jonathan452 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Got this today from the Signal Box at the Chatham Show. Even at a 'Box Shifter' price it was rather dissapointing as the Class 90 (other than the new motor) showed absolutely no improvement over Hornby's previous EWS release back in 1999 (R2110 - 90020 Sir Micheal Heron). I was expecting to see the new Brecknell Wills pantograph as produced for the ex Lima Class 87, instead we seem to have reverted back to the previous crude Hornby version. Even though the latter is of the working (rather than dummy) variety. Furthermore for the price I was also hoping for sprung buffers and working lights rather than what is basically a 'Railroad' specification. EDIT Monday 13.06.11 - On further inspection the Class 90 is missing the cab interiors (you can see from one end to the other) despite all previous releases including this. I would like to know if this is a quality control issue or cost cutting/penny pinching by Hornby? For the price this really is a very poor buy. With the DVT it would have been nice to have used black plastic for the body rather than transluscent self coloured red, even though this would have involved extra painting for the roof. Again the price would more than justify this. Had I not bought the accompanying coaches already (also with transluscent self coloured red on the roofs) I may have given it a miss. Presumably the next issue of Rail Express will contain a review although I will be interested if others share my views. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike tugsandsheds Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I was going to buy this and thecoach packs to team up with my Bachmann "Lady Penelope" By the sounds of it I'm glad I haven't ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 I was going to buy this and thecoach packs to team up with my Bachmann "Lady Penelope" By the sounds of it I'm glad I haven't ! Unless it ends up in the bargain bin a few months down the line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 EDIT Monday 13.06.11 - On further inspection the Class 90 is missing the cab interiors (you can see from one end to the other) despite all previous releases including this. I would like to know if this is a quality control issue or cost cutting/penny pinching by Hornby? For the price this really is a very poor buy. As I understand it, this release was meant to come with a Limby style power bogie as part of Hornby's quest to divest itselfy of ringfield powered units, is that the case? If so it could be that the changes required to the tooling meant that the existing cab interiors might not clear the new power bogie and therefore both interiors got left out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 As I understand it, this release was meant to come with a Limby style power bogie as part of Hornby's quest to divest itselfy of ringfield powered units, is that the case? If so it could be that the changes required to the tooling meant that the existing cab interiors might not clear the new power bogie and therefore both interiors got left out? Yes it has got the new 'Limby' power unit. It had indeed crossed my mind that this may have been a possible reason for the cab interiors being left out. Unfortunately this does nothing to enhance the 'Railroad' appearance. Also looking at http://www.Hornby.co...dvt-train-pack/ the following is mentioned-: Special Features Sprung Buffers Extensive Detail All-wheel pickups Directional lighting Working head/tail lights Non-working Pantograph NEM Couplings However the above doesn't note that most of the advertised features only relate to the DVT and not the Class 90. Also note the section about 'Non Working Pantograph'. Does this infer that it was originally intended to fit the 'Limby' Class 87 version but got omitted at a late stage for one reason or another? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold pheaton Posted June 13, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 13, 2011 Is the model DCC ready? If it is then despite the fitted pantograph which matches the 86s...i think you might find its not actually connected with the motor...so it really is non working! Reason being that some resourceful folk have working OLE and you would fry decoder with 24 volts going through it instead of 12 through the wheels.. Having said that im sure Hornby dispensed with the pantograph wiring long ago on the 86? Yes i concur with the cost £109 is the price ive seen it at... shocking really if it had some mk3s with it then fair enough but its just the loco and dvt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike tugsandsheds Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Unless it ends up in the bargain bin a few months down the line. I'll kep my eye out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Also looking at http://www.Hornby.co...dvt-train-pack/ the following is mentioned-: There has been some rampant cut'n'paste-itis on the Hornby website and I think this has been another victim of it all I've got to admit the set's RRP is rather high compared to the RRP of the components in the current range; For instance, both listed as new, the Class 90 has an RRP of £58.49 and £77.25 in First Scotrail and Frieghtliner liveries respectively (is the difference due to a licensing arrangement on the FL livery..?) and the One DVT is £56.49. There's not any track in the set or anything like that is there, but I'm hard pushed to justify the price difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium NaN Posted June 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 14, 2011 I opened mine up on Saturday and the overhead wiring is connected from the pantograph. I didn't pay too much attention to where it was headed so it may be the switch bypasses the DCC socket if running on overheads. I also didn't notice the missing cabs, and only had a visual comparison on the bodyshell to see if old models will fit. I'll have a better look when I get chance. Re the pricing comment on the standalone models. It does not appear to be licensing costs for Freightliner as the Hornby 86 in Freightiner Powerhaul is actually a couple of pounds cheaper than the Scotrail model! I would guess this is simply down to Hornby pricing a what they think people will pay: there hasn't been a Freightliner 90 in a while whereas there have been 2 other Scotrail 90s in recent years, and the 86 has it's critics plus there's the alternative Heljan product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium NaN Posted June 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 14, 2011 Should have added the new motor seems a large improvement, and it definitely has an 8 pin DCC socket. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 If the model supplied doesn't meet the specifications in the advert, why not send it back and ask for a refund? Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted June 14, 2011 Author Share Posted June 14, 2011 If the model supplied doesn't meet the specifications in the advert, why not send it back and ask for a refund? Geoff Endacott The link was not an 'advert' as such but the product description on the Hornby Website (RRP £143!). The point I am getting at is that I had high hopes for this model and was preperared to pay a premuim price for a premium product. Whilst not expecting a re-tooled Class 90 I had been hoping for a number of incremental improvements (other than just the new motor) to a twenty plus year old tooling to bring it nearer to the standard of the accompanying DVT. The sort of incremental improvements Bachmann regularly make to their D&E models, despite most of these being of a far more recent pedigree. Instead we have got a 'Railroad' standard model but not at a 'Railroad' price. It is not a case of getting a refund as strictly speaking it is not faulty but in retrospect I would not have bought it. Hattons now have their pictures uploaded, just look at that wonky pantograph. The proof of the pudding however will be the magazine reviews, particularly those in 'Model Rail' and 'Rail Express'. Anyway I have now put my money where my mouth is and written to Hornby as follows-: Tuesday 14.06.11 RE: Virgin Charter Relief 'Pretendolino' - R2955 EWS Class 90 & Mk3 DVT Train Pack/R4433 Open Standard Coach (TSO) Dear Hornby I previously sent you an e-mail back on the 11th January of this year concerning the R4433 Virgin Charter Relief 'Pretendolino' Open Standard Coach (TSO) mentioning that it had incorrectly been fitted with the First Open Seating Unit. To this day I have not received a reply. Further to this I have just purchased the delayed R2955 EWS Class 90 & Mk3 DVT Train Pack. I am extremely disappointed with the latter, representing particularly poor value for money (even after buying it at a discounted price). I had rather hoped that for the price a series of modest upgrades would have been made to the Class 90 tooling to bring it nearer to the standards of the DVT. Other than the new motor we have a model of ‘Railroad’ standards which in some respects is actually inferior to the last Hornby EWS Class 90 released way back in 1999. I would have expected the following upgrades-: · New scale (Brecknell Wills) pantograph as per the one fitted to the re-issued ex Lima Class 87. · Working directional lights. · Sprung buffers. · NEM coupling sockets. · Cab interiors (these were fitted to previous Class 90 releases). I would be interested to know whether any of the above items were originally intended for this model but may have been shelved to facilitate its delayed release. Even with the Mk3 DVT I feel that an element of corner cutting has taken place with the use of translucent self coloured red plastic for the main body. This allows light bleed in the roof area. I will re-iterate that this train pack is particularly poor value for money and has made me think twice about buying any future Hornby releases. Therefore I would welcome your response. So we will await to see if I recieve a response (Call no: HA82026). Before anybody thinks that I’m Hornby bashing I did get also two of the new KFA container wagons at the same time which I’m more than happy with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 If the model supplied doesn't meet the specifications in the advert, why not send it back and ask for a refund? If it had been ordered from Hornby online, then there would be a case for that, but it depends how the shop the OP ordered from advertised the set. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Endacott Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 I would have thought that an item advertised as XYZ and supplied as XYZ should match the description of XYZ on the manufacturer's web site. Geoff Endacott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium NaN Posted June 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 14, 2011 Just checked and I can fit an old bodyshell onto the new chassis fine, so the omission of the cab pieces may be accidental. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickL2008 Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Had a look at this set myself, £109 seems an awful lot for a dated Horby 90 and DVT. that saod the DVT model continues to look good, but its let down badly by the class 90 supplied, which itself still has crude moulded detail, that awful clunker of a pantograph representing the Backnall Willis, and the uneasy to remove tension lock. I think this set should of been priced more like £50-£70 instead NL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I would have thought that an item advertised as XYZ and supplied as XYZ should match the description of XYZ on the manufacturer's web site. But at the end of the day, the transaction is between the retailer and the consumer and the burden of false advertising has to fall on the point of sale if anywhere. If you ordered from Hornby based upon the online description, then there is clearly a disparity between the description and the goods that would be supplied, but I guess very few people want to order things at RRP so Hornby have dodged the bullet so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted June 17, 2011 Author Share Posted June 17, 2011 Reply recieved from Hornby in respect of my e-mail above. (Note the e-mail I sent on the 11th January this year was from the same address, therefore I cannot comment as to why it wasn't answered). Also note how I am referred to as 'Mr Jonathan' rather than using my surmame (though this was supplied). Finally the fact that the time of the e-mail is fourty minutes AFTER from when I am submitting this post. Would this suggest that it was sent from abroad rather than Margate? From: customercare@Hornby.com [mailto:customercare@Hornby.com] Sent: 17 June 2011 17:35 To: xxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Call No: HA82026 Dear Mr. Jonathan, I am sorry to hear of your disappointment with the R2955 EWS Class 90 & Mk3 DVT Train Pack you have recently purchased. While I am more than happy to pass on any feedback, be it positive or negative, I must mention that I am unaware of any limiting factors on the production of this train pack. I will certainly pass on your thoughts to our Development team for their consideration however. I have also checked our system by your email address for your previous email and can only find two other emails back from 2007 and 2008. Was the email from a different address? Do you have an email reference for this email? Kind regards, Adam Jones Customer Care Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raffles Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 I wonder what you would like from Hornby in this instance... An apology? Money off? A fully re-tooled 90 just for you? What? Personally, if I were as dissatisfied as you appear to be, it would have gone back straight away. As has been said before around these parts, by buying what you consider to be poor quality, you are supporting that level of product. Or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted June 20, 2011 Author Share Posted June 20, 2011 I wonder what you would like from Hornby in this instance... An apology? Money off? A fully re-tooled 90 just for you? What? Personally, if I were as dissatisfied as you appear to be, it would have gone back straight away. As has been said before around these parts, by buying what you consider to be poor quality, you are supporting that level of product. Or something. A fully re-tooled Class 90 just for me would do very nicely thank you . On a more pragmatic basis the missing cab interior would be good as I am now of the impression that this was definately an ommision/quality control issue. Perhapes also the correct TSO interior unit for the two R4433 Open Standard Coaches I previously purchased. Maybe I should have taken it back but that would entailed a long and costly journey. It would have been better if I had waited for the magazine reviews and pictures, however this model was on my wish list for a long time and impatience got the better of me. Looking at some of the recent posts on the Tornado thread (in respect of moulded handrails on the non railroad version) various people were suggesting a possible conflict between the aspirations of the marketing department and those of the accountants. I do therefore wonder if this model suffered the same fate? Due its delayed release there may have been a desire just to get in-to the shops ASAP to bring in the revenue, so any planned upgrades to the Class 90 (particularly the pantograph) were quietly shelved? At this point I am going to shut up and wait for the magazine reviews in Model Rail and Rail Express, hopefully these should be in the editions that appear towards the end of July. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westie7 Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Also note how I am referred to as 'Mr Jonathan' rather than using my surmame (though this was supplied). I find that I'm only referred to as Mr Mark when I'm in the Middle East, Oman or Pakistan... Rgds Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan452 Posted July 16, 2011 Author Share Posted July 16, 2011 At this point I am going to shut up and wait for the magazine reviews in Model Rail and Rail Express, hopefully these should be in the editions that appear towards the end of July. So the review in Model Rail 159 has now arrived. DVT 86% Locomotive 60% Noting that the locomotive still commands a premium price for a fairly basic model lacking modern features. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 Noting that the locomotive still commands a premium price for a fairly basic model lacking modern features. While I agree about it being a little pricey, now you have it, it would make an excellent basis for a project - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/14161-intercity-class-90/ The shape is spot and I've always thought it captures the look of a ninety rather well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 Hi All Am I the only one consistantly bemused by this? EVERY time Hornby release anything from the railroad range we get people moaning that the power bogie is different but nothing else is changed. IT NEVER HAS! When are people going to learn that the railroad range is NOT going to have any improvements over what came before? Why would Hornby go to the expense of ammending a tool for its budget range when it seems people are happy to buy it regardless at an over inflated cost when you can get the old version at sometimes half the price? Can people please understand the obvious fact that Hornby is all or nothing! The railroad range is what we had with a new power bogie and (probably) a better paint job while the rest of the range is their high end stuff, There is no halfway house. The fact that another company does small changes to its range has nothing to do with it. I constantly think peoples expectations of the railraod range is completely unrealistic although I do agree with the OP here in that its way over priced for what it is. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 Hi All Am I the only one consistantly bemused by this? EVERY time Hornby release anything from the railroad range we get people moaning that the power bogie is different but nothing else is changed. IT NEVER HAS! When are people going to learn that the railroad range is NOT going to have any improvements over what came before? Why would Hornby go to the expense of ammending a tool for its budget range when it seems people are happy to buy it regardless at an over inflated cost when you can get the old version at sometimes half the price? Can people please understand the obvious fact that Hornby is all or nothing! The railroad range is what we had with a new power bogie and (probably) a better paint job while the rest of the range is their high end stuff, There is no halfway house. The fact that another company does small changes to its range has nothing to do with it. I constantly think peoples expectations of the railraod range is completely unrealistic although I do agree with the OP here in that its way over priced for what it is. Cheers Jim Jim, I absolutely agree with you in principle. But the DVT pack with the class 90 in this case, isn't in the Railroad range, nor is it advertised as such. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.