Hornby Schools Class

[71000]

Two further - you mentioned changes to the schools. Aside from loco-tender connection, anything else major. Is my current thinking of interchanging parts from a Green 'Brighton' (Sanda Kan) to Westminster (post SK) even possible?

 

If the boiler is metal (I knew this was the case on the T9, didn't realise Schools as well), am I correct in thinking the smokebox is plastic? Part of the running plate moulding?

 

Basically I am now thinking that swapping the Boiler AND Cab between running plates/smokeboxes might be less risky than removing the cab from boiler, and also eliminate any difference in pain finish between cab and boiler of two different model batches... (leaving only slight difference between cab and running plate).

E

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[JSpencer]

Early Schools models had a different motor. The method of attaching the front bogie has changed. The wiring has been altered. Can't think of anything else off hand. The chimney's fitted as far as I'm aware just uses two small pegs, like the King Arthurs, and can of course be interchanged. Often alternative parts for such models use a standard fitment, to reduce tooling.

 

The plastic smokebox is a seperate part, and appears to be glued to both the running plate and boiler. The division is where the colour changes from black to green.  The Cab, boiler and Smokebox is fitted as one to the running plate during assembly. Then all the little detail parts are most likely added. So dissassembly is best tackled in reverse.  

 

The Schools for the same reason as the T9 needs both a heavier metal diecast boiler, and traction tyres, to allow it haul the sort of loads it could in real life. See my LOAD HAUL TESTS of many steam loco models, in my regular "Basingstoke 1958-67" (Layout and Stock) in the RM category "Modelling real locations" which will give you some idea of what many models capabilities are out of the packet.

 

The T9 is quite weak in the haulage dept being light. But the Schools punches way above its weight. Both my Schools and T9s have traction tyres. Have they removed them since.

 

I agree with others about the schools being fragile. Mine arrived with bits popped off such as the back head. The metal brackets which retained the loco in the box were seriously tight, I almost deformed the thin plastic running plate trying to remove them. It is better now, but only last week the fall plate fell off, fitted that but then on of the wires broke on the devils plug, re-soldered that, a delicate task but succeeded.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

I'm afraid I can't really agree, as my experience with my own German and Japanese exhibition layouts and stock, does not really support your arguments

 

*Indeed the History of traction tyres in Britain is not good...

Thank you, but I am entirely aware of the superior qualities of HO traction tyre implementation as compared to the poor implementation on UK OO. And it is the poor implementation to date of traction tyres on OO product (*that you confirmed by your own statement) that is responsible for the poor acceptance of the traction tyre in OO. I know it can be done much better, I have long term seen the HO European product very regularly, as citing the Rivarossi product from the 1970s might have hinted.  But such superior implementation of traction tyres has not been seen on any RTR OO I am aware of to date.

 

As such, the all metal tyre option with weight for traction is the present better choice for OO manufactures and why I am very happy to see the traction tyre eliminated from current OO product designs. This works with none of the downside of the previous poor traction tyre implementation. To repeat what I previously posted:

...Now there are better traction tyre formulations. Rivarossi - now owned by Hornby - were using a high grade translucent traction tyre which is both near invisible and doesn't dirt up since the 1970s, and this tyre material is long lasting, like over forty years! While it isn't what I want, were Hornby to switch to this material it is likely that as UK customers saw its benefits objections to the traction tyre would dwindle rapidly...

 

Which leads to:

 

...As to the visual aspects of models being impaired by the existence of Traction tyres, you yourself have mentioned one of the options is to use a clear material.  Maybe someone should tell Hornby ...

I am not an insider in this industry - and have no desire to be so - but you are. Please go tell Hornby, the background you have makes you a credible expert advocate. (I have brought the Rivarossi traction tyre material to the attention of Hornby's representatives in the past, and they have not shown the slightest interest.)

[OFFTHE RAILS]

Early Schools models had a different motor. The method of attaching the front bogie has changed. The wiring has been altered. ...........

Could you expand on this a little please.

I have three of the early super detail loco drive Schools (R2744 Blundells, R2815 Haileybury, R2844 St. Lawrence) and two have had broken plastic bogie pivot pins which I had to replace with BA bolts. How has Hornby changed the bogie? The Hornby service sheet HSS330C doen't show an alternative bogie bit if the bogie has been improved I'd like to get hold of one.

Also how has the wiring been improved ? All my Schools have the white plastic plug which fits in the socket in the tender. Has this changed on recent models?

Ian

[71000]

Could you expand on this a little please.

I have three of the early super detail loco drive Schools (R2744 Blundells, R2815 Haileybury, R2844 St. Lawrence) and two have had broken plastic bogie pivot pins which I had to replace with BA bolts. How has Hornby changed the bogie? The Hornby service sheet HSS330C doen't show an alternative bogie bit if the bogie has been improved I'd like to get hold of one.

Also how has the wiring been improved ? All my Schools have the white plastic plug which fits in the socket in the tender. Has this changed on recent models?

Ian

 

I

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[71000]

The T9 is quite weak in the haulage dept being light. But the Schools punches way above its weight. Both my Schools and T9s have traction tyres. Have they removed them since.

 

I agree with others about the schools being fragile. Mine arrived with bits popped off such as the back head. The metal brackets which retained the loco in the box were seriously tight, I almost deformed the thin plastic running plate trying to remove them. It is better now, but only last week the fall plate fell off, fitted that but then on of the wires broke on the devils plug, re-soldered that, a delicate task but succeeded.

J 

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[JSpencer]

J Spencer,

 

Hornby would be foolish to remove the Traction tyres, as this would most likely cut 60% off the power capabilities of both the T9 and the Schools class.

 

In other words Hornby would start opening the door to all the kit production companies again, such as DJH. Who have virtually given up with British OO as a result of the huge improvements in British RTR !  

 

71000

Thanks, so overall, traction tyres are still there on the latest versions too. I agree removing them could see the return of kit building, especially combined with increasing prices.

[Steamport Southport]

Traction tyres?!

 

I thought they went with Lima!

 

 

Seems that Hornby T9s and Schools are off the menu then. Any others have them? As I haven't come across any models with traction tyres since the 1980s.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[JSpencer]

Traction tyres?!

 

I thought they went with Lima!

 

 

Seems that Hornby T9s and Schools are off the menu then. Any others have them? As I haven't come across any models with traction tyres since the 1980s.

 

 

 

 

Jason

Well there was the former Triang Battle of Britain re motorised with a small open frame motor, heavy weight and traction types in the 90s. No chance of wheel slip here and yes it ran like a dog (well dogs run more gracefully TBH). But no only the T9 and Schools have traction tyres and they are better than what Lima previous Hornby used. Some former Limas lost them briefly but have had them put back since. Edited January 3, 2018 by JSpencer

[Steamport Southport]

Yeah. It was bad experiences with Lima diesels in the 1980s that put me off traction tyres for good. In a similar way that I tried to avoid tender drives with or without traction tyres.

 

Now the "bogie man"* seems to be coreless motors. But I won't start that discussion here.

 

 

 

 

*Spelt that way for comic effect.

 

 

 

Jason

[adb968008]

Could you expand on this a little please.

I have three of the early super detail loco drive Schools (R2744 Blundells, R2815 Haileybury, R2844 St. Lawrence) and two have had broken plastic bogie pivot pins which I had to replace with BA bolts. How has Hornby changed the bogie? The Hornby service sheet HSS330C doen't show an alternative bogie bit if the bogie has been improved I'd like to get hold of one.

Also how has the wiring been improved ? All my Schools have the white plastic plug which fits in the socket in the tender. Has this changed on recent models?

Ian

The bogie changed with R3208 Brighton, R3194 Epsom, R3311 Westminster onwards. Though looking on the net, the problem moved rather than solved itself.

The bogies as spares are as common as Merchant Navy valvegear/cylinders and Dodos..both Hornby and the real ones.

Edited January 3, 2018 by adb968008

[71000]

Traction tyres?!

 

I thought they went with Lima!

 

 

Seems that Hornby T9s and Schools are off the menu then. Any others have them? As I haven't come across any models with traction tyres since the 1980s.

 

 

 

 

Jason

J

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[Steamport Southport]

Jason 

Around 90% of all RTR model locomotives and MU's, produced each year include Traction tyres. For the simple reason that they massively increase the usefulness of the product, and allow most layouts to be doubled in size. By having your Fiddle Yard on a lower deck. It is still only British outline RTR that tends to avoid them. For now outdated quality issue reasons. As a result British outline steam in particular is underpowered generally. See my LOAD HAUL TEST tables, on my regular page "Basingstoke 1958-67" Layout and stock, in the "Modelling real locations" category - The results may surprise you !!!!  

 

 

71000

 

90%? 

 

None of the 20 or so RTR locomotives that I've bought since returning to the hobby have them. Nor the EMUs. All of which work fine. I'm surprised that Hornby fitted them to the T9 and Schools. I suppose I could buy them and sell the chassis on and replace it with something better, or I could just replace the wheels with Gibsons.

 

 

I've had 14 coaches behind my Hornby Duchess. That includes Comet as well as RTR. Not a traction tyre in sight. In fact any model that had them would be getting re wheeled.

 

Dreadful things and certainly don't agree with track cleaners. Something that should be consigned to history.

 

 

 

Jason

[adb968008]

90%? 

 

None of the 20 or so RTR locomotives that I've bought since returning to the hobby have them. Nor the EMUs. All of which work fine. I'm surprised that Hornby fitted them to the T9 and Schools. I suppose I could buy them and sell the chassis on and replace it with something better, or I could just replace the wheels with Gibsons.

 

 

I've had 14 coaches behind my Hornby Duchess. That includes Comet as well as RTR. Not a traction tyre in sight. In fact any model that had them would be getting re wheeled.

 

Dreadful things and certainly don't agree with track cleaners. Something that should be consigned to history.

 

 

 

Jason

90% of the models made..aren’t British., I think is being implied.

 

I have no issue with Traction tyres, my layout combines US, European and UK outlines.. the contrast between them is considerable... European seems to be very well engineered, uses traction tyres, runs smooth as a bird, pulls enormously well and touch wood I’ve never had a return, defect or even a failure.

US outline weighs more, consumes more power and is less efficient, not all use traction tyres, but they can pull the house down.

UK tends to look nice has more detail, weighs less, no traction tyres and pulls less, but costs less. There are some exceptions of course.,, the monsters of UK rtr are the Heljan DPU, Heljan O2, and Dapol Western.. very energy efficient, meaty and pull anything.

 

You pays your money and you takes yer choice.

[Steamport Southport]

But I don't "do" foreign. The USA Tank is probably the limit I'm afraid. This is from someone that saw the end of steam in Eastern Europe. I like them, but I have no intention of modelling them.

 

 

I haven't had anything that has had problems with pulling power. Just add weight. Usually plenty of space in most models.

 

It's just that I had planned on getting a couple of Schools as they are currently reasonably priced. Seems I've had a lucky escape.

 

 

 

 

 

Jason

[MikeParkin65]

Traction tyres?!

 

I thought they went with Lima!

 

 

Seems that Hornby T9s and Schools are off the menu then. Any others have them? As I haven't come across any models with traction tyres since the 1980s.

 

 

 

 

Jason

Hornby loco drive Fowler 4F and 2P 440. GWR 14xx. All ex Lima diesels now produced by Hornby (in the Railroad range)

[Steamport Southport]

Thanks.

 

 

All older models that I don't think I would buy now days. I already have versions of all of those and most of them have had their chassis replaced since.

 

 

 

Jason

[No Decorum]

I seem to recall that when the Schools first appeared, Simon Kohler said that the choice was between tender drive, rubber tyres or poor adhesion. I thought it wouldn’t have hurt to supply spare driving wheels without them, even as spares.

 

We now have 4-4-0s without them, a welcome development in my opinion.

[Wickham Green]

Early Schools models had a different motor. The method of attaching the front bogie has changed. The wiring has been altered. Can't think of anything else off hand. The chimney's fitted as far as I'm aware just uses two small pegs, like the King Arthurs, and can of course be interchanged. Often alternative parts for such models use a standard fitment, to reduce tooling.

 

The plastic smokebox is a seperate part, and appears to be glued to both the running plate and boiler. The division is where the colour changes from black to green.  The Cab, boiler and Smokebox is fitted as one to the running plate during assembly. Then all the little detail parts are most likely added. So dissassembly is best tackled in reverse.  

 

The Schools for the same reason as the T9 needs both a heavier metal diecast boiler, and traction tyres, to allow it haul the sort of loads it could in real life. See my LOAD HAUL TESTS of many steam loco models, in my regular "Basingstoke 1958-67" (Layout and Stock) in the RM category "Modelling real locations" which will give you some idea of what many models capabilities are out of the packet.

One other change you haven't mentioned may have been specific to one batch of NRM 'Cheltenham's ......... the use of extra-fast-rotting mazac for the chassis : I know Jack P shows a horrible example ( second-hand via eBay ) on his thread and I bought one second-hand from a well-known retailer in the north west - the chassis was well wedged into the body and fell in two as i 'persuaded' it out ! ....................... oddly I've not seen any other references to this problem with a Schools - were Jack and I particularly unlucky or are there other horror stories out there ?

[71000]

One other change you haven't mentioned may have been specific to one batch of NRM 'Cheltenham's ......... the use of extra-fast-rotting mazac for the chassis : I know Jack P shows a horrible example ( second-hand via eBay ) on his thread and I bought one second-hand from a well-known retailer in the north west - the chassis was well wedged into the body and fell in two as i 'persuaded' it out ! ....................... oddly I've not seen any other references to this problem with a Schools - were Jack and I particularly unlucky or are there other horror stories out there ?

D

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[OFFTHE RAILS]

Ian,

 

Due to the fact that Hornby were forced at short notice to change production facility back around 2012-13, this has had an impact on a number of models. However your three Schools locos were produced in R27xx (2007) R28xx (2008) give or take a few months for production delays. So they were all produced in the Sandakan plant in Hong Kong. 

 

As Hornby required a pretty advanced production facility with the capacity to cope with the still growing British model market. There was realistically only one suitable plant open to them. This being the new Piko plant just up the road over the border in China near Canton. Piko were an East German model railway company, who like Hornby had to move "Up Market" or go bust. So the new Piko plant is where Hornby have gone.

 

As the production system is obviously a little different in the Piko plant, this has some effect on the design of models primarily in respect of the chassis's. So a growing number of Hornby models have had a chassis redesign to match what Piko can produce. This means different motors in some but not all cases. And of course a different mounting for these motors and a new gear train. Changes in the needs of DCC modellers have also seen the wiring of models altered to cope with blanking plates moved to tenders, and capacity for chips requiring more "pins". Flywheels are also starting to make an appearance. Not before time in my opinion. But so far these are small flywheels and realistically do very little except smooth the motor. Larger diameter flywheels, which can dramatically improve acceleration and deceleration, I have so far only found in the new "as built" Merchant Navy model. Although it is possible larger flywheels have been introduced to models I have not purchased for my large layout. My new Merchant Navy model has a "run on" ability of around 12-15 inches from full speed, now it has been "run in".          

 

You mention you have had problems with the front bogie mounting on your models. This probably reveals why the mounting has been slightly altered. Although to be honest, I'm not inclined to think the alterations have gone far enough. BA bolts are definately more sturdy, and if your fix works okay, you have a solution that will work on the newer altered models !!!

 

The "white plastic plug that fits in the tender" is still the current system, and was introduced to allow the DCC blanking plates to be moved to tenders. Indeed I think the Schools was one of the first to use this, as there was no space in the loco interior to start with. However they have now tidied up the coupling. Which on the latest (2017) Schools offering, now has a metal coupling screwed to both the loco and tender. 

 

Worth noting in respect of the "white plastic plug" is that Hornby do sell a little plastic tool designed to extract this from its socket. 

 

Minor mods to models are of course par for the course. As a result of problems being identified, or to simplify production, and particularly assembly. 

 

 

71000

So, although you've explained Hornby's production problems etc. you can't actually answer what I asked which was: what has changed with the Hornby Schools 4-4-0 bogie......

[Oldddudders]

All my Schools have the white plastic plug which fits in the socket in the tender. Has this changed on recent models?

In the DCC era, it is difficult to imagine widespread use of anything else to transmit four electrical connections reliably between loco and tender, where the decoder hopefully sits. I first encountered this nearly 20 years ago on a Bachmann US 2-8-0, and it is virtually universal now for tender locos in 3.5/4mm scales, maybe others. Earlier Hornby steam locos used contacts from the tender on the drawbar, but these were limited to two poles, and more recent versions of Bulleid pacifics and N15 have the plug. It enables the tender to provide a sound chamber, difficult to design into a loco in the smaller scales.

 

Not everyone wants DCC, let alone sound, but making provision is part of selling more locos.

[Tim Hall]

One other change you haven't mentioned may have been specific to one batch of NRM 'Cheltenham's ......... the use of extra-fast-rotting mazac for the chassis : I know Jack P shows a horrible example ( second-hand via eBay ) on his thread and I bought one second-hand from a well-known retailer in the north west - the chassis was well wedged into the body and fell in two as i 'persuaded' it out ! ....................... oddly I've not seen any other references to this problem with a Schools - were Jack and I particularly unlucky or are there other horror stories out there ?

 

No, mine did the same recently. Kept derailing, and when I started prodding its nether regions, the metal bar that keeps the cylinders attached to the chassis crumbled. Actual chassis seems okish, but I've feeling it's slightly warped, hence derailing.

[71000]

So, although you've explained Hornby's production problems etc. you can't actually answer what I asked which was: what has changed with the Hornby Schools 4-4-0 bogie......

O

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000

[71000]

Not everyone wants DCC, let alone sound, but making provision is part of selling more locos.

A 

Edited April 7, 2018 by 71000