Hornby corroded class 31 chassis

[bigherb]

Is there not some recourse for faults that are clear manufacturing faults which would have been present at the time of manufacture and not related to wear and tear? I'm sure one of the several solicitors and barristers on here could add to that. 

Yes but these models are now getting on for twelve years old. Hornby have been very fair in repairing/reimbursing for ten years which is considerably better than other manufactures especially Bachmann with the 42 Warship.

[Roy Langridge]

Is there not some recourse for faults that are clear manufacturing faults which would have been present at the time of manufacture and not related to wear and tear? I'm sure one of the several solicitors and barristers on here could add to that.

Yes, as my post above mentioned, but for 6 years.

 

Roy

[Holmesfeldian]

Our company does metal cutting and milling on CNC machines and I'm happy to investigate the economics of producing new chassis blocks.

 

We can cut steel and phosphor bronze quite easily and are our regular materials.

 

I note on the interweb that the density of mazak is roughly 6.6 g/cm3 whereas steel is 7.8/cm3, brass is 8.5g/cm3 and phosphor bronze is 8.8gcm/3

 

I would imagine phosphor bronze would more desirable due to its higher density but steel or brass would obviously be cheaper to buy

 

If someone can supply a CAD drawing of the Hornby chassis block (or a pattern) - or even an accurate dimension drawing, I can cost the production to see if it's economical to offer high quality CNC engineered replacement blocks.

 

Clearly the more produced, the cheaper the uint cost.

 

Would there be a demand for this (and other affected loco types if successful) ?

 

And are the Hornby chassis blocks the same for super detailed and RR models ?

Edited May 31, 2017 by Holmesfeldian

[Georgeconna]

Our company does metal cutting and milling on CNC machines and I'm happy to investigate the economics of producing new chassis blocks.

 

We can cut steel and phosphor bronze quite easily and are our regular materials.

 

I note on the interweb that the density of mazak is roughly 6.6 g/cm3 whereas steel is 7.8/cm3 and phosphor bronze is 8.8gcm/3

 

I would imagine phosphor bronze would more desirable due to its higher density but steel would obviously be cheaper to buy

 

If someone can supply a CAD drawing of the Hornby chassis block (or a pattern) - or even an accurate dimension drawing, I can cost the production to see if it's economical to offer high quality CNC engineered replacement blocks.

 

Clearly the more produced, the cheaper the uint cost.

 

Would there be a demand for this (and other affected loco types if successful) ?

 

And are the Hornby chassis blocks the same for super detailed and RR models ?

 

 

And are the Hornby chassis blocks the same for super detailed and RR models ? = NO, ones plastic.

 

Good idea though on producing a replacement chassis.

 

[pharrc20]

I've said it before and the mere suggestion was dismissed but surely some bright spark could make a 3D printed chassis with the exact same cut-outs,holes etc. as the Hornby one to allow owners to swap over their broken rotted mazak chassis for a plastic one. Sure there won't be as much weight as the mazak type and you could strengthen the new version around the cab floor weakspots. In the age where you can 3D print foodstuffs, body parts and god knows what else surely a 31 chassis would be a doddle??

Paul

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...If someone can supply a CAD drawing of the Hornby chassis block (or a pattern) - or even an accurate dimension drawing, I can cost the production to see if it's economical to offer high quality CNC engineered replacement blocks.

 

Clearly the more produced, the cheaper the unit cost.

 

Would there be a demand for this (and other affected loco types if successful) ?

 

And are the Hornby chassis blocks the same for super detailed and RR models ?

Interesting idea, my thoughts would be:

 

It is quite possible that the chassis block alters in detail within the super-detailed model variants so far produced, that's one aspect to be cautious of.

 

Even with the cab ends fallen off (never seen those!) the castings are pretty elaborate. Something far simpler would suffice to mount the drive components, little more than a U channel as a basis, with appropriate holes and cut outs; rather than replicating the casting in every detail.

[BrushVeteran]

Our company does metal cutting and milling on CNC machines and I'm happy to investigate the economics of producing new chassis blocks.

 

We can cut steel and phosphor bronze quite easily and are our regular materials.

 

I note on the interweb that the density of mazak is roughly 6.6 g/cm3 whereas steel is 7.8/cm3, brass is 8.5g/cm3 and phosphor bronze is 8.8gcm/3

 

I would imagine phosphor bronze would more desirable due to its higher density but steel or brass would obviously be cheaper to buy

 

If someone can supply a CAD drawing of the Hornby chassis block (or a pattern) - or even an accurate dimension drawing, I can cost the production to see if it's economical to offer high quality CNC engineered replacement blocks.

 

Clearly the more produced, the cheaper the uint cost.

 

Would there be a demand for this (and other affected loco types if successful) ?

 

And are the Hornby chassis blocks the same for super detailed and RR models ?

If the price was right I'd probably purchase a dozen or so to resurrect some old Lima Brush Type 2's and improve the running quality.

[Classsix T]

Would there not be some sort of copyright issue replicating the chassis to the exact design as the original manufacturer?

In which case, 34theletterbetweenB&D's suggestion would amply suffice.

 

C6T.

[Roy Langridge]

I would be interested in two.

 

Copyright would not be an issue if Hornby gave their blessing for a simple replacement programme.

 

Roy

Edited May 31, 2017 by Roy Langridge

[Graham456]

Copyright would lot be an issue if Hornby gave their blessing for a simple replacement programme.

Roy

Well Branchline have and do replacement M7 milled brass part chassis with no law suits yet! So I would have thought a milled chassis would not be a problem, after all you or someone has to buy a 31 from Hornby in the first place for you to repair it later

But I would be amazed if any one has a CAD drawing other than Hornby to produce the new one from as asked by Holmesfeldf

[sb67]

Seems quite a big problem, I wonder how many locos are corroding or will do in the future?

Steve.

Edited May 31, 2017 by sb67

[rob D2]

Hmmm,

Doesn't leave me with much faith in Hornby diesels TBH, when the faults are still coming out.

 

Disintegrating 31, now a 50, hope my 2 class 60s don't have issues....

 

Bit of a pain as a WR modeller, I could do with more 50s and 31s but the potential future layout will be chock full of 37s and 47s

[Andrew P]

Is there not some recourse for faults that are clear manufacturing faults which would have been present at the time of manufacture and not related to wear and tear? I'm sure one of the several solicitors and barristers on here could add to that. 

Hornby SHOULD be manufacturing just Chassis for customers, and then all would be good in this bad bad world.

[Dan Griffin]

what  class 50's are affected? is there a list?

[Wayne 56089]

Hatton have great example for sale

 

http://www.hattons.co.uk/274674/Hornby_R2413_SD02_Class_31_31270_in_BR_blue_weathered_Pre_owned_Re_attached_cab_ends_chassis_no/StockDetail.aspx

 

The description is, interesting to say the least

[Dan Griffin]

One question I have, as people are in the know more than me, could we (as in modellers) crowd fund Hornby into producing a run of chassis?

 

no bodies ect, in much the same way as retailers/magazine commission limited editions?

 

just a working chassis would be cheaper than a full blown model, as we could reuse the body/buffers/detailing off locos which are affected? or even just the chassis block and leave modellers to rebuilt the loco, and for those unable to do so, Model shops could offer the service with a charge.

 

If someone has say, 2 31's that are duff, they chip in £20 for each chassis for example and when the money is all together commission Hornby into making something they already have the tools to make? obviously it would have to have Hornby on board and manage the monies ect, but its worth a shot? its better than nothing in the long run.

 

just a thought.

[BrushVeteran]

One question I have, as people are in the know more than me, could we (as in modellers) crowd fund Hornby into producing a run of chassis?

 

no bodies ect, in much the same way as retailers/magazine commission limited editions?

 

just a working chassis would be cheaper than a full blown model, as we could reuse the body/buffers/detailing off locos which are affected? or even just the chassis block and leave modellers to rebuilt the loco, and for those unable to do so, Model shops could offer the service with a charge.

 

If someone has say, 2 31's that are duff, they chip in £20 for each chassis for example and when the money is all together commission Hornby into making something they already have the tools to make? obviously it would have to have Hornby on board and manage the monies ect, but its worth a shot? its better than nothing in the long run.

 

just a thought.

I think we should encourage Hornby to release R3470, D5509 discontinued from the 2016 releases, then they can encourage us to purchase some chassis at reasonable prices to put right our investments from them in previous years. I don't think it is morally right for us to crowdfund a product that has potentially 'failed' in such a short timescale. Whilst I appreciate the desire for people to be able to cure their existing models' problems, I feel that Hornby should be  offering more of an incentive to attract people who wanted a perfect product in the first place. At the end of the day it will be a 'win win' for Hornby.

[stovepipe]

Seems quite a big problem, I wonder how many locos are corroding or will do in the future?

Steve.

 

It's R2413, R2420 and R2421 predominantly, sold from 2004 to 2006. Potentially the whole production of these could have been affected, but I guess some may escape if not all the casting batches were contaminated. I'd estimate around 4,000 of each variant may have been made, with maybe 25% of owners aware of the problem. There'll be quite a few more Limby-spec owners looking for a better chassis too - put me down for a couple.

Edited June 3, 2017 by stovepipe

[sb67]

I think Brush Veteran and Dan Griifin have great ideas, what would it take to seriously propose something like that to Hornby?

Steve.

[cheesysmith]

holmesfieldian, i can prvide a undammaged chassis as a master. just a idea as i only live down the road (got spare chassis blocks for the 31, 50 and 56).

[Roy Langridge]

But are we talking complete chassis or just chassis blocks? For me the latter is perfect, others are talking about remotoring Limby 31s. That is a different need altogether.

 

Roy

[BrushVeteran]

But are we talking complete chassis or just chassis blocks? For me the latter is perfect, others are talking about remotoring Limby 31s. That is a different need altogether.

 

Roy

I think the chassis block is the starting point as the original material has failed. I think anyone in a position to want to re-chassis a Lima will already have the rest of the parts available, if not most of them can be obtained as spares. So yes I would say we need chassis blocks, that would certainly suit my requirements.

[juke]

I think the chassis block is the starting point as the original material has failed. I think anyone in a position to want to re-chassis a Lima will already have the rest of the parts available, if not most of them can be obtained as spares. So yes I would say we need chassis blocks, that would certainly suit my requirements.

I guess this idea has stalled?

 

My D5512 has a crumbled front component, the one that mounts the copper contacts. The chassis below is bent downward a bit but appears unrotted (if there is such a word). The other end is like new, the component and the chassis. Also an 9f gone and a Class 50 to check...

[Lowlander]

Hi

 

I would also like to add my name to the list for new chassis blocks if a casting is in the offing. So far I've found three class thirty ones with expanded chassis. I hope this doesn't happen to my class fifty sixes or sixties. That would be me finished buying Hornby locos for good. And I don't think I'd be alone.

 

Stephen

Edited July 30, 2017 by ayrmrg

[Freightliner Class 66]

i have just bought a new condition r2963 class 31 in regional railways livery and im now worrying about the chassis. is this one of the models effected or is it modern enough to have avoided the issues?

also i see someone mentioned the class 50s, is the current r3471 indomitable affected by chassis or running prolbems? i hope these 2 models are not going to fall apart in my hands!

Edited August 10, 2017 by Freightliner Class 66