Hornby Class 423 4-VEP

[DavidH]

Hornby's lack of response ...

 

Or they are keeping quiet while they thoroughly research the problem, and come up with a costed and sensible plan to deal with the models. It's the trouble with the internet world, everyone wants a reply immediately. In the non-virtual world, people have to talk to each other, have meetings, come up with action plans, submit them for approval ... and so on.

 

A lack of any comment is regrettable, but maybe they don't wish to seem to commit themselves to any particular line of action? Anything that anyone says will be picked over ad nauseum on web forums anyway, so if I was a company, I'd probably err on the side of saying nothing until I was sure what the problem was and what I could afford to do about it.

[petee19]

Reluctantly,but now somewhat pleased I cancelled my order for the VEP after reading reviews in various magazines,my decision was made purley on the front/rear end look,and the solid wall to the first class compartments, at that point I had not read,or heard of any of the running problems.

If I had not cancelled my order I think I would have been so dissapointed with the model that I would have returned it to the dealer and requested a refund,so the question I ask,is,why don't all those who have bought the VEP and are dissapointed with it simply return them for a refund,surely if everyone did that then maybe Hornby may start to take notice of the problems that everyone are talking about.

I think that if any members of this site were the owners of a manufacturing business and you were suddenly bomb barded with a load of complaints, and returns you would soon start asking what was wrong with the product.

So my final plea, RETURN YOUR MODEL,that way hopefully somethig may just be done to rectify the problems.

 

Pete.

 

[spamcan61]

 

If I had not cancelled my order I think I would have been so dissapointed with the model that I would have returned it to the dealer and requested a refund,so the question I ask,is,why don't all those who have bought the VEP and are dissapointed with it simply return them for a refund,surely if everyone did that then maybe Hornby may start to take notice of the problems that everyone are talking about.

 

Pete.

 

You can't just return a model to the retailer because you're disappointed with it, there has to be something wrong with it in SOGA terms, e.g. not for for purpose. I very much doubt if the dimensional problems, for example, would render it 'not fit for purpose' in the eyes of trading standards. Very poor running on the track is probably a different matter, though.

 

OK those who've bought the model via mail order/internet have the option of returning it under DSR within 7 days* of receipt, provided they haven't poked about with it.

 

I do agree with the fundamental point that hitting them in the bank balance is the way to make any manufacturer take notice; although it can't be much fun being a retailer playing piggy in the middle.

 

 

*IIRC that increases to 30 days if the retailer's T&Cs don't mention your rights to return under DSR. IANAL

Edited October 13, 2011 by spamcan61

[Uk_Steve]

 

You can't just return a model to the retailer because you're disappointed with it, there has to be something wrong with it in SOGA terms, e.g. not for for purpose. I very much doubt if the dimensional problems, for example, would render it 'not fit for purpose' in the eyes of trading standards. Very poor running on the track is probably a different matter, though.

 

OK those who've bought the model via mail order/internet have the option of returning it under DSR within 7 days of receipt, provided they haven't poked about with it.

 

I do agree with the fundamental point that hitting them in the bank balance is the way to make any manufacturer take notice; although it can't be much fun being a retailer playing piggy in the middle.

 

i was disappointed that my 4 vep wouldnt go round the track

 

same thing in my eyes

 

hence why i sent back for a full refund

[Uk_Steve]

i was thinking is there anybody on this forum which have a fully running 4VEP?

where the member is 100% happy with their train?? ie running out of the box with NO modifications

was necessary,

 

i thought it meight be a good way to see how this issue balances out with all forum members storys

 

all the best

[Mod6]

 

i was disappointed that my 4 vep wouldnt go round the track

 

same thing in my eyes

 

hence why i sent back for a full refund

 

Not going round the track would be a valid reason as per Spamcan's post.

 

If you were disappointed (for example) that the cantrail stripe was the wrong colour that wouldn't be.

 

(Subsequent silly posts deleted).

[Pennine MC]

A lack of any comment is regrettable, but maybe they don't wish to seem to commit themselves to any particular line of action? Anything that anyone says will be picked over ad nauseum on web forums anyway, so if I was a company, I'd probably err on the side of saying nothing until I was sure what the problem was and what I could afford to do about it.

 

I dont see that as an acceptable reason I'm afraid. On occasion in my own job I have to acknowledge receipt of a potential complaint/error, whilst also remaining non-committal until it's looked into properly. Taking a similar tack shouldnt be a problem to a professional company like Hornby; OK, I'm not saying they should do it for every little whinge, but this situation is pretty clearly a significant one.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Pennine MC

[Matabiau]

If it is any help I have found the cause of my 4VEP's derailment problem. The motor bogie swivels on a clip on the top if the motor housing. This clips into a plastic mounting which also supports the additional weights used to improve traction. The mounting has two plastic studs on its underside designed to keep the motor housing and hence the motor bogie level. On my model the mounting was slightly warped so one stud was 1mm lower than the other. As a result the motor housing and the bogie were skew and the trailing axle sat 2mm higher than the leading one causing it to leave the rails on curves. A little pressure on the mounting has resolved this problem for the time being.

This doesn't resolve the poor running of the trailer coaches though!

[tomstaf]

Hello all,

 

This sheds some positive light.

 

I contacted Hornby last week via their website. The essence of my email reflects the issues discussed here so I shall no repeat them. I ended with:

'Please confirm if Hornby will attempt to remedy the design, production and quality control issues with an updated model.'

I received an encouraging reply from the customer care team today stating: 'Your comments have been given to the Engineering Department whom will be rectifying certain aspects of the model. Kind Regards'

 

Note that 'certain aspects' was not defined but suffice to say, watch this space.

 

Regards

 

Tom

Edited October 13, 2011 by tomstaf

[Matabiau]

What does that mean for those of us with the current model, should we expect replacement wheelsets for example?

[Mod6]

 

I received an encouraging reply from the customer care team today stating: 'Your comments have been given to the Engineering Department whom will be rectifying certain aspects of the model. Kind Regards'

 

Note that 'certain aspects' was not defined but suffice to say, watch this space.

 

 

 

What does that mean for those of us with the current model, should we expect replacement wheelsets for example?

 

Matabiau, the holding reply from Hornby does not define what 'will be rectifying certain aspects' means, as emphasised by tomstaf. So quite how do you imagine anyone here to know the answer to your question at this stage?

Edited October 14, 2011 by Mod6
Clarification

[pauln]

 

I think the letter is fine. Calm and considered listing all of the issues you have found.

 

I too have written to Hornby regarding my experience highlighted earlier in the thread. I have focused only on the running qualities and enclosed the links to the two videos I posted.

 

I wrote an email too to the editor at Model Rail who, to his credit as I am sure he is busy, responded very quickly. I won't repeat the exact wording without permission but he noted that the examples they had seen did not have this problem but he has forwarded my note to Simon Kolher at Hornby and asked them to investigate.

 

I'd agree that more people need to write if they are unhappy but let's hope they follow your measured example rather than a distracting rant.

 

As above Model Rail passed on my email to Hornby and the response from Simon Kolher says:

 

"Thanks for the e-mail and although there have been a couple of issues, mainly I think to some poor assembly I am unaware of any noise issues. In fact apart from the occasional de-railing which I believe is down to a bit of flash they run a treat. I will speak to our engineers and of course Customer Care who would be the first to sound alarm bells."

 

This is a bit disappointing given that I provided the links to my youtube clips showing exactly the problem I experienced (4 times) and referenced this thread on rmweb.

 

Anyway my letter to Hornby went yesterday so will wait and see what they say direct.

 

Model Rail also said that they would put their 4 VEP on long term test and monitor the situation over the coming months to see if it becomes more widespread.

 

I think if any of you have had problems then you have to make your feelings known direct to Hornby, not just on a web forum. It is said that we have to criticise the first foray into SR EMUs by Hornby but some of the issues do seem fundamental mechanical issues rather than just nit picking.

Edited October 13, 2011 by pauln

[frobisher]

If it is any help I have found the cause of my 4VEP's derailment problem. The motor bogie swivels on a clip on the top if the motor housing. This clips into a plastic mounting which also supports the additional weights used to improve traction. The mounting has two plastic studs on its underside designed to keep the motor housing and hence the motor bogie level. On my model the mounting was slightly warped so one stud was 1mm lower than the other. As a result the motor housing and the bogie were skew and the trailing axle sat 2mm higher than the leading one causing it to leave the rails on curves. A little pressure on the mounting has resolved this problem for the time being.

This doesn't resolve the poor running of the trailer coaches though!

 

This is a good catch - it appears that it's another quality control (rather than a design) issue amongst the others that have been reported. I think Hornby need to pay very close attention to the line these models are coming off of because this is doing them no favours at all.

[tomstaf]

The reply does not define what 'will be rectifying certain aspects' means, as emphasised by tomstaf. So quite how do you imagine anyone here to know the answer to your question at this stage?

 

It was undefined in the reply hence why I said watch this space. Hornby chose not to be too committal, I presume so they're not held to it. I thought it may be helpful for people on here to know that Hornby acknowledge that there are issues with the VEP and are looking into it as they've said. As I said in the opening to my post, that is surely a positive step. I hope that helps Mod6?

 

Tom

['CHARD]

 

It was undefined in the reply hence why I said watch this space. Hornby chose not to be too committal, I presume so they're not held to it. I thought it may be helpful for people on here to know that Hornby acknowledge that there are issues with the VEP and are looking into it as they've said. As I said in the opening to my post, that is surely a positive step. I hope that helps Mod6?

 

Tom

I think Mod6 was referencing a post by Matabiau rather than yourself, in a problem > reaction > solution sequence. I don't believe there was any slight taken to your post.

[Mod6]

Thanks CHARD, that's correct - sorry Tom, I agree with you and should have made that clearer in my post.

[metadyneman]

I think it's important that we do not lose sight of the importance of this subject. I myself of some 51 years vintage have waited at least 35 of those years for a BR(SR) based, ready to run EMU such as the VEP to be produced. As production and design quality has improved vastly in that time I fully expect anything that is produced to be of merchantable quality and is likely to last more than a few weeks in service before it starts to go wrong. Most of us on here who have contributed to this thread have not achieved that with the Hornby VEP and I put it fairly & squarely on a poor, half baked cost cutting design to produce a "curates egg" model that looks nice but is not fit for purpose.

[S.A.C Martin]

I wish I had something positive to say about my experience with the 4VEP other than the enjoyment I have had researching members of the class through the online websites, databases, and Flickr accounts on the internet, but I just don't.

 

It's perhaps harsh in some ways because yes, many people have waited a very long time for a ready to run 4VEP to appear, but the fact of the matter is that this first batch has some serious issues, some rectifiable and quite easily so (turning bogies to correct orientation), some others not (cutting and shutting bogies and cab faces, remotoring units and rewiring).

 

I hope that my letters - going out tomorrow - can be taken in the spirit that they are meant; which is, simply, that I want to buy more 4VEP models from Hornby and that this is now in their hands, based on what they do from this point on with the information I, and others like me, provide.

[Gwiwer]

It is sad that we have to criticise the first foray into SR EMUs by Hornby

 

Not quite the first. They issued a 2-car class 466 Networker around 9 years ago which, from personal observation, would seem to be rather better than the Vep in many respects. Going back rather longer and into the annals of "Hornby" history there was the generic 2-car EMU alleged to look like a 2Bil, 2Nol or 2 car version of a 4Sub. It was freelance and actually represented none of the above, was considered good for its time, and came from the original Hornby company. Some are still running to this day.

[John M Upton]

Not quite the first. They issued a 2-car class 466 Networker around 9 years ago which, from personal observation, would seem to be rather better than the Vep in many respects. Going back rather longer and into the annals of "Hornby" history there was the generic 2-car EMU alleged to look like a 2Bil, 2Nol or 2 car version of a 4Sub. It was freelance and actually represented none of the above, was considered good for its time, and came from the original Hornby company. Some are still running to this day.

 

Even the first issues of the 466 Networker had some techincal issues (something about the inner coupling being too low and touching the track or something) and the motor bogie struggled in the rice pudding skin hauling department whilst the plastic the bogie frames were made from were notoriously brittle and many of the early examples disintegrated in transit between retailer and owner. As a collector of 466's in recent times, it has taken me four second hand purchases from various sources to finally get two that were in one piece!!

 

The old freelance BIL/NOL hybrid of yore has always held a certain charm to me, however there is no way I am paying the lunatic prices they are now fetching on Ebay!!!

[Xerces Fobe2]

 

Even the first issues of the 466 Networker had some techincal issues (something about the inner coupling being too low and touching the track or something) and the motor bogie struggled in the rice pudding skin hauling department whilst the plastic the bogie frames were made from were notoriously brittle and many of the early examples disintegrated in transit between retailer and owner. As a collector of 466's in recent times, it has taken me four second hand purchases from various sources to finally get two that were in one piece!!

 

The old freelance BIL/NOL hybrid of yore has always held a certain charm to me, however there is no way I am paying the lunatic prices they are now fetching on Ebay!!!

 

The Hornby Dublo Southern EMU which in fact was a resonably accurate model of an LMR Class 501 was very good for a model from the early 1960's

 

XF

[tomstaf]

Thanks CHARD, that's correct - sorry Tom, I agree with you and should have made that clearer in my post.

 

Whoops. I follow now. Hopefully my clarification will also answer Matabiau's qu.

 

Regards

 

Tom

[Matabiau]

I should point out mine was a rhetorical question and as such perhaps not quite appropriate, sorry for the confusion.

[Ceptic]

 

The Hornby Dublo Southern EMU which in fact was a resonably accurate model of an LMR Class 501 was very good for a model from the early 1960's

 

XF

 

Present day Hornby could have, at least, taken a leaf out of the Hornby Dublo's motor bogie set-up.

Mine will still haul itself, and eleven, or more, other coaches, quite happily, without all these current issues afflicting the VEP.

l always use this as a comparison with latter day performances.

(Mind you, it does use traction tyres)

[SRman]

I always found the Hornby Dublo SR EMU a little unreliable because the drive was to only one axle, which meant that if the traction tyre dug in it could lift the unpowered end off the track. Otherwise, it was a nice smooth mechanism ... good enough for me to consider putting a neo magnet into mine and adding a decoder.

 

I commented to Simon Kohler quite a few years ago that I really liked the Networker unit but that the motor arrangement let it down. I have fitted mine with a Black Beetle but even this struggles for traction as (like the 4VEP) it is not a very free runner.