RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 ======================================================================================================== Ok then why do or have Hornby run two types of motor`s in steam locos then 3 & 5. Why don`t Hornby just have one style 3 or 5 pole skew like Bachmann run. I think I did suggest you contact Hornby for the answer to that question.Unfortunately,members of this forum aren't party to decisions on their design and engineering. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verulam Central Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Has anyone done any running videos yet of their P2 on their layout? many thanks Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkC Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Damn iPhone* autocorrect! *other too-smart-for-their-own-good devices are available There, fixed it for you, Simon 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Moss Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 The railroad 9F also has a 5 pole with flywheel fitted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2014 In one of his interviews with Model Rail or Hornby Magazine, Simon Kohler said that the 5 pole adds around £25 extra to the price. IMHO that is total twaddle. If a new spare 3 pole P2 motor, gear and flywheel are on offer for £8 (linked to previously) Hornby must be buying gold plated ones. It suggests 5 pole motor alone is about £30 and that is buying in bulk! I wonder just how cheap 1000 5 pole motors might be? If Hornby used the same one in many locos the number could be greater. On Alibaba I can find something like this: http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/FK-130SPH-simple-small-12v-dc_411173765.html NB from 39 cents each! Keith 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2014 All I was doing was typing what I read in Model Rail, which had been confirmed by Chris Leigh several posts back, that the 5 pole is vastly more expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkC Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 After the heads up on this thread the other day, I have ordered one of these Railroad P2s for my nephew, to be put aside for his xxxxxxxxx* present - it will go well with his Railroad "Tornado". Of course, I will have to give it a good looking at when I get home from my present tour of duty... *It's WAY too early to mention a certain "C" word, is it not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) All I was doing was typing what I read in Model Rail, which had been confirmed by Chris Leigh several posts back, that the 5 pole is vastly more expensive. Yes, I know. I was just showing that Hornby's excuse for not fitting 5 pole motors is a bit lame. Making a 5 pole and a 3 pole cannot be much difference in price. The laminations for the armature will be very similar, the main difference is winding on 5 poles instead of three and even that using automatedequipment isn't going to add much Keith Edited August 30, 2014 by melmerby Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 3 Pole, 5 Pole, but why no 4 Pole? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) 3 Pole, 5 Pole, but why no 4 Pole? You'de get dead-centre. The only time you got 4 poles was when queuing up for overtime... Edited August 30, 2014 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) You'de get dead-centre. The only time you got 4 poles was when queuing up for overtime... Overtime? Edited August 30, 2014 by toboldlygo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Wheeee!!!! Just decanted P2 onto the layout - a smooth runner, handles the curves with aplomb, hauls like a hero and looks terrific. A BIG thumbs up to Hornby! 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CathcartCircle Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) My P2 arrived this morning and is the first Railroad Range model I have bought. I am mightily impressed, she looks great out of the box being that I am not a rivet counter but with a bit of paint here and there she will be stunning. She is also a smooth and powerful runner, handling 8 coaches with ease. I was surprised that she had glazing and the whistle atop her smokebox is just fab. Well done Hornby with this one! Edited August 30, 2014 by CathcartCircle 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 No sign of mine yet - nor even an unhappy smiley to add to the comment :-( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) Mine has now turned up, from Rails, always had very good service from them, good price and they have without fail always packed items very securely in custom cut boxes, with loads of packing. So it arrived without damage. Looks a very impressive model. It measured up well against the Skinley drawing. 1) surprised that the boiler bands are white/black/white, with the black line in the middle, as they should be. In earlier pics I couldn't see the black line as it is so fine. Thought it was going to be like (say) old tender drive Flying Scotsman where there was just a white band. So I won't have to get out the LNER lining transfers after all. 2) Finish is very good, no blemishes or finger marks (see Mansell push-pull coaches thread). 3) Coupling/connecting rods very fine. 4) reasonable cab details but not painted/printed. 5) Cab doors are nice also the roof vents are moulded as open differently (they don't actually slide like the Stanier 4P tank for instance). 6) The box holds the model very firmly in an expanded polystyrene inset, from which it just lifts out by means of a piece of clear wrapping. So simpler than previous Hornby boxes but effective. 7) The loco tender coupling is pivoted from underneath the front of the tender. A moulded pin under the loco cab slots into one of two holes in the drawbar. The drawbar is flimsier than previous arrangements but works ok. My coupling bar dropped and I had to tighten the retaining screw. That didn't completely tighten so I bent the bar slightly up which did the trick. Somewhere on this thread I read that the loco/tender coupling was adjustable. In fact there are just 2 settings. In Tony Wright's original video review he said that the loco/tender gap was too big but that had to be because of the length of the loco. However, running the loco round the outer loop on my layout, which has 36" radius curves, I just got away with using the "scale length but only for display" inner hole on the drawbar, so I think an intermediate setting could work for most layouts. I'd need it for inner main line (30" radius). It would mean making a new drawbar of course. Otherwise the "running" setting hole on the drawbar does leave a noticably overwide gap between loco and tender. 9) The pony truck is that (rather annoying) system from the 8F, 4P, L1 etc. where the truck gets pushed crab-wise through curves. But there is a work around for that with a length of wire fitting into a hole drilled in the pony truck to let it swivel but not jiggle for and aft. There were some postings about this on a thread about the L1 I think but can't find them at the moment. Running. 10) Ran perfectly straight out of the box. Very quiet and controllable forwards and reverse (this is using DC). Apart from the tender uncoupling (see above for fix) had no problems so far. I did oil the loco bearings and motion pins as advised in the instruction leaflet. 11) Runs smoothly at speed and also just creeps along, so no problems with motor or gearing. Looks great running, also because of the eight-coupled chassis, I think. The prototype must have looked fantastic from the lineside. In conclusion, I was expecting the Railroad version to look rather cheap and toy like but be a good basis for relining and adding more detail. As it happens, it looks good enough to leave as it is, (apart from tender drawbar length adjustment) by and large. I was thinking of etched name plates and an etched works building plate on the cab side would be the icing on the cake. Probably there are various details that can be painted up or highlighted (the acfi water heater moulding looks a little light in colour for instance and the oil boxes could be picked out in brass). I'm sure a list will soon appear on here! Oh and there are the moulded cab and tender hand rails of course but let's not go there just now... Overall, looks good, runs very well (so far...) and for the price, a real bargain. Started to slip with 17 coaches on, but still managed to keep going. Think that's enough coaches really. And still running fine! Well done Hornby and thanks for the excellent service, Rails. Edited August 30, 2014 by railroadbill 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2014 The railroad thing is confusing me a bit as looking at this and also the pics of the crosti 9F in Hornby Magazine they seem to have narrowed the differential between railroad and top line models to the point where there doesn't seem to be that much difference. Not saying that is a bad thing if railroad are offering bargain slightly de-spec versions of models that'd be considered perfectly acceptable to most modelers but I am a bit confused by how it will all fit together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Corbs Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 It might be that the main range gets up-specced away from 'design clever', such as the GWR 42xx receiving proper smokebox door handles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigherb Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 7) The loco tender coupling is pivoted from underneath the front of the tender. A moulded pin under the loco cab slots into one of two holes in the drawbar. The drawbar is flimsier than previous arrangements but works ok. My coupling bar dropped and I had to tighten the retaining screw. That didn't completely tighten so I bent the bar slightly up which did the trick. I cured my drop with a packing washer, one Peco fibre 1/8 axle spacer worked well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) The railroad thing is confusing me a bit as looking at this and also the pics of the crosti 9F in Hornby Magazine they seem to have narrowed the differential between railroad and top line models to the point where there doesn't seem to be that much difference. Not saying that is a bad thing if railroad are offering bargain slightly de-spec versions of models that'd be considered perfectly acceptable to most modelers but I am a bit confused by how it will all fit together. I think if this loco were bought as "railroad is for little [insert child's name here] trainset" then it would be rather flimsy. The valve gear would be easily bent inwards,if held roughly by the wheels, the scale handrails bend in if sqeezed against the boiler, that plastic peg that fits into the thin drawbar wouldn't take much abuse etc (thanks by the way Bigherb for the Peco washer tip). That's not to say that all kids abuse toys, if fact complicated toys arguably teach that treating equipment responsibly and properly keeps it going. But accidents happen. Railroad warship, all moulded detail and could probably be thrown against the wall and still run, might be better as a Railroad brand example. Maybe main range and main range lite would do the trick? Edited August 30, 2014 by railroadbill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 Etched plates are a perfect fit 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
railroadbill Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 2001_rhfancu.jpg Etched plates are a perfect fit Excellent! Etched plates it is then. And looks better with the steps and drain cocks fitted. One thing where "design clever" worked was that I thought the outer smokebox door handle was separately fitted at first rather than moulded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Moss Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Motor prices etc, my Uncle buys motors in by the hundred from Hong Kong that are 5 pole and strapped to a precision reduction gear box for about £6 each. £25 each sounds a rather large exaggeration by Hornby. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamOrmorod Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) 2001_rhfancu.jpg Etched plates are a perfect fit Sorry to point it out, but those nameplates don't look quite straight, sloping down towards the front, though I must say they do look very nice. Edit: It could just be the angle of the photo that makes the plates look off, though I'm still not sure. Edited August 30, 2014 by Ade the Pianist 4468 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 There's always one at every exhbition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted August 30, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 30, 2014 Sorry to point it out, but those nameplates don't look quite straight, sloping down towards the front, though I must say they do look very nice. Edit: It could just be the angle of the photo that makes the plates look off, though I'm still not sure. I politely suggest you recalibrate your eyeballs - it's the camera angle 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now