Great Gathering A4 Collection

[Nimbus]

Tools reveal their 'personalities' in the random surface markings particularly where cosmetics don't matter, i.e. on the inside surfaces. We need a moderate gathering of model A4 owners willing to take the lids off their A4s and compare the inside surfaces!

 

As it happens, I discover I have Hornby Van B's from two sources, Sanda Kan and Refined. I have just taken them apart, and the random markings are identical, these being patches of rash on the floor where the erosion machining has not been fully polished out, and localised hand dressing inside the roof around slides and ejector pins. So these tools, at least, have found their way to a new plant. The newer one from Refined has been cost reduced in minor ways - close coupler option no longer packed, and guards compartment moulding omitted.

 

The box labels:

R 4536A Green S204S:  SK101-89789 R4536A-11-963

R 4586 Crimson S266S:  REF01-90380 R4586-50-979

 

The Nim.

[darren01]

Hi

Who is this company Refined never heard of them, also where are they based?.

Thanks

Darren

[G-BOAF]

Closer couplings maybe still with Sanda Kan, hence not included?

[Guest 2750]

My Great Snipe Models have arrived this morning.

 

Locos themselves look fine, apart from what look like oil marks on the body.

Annoyingly the transfer positions aren't where they should be, which seemed to be the case on the Great Gathering set.

 

Front number on buffer beam is too high, not a big problem to be honest as I'm renumbering.

 

What is annoying is they have printed LNER slightly too high on the tender, it is supposed to be level with the cabside numbers, therefore should be lower on the tender. This has always been correct on prior releases (Mallard, Great Snipe, Kingfisher).

This is a real annoyance as I'm happy renumbering, as you are usually adding transfers over the top of where existing numbers once were. The issue now is that the old numbers will still show on the plastic, giving a ghost LNER under the newly correct position numbers.

 

I've compared a photo to the pre Great Gathering Mallard R2339 tender.

 

To be honest I will probably leave it as it is, it's just annoying when they have got it right in the past.

 

What a shame.

[Hilux5972]

Wow that is quite a difference. Has this new production company produced anything like model railway locos before?

[Guest 2750]

Some side on shots showing the mis alignment. Quite a bit of handling marks and oil smears.

 

 

[shunny]

This is a real worrying trend with the quality of models from Hornby they have been producing A4's for years with the correct tender lettering height but now it seems to be an issue. Its a great model but for £145 I would expect the livery to be spot on as in the past. I will be cancelling my order and I am also concerned about the A3 Booklaw as looking at sample model on Hornby's website it has the same issue with the tender decals too high up. Maybe Hornby need to follow Bachmann and have livery samples sent to UK for approval before production is signed off.

[CPRAIL2011]

My Great Snipe Models have arrived this morning.

 

Locos themselves look fine, apart from what look like oil marks on the body.

Annoyingly the transfer positions aren't where they should be, which seemed to be the case on the Great Gathering set.

 

Front number on buffer beam is too high, not a big problem to be honest as I'm renumbering.

IMG_6073.jpg

 

What is annoying is they have printed LNER slightly too high on the tender, it is supposed to be level with the cabside numbers, therefore should be lower on the tender. This has always been correct on prior releases (Mallard, Great Snipe, Kingfisher).

This is a real annoyance as I'm happy renumbering, as you are usually adding transfers over the top of where existing numbers once were. The issue now is that the old numbers will still show on the plastic, giving a ghost LNER under the newly correct position numbers.

IMG_6074.jpg

 

I've compared a photo to the pre Great Gathering Mallard R2339 tender.

IMG_6075.jpg

 

To be honest I will probably leave it as it is, it's just annoying when they have got it right in the past.

 

What a shame.

I am curious, can you comment on the tender base, is there any improvement in the moulding following the GG set, are the sides flush and straight and does the tender top sit well on the base ?

[micklner]

Some side on shots showing the mis alignment. Quite a bit of handling marks and oil smears.

 

IMG_6077.jpg

 

IMG_6078.jpg

Tom

      Thought about this overnight.  In view of the marks and the price!! I personally would send them back . Hornby are not going to change whilst people accept such poor quality.

[Steffi_C]

Tom

      Thought about this overnight.  In view of the marks and the price!! I personally would send them back . Hornby are not going to change whilst people accept such poor quality.

 

£116?  You think that's too much?

[micklner]

£116?  You think that's too much?

Yes, misaligned livery and oil marks simply not good enough, price is irelevant.

 

 

 

edit

 

I should also add that when I said price I was refering to the fact that Tom has bought two of these Locos hence a lot of money, has been paid .

[Steffi_C]

Yes, misaligned livery and oil marks simply not good enough, price is irelevant.

 

edit

 

I should also add that when I said price I was refering to the fact that Tom has bought two of these Locos hence a lot of money, has been paid .

 

Tom will make up his own mind of course, but I've noticed how often the advice to return the models comes from those who have no interest in buying the model in question.

 

I'll take a view when my own package turns up, but I'm not anticipating any return.  I don't like the problems with the recent A4s but I still see this as good value.

[G-BOAF]

But good value at full RRP (which is, as far as HRN are concerned the price)? I totally disagree, given that it would not have 'cost' any more to get the positioning correct. They are not being sold off as 'seconds' are they?

 

The fact is the model is not to spec, nor is it as advertised by Hornby themselves (check out the website pics - cab and tender characters aligh).

 

I thought after the GG models 'tweaks' were being implemented? Either they aren't, or these models were already made some months ago and have been on the 'slow boat' for a while.

The rest of the model looks very good, from what the pictures show, aside form the tool seam along the tender cantrail (more prominent than R2339 I think).

But these numbers and lettering are just complete howlers.

 

Disappointed.

[Guest 2750]

Gents I'm going to keep one I've had out of the box and return the other to Hattons.

 

I'm also going to email Simon Kohler.

[durham light infantry]

Tom

 

You might like to ask him why why the Hornby Railway side of Hornby Hobbies thinks it can treat its customers so poorly compared to the way Airfix is performing?

 

Airfix is releasing new kits to a standard that rivals all the competition, and is revisiting it's older models and re-tooling them to the same new standard. All at a reasonable price and readily available to buy in sufficient numbers.

 

Hornby railways are going backwards in terms of specification, finish and supply. With prices not being of equal parity. Is it because they think so little of railway modellers, or just don't care?

 

Mike

[dibber25]

Tom

 

You might like to ask him why why the Hornby Railway side of Hornby Hobbies thinks it can treat its customers so poorly compared to the way Airfix is performing?

 

Airfix is releasing new kits to a standard that rivals all the competition, and is revisiting it's older models and re-tooling them to the same new standard. All at a reasonable price and readily available to buy in sufficient numbers.

 

Hornby railways are going backwards in terms of specification, finish and supply. With prices not being of equal parity. Is it because they think so little of railway modellers, or just don't care?

 

Mike

He actually told me - at least five years ago - that India could do a very good job with the Airfix kits but couldn't do the intricate assembly of the locomotives, which was best done by the Chinese. So just maybe, it's got rather more to do with the production difficulties with the railway models and the relative ease of making plastic mouldings and putting them in a box, and the fact that the two jobs are being done in different countries.

CHRIS LEIGH

[Steffi_C]

I'm also going to email Simon Kohler.

 

That's probably just what is needed.

 

Hornby's A4 is an absolutely superb model, with recent examples let down by the most basic quality control.  Having said that, my Snipe arrived this morning and there are no handling marks at all.  If it wasn't for the failure to position the lettering / numbering correctly it would be pretty much perfect.  I'm wondering whether to order a couple more for renumbering myself..

[iankemp]

Found this picture on Facebook of Mallard with the number and lettering in line.

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153872533415375&set=pcb.10152238637767692&type=1&theatre

 

 

There is a lot of difference between the newer models to the older super detail ones. The Super detailed version has the numbers and letters are all in line compared with the newer versions of it ie Great Gathering and the Great goodbye. They really should have a better QC system in place. You should email Simon Kholer and try and make him aware of the complete screw ups the new plant are making. In the past when I have bought an A4 brand new there was hardly any faults with it but the new plant is making more problems than there should be.

[S.A.C Martin]

Tom will make up his own mind of course, but I've noticed how often the advice to return the models comes from those who have no interest in buying the model in question.

 

I'll take a view when my own package turns up, but I'm not anticipating any return.  I don't like the problems with the recent A4s but I still see this as good value.

 

I just can't fathom what other industry would accept oil and handling marks in this way not to mention decoration errors?

 

If you buy an iPod and the colour is off or there are handling marks making it imperfect, you'd take it back. If you bought a watch and the numbers were misprinted on the dial, you'd take it back. If you buy a dinner in a restaurant and when it comes out, it's not what you ordered, you'd send it back.

 

You're effectively saying our rights as consumers are immaterial to your own perceived standards of "value for money".

 

I just don't understand railway modellers at times. The aim of the game is to model certainly but there's got to be a line drawn between modeller and consume whereby the modeller feels he or she is getting bang for their buck. We're talking about models with RRPs in excess of £130 now and there are people in other threads who want us to accept higher prices and lower overall specifications for money.

 

These are careless errors which modellers have pointed out to Hornby on Commonwealth of Australia, Dominion of Canada and I think the Bittern model too over the last year and to see it perpetuated yet again on Great Snipe (which was meant to be a 2012 release I seem to recall) is infuriating at best.

[Steffi_C]

You're effectively saying our rights as consumers are immaterial to your own perceived standards of "value for money".

 

Of course I'm not.  I'm saying that it comes down to individual judgement.  People are quite free to exercise their rights as consumers by returning faulty models or by not buying them in the first place.  If the model doesn't sell or has a high level of return it will undoubtedly increase the pressure on Hornby to take action.

 

We're not some sort of Marxist commune bound by any obligation to collective action.  Tom helpfully posted photos of his Snipe which clearly illustrated the problems with the models he received.  People who haven't already purchased but were considering doing so can make a more informed decision as a consequence.  Tom's decided to return one of the two models and I'm sure Hattons will refund him promptly and courteously as they always do.

 

My experience was slightly different in that the model I received didn't display any handling marks, although the misaligned printing is of course exactly the same, which was disappointing but all too predictable given Hornby's recent history and current production difficulties.  In truth it's pretty much what I expected, if anything slightly better than the Great Gathering examples, and I'm happy enough to resolve the printing issues.  I'm probably going to order a couple more, since the base model remains superb.

 

 

I just don't understand railway modellers at times. The aim of the game is to model certainly but there's got to be a line drawn between modeller and consume whereby the modeller feels he or she is getting bang for their buck.

 

 

 

For the £116 I paid, I feel that I got more than enough bang for my buck, far more so than with (say) the recent Duke of Gloucester.  Were it not for the fact that I'm expecting Hornby to catch a serious cold with the Great Goodbye, I'd say that we're unlikely to see a new super detail A4 as cheap again.  I only wish I felt more optimistic that Hornby will get a firm grip with these ridiculous QC issues.  As for the P2, I'm fearing the worst.

[S.A.C Martin]

Totally agree its more value for money than DoG - but at £116 it's still not value for money with those decoration errors. Nameplates can be replaced but the nature of the LNER printing on Hornby models means you're very unlikely to replace them easily or without the older letters showing through.

 

I take your point about it being up to the individual too, absolutely right to pull me up on that. I would still however say the errors are entirely avoidable given the number of emails from LNER forum members, and posts there, here and elsewhere citing previous models' livery problems.

 

Do not understand how a £3.99 model A4 can get this right and a £140 RRP model doesn't by comparison!

[Dunsignalling]

Totally agree its more value for money than DoG - but at £116 it's still not value for money with those decoration errors. Nameplates can be replaced but the nature of the LNER printing on Hornby models means you're very unlikely to replace them easily or without the older letters showing through.

 

I take your point about it being up to the individual too, absolutely right to pull me up on that. I would still however say the errors are entirely avoidable given the number of emails from LNER forum members, and posts there, here and elsewhere citing previous models' livery problems.

 

Do not understand how a £3.99 model A4 can get this right and a £140 RRP model doesn't by comparison!

The obvious advice is, if you don't like it and can't fix it; don't buy it!

 

If you've already bought it, send it back for rectification or refund.

 

John

[S.A.C Martin]

I think you've missed the point I'm making John.

 

I would happily have purchased multiples if the model had been correct. It's not, so I won't. I'm normally very happy to correct things on my models but not brand new ones which should be right from the get go.

 

Is it only LNER modellers who are told this by other modellers - I wonder how GWR modellers in the Star thread would have liked being told effectively to put up or shut up given the issues outlined there?

 

I do think Hornby have had a rough time of it and I want them to succeed. But - as I've said before (and nobody likes a soothsayer) you can't keep putting prices up and specifications down without alienating your core customers at some point. Add to that not producing your existing models to the correct specification and you're effectively throwing away your business.

 

A few years back, a decoration error on the 2EPB led Bachmann to create replacement body shells - as I recall they did a fine job in making those available. This is the third time Hornby have made this entirely avoidable error - so it's a question of changing it going forward or offering replacement tender body shells to correct the error.

 

The latter option is unlikely given the current manufacturing capacity or lack there of described elsewhere on this forum but the difference in approaches to errors between the major manufacturers never ceases to amaze me.

[Guest spet0114]

A few years back, a decoration error on the 2EPB led Bachmann to create replacement body shells - as I recall they did a fine job in making those available.

 

Yes, the contrast in the approaches shown by the two companies is quite marked.

 

Going a little off topic, when I heard about the aforementioned 2EPB error I immediately nipped out and bought an 'incorrect' one. Not, I hasten to add, as an 'investment' or for some 'Gostude'-style profiteering but more as a sort of 'zeitgeist' thing - mistakes of this order are quite rare nowadays (at least around Barwell), so it was a bit of fun to have an example of one. Doubtless this shows me up as having a 'collector' mentality of the worst sort, but that doesn't bother me too much! 

 

Cheers

Adrian

[Cy Lindercocks]

Gents I'm going to keep one I've had out of the box and return the other to Hattons.

 

I'm also going to email Simon Kohler.

 

 

 

I realize that people see Simon Kohler as the "face" of Hornby however Simon is the Brand Marketing Manager and, as such, cannot influence areas such as sales and quality control. 

 

The person you should be addressing you concerns to is Nat Southworth, Sales and Brands Director of Hornby who as a board level director is in a position to actually influence the Board and the suppliers regarding those problems.

 

One final thought re the Tender lettering. While accepting that the lettering is a shade out please remember that the difference in ride height on an A4 tender varies by around 5" depending upon the coal and water capacity in the tender!