Hornby's 2013 Announcements

[Dunsignalling]

I do not consider resale value when I buy any item, railways or otherwise. I buy for enjoyment. Renumber, reworking etc adds significant personalenjoyment value - resale consideration does not come into it. I have recently taken a knife to a Hornby 14XX to remove topfeed etc and bring up to 1930's condition as I wanted greater accuracy for my time period. As to what I could sell it for (not that I am likely to do so) is ever included in any modifications.

 

Ever considered it may also add value? I streamlined a Hornby Castle and was recently offered £300 for it. Answer - NOT FOR SALE!

 

 

Mike Wiltshire

Totally agree. It's very nice if Hornby pick one I want but I have already turned Tangmere into Hawkinge, Wilton will become Salisbury or Seaton, 605 Sqadron will become Lapford (with modifications) and Yes Tor will probably re-emerge as Axminster. 

 

The only one certain not to be touched is Manston, which, as one of a limited edition of only 500 is, I am told, worth quite a bit already.

 

John

[Mike at C&M]

More Delays to

 

DBS Class 60

 

Sentinels and Class 67's

.... and the Duke of Gloucester..... and Cock o' the North.... and the Great Gathering A4s......

[sub39h]

Not really. The 9F is the likely end point of an aborted development plan for a "super detail" model that took a left turn when Bachmann announced theirs. Tornado was squarely aimed at producing a Flying Scotsman for the next generation, and Hornby have had an A4 in their range for the last 33+ years and it's obvious train set fodder - the Bachmann A4 is not the impetus for this.

 

What goes into the Railroad range depends to a large extent upon the outdated tooling available within the Hornby inventory plus "Design Clever" opportunities from new tooling. It's notable that it's only been the last three years that Hornby have been making new tools specifically for Railroad items.

 

just to drag up an old point, I feel that Hornby should take a page from Lima's book when producing Railroad items. Recently I've been purchasing some of the Lima Intercity 125 sets as they seem a less expensive way of gathering coaches for HST rakes. Subtle adjustments have been made between the train set Class 43s and the ones that Lima sold separately. They use exactly the same mould but, for example, the train set version uses white plastic, so the white part of the Intercity livery did not need to be painted at the cost of some loss of definition in the moulding. some of the finer details such as the window surrounds and weight and warning stickers have been omitted. there are no directional lights. the coaches have plastic wheels instead of metal and again the warning stickers and yellow coach ends are omitted. for the Hornby HSTs my advice would be to lose maybe the cab lighting, maybe the cab details, seats and directional lights themselves, any spinning fans and some of the transfers and the opening doors. 

 

i feel that using existing mouldings for the super detail models and then making them simpler to produce is a better way to go. it means that someone transitioning from "train set" to "model railway" is able to carry some models over. ok so this means that Hornby may not sell as many models as it otherwise might, but on the other hand it means that they wouldn't have to use two sets of  tools like they do for their Class 47s where the new ones are the old Lima ones and the RailRoad ones are the old Hornby ones. this means less staff as there is half the machines, and this means that if they developed a new model then if the RailRoad AND the regular ranges both used the same tools it would take less time to get the development costs back. 

 

the key to this all is that anything that you buy in the RailRoad range should look perfectly suitable running next to a regular model unlike the Class 47s do at the moment. and maybe Hornby should offer an option to reinstate the finer details later so they can make money selling detail parts so that people can detail their old RailRoad models and add a new dimension to ownership. 

[frobisher]

sub39h, on 25 May 2013 - 03:34, said:

just to drag up an old point, I feel that Hornby should take a page from Lima's book when producing Railroad items. Recently I've been purchasing some of the Lima Intercity 125 sets as they seem a less expensive way of gathering coaches for HST rakes. Subtle adjustments have been made between the train set Class 43s and the ones that Lima sold separately. They use exactly the same mould but, for example, the train set version uses white plastic, so the white part of the Intercity livery did not need to be painted at the cost of some loss of definition in the moulding. some of the finer details such as the window surrounds and weight and warning stickers have been omitted. there are no directional lights. the coaches have plastic wheels instead of metal and again the warning stickers and yellow coach ends are omitted. for the Hornby HSTs my advice would be to lose maybe the cab lighting, maybe the cab details, seats and directional lights themselves, any spinning fans and some of the transfers and the opening doors.

Or they could just continue using the ex-Lima tooling for the Railroad version, just saying. Self coloured plastic really is not a good idea, if only from the point of view that lighter plastics have a tendency to discolour with age and exposure to sunlight.

 

sub39h, on 25 May 2013 - 03:34, said:

i feel that using existing mouldings for the super detail models and then making them simpler to produce is a better way to go. it means that someone transitioning from "train set" to "model railway" is able to carry some models over. ok so this means that Hornby may not sell as many models as it otherwise might, but on the other hand it means that they wouldn't have to use two sets of tools like they do for their Class 47s where the new ones are the old Lima ones and the RailRoad ones are the old Hornby ones. this means less staff as there is half the machines, and this means that if they developed a new model then if the RailRoad AND the regular ranges both used the same tools it would take less time to get the development costs back.

You're not quite getting the savings in the same way you are thinking (The class 47 example is probably not a good one as that is likely down to manufacturing issues out in China as discussed elsewhere and probably shouldn't have happened the way it did).

 

You don't actually reduce the number of staff by having less tooling for instance. There isn't half the number of "machines". There's exactly the same amount, it's just that a Railroad production run would use a percentage of the same tooling as a main range one, and in any case, you don't leave the tooling in a dedicated moulding machine, it will be taken from store at the start of a production run, cleaned etc, put in the moulding machine, production run made, then removed and put back into store so that something else can be produced. In practice that may even happen if two production runs on the same moulding machine with the same tooling are done one after the other.

 

Where there is serviceable older tooling (such as with the Lima HST) it makes sense to use that (which has already had a return on investment), whereas a "Design Clever" two range version would actually then cost you a little more in R&D costs which would take longer to recoup. Also, take a look at the service sheet for the two versions of the Class 395 EMU. They share the same R&D obviously, but it's clear that the number of common components is not as high as you might think, but

 

For new development where no suitable previous tooling exists then yes, it makes perfect sense. This year's examples being the Hall, Duke of Gloucester and P2 which were deemed appropriate for both ranges,

[sub39h]

i've got Lima HSTs from the train set in abundance that are in very good condition. i did have one pair that were yellowed, but i was under the understanding that this was due to a component of the type of plastic which isn't commonly used anymore. so my point still stands regarding livery simplification.

 

i read somewhere that the Lima HST toolings were irreparably damaged at some point, which was the reason we only saw one run of them in Virgin livery. it is a shame, i think that as a "toy" or a budget model they would have been absolutely fantastic. i definitely would have bought some with a modern motor.  

 

point taken regarding production, but i still feel that using the same moulding for both ranges and making the RailRoad version in a simpler way and reducing the complexity, the number of electrical components and trinkets is the way to go rather than what Hornby sometimes do and use effectively two completely different models. the R&D might cost a little bit more, but my experience from speaking to a lot of model shop owners recently (and I mean a lot - I've called over the country looking for something recently) is that the RailRoad items are their biggest sellers. so the added volume from the RailRoad sales would easily make up the added R&D and help them recoup some money spent on making the super detail model as well.  

[frobisher]

i've got Lima HSTs from the train set in abundance that are in very good condition. i did have one pair that were yellowed, but i was under the understanding that this was due to a component of the type of plastic which isn't commonly used anymore. so my point still stands regarding livery simplification.

The reason you don't see it anymore is that by and large Hornby et al don't use self coloured plastic in models any more as the market no longer tolerates it.

 

i read somewhere that the Lima HST toolings were irreparably damaged at some point, which was the reason we only saw one run of them in Virgin livery. it is a shame, i think that as a "toy" or a budget model they would have been absolutely fantastic. i definitely would have bought some with a modern motor.

I believe you are incorrect on that. The initial railroad production run was using the old Hornby HST tooling because of the repair work needed to be done on the Lima tooling. Subsequent runs have been using the fixed up Lima tooling.

 

point taken regarding production, but i still feel that using the same moulding for both ranges and making the RailRoad version in a simpler way and reducing the complexity, the number of electrical components and trinkets is the way to go rather than what Hornby sometimes do and use effectively two completely different models. the R&D might cost a little bit more, but my experience from speaking to a lot of model shop owners recently (and I mean a lot - I've called over the country looking for something recently) is that the RailRoad items are their biggest sellers. so the added volume from the RailRoad sales would easily make up the added R&D and help them recoup some money spent on making the super detail model as well.

How can that possibly be better than having an existing model that you don't need to tool up completely that is already simplified to the level required? The single most expensive component in the diesels is the all wheel drive system. Removing the lights and wotnot from that won't save that much - you need to ditch the drive mechanism for something cheaper which means you need a complete new chassis plus bogies etc. tooled up. Alternatively, you turn to that inherited set of tools and modify it to take the Limby motor and not worry about it.

 

The reason Railroad models are such good sellers is that they have been built down to a price point using tooling that has very little R&D cost to recoup.

[coachmann]

Personally i don't mind moulded smokebox darts and questionable handrails on Railroad models costing in the region of £67.00, such as the 8P 'Duke' and Modified 'Hall', but the GW 2-8-2T at £100.00 is a different kettle of fish.

[The Stationmaster]

Personally i don't mind moulded smokebox darts and questionable handrails on Railroad models costing in the region of £67.00, such as the 8P 'Duke' and Modified 'Hall', but the GW 2-8-2T at £100.00 is a different kettle of fish.

Over £100 at some shops (and I don't mean Modelzone)

[Dunsignalling]

The reason you don't see it anymore is that by and large Hornby et al don't use self coloured plastic in models any more as the market no longer tolerates it.

 

 

I believe you are incorrect on that. The initial railroad production run was using the old Hornby HST tooling because of the repair work needed to be done on the Lima tooling. Subsequent runs have been using the fixed up Lima tooling.

 

 

How can that possibly be better than having an existing model that you don't need to tool up completely that is already simplified to the level required? The single most expensive component in the diesels is the all wheel drive system. Removing the lights and wotnot from that won't save that much - you need to ditch the drive mechanism for something cheaper which means you need a complete new chassis plus bogies etc. tooled up. Alternatively, you turn to that inherited set of tools and modify it to take the Limby motor and not worry about it.

 

The reason Railroad models are such good sellers is that they have been built down to a price point using tooling that has very little R&D cost to recoup.

I am frankly amazed to see anybody advocating the displacement of the biggest advance in non-steam model locomotives with a reversion to cheap and nasty motor bogies. They would have to be so because decent ones wouldn't save enough over a centre-can chassis to give much of a saving for purchasers. Previous designs are not an option as they cannot meet current electrical interference standards.

 

Tooling is expensive, but the main driver of price in 21st century models is the cost of assembly; hence the move away from separately applied details. Lighting tends to be quite fiddly in production terms - try removing and replacing the body on a Hornby 31 if you doubt that; I bet you can't get all the lights working again at the first attempt. Deleting it is therefore likely to produce a significant saving. 

 

Just because an all-wheel-drive chassis performs four times better than a motor bogie doesn't mean it automatically costs four times as much to make. A modern chassis is very much a collection of modules which can be mixed and matched to produce a huge number of different models long into the future. The tooling costs can thus be spread over a much longer period than the sales life of one model.

 

This is borne out by the fact that retail prices of "new quality" non-steam locos increased proportionately less than those of their steam outline counterparts (in which mechanical changes played a much less significant part).

 

If I were offered the choice between spending £x on a properly engineered model diesel or the same amount on two (outwardly similar) Lima throwbacks, I know exactly what I would do. Anybody who actually prefers the latter can easily find thousands of mint second hand ones at prices that make Railroad models look like expensive indulgences.    

 

John

[frobisher]

Dunsignalling, on 27 May 2013 - 13:13, said:

I am frankly amazed to see anybody advocating the displacement of the biggest advance in non-steam model locomotives with a reversion to cheap and nasty motor bogies. They would have to be so because decent ones wouldn't save enough over a centre-can chassis to give much of a saving for purchasers. Previous designs are not an option as they cannot meet current electrical interference standards.

Excuse me? That's not what I wrote. What I said was that the all wheel drive chassis is what you would have to sacrifice to get a model to the price point needed for Railroad.

 

Dunsignalling, on 27 May 2013 - 13:13, said:

Tooling is expensive, but the main driver of price in 21st century models is the cost of assembly; hence the move away from separately applied details. Lighting tends to be quite fiddly in production terms - try removing and replacing the body on a Hornby 31 if you doubt that; I bet you can't get all the lights working again at the first attempt. Deleting it is therefore likely to produce a significant saving.

 

Just because an all-wheel-drive chassis performs four times better than a motor bogie doesn't mean it automatically costs four times as much to make. A modern chassis is very much a collection of modules which can be mixed and matched to produce a huge number of different models long into the future. The tooling costs can thus be spread over a much longer period than the sales life of one model.

Er no. Take a look at the Hornby service sheets and list all the common parts between the centre drive locos. It won't be a very long list. There is actually greater commonality between the modern steam locos (shared chassis, shared tenders, valve gear etc.).

 

Dunsignalling, on 27 May 2013 - 13:13, said:

This is borne out by the fact that retail prices of "new quality" non-steam locos increased proportionately less than those of their steam outline counterparts (in which mechanical changes played a much less significant part).

Diesels don't have valve gear to assemble for starters...

 

Dunsignalling, on 27 May 2013 - 13:13, said:

If I were offered the choice between spending £x on a properly engineered model diesel or the same amount on two (outwardly similar) Lima throwbacks, I know exactly what I would do. Anybody who actually prefers the latter can easily find thousands of mint second hand ones at prices that make Railroad models look like expensive indulgences.

Railroad isn't the range for you then so why sweat it?

[Dunsignalling]

Excuse me? That's not what I wrote. What I said was that the all wheel drive chassis is what you would have to sacrifice to get a model to the price point needed for Railroad.

 

Er no. Take a look at the Hornby service sheets and list all the common parts between the centre drive locos. It won't be a very long list. There is actually greater commonality between the modern steam locos (shared chassis, shared tenders, valve gear etc.).

 

Diesels don't have valve gear to assemble for starters...

 

Railroad isn't the range for you then so why sweat it?

Sorry, I misunderstood your first point which is fair enough but if they have already produced the centre-drive chassis parts, why not re-use them rather than tooling up a new motor bogie from scratch? Obviously that won't apply if a loco can use the Railroad Lima-replacement motor bogies which are very much better than what they replace.

 

Again, I was thinking more of the whole range rather than just Railroad when I made the Diesel/Steam price comparison in my earlier post. The new dual-range tooling (DoG/P2) seems to be resulting in a smaller price differential between the Railroad and "Main range" locos than has been the case with the New tooling vs Old tooling concept that Railroad started from.

 

I actually think the Railroad range is a very good idea and have bought a couple of Railroad diesels to provide better mechanisms for detailed Lima locos in my collection. I am also working on a Schools + Bachmann Nelson tender project based around the Railroad version.

 

However, as someone who has been at this lark long enough to amass many more locos than I really need, there would be no point in my placing quantity ahead of quality for a given outlay when it comes to further additions to my fleet.

 

John  

[sub39h]

The reason you don't see it anymore is that by and large Hornby et al don't use self coloured plastic in models any more as the market no longer tolerates it.

 

 

I believe you are incorrect on that. The initial railroad production run was using the old Hornby HST tooling because of the repair work needed to be done on the Lima tooling. Subsequent runs have been using the fixed up Lima tooling.

 

 

How can that possibly be better than having an existing model that you don't need to tool up completely that is already simplified to the level required? The single most expensive component in the diesels is the all wheel drive system. Removing the lights and wotnot from that won't save that much - you need to ditch the drive mechanism for something cheaper which means you need a complete new chassis plus bogies etc. tooled up. Alternatively, you turn to that inherited set of tools and modify it to take the Limby motor and not worry about it.

 

The reason Railroad models are such good sellers is that they have been built down to a price point using tooling that has very little R&D cost to recoup.

 

As far as I'm aware R2707 was the only Hornby RailRoad HST, and it used the Lima tooling. there has not been any other versions. you may well be right with regards to the costs, but if it ends up with a hotch potch of different products that you can't run side by side then i don't think it's a good idea. 

 

i think you're kind of missing the point of some of my opinions - as RailRoad is a dedicated "toy" or "budget" brand, i think coloured plastics would be wholly acceptable. it's a toy, not a model. i'm sure there are many toy manufacturers who use coloured plastics. as mentioned, I don't think all plastics yellow in the way you describe anymore so I really don't see what the issue would be in terms of longevity either. 

 

i think we'll just have to agree to disagree. RailRoad is very popular from what I understand so Hornby must be doing something right. but I just think an easier transition from the RailRoad brand to the regular range would be a good idea in terms of keeping people from switching to Bachmann and the like when they want "proper" models

[jrg1]

A feast for modellers, and with the models such as the LMS CCT, shunter's wagon and Insulfish it means we can spend modelling time in other areas, instead of building vehicles.  The Grimsby Fish will come together a lot sooner for me than anticipated.

As the manufacturers are increasing poll driven, I wonder if Simon Kohler would consider the rarer examples.  For instance, the A4 mechanism and tender can be used as a basis for the W1 4-6-4, original and rebuilt.  Tooling costs could thereby be kept reasonable.  These could be limited editions through the NRM.

Also, the B17 could be developed as the B2 variant, and the Duchess could be used for the Ivatt Pacific.

Over at Bachmann, the Standard class 5 locomotive and tender chassis could be used GT3-again marketed as a limited edition.  

[Jawfin]

Drool...

GT3...

[mikesndbs]

Very tempted by the blue or red Sentinel! are these out yet, any low price offers been found?

 

Thanks

[Multiple identity account]

Very tempted by the blue or red Sentinel! are these out yet, any low price offers been found?

 

Thanks

They have been out for a couple of months... a simple google search can find you the best price

[Arthur]

Very tempted by the blue or red Sentinel! are these out yet, any low price offers been found?

 

Thanks

Follow this link, this is the first posting on the Sentinel thread announcing their arrival, and it's followed by pages and pages devoted to it.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65710-Hornby-sentinel-at-last/?p=1274017

[Mike at C&M]

Second batch of Sentinels showing on their trade website as due into Margate this week, so they should be in the shops very soon.