Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[tomstaf]

Okay, the suggested edits have been made - see what you think, ladies and gentlemen (thanks to everyone for your input, greatly appreciated).

 

Simon, I think it's great that you're writing to them with criticisms and suggestions, but a few pointers. It's too wordy still which really detracts from the true point you're making. Remember that it may not be read by a specialist, particularly to start with. You really need to make the points shine out. For example, you say: "I write to you with regards a current product of yours, the Hornby 4VEP (the R number is R2947)."

This is your opening which really needs to set the tone. So how about: "I purchased your new product R2947 which disappointingly has a number of significant design and quality control deficiencies." This identifies what you have bought, your opinion, and a summary of the faults. Using terminology that a manufacturer uses regularly will instantly register with the potentially non-specialsit reader. Then maybe set out the points numerically. It makes it easier for Hornby to refer back and find specific points you've made. This will also make it more persuasive and less descriptive.

 

I hope that helps.

 

Tom

Edited October 11, 2011 by tomstaf

[Pennine MC]

 

...Then maybe set out the points numerically. It makes it easier for Hornby to refer back and find specific points you've made. This will also make it more persuasive and less descriptive.

 

 

I'd agree with that, numbered or bulleted points do make for ease of absorption of multiple complex issues.

[S.A.C Martin]

That sounds good to me Tom, point well made.

 

It's a little late in the day to start editing again so I'll start work on it again tomorrow. Bullet points definitely required to go through that email.

[Gwiwer]

A word or two of caution if something like a Facebook page is going to be started as suggested.

 

Keep it factual and to the point. And keep it well managed by whoever is given admin rights. "Everyone" seems to be on Facebook (not everyone is by any means of course) but that doesn't give any right or precedent to set up something with the sole intention of harming the reputation of another business. By all means use that route as a clearing house to add weight of numbers with substantiated complaints however. Normal internet protocols apply in terms of fair comment and review but not misrepresentation or wilful damage to reputation.

[phil gollin]

.

 

When will the next model railway show be with the Official Hornby Stand present ?

 

Surely a reasonable number of people with REAL LIFE complaints would be the best representation ?

 

.

[S.A.C Martin]

I don't think a facebook group is necessary at this point.

 

However this morning something clicked with me that suddenly got me looking through the advertising photographs of the 4VEP which are present in Model Rail, and on the website.

 

Looking at the model depicted, there is something of a gulf between the actual product and its advert. The NSE version depicted has red cantrails (correct), black window frames (correct) and a back corridor connection (correct), BUT, crucially, I had to do a double take - the front end is not the same as on my model at all!

 

The adverts show the 4VEPs with their gangways retracted - something which is sincerely not the case on the model. The different gangway ending changes the look of the model rather significantly, making the door look further forward in the gangway as a result!

 

I'm not sure whether this was entirely intentional, but I do think the advert in question is somewhat misleading.

Edited October 12, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[Uk_Steve]

I don't think a facebook group is necessary at this point.

 

However this morning something clicked with me that suddenly got me looking through the advertising photographs of the 4VEP which are present in Model Rail, and on the website.

 

Looking at the model depicted, there is something of a gulf between the actual product and its advert. The NSE version depicted has red cantrails (correct), black window frames (correct) and a back corridor connection (correct), BUT, crucially, I had to do a double take - the front end is not the same as on my model at all!

 

The adverts show the 4VEPs with their gangways retracted - something which is sincerely not the case on the model. The different gangway ending changes the look of the model rather significantly, making the door look further forward in the gangway as a result!

 

I'm not sure whether this was entirely intentional, but I do think the advert in question is somewhat misleading.

 

Simon have you got a link to the ad photos please

 

thanks in advance from Steve

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Simon have you got a link to the ad photos please

 

thanks in advance from Steve

 

I'm afraid not Steve. It's in this month's Model Rail, and I think last month's. It was up on the Hornby site but I can no longer find it.

[Matabiau]

I contacted Hattons this morning regarding the derailing habit of my Hornby 4VEP when running in reverse. They claim not to be aware of any problems with this model, not exactly the sentiment I am getting reading the 31 pages of posts here!

[Ceptic]

 

I'm afraid not Steve. It's in this month's Model Rail, and I think last month's. It was up on the Hornby site but I can no longer find it.

 

The Hornby promo video is here on youtube. The opening stills show the ad, which appeared in the various modelling mags.

 

 

There was a further / later ad,, which I have in front of me, showing two NSE driving ends side by side. This time without the 'Black cap', but still with Black gangways and window outlines. The Red cant-rail is also shown.

 

Regards.

[Ian J.]

I think a previous poster here said something that fits with how I feel about how this model has turned out - it feels distinctly like a low-budget Railroad model. It certainly seems to fall far short of the standard of the Maunsells and Hawksworths, and being a model of what are essentially carriages, I was expecting it to be to a similar standard.

 

I for one am glad that I couldn't pre-order one due to financial constraints. I can only hope that either Hornby drastically improve the model (unlikely due to the body and ends needing significant re-tooling), or another manufacturer might do a better version sometime in the future, but I'm not holding my breath on either possibility.

 

[Guest oldlugger]

What about adding a Black Beetle or two to the power car; replace the pancake motor and retain the bogie side frames to attach to the BB(s). More expense I know but at least you'll remove the traction tyre issue and improve the overall running.

[Trevellan]

BBs might be one answer, but from what I've read here the trailer bogies are part of the problem too.

[S.A.C Martin]

The problem is two-fold. The traction tyre bogie is horrendous: it climbs rails, it causes vast amounts of slowing down, and takes off a quarter of the potential pickups (the only pickups are on the powered coach: not the whole unit as reported in Model Rail and Railway Modeller).

 

At the same time, the clip in wheelsets on the bogies throughout the train cause a lot of friction. Testing this further today, none of them "roll" so much as grind to a halt. A severely underpowered motor with the traction tyres isn't enough to overcome the rolling resistance.

 

The whole unit effectively needs rebuilding (in my opinion) to run at all (never mind reliably!)

 

The Black Beetle is a good shout - perhaps one each on the outer bogies of the inner two coaches would solve some issues of traction, but I fear that would not be enough when the rest of the train's bogies probably need extensive modification too, or outright replacing.

Edited October 12, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[Removed a/c]

I think I will wait until they appear on the bay for cheap and then buy one to sit in a siding. Such a shame as this has put me off buying Hornby products and as a "newcomer" coming back into the hobby this isn't good.

[G-BOAF]

Would it be possible to graft Bachmann B4 bogies onto the non powered cars? I don't know how much difference there was between a hauled stock B4 and those on an EMU, obstical deflectors aside.

[Guest oldlugger]

The problem is two-fold. The traction tyre bogie is horrendous: it climbs rails, it causes vast amounts of slowing down, and takes off a quarter of the potential pickups (the only pickups are on the powered coach: not the whole unit as reported in Model Rail and Railway Modeller).

 

At the same time, the clip in wheelsets on the bogies throughout the train cause a lot of friction. Testing this further today, none of them "roll" so much as grind to a halt. A severely underpowered motor with the traction tyres isn't enough to overcome the rolling resistance.

 

The whole unit effectively needs rebuilding (in my opinion) to run at all (never mind at reliably!)

 

The Black Beetle is a good shout - perhaps one each on the outer bogies of the inner two coaches would solve some issues of traction, but I fear that would not be enough when the rest of the train's bogies probably need extensive modification too, or outright replacing.

 

Hello Simon,

 

It seems to me that as a good deal of correction work needs doing on the unit, especially in the chassis department, it would be worth upgrading the motor bogie and trailing bogie with one or two BB's fitted ONLY to the motor coach (I wouldn't put one in one coach and one in another); the un-powered end of the motor coach would have to have part of the floor removed to accommodate the second BB (if used). Using the BBs would also remove the Hornby motor taking up room unrealistically inside the coach compartment. Then as the bogies on the other coaches do not have pick ups (I'm relying on your statement here!) like the Bachmann EMUs remove the Hornby wheels and replace them with plain Black Beetle coach wheels or Ultrascale wheel sets, drill out the insides of the axle boxes and add top hat bearings and fit the new wheel sets. If the motor coach has enough weight, one BB should easily move the now very free rolling coaches. Without a Hornby 4 VEP in front of me it is hard to visualise the trailing bogie arrangement but I would imagine the above conversion would be very straight forward. I know none of this should be necessary but as modellers want one of these units, and a reliable one, with no other manufacturer producing one, then there seems to be no other option but to upgrade the chassis X 4.

 

Cheers

Simon

Edited October 12, 2011 by oldlugger

[spamcan61]

I think I will wait until they appear on the bay for cheap and then buy one to sit in a siding. Such a shame as this has put me off buying Hornby products and as a "newcomer" coming back into the hobby this isn't good.

 

They've made plenty of excellent products in the last few years, the L1 perhaps is the most recent. Whether this expensive pig in a poke of an EMU is a temporary aberration or the shape of things to come we shall see :-/

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Hello Simon,

 

It seems to me that as a good deal of correction work needs doing on the unit, especially in the chassis department, it would be worth upgrading the motor bogie and trailing bogie with one or two BB's fitted ONLY to the motor coach (I wouldn't put one in one coach and one in another); the un-powered end of the motor coach would have to have part of the floor removed to accommodate the second BB (if used).

 

That is a very fair point, well made. Equally, what is the current motor coach will need extensive hacking so it may as well be kept to a minimum in the one coach.

 

Using the BBs would also remove the Hornby motor taking up room unrealistically inside the coach compartment. Then as the bogies on the other coaches do not have pick ups (I'm relying on your statement here!) like the Bachmann EMUs remove the Hornby wheels and replace them with plain Black Beetle coach wheels or Ultrascale wheel sets, drill out the insides of the axle boxes and add top hat bearings and fit the new wheel sets.

 

They definitely don't have pickups - all of the bogies are clip in arrangements which seem to share some dimensions with previous Hornby bogies.

 

Certainly the similar bogies on my Hornby Mk2s could, with removal of the couplings, clip into the slot quite easily as the clip in arrangement is the same! One wonders why, when point to point bogies have been done in the range before, Hornby chose to change it for the 4VEP. It is mystifying.

 

If the motor coach has enough weight, one BB should easily move the now very free rolling coaches. Without a Hornby 4 VEP in front of me it is hard to visualise the trailing bogie arrangement but I would imagine the above conversion would be very straight forward. I know none of this should be necessary but as modellers want one of these units, and a reliable one, with no other manufacturer producing one, then there seems to be no other option but to upgrade the chassis X 4.

 

Weight is definitely one option, but it would be easier to simply fix the running of the bogies on the other three coaches. Their improved running would give whatever motor mechanism the power coach has a lot less work to do to get it moving.

Edited October 12, 2011 by S.A.C Martin

[Uk_Steve]

I think I will wait until they appear on the bay for cheap and then buy one to sit in a siding. Such a shame as this has put me off buying Hornby products and as a "newcomer" coming back into the hobby this isn't good.

 

 

Hi

 

to be fair i do have a class 50 and another diesel from Hornby and none have been a problem with me

 

i understand your view it totally blow confidence however i do think if they take this 4vep issue actually " 4vep issues" in due course we all can be happy customers again

 

maybe i alway look on the bright side of life but hopefully they do something

 

now for a sing song

 

"always look on the bright side of life do do do"

 

all the best

Edited October 12, 2011 by Uk_Steve

[S.A.C Martin]

 

Simon, I think it's great that you're writing to them with criticisms and suggestions, but a few pointers. It's too wordy still which really detracts from the true point you're making. Remember that it may not be read by a specialist, particularly to start with. You really need to make the points shine out. For example, you say: "I write to you with regards a current product of yours, the Hornby 4VEP (the R number is R2947)."

This is your opening which really needs to set the tone. So how about: "I purchased your new product R2947 which disappointingly has a number of significant design and quality control deficiencies." This identifies what you have bought, your opinion, and a summary of the faults. Using terminology that a manufacturer uses regularly will instantly register with the potentially non-specialsit reader. Then maybe set out the points numerically. It makes it easier for Hornby to refer back and find specific points you've made. This will also make it more persuasive and less descriptive.

 

I hope that helps.

 

Tom

 

Bearing the above in mind, I've made a few edits to the letter, which I intend to send out sometime tomorrow.

 

Simon Martin,

Imaginary Road,

Copley Hill,

Leeds,

CH60 114

11/10/11

 

 

 

Dear Sir,

 

I purchased your new product R2947 (the Hornby 4VEP) which disappointingly has a number of significant design and quality control deficiencies.

 

I bought mine from Hattons Model Railways around a month ago, and have encountered several issues with the model, some of which I have solved myself, but one issue is beyond my expertise. I am aware that by modifying my model in the way that I have, its warranty is invalidated, but I write to suggest solutions for any batches of the 4VEP which may appear in the future.

 

1. On opening the box I found that what should have been the power coach was in fact unpowered. It turned out that the coach body 62467 had been fitted to the unpowered chassis of what should have been coach 71146. Sadly I did not take photographs at the time, however the 71146 body was poorly fitted onto the 62467 chassis and was bowing out towards the centre as the fit was incorrect.

 

Swapping them over so that the bodies matched their chassis solved this first issue.

 

2. As manufactured, the guard irons on the trailing bogies at either end are fitted the wrong way. This also causes a problem with the placement of the steps and 3rd rail shoes on each bogie, as seen here in this photograph:

 

 

 

The solution I used in order to make this bogie accurate to its prototype, was to remove the guard rails, and remount them at the opposite end of the bogie. By doing this, you also need to move the steps from end to the other, and swap the 3rd rail shoes so that they are fitted on the opposite side to their original position. As seen in this photograph:

 

 

 

3. On my sample, all of the inner bogies, bar those on the power car, were attached facing the wrong way. The damper should face towards the centre of the coach, as seen in my attached photographed of one end of the coach 76923:

 

 

This can be easily solved by turning the bogies around, although in order to do so they must be unclipped from the chassis and turned around.

 

4. The next issue regards the livery of the unit. After much debate on the RMweb forum, there is some consensus that the orange cantrail stripe along the whole of the unit should not be orange, but red, when coupled with the black painted cab at each cab end. I am not by any means an expert in these matters, but close examination of a variety of photographs of NSE 4VEPs on the net seems to bear this out. If of course this is correct as depicted, for a specific date in the unit's life, then please accept my apologies on this point.

 

5. Another issue emerges regarding the size of both the roof horns and the roof vents - neither of which are as prominent as they are on an actual 4VEP, both rather undersized. On my 4VEP, these are being replaced with components sourced from various cottage industries to improve the look of the unit.

 

6. The solid compartment walls were a disappointment upon first inspection, but reading back through the development of this model were apparently for production reasons. An extremely good suggestion which has emerged on the RMweb forum which might appease both consumer and manufacturer, would be to use the same component, but mould it in clear plastic, then print onto the clear plastic the doorways. This would improve the look of the unit immensely in terms of its interior decoration.

 

7. Finally, with regards the aesthetics of the model, the end gangway connection has two major problems: firstly, being modelled in the extended position, makes the unit look distinctly odd when run as a single four car set. secondly, the door is not far enough forward in the gangway, making the gap look rather more pronounced than it should between the door and the edge of the gangway.

 

8. The traction tyred bogie has been a poor runner from out of the box. It finds it difficult to run on second radius curves on a simple oval of track. Much worse, the traction tyres on my particular unit appear to be disintegrating, as shown in the photograph below:

 

 

 

 

 

I have explored all the options, including whether or not my cleaning solution for the track was to blame, or that the track was laid poorly, causing damage, but none of these bear out when it is considered that the oval also plays host to similarly set up Hornby Eurostar and HST units from time to time, using similar traction tyres. Neither of these show this particular characteristic.

 

9. Further, the motor bogie has derailed consistently and randomly. The traction tyres appear to make the bogie "climb" the rails, causing derailments. It also starts, and stutters, on level, straight track, and finds it difficult to pull its own weight, due to the design of the bogies.

 

There is so much friction in the wheelsets as a result of the clip in arrangement, as opposed point to point bearings, that the motor - already faced with the problems of the traction tyres, is overcome by the rolling resistances of the rest of the train.

***

 

I have been a purchaser of Hornby products for some years, and have been delighted with my last few purchases - one of the superb Thompson L1 locomotives, the Hornby Railroad and Special Edition Tornados and the Flying Scotsman USA Train Pack - all superb products which worked out of the box, first time, and have proved both reliable and accurate to their respective prototypes.

 

Therefore I am sure you will appreciate, given my previous positive experiences with your products, that the 4VEP has come as an immense disappointment to me. It does not continue in the vein of the most recent Hornby products in terms of its accuracy to prototype, and its quality control in my personal experience leaves something to be desired. The design decisions regarding its motor arrangement are equally disappointing.

 

I feel that the model is not fit for purpose to that end. I will not, however, be returning my model to Hattons for return as I have modified it beyond its original specifications towards producing a satisfactory 4VEP for my own requirements. This will require a rebuilding of the power unit, most likely disposing of the motor bogie supplied altogether.

 

I feel that some degree of investigation of this model, its quality control, and its design ethos would be beneficial to all parties concerned, manufacturer, retailer and consumer. If a remotored 4VEP with all other issues outstanding were to be released in the future, and its running qualities were satisfactory and reliable, I would not hesitate in purchasing a second Hornby 4VEP.

 

However, I cannot in all good conscience at this time recommend the model in question to anyone in my immediate circle, simply on the basis that the amount of modification required to get the model accurate to its prototype (particularly with regards the bogies) is unacceptable.

 

Further, the performance of the unit on a simple train set oval is also unacceptable. For its total cost to purchase, and given there are other similarly sized models in both your own range and others, the 4VEP falls very short of "ready to run", particularly given its inadequate traction.

 

It is a terrific shame as what should be a roaring success for Hornby - a proper electric multiple unit workhorse, which should sell in droves, is simply not good enough.

 

I have no wish to go elsewhere for my purchases, but the 4VEP experience has severely altered my confidence in the company's ability to produce a satisfactory multiple unit/model in future, and has put my intended purchase of the forthcoming 'Brighton Belle' and other products in severe jeopardy.

 

I feel Hornby could go some way towards satisfying the situation which is steadily emerging online if they could investigate the cause of these problems, and perhaps go part way towards solving the problems which have emerged with their eagerly anticipated product.

 

For my own part, I would simply appreciate acknowledgement of this letter, and a positive response that the company will be looking into my concerns.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Simon A.C. Martin

[G-BOAF]

Good letter. I would say leave offthe bit about the car bodies needing swapping round. This is probably an isolated case and easily fixed, I feel it detracts from the main batch wide faults (front end, bogie inclination, bogie design, motor design, detail design) that are the main topic.

[spamcan61]

Good letter. I would say leave offthe bit about the car bodies needing swapping round. This is probably an isolated case and easily fixed, I feel it detracts from the main batch wide faults (front end, bogie inclination, bogie design, motor design, detail design) that are the main topic.

 

It's still indicative of poor manufacturing process control though.

[Guest oldlugger]

 

That is a very fair point, well made. Equally, what is the current motor coach will need extensive hacking so it may as well be kept to a minimum in the one coach.

 

 

 

They definitely don't have pickups - all of the bogies are clip in arrangements which seem to share some dimensions with previous Hornby bogies.

 

Certainly the similar bogies on my Hornby Mk2s could, with removal of the couplings, clip into the slot quite easily as the clip in arrangement is the same! One wonders why, when point to point bogies have been done in the range before, Hornby chose to change it for the 4VEP. It is mystifying.

 

 

 

Weight is definitely one option, but it would be easier to simply fix the running of the bogies on the other three coaches. Their improved running would give whatever motor mechanism the power coach has a lot less work to do to get it moving.

 

Hello Simon,

 

The only problem with that would be that the Black Beetle would show up behind the bogie side frames; the motor bogie side frames are deep enough to hide the BB almost completely. You'd have a hell of a job hiding it behind the thinner less deep coach bogies.

[S.A.C Martin]

Good letter. I would say leave offthe bit about the car bodies needing swapping round. This is probably an isolated case and easily fixed, I feel it detracts from the main batch wide faults (front end, bogie inclination, bogie design, motor design, detail design) that are the main topic.

 

It probably is an isolated case, but it caused me a severe amount of consternation and angst at the time of working out what the problem was; so for me personally, I think it's a necessary point.

 

 

 

Hello Simon,

 

The only problem with that would be that the Black Beetle would show up behind the bogie side frames; the motor bogie side frames are deep enough to hide the BB almost completely. You'd have a hell of a job hiding it behind the thinner less deep coach bogies.

 

There just doesn't seem to be an easy answer to this how on earth did Bachmann overcome these problems in their 4CEP?

Edited October 12, 2011 by S.A.C Martin