S.A.C Martin Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 It was my sorry excuse to inject a little synical humour into the thread hence the emoticon at the end of my sentence. please forgive me Nothing to forgive - just unfortunately (as demonstrated in this thread), posts can be completely misinterpreted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted October 22, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 22, 2011 Without wishing to drag this off topic any further my test run was done with a 121 from an early run with the large hook coupler and no traction tyres. It was selected at random from the seven I own other than the fact that I wanted something with a big hook to prove the derailment with the 153 was a coupler issue and nothing more. I have 121s with the later smaller coupler as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadyneman Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 As a point of interest I have two "Limby" 73s and two 121s. All but one of the 121s are fitted with traction tyres, They are all temperamental in their own way and never run properly without a period of running in on each session. The 121 without the traction tyres is perhaps the best performer as it rarely stalls over pointwork. The downside is that it can only pull itself round the layout and nothing else, so if I wanted to add a driving trailer 2nd to it as used to be on the Greenford branch in the '70s then forget it! Interestingly the traction tyres are only on one wheelset on the 4-VEP. The tyres on the other "Limby" bogies are on both wheelsets but on one side only. Whether changing this on the VEP would make a difference would be interesting to see. Incidentall I have had my VEP running in consist with a CEP round the garden again this week and so far it has not been a problem. Maybe mine has settled down and run itself in. Only time will tell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Incidentall I have had my VEP running in consist with a CEP round the garden again this week and so far it has not been a problem. Maybe mine has settled down and run itself in. Only time will tell! One of my main worries with the VEP was that it wouldn't double head well with the Bachmann units. This has not yet been a problem and it runs well with other units. Mine is still running fairly well though i'm going to have another look to see if I can sneak a bit of extra weight into the power bogie area. Still happy with it, enjoyed the challenge of the modifications (though I strongly agree that it shouldn't have been necessary) and would I like a second one? Yes. (though would like to get a cheap(er) one!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted October 22, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 22, 2011 Is it significant that one well-known box-shifter has the plain blue VEP, DCC-fitted, as a special offer for £127.50? Seems a bit cheaper than some. Maybe they aren't flying off the shelves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Another well known box shifter has them at £120 DCC ready and £134 DCC fitted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Can't find a camera at the moment but will see if I can take some photos a bit later. Weighed the VEP motor coach on our kitchen scales and it came in at 305g. Comparisons are: EPB 385g, CEP 413g. I have an MJT 4CIG with a Limby 73 bogie and that is a heavy 468g. I have added a few small weights around the motor bogie area increasing it to 350g. The noticeable difference is that when the motor is the second vehicle, it will now start from a stand and head up my hills. Before this it would not be able to do this, you would have to take a run up from the level track and hope it made it to the top! Interestingly though it cannot do this when in reverse. I do not have any more small chunks of metal to add to it at the moment but plan to get a few bits to secure in the various gaps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Bus Driver Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Fishing weights perhaps? Is there a tackle shop near you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadyneman Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Fishing weights perhaps? Is there a tackle shop near you? That's a b---dy good idea.. never thought of that one .. do they still make em out of lead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Will have to look into fishing weights. Just to show where i've added the weights: Side on view with the weights removed As you can see they have only been attached with blu-tack for now. The chunky weight is sat on the seating bay. Just looking at the final shot again... I think two chunky weights could be fitted in the spaces marked. I assume i'm right in thinking that there is no point adding weight anywhere else along the chassis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 (edited) On the subject of Fishing weights Ask for SEA FISHING Weights!! These are apparently heavier (LEAD) than freshwater ones where lead is illegal so I am told. Sea fishing weights come in various weights, and are easy to cut and 'pound' into shape But please note lead is poisonous wash hands after use and also be careful when cutting and shaping, wear protective eye goggles if poss!! ( its the health and safety you know) I have used these weights for many years! Also another source of weights is shops that sell items for domestic curtains, they usually stock weights which are approx 4" x 2" which are intended to be used in curtain hems to make them hang 'nicely' these too are easily cut into required sizes!! Just for the record!! I have no interest in fishing or sewing curtains !! Edited October 22, 2011 by Stevelewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petee19 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 On the subject of Fishing weights Ask for SEA FISHING Weights!! These are apparently heavier (LEAD) than freshwater ones where lead is illegal so I am told. Sea fishing weights come in various weights, and are easy to cut and 'pound' into shape But please note lead is poisonous wash hands after use and also be careful when cutting and shaping, wear protective eye goggles if poss!! ( its the health & safety you know) I have used these weights for many years! Also another source of weights is shops that sell items for domestic curtains, they usually stock weights which are approx 4" x 2" which are intended to be used in curtain hems to make them hang 'nicely' these too are easily cut into required sizes!! Just for the record!! I have no interest in fishing or sewing curtains !! So there's no truth that you sew fishing nets in your spare time! Pete. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevelewis Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 No------------ I dont seem to have any spare time!!! s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceptic Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Many Thanks S.A.C. Martin, and Others, for your support / observations / input, into this topic Going back to the original observations that, possibly, kicked Hornby's VEP into touch, here's some comparitive photos showing MJT's front end, up against Hornby's. Both have their faults . Hornby's width. MJT's... Note that it represents three flat panels. Not a continuous curve, as it should be. A close-up. To match Hornby's detail, this would need a lot of work. Hornby's gangway / corridor connection. Note the sides' distortion. MJT's. Much nearer the mark, although the headcode window is larger than Hornby's. A vertical comparison. And a horizontal one. Taking into account all the other drawbacks / faults found with this model, l can only recommend a complete rebuild, using only the vehicles' sides.(cab-side windows excepted) and underframes . The thing is, where. do l, or anyone else, looking for a fair representative. start ?? Edited October 23, 2011 by Ceptic 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) That's an interesting front-end perspective Ceptic. And dare I say, it puts a slightly new perspective on things for me. Now, I'm no third-rail guru by any means, so can't speak for the trueness of the MJT face to the real thing (another montage of those two morphed together would be telling), BUT I would observe the following at this point: Hornby's windscreens don't look especially undernourished alongside MJT (to me at least) Hornby's jumper recesses are far more convincing even in an unweathered state. To my mind, it's the outer footprint of Hornby's gangway connection that seems to throw everything else into compromise; despite the measured width its shape goes a long way to distort the character. I wonder if (something like) a fettled Bachmann MkI corridor could provide a better starting point for a more balanced, and convincing, face. I just so happen to have ten of these hanging around from my Carflat conversion programme, if anyone fancies a try-out... Edited October 23, 2011 by 'CHARD 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted October 23, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Looking at Ceptic's Hornby vs MJT VEP end images and remembering photos of the real thing, it looks like Hornby got the gap between the cab windows and the corridor connection right (which MJT plainly didn't) but not between the cab windows and the sides, it's just that the Hornby corridor connection is too narrow. They could fix this with a re-tool of the front end. If they then did the inner partitions with cut outs for the windows etc, they'd be a long way to a fair representation of a 4VEP. Obviously they'd still need to sort out the mechanical problems, and the moulded detail for the handrails etc on the sides would still be somewhat below the detail level we've come to expect from them, but it would still be better than no VEP at all (which to my mind is what we've got). Edited October 23, 2011 by Ian J. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Welly Posted October 23, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 23, 2011 Interesting comparison between the MJT and Hornby front ends, Ceptic. Personally I think Hornby has captured the front end face slightly better than MJT - I have decided to live with the doorway being too far in and that the slightly narrower vestibule doesn't detract from the appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadyneman Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I think it's a bit unfair to say we haven't got a 4VEP really because we have, The front end of Hornby's model is already a "fair" representation of the real thing. It just isn't a compltetly accurate representation of the real thing and that is the crux of the matter which Hornby will either look at and say OK lets modify it or, do nothing and let it sell as it is. In the case of the former they will have to weigh up the cost of modifying the tooling against the fact that the model has already been released and some will be happy with it the way it is and will not buy a modified one. Personally I'm not entirely happy with the new VEP and the one I have got has put me off buying another one for the time being (unless I can pick up a secondhand non runner and use it as a trailer unit to drag behind a CEP). But in my view it definitely Is a VEP! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I'm inclined to agree with Ian J: if Hornby could modify the front end and gangway, add the side corridor windows/doors and fix the mechanical issues, that would go a long way towards making the model a success for many of us. There is stil lthe issue of the reversed bogies but I think that once the unit is in motion or sitting in a station or lurking in amongst other stock in the sidings, how many people would really notice that? Personally, I think I could live with the corridor moulding remaining the same as it is not that hard to modify to a reasonable standard, even with a bit of stiff card or plasticard (as shown in an earlier post in this thread). Given the choice of front styles with both being incorrect to a degree, I would prefer the MJT ones, which would also match the VEP I did some time ago with MJT sides and ends on Lima Mk 1 chassis. The Hornby "face" just doesn't quite do it for me, even if it is not that far out dimensionally. As Chard said, the Hornby jumper cables and recesses do look better than the MJT ones. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venator Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Give it a couple of days running and I bet you change your mind! I've had mine for over six weeks now, I haven't changed my mind. In fact quite the opposite, the more I run it the more I like it. thats great information Venator i love to see a video of your working model if that is ok and the 2epb working together maybe post it on here if you can because i am sure others would like to see the video all the best from Steve Steve, here is my video: Apologies for the state of my layout, it's having a refurbishment at the moment and various things are on and off the board. As you can see the 4VEP has little issue with running round radius 2 curves, multiple sets of points and even goes over my diamond crossover (which other multiple units don't like). Edited October 23, 2011 by Venator 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadyneman Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 The relationship between me and my 4VEP is also improving... i guess I'm getting used to the fact it looks like a VEP but disappointed it doesn't run as well as a Bachmann CEP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) I've had mine for over six weeks now, I haven't changed my mind. In fact quite the opposite, the more I run it the more I like it. Steve, here is my video: Apologies for the state of my layout, it's having a refurbishment at the moment and various things are on and off the board. As you can see the 4VEP has little issue with running round radius 2 curves, multiple sets of points and even goes over my diamond crossover (which other multiple units don't like). thank you so much for posting the video because i really wanted to see this video after your comments on your 4 Vep i am very encourage to see it runs on curves at speed and low speed also this is brilliant i like to think i am a fair person in life and this stance does indeed work good towards my feelings to Hornby i am sure and now hoping maybe on the next batch of 4 VEP will all be as good as yours on your layout hopefully Quality Control from Hornby could make this happen without a big problem to them on every train on the market in due course. i am even tempted to get another soon as long as i can see it work b4 i buy from a store yeah thats great Venator i am glad this really does put another light on the Hornby4 VEP and maybe more could come from them i am now feeling good i will have a 4 vep with my NSE 2EPBs soonish now All the best from Steve Edited October 23, 2011 by Uk_Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davyjcrow Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 On the motor performance, if Hornby don't offer an upgrade to the mechanism, does anyone have any thoughts on how to improve the performance of the existing motor bogie without replacing it entirely? Low rail adhesion aside, the performance is noticeably "coggy" at slow speeds which my Hornby 73 also suffers from. I have tried messing with the settings on DCC, and turning the BEMF right down definitely helps, but still the start is unrealistically jerky - speed step 1 is not the slow crawl that we have become used to in most modern models (and CV2 is set to 0 volts!) I remember reading in another thread that someone was considering replacing the actual motor inside their Limby bogie with a Mashima motor (the limby bogie was from a different model - I think a 101 or similar). Has anyone tried this with a limby motor, and did it help at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) As yet, no reply to my letters. I'm not entirely at the stage where everyone else seems to be. Yes, in comparison to a kit manufacturer (with a limited budget and developed long before laser scanning) the Hornby 4VEP is marginally better in look (perhaps). But it's still no great shakes to contemporary alternatives. Now my traction tyre problem may be related to just me - but whether it is or not, is irrelevant: they should not have been used on this model. The Bachmann 4CEP is a prime example of what happens when you get it right first time. Praised universally, reportedly selling very well, and has the performance to match. The 4VEP is inferior in every which way except its markedly higher price. This isn't a question of opinion, it's absolute stone wall fact. I will not buy another EMU from Hornby until I feel my confidence in them to develop one to a similarly high standard is restored. Edited October 23, 2011 by S.A.C Martin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uk_Steve Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) i sent my letter b4 yours Martin i havnt had a reply either mind you that be a very quick responce in my eyes i have a time frame of 28 days if they was going to reply to me? Be nice if they do but i be more happy if they concentrate on the issues at hand, you have every right to feel the way you feel about your 4 Vep and anybody else which are in a simular situation! there is no doubnt in my mind i be feeling the same if i went down the same route as you. lets not forget because of you and others helped to get the warning signals out there on this forum b4 i even got my model and help other modellers/hobbyiest which i am 1 is very grateful all the best from Steve OT what do you think of my new updated pics of my weathering efforts? http://www.rmweb.co....__fromsearch__1 Edited October 23, 2011 by Uk_Steve 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now