Hornby Hall - Why?

[Bernard Lamb]

 

 

 

R3205 (Rood Ashton Hall) in BR livery is the high-spec model. At £119.99, it is 45% more expensive, and lists the following:

• Motor:  5 Pole Skew Wound

 

 

Is that up to date?

The general comment in other places is that 3 pole motors will be used.

Not sure which mag, Model Rail I think, quoted a retail price difference of £25 between the two types of motor.

Bernard

[Ozexpatriate]

Is that up to date?

The general comment in other places is that 3 pole motors will be used.

Not sure which mag, Model Rail I think, quoted a retail price difference of £25 between the two types of motor.

Bernard,

 

details are all directly from what was on Hornby.com yesterday. (Prices are list / RRP.) I was surprised to see them specify 5-pole too. I'll make the observation that Hornby's online catalogue can be a minefield of typographical/transcription errors.

[Horsetan]

If it comes out with 3-pole (in common with some of the other new production), then maybe there'll be a lively industry centred around replacement 5-pole motors, perhaps even coreless.....

[Bernard Lamb]

If it comes out with 3-pole (in common with some of the other new production), then maybe there'll be a lively industry centred around replacement 5-pole motors, perhaps even coreless.....

But we do not know how good or bad the new 3 pole  motor will be.

A quick read in various places this morning throws up the following.

Hall 5

Sandringham 5

DoG 3

P2 3

O1 3

I am now totally bewildered.

Given the substancial cost dfifference I cannot see the 3 pole  being any where near as good, so you are probably correct with your thoughts.

We could approach Dapol to supply a batch of their motors suitably modified as a direct drop in replacement.  

Bernard

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

With the advent of DCC, I am pretty sanguine about three pole. Bachmann dropped three pole motors from their steamers a good decade past to no detectable outcry. I have A1 and WD examples with both 5 pole (Mashima and Buhler respectively) and the later three pole Bachmann made motor. On track you cannot see the difference in performance, all equally smooth and quiet with the same tractive potential. A current design good three pole motor is good; stick a flywheel on it as on Bach's 9F, and you get good reviews for running with no adverse comment relative to Hornby's 9f with their (fine) skew wound five pole unit: Hornby must have been aware of this. looked at the savings potential and made the obvious move. Fewer manufacturing steps, two whole windings not to produce, is a significant saving.

[30801]

 

I'm not sure what you mean here. The Hornby page for R3169 (Olton Hall) says almost nothing besides price and Railroad branding. Curiously the livery description is "GWR". Given that it will be in Hogwarts livery in Harry Potter trainsets, is the standalone R3169 liveried for 11am departures from Platform 9¾, or actually liveried for the GWR I wonder?

It's from this pdf linked in the Hornby 2013 thread.

 

NEW TOOLING: RailRoad locomotive. DCC Ready . 3 pole

flywheel. Part of the “design clever” range. Minimal decoration

however if full “Hogwarts Castle” then as per the 1:1.

I read that as there being a basic GWR version in the Railroad range and a Hogwarts Castle in main range spec.

[Bernard Lamb]

 Hornby must have been aware of this. looked at the savings potential and made the obvious move.

If the savings were that great, as they are reported to be, then they were very slack in not taking this step a good few years ago.

Yet another eye not on the ball moment.

It could have produced more profit for them and a better mark up for their dealers.

If they have made the obvious move then that's fine.

Going by the information published they seem to be stuck in no mans land.

I was told always under promise and over achieve.

Hornby do have a tendency to repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot.

Bernard

[Ozexpatriate]

It's from this pdf linked in the Hornby 2013 thread.

 

I read that as there being a basic GWR version in the Railroad range and a Hogwarts Castle in main range spec.

 

Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't looked at that. From the pdf ...

 

p. 44 (under LOCOMOTIVES range): R3206 - BR “Rood Ashton Hall” Hall Class

NEW TOOLING: DCC Ready . 3 pole flywheel. Part of the “design clever” range. Includes additional detail pack , glazing and etched nameplates.

 

p. 74 (under RAILROAD range): R3169 - GWR “Olton Hall” Hall Class aka “Hogwarts Castle”

NEW TOOLING: RailRoad locomotive. DCC Ready . 3 pole flywheel. Part of the “design clever” range. Minimal decoration however if full “Hogwarts Castle” then as per the 1:1.

 

p. 75 (under RAILROAD range): R3170 - GWR “Adderley Hall” Hall Class

NEW TOOLING: RailRoad locomotive. DCC Ready . 3 pole flywheel. Part of the “design clever” range. Minimal decoration. Smooth running.

 

So, I'd say:

• there's no five pole motor here - despite Hornby's website
• Hogwarts Castle is indicated as RAILROAD, which is a completely sensible choice for a child's trainset.
• My instinct says R3169 is probably just Hogwarts Castle and not Olton Hall in GWR green - otherwise there'd be another R-number

This: "however if full “Hogwarts Castle” then as per the 1:1" is truly dreadful copy. I can't say with any certainty what that is supposed to mean.

 

Other than all three* are "design clever" and all three probably have 3-pole motors, I still don't know what to expect.

 

* Including the regular range.

[Paul.Uni]

I'm reading it as 5972 in Hogwarts Red with 'Olton Hall' nameplates as the real engine currently is, unless the real engine has the 'Hogwarts Castle' nameplates applied.

[Charlie]

Isn't Hornby's Tornado equipped with a 3-pole motor?

[The Black Hat]

I'm reading it as 5972 in Hogwarts Red with 'Olton Hall' nameplates as the real engine currently is, unless the real engine has the 'Hogwarts Castle' nameplates applied.

Well thats how Im seeing it too. I know the NRM doesnt have the permission to use the Harry Potter name and logos for its events at York. Hence how everything is a Wizzard Weekend and the engine there is Olton Hall, rather than Hogwarts Castle. Even when running the NRM shuttle service, the engine was Olton rather than Hogwarts. I was wondering whether because Hornby are modelling it in its apparent NRM guise, ie Red and Olton Hall whether they would be able to save on having to use the Potter icons for the model and release it as a standard range engine. Thus payments for Potter trainsets would be where they need to pay royalties to the film company. If not for the general release then Hornby might save on some payments. Still, the accountants and contracters at Margate would have all that in hand and would be the ones that know.

[Coach bogie]

But we do not know how good or bad the new 3 pole  motor will be.

 If the three pole has a flywheel, there would be enhanced performance not too different to a five pole without flywheel.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Bernard Lamb]

 If the three pole has a flywheel, there would be enhanced performance not too different to a five pole without flywheel.

 

Mike Wiltshire

Every thing else being equal.

However with a saving in retail price of around £25 as I quoted, it was from Model Rail, I do not think that all things are equal.

Back to my comment of wait and see.

Bernard

[melmerby]

Every thing else being equal.

However with a saving in retail price of around £25 as I quoted, it was from Model Rail, I do not think that all things are equal.

Back to my comment of wait and see.

Bernard

 

How many motors of the same size would have that price differential 3pole/5pole?

A decent Mashima doesn't even cost that much!

 e.g. http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/modules/viewcategory.php/Motors%20and%20Gearboxes

 

Keith

[frobisher]

How many motors of the same size would have that price differential 3pole/5pole?

A decent Mashima doesn't even cost that much!

 e.g. http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/modules/viewcategory.php/Motors and Gearboxes

Remember that it's a difference of £25 on the RRP which doesn't relate directly to the cost of components but to a certain extent on manufacturer's whim. But even if there is a 3/5 pole differentiator (and I don't think there will be) it isn't the biggest source of any cost difference. The most labour/time intensive part of manufacture is assembly and finishing. Less bits to stick on means it's costing Hornby less. The more complicated the paint finish, the more cost to Hornby, hence us. Just take a look at the price differential between LNER teak finish rolling stock (not the self coloured ones in the Railroad range) and the post nationisation finishes of the same prototypes. This is probably at the extreme end of the finish differential though. Also batch size may make a difference (look at the eye watering prices of last year's Blue Grey Gresley Buffet and this year's 12 wheel Stanier Diner). More of the Railroad version may be produced so whilst it may share most of the same components with the non Railroad version which would be prepared in one bigger batch, the set up for the different assembly and finishing costs for the main range version are likely to be proportionatly higher relative to the batch size being produced.

 

A marked differentiation in price points is of course reinforced by Hornby's wish to differentiate the two price points. If they were only a couple of pounds apart, then there would be no commercial case for producing the cost saving (to Hornby) cheaper price point because it becomes a no brainer decision for which you go for then.

[Bernard Lamb]

You are introducing other things into the equation Paddy.

I am talking about the price difference just for the motor and not any variation between Railroad and Hi Fi.

Keith has done his homework and flags up a cheaper way of acheiving the same result as Hornby by using an off the shelf motor.

All I am trying to flag up is that there is, yet again, a lack of rational in Hornby's pricing policy.Not to mention the confusion in the material that they publish.

Bernard

[Horsetan]

How many motors of the same size would have that price differential 3pole/5pole?

A decent Mashima doesn't even cost that much!

 

£25 would go some way towards the price of a decent coreless.

[melmerby]

£25 would go some way towards the price of a decent coreless.

And why would Hornby want to fit a coreless when you can get a standard motor for a few quid?

(Still don't understand how Hornby can price a 5-pole at £25 more than a 3-pole!)

 

Keith

[Horsetan]

And why would Hornby want to fit a coreless when you can get a standard motor for a few quid?

 

Not Hornby; but maybe you. I was thinking about the possibility in terms of efficiency / low current consumption.

[melmerby]

Not Hornby; but maybe you. I was thinking about the possibility in terms of efficiency / low current consumption.

I used to have some small Canon motors culled from flat bed plotters but dumped them some years ago during a move (can't find a use for these!)

Oh. Dear.

 

Keith

[Ozexpatriate]

I'm tired of the sloppy work done by the editors of Hornby's marketing collateral.

 

I recognize that the briefing in the press kit kindly supplied by Andy in the 'news' thread might have been rushed and contain some errors. Plus, when you have 100s of items in a catalogue there are bound to be a few details that simply missed.

 

Having said that, between what is listed on the website and what was in the briefing, there are at least five discrepancies - some administrative (part number and price), some inconsequential details in potted history (introduction and number built) and one glaring issue in the specification - 3 pole versus 5 pole.

 

 

One could presume the website (which is the most easily revised) is accurate and the reference to 3-pole in the briefing kit is a result of copy and paste. But is it? Different motors 'feels' like an unlikely variant to me in the manufacturing process.

 

At this point I don't feel like I can trust any of Hornby's copy.

And why would Hornby want to fit a coreless when you can get a standard motor for a few quid?

(Still don't understand how Hornby can price a 5-pole at £25 more than a 3-pole!)

My arithmetic leads me to £37.00 and that for your extra £37.00 you get nicer paint, glazing, etched plates, brake gear and painted cab details.

 

Let me finish this mini-rant with a particular pet peeve. "Livery: BR".

 

OK, for a Hall, I think that more than likely means lined Brunswick green - but late crest or early crest? (The supplied photograph is the late totem.) Did Halls appear in BR black? (I don't know.)

 

Why can't as glaring a detail as livery be more specific in the marketing collateral?

 

This has been an issue with new Hornby announcements for years.

[petethemole]

Some Halls received BR lined black in the early 50s (so early emblem). As did Saints, Granges and Manors. See appropriate photo collection albums! I'm not going upstairs to check any, i might spill my beer.

Pete

[Coach bogie]

Some Halls received BR lined black in the early 50s (so early emblem).

 Black Hall with green tender and vice versa appeared more than once.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[frobisher]

You are introducing other things into the equation Paddy.

I am talking about the price difference just for the motor and not any variation between Railroad and Hi Fi.

Keith has done his homework and flags up a cheaper way of acheiving the same result as Hornby by using an off the shelf motor.

But you're making the assumption the only differential between the two is the motor, and that the only thing that effects end price is cost of components.

All I am trying to flag up is that there is, yet again, a lack of rational in Hornby's pricing policy.Not to mention the confusion in the material that they publish.

Diagree on the first, totally agree on the second. Hornby's cut'n'paste errors in their published specs continue to raise false hope...

[The Stationmaster]

I'm tired of the sloppy work done by the editors of Hornby's marketing collateral.

 

I recognize that the briefing in the press kit kindly supplied by Andy in the 'news' thread might have been rushed and contain some errors. Plus, when you have 100s of items in a catalogue there are bound to be a few details that simply missed.

 

Having said that, between what is listed on the website and what was in the briefing, there are at least five discrepancies - some administrative (part number and price), some inconsequential details in potted history (introduction and number built) and one glaring issue in the specification - 3 pole versus 5 pole.

 

Why can't as glaring a detail as livery be more specific in the marketing collateral?

 

This has been an issue with new Hornby announcements for years.

 

Quite agree - in view of the time they've had to prepare their material Hornby (or their contractor - I think that might well be the case with marketing material?) have not done a good job and I would at least have expected them to get the description of the specification of the models both complete and accurate.  Maybe they'll manage that in the printed catalogue but I wonder, especially in view of the tangle they got themselves into (and might still be in?) with the running numbers for the 8-coupled tanks.

 

I doesn't whether or not this is down to poor internal communication or slapdash editing but it hardly shows the company in a good light when presenting its new range.  And as far as I'm concerned far from sufficient information to even think about placing a pre-order - the only Hornby pre-order I have against the 2013 Hornby catalogue is for teh 'Grange' reinstated after being dropped from the 2012 list;  I know what I'll be getting with that.

 

As far as the differences between Hornby and MRL on prototype detail are concerned it's all a matter of interpretation - the prototype 'Saint' conversion was in 1924 so technically the first 'Hall' was, in effect, running in that year; but the first 'real 'Halls' off the production line didn't emerge until 1928.  Similarly with the number  of them -counting the prototype conversion there were a total of 259 'Halls' but if you include the 'Modified Halls' as the same class (as was the case in most GW/WR operating publications) there were over 300 of them.