Hornby 2023 - New tooling - Macaw B / Bogie Bolster C

[AY Mod]

Hornby announce new tooling for GW Macaw B and BR Bogie Bolster C

 

 

R60210 GWR, Bogie Bolster 'Macaw B', 107287 - Era 3

R60211 GWR, Bogie Bolster 'Macaw B', 107292 - Era 3

 

 

R60212 BR, Bogie Bolster 'C', W32798 - Era 4

R60213 BR, Bogie Bolster 'C', W32876 - Era 4
 

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

All the best to Hornby with this announcement.

 

The vehicle was at the very top end of Middle Polling in The 00 Wishlist Poll 2022 and missed High Polling by just four votes.

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

[Miss Prism]

'Macaw B' covers a variety of diagrams. Hornby's choice of the J21 duplicates the Bachmann.

[gwrrob]

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

'Macaw B' covers a variety of diagrams. Hornby's choice of the J21 duplicates the Bachmann.

 

Are any other diagrams preserved.

[The Stationmaster]

I'm genuinely surprised that Hornby have gone for a newly tooled 'traditional' wagon as that market is being heavily attacked by Rapido and Accursascale.  But they have at leat been a bit cleverer by going for a bogie vehicle which might be less likely - so far - for the competitors.  But as they seem to have little to show for this announcement so far i do wonder just how far they've got with it and when it will eventually appear?

[Miss Prism]

There's a Macaw H J25 on the Glos & Warwickshire Railways. There are others as well:

http://www.uksteam.info/gwr/wagons.htm

 

[Ravenser]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

I'm genuinely surprised that Hornby have gone for a newly tooled 'traditional' wagon as that market is being heavily attacked by Rapido and Accursascale.  But they have at least been a bit cleverer by going for a bogie vehicle which might be less likely - so far - for the competitors.  But as they seem to have little to show for this announcement so far i do wonder just how far they've got with it and when it will eventually appear?

 

A new wagon isn't just for Christmas.... it is going to sit in your tooling bank for 20-30 years 

 

The Bachmann model has been around a long time. I have a long stalled crane project that uses/used one as the runner wagon, so it could be about 20 years old.

 

More pertinently, when did Bachmann last release it? I get the impression that Barwell is now somewhat constrained in what they can offer because they can't afford to bid high enough to get all the production capacity they would like, given the price point they would have to sell at. (They can't price too far above Hornby). A wagon that Bachmann can't find capacity to make is a good target for Hornby .

 

Rapido seem to be doing wagons never before made (easy enough in a field as broad as wagons) . Accurascale have so far only announced 2 wagons that didn't get TOPS codes ( NER hoppers and the chaldrons ), and one steam loco , so their current emphasis is post steam. And Rapido will be using soft tooling /shorter runs and do seem to operate on a "do a project then move on" basis

 

Unless someone else is determined actively to target Hornby development projects I can't see a rival model being tooled against this . (A good reason for Hornby to announce the project early, especially in the context of a thin year)

 

More pertinently - can they make the numbers stack up for the investment? Tooling costs have escalated as well as production costs. However developing and tooling up a large wagon might not cost dramatically more than tooling up a 4 wheel open even though the retail  price may be significantly higher.

 

Hornby are potentially vulnerable to Bachmann hitting them with a release from paid-off tooling when they have a substantial tooling cost to recover themselves. They must be fairly confident Bachmann can't find production capacity (at a bearable price) to do it 

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

Looking at the Pat Hammond Ramsay's British Model Trains, the vehicle was made originally by Mainline in 1980 and taken into the Bachmann range in 1992.

 

The book (the 9th and final edition) only goes up to 2015, so I can't tell if Bachmann has made any updates.

 

Brian

[Paul.Uni]

16 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

More pertinently, when did Bachmann last release it? I get the impression that Barwell is now somewhat constrained in what they can offer because they can't afford to bid high enough to get all the production capacity they would like, given the price point they would have to sell at. (They can't price too far above Hornby). A wagon that Bachmann can't find capacity to make is a good target for Hornby .

Last announced 2019, IIRC released late 2021 or early 2022.

[The Stationmaster]

27 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

A new wagon isn't just for Christmas.... it is going to sit in your tooling bank for 20-30 years 

 

The Bachmann model has been around a long time. I have a long stalled crane project that uses/used one as the runner wagon, so it could be about 20 years old.

 

More pertinently, when did Bachmann last release it? I get the impression that Barwell is now somewhat constrained in what they can offer because they can't afford to bid high enough to get all the production capacity they would like, given the price point they would have to sell at. (They can't price too far above Hornby). A wagon that Bachmann can't find capacity to make is a good target for Hornby .

 

Rapido seem to be doing wagons never before made (easy enough in a field as broad as wagons) . Accurascale have so far only announced 2 wagons that didn't get TOPS codes ( NER hoppers and the chaldrons ), and one steam loco , so their current emphasis is post steam. And Rapido will be using soft tooling /shorter runs and do seem to operate on a "do a project then move on" basis

 

Unless someone else is determined actively to target Hornby development projects I can't see a rival model being tooled against this . (A good reason for Hornby to announce the project early, especially in the context of a thin year)

 

More pertinently - can they make the numbers stack up for the investment? Tooling costs have escalated as well as production costs. However developing and tooling up a large wagon might not cost dramatically more than tooling up a 4 wheel open even though the retail  price may be significantly higher.

 

Hornby are potentially vulnerable to Bachmann hitting them with a release from paid-off tooling when they have a substantial tooling cost to recover themselves. They must be fairly confident Bachmann can't find production capacity (at a bearable price) to do it 

While it doesn't apply to Bachmann branded reruns don't overlook the fact the Barwell has a second stream of production available through the EFE brand.  Hornby will no doubt announce production of the Macaw/BBC at some date and it quite possibly wasn't advanced enough for that at this launch but was effectively announced as 'we're working on it'.

 

Interesting to learn that rapido are using 'soft' one shot tooling but have already re-run several past models which doesn't seem to sit with that situation.  As you say wagons are not just for Christmas so no doubt demand will be there at future dates?

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Can't beat a Mainline/Rumney BBC IMHO.

 

Mike.

[Pteremy]

Don't forget the Dapol Bogie Bolster E - the Bauxite versions only appeared a couple of months ago.

[Pre Grouping fan]

10 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

 

Interesting to learn that rapido are using 'soft' one shot tooling but have already re-run several past models which doesn't seem to sit with that situation.  As you say wagons are not just for Christmas so no doubt demand will be there at future dates?

 

Don't think that's correct about Rapido using soft tooling.

 

The Canadian arm does leave a year or more between runs but they do reruns of their Locos/Coaches/Wagons. Doesn't make sense to scrap tooling and retool every time you want to do a run which brings all the tuning etc to get it the tools to run.

[spamcan61]

19 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Interesting to learn that rapido are using 'soft' one shot tooling but have already re-run several past models which doesn't seem to sit with that situation.  As you say wagons are not just for Christmas so no doubt demand will be there at future dates?

Maybe that's one long shot or several shorter shots, if you see what I mean. 

[mckendrick]

4 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

'Macaw B' covers a variety of diagrams. Hornby's choice of the J21 duplicates the Bachmann.

...thought they're clearly expanding on the possibilities with the release of the lever brake variant - making later BR variants highly likely.

[Ravenser]

42 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

While it doesn't apply to Bachmann branded reruns don't overlook the fact the Barwell has a second stream of production available through the EFE brand.  Hornby will no doubt announce production of the Macaw/BBC at some date and it quite possibly wasn't advanced enough for that at this launch but was effectively announced as 'we're working on it'.

 

Interesting to learn that rapido are using 'soft' one shot tooling but have already re-run several past models which doesn't seem to sit with that situation.  As you say wagons are not just for Christmas so no doubt demand will be there at future dates?

 

The EFE venture signals that Barwell have capacity issues: it's a way round it. I don't think there's any suggestion at this stage of Bachmann owned tooling being run elsewhere than Kadar , so EFE would not allow Bachmann to use existing tooling to hit back at Hornby.

 

I presume that Rapido are using so-called "soft" tooling , like Heljan : it's been repeatedly stated that Hornby and Bachmann use a different style of "hard" tooling , which costs more to tool but has a much longer life.

 

It's never been suggested that Heljan's tooling wears out after one run - but it has frequently been suggested that it makes viable their style of targetting "exotics" like 10800, Baby Deltics and the like where sales volume will be lower. Lower volume subjects run from cheaper , shorter life tooling. It is reasonable to assume Rapido are the same.That fits with the "Australian model" -  RTR , on a "do a project then move on" basis ,  at a premium price, with the lower tooling cost recovered over a much shorter run than traditionally the case, and the bulk of the production sold direct against pre-orders. Yoyu don't produce until you have the orders . Popular subjects may be re-run some years later, (as Heljan do anyway). The same applies to Revolution 

 

It's an effective way of doing RTR for markets traditionally thought too small to support a RTR range. But it does mean that models even of popular subjects are only intermittantly available. It also generally goes with the model being of something new, that people traditionally didn't expect to get. You mop up the entire suppressed demand for a decade , then move on.

 

There is a debate to be had whether Hornby and Bachmann are making a serious mistake by clinging to old-fashioned "hard" tooling at a much higher cost.  If you are never going to use the tooling for that kind of long high volume production , why spend the extra money on hard tooling that needs a long run to recover the cost?  If the market is shifting to short lower volume runs and intermittant use of your tools , hard-tooling might now be shooting yourself in the foot.  (Indeed looking at the ongoing saga of OO Class 37s , you'd have to say "hard" tooling is not worth the money. Is it possible that the reason for the new Bachmann 37 is that Barwell opted for "soft" tooling on their Mk3 37, and that tool is now life expired. meaning a new Mk4 tool??)

 

The point is simply that Rapido will be expecting to recover the bulk of the development and tooling cost on the initial production runs . Any reruns become bunce . They don't necessarily have the production capacity to keep expanding their product range (defined as those currently on offer) . They can keep doing several new wagons a year - but the price of that is that last year's wagon project makes way for this one.  (The Rapido J70 is no longer available, and they aren't taking orders for a rerun. Looks like that one has had its time, and they move on)

 

Hornby and Bachmann expect to recover their (higher) tooling and development costs over many years of production and a high unit volume . Whether that is still a realistic approach is open to discussion (EG Hornby really ought to "soft"-tool the B17/5 bodyshell. It can't possibly achieve the production runs to justify "hard" tooling)

 

Are Hornby suffering because they are using the wrong tooling technology now, and competitors use a more suitable short run technology? That's one debate we haven't had.

 

Hornby's behaviour on many fronts looks like they are trying to get long runs out of "hard" tooling. Is that a correct call any more?

 

 

[Dagworth]

Hmmm bogie bolster C’s, just need a few cement mixers now :-) 

 

Andi

[Miss Prism]

25 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

Hornby's behaviour on many fronts looks like they are trying to get long runs out of "hard" tooling. Is that a correct call any more?

 

61 years old, and counting

[Ravenser]

1 minute ago, Miss Prism said:

 

61 years old, and counting

They ran the  1960s Mk1 tooling into the ground as well, to bitter complaints  on here, every time it was re-released

 

Caley 123 has been re-released again...

 

There's a pattern. 

Edited January 10, 2023 by Ravenser

[AY Mod]

2 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Rapido will be using soft tooling /shorter runs

 

Evidence?

[Ravenser]

35 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Evidence?

 

Model Rail and Rapido certainly approached the J70 as a "one-time" project, and it's reasonable to assume that the same applies to other Model Rail/Rapido collaborations

 

On 27/05/2022 at 18:40, NHY 581 said:

With stocks levels now lower than a Dachshund's belt buckle, is it time to think of a re-run of the J70s ? 

 

Perhaps as a stand alone Rapido item ? 

 

 

Rob. 

 

On 31/05/2022 at 21:50, dibber25 said:

If we do a re-run - and to the best of my knowledge there are no plans to do so - it would probably include a GER livery this time. However, in the survey we did originally, the GER livery choice was evenly split between the blue and the red/grey schemes, meaning that neither got sufficient support to be worthwhile. (CJL)

 

The full cost of tooling and development must surely have been put against the first run, since there is no current plan for a second run. Why on earth would you use more expensive "hard" tooling for this?

 

That doesn't rule out a second run, any more than it stopped Heljan,  but the business model clearly wasn't based on ongoing production. And the same seems to be true of the other collaborations

 

Revolution have stated that some of their models are done by Rapido .And Revolution supply a handy project status list:  Revolution Trains projects

 

The "Completed Projects" section makes it obvious that most of these projects have been done on a "one-time" basis. No doubt a second run is possible if demand is obvious, but the numbers must have been done on a "one-time" basis, to pay off tooling/development costs against the first time. Again it doesn't make sense to do anything other than use shorter life/lower cost "Soft" tooling for this. Some of these projects will have been done through Rapido 

 

Given today's announcement, the Revolution OO TEA project is of particular relevance. One run, models delivered to those who ordered in late 2018 /early 2019. No intention expressed to do any further run.

 

Today Hornby have announced the re-release of their own TEA. Many would have declared that Hornby had ".lost" the TEA to Revolution - but plainly they haven't . The Revolution TEA has been and gone . If you want a TEA now and for the foreseeable future, then Hornby is the only game in town...

 

This is why I don't accept the argument that Rapido are going to "block out" Hornby from the OO wagon market. The "new players" do not keep their models continously available. There will always be large gaps in their availability - into which Hornby can release their own model.

 

Whether Hornby can generate enough unit volume over time from those gaps to recover the rapidly escalating cost of new "hard" tooling in China, plus the development costs , is another matter.

 

But that is a clash between two different business models , based on two different approaches to tooling.

It's also clear none of this stops Hornby knocking out models from existing paid-for tooling.

 

The current run of Drax Biomass wagons where the price has crashed from £83 /wagon  originally to £25/ wagon now (2 pack for £50 RRP from Hornby) is a startling indication of how costs drop when you don't have to pay off tooling and development costs 

[AY Mod]

19 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

Model Rail and Rapido certainly approached the J70 as a "one-time" project, and it's reasonable to assume that the same applies to other Model Rail/Rapido collaborations

 

You can't assume anything of the sort. I've said before, please stop making things up.

[andythenorth]

4 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Today Hornby have announced the re-release of their own TEA. Many would have declared that Hornby had ".lost" the TEA to Revolution - but plainly they haven't . The Revolution TEA has been and gone . If you want a TEA now and for the foreseeable future, then Hornby is the only game in town...

LOL the entertainment rolls on eh?  I really rate Revolution, but you're not going to buy your kids a Revolution TEA for the trainset. 😆

 

Anyone declaring Hornby had 'lost' that to Mike and Ben et al would have need all the froth wiping off them, and probably all the surrounding surfaces.  

[Enterprisingwestern]

13 hours ago, andythenorth said:

LOL the entertainment rolls on eh?  I really rate Revolution, but you're not going to buy your kids a Revolution TEA for the trainset. 😆

 

Anyone declaring Hornby had 'lost' that to Mike and Ben et al would have need all the froth wiping off them, and probably all the surrounding surfaces.  

 

Whilst I fully agree, it would have been good for Hornby to chuck the right bogies at the right centres under it and elevate the quality of it, despite its other shortcomings.

 

Mike.

[The Stationmaster]

20 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

The EFE venture signals that Barwell have capacity issues: it's a way round it. I don't think there's any suggestion at this stage of Bachmann owned tooling being run elsewhere than Kadar , so EFE would not allow Bachmann to use existing tooling to hit back at Hornby.

 

That wasn't what I was suggesting - was it.  I pointed out that Barwell have a second source of models through their EFE range;  I certainly didn't suggest or hint that they would use existing Kader tooling for that range (EFE models of course aren't made by Kader).

 

While I think it's fairly obvious why the current Barwell management went in for the creation of a second brand with a different stream of manufacture there's probably a lot more to it than whatever first comes to mind.  And don't overlook the fact that totally new models which have never appeared under any other brand have come from EFE including some fairly recently released LSWR coaches.  That alone suggests to me that EFE is maybe developing as a brand and could well produce further original models of its own.