Hornby 2023 - Steam locomotives

[frobisher]

3 minutes ago, Jon Harbour said:

If people buy it. I desperately want a decent 14xx - but the wait goes on...

 

It's about time somebody had the testicular fortitude to take Hornby on with this model. 

 

I'll put a fiver on Rapido for Titgate Part II...

 

[Hilux5972]

5 hours ago, Rhydgaled said:

what's with the wheels on the 1924 edition of Flying Scotsman (the one with something like a coat of arms on the cabside and both 'LNER' and '4472' on the non-corridor tender)? 

That’s how it looked at the Wembley exhibition. Polished rims instead of painted. Will be interesting how they pull that off. Pic from the NRM Facebook page. 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by Hilux5972
Added images

[jonnyuk]

9 hours ago, Jon Harbour said:

 

If people buy it. I desperately want a decent 14xx - but the wait goes on...

 

It's about time somebody had the testicular fortitude to take Hornby on with this model. 

someone did and made a right mess of it, ok not a complete mess, but more a mess than success.

[5Dublo2]

The Hornby website entry for the GWR 14xx (R30319) has changed from being named as 1401 with a picture of 1451, to now being named as 1451 to match the picture 

[Dunsignalling]

10 minutes ago, 5Dublo2 said:

The Hornby website entry for the GWR 14xx (R30319) has changed from being named as 1401 with a picture of 1451, to now being named as 1451 to match the picture 

 

I presume Hornby did 1401 some years ago in the Titfield Thunderbolt train-pack of "happier" times....

 

[45568]

Of interest to me, and the only item from this year's announcement, is the Tyne Dock 9F. Another run of Consett hoppers from KR models on the horizon?

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

[Miss Prism]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

I presume Hornby did 1401 some years ago in the Titfield Thunderbolt train-pack of "happier" times....

 

True. But 1401's time in the film was when it did not have a topfeed.

[tomparryharry]

3 hours ago, jonnyuk said:

someone did and made a right mess of it, ok not a complete mess, but more a mess than success.

Yes, I tend to agree. I've got a DJM iteration.  It does look good.  It's pity that the mechanics of the model do not match the aspirations  of the exterior. Captain Kernow of this parish very kindly donated a chassis  for me to have a post-mortem on it.  It's still here, nicely boxed up. Every time I go near it, It goes "Grrr!, Grrr!, WOOF! WOOF!  

 

The problem with the 14xx, is how do you get past the field of fallout over the 2 models?  fair play to Hornby, the prospect of remaking the model is fraught  with trip wires all over it.  Loss of quality reputation, and the prospect of being tarred with the same brush. Oh dear.....

 

On the other hand.... A change of scale would serve in this instance. Hornby could do a full 'bells& whistles' on the much-maligned model. 2 models: A GWR version, sans topfeed, and a BRW version with topfeed.

 

As  Jim Bowen said.. "Look what you would've won......"

[APOLLO]

Just reading this in the Mazak Zinc Pest thread.

 

 

Given the (eye watering) costs of current model locomotives and stock, are Hornby (etc) still using Mazac in the frames of new locomotives, and if they are, why ?

 

More and more locos are added to the above list virtually weekly. Given that many locos will be bought as a collectors item I dread to fear what the said collector will find when looking at his "as new" loco in a few years time.

 

This, in my mind, is a serious issue as it now involves serious money being invested.

 

Mazak should be banned, The Chinese (sub contracting manufacturers ?) cannot be trusted to get this (the mazac menu) right, as many very recent models from various manufacturers has shown. There are surely alternatives that can be used, even if they cost a bit more.

 

Brit15

[rogerzilla]

Is mazak used for the Dublo die-cast bodies?  It would be ironic if they didn't last as long as the plastic ones.

Edited January 11, 2023 by rogerzilla

[AdamOrmorod]

13 hours ago, Rhydgaled said:

...

Personally I might (big if) have been tempted by a model of Sir Nigel Gresley in BR dull blue as seen in preservation (and this image from Wikipedia https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2011-04-24_SirNigelGresley.jpg) if it was issued as a normal release and not with a limited/special/die-cast edition premium price tag. Has Hornby ever done it as regular release or only as some kind of special edition?

...

Not SNG, but a more cost-effective model might be renumbering the Mallard in BR Blue they did a couple of years ago, as it has the double chimney and correct tender type, and the record plaques even are similar at a distance. However, the speedo drive would be missing, and the cab roof suffers from the slight droop some of the more recent A4s have had.

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

True. But 1401's time in the film was when it did not have a topfeed.

Nothing a file can't fix!

[Dunsignalling]

59 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Just reading this in the Mazak Zinc Pest thread.

 

 

Given the (eye watering) costs of current model locomotives and stock, are Hornby (etc) still using Mazac in the frames of new locomotives, and if they are, why ?

 

More and more locos are added to the above list virtually weekly. Given that many locos will be bought as a collectors item I dread to fear what the said collector will find when looking at his "as new" loco in a few years time.

 

This, in my mind, is a serious issue as it now involves serious money being invested.

 

Mazak should be banned, The Chinese (sub contracting manufacturers ?) cannot be trusted to get this (the mazac menu) right, as many very recent models from various manufacturers has shown. There are surely alternatives that can be used, even if they cost a bit more.

 

Brit15

If said collector doesn't open the box, chances are he'll never know.

 

Schroedinger's locos.

 

I've definitely bought my last Hornby T9 though because as far as i can make out, none of them can be trusted to be free of rot.

[spamcan61]

1 hour ago, rogerzilla said:

Is mazak used for the Dublo die-cast bodies?  It would be ironic if they didn't last as long as the plastic ones.

I doubt it's specifically Mazak (which is a specific product from a specific manufacturer) but I imagine they will be Zinc alloy of some sort so there's likely to be some degree of risk. 

[APOLLO]

42 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

I doubt it's specifically Mazak (which is a specific product from a specific manufacturer) but I imagine they will be Zinc alloy of some sort so there's likely to be some degree of risk. 

 

There should be zero risk of metal rot in a £250 + locomotive. It's not as though they are kept outside in all weathers (OK, Garden Railways are, but my LGB & Bachmann Gauge 1 locos get wet occasionally, stored indoors and are rot free at the moment).

 

Is anyone talking to the manufacturers re this ? The stuff needs banning from new models. If so have the manufacturers given any feedback - I've searched but can't find any.

 

I have a couple of Hornby Railroad 9F's with swollen tender frames, well known problem, They still run OK (ish). Got em when they were cheap at under fifty quid from Hattons.  A Heljan Brush 4 "Isambard Kingdom Brunel" is also starting to disintegrate (it is after all a "Duff") !!, but still runs well - God only knows what is happening to other items in my extensive collection. 

 

Brit15

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Just reading this in the Mazak Zinc Pest thread.

 

 

Given the (eye watering) costs of current model locomotives and stock, are Hornby (etc) still using Mazac in the frames of new locomotives, and if they are, why ?

 

More and more locos are added to the above list virtually weekly. Given that many locos will be bought as a collectors item I dread to fear what the said collector will find when looking at his "as new" loco in a few years time.

 

This, in my mind, is a serious issue as it now involves serious money being invested.

 

Mazak should be banned, The Chinese (sub contracting manufacturers ?) cannot be trusted to get this (the mazac menu) right, as many very recent models from various manufacturers has shown. There are surely alternatives that can be used, even if they cost a bit more.

 

Brit15

Ive not seen 6100 before but other Scots around this period have been affected. Ive a Rebuilt patriot  thats the same.

its in that 2004-8 window where early days China seemed to have a number with issues with a wide selection of various HO/OO models.

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by adb968008

[JSpencer]

Concerning Tiger, I think I may have found a suitable prototype for her!

 

Now we all know that Lion today has raised some doubts as to the true origin of the locomotive particularly as certain dimensions do not match.

 

There is a nice youtube video here. At the 2 minutes 9secs part, there are 2 photos showing the condition that Lion was found in, in 1919.

 

 

 

Now the cylinders of Lion as built 11in by 20in. Today's Lion 14in by 18in and has 5feet wheels.

The original Lion was made at Todd, Kitson and Laird.

 

It is said that today's Lion was one of three locos brought Mersey Docks and Harbors, the other 2 coming from the Lancashire and Yorkshire railway. Those from the L&Y were doubtlessly originally built for the Manchester & Leeds railway.

 

When I Look at the 1919 photos, the boiler barrel is relatively feature less, this is shown in the video and raises doubts that the Lion today was ever built at Todd, Kitson & Laird. (again stated in the video).

So I looked at where the Manchester & Leeds brought their locos from. They had several sources, most could be dismissed as having nothing like the 1919 photos.

And then boom, I hit upon the Haigh Foundry and here is Ajax built for Leicester &Swannington railway;

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254818071340

or check 3rd image here: https://www.meppostcards.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=2834

 

And in 1841, Haigh Foundry built 4 locos with an 0-4-2 wheel base, 5ft diameter wheels 14*18in cylinders (the exact dimensions of Lion today) for the Manchester & Leeds railway. Numbers 33,34,35 and 36.

I suspect today's Lion is one of these four!

 

===========

 

Edit: since writing this, the 2 L&Y locos were 2-2-2s so counts them out but there were other 0-4-2s brought later. And the pistons, cylinders and motion are unchanged since it was built in the 1840s.

Another video...

 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by JSpencer

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, JSpencer said:

Concerning Tiger, I think I may have found a suitable prototype for her!

 

Now we all know that Lion today has raised some doubts as to the true origin of the locomotive particularly as certain dimensions do not match.

 

There is a nice youtube video here. At the 2 minutes 9secs part, there are 2 photos showing the condition that Lion was found in, in 1919.

 

 

 

Now the cylinders of Lion as built 11in by 20in. Today's Lion 14in by 18in and has 5feet wheels.

The original Lion was made at Todd, Kitson and Laird.

 

It is said that today's Lion was one of three locos brought Mersey Docks and Harbors, the other 2 coming from the Lancashire and Yorkshire railway. Those from the L&Y were doubtlessly originally built for the Manchester & Leeds railway.

 

When I Look at the 1919 photos, the boiler barrel is relatively feature less, this is shown in the video and raises doubts that the Lion today was ever built at Todd, Kitson & Laird. (again stated in the video).

So I looked at where the Manchester & Leeds brought their locos from. They had several sources, most could be dismissed as having nothing like the 1919 photos.

And then boom, I hit upon the Haigh Foundry and here is Ajax built for Leicester &Swannington railway;

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254818071340

or check 3rd image here: https://www.meppostcards.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=2834

 

And in 1841, Haigh Foundry built 4 locos with an 0-4-2 wheel base, 5ft diameter wheels 14*18in cylinders (the exact dimensions of Lion today) for the Manchester & Leeds railway. Numbers 33,34,35 and 36.

I suspect today's Lion is one of these four!

What is Lion today is probably no more original than the replica coaches they built for it.

[Ravenser]

5 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Just reading this in the Mazak Zinc Pest thread.

 

 

Given the (eye watering) costs of current model locomotives and stock, are Hornby (etc) still using Mazac in the frames of new locomotives, and if they are, why ?

 

More and more locos are added to the above list virtually weekly. Given that many locos will be bought as a collectors item I dread to fear what the said collector will find when looking at his "as new" loco in a few years time.

 

This, in my mind, is a serious issue as it now involves serious money being invested.

 

Mazak should be banned, The Chinese (sub contracting manufacturers ?) cannot be trusted to get this (the mazac menu) right, as many very recent models from various manufacturers has shown. There are surely alternatives that can be used, even if they cost a bit more.

 

Brit15

 

 

There seem to have been just four  models reported with mazak rot since June last year.

 

Some of the models being reported are HO , and some are vintage Triang dating back to the late 50s, where only one batch in a long production run will be implicated 

[TomScrut]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

The stuff needs banning from new models.

 

And replace with what?

[Pmorgancym]

13 hours ago, Hilux5972 said:

That’s how it looked at the Wembley exhibition. Polished rims instead of painted. Will be interesting how they pull that off. Pic from the NRM Facebook page. 

 

That's going to look worse with Hornby's patented flying rear pony...

[rogerzilla]

13 minutes ago, Pmorgancym said:

That's going to look worse with Hornby's patented flying rear pony...

It's a flying pony or a pivoting truck, which is arguably even worse, as the prototype didn't pivot.

 

It only looks terrible on tight curves

[tomparryharry]

Mazak doesn't need banning, or replacing. It just needs a tight QC programme. As an alloy, its proportions need tight control. The temperature is a huge factor, if it's too cold, it wont pour properly: Too hot, and you'll be introducing gas into the material; normally in this case, Hydrogen. Humidity: A lot of alloys change composition with a change in the weather. The method of casting also has a great influence on the outcome. Pressure die casting, or gravity mould casting? Mould temperature? 

 

Remember that the subcontractor will try to cut costs, despite what anyone thinks. For a tight QC system, someone needs a mass spectrometer, and you can't buy one from the back pages of Exchange & Mart.  Such equipment & inspection adds another tier of costs. 

 

Remember that these are just 'toys'. They might be important to you, but the oriental gent (or lady) might have other ideas. You won't improve quality until you issue material specifications, and enforce it.  That, of course, is cost.....

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, TomScrut said:

 

And replace with what?

 

Steel, (as in the blocks fitted in Lima diesels), Cast Iron, Brass castings anything BUT Mazak And if it adds a few quid to the cost, so what on a £250 + "investment" ?

 

As Tomparryharry writes above, quality control is essential, but lack of QA is the downfall of lots of things manufactured in China. I once bought a box of Fibre tap washers, made in China, lasted 5 minutes and leaking, yes, they were fibre - AKA cardboard !!!!

 

I would like to hear Hornby's (Simon Kohler) views regarding this. These problems will arise well into the future when spares are most likely non available. 

 

It seems a bit of a lottery.

 

Brit15

 

 

 

[TomScrut]

35 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Steel, (as in the blocks fitted in Lima diesels), Cast Iron, Brass castings

 

I expect that brass would be the only practical substitute there, and it would be a lot more expensive I think. When people are already complaining about prices.

 

36 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

As Tomparryharry writes above, quality control is essential

 

Which is why it doesn't seem to happen in recent models.

 

1 hour ago, tomparryharry said:

Mazak doesn't need banning, or replacing. It just needs a tight QC programme.

 

Exactly!