Venator Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I had a quick look at the D of G model in my local model shop. Looks reasonable to me, I think they've done well to reproduce the caprotti valve gear, something which I believe Bachmann avoided doing for their Standard 5MT model. As the owner of a Hornby Brit I can't say I saw too much difference but I didn't have them side by side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 ....... I think they've done well to reproduce the caprotti valve gear, something which I believe Bachmann avoided doing for their Standard 5MT model. Reproduction of non-working Caprotti has to be the easiest thing in the world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 3, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2014 If it had been tooled by the same tool-making folk, I doubt we would have got square axle boxes on DoG. Which again suggests they cant access the original tooling. More likely they are are using amended designs because of lack of access to the tools and money saving at the same time . If that is the reason (who will ever know I dont think anyone will !!) it is a sad retrograde step and a very poor short term business decision to get money in asap. What we don't know is which factory is making it - in view of the delays it could well be Kader (hence the same size screws in the valvegear) but it could be someone else entirely. What we do know is that at present Hornby are still being supplied with some stuff by Kader - although we don't know exactly what - and that will continue, presumably gradually winding down, until July when Hrnby finally cease their contracts with Kader. As far as the axle slots are concerned that is simply a matter of manufacturing cost - if Hornby specified a certain level of bearing finish to whoever happens to make the engines that is what they will get, irrespective of, say, exactly the same supplier making previous chassis to a different arrangement of bearings. However the simple fact is that we don't know who is making DoG for Hornby, we don't know who tooled it (which might not even be the firm which assembles it) and so on; all we know is what eventually appears in the shops and whether or not we like it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steffi_C Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 However, I persist. 71000 has always held an interest for me and the model is proving a modelling challenge. It's a good starting point for something better body shell wise but the chassis is going to need a lot of work to be satisfactory (for me). I'm very appreciative of your work on this, and the very detailed information you're posting. Is there any chance you could add Hornby part numbers to future posts? Their service sheets aren't always the easiest to navigate with certainty. Just cancelled my order with Hattons as I picked up a (new) train pack for £95 on eBay last night. I've got some Britannia bits in in anticipation already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venator Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Reproduction of non-working Caprotti has to be the easiest thing in the world. It's still a positive move in my opinion. It does beg the question, if its so easy why haven't Bachmann done it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 It's still a positive move in my opinion. It does beg the question, if its so easy why haven't Bachmann done it? It might simply be a Caprotti BR Std 5 never occurred to them. Like no one has ever done a RTR LMS 'Crab' with Lenze motion or the even simpler Caprotti Black Five. They would probably all find a ready market but whether it would be large enough for Bachmann or Hornby is something else.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 3, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2014 It might simply be a Caprotti BR Std 5 never occurred to them. Like no one has ever done a RTR LMS 'Crab' with Lenze motion or the even simpler Caprotti Black Five. They would probably all find a ready market but whether it would be large enough for Bachmann or Hornby is something else.... WEB Caprotti LMS 5.jpg I suspect both Hornby and Bachmann would say that the additional tooling costs wouldn't give them sufficient extra return. That's not to say they wouldn't sell. There will be those that would buy it because they specifically wanted a Caprotti and those that would buy it because they were not aware of or didn't care about the differences. Starve the market for a few years and most popular locomotive types will sell out the next production run - which could be a Caprotti version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 3, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2014 However the simple fact is that we don't know who is making DoG for Hornby, we don't know who tooled it (which might not even be the firm which assembles it) and so on; all we know is what eventually appears in the shops and whether or not we like it. Do Hornby actually know who's making the DoG for them? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I had a quick look at the D of G model in my local model shop. Looks reasonable to me, I think they've done well to reproduce the caprotti valve gear, something which I believe Bachmann avoided doing for their Standard 5MT model. The caprotti gear is a plastic moulding which is not connected in any way to the metal valve gear. It hovers over the eccentric which spins on its own, unattached. So it's hardly "producing" Caprotti valve gear so much as making a representation of it. Nicely moulded but not exactly difficult in the great scheme of things to make as it has been. I do wonder though whether you are being overly harsh on Bachmann there - unlike DoG where making Caprotti valve gear is an absolute, the number of standard 5MTs with caprotti gear was far exceeded by the number made with standard walscaerts gear. Why tool up for some minor members of the class when the standard will sell well on its own? It's not as if, if we take Hornby's DoG to be an acceptable standard, for someone to simply remove the eccentric gear on a standard 5MT and fit a non functioning caprotti gear as well. I do wonder what your point actually is? As the owner of a Hornby Brit I can't say I saw too much difference but I didn't have them side by side. I've had the pleasure of looking at a Hornby Clan today alongside my DoG and the first thought which came to mind was the significant difference in finish and overall quality. I'm very discerning, accepted, but I don't think the Railroad or main range DoG can stand alongside the Clan or Brit and look good by comparison. The plastic is of a very different quality, the colour of the paint and the finish, though sharp on both the main range Clan and DoG shows up just how good the Clan is. I do think there's a level of ostrich in sand thinking regarding DoG. It represents an excellent, and very close to prototype model in terms of accuracy to prototype, but it takes significant steps backwards from that found on Hornby's Tornado model, which was already in some respects a few steps backwards with the higher levels of moulding. We're not talking about a model which is completely incapable, but it frustrates me that we continuously have to accept lower standards for one manufacturer, charging more, and accept higher standards from another, charging similar amounts for similar models. I'm not going to criticise any of them unduly: I think Bachmann only half retooling the A4 and V2, and forthcoming V3 is daft, and they are missed opportunities on a number of levels but I will defend their chassis design because the first two are excellent and the third one should be if it follows the same design ethos as the former two. Hornby's DoG should have followed the Tornado model to the book (particularly given the Tornado model has a superb chassis) and yet more drastic corners were cut leading to what I think is a ticking time bomb in terms of chassis design. I simply do not understand at any level the squarish cut outs in the mazak chassis block and lack of brass bearings. if they could do it with Tornado they could and should have done it with DoG, the heavy tanks and the Star (and the forthcoming P2). I'm very appreciative of your work on this, and the very detailed information you're posting. Is there any chance you could add Hornby part numbers to future posts? Their service sheets aren't always the easiest to navigate with certainty. Just cancelled my order with Hattons as I picked up a (new) train pack for £95 on eBay last night. I've got some Britannia bits in in anticipation already. No problem. I have used thus far X9599 (coupling rods), and will be using X6592 (rear pony truck wheels), X9313R (class 31 buffers), X9609 (Brit detail pack) and am debating using X9602 (tender frames). Driving wheels I will give you the X number when I have decided which set I am using, watch this space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebell Model Railway Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Still awaiting detailing packs from Hornby to complete mine, apparently they are not too far away... possibly end of Feb, from what they said last week. I was going to order various Britannia detail packs but found they lacked a few bits, like steps for example. There does seem to be some running issues with some and not others, I remember Simon you mentioned yours was running tight were mine seemed ok... I have to admit I have changed the rods maybe I will look in to this next month, I will also look to add back tender pickups at a later stage which is quite straight forward. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81139-Hornby-duke-of-gloucester-r3168-railroad-model/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yours very much looking the part Matt. Mine started out quite nice, but loud, but the running degraded with more running in, not less. The new connecting rods have quietened the model down a lot and it certainly seems happier with them. I have an idea for the driving wheels but it's going to have to wait a week or so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebell Model Railway Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yes I was looking in to the bearings, speaking to someone with a milling machine or something along those lines to cut the block for the bearings, but think there has to be a line to the mods, before going to far. I will look in to the rods, a little later but pleased yours is running better now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Hi MattAn update ... pleased yours is running better ... It am actually beginning to quite like the model now it is tidied up a bitRegardsRay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Belgian Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Looking at Silver Sidelines photo, has the DoG got thicked handrail wire than the Brit? Or is it just that they are bright plated? Either is a retrograde step, both would be . . well, not good.. JE JE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Hello JE You may be right- something that I had been thinking - there are some more comparison pictures on another Post ...has the DoG got thicked handrail wire than the Brit? . Oh and it is not bright plated - it is silver paint. Regards Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Ray, you have my thanks and gratitude for your illuminating blog posts. Very much looking over your blog as I prepare to do something rather drastic to my DoG this weekend…! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted February 5, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 5, 2014 Given that this has one piece coupling rods, let's pray the P2 doesn't have them too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 I can't imagine the P2 would have one piece coupling rods over the whole length of the eight driving wheels. That would create a very long, very stiff wheelbase surely? Particularly if it has been designed to go round train set curves. Just to add to the above list of parts, I am also using Markits M4sBD1 - B.R smokebox door handle - for my DoG rebuild. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted February 6, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 6, 2014 We didn't think DoG would have one piece rods either. Hornby are really falling behind. Hall R3169 has gone from April 28 to September 17 delivery. For a loco due last year this is ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 6, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 6, 2014 We didn't think DoG would have one piece rods either. Hornby are really falling behind. Hall R3169 has gone from April 28 to September 17 delivery. For a loco due last year this is ridiculous. Count yourself lucky - I'm still waiting for a 'Grange' deferred from 2012 to 2013 and now into 2014, hopefully. Maybe things will improve once Hornby depart from Kader manufacture? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted February 6, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 6, 2014 Hopefully. Hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 8, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 8, 2014 We didn't think DoG would have one piece rods either. Hornby are really falling behind. Hall R3169 has gone from April 28 to September 17 delivery. For a loco due last year this is ridiculous. That's nothing. The 2012 catalogue shows two T9s due 2nd Quarter and two West Countries for 3rd quarter. All from existing tooling and none anywhere near the shops yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 11, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2014 Hattons inform me that my order for R 3191.....'Oh Lord,it's on its way!'....for whom it may concern. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted February 14, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 14, 2014 Has anyone tried to solve the excessive front overhang of the smokebox yet? I am going to attempt it when I get my model. I think it's such a visual difference, it was the first thing that I personally noticed when they released the first pics. Does the boiler come away from the foot plating? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Has anyone tried to solve the excessive front overhang of the smokebox yet? I am going to attempt it when I get my model. I think it's such a visual difference, it was the first thing that I personally noticed when they released the first pics. Does the boiler come away from the foot plating? See Coachman thread on detailing. Hornby magazine has a article this month as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.