Hornby Star Class

[melmerby]

Preserved Lode Star it is in line.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/crayzy_ray/4481899018/in/set-72157623747388230

 as is 4061

 

http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/m_in_str.htm

 

As much as we would like them to, Hornby cannot be expected to move it about for different engines

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

"As much as we would like them to, Hornby cannot be expected to move it about for different engines"

 

 

thats for us to do, cut off the offending mouldings and replace them in the correct position with wire ones, just add it to the ever growing list of tweaks

There seems to be no consistency, even within batches as built, to whether the cab rail is high or low.

Looking in OS Nock and Russell, locos at the same time have different heights!

 

Maybe pick a loco with the right number to suit?

[gwrrob]

Maybe pick a loco with the right number to suit?

 

They picked 4003 and 4018 and are both different on the prototype.

[Dunsignalling]

Curiously, the CCT buffers are like that:-

http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lmsparcels/h1e6e5e71#h1e6e5e71

'orrible, but evidently accurate.......

[Mike Riley]

Re the Stationmaster (post 533) I have had problems with many locos from both Hornby and Bachmann but have never retruned one to the supplier or manufacturer.  It would mean wrapping it, labelling it, going into town, paying 60p to park, queing at the Post Office and then paying the postage.  And nowadays asking inquisitive questions about the contents of the parcel.  Then waiting to get a replacement which may be just the same.  Glad I'm not alone in this.  I'm sure we are the majority.  After all, we are railway modellers and like to think we can fix an error or improve on the  rtr product.

 

One thing that I have not seen mentioned is Hornby's version of Brunswick green.  It does not come close to the prototype or Railmatch of Precision Paints version - it is too light.  Bachmann seem to get it much closer.

 

Mike

[7013]

Mike just because we are modellers I don't think you can make assumptions like the one you are making. Yes bits falling off or something minor can easily be rectified but where does it stop, there is only so much that is acceptable as a fault before it is prudent to return it to the manufacturer. There are many people who buy RTR precisely because they either cannot or do not wish to make wholesale changes to what should be a correct model in the first place.. It is one thing to buy a model and then choose to alter it to ones liking, however it should not be the case that the purchaser has to make changes just to bring it up to the expected base standard. Yes it can be a bit of a fag to send ones model back to the manufacturer, however that said when I have had occasion to return products to Hornby they have refunded my postage without me even requesting it.

[Phil Parker]

Regarding returning models; the latest Hornby policy seems to be customers cannot return direct to Hornby. Therefore it is up to retailers to return 'faulty' models. It is my guess (and only guess) that some returns will be categorised by retailers as customers being 'fussy' and therefore not returned as faulty models to Margate. Other less discerning customers will happily purchase these models. Especially if the problem is widespread and not confined to single models. Therefore Hornby gauging a model's success by the number of faulty models returned may well be a rather blunt instrument.

I have certainly returned models in the past that have merely been exchanged and gone back on sale, or even rejected examples in the shop for better examples, with those ‘rejected’ staying in stock.

 

Responsibility for faulty goods initially rests with the retailer who sold it to you, not the manufacturer. Hornby is no different to Apple, Ford or Bosch in this respect - if you buy a faulty washing machine it doesn't go back to the maker in the post, you take it back to the shop you bought it from.

 

The shop should then offer to get it fixed or better still, replace it with a working version. They can then have a go at the manufacturer. If the shop chooses to put the faulty model back on the shelf, well that's their bad and not the manufacturers and I wouldn't be keen to go back there in the future.

 

I'm always mystified why modellers buy something from a retailer and then want to deal direct with the maker when they have a problem. Ring Ford up with a fault with your new car and they point you at the dealer network. It's more practical that way, they don't have to maintain a huge number of people at the centre to deal with every individual customer.

[Mike Riley]

Mike just because we are modellers I don't think you can make assumptions like the one you are making. Yes bits falling off or something minor can easily be rectified but where does it stop, there is only so much that is acceptable as a fault before it is prudent to return it to the manufacturer. There are many people who buy RTR precisely because they either cannot or do not wish to make wholesale changes to what should be a correct model in the first place.. It is one thing to buy a model and then choose to alter it to ones liking, however it should not be the case that the purchaser has to make changes just to bring it up to the expected base standard. Yes it can be a bit of a fag to send ones model back to the manufacturer, however that said when I have had occasion to return products to Hornby they have refunded my postage without me even requesting it.

My point was that many people, like the Stationmaster and myself prefer to fix the fault rather than return it to the retailer who then (maybe) returns it to the manufacturer.  Hornby judge their sucess rate on the number of products returned to them.  I think the returned products represent a small proportion of the total of faulty products.  Of course, many people may not be able to fix the faults.  But then may of those may not even realise that there is a fault - number of spokes, missing valve linkage etc.

 

Mike

[G-BOAF]

Responsibility for faulty goods initially rests with the retailer who sold it to you, not the manufacturer. Hornby is no different to Apple, Ford or Bosch in this respect - if you buy a faulty washing machine it doesn't go back to the maker in the post, you take it back to the shop you bought it from.

 

The shop should then offer to get it fixed or better still, replace it with a working version. They can then have a go at the manufacturer. If the shop chooses to put the faulty model back on the shelf, well that's their bad and not the manufacturers and I wouldn't be keen to go back there in the future.

 

I'm always mystified why modellers buy something from a retailer and then want to deal direct with the maker when they have a problem. Ring Ford up with a fault with your new car and they point you at the dealer network. It's more practical that way, they don't have to maintain a huge number of people at the centre to deal with every individual customer.

Yes but if the problem is widespread, and the replacement is the same, what is one supposed to do? The manufacturer needs to be made aware, but how?

[Phil Parker]

Yes but if the problem is widespread, and the replacement is the same, what is one supposed to do? The manufacturer needs to be made aware, but how?

 

If the retailer gets loads to send back, they will pretty quickly tell the manufacturer there is a problem. When the people who are supposed to be selling your product are on the phone wanting to know why they are getting then coming back over the counter then you pay attention. This works for washing machines and model railways.

[7013]

Well on sites like this which is a start, Simon Kohler follows this and other sites. If we extrapolate from Phil's posting , if a car or washing machine was faulty a product recall would be issued, admittedly the Star is not faulty (Although if the curved footplate and the missing valve linkage if widespread would be a good enough reason to recall the product) but the issue of returning a product has been discussed at length on the Bachmann quality issues topic.

Initial return should always be to the retailer not the manufacturer.

[The Stationmaster]

Regarding returning models; the latest Hornby policy seems to be customers cannot return direct to Hornby. Therefore it is up to retailers to return 'faulty' models. It is my guess (and only guess) that some returns will be categorised by retailers as customers being 'fussy' and therefore not returned as faulty models to Margate. Other less discerning customers will happily purchase these models. Especially if the problem is widespread and not confined to single models. Therefore Hornby gauging a model's success by the number of faulty models returned may well be a rather blunt instrument.

I have certainly returned models in the past that have merely been exchanged and gone back on sale, or even rejected examples in the shop for better examples, with those ‘rejected’ staying in stock.

An interesting parallel is the case of this year's new release 'Modified Hall' from Bachmann.  As a result of early noticing of an error (I think on RMweb but it might have been MREmag) Bachmann acted to withdraw the model and send it back to China for correction.  In the meanwhile some retailers who hadn't heard of the recall or not received advice of it carried on selling them, and as far as I know none that I know of ever received either complaints from their customers or returned 'Not Quite Modified Halls'.

 

This suggest to me that there are out there a goodly percentage of customers who neither know nor care plus those who are prepared to put things right for themselves because they are only dealing with niggly or simply rectified things while a few are only using the r-t-r model as a basis for more complex surgery and any errors or faults will be disposed of by that process.  Bachmann have followed the course of recall on several occasions following faults or shortcomings in assembly coming to light.

 

In the case of the 'Star' Hornby can't, obviously, do much about moulded handrails if that's what they agreed with the factory who makes the 'Stars' - but having been told by several sources surely the answer in a company which cares for its customers, and wants their further business, is not to say 'I'm right and you're wrong' but to say 'we'll look into that and if we had made an error we will take the necessary action to put things right by dishing out an exchange bogie when you send in the one with incorrect wheels or we'll send you replacement wheelsets'.  That might cost them a few quid but it will earn them a lot of kudos and praise rather than giving yet another chance to say less than favourable things about them - it's easier to damage reputation than to build it.

[G-BOAF]

If the retailer gets loads to send back, they will pretty quickly tell the manufacturer there is a problem. When the people who are supposed to be selling your product are on the phone wanting to know why they are getting then coming back over the counter then you pay attention. This works for washing machines and model railways.

 

OK, I'll re-emphasise. Product not 'faulty' it works/runs. I would say that for 50% of the purchasers, esp not so little Jonny, if it runs generally OK, its fine. I would say that the problems highlighted here would only be noticed by maybe 20% of purchasers, and possibly only generate returns from 5% of the most discerning (not fussy note) modellers [1] That rate of return DOES NOT mean the model is built to spec (e.g. instances of footplate problems), or errors in design/reserach (wheel spokes), merely that most customers are not bothered. In that case, lets not bother making scale models, lets return to the 1970s and 1980s and cut prices to suit. That is not happening, manufacturers are striving to make scale models, therefore should be listening to concerns raised over such details.

 

How many online reviews (esp by younger 'enthusiasts') drool, in some cases litterally poor things, over 'amazing detail', and 'great runner' (what a horrid term), as the model sets off at a scale 25mph, but fail to acknowledge or notice more fundamental problems in dimensional accuracy or detail assembly? I'm afraid magazines are on occasions also guilty, albeit to a lesser degree. Going O/T my own online review of the Bachmann A2 points out an error on the middle cylinder and front frame dimensions, along with the significant and not-too-easy to fix cab droop on the first batches, which were to Bachmann's credit fixed on subsiquent batches, but never publically acknowledged or recalled. While I think these issues was first raised on RMWeb, I have not seen any similar significnat comments in online reviews or magazines. That does not mean the model is correct!

 

[1] I myself have returned various models in the past few years up to three times before getting one I'm happy with, or feel able to correct/repair myself. Indeed only 50% of 00 locos/stock have been right first time in past c24 months. I can't imagine many modellers going to these lengths, and reckon I'm in the top 1% for attention to manufactured detail.

 

EDIT - note this post was composed while 'The Stationmaster' was posting above...

Edited November 3, 2013 by G-BOAF

[robmcg]

Rob, have you already changed your bogie wheels ? I only count ten spokes, or is that a bit of your photo magic?

 

Photo-edited the spokes from 12 to ten, and have ordered 10"-spoke Castle front bogie from Peter's Spares, £6-ish from memory. Will be unwilling to fit this if it means body-off, more likely press wheels off/on axles. Or if I sell the model, include them in the price.

 

I'm sorry that Mike received a KoGC with missing front valve gear and pleased he could use old Castle bits, it all seems very much business as usual in finding and buying RTR models and doing what we can. In my case I will be undeterred in making photos, and await a couple of suitable carriages. I'm interested in any gap or cutout between cylinders and running plate and will look at photos for guidance, thanks to those who have shown several prototype pics here..

 

As to lining and livery between 1934-42 I would be surprised if there was much lining visible after 1939 but you never know, photos again will tell the story. Presumably most Star work was second-tier by 1937 so  possibly less cleaning, but in my experience photos can be a bit misleading, they may show more clean engines than was common, and more smoke-emitting engines than everyday running, because photographers were and are drawn to both.

 

As to the attitude of Hornby, I like SK and know him slightly at a commercial level and he is generally tireless, and very positive and honest and inspiring, and have nothing but the highest praise for him. Feel a bit sorry for him with workload right now  but I think he will look back on it as challenging.

 

New pics to come in short order... 1-2 days.  Thanks for all the nice comments.  For once I was pleased with my GWR green!

 

Rob

[dibber25]

An interesting parallel is the case of this year's new release 'Modified Hall' from Bachmann.  As a result of early noticing of an error (I think on RMweb but it might have been MREmag) Bachmann acted to withdraw the model and send it back to China for correction.  In the meanwhile some retailers who hadn't heard of the recall or not received advice of it carried on selling them, and as far as I know none that I know of ever received either complaints from their customers or returned 'Not Quite Modified Halls'.

 

 

It was actually noticed by Richard Foster at Model Rail and notified to Bachmann before it appeared in any magazine review or forum. 

CHRIS LEIGH

[Miss Prism]

Rob - read your PMs!

[melmerby]

Responsibility for faulty goods initially rests with the retailer who sold it to you, not the manufacturer. Hornby is no different to Apple, Ford or Bosch in this respect - if you buy a faulty washing machine it doesn't go back to the maker in the post, you take it back to the shop you bought it from.

 

Quite a few manufacturers now deal with their faulty products direct. It saves a journey back to the retailer.

It usually says something like: "Do not take a faulty item back to the retailer", then gives a contact number with the manufacturer, who will arrange repair or replacement directly.

 

They have undertaken to take the responsibility from the retailer. It doesn't change the law but can make for a more efficient service system.

 

Keith

[farren]

But the models are not faulty, they are has Hornby designed and produced and as such are not faulty what they are is a incorrect model of a star loco. so can responsibility rest retailers .

Edited November 4, 2013 by farren

[Unknown Warrior]

But the models are not faulty, they are has Hornby designed and produced and as such are not faulty what they are is a incorrect model of a star loco. so can responsibility rest retailers .

 

Agreed. We know the design faults, it is up to us to decide to buy or not. It seems that Hornby are not interested in the inaccuracies or in changing the "design clever" features. Those of us who ordered and paid for "Lode Star" from Steam long ago are in a cleft stick because we want the Museum to benefit from the sale (well I do!). As long as the model is not faulty - eg. it doesn't run properly, bits have broken off, I will accept delivery and live with it. May change the wheels. I certain have no expectation of Hornby having the good grace to supply a correct set!

 

As I was the fourth person to place an order I expect to receive mine later in the week, once replacement limited edition certificates have been produced.

 

It is regrettable that the Star has been tainted by the design clever concept I just hope that when 2807 arrives next year it will be to the same standard as the previous 28XX models and not adulterated by design clever.

 

Duke of Gloucester and Cock O' The North are a different matter as we have always been aware that they would be design clever and ordered/ didn't order on that basis.

 

I have to say that my confidence in Hornby is severely dented by their efforts(?) this year.

[7013]

Sale of goods act does not just cover faulty goods, it covers, description of goods and quality amongst others. Below is a bit of the information on quality, this is simplified but it gets more complicated. The said loco looks like a Star and is advertised as a Star and if the consumer is willing to accept it as such then so be it, however if it comes with a warped footplate, missing valve gear wrong wheels, then the customer can ask for a replacement or refund, given that Hornby are in denial about the latter the customer may accept the first two being rectified. Because a loco does not look the shade of green you expect and has moulded handrails the customer has not recourse because those details are known about before purchasing, and by purchasing the customer accepts this. Colour is a very subjective topic as one persons interpretation of Brunswick green mat differ from another.

What does satisfactory quality mean?

Goods are of satisfactory quality if they are of a standard a reasonable person would think was satisfactory at the time of sale. This should take into account their price and anything else that seems to be relevant, for example, whether they're second-hand. Goods should:

Be fit for purpose

Goods should be fit for all the purposes this type of goods is normally used for. For example, a toaster must be able to make toast and a washing machine must be able to wash clothes.

Be of satisfactory appearance and finish

You can expect a new item to have a good appearance and finish. If it doesn't, it's probably not of satisfactory quality, even if it has no other faults. For example, a new car with scratches or a shop-soiled dress aren't of satisfactory quality.

If goods are second-hand then you can't expect their appearance and finish to be as perfect as that of new items.

Be free of minor defects

Something with minor defects is probably not of satisfactory quality, even if the defects could be repaired. For example, a new shirt with buttons missing isn't of satisfactory quality, even if you could replace the buttons. A china dish with a small chip also isn’t of satisfactory quality.

[Gruffalo]

I believe the Sale of Goods legislation provides protection to the purchaser against the retailer so this would not allow me to progress a claim against Hornby, only against the retailer who supplied it to me. In that case, Steam / Kernow et al would be suffering for Hornby's misdemeanours.

[rovex]

Goods are of satisfactory quality if they are of a standard a reasonable person would think was satisfactory at the time of sale. This should take into account their price and anything else that seems to be relevant, for example, whether they're second-hand.

 

I rather think the problem with this approach is the use of the "reasonable person", The reasonable person, being the man on then Clapham Omnibus, probably isn't an avid railway modeller, and wouldn't be able to get terribly excited about the wrong spokes and a missing valve gear.

[Oldddudders]

ISTR that big retailers like M&S operate a no-quibble return on products in good condition. They can afford to do so, while our tiny retailers are having a relatively tough time staying afloat. When OO scale's biggest player shows little interest in its own cockups, the retailer is in a hard place indeed.

[7013]

I think the referral is to a normal everyday person ( whatever that is?) without extremes. One does not have to be a modeller or an expert, however they are around to advise those who do not know.

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

Dear All,

 

I've been following this thread for some months and in particular the observations regarding the flimsy plastic footplate/frame moulding on both the Star and forthcoming Hall. It's interesting to compare the problems of Hornby's approach with Bachmann's solution. Over on RMweb's "Modified Hall" thread, member '6959' posted this helpful photo of a Bachmann Hall in a dismantled state and hope he will not object to me including it here:-

 

 

I did likewise with one of mine, and 'lo and behold', the loco does come apart quite easily as it isn't all 'glued up' unlike Hornby's models. Unlike Hornby's frames which are a thin plastic moulding, the Bachmann frames are a beautifully cast, rigid piece of metal (I'm guessing 'Mazac'?). This has the double advantage of giving nice straight, flat, level frames together with better adhesive weight. I believe the Bachmann Prairie and City are the same, though not older tooling such as the Panniers and 56xx.

 

I can't help feeling Bachmann's approach is more practical than Hornby's. I could understand Hornby rejecting Mazac on the grounds of cost, but Bachmann seem to be able to produce models with cast footplates at identical or cheaper cost to Hornby!

 

I'm surprised it's taken so long for this issue to come to attention. My first Hornby loco with 'banana frames' was "Resolven Grange" which I purchased at least five years ago. Both my 28s were blighted with the same problem. The only modern Hornby loco in my collection free of this problem is the re-tooled Castle. I am lucky enough to have three of these and they are sublime. I have ordered and will buy 'Glastonbury Abbey'. The frame moulding is very similar to the Castle so I am expecting (hoping?) the distortion to be not too bad.

 

One final thought. I had thought the purpose of the "Railroad" range was to offer a budget models as an alternative to the premium range. It seems to me that Hornby is now blurring the lines between the two by introducing "Railroad" economies onto "Premium" models. If the cabside handrail on the Star had been implemented as wire rather than a plastic blob, how much would it have really added to the production cost of the Star? How long does it take a productions line operative to insert a 'staple-shaped' piece of wire into two blind holes? If it added £10 to the retail price, does Hornby really think that the kind of customer who is going to buy that model couldn't run to that additional expense?

 

I hope SK and Hornby don't take any of the above as harsh criticism. Their models have given me great pleasure over the years and I am grateful to them. But please folks, if you're going to sell models into a discerning, premium market and please don't give us budget corner cutting.

 

 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Could you possibly post a pic of the cab interior? Be interesting to see how design clever has affected that part of the loco.

This question exercises me too. From what I can already see from robmcg's ever useful photographs - take a bow sir - the cab interior is full of variously painted doo-dads. There's some red paint forward between the frames also. 

 

Now, my interest is in the detail 'mix' that Hornby - and indeed other RTR manufacturers, because where one leads another may follow - choose to adopt when tooling models, rather than this specific model. My strong preference for this mix is nothing inside the cab or between the frames, at least not until the exterior detail parts practical in 4mm are all present and correct. So if the budget only takes it to some or most of the exterior detail fit, so be it, and the cab interior left an empty box. Because it is the exterior that is mostly seen with the loco or whatever in motion. Fitting any detail pieces inside the cab or elsewhere and dabbing on a little paint to highlight them is simpler for the modeller than paring away a moulded on handrail, drilling locating holes into the exterior, restoring the paint finish, and fitting the replacement handrail.

 

I appreciate that getting any agreement on this is akin to herding cats; and it is quite likely that some purchasers would prefer a fully detailed cab fit above basically accurate exterior appearance, so this is probably a lost cause...

Edited November 4, 2013 by 34theletterbetweenB&D