those trains at that time.

The VEPs hadn't been on the New Line for that many years, I don't think, as I recall EPBs there. Was it an EPB that failed to stop in the bay at Guildford, crashing through the stops and killing a manager in his office?

[Gwiwer]

Correct on both counts Ian.

 

Veps were drafted to the Guildford "New" line to replace EPB units and as a stop-gap until sufficient 455s were available. First class had not been offered on that line on a regular basis since electrification. The humble 4Vep has been something of a "maid of all work" appearing on most lines on a scheduled basis over the years including some diagrammed suburban workings. Of the latter most were one-off trips and effectively positioning moves or infil trips.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Gwiwer

[Xerces Fobe2]

The 4VEPs also appeared on the Windsor & Eton Riverside services occasionally, when there were insufficent 455's avialable.

[Uk_Steve]

just had a telephone call from Digitrains my Hornby 4 VEP NSE is ready to go with DCC sound chip

 

i got my 2EPB NSE in the post yesterday i must admit the Bachmann 2EPBs are lovely looking models hence

having 2 now, 1 in grey and blue and a NSE version

 

All the best from Steve

[Ceptic]

Right,...I must admit to being diverted onto other things, the last couple of days. After all, it was me Mum's 93rd. Birthday yesterday...Pheeww..What a Rave-up...l'm glad for the sit down.

l have looked in on this thread regularly, and the post #342 by Brian Kirby is of interest.

Granted, there is lens distortion of my photos, (done in a hurry, with no correction) which gives the impression of them being taken on a curved track. l can assure you, the track was straight, and level.

What really stands out, when comparing these models, is the difference in body heights.

According to my calculations, the prototype height dimensions of the Mk.1 body, works out as :-

6' - 4.5" from the body base, to the top of the gutter. Whiich in 4mm. scale, equals 25.5mm.

The height to the top of the roof, from the base is 8' - 4" on the real thing. On the model, it should be 33.3mm.

Now,..This may come as a bit of a surprise to some of you, as it did to me.

l've just given the VEP, CEP and EPB another quick going over with the vernier.

What l discovered was that the VEP's height, from the body-side base. at sole-bar level, to the top of the roof's gutter, is approximately correct, at 25.3mm. Whereas, the same measurement taken from the EPB and CEP averages out at 26. 5mm.!!, as these pics. show.

 

4-VEP

 

4-CEP

 

2-EPB

 

All l need now, is two extra, shake-free, pairs of hands, to measure and photograph the cab windows.

 

Regards.

[Trains4U]

Excellent Gareth,

Many thanks for the side-on comparison photos, you couldn't have highlighted the problem any better. It can now clearly be seen, that the Hornby VEP is decidedly squat, when compared with the Bachmann CEP, it's almost as if they've built it to the old British Trix scale of 3.8mm/ft. Even your end-on photo of the two types of cab, shows the discrepancy. The dimension to study is between the cantrail guttering and the bottom of the body, it should be 25.3mm, like the correct Bachmann CEP and EPB. A friend of mine, who is also a RMwebber reckons that they may have squashed the body, so as to raise the underframe up over the bogies, whilst maintaining the roof height, but helping the unit handle sharp Hornby curved track? Shame really, because overall it looks quite smart and the colours are good.

I wouldn't worry about the different height of the CEP ends (we know why), depends on the track pitch, the load being carried and sagging of the springs, but bodies of different sizes will never match up.

Well done, you've just saved me a lot of money. My kit VEPs can now be refurbished.

 

Cheers, Brian.

 

 

Or perhaps Ceptic and I have just cost you a lot of money...

 

Ceptic's measurements show that the CEPs and EPBs are too tall.

 

 

What l discovered was that the VEP's height, from the body-side base. at sole-bar level, to the top of the roof's gutter, is approximately correct, at 25.3mm. Whereas, the same measurement taken from the EPB and CEP averages out at 26. 5mm.!!, as these pics. show.

 

 

so even if you do refurbish your kitbuilt VEPs, (assuming they are accurate) they'll still be smaller.

 

As this height difference is clearly unacceptable, I guess you now need to chuck out the CEPs and EPBs and build them from kits instead?

Edited September 14, 2011 by Trains4U

[S.A.C Martin]

It's a strange thing isn't it - looking at the VEP I think it looks too "squat" as others have said, and the EPB/CEP the right height. But to read the measurements and the fact of the matter is that the Bachmann EMUs are incorrect, and more than that, the VEP is right - but the Bachmann pair look more "correct" - which then, is the correct route to follow?!

 

I'm flabbergasted, frankly. It's the extreme to both sides of the argument!

 

Thank you Ceptic and everyone on this thread for their input. It's certainly food for thought, isn't it?

[orcadian]

Ooh, err, bloomin'eck! and similar expressions!

 

Sorry, Hornby!

 

Without any measurements or facts available at the time, I wonder why the assumption had been made that Baccy came first and look right, Hornby came second , look different, so Hornby are wrong! And, yes, on reading this thread through before these measurements appeared, I admit that I had mentally joined that group!

 

Most certainly food for thought - probably tasting remarkably like humble pie!

(Some will still say never let the facts spoil a good story, though )

 

Richard

[John M Upton]

My NSE VEP has just arrived and overall I am happy with it. As with any model I will make a few light improvements, the pencil trick on the gangways being one, plus a renumber to a Brighton unit.

 

The same thing still strikes me, those horns are seriously undernourished but easily fixable, the first class compartment walls have already been noted elsewhere, if they were in black or a neutral grey then the starkness of the solid white wall would not have been so noticeable from the outside, again something that will receive some attention at some point.

 

One interesting issue that has arisen though, mine is a DCC Ready version on the box, the VEP within however has a little slip of paper telling me it is fitted with a DCC chip, a fact now confirmed once I got the MBSO body off!! Looks like a some DCC fitted ones have wound up in the wrong outer boxes, not a major problem for me but may be something others will need to check.

[Uk_Steve]

My NSE VEP has just arrived and overall I am happy with it. As with any model I will make a few light improvements, the pencil trick on the gangways being one, plus a renumber to a Brighton unit.

 

The same thing still strikes me, those horns are seriously undernourished but easily fixable, the first class compartment walls have already been noted elsewhere, if they were in black or a neutral grey then the starkness of the solid white wall would not have been so noticeable from the outside, again something that will receive some attention at some point.

 

One interesting issue that has arisen though, mine is a DCC Ready version on the box, the VEP within however has a little slip of paper telling me it is fitted with a DCC chip, a fact now confirmed once I got the MBSO body off!! Looks like a some DCC fitted ones have wound up in the wrong outer boxes, not a major problem for me but may be something others will need to check.

 

Looks like you got a result where others are going to have mmmm mine does not have a DCC Chip when they are expecting them in DCC fitted versions

 

Hornby are going to have fun i guess with this, he!he!

Edited September 14, 2011 by Uk_Steve

[Brian Kirby]

Thanks Ceptic, for doing more pics and measuring.

I've done a bit more measuring myself, i find the Bachmann CEP and EPB bodies do come out at 34mm high (not including the ventilators), which is 8ft 6in in real money, so they are 2 inches too high (0.666mm !). Quite a few of us think the regular Bachmann Mk1s are ever so slightly on the big side, but they are the bench standard now, so it is overlooked. I'm pleased to say that my MJT and Southern Pride bodies come out spot on at 33.3mm (8ft 4in). Both the MJT and SP sides, plus the Bachmann coach sides come out at the magic 25.3mm (from bottom to UNDER and NOT including the guttering), whereas with Ceptic's helpful VEP photo, he measured 25.33mm from bottom to and including the TOP of the guttering. This proves the discrepancy, the VEP guttering is too low by about 1mm and this has squashed the sides down, which would be extremely difficult to rectify.

 

Notice when the VEP+CEP roofs line up, the VEP buffers are way too high. When the VEP+CEP buffers are lined up, the VEP roof is then too low.

 

Now, i ask myself, when all my existing EMUs harmonise nicely in the main dimensions, do i really want to introduce something new that doesn't match? Is the answer to replace the Hornby VEP sides with MJT etchings? I doubt it with all the other problems to fix.

 

Cheers, Brian.

 

 

[Ceptic]

lt's just occuured to me, and l would like to add, that, wheel tread diameters need to be looked at. as do the official ref. specs..

Both model Motor Coaches, and Trailers, as did the prototypes, are equipped wtih different bogie types, each with differing wheel diameters.

 

What a nightmare...Even for the R.T.R 'Big Boys'

 

Hopefully, l'll get back to you on this. Unless, some one has the info. to hand

 

Regards.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Ceptic

[Oldddudders]

The most recent concern in this thread seems to be the differences in "ride height" between the Hornby VEP and Bachmann's pair of EMUs. While it it true that all three types could be coupled together, and would run satisfactorily (as long as at least 50% of the formation were mainline stock) that is not to say it happened all day every day. The EPBs were primarily used in suburban service. The CEPs were primarily used on mainline runs of a longer, limited-stop nature. The VEPs, with their high-density seating layout, tended to be used for secondary mainline services. In the peak VEPs were used on the most heavily-loaded services, where a 12-CEP would not cope, for example. With such a big mix of units, there were often wrong formations at start of service, but, particularly in the earlier years of both CEPs and VEPs, i.e. the versions on offer to date, the formations were intended to be "pure". You'd be much more likely to see an 8- or 12-CEP or VEP than a mixture of the two types. Anyone modelling the South Western Division would have little use for original CEPs except between Portsmouth Harbour and Havant, when a single 4-car would form the Victoria via Chichester service.

 

If the effect of coupling the two units together is holding you back from a purchase, just ask yourself which service you are seeking to model, that's all. There simply weren't intended to be that many.

[Pennine MC]

 

Without any measurements or facts available at the time, I wonder why the assumption had been made that Baccy came first and look right, Hornby came second , look different, so Hornby are wrong!

 

Interesting isnt it. Possibly it's because a number of other shortcomings had come to light, before the height issue was even considered? I'm not saying it's a particularly objective way to go about things, but it's an understandable thought path to follow, once you've been put into that mindset of looking for faults.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Pennine MC

[Brian Kirby]

While it it true that all three types could be coupled together, and would run satisfactorily (as long as at least 50% of the formation were mainline stock) that is not to say it happened all day every day. The EPBs were primarily used in suburban service.

 

On a slightly academic note, i seem to recall that quite a few of the BR 4EPBs were fitted with "express gear ratio" for use as regular strengtheners for rush-hour main line trains, at least during the 1970s. I think it was mostly on the South-Eastern Division and possibly on the Central Division? 2HAPs seem to have been regular partners with VEPs as well.

 

I'm sure we'll get a 4CIG/BIG in the not too distant future, which may antagonize the above body size problem further. I know who i'd rather have make it.

 

Cheers, Brian.

[NickL2008]

sorry all, know its a bit late, but id like to thank everyone earlier on in this thread for confirmed the VEPs on SWML useage, sorry not an expert ... better get saving!

 

NL

[pauln]

 

One interesting issue that has arisen though, mine is a DCC Ready version on the box, the VEP within however has a little slip of paper telling me it is fitted with a DCC chip, a fact now confirmed once I got the MBSO body off!! Looks like a some DCC fitted ones have wound up in the wrong outer boxes, not a major problem for me but may be something others will need to check.

 

Mine arrived today. I haven't taken the body off yet but mine has the same slip so assuming it has a chip this is not just a one-off issue.

[Oldddudders]

On a slightly academic note, i seem to recall that quite a few of the BR 4EPBs were fitted with "express gear ratio" for use as regular strengtheners for rush-hour main line trains, at least during the 1970s. I think it was mostly on the South-Eastern Division and possibly on the Central Division?

5357 and 5358 were given mainline gearing in the mid-60s, to cover a diagram which I think was probably 06 47 Eastbourne - London Bridge, ECS to Streatham Hill, 1751 Vic - Eastbourne. There may have been others later. Not good for older businessmen with bladder problems!

[spamcan61]

 

Mine arrived today. I haven't taken the body off yet but mine has the same slip so assuming it has a chip this is not just a one-off issue.

 

So hopefully (from Hornby's customer relations point of view at least) they're all DCC fitted, rather than the 'fitted' and 'ready' being swapped over.

[Charlie]

To those that have them, has anyone considered how to amend the first class comparment walls? Or is it possible one for an etched frame replacement like PHD's "seating" for the class 150? Still trying to decide whether to take the plunge or as I think an NSE one will look good next to my NSE 2-EPB

Edited September 14, 2011 by Charlie